Ski Area Challenge - 2006 Feedback Thread

[Greg]

Any interest in us doing this again this spring/summer?

 

[riverc0il]

i think this was a great concept in theory but often missed in practice on two different fronts:

first, i think many of the questions were routed from personal vendetas and issues individuals had with the ski area. if you have an issue regarding your ski visit, you should take it up with the management personally. questions also missed with the general trend of the same questions for every ski area: any new lifts? any expansion plans? new terrain? new snow making? price changes? etc. essentially, 90% of the questions could have been addressed with a standardized questionaire (a possible idea, fwiw).

second, the other aspect of the miss was 75-80% of respondants replying in market driven advertising lingo instead of breaking things down. in other words (and with all due respect to the marketing folks who were just doing their job), folks were not stepping up to the "challenge" aspect and delivering the straight poop (for the most part, some exceptions). i don't see the point in making a big deal about information we could be gathering from a ski area's web site.

that is just my take on the challenge. refining it would be a good idea. standardized questionaire for all areas and focus on perhaps one major area per month that has a lot going on that hasn't been put on the table to dig down deeper. also, the word challenge may appear hostile to resorts despite the intentions. a more interview developed article/interview format may be helpful... and those only for areas with some activity and lots of unanswered questions.

cheers.
:beer:

 

[Greg]

Perhaps just focusing on a limited number (maybe a half dozen) of ski areas each summer or so is a good approach versus trying to get as many as possible participating. If a ski area is selected as a respondant, maybe we can somehow try to encourage more thoughful and enlightening responses.

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

Perhaps just focusing on a limited number (maybe a half dozen) of ski areas each summer or so is a good approach versus trying to get as many as possible participating. If a ski area is selected as a respondant, maybe we can somehow try to encourage more thoughful and enlightening responses.

I liked it just the way you've done it in the past. I've looked forward to it the last 2 years. It's a great asset to Alpine Zone.

 

[skibum1321]

Perhaps just focusing on a limited number (maybe a half dozen) of ski areas each summer or so is a good approach versus trying to get as many as possible participating. If a ski area is selected as a respondant, maybe we can somehow try to encourage more thoughful and enlightening responses.

I think if we are going to do it, we need to at least have the ones that are discussed most here (Whiteface, Sugarbush, MRG, Jay, Kmart, etc). I may be alone on this one but I really don't care what is going to be happening at Mountain Creek or Stratton (sorry for singling out Intrawest. Insert any ski area not discussed often on the forum) this summer and next season.

 

[thetrailboss]

FWIW Stratton and other Intrawest Resorts have historically not participated.

One of the benefits of the program was also to elevate the status of lesser known resorts.

 

[riverc0il]

i think i may have floated this idea before, but perhaps the "challenge" should be looking back at past challenges and following up? the challenge could most certainly be accountability to customers and see if the ski areas followed up on their talk. it is so easy to talk, accountability is such an important factor. talk gets nothing done, accountability gets everything done.

 

[MikeTrainor]

I am up for it but have to agree to leave personal stuff out of it. No complaing there was ice on a certain day or a trail was closed for a race, etc. (No offense to members who asked those questions). Also rather than doing every resort every year, maybe divide the resorts into two groups and alternate every year

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

I am up for it but have to agree to leave personal stuff out of it. No complaing there was ice on a certain day or a trail was closed for a race, etc. (No offense to members who asked those questions). Also rather than doing every resort every year, maybe divide the resorts into two groups and alternate every year

I agree about the personal stuff, it should, IMO, be about what will be new, different, or better at each mountain. However, I think the more responding each year the better.

 

[deadheadskier]

i think this was a great concept in theory but often missed in practice on two different fronts:

first, i think many of the questions were routed from personal vendetas and issues individuals had with the ski area. if you have an issue regarding your ski visit, you should take it up with the management personally. questions also missed with the general trend of the same questions for every ski area: any new lifts? any expansion plans? new terrain? new snow making? price changes? etc. essentially, 90% of the questions could have been addressed with a standardized questionaire (a possible idea, fwiw).

I agree that personal beefs should be taken up on an individual basis with the resort's management. Blogging rarely helps the individual resolve their problem.

As for the general trend of questions, I don't really see a problem with that and it should be expected. Ask any ski resort manager what are the two greatest things an area can do to increase market share and they'll respond lift/trail expansion and increasing the bed base at the mountain. While these questions might not intrigue you all that much as from what I've read of your posts over the years, you're much more of a purist than the traditional skier. Most of the masses though have interests in skiing just like every other facet of society. Will it be bigger, better, newer, faster etc than before? A standardized form is a decent idea, but at the end of the day, I think it helps feed the egos of some skiers to ask the questions directly themselves

second, the other aspect of the miss was 75-80% of respondants replying in market driven advertising lingo instead of breaking things down. in other words (and with all due respect to the marketing folks who were just doing their job), folks were not stepping up to the "challenge" aspect and delivering the straight poop (for the most part, some exceptions). i don't see the point in making a big deal about information we could be gathering from a ski area's web site.

that is just my take on the challenge. refining it would be a good idea. standardized questionaire for all areas and focus on perhaps one major area per month that has a lot going on that hasn't been put on the table to dig down deeper. also, the word challenge may appear hostile to resorts despite the intentions. a more interview developed article/interview format may be helpful... and those only for areas with some activity and lots of unanswered questions.

cheers.
:beer:

the later is also inevitable. the marketing folks can only tip there hand so much and need to play the middle of the field in their responses. Ambiguity is king in the ski business, just look at the average snow report.


all and all my opinion is that the challenge is a great little piece to read for the summer while we're all dreaming of snowlife to come. I hope you continue the trend next summer Greg.

 

[Greg]

Bump.

 

[Vortex]

I talked to a couple of folks from the Sr board who poke over and look at it. Hoping to see it again.

 

[Sky]

Hmmm...here's a self-serving question for the proposed "standard" questionaire:

"Would you be intersetd in sponsoring an AZ outing?" (looking for discount tix of course).

I like the smaller resorts option. I understand why some folks would prefer to focus on the resorts discussed "most" in here.

Regardless...I support doing the "challenge". I trust the mods to "approach" the resorts in such a way as to alleviate concerns about the word "challenge". AND...*Greg*, I've come 180 on the concept of having questions edited by the mods. That way the "edge" can be taken off the more daggered questions and we still get answers to questions....and AZ looks (remains) credible (and maybe we get a sponsored AZ outing *smirk*)

 

[thetrailboss]

I'm not sure if I like the standard questionaire proposal.

As the moderator who worked with Greg on this last season, certain people have a knowledge of certain resorts and we all learned from them when they posed questions to the resorts that they had an intimate knowledge of. I also feel that using "cookie cutter" questions eliminates participation by members and will discredit the forum.

Why fix something that is not broken?

Now there were some mountains and places that we could not get enough questions for, so I inserted some common questions (what are you doing for this season? Improvements? etc). So we can certainly insert one or two pre-selected questions. But I would not go more than that. The point, from my angle, was to be a connection between the resorts and us.

 

[Greg]

I'm not sure if I like the standard questionaire proposal.

As the moderator who worked with Greg on this last season, certain people have a knowledge of certain resorts and we all learned from them when they posed questions to the resorts that they had an intimate knowledge of. I also feel that using "cookie cutter" questions eliminates participation by members and will discredit the forum.

Why fix something that is not broken?

Now there were some mountains and places that we could not get enough questions for, so I inserted some common questions (what are you doing for this season? Improvements? etc). So we can certainly insert one or two pre-selected questions. But I would not go more than that. The point, from my angle, was to be a connection between the resorts and us.

I agree here. The point of the challenge is to open up a channel of communication between you and the resorts. As trailboss said, if we don't get enough questions within a reaonable amount of time, we'll take the liberty of including some stock questions in order to move forward. With that said, I think we should select ten or so ski areas max and concentrate on those this summer. Also, perhaps ten questions is too many. Maybe five? Trailboss and I are working out the details in the coming days/weeks and we'll follow up with how we're going to proceed. Perhaps we'll start a thread looking for "nominations" of resorts you'd like to see participate. Keep the feedback coming...

 

[Vortex]

Some of Sky's points have good value..ie AZ outing ideas and discounts. I think we need to work on that a bit, but the challenge may not be the place. Your goals seem to be similar to mine SKY. Good post

 

[kcyanks1]

that is just my take on the challenge. refining it would be a good idea. standardized questionaire for all areas and focus on perhaps one major area per month that has a lot going on that hasn't been put on the table to dig down deeper. also, the word challenge may appear hostile to resorts despite the intentions. a more interview developed article/interview format may be helpful... and those only for areas with some activity and lots of unanswered questions.

I don't like the standardized questions idea. I think I've enjoyed some questions tailored to specific ski areas from people who know those ski areas well. For ski areas that have publicized potential expansion plans, there are some here who know the areas very well, and can ask tailored questions about the plans. For ski areas with recent changes in ownership, we can learn about the direction the new owners intend to take the place.

I've actually enjoyed the Challenge a lot the way it has been. Some areas do a better job responding than others, but it has still been fun, in my opinion.

 

[Greg]

Well, with Mount Snow's response, we've officially wrapped up the 2006 ski area challenge. This was our third year in a row and I think it was very successful again, and has value. I think the respondents did a great job overall, and we even had some participation from upper management, most notably Win Smith of Sugarbush. We got a few new participants on board and even had some drama with the Killington challenge. The most positive results though has been increased participation from Industry reps directly in the forums, including Tom from Killington, Chris from Mount Snow, Win, et.al. That's been part of the goal overall - to make AZ the place to come to get the real scoop on things.

So.....overall, do you have any other feedback or comments regarding the 2006 challenge? A big thanks to thetrailboss for taking on even more of a role this year. :beer: