Saddleback

[MEtoVTSkier]

The Cog has been operating to the summit since 1869. I don't think it's going to disappear anytime soon.

 

[x10003q]

The $40 million number does seem kind of rich. The Berry's also claim to have sent $13 million "updating" the lodge. Who does such nonsense at a place that never cracked 100K (probably 80k) visits? If they did actually spend $13 million on the lodge and did not see fit to spend some of it to replace the main lift, then the Berry's are fools.

The Berrys have access to the actual numbers and continue to overvalue SB.

The fact is the place is difficult to get to and that is never going to change.

 

[Rowsdower]

My point is mainly as a potential marketing aspect to serious or adventurous skiers. Also 300-400 feet of some of the most badass and interesting snowfield and semi-snowfield terrain. How much has Sugarloaf used their snowfields for marketing purposes? Quite successfully, and it's badass terrain as well. What Saddleback has is unique even without that though.

I think when areas are covered with snow the ecological impacts are mitigated at least to a certain extent. A few shrubs and rare flowers have to stay 20 feet to the left.

Think of Tuckerman Ravine... do we worry about the alpine ecosystem while people are trampling over the Alpine Gardens covered in snow? There are some rare alpine flowers growing in the summer in the Tuck headwall zone. They don't seem to be affected by the skiers.

I think the Auto Road is fairly obnoxious, and likewise the Cog Railway which spews black smoke and makes noise you can hear over the whole Presidential range.

What if we put our ecological concerns in perspective and applied it evenly?

I mean installing the lift and grading new trails. That would be pretty invasive.

Part of the allure is that you're hiking to it. You're too gnarly for the lifts. You earn your turns, unlike all those shoobies on the groomers. When you get up top its just you and the diehards. The real ski bums. After ripping your line you head down to the bar and talk up anyone who will listen "Yeah, did you see that guy dropping in off the ridge? Yeah that was me. Yeah I'm basically the best skier on the mountain".

Those are the days people remember and come back for.

 

[delco714]

The issue is Rangeley is just so dead in the winter AND the resort is 7 miles away from town anyway. It has to draw skiers first, IMO, and it is really hard when you have a lively Bethel or SL base area in the winter. Lively being relatively speaking of course, but definitely more happening than Rangeley between November and May. I stayed on mountain a few times and you really feel like you're in the middle of no where. I love it, but I think most Southern ME residents or Boston Metro residents aren't looking for that much wilderness. The average skiing family or couple wants some resorty activities to do in addition to pure skiing. It would take a herculean effort (and bank account) to build up SB to have it feel anything but the most remote ski area in NE (except maybe Big Rock). It is possible though, looking at Jay Peak as an example haha.

If SL's infrastructure could be duplicated at Saddleback, I would definitely own there before Sugarloaf too though.

I'm not so sure if things would have played out different if the Rangeley was replaced first unfortunately. The fact that the Berry family dropped $40 million into the place and it still has the infrastructure hurdles it has (lodge that is too small (supposedly), rangeley lift, no base development) is telling. I imagine a good amount of the $40 million had to have been into snowmaking, right? I don't hear about a lack of snowmaking infrastructure like you typically hear at places like SB (e.g. Magic).

You make excellent points and said it way more politically correct than I would've

I used to be a loafer, haven't been for last two seasons from broken ankle last year and divorce year prior.
Went to SB twice before that and absolutely love it. But I traveled from my cabin in Eustis.

Sugaloaf as a mountain sucks. Too pointy and faces the wrong direction.

Sb is amazing as a mountain goes, slight lake effect for incr snow total.

Again..it's too remote. It can never be a big hopping place..thus no money to invest and no reason to invest money bc no money will be made. Maybe if they open al natural with a handful of tows they could turn a minor profit.


If buyer X puts 15-45 mil in...how are they getting the return on investment? How' many passes/Gatorade/hamburger/lesson/rental

Would it take? That is while paying employees and general operating costs/insurance.

Maybe I'm just in a mood..I would love to board SB again..especially during a weekday..it's so very excellent

 

[bdfreetuna]

Rowsdower I'm fine with Saddleback leaving the summit hike only ... I was more thinking of the marketing angle. Since we're just fantasizing how to save Saddleback at this point.

 

[deadheadskier]

In regards to Jullys comment about SB being 7 miles from Rangeley, that's really not far. It's almost 8 miles from Stowe Village to the ski area. Perhaps the access road to Saddleback eventually starts filling in a bit with private businesses like what happened at Stowe over the decades.

I guess overall I just can't write the place off as Sugarloaf thrives despite an equally difficult location. SB has better year round potential and depending on what you are looking for, better skiing.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[prsboogie]

I just feel horrible for my friend and her husband who have been condo owners for nearly 20 years slope side on a non-existent ski resort. What do they do?

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

 

[bdfreetuna]

I just feel horrible for my friend and her husband who have been condo owners for nearly 20 years slope side on a non-existent ski resort. What do they do?

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

 

[fiddleski]

Great terrain on the other side of the ridge, but can't string lifts to the top - didn't Snowbird have the same issue? They solved it - maybe Saddleback could do the same!:smile:

 

[SkiFanE]

You make excellent points and said it way more politically correct than I would've

I used to be a loafer, haven't been for last two seasons from broken ankle last year and divorce year prior.
Went to SB twice before that and absolutely love it. But I traveled from my cabin in Eustis.

Sugaloaf as a mountain sucks. Too pointy and faces the wrong direction.

Sb is amazing as a mountain goes, slight lake effect for incr snow total.

Again..it's too remote. It can never be a big hopping place..thus no money to invest and no reason to invest money bc no money will be made. Maybe if they open al natural with a handful of tows they could turn a minor profit.


If buyer X puts 15-45 mil in...how are they getting the return on investment? How' many passes/Gatorade/hamburger/lesson/rental

Would it take? That is while paying employees and general operating costs/insurance.

Maybe I'm just in a mood..I would love to board SB again..especially during a weekday..it's so very excellent

SB has awesome terrain! I rarely go to SL even though it's included in my pass - just not worth the drive for a runout. Sorry, but SL'ers don't miss one more masshole anyway lol. But Saddleback...just loved it. I'm not sure how to successfully run a business - but if they blew all their $ on a lodge, they are just bad business folks. My recollection is a nice small lodge with decent food, but crowded and still the "ski bags all over" feeling we all love. Sad if THAT is what causes the downfall.

I do think it it has potential if they can get summer traffic. The lake looks gorgeous and in general lots of outdoor things to do. With SL and SR in the $100+ day pass range - I do think there is a market for a nice mid size mountain in ME. I'd take an annual trip there if I could. Can't imagine Casablanca right now.

 

[speden]

Maine should really try to get a decent highway built to improve access to their ski country. Without that they are leaving a lot of money on the table since it takes too long to drive up there.

 

[Jully]

Maine should really try to get a decent highway built to improve access to their ski country. Without that they are leaving a lot of money on the table since it takes too long to drive up there.

Maine can't keep its current roads in good repair. I guarantee you whatever additional revenue it will gain from ski and some summer traffic in western Maine will come nowhere close to the cost of building and maintaining a divided highway. It'll never happen. Even a toll road would have too ginormous of an initial cost. Most of the tourism money is south of Portland and along the coast and the road conditions reflect that.

 

[deadheadskier]

I'd be happy with a few more passing lanes. Many of the roads to the Western Maine mountains have a 55mph limit and plenty of stretches you can drive 60-65 safely. The problems occur when you get stuck behind Emmit and Gertrude traveling 45-50 as they are in no hurry to get anywhere. Lots of those types in Maine. Lots of people up there also like to travel slowly in the passing lanes on highways. Its so prevalent, I swear they must teach it in drivers Ed.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[Jully]

In regards to Jullys comment about SB being 7 miles from Rangeley, that's really not far. It's almost 8 miles from Stowe Village to the ski area. Perhaps the access road to Saddleback eventually starts filling in a bit with private businesses like what happened at Stowe over the decades.

I guess overall I just can't write the place off as Sugarloaf thrives despite an equally difficult location. SB has better year round potential and depending on what you are looking for, better skiing.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

I don't know if thrive is the right word for Sugarloaf anymore. It does okay, but it hardly prints money. The location is pretty much the only reason for that.

You're right about Stowe for sure, and if SB were well established it certainly wouldn't have an issue. However, right now/when it was open SB felt incredibly remote from Rangeley. On top of that, Rangeley itself is currently pretty dead in the winter.

I'll never write it off either, the potential is certainly massive, but the distance (though not a terminal or even the biggest challenge) coupled with how empty Rangeley is in the winter really hurts. I think the pull would be a lot stronger if your slopeside condo could practically double as a lake house. Houses at Shawnee have this, for example.

I imagine the amount of empty remoteness felt at the base of SB is similar to how Jay Peak felt pre EB5. I never went though, so I might be wrong.

 

[Jully]

I'd be happy with a few more passing lanes. Many of the roads to the Western Maine mountains have a 55mph limit and plenty of stretches you can drive 60-65 safely. The problems occur when you get stuck behind Emmit and Gertrude traveling 45-50 as they are in no hurry to get anywhere. Lots of those types in Maine. Lots of people up there also like to travel slowly in the passing lanes on highways. Its so prevalent, I swear they must teach it in drivers Ed.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

Here here. Roads east of 95 (Rt 3 comes to mind) that are similar to 27 and 26 to SL and SR are 60-65 for stretches.

 

[Smellytele]

Rangeley in the winter does have a good snowmobiler population. Most places you go it smells like snowmobiler.

 

[machski]

Great terrain on the other side of the ridge, but can't string lifts to the top - didn't Snowbird have the same issue? They solved it - maybe Saddleback could do the same![emoji2]

With the AT going over that ridge, you will never get the AMC to allow lifts up to and certainly not over the ridge. Killington has yet to build the interconnect, but to even get to the planning stages (and the initial trail cut off Pico), they had to agree, pay and move the AT/Long Trail from its original route (up andover Pico Peak) to the west of Pico peak and crossing Route 4 west of Pico. All this so the AT would not traverse the ski trails and lifts in the interconnect. And we see how far that project has progressed in 2 decades, but the AT is relocated.

Sent from my SM-T900 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[mister moose]

^ So it's ok to cross over a 4 lane Mass Pike, but somehow crossing a meadow like ski trail ruins the experience?

 

[folledeski]

Was up that way this weekend. Roads in and out of Rangeley are in horrible shape.

For folks driving up from Massachusetts, the 2+ hours on those local, slow, sometimes crappy roads is about an hour too far. The skiing isn't that much better than closer options for most to justify the trip.

Sent from my moto x4 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[fiddleski]

With the AT going over that ridge, you will never get the AMC to allow lifts up to and certainly not over the ridge. Killington has yet to build the interconnect, but to even get to the planning stages (and the initial trail cut off Pico), they had to agree, pay and move the AT/Long Trail from its original route (up andover Pico Peak) to the west of Pico peak and crossing Route 4 west of Pico. All this so the AT would not traverse the ski trails and lifts in the interconnect. And we see how far that project has progressed in 2 decades, but the AT is relocated.

Sent from my SM-T900 using AlpineZone mobile app

I definitely would not want lifts at the top of Saddleback, or the AT relocated - that's one of the most spectacular ridge walks in the east. I was referring facetiously to the conveyor tunnel at Snowbird that connect the front side to Mineral Basin.