Ski Vermont Reports Record Breaking Season

[Mapnut]

Was travel out of Boston impaired by big snowstorms? That would hurt NH and ME more than VT.

 

[deadheadskier]

Fair enough. I hadn't seen any articles from NH or ME outlining their skier visits. I did read an article from February stating ME was on pace to possibly break their skier visit record, but I guess they fell off that pace.

Interesting that Sugarloaf, arguably the coldest major ski area in the Northeast had a record year.

 

[steamboat1]

Skier visits don't necessarily translate into profits. If you remember just last month Vail Resorts reported lower skier visits but higher profits. I don't know if that held true at other resorts.

 

[BenedictGomez]

I'm still trying to figure out why Vermont fared better than New Hampshire.

Two reasons come to mind, both of which have to do with the fact that Vermont has some very large ski areas in its southern portion whereas New Hampshire does not.
1) Southern Vermont got some bigger dumps than northern Vermont and nothern New Hampshire received.
2) During the real cold snaps, skiers might have preferred the southern Vermont areas, such as Mt. Snow and Stratton, and didn't have comparable areas to choose from in southern New Hampshire.

I think the Occam's Razon answer is simply that Boston got hammered quite a bit. The Boston skier is more likely to ski New Hampshire than Vermont. Conversely, I-87 is the Vermont ski capillary, and that coast was clear most of the season.

 

[thetrailboss]

I'm still trying to figure out why Vermont fared better than New Hampshire.

Two reasons come to mind, both of which have to do with the fact that Vermont has some very large ski areas in its southern portion whereas New Hampshire does not.
1) Southern Vermont got some bigger dumps than northern Vermont and nothern New Hampshire received.
2) During the real cold snaps, skiers might have preferred the southern Vermont areas, such as Mt. Snow and Stratton, and didn't have comparable areas to choose from in southern New Hampshire.

Take a look at the resorts in Vermont and compare them to NH. Aside from Cannon, Wildcat, and maybe Loon, the other areas are moderate size if not smaller day resorts. Look at how many areas in NH have 2,000 vertical feet. That and the fact that NYer's go to VT.

 

[chuckstah]

VT areas with 2000 vert: Bush, Stowe, Smuggs, and K, if you take the beginner route down to route 4. Also, Okemo with a lot of traversing.
NH: Cannon, Loon, Wildcat, .and Waterville
Pretty close according to
Mountainvertical.com.
Other mountains in VT round up to 2000 feet: MRG, Pico, Jay, Stratton.
I prefer skiing Vt, but have to also give credit to my home state of NH.

 

[machski]

"Nationally, preliminary numbers show Vermont among just a few states in the country - and the only one in the Northeast - with increased visits."

Preliminary Numbers I believe is key. It sounds like Vermont has finalized its numbers ahead of most other states/regions. So they are are first to the press with their actual numbers. As others have said, I have yet to see NH or ME make any official statement about the winter skier visits this year. Hard to compare apples to oranges right now until all numbers are "official and total". Still, good for VT for having a great skier visit year. I love the line about big snows, but I guess when conditions stayed as consistently good as they did, you can pretty much say anything and get away with it

 

[joshua segal]

I'm not surprised that the destination resorts (2000+ vertical) did well. Bookings at these areas in many cases are made well in advance (independent of snow conditions or forecasts) and may well be a reflection on the improving economy rather than the weather.

 

[machski]

I'm not surprised that the destination resorts (2000+ vertical) did well. Bookings at these areas in many cases are made well in advance (independent of snow conditions or forecasts) and may well be a reflection on the improving economy rather than the weather.

Tell that to the big resorts out west then. Sorry, people cancel bookings made far in advance when the weather for skiing does not cooperate.

 

[machski]

NH has reported in, with a gain over 2013-2014 though not a record skier visit year.

New Hampshire Ski Areas Report 4th Best Season

Strong Spring Skiing Season Keeps 2014/15 Season in Top 5

Lincoln, NH – The 2014/15 ski season in New Hampshire will go down as the fourth best season on record, with over 2.57 million visits (alpine, cross-country and tubing) to NH ski areas combined. While the season kicked off with 12” of snow in most areas around the state, making for a great early season, key periods between the Christmas holiday week and Presidents Day vacation saw weather challenges. Nonetheless, abundant snowfall in February and March resulted in numerous record-breaking spring skiing days for many New Hampshire ski areas.

This winter alpine ski areas recorded 2,311,095 visits, which was an increase of 1.7% over 2013/14, and a gain of 5.1% over the 10-year average.

 

[deadheadskier]

That's why I questioned the validity of the statement that Vermont was the only Northeastern state with increased visits. The statement didn't seem accurate given the stellar conditions we had. I wonder how Maine, MA and CT faired compared to 13-14

 

[from_the_NEK]

VT areas with 2000 vert: Bush, Stowe, Smuggs, and K, if you take the beginner route down to route 4. Also, Okemo with a lot of traversing.
NH: Cannon, Loon, Wildcat, .and Waterville
Pretty close according to
Mountainvertical.com.
Other mountains in VT round up to 2000 feet: MRG, Pico, Jay, Stratton.
I prefer skiing Vt, but have to also give credit to my home state of NH.

I hate that website. I get what they are trying to do (report a measurement of continuous vertical) but the numbers they come up with seem very arbitrary.
If you are going to include -

"K, if you take the beginner route down to route 4. Also, Okemo with a lot of traversing" -

in your list of 2000' vert mountains, you have to include Burke. I have no idea how they came up with 1928' unless they stopped their measurement when they skied into top level Powderhorn condo for lunch.

And how they get 2003' for Waterville is a head scratcher unless they measured down into the parking lot (Waterville's own claim is that they are 2020' but that number is from the summit of Mt Tecumseh a half mile away from the nearest lift :roll: ).

Anyway, my rant is done.... Carry on

 

[dlague]

I hate that website. I get what they are trying to do (report a measurement of continuous vertical) but the numbers they come up with seem very arbitrary.
If you are going to include -

"K, if you take the beginner route down to route 4. Also, Okemo with a lot of traversing" -

in your list of 2000' vert mountains, you have to include Burke. I have no idea how they came up with 1928' unless they stopped their measurement when they skied into top level Powderhorn condo for lunch.

And how they get 2003' for Waterville is a head scratcher unless they measured down into the parking lot (Waterville's own claim is that they are 2020' but that number is from the summit of Mt Tecumseh a half mile away from the nearest lift :roll: ).

Anyway, my rant is done.... Carry on

I agree with you - there was a whole debate about this last summer!

 

[from_the_NEK]

I agree with you - there was a whole debate about this last summer!

I know, right?.
People should really read back through threads to learn that quoting elevations from that website is a bad idea ;-).

 

[WWF-VT]

Was travel out of Boston impaired by big snowstorms? That would hurt NH and ME more than VT.

No - most of the storms came early in the week and had no impact on the weekend travelers from Boston.

 

[slatham]

A couple of challenges:

Boston people don't ski VT? 89 is a major route to Northern VT and heavily traffic by Boston-area skiers going to VT. I agree that So VT see little from the Boston area. But North has a lot of people from Boston. (anyone have any real data on this?)

2000' vert areas - you guys already covered to some extent. But areas like Stratton, Burke, Mad River Glen and Jay are substantial ski areas that are "around" or over 2,000 vert. And Sugarbush is 2 mountains. No comparison to NH.

I agree that many of the Boston storms did not hit right on a weekend. But the shear amount of snow, the clean up of driveways and roofs etc, had to have a significant impact on skier visits.

 

[deadheadskier]

No - most of the storms came early in the week and had no impact on the weekend travelers from Boston.

Not entirely accurate. I've got several friends in Jamaica Plains and Allston who were unable to use their cars for many days following a couple of the storms as the city was so overwhelmed it took that long for the plow trucks to arrive.

 

[Jully]

Yes, even if the storms themselves didn't come on a weekend, people were exhausted from commuting for 3x the normal commute length because of public transportation and road issues, or had broken pipes, roofs, etc to deal with. Wachusett at some point around March reported significantly lower skier visits, partly because of the cold, but most likely because people didn't want to go skiing on the weekend after the dreadful weather during the week

 

[BenedictGomez]

That's why I questioned the validity of the statement that Vermont was the only Northeastern state with increased visits.

As someone who spends a lot of time crunching data, the cynic in me questions how you go from a decrease on analysis of your preliminary data, to an increase on final analysis of the data. There could be a perfectly logical explanation, but there might not me. lol

I hate that website.

in your list of 2000' vert mountains, you have to include Burke. I have no idea how they came up with 1928' unless they stopped their measurement when they skied into top level Powderhorn condo for lunch.

I dont see why their 1,928 Burke figure bothers you, as Burke's own figure is barely 2,000 feet itself at 2,011.

It's not like 2,011 versus 1,928 is a dramatic difference to begin with, but given Mountain Veritcal's impartiality (and obvious lack of motivation to eek out a 2,000th foot versus 1,999) I'd inherently trust Mountain Vertical's 1,928 to the resort's 2,011.

 

[deadheadskier]

As someone who spends a lot of time crunching data, the cynic in me questions how you go from a decrease on analysis of your preliminary data, to an increase on final analysis of the data. There could be a perfectly logical explanation, but there might not me. lol
.

What I'm guessing is that they projected out end of season numbers following February vacation weeks. Usually northeast ski areas see 90+% of their business prior to March 1st, so it's fairly simple to project reasonably accurate end of year numbers.

This year March was cold and the flat lands were still covered in snow into April. People couldn't golf or participate in other warm weather outdoor activities, so they kept skiing. Then when it did warm up in April all the ski areas were still at or near 100% open, so more people than normal continued to go.

I had nothing to base things off of, but I know in NH, it "felt" like a pretty busy season despite some holiday busts and I was surprised to hear numbers were down. Turns out numbers were up we now find out.