• Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!

    You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!

This might be an interesting read, Ski Inc.

catskills

New member
Joined
Dec 26, 2004
Messages
1,343
Points
0
I think that just helped guide it and stabilize it when in the docking stations on either end. There were only two cars. Mount Snow was searching for them a few years ago. I never heard if they were ever found.

See the two boards on the floor in this photo. Looks like the loop went between those boards for stabilizing during loading and unloading.

http://www.chairlift.org/pics/mtsnow/ms78.jpg
 

cdskier

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 26, 2015
Messages
3,962
Points
48
Location
NJ
Just wanted to confirm for everyone that this is an excellent read. If you've ever wondered what really went on with the rise & fall of ASC, or to learn more about the crazy characters that make this industry go, you'll love it. Some neat vintage pictures in the center as well. 5/5 star review from me.

Just read it today (started late this morning and finished before it was time to make dinner). I'll agree that it is an excellent read and well worth it for anyone interested in an insider's view of the ski industry. I had a hard time putting it down. I have a couple minor nit-picky complaints:

1) I disagree with his assessment of where Sugarbush is in 2016. Particularly I have issue with his statement that the interconnect lift only operates on peak days. That's a surprisingly common misconception from how it was during the earlier Summit Ventures years. The past few years it has operated daily when both LP and ME are open as long as there is sufficient snowpack under the lift and as long as temps are not below 5 degrees. I get that Chris is only mentioning Sugarbush as it related to whether ASC's investments in SB paid off and that he had no real direct involvement, but I still consider this statement a factual error. Many people not as familiar with SB might over-look that and not even notice it though.

2) In this day and age of computers and spell-check, I really can't understand how a book gets published with a word like "nuymerous" included in it...

Overall I highly recommend this book though!
 

BushMogulMaster

Industry Rep
Industry Rep
Joined
Mar 9, 2007
Messages
1,780
Points
38
Location
Leadville, CO
Website
www.patricktorsell.com
1) I disagree with his assessment of where Sugarbush is in 2016. Particularly I have issue with his statement that the interconnect lift only operates on peak days. That's a surprisingly common misconception from how it was during the earlier Summit Ventures years. The past few years it has operated daily when both LP and ME are open as long as there is sufficient snowpack under the lift and as long as temps are not below 5 degrees. I get that Chris is only mentioning Sugarbush as it related to whether ASC's investments in SB paid off and that he had no real direct involvement, but I still consider this statement a factual error. Many people not as familiar with SB might over-look that and not even notice it though.

Keep in mind that Chris had been at Steamboat during the SV years at Sugarbush. I'm sure his assessment was based on his best knowledge of the area. And my experience at Sugarbush (2005-2011) aligns with his assessment. If that has changed, so much the better. But I agree 100% with Chris that--aside from its potential at the time to open the door to a Slidebrook development--dollar for dollar it was not a good investment. It's an incredibly complex piece of machinery, difficult to maintain, and its operation relies on a lot of variables (temperature, snowpack, etc.).


That aside, I'm with you... hard to put down!
 

cdskier

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 26, 2015
Messages
3,962
Points
48
Location
NJ
Keep in mind that Chris had been at Steamboat during the SV years at Sugarbush. I'm sure his assessment was based on his best knowledge of the area. And my experience at Sugarbush (2005-2011) aligns with his assessment. If that has changed, so much the better. But I agree 100% with Chris that--aside from its potential at the time to open the door to a Slidebrook development--dollar for dollar it was not a good investment. It's an incredibly complex piece of machinery, difficult to maintain, and its operation relies on a lot of variables (temperature, snowpack, etc.).

If it wasn't for him specifically saying "Fast forward to 2016", then I'd completely understand why he said what he did about how the lift operates. Like I said though, I'm being very nit-picky here and overall from an ASC perspective SB in general was definitely a poor investment. No disagreement there with what Chris stated in the book. From a Sugarbush pov now, I think a lot of the money ASC spent certainly helped in different ways. Who knows where SB would be today if ASC hadn't spent the money that they did or if they had held onto it longer instead of taking a loss at the time they sold it.

FWIW, prior to the 2012-2013 season the Slidebrook chair ran only weekends and holidays. In 2012-2013 it seems they extended it to include Fridays and Mondays. Then in the 2013-2014 season is when they began daily operations for that lift (conditions permitting of course).
 
Top