The 2006 AlpineZone Ski Area Challenge: SUGARBUSH Owner and Operator WIN SMITH!

[skibum1321]

Perhaps an FGQ would be okay if they don't extend it further down the hill. The spot where the VH double loads is sort of removed from the base so it would only service folks skiing that section of the hill. Nobody is going to hike up from the base to load it so it may keep use down a bit. Not sure that is worth it or meets the goal here, but it might serve to keep overcrowding down a bit. Consider this: would a FGQ which loads at the current station see more, less, or roughly the same use as a triple that loads down at the base-proper?

If they don't extend it down to the base then I don't see the need for the lift capacity that a quad would deliver. The area rarely seems to have large lift lines. I would like to see the double stay.

 

[Greg]

A couple of added comments. Allyn's Lodge was a terrible disappointment. I give myself a D-- on it. We used two outside vendors and in hindsight that was a mistake which we will not make next year. Because we do not have running water there we are limited as to what we can legally serve. However, it will be better next year.

Wow! :-o

Kudos for such an unpretentious response. Probably one of the most humble guys in the industry.

 

[Tin Woodsman]

A couple of added comments. Allyn's Lodge was a terrible disappointment. I give myself a D-- on it. We used two outside vendors and in hindsight that was a mistake which we will not make next year. Because we do not have running water there we are limited as to what we can legally serve. However, it will be better next year.

Castlerock was in the planning by ASC, but in our negotiation with them, we committed to it and paid for it.

The VH replacement comments was what Tin Woodsman clarified. I would not like to put too much traffic on that part of the Hill. HSQs move people faster and therefore put more people up top and do not allow for as much slope distribution. That is why I feel a fixed grip quad or triple would be better for us than a HSQ (or Heaven forbid a six pack.) I have to do more homework before deciding between a triple and quad. It is also good to have some insurance in case we have a problem with Bravo or a windhold. The current VH used to exit to the left but that was stopped by the tram authority as not being safe. The current narrowness at the exit of the VH lift is not at all desirable, but we are currently unable to change it. We hope that in working with the USFS that we can have a much better exit ramp with a new lift.

We do have active military tickets. We were also really flattered that the Vermont National Guard honored us with a citation for our support of an employee who was called to duty in Iraq and then in New Orleans.

I spent 10 years travelling to China, so I appreciate their culture and sayings. Readers probably know that the Chinese character for crisis is the same at that for opportunity. It is also fitting for the ski and ride business.

Wow - so much to respond to here. Really, really great insight Win. Thanks.

A couple of added comments. Allyn's Lodge was a terrible disappointment. I give myself a D-- on it. We used two outside vendors and in hindsight that was a mistake which we will not make next year. Because we do not have running water there we are limited as to what we can legally serve. However, it will be better next year.

Everyone makies mistakes, but it takes a great leader to admit as much. Thanks for your candor. I know that your hands are somewhat tied with the lack of septic at Allyn's but it's such a fantastic facility and setting, so it was a shame to see it not utilized to its fullest advantage last winter. Might I suggest a simplified approach next year whereby your internal F&B group simply takes a load of pre-made goodies (sandwiches, salads, wraps, power/granola bars, fruits, veggies) up there at the beginning of the day? Also, please staff no less than two people on that window, at least during the peak mid-day hours, in order to move things along. The lines pre-Waffle Haus in 2004-2005 were getting ridiculous on the colder days.

Castlerock was in the planning by ASC, but in our negotiation with them, we committed to it and paid for it.

Interesting. I had been under the impression that, at least from a timing perspective, this was a surprise sprung upon SV by the VT State Tramway board inspection that year.

The VH replacement comments was what Tin Woodsman clarified. I would not like to put too much traffic on that part of the Hill. HSQs move people faster and therefore put more people up top and do not allow for as much slope distribution. That is why I feel a fixed grip quad or triple would be better for us than a HSQ (or Heaven forbid a six pack.) I have to do more homework before deciding between a triple and quad. It is also good to have some insurance in case we have a problem with Bravo or a windhold. The current VH used to exit to the left but that was stopped by the tram authority as not being safe. The current narrowness at the exit of the VH lift is not at all desirable, but we are currently unable to change it. We hope that in working with the USFS that we can have a much better exit ramp with a new lift.

Very very interesting stuff. I completely understand your comments w/r/t skier distribution, at least when the lift isn't being utilized at full capacity (at full capacity, there would be no change in distribution). The only real benefit I could see for the quad, and one I hadn't thought off, is in providing a back-up for Bravo in case of mechanical failure or wind hold. I guess you could make an argument that you could install a quad, but only allow three people on each chair unless there's an issue with Bravo or GH? That might not be practical either. My view is that I'd much rather be at a proper carrying capacity for the 95% of time when Bravo will be on-line than for the 5% of the time when it will be off line. Perhaps the money would be better spent identifying and implementing solutions to reduce Bravo downtime instead of spending money to create what is likely to be idle capacity most of the time?

Would a redesigned top terminal for the new lift satisfy the USFS concerns? Or is there a broader issue regarding the total amount of space available there? Either way, I'm glad that you guys recognize that the current situation is, shall we say, less than optimal.

I spent 10 years travelling to China, so I appreciate their culture and sayings. Readers probably know that the Chinese character for crisis is the same at that for opportunity. It is also fitting for the ski and ride business.

So true, so true. I believe that crisis (weiji) actually is composed of two characters - danger (wei) and opportunity (ji).

 

[Tin Woodsman]

Perhaps an FGQ would be okay if they don't extend it further down the hill. The spot where the VH double loads is sort of removed from the base so it would only service folks skiing that section of the hill. Nobody is going to hike up from the base to load it so it may keep use down a bit. Not sure that is worth it or meets the goal here, but it might serve to keep overcrowding down a bit. Consider this: would a FGQ which loads at the current station see more, less, or roughly the same use as a triple that loads down at the base-proper?

My guess is that it would see less traffic, especially with the imminent demise of the VH Lodge. This of course begs the question of why you'd install a quad in the first place.

I think extension down to the lower base is the right approach for sure. And whether it's a FGQ or FGT, it's going to automatically see less traffic than Bravo b/c it's not a detatch and doesn't access as much terrain (much harder to get to the upper mtn from there). the question, IMO, is whether your install optimum capacity for the 95% of the time when Bravo is operational, or the 5% of the time when it's down. You can probably tell from how I've framed the question where I fall on this issue.

 

[Greg]

Regardless of the lift that replaces the VH double, can we be assured that The Mall will remain virtually unchanged? I'd hate to see such a great liftline altered in any way to accomodate a new lift. It seems wide enough to me that it won't need to be thinned out or graded in some way.

 

[Tin Woodsman]

Regardless of the lift that replaces the VH double, can we be assured that The Mall will remain virtually unchanged? I'd hate to see such a great liftline altered in any way to accomodate a new lift. It seems wide enough to me that it won't need to be thinned out or graded in some way.

The Mall, Twist and Moonshine represent some of SBs most sacred terrain, perhaps half a notch below Castlerock if only b/c of the lower snowfall they receive. SV messes with those trails at their peril.

 

[win]

Yup! They are classic New England and reachable from mid-mountain!

 

[Greg]

I posted a quick little blurb about Win's participation here:

http://news.alpinezone.com/8560/