MRG's Single Chair Set for Renovations (?)

[thetrailboss]

According to WCAX in VT, the shareholders will decide the future of the legendary chair. There is a $1.4 million proposal on the table to renovate the lift with new "moving equipment" and using the same towers and line. Other proposals have included a new double. The current capacity is 420 skiers per hour.

Here is the story: http://www.wcax.com/Global/story.asp?S=3141657&nav=4QcRY3ZK

Seems like a good idea IMHO. That is the icon of the ski area...

Your thoughts? Sound off!

 

[dmc]

According to WCAX in VT, the shareholders will decide the future of the legendary chair. There is a $1.4 million proposal on the table to renovate the lift with new "moving equipment" and using the same towers and line. Other proposals have included a new double. The current capacity is 420 skiers per hour.

Here is the story: http://www.wcax.com/Global/story.asp?S=3141657&nav=4QcRY3ZK

Seems like a good idea IMHO. That is the icon of the ski area...

Your thoughts? Sound off!

If they fix the chair - then snowboarders will be allowed... Or the true colors of the "Share Holders" will be shown...
Cause it's snowboarders derailing the single chair that has them banned right now...

 

[Greg]

I've sent Mr MRG and Mr MRG Jr a link to this thread. It would be great to get some comments direct from the mountain.

 

[thetrailboss]

I've sent Mr MRG and Mr MRG Jr a link to this thread. It would be great to get some comments direct from the mountain.

Good call...was thinking of doing the same since I personally know Mr MRG Jr. Looking forward to their insight on this... :wink:

 

[Greg]

If they fix the chair - then snowboarders will be allowed... Or the true colors of the "Share Holders" will be shown...

So? It's their prerogative, no? I don't think it's a secret that a majority of the shareholders support the ban because they want to preserve one aspect that contributes to the uniqueness of the ski area.

Cause it's snowboarders derailing the single chair that has them banned right now...

I disagree. Again, I believe the shareholders simply like it the way it is. The safety issue on the single initially caused the ban, but it's not the main reason it's still supported today. More information.

 

[ctenidae]

Interesting. I wouldn't expect the shareholders to lift the ban, even if they install a heated gondola. They will do whatever they want. It's their mountain, their business, and their decision. Personally, I think its great- MRG is perhaps the only comany in the country that actually does what its shareholders say. As I believe Mr MRG once said- you don't like it, buy a share and vote.

 

[thetrailboss]

If they fix the chair - then snowboarders will be allowed... Or the true colors of the "Share Holders" will be shown...

So? It's their prerogative, no? I don't think it's a secret that a majority of the shareholders support the ban because they want to preserve one aspect that contributes to the uniqueness of the ski area.

Cause it's snowboarders derailing the single chair that has them banned right now...

I disagree. Again, I believe the shareholders simply like it the way it is. The safety issue on the single initially caused the ban, but it's not the main reason it's still supported today. More information.

Hey Greg...I'm sure we must have had a "to ban or not to ban snowboarders" conversation in here at one point...seems like an interesting tangental thread :wink:

 

[dmc]

If they fix the chair - then snowboarders will be allowed... Or the true colors of the "Share Holders" will be shown...

So? It's their prerogative, no? I don't think it's a secret that a majority of the shareholders support the ban because they want to preserve one aspect that contributes to the uniqueness of the ski area.

Cause it's snowboarders derailing the single chair that has them banned right now...

I disagree. Again, I believe the shareholders simply like it the way it is. The safety issue on the single initially caused the ban, but it's not the main reason it's still supported today. More information.

Whatever... I'm not hear to argue with you Greg...

It sucks to be excluded from such a great place on my primary sliding device...

 

[ctenidae]

I hear you, dmc, but them's the breaks, you know? Right or wrong, good or bad, it is their decision, and as long as a majority of shareholders agree, the ban will stand on its own two skis.

 

[Greg]

Whatever... I'm not hear to argue with you Greg...

It sucks to be excluded from such a great place on my primary sliding device...

I'm not arguing. I'm just stating that I think it's a VERY long shot that the coop will ever vote to lift the ban and I don't think they are hiding behind the safety excuse. And I hear you. It must suck to be excluded, but luckily for you, you have the skill to ski and tele at MRG.

In any event - let's get back on topic. I'd be in favor of a new single vs. a double or quad. I 'm just happy I got the chance to experience the old single this season. Is the current chair beyond repair, or is it simply too costly to maintain? Maybe they could auction off the old chairs? I was surprised to read that there were only 158 on that line.

 

[dmc]

I hear you, dmc, but them's the breaks, you know? Right or wrong, good or bad, it is their decision, and as long as a majority of shareholders agree, the ban will stand on its own two skis.

Think those exact words havent been said to me a million times??
Well they have...

Whatever... Not here to argue - just saying that from what I've heard from shareholders(most passive agressive about riding) is that the ban is due to snowboarders derailing the old single chair...
If it's fixed - then they will have to give me another reason...

 

[dmc]

Whatever... I'm not hear to argue with you Greg...

It sucks to be excluded from such a great place on my primary sliding device...

I'm not arguing. I'm just stating that I think it's a VERY long shot that the coop will ever vote to lift the ban and I don't think they are hiding behind the safety excuse. And I hear you. It must suck to be excluded, but luckily for you, you have the skill to ski and tele at MRG.

You asked me questions about their peraogative... Thats the start of an argument...

No biggie...

 

[David Metsky]

Based on the shareholders that I know, the single will remain a single, and there won't be snowboarders there anytime soon. The two issues aren't really related at this point, since it would have been easy to allow boarders on the doubles but not the single.

But I don't know enough shareholders to know if their views are a concensus.

-dave-

 

[thetrailboss]

Anyway....getting back to the topic at hand, the chair... :roll: ....what do you think? $1.4 million is a lot for a single chair. Would you think a double would work? Stick with the single for identity?

This is very similar to the debate/passion for the Castlerock Double just literally a couple ridges over at Sugarbush. If I get a chance, I'll try to dig up that 1994 Powder Magazine article in which the lifties threatened to chain themselves to the lift and light themselves on fire if Les Otten came to replace it...

Turns out in 2001 the chair failed inspection and SB decided to replace it with a new Poma Double chair, which has tubular towers (using less trail space), a better loading area, more comfortable chairs, and the same rope speed and long distance between the chairs (as Greg and others have noted). I've rode both lifts. The former lift had great character, but I appreciate the newer model. If one still wants to ride an old Mueller Double, check out the Peak Double at Pats Peak (see here: http://forums.alpinezone.com/module...ame=gallery&file=index&include=view_album.php) or the Summit Double at Tenney. :wink:

 

[bvibert]

I was wondering the same thing, would the snowboarding thing come up again if they replaced the single... I honestly don't think they would lift the ban even if they put in a brand new quad... Its unfortunate for snow boarders, but thats the way the shareholders want it.

Sounds like they plan on putting in new chairs either way, I wonder if they'll be selling off the old single chairs?

 

[thetrailboss]

In any event - let's get back on topic. I'd be in favor of a new single vs. a double or quad. I 'm just happy I got the chance to experience the old single this season. Is the current chair beyond repair, or is it simply too costly to maintain? Maybe they could auction off the old chairs? I was surprised to read that there were only 158 on that line.

I think it is just age and probably the fact that like Castlerock, she can't pass inspection.

 

[bvibert]

Anyway....getting back to the topic at hand, the chair... :roll: ....what do you think? $1.4 million is a lot for a single chair. Would you think a double would work? Stick with the single for identity?

I think its worth the extra money to stick with a single. Just wouldn't be the same with anything else

 

[Greg]

Anyway....getting back to the topic at hand, the chair... :roll: ....what do you think? $1.4 million is a lot for a single chair. Would you think a double would work? Stick with the single for identity?

This is very similar to the debate/passion for the Castlerock Double just literally a couple ridges over at Sugarbush. If I get a chance, I'll try to dig up that 1994 Powder Magazine article in which the lifties threatened to chain themselves to the lift and light themselves on fire if Les Otten came to replace it...

Turns out in 2001 the chair failed inspection and SB decided to replace it with a new Poma Double chair, which has tubular towers (using less trail space), a better loading area, more comfortable chairs, and the same rope speed and long distance between the chairs (as Greg and others have noted). I've rode both lifts. The former lift had great character, but I appreciate the newer model. If one still wants to ride an old Mueller Double, check out the Peak Double at Pats Peak (see here: http://forums.alpinezone.com/module...ame=gallery&file=index&include=view_photo.php) or the Summit Double at Tenney. :wink:

Some good points. The Castlerock Chair is great and results in the similar snow preservation found off the MRG Single, I'd imagine. I guess if the lift is going to be new, sans the line and towers, a double with a long spacing would work from the limiting skier traffic perspective. However, I think the a new single is better from a marketing standpoint, but what do I know... :wink:

 

[dmc]

When has MRG ever cared about marketing???? :lol:

 

[Greg]

When has MRG ever cared about marketing???? :lol:

Ouch. I hope Eric doesn't read that...