The Future of the Ski Industry

[skiNEwhere]

I'm hoping someone who picked up skiing as an adult can answer this, since I started as a kid:

"How did you get into the sport?"
"How did you figure out what equipment and gear you needed?"
"Where was the first place you skied?"
"What were your first impressions?"
"How much did everything cost?"

The reason I bring this up, is because, as we all know, skiing is not a cheap sport. And I think skiing has a MUCH higher potential to make a poor first impression than other sports.

Lets say someone in Mass sees an ad for Wildcat. They head up there, and don't understand the concept of layers, and end up freezing their ass off and swearing off skiing forever. I can't see how you can make a poor first impression in regards to the way you dress with golf.

I'm not a golfer, I don't know how much it costs to play if you have to rent everything vs skiing if you have to rent everything. I don't know what ski shops let people rent these days either in terms of ski clothes. The majority of people don't like the cold, so if it is an especially cold day for skiing, that person may not want to try again unless they absolutely fall in love with the sport the first time.

I try to ski weekdays at all costs, but if I ski on the weekend, I prefer the temps between -5 and 10, because that is still bearable for me, and there are noticeably less crowds, which goes to show most people won't voluntarily put themselves out in that weather.

I'm being somewhat extreme in using Wildcat as an example, but this is just to illustrate the end of the spectrum that a skier could fall on when skiing for the first time.

 

[mister moose]

Lets say someone in Mass sees an ad for Wildcat. They head up there, and don't understand the concept of layers, and end up freezing their ass off and swearing off skiing forever. I can't see how you can make a poor first impression in regards to the way you dress with golf.

If you grew up in New England, and don't know how to dress to be outdoors in the winter, you probably never did this, and don't have the inner child to be a skier.

 

[skiNEwhere]

If you don't know how to dress to be outdoors in the winter, you probably never did this:

LOL Did that all the time, along with snow bank igloos.

I grew up outside of Boston though, so I only had 2 layers on max, which wouldn't work for wildcat on a "typical" day.

 

[Domeskier]

The future of golf, like skiing, lies in the proliferation of domes.

 

[AdironRider]

I'm hoping someone who picked up skiing as an adult can answer this, since I started as a kid:

"How did you get into the sport?"
"How did you figure out what equipment and gear you needed?"
"Where was the first place you skied?"
"What were your first impressions?"
"How much did everything cost?"

The reason I bring this up, is because, as we all know, skiing is not a cheap sport. And I think skiing has a MUCH higher potential to make a poor first impression than other sports.

Lets say someone in Mass sees an ad for Wildcat. They head up there, and don't understand the concept of layers, and end up freezing their ass off and swearing off skiing forever. I can't see how you can make a poor first impression in regards to the way you dress with golf.

I'm not a golfer, I don't know how much it costs to play if you have to rent everything vs skiing if you have to rent everything. I don't know what ski shops let people rent these days either in terms of ski clothes. The majority of people don't like the cold, so if it is an especially cold day for skiing, that person may not want to try again unless they absolutely fall in love with the sport the first time.

I try to ski weekdays at all costs, but if I ski on the weekend, I prefer the temps between -5 and 10, because that is still bearable for me, and there are noticeably less crowds, which goes to show most people won't voluntarily put themselves out in that weather.

I'm being somewhat extreme in using Wildcat as an example, but this is just to illustrate the end of the spectrum that a skier could fall on when skiing for the first time.

This is a stupid analogy. If someone has a bad day skiing since they were cold, they were never going to enjoy it in the first place. They dont like winter.

You really like to overthink things.

 

[skiNEwhere]

This is a stupid analogy. If someone has a bad day skiing since they were cold, they were never going to enjoy it in the first place. They dont like winter.

You really like to overthink things.

I don't think you get the meaning of "first impressions"

I use wildcat as an extreme example. Everytime I went there it was below 0 at the summit, which that skier may take as the standard for all resorts. Most causal skiers don't ski when it's below 0.

 

[AdironRider]

Your analogy still sucks.

Cold and skiing are hand in hand. Saying someone had a bad first impression because of it is just dumb. That person most likely isn't going skiing in the first place. Thats the point, not whatever mountain you chose to put in there.

 

[VTKilarney]

I think it's a fair analogy in that a newbie who books a weekend in advance is going to have a bad impression if the weather turns out to be sub-zero.

 

[deadheadskier]

I think his point DH was are you rocking 10 year old skis, using the same boots for a similar period of time, etc? Sure you can do it, but like skiing, if you decide you really like the sport you are probably spending more money than you say.

I'm really not. Four year old racket I got for $40. It's been restrung once and had the grip redone once. Second set of shoes. Other than that it's just balls. Wife and I try to get out there 2-3 days a week to rally for an hour or so. Nothing competitive, just fun. 90% of the tennis players I see (I mainly play at the rec area in your hometown of Exeter) don't play matches, they just bang a ball around. When the wife isn't into it, I'll head to the courts like I did tonight and work on my serve for an hour.

I'm pretty content just to keep it simple and inexpensive. I may someday get a ball machine, which cost big bucks. If I had more people to play with, that wouldn't be necessary.

 

[BenedictGomez]

Four year old racket I got for $40. It's been restrung once and had the grip redone once. Second set of shoes. Other than that it's just balls.

Lol. We're talking about two WAY different sports.

Yes, tennis CAN be cheap, and that's great, but I was approaching it from the standpoint of someone who's into it and takes it seriously. You 100% need two racquets (3 really), because once you get pretty good you start to break strings somewhat commonly from the swing speed and (mostly) from the topspin you're generating. Topspin wears away at the strings. Think of taking a knife and quickly just barely brushing against a wire, after a while that wire will fray. And even if you didnt break a string, you'd restring it after a while, because when you get advanced you can tell approximately how many pounds of pressure the stings are strung at, and each racquet needs to the constant for your game (looser for more power, tighter for more control). Grips? If you're playing 8 hours a week, those grips get dank and nasty pretty quick (though that's not too much of an expense).

 

[goldsbar]

Kid focused parents. My grandparents were of the "seen and not heard" approach to kids. Now the program sports drive the parents' schedule all year long. Schools are more rigid on days out of school, some schools fine parents for too many missed days.

This one. I have a 6 and 9 y/o. Many parents are already deep into the whole "travel" sport thing at these ages. Worst part is many of the kids are just mediocre, but the parents wrap their lives around driving them town-to-town to sit on the bench. This trend needs to change for skiing to become more popular - good luck!

 

[deadheadskier]

Lol. We're talking about two WAY different sports.

Yes, tennis CAN be cheap, and that's great, but I was approaching it from the standpoint of someone who's into it and takes it seriously. You 100% need two racquets (3 really), because once you get pretty good you start to break strings somewhat commonly from the swing speed and (mostly) from the topspin you're generating. Topspin wears away at the strings. Think of taking a knife and quickly just barely brushing against a wire, after a while that wire will fray. And even if you didnt break a string, you'd restring it after a while, because when you get advanced you can tell approximately how many pounds of pressure the stings are strung at, and each racquet needs to the constant for your game (looser for more power, tighter for more control). Grips? If you're playing 8 hours a week, those grips get dank and nasty pretty quick (though that's not too much of an expense).

You are talking about a very small percentage of competitive players; likely those who belong to a club.

I'm just talking recreational tennis - banging a ball around. Like I said, I get out there a few days a week, get some exercise and have fun. The vast majority of people I see are just like me; not wannabe Rafael Nadals.

Kind of like how the vast majority of skiers don't have the latest and greatest equipment and aren't trying to become the next Bode Miller. You see a lot of ten year old gear on the hill in New England.

 

[machski]

I think skiing can still thrive in this era. But this will depend on if people still want to enjoy the outdoors in the winter. Granted there are alternatives like snowshoeing, x-c, snow biking, biathlon and I guess even snowmobiling. From a resort standpoint, many of these can go together and be marketed as a total package.
As far as learning to ski, we are starting to see some evolution here. Cranmore started using shaped learning terrain to keep it fun and keep newbies upright day 1. They took park elements (ramps, rollers and pipes) and scaled them way back to contour terrain and allow a constant but easy flow with built in speed brakes. That is kind of cool!

 

[4aprice]

As far as learning to ski, we are starting to see some evolution here. Cranmore started using shaped learning terrain to keep it fun and keep newbies upright day 1. They took park elements (ramps, rollers and pipes) and scaled them way back to contour terrain and allow a constant but easy flow with built in speed brakes. That is kind of cool!

It's called terrain based teaching and its at several places. It's designed to take the fear factor out and its got good points.

Alex

Lake Hopatcong, NJ

 

[Highway Star]

Lol. We're talking about two WAY different sports.

Yes, tennis CAN be cheap, and that's great, but I was approaching it from the standpoint of someone who's into it and takes it seriously. You 100% need two racquets (3 really), because once you get pretty good you start to break strings somewhat commonly from the swing speed and (mostly) from the topspin you're generating. Topspin wears away at the strings. Think of taking a knife and quickly just barely brushing against a wire, after a while that wire will fray. And even if you didnt break a string, you'd restring it after a while, because when you get advanced you can tell approximately how many pounds of pressure the stings are strung at, and each racquet needs to the constant for your game (looser for more power, tighter for more control). Grips? If you're playing 8 hours a week, those grips get dank and nasty pretty quick (though that's not too much of an expense).

Just on a side note, from all my gear I could put together a completely high end skis/boots/bindings/poles setup that I paid about $250 for. My normal ski/binding setups range from $100-$500, with most around $300-$350, mostly high end sandwich construction midfats/fats and metal high din race bindings. Boots used be about $200, but I'm into my current pair for about $500 over time. Poles (scott series 4, the best ever) about $30-$50. Dropped about $1500 last year on various gear including multiple pairs of skis, bindings, poles, clothes, tuning supplies, and a current year pair of boots. Nothing this year.

Between lifts, lodging and transportation, I'll probably pay about $60-$70 per day this year even while trying to cut back on costs, which really does add up.

 

[snoseek]

As someone that's been working at clubs for the better part of the past two decades I can tell you that the decline is noticeable...but some of that is due to a boom back awhile ago, much of it driven by real estate. The bubble burst for sure. Skiing is similar maybe?

People are also glued to there games/facebook/iphone. I feel like this is going to be a trend going forward.

 

[mister moose]

Continuing my banter with "mister moose":

We're talking about small feeder areas and you bring up Okemo? Westford was already well on its way to boom-town status when Nashoba Valley set up shop.

Obviously Okemo is not an example of a feeder hill. I used it as an example of an area that is not going to get sold any time soon to be a subdivision. Just like Storrs Hill in Lebanon, see below. Plenty of land around it, no development pressure. Not the case with Woodbury CT, that is prime real estate. I'm not familiar with Nashoba Valley. The larger point is that development is not threatening all ski areas, just those that are not on public land, and are near enough to large populations to create development pressure.

Mister moose said, "Cheaper lift tickets come from lower snowmaking costs, and the related shorter season and more dependence on natural snow."

That statement is just plain untrue. Taxes have to be paid based on 12 months a year. Depreciation is based on 12 months a year. The more those costs can be amortized over a longer season, the better it is for both the ski area and its employees. Killington management has told me they are profitable through the end of April. Most areas turn off the lifts when the customers (read: cash-flow or profitability) disappear, which is usually 2-weeks before the snow disappears.

Nice list of unrelated statements, but your first one is blatantly wrong. And you clearly have no clue on managing costs in a business to keep prices down. So let me school you a little:

Cochrans, VT, $20 lift ticket, T-bar, 350 feet vertical.
Northeast Slopes, VT, $15 lift ticket, T-bar, 360 feet vertical.
Storrs Hill, NH, $10 lift ticket, Poma-lift, 300 feet vertical.

Killington, VT $92 lift ticket, chairs and gondolas, 3,050 vertical.

Now pay attention, there will be a test at the end.

The OP said:

IMHO, skiing is just too expensive for the average family to dabble in. It's also a massive time commitment. There are fewer and fewer feeder hills to develop a new client base.

Which hills of the 4 above is a 'feeder hill'?
Which hill has a lower lift ticket?
Which hill has cheaper lifts, less snowmaking, fewer operating days per week, and a shorter season?
Which hills are more affordable for a family to learn on?

 

[BenedictGomez]

This one. I have a 6 and 9 y/o. Many parents are already deep into the whole "travel" sport thing at these ages. Worst part is many of the kids are just mediocre, but the parents wrap their lives around driving them town-to-town to sit on the bench. This trend needs to change for skiing to become more popular - good luck!

I think this is the biggest difference in sports now from when I was a kid. The travel is crazy. I dont even understand why it's necessary until they're teens.

You are talking about a very small percentage of competitive players; likely those who belong to a club.

I'm just talking recreational tennis - banging a ball around. Like I said, I get out there a few days a week, get some exercise and have fun. The vast majority of people I see are just like me; not wannabe Rafael Nadals.

Kind of like how the vast majority of skiers don't have the latest and greatest equipment and aren't trying to become the next Bode Miller. You see a lot of ten year old gear on the hill in New England.

No, not at all. Anyone who's into tennis would be just like that, even at a recreational level, yes certainly club too, and any high school tennis players as well or any younger kids taking lessons. It's the same with this ski board, most people on this board aren't on "ten year old gear on the hill". The tennis folks you're talking about just want to hit a tennis ball 5 or 6 times per year (likely around Wimbleton & the US Open, which is when the public courts are clogged), I guess they'd be comparable to the 1 or 2 time-per-year skiers who are still on straight skis and (GASP) rear-entry boots. They're still having fun, but they're certainly not invested in the sport.

Cochrans, VT, $20 lift ticket, T-bar, 350 feet vertical.
Northeast Slopes, VT, $15 lift ticket, T-bar, 360 feet vertical.
Storrs Hill, NH, $10 lift ticket, Poma-lift, 300 feet vertical.

Killington, VT $92 lift ticket, chairs and gondolas, 3,050 vertical.

CORRECTION: Killington's real, skiable, enjoyable, vertical, is closer to only 1,650 feet (even less than Okemo).

Don't spread Killington's marketing lies.

 

[deadheadskier]

Well then, the tennis demographic is different down by you than what it is here. I can only report what I see on the courts on the NH seacoast. Hacks like me with cheap equipment getting a little exercise. That's 90% of what you see. People looking for cheap affordable exercise / entertainment.

And I guess my high school was different than where you play. Not a single player on the varsity tennis team had more than one racket. I played JV one year, but we all practiced together. The coach had a spare if someone broke a string at a match. And there were some really impressive players on the varsity squad, one got a scholarship for his game.

You really don't have to go pro like you say and get a bunch of rackets and fancy Agassi clothing.

You can do it cheap and have fun. That is what I was questioning. With how affordable it is, why don't more people participate.

 

[mister moose]

...marketing lies.

Ah, but you repeat yourself.

If you go with 'enjoyable vertical', (whatever that Gomezerism means) Storrs Hill is zero. We're talking about beginners here.