Kingslug20
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2021
- Messages
- 2,506
- Points
- 113
No...facts!!
-
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!
VAIL SUCKS
- Thread starter thebigo
- Start date
KustyTheKlown
Well-known member
people spend crazy money. i had to fly for work last week and i was at a restaurant in newark airport and a guy at the next table was loudly and obnoxiously talking about his $3000 per night ski in/out place he rented for a week at Breckenridge over president's week, and then he's complaining about how the mountain is crowded. hey idiot, spend half as much on lodging and the difference on lift tickets and ski someplace not called Breckenridge. i had to get up and change seats i couldn't handle listening to this rich fuck spout off.
I'm glad idiots like this exist and will continue paying for $3000 ski in ski out lodging at absurdly crowded resorts on holiday weeks.
machski
Well-known member
I was basing that off what a Patroller told me on a lift ride. That said, I also overheard some locals say CB has always had a hard stop mid April because of being in the Gunnison NF and Elk migration season.
ss20
Well-known member
He was pretty old school. Myself and a couple other supers made sure that did not happen, lol. We'd go inside and give the office firm lesson maximum capacity numbers. They were in on it as they'd get a ton less complaints when there weren't lots of students in group lessons, as you can imagine. Final nail in that coffin was covid forcing smaller groups.
Groups are in general getting smaller. Powdr had MAX4, 4 students in a group lesson. That's no longer a thing tho. Vail caps out at 6 students. Deer Valley at 4.
Kingslug20
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2021
- Messages
- 2,506
- Points
- 113
Picture worth a thousand words
One of my favorite comedies! I went through Marine boot camp. When that movie came out my wife and I were sitting next to a Green Beret in the theater. He and I were laughing about the boot camp scenes..."did they do that to you? No, but they did..". Watching the looks on people's faces was just as funny.
BenedictGomez
Well-known member
That surely means they're getting more expensive I imagine. Makes no sense to me. Like I said, you can get decent quality private tennis, piano, violin, golf, etc... instruction for $100 an hour, so why not skiing? My complete speculation is that underground guerilla ski lessons are far more common than any of us know. Markets always find a way.
ss20
Well-known member
Average going rate for private ski lessons for one person is between $90-$130 per hour depending where you go with some outliers on either side.
Underground ski instruction is a thing. But no, it is not as common as you would think. The risks greatly outweigh the reward in the eyes of 98% of instructors. First you could get convicted on theft of services. Second if you get hurt you're not getting worker's comp. That's the big one.... instructor injuries are more common than you'd probably expect.
Also will lose PSIA membership. Overall not worth it at all if you already have a job as an instructor.
ss20
Well-known member
Yeah you'd never work in the industry again, that's certain. It's a job people take for passion, not the money, so few get corrupted.
I have to be honest, I still don't quite understand the whole "theft of services" thing. Why is instructing where they draw the line? You can rent skis off mountain, or bring food from off-mountain, yet if you bring someone along to coach you, all of a sudden it becomes illegal? I just don't get it.
How does the mountain prove that this happened? Just deny that this person paid you to instruct them, as long as they do the same how could it be proven otherwise? It's not illegal to teach someone to ski, only to be paid for it.
ss20
Well-known member
Because it's not $100 ski rentals or bringing a $25 pizza into the lodge to feed your family at lunch. It's much more than lift ticket theft as well. It's $700+ per day "stolen" from the resort by a member of the industry community that absolutely knows the wrongness and consequences of what they are doing. Instructors are not independent contractors. They are a "product" sold by their mountain. If I had a client want to ski at Solitude it could be arranged. But I'd be in my Alta coat, paid by Alta, and my client would book through Alta... because that is my current ski school.
Legally, the mountains on public land can operate in whatever reasonable means they have to in order to be a profitable private business. And that means no outside instruction permitted. I understand your argument of the outside food/rentals... but the price of instruction and the effect that has on a resort's bottom line makes that another can of worms.
There is a massive thread on SkiTalk on this issue for those interested- https://www.skitalk.com/threads/ski-school-monopolies.25326/
This was my one post in the thread-
I am in the boat of MANY who see the system as flawed. But I, like MANY, do not see myself so disillusioned that I'd go the underground route. I'd love to see myself as an independent contractor, with my own client pool, and not tied to a resort. But that's not the way the rules of the game are written at the moment... so if I love what I do... I have to work with how the system is.
You can bring someone to coach you, just not pay them for it. Lessons are also lot more $ for the mountain then rentals and there are rental+lesson packages. I agree the lines are blurred but it is what it is at the moment.
SS20s answer is perfect
Sorry...I don't understand why "price" is somehow a determining factor. The value (per VT law) is only a factor in the potential punishment. There's no minimum value in the law.
I've read through 4 pages of that thread so far and don't see any actual "legal" reason why/how ski areas can have exclusive rights on instructing.
ss20
Well-known member
It would be hard to prove, I totally understand that. If you're able to go underground you'd more than likely be a very good instructor with a lot of years of experience. PSIA examiners (almost every medium sized mountain has at least 1 on their staff) would know you on a first-name basis, as would other Level III certed instructors. So I think eventually you'd get spotted unless you keep going to small, obscure mountains (places clients with more $$$ than Jesus Christ himself could imagine would not visit). Then, even if they can't criminally convict you on theft of services, word would certainly get out about what you're doing- within PSIA and at your home mountain. I think you could get away with it for a while, but not forever. If you're so good that your client is paying for your ticket, your travel, your lunch, and your services you're likely going to be one of the top skiers on the hill any given day, and that means a lot of eyes on you.
Also, the top tier instructors get their name out there by word of mouth. So asking your clients not to say anything about your instruction would be shooting yourself in the foot in the long run.
ss20
Well-known member
I understand your first point. It's blurry. It'd be more likely a resort enforces someone taking roughly $1,000 in revenue from them than $100 in lift ticket theft.
The legal reason for outside instruction not being allowed... is that the resorts have the power to do that as @ThatGuy said. Same reason why some resorts are cracking down on uphill travel.... they can. Same reason why Eagle Point prosecuted the now-infamous "powder poachers".... they can. Same reason why MRG, Deer Valley, and Alta don't allow snowboards... they can. They are private companies. I can't give you a better than answer than that.
"They can" sounds like a pretty weak legal argument. Has this actually been proven (i.e. has someone actually been charged and convicted of this)? Or is this one of those things where the "threat" of what "they can" do is considered enough of a deterrent and there's no actual legal precedent for it having been successfully been done?
I'd also argue that some of your other "they can" examples are a bit different. Not allowing snowboarding isn't something that would result in a crime being charged if someone showed up with a snowboard. The Eagle Point example was on private property, so trespassing is valid in that case.
I've never hired an outside instructor or ever even thought of doing this. I'm just legitimately interested in "how" this is actually "theft of services" as people always claim. VT's "theft of services" statute defines it as "A person who purposely obtains services that he or she knows are available only for compensation, by deception or threat, or by false token or other means to avoid payment for the service". I just don't know that hiring a random person to instruct you privately really falls under this definition. That said, I totally get the reasons why an instructor wouldn't want to take the risk of doing it privately (liability, insurance, risk of losing employment or PSIA membership). I just question the whole "theft of services" argument itself.
legal monopoly, like doctors, lawyers....protecting market share. https://legislature.vermont.gov/statutes/section/13/057/02582 is the full text of the above reference. Sounds more like to me it's theft of services if you get a lesson and then high tail it.
Similar threads
