Sugarbush is being sold to Alterra...

[skifree]

I dont think it's the "skiing" that will be killed, what I do worry about is that EPIC & IKON will kill new skier/snowboarder recruitment; and that wont show up in the data in a way that can likely be realistically measured for probably a decade. That's the bit I worry about.

+1

 

[cdskier]

I'm not sure I like the "as we know it today" part. It seems already too expensive for new skiers.

I remembered it didn't feel expensive when I learned (80's). I was a graduate student, living on part time jobs on campus. Can today's graduate students afford to go skiing the same?

I think the answer depends a lot on where they want to ski. I went to college in Rochester NY. We used to typically go to Bristol to ski (45 minutes away). Back then when we wanted to ski for cheap, we'd do the "Wegman's Family Night" where you could ski from 4PM until closing for relatively cheap. Looking at Bristol's site now, they still have that (Although they don't seem to require a Wegman's shopper's club card anymore). Now it is $89 for 3 people so less than $30 a person. That's pretty reasonable. I really don't think it was much cheaper when I was in college (nearly 20 years ago). I want to say maybe it was 3 for $75 back then as I don't remember paying less than $25 a person.

So I guess my point is deals can be found, but you're more likely to find them at the smaller "feeder" type mountains. If you're spoiled and want to just ski the major resorts, then it will be much more difficult to find those cheap deals (unless you get a college pass to 1 resort). I typically only did one major trip to VT a year back then, so I don't really have a point of reference for what it cost to try to ski the bigger places back then with day tickets.

 

[skimagic]

Yes but small is the operative word and conglomerate definitely doesn’t fit. First of all, Fairbanks Group is a local New England group that only operates those three areas. They started with Jiminy Peak (which I believe they no longer own, just operate), then took over operation of Cranmore (unsure of ownership) and more recently (5-7 years) began operating Bromley (which they do not own). So nowhere near a Boyne or a Powdr much less Vail or Alterra.

Although these 3 are part of a mini conglomerate, the "Fairbanks Pass" is not competitive, it only offers 1 ticket at the other 2 non home resorts. They do offer 15 bucks off a ticket at a bunch of other independents.

They need to change this model next season and offer a few more tickets at the very least

 

[BenedictGomez]

I typically only did one major trip to VT a year back then, so I don't really have a point of reference for what it cost to try to ski the bigger places back then with day tickets.

Cost to ski those resorts increased at a rate in excess of inflation over the years even at non EPIC/IKON resorts.

Of course, if we're talking EPIC/IKON resorts then the cost is absurdly higher, but that's a feature, not a bug.

 

[cdskier]

Cost to ski those resorts increased at a rate in excess of inflation over the years even at non EPIC/IKON resorts.

Of course, if we're talking EPIC/IKON resorts then the cost is absurdly higher, but that's a feature, not a bug.

I'd argue that's a "feature, not a bug" even at the non-Epic/Ikon places. Simply put, the big resorts want you buying season passes (or some other form of advance commitment such as discount cards, quad packs, advance online ticket sales, etc).

Another thing never really discussed, how have lodging prices changed over that same time? For me VT was never a day trip option and always required lodging of some sort. So right off the bat even with cheaper tickets that made VT "expensive" to me. If lodging has not increased much (or even decreased thanks to it being easier to find deals with AirBNB and the Internet in general), then at least for the people outside of day-trip range for VT the % price increase has been mitigated somewhat. Not that this justifies the high day ticket prices of course. But then again, we tend to compare walk up window ticket rates over time when in reality there are still ways to pay substantially less than that even at the big resorts today. It would be interesting to see true numbers on what price people actually paid for day tickets accounting for typical deals over the years. I suspect years ago you had a much higher percentage of people willing to just pay the walk up rates while today you have a much higher percentage using some sort of pre-purchased deal (i.e. a quad pack at SB for example).

 

[deadheadskier]

Devil's advocate

Season passes to the major players in the East were more expensive 20 years ago even without inflation. It was $1150 for an Okemo pass in 1999. Stowe was $1290.

Day tickets have obviously outpaced inflation, but how much of that is due to consolidation vs more snowmaking, grooming, high speed lifts, lodges/restaurants that require more staff etc.

Day tickets aren't necessarily the best metric on the cost to bring new people into the sport. I'd say learn to ski package pricing would be a better thing to look at. I have a friend that started last year at 42. I couldn't believe how affordable it was for him to do so. He got some crazy deal at Pat's Peak. I want to say it was $500 and included ownership of new skis and boots, five Saturday lessons and then once those were done he was given a pass for the rest of the season. He's now getting his kids into a program this winter. Single father on a high school teachers salary. I think as long as the ski areas maintain these type of programs consolidation won't matter too much. Let's not forget that industry participation has been flat since the 80s, so it's not like the industry was doing that much of a better job growing participation pre-consolidation

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[bdfreetuna]

Devil's advocate

Season passes to the major players in the East were more expensive 20 years ago even without inflation. It was $1150 for an Okemo pass in 1999. Stowe was $1290.

Day tickets have obviously outpaced inflation, but how much of that is due to consolidation vs more snowmaking, grooming, high speed lifts, lodges/restaurants that require more staff etc.

Day tickets aren't necessarily the best metric on the cost to bring new people into the sport. I'd say learn to ski package pricing would be a better thing to look at. I have a friend that started last year at 42. I couldn't believe how affordable it was for him to do so. He got some crazy deal at Pat's Peak. I want to say it was $500 and included ownership of new skis and boots, five Saturday lessons and then once those were done he was given a pass for the rest of the season. He's now getting his kids into a program this winter. Single father on a high school teachers salary. I think as long as the ski areas maintain these type of programs consolidation won't matter too much. Let's not forget that industry participation has been flat since the 80s, so it's not like the industry was doing that much of a better job growing participation pre-consolidation

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

Those are good insights, you should take those over to Scottys thread

 

[BenedictGomez]

Day tickets aren't necessarily the best metric on the cost to bring new people into the sport. I'd say learn to ski package pricing would be a better thing to look at.

They should be, but they're not.

Many people dont even know they exist.

I cant tell you how many people would show up at the register to buy a lift ticket, skis rental, and a lesson, without knowing that much cheaper bundled packages exist. Many more beginner people (inadvisably) just buy a lift ticket and forego lessons. Especially the people who are "just trying" it to see if they like it. It's all these people, and they are not a small number of total beginners, that I worry will never have that first day on the slopes due to the artificially high single-day lift ticket prices being demanded by Vail & Alterra.

 

[deadheadskier]

They should be, but they're not.

Many people dont even know they exist.

I cant tell you how many people would show up at the register to buy a lift ticket, skis rental, and a lesson, without knowing that much cheaper bundled packages exist. Many more beginner people (inadvisably) just buy a lift ticket and forego lessons. Especially the people who are "just trying" it to see if they like it. It's all these people, and they are not a small number of total beginners, that I worry will never have that first day on the slopes due to the artificially high single-day lift ticket prices being demanded by Vail & Alterra.

You would think today more than ever it would be much easier for the resorts to broadcast these package discounts.

Quite frankly, if someone shows up to pay rack rate, I don't have much sympathy. A minimum amount of research is all that's needed

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[bdfreetuna]

^^
That's discrimination against stupid people though.

Kind of joking but kind of serious. New skiers are "stupid". They don't know shit compared to us about where to go and for what reasons, how to save, etc.

They get taken advantage of like customers at a shitty car dealership to be frank.

The savvy will always have an edge!

 

[deadheadskier]

I can understand the added terrain above inverness. I would like to see that. I have no interest in putting trails and lifts in slide brook. We already ski that. Why ruin it for the people that actually enjoy less crowded areas. No need for lifts there and no need to dumb it down for the masses.

^^
That's discrimination against stupid people though.

Kind of joking but kind of serious. New skiers are "stupid". They don't know shit compared to us about where to go and for what reasons, how to save, etc.

They get taken advantage of like customers at a shitty car dealership to be frank.

The savvy will always have an edge!

Yeah, still no sympathy. lol

If I want to buy a product or service from an industry I know little about, at bare minimum I'm going to do some Google research or at least reach out to a friend or relative with experience.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[p_levert]

And I fear that in 10 years we will all look back on these mergers and realize how they killed skiing as we know it today.

Well I remember skiing in Colorado and Utah in the late 70s. That experience has already been killed, with just a few exceptions.

 

[1dog]

You would think today more than ever it would be much easier for the resorts to broadcast these package discounts.

Quite frankly, if someone shows up to pay rack rate, I don't have much sympathy. A minimum amount of research is all that's needed

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

Does Bush still have the never ever skied person purchase 2/3 or 4 lessons and get a season pass included? Was that way at least for kids under a certain age a while ago.

Everyones forgetting higher taxes everywhere - cuts into disposable income - many more choices in sports and couch sports- in the 80's few had $200 cable/internet packages and $100 mobile phone bills or $400/$500 car payments.

Gas is cheaper - way cheaper. Airbnb and VRBO types make lodging competitive if not cheaper. The public is fatter so less inclined to exercise.

VT is not business-friendly - less friendly now than 30 years ago. NH is a little better. Maine? No clue.

Rents are far higher, mortgage rates less than half 80's but prices 200-400% higher DC-Boston ( San Diego- Seattle too for that matter)

Equipment much improved and cheaper only if you look hard for last year's stuff. Retail prices are out of sight.

Ski areas are trying to grab more business in the off-season with mt biking/ wedding business, conferences, and beer fests/concerts.

Regulation and over-compensating for warming - it's .6 F degree warmer than 100 years ago - but the public is directed to believe its criminal to suggest there are two sides to the debate - are all adding to the cost.


Last example of the result of all of the above - and it's amazing to think its possibly true:
https://www.sfgate.com/expensive-sa...area-california-where-to-go-cost-13614119.php

53%? In such a beautiful state? Stunning. (BTW- gas is not cheaper there - paid $4.25 last summer out there)

 

[mister moose]

I agree that high prices discourage beginners at resorts. There are great alternatives at local hills.

Look at Blanford, a great local hill easily driveable from Hartford or Springfield, 3 chairs, 570 feet of vertical:

Lift, equipment, lesson for beginners: $70
Adult weekends lift ticket: $45
Weekday lift ticket: $20
Evening lift ticket: $25
Group adult lesson: $40
Season Pass: $259


This is not expensive compared to big VT resorts. Plus you can eliminate hotels and restaurants and day trip it.

 

[Killingtime]

^^
That's discrimination against stupid people though.

Kind of joking but kind of serious. New skiers are "stupid". They don't know shit compared to us about where to go and for what reasons, how to save, etc.

They get taken advantage of like customers at a shitty car dealership to be frank.

The savvy will always have an edge!

The internet and social media helps a lot now to pass along info and deals. When I first started I thought the whole ski world consisted of Hunter, Windham, Belleayre, a few places in Vermont and the "West". You are right though, I paid walk up rates for a season or two until I started skiing more and discovered all the deals out there.

 

[Orca]

Hopefully Alterra will realize that the numbers of skiers at Mt. Ellen are limited by the much too small and outdated base lodge that sullies the skiing experience there. (Ever try to eat lunch there on a Saturday? Nightmare.) With all due respect, I think Win had a blind spot in neglecting the physical plant at the base. He said he wanted to get more people to ski Ellen, but never did anything other than offer discounts, implicitly affirming it as an inferior product. People like nice things, and quite simply the Mt. Ellen base lodge isn't; it is claustrophobic and icky in that smelly old motel sort of way. But imagine this: a nice, airy, modern lodge with plenty of glass where people find sufficient and pleasant space to enjoy lunch or a rest. They might just prefer it to the Lincoln facilities.

 

[cdskier]

Devil's advocate

Season passes to the major players in the East were more expensive 20 years ago even without inflation. It was $1150 for an Okemo pass in 1999. Stowe was $1290.

Yes, an excellent point. I've personally benefited from this change as well. It is absolutely one of the best (and most cost effective) times to be a season pass holder.

Kind of joking but kind of serious. New skiers are "stupid". They don't know shit compared to us about where to go and for what reasons, how to save, etc.

Hmm, I don't know how much I agree with this. How many people on their own really jump into skiing with doing no research or not talking to anyone? I'd like to think most people either get introduced to the sport by parents, family or friends. In either case those people should be helping the new skiers know where to go and how to find the deals, etc.

Does Bush still have the never ever skied person purchase 2/3 or 4 lessons and get a season pass included? Was that way at least for kids under a certain age a while ago.

Yes (at least this season), but you have to be OVER a certain age (13), not under as they don't want to under-cut their existing kids ski school seasonal programs.

 

[bdfreetuna]

Hopefully Alterra will realize that the numbers of skiers at Mt. Ellen are limited by the much too small and outdated base lodge that sullies the skiing experience there. (Ever try to eat lunch there on a Saturday? Nightmare.) With all due respect, I think Win had a blind spot in neglecting the physical plant at the base. He said he wanted to get more people to ski Ellen, but never did anything other than offer discounts, implicitly affirming it as an inferior product. People like nice things, and quite simply the Mt. Ellen base lodge isn't; it is claustrophobic and icky in that smelly old motel sort of way. But imagine this: a nice, airy, modern lodge with plenty of glass where people find sufficient and pleasant space to enjoy lunch or a rest. They might just prefer it to the Lincoln facilities.

I'm fine with the lodge, I just avoid peak lunch times if it's busy. Rather keep it as a discount mountain with $40 Thursdays and cheaper tickets. Mount Ellen IMO should be a place like Bolton Valley & MRG where the amenities are just sufficient but the skiing is the focus.

 

[cdskier]

I'm fine with the lodge, I just avoid peak lunch times if it's busy. Rather keep it as a discount mountain with $40 Thursdays and cheaper tickets. Mount Ellen IMO should be a place like Bolton Valley & MRG where the amenities are just sufficient but the skiing is the focus.

Personally I agree with this. I suspect I'm not the only one either... (of course this could also partly be out of selfishness where I don't want to see it be more popular!)

 

[bdfreetuna]

Hmm, I don't know how much I agree with this. How many people on their own really jump into skiing with doing no research or not talking to anyone? I'd like to think most people either get introduced to the sport by parents, family or friends. In either case those people should be helping the new skiers know where to go and how to find the deals, etc

I have special sympathies because I married Puerto Rican, and her some of her friends started skiing and snowboarding after I taught my wife. So you get the perspective of a real "outsider" to the entire culture and with no families ties, etc.

Funny thing is a lot of, immigrants we'll say, think skiing is the ultimate activity but many of them just think of it as a bucket list kind of thing, instead of actually taking that leap and participating.

Cost is one thing, but there is also a culture in skiing that is about sharing knowledge with an "in group". And people show up to the mountain not knowing a thing and carrying their skis wrong getting weird looks, it's probably a little intimidating at first.