Saddleback developement

[ski_resort_observer]

It looks like Saddleback is moving forward with their real estate plans. I hope this doesn't disaffect the Rangeley area. This ad was in the local paper this week.

www.alpinezone.com/albums/album157/saddleback.jpg

 

[thetrailboss]

And the prices range from.....


I bet lots of local papermill workers will be buying into the place. :lol:

 

[Snowflower]

They're 300k and up I think.

 

[ski_resort_observer]

TB...once you become a lawyer you will be able to afford one at Saddleback AND Burke and maybe the Bush.

 

[thetrailboss]

TB...once you become a lawyer you will be able to afford one at Saddleback AND Burke and maybe the Bush.

Hope so :roll: Have to pay the school debt first.

But this leads to an interesting discussion of WHY places like Burke, Saddleback, and even Sugarbush, etc. are trying to grab the "high rollers" and in essence leaving some of the people in their back yard behind.

Many natives of N New England can't afford $300,000 ski houses, let alone a regular house nowadays :roll: But they still ski and ski these places when the weather turns.

Last weekend, a wide majority of cars at Burke had Vermont plates. At the passholder party, a wide majority of the crowd were folks that I knew or recognized from town and they don't drive expensive sports cars.

Over xmas break, on a rainy day, I went up there and saw locals who had PAID for a ticket to ski. I, myself, dropped $20 or so in the mountain shop buying a hat and a few things. I don't make $175K a year.

So my question is: what can resorts do to strike a balance and capture the local market? Is the overall strategy to sell real estate to high-end market so as to subsidize the skiing experience for locals and the rest of the world?

 

[riverc0il]

i think resorts are striking a balance. at least resorts like burke and saddleback. the locals aren't being priced out on lift tickets or season passes (yet) and then there is the fancy restaurant, slopeside condos, and second homes for the well-to-do metro folks. resort housing and real estate is a premium offering, it isn't built for the typical 'local', that isn't where the money is and that isn't the way to build a financially successful resort around real estate. do i like the trend towards real estate? hellz no. do i support the efforts if it keeps my favorite ski hills around? for now, yes.

and an honest question: why should ski areas even care about the local market if 95% of their profits come from people from outside the state? honest question. financially, it doesn't make sense. in burke's case it does because, well, who else is spreading the word? support the locals and you get free word of mouth, the best form of advertising. i just don't see why ski areas should discriminate between locals and out of staters in regards to who it cators to.

 

[ski_resort_observer]

I think alot of business sectors, ski resorts are just following the perception/trend that you need the real estate to have a successful ski resort, ie successful business.

Some would probably say that without the real estate there would be no ski area for anybody to ski at. A few years ago alot of people were pointing to Whistler, Vail, Stratton then Tremblant as successful businesses as a result of the real estate. Now you have Burke, Haystack, Saddleback, Stowe, the Bush, Loon, Okemo, the list goes on and on. Personally I don't really agree as this is the "all to end all".

BTW I left out the ASC resorts as they too have jumped big time on the same bandwagon but the jury is still out on whether they will be a success.

Conversly, you have places like MRG, Shawnee Peak, Crotched, many are the mid size feeder hills but most are busy, when there's snow, making a profit. Just try to find a parking space 4-9 during the week at Shawnee Peak, forget about it.

I think that if you have a ski area and it's losing money, I don't think building a bunch of condos and maybe a base village is a for sure ticket out of the red.

When a favorite hill does the big jump to ski resort I think some of it is bad for the locals but some of it is good as well.

 

[riverc0il]

not a sure ticket indeed. i have some concern that the expansion at so many ski areas all at the same time will decrease demand and lead to some ski resorts that have placed all their eggs into the development of real estate bandwagon will fail. compounded with the real estate slow down and the increased supply, and there could be some issues soon. haystack, burke, saddleback, perhaps tenney soon, loon next year, stowe, etc. all adding the real estate? something has gotta give. eventually, the people that want/can afford the slopeside will already have slopeside. perhaps folks that already have ski area real estate will sell the current places and then buy up the latest and greatest at lesser known quieter resorts. or perhaps the whole thing will flop? who knows.

in regards to areas that don't have real estate, they fill other niches. MRG? not even worth discussing. shawnee peak is a mid-sized feader mountain close to a small metro area in portsmouth/portland area. crotched, same thing different region. great learning areas. but how many mid-sized mountains are there two hours or more outside of the metro areas? those are the areas that went the way of NELSAP. whaleback is coming back as a niche area. dartmouth and middlebury are owned by the colleges. balsams is more a resort than a ski area. tenney is struggling in the shadow of waterville, loon, and cannon. i don't know how black mountain holds on, all the other jackson ski areas are lost, so is whittier.

the further away from metro areas, the more ski areas depend upon a bed base unless they have a niche like MRG. places like burke and saddleback really really need that bed base to thrive. i don't know how they could continue with their current business model without changing something. though the huge mega resort concept isn't something i look forward to seeing, i still enjoy skiing open areas...

...sometimes

 

[bigbog]

...

In this day in age...communities have to become pro-active in maintaining community identity, otherwise..their identities becomes lost to big money. The big realty firms with the deepest pockets & interests are not from your state...if you are in ski country. If they are, you're very lucky 8) ..IMHO It would be great to have, for example, a Burke Mtn. environment of your school days 8) ...forever.. :lol:

 

[Angus]

Saddleback might be a little different.

Rangeley is perceived as the only true 4 season resort area in Maine (Moosehead/Squaw could be if a) investment & b) distances were not overwhelming).

Significant portions of the shoreline of both Rangeley and Mooselookmuguntic (spellings wrong) are protected and there is little developable land left.

I don't know this for a fact, but the people who bought Saddleback do not appear to be deep pocketed investors. selling land and/or development activities is probably the way to recoup their investment and fund mountain expansion.

i've written here before that it appears that the development around the ski slopes is what makes or breaks ski areas financially

 

[Skifastsailfast]

Saddleback might be a little different.

Rangeley is perceived as the only true 4 season resort area in Maine (Moosehead/Squaw could be if a) investment & b) distances were not overwhelming).

Significant portions of the shoreline of both Rangeley and Mooselookmuguntic (spellings wrong) are protected and there is little developable land left.

I don't know this for a fact, but the people who bought Saddleback do not appear to be deep pocketed investors. selling land and/or development activities is probably the way to recoup their investment and fund mountain expansion.

i've written here before that it appears that the development around the ski slopes is what makes or breaks ski areas financially

Angus, I agree with everything you wrote except the part about the distance to Moosehead/Squaw being overwhelming. This is a HUGE misconception. I live in Freeport. Greenville's a two-and-a-half hour drive. Rangeley (and Sugarloaf) are maybe two-and-a-quarter hours. How does an extra 15 minutes suddenly make something overwhelming? Sorry, just a pet peeve of mine. Squaw's also an easier drive, IMHO, but maybe I'm just used to it and know all the good places to pass the slowpokes towing the sled!

Sad part is that Squaw is barely running this year, if at all. Nothing has been done in terms of upkeep, and there's not a lot to be optimistic about at the moment.

So the $300K slopeside condos are out of range for the locals. Well, um, why would a local even NEED a condo? They're LOCALS! They've already got a place closeby! Let someone else fork over the big bucks and add to the tax base without putting any extra burden on the school system.

BTW, Saddleback's owner is a local. Betcha dollars to donuts he'll not forget his Franklin County roots when it comes to, say, special deals and what not.

I say after the decades of frustration at the hands of the AMC, Saddleback deserves to grow and prosper.

 

[smootharc]

This topic has been timely for...

...the past 30 years, with greatly increased press on the issue starting, from my recollection, in the mid-80's. Telluride went ballistic at about that time, and suddenly resort employees were commuting 20+ miles because the $200/month rental the previous season, a tiny house in the town, had been sold for $500k+, bought five years earlier for $135k.

One place that seems to be at least okay currently with regard to this issue/debate is the Mad River Valley, which is fairly spread out yet accessible "within striking distance" from 6 or 7 pockets where folks can still find, relatively speaking, reasonable housing.

And while it seems the big places just get bigger, and speak to this debate, the valley seems to remain low on the list for the thundering hordes from NY, Boston, RI, NJ, and CT. It's just that little extra hard to get to, I guess, and the "resort" amenities like outlet shopping / shopping and raging nightlife are non-existent or minimal. Hopefully the powers that be in local MRV government will "stay the course" and keep development sane, and the "good life" in the valley sustainable. WIth so many other places, it seems there's no turning back.