VAIL SUCKS

[thetrailboss]

Strike's over. Settlement announced about 30 minutes ago. Details coming....

It was two waffles each day from the Waffle Cabin that sealed the deal.

 

[Tin Woodsman]

Just like I said, a little more, nothing crazy. So...... what was your point again?

Since when is an 11% raise "nothing crazy". My god - $2.50/hr may not mean anything to you but you're obviously pretty out of touch with the experience of the average hourly worker in this country. And as you know, this was about much more than just wage levels.

Please do keep coming with the red herrings though.

 

[Tin Woodsman]

Thoughts @Tin Woodsman? Is there a Sundance ski resort in "the midwest or somewhere", I'm not aware of?
View attachment 64199

Your point, which you've conveniently forgotten, was comparing to the national avg, which is completely irrelevant. Even Sundance, down in the Provo market, offers a cost of living that is VERY different than someone trying to commute to the PC area. You know this, b/c you live there, but pls keep throwing out the misdirection for our collective entertainment.

 

[Cheetah440]

I mean, we're a week into January right now and I'm looking at their trail report. For non-beginner terrain, what is currently open is basically:

1 T2B intermediate run off of each lift, and the one off the 6 is also a terrain park and presumably going to be less fun to ski.

The current terrain offering looks nice for a beginner, sure. But for everyone else I don't see how you'd enjoy spending a day or even half a day there with that.

Pats is 100% open, and Gunstock is also offering far more variety.

I have an Indy Pass and was considering Ragged last weekend - lack of enough remotely interesting to ski that's open is why I didn't go.

I would compare to Sunapee, pats is half the size, regardless, this time of year is usually the same story, cold surpressed systems, icy groomers. Been that way forever. As I’ve said, Ragged shines in their woods and natural betweem peaks, otherwise there’s little to differentiate terrain wise. Like every other area, we need snow. Well outside of the northern greens that just always seem to snow.

 

[Cheetah440]

Yeah, sorry, but Ragged's system or how it's deployed is nowhere near as strong as Pat's or Gunstock. Not even close.

I had a pass to Ragged 2009-2011. I left for Gunstock for 2011-12 because I got frustrated with how slow expansion was at Ragged. Then left Gunstock for Peak because they recently bought Cat.

Gunstock expansion speed was world's better then and still is today. I was shocked how little terrain Ragged had open in comparison to Gunstock when I visited with my kids on 12/29. And no, it's not because they blow appreciably deeper. When I left Vail, I had considered Ragged plus Indy, but I'm happy with my selection of Gunstock instead because of snowmaking.

No argument that Ragged has some killer trees and some other cool trails like Sweepstakes. Doesn't matter when you only get 100" of snow a year. Whaleback has killer natural terrain too, but like Ragged, it's just not open enough.

In New England, other than resorts in VT from Killington on North, snowmaking is for certain what matters most to me followed by how crowded the areas are. Third would be terrain. Fourth cost.

Ragged would need to catch up to Gunstock for me to ever consider change, but I doubt I would. Gunstock has vastly superior groomed runs than Ragged. They have more of them, they are longer, and many have more character. On a powder day, I'll take Ragged 10/10 over Gunstock. Those are simply too rare in southern NH to factor into my pass buying decision.

See this is what makes all this so interesting. We see the same thing but come to different choices. I would never choose Gunstock over Ragged because of better groomers. We use a groomer only day just to stretch the legs and log a day, but we ski for non groomers. We were lucky over the last few years with those early December storm dumps, with Sweepstakes and pels and takes open, then usually it’s just a few days until Feb when the good stuff opens. Skiing is always best Mid Feb-April. We find groomers just boring but I can see someone choosing pats or Gunstock based on groomers. I love Pats, when Vail bought Sunapee we went to Ragged but almost picked Pats, that place is such a little gem, it’s what’s best about skiing.

 

[deadheadskier]

See this is what makes all this so interesting. We see the same thing but come to different choices. I would never choose Gunstock over Ragged because of better groomers. We use a groomer only day just to stretch the legs and log a day, but we ski for non groomers. We were lucky over the last few years with those early December storm dumps, with Sweepstakes and pels and takes open, then usually it’s just a few days until Feb when the good stuff opens. Skiing is always best Mid Feb-April. We find groomers just boring but I can see someone choosing pats or Gunstock based on groomers. I love Pats, when Vail bought Sunapee we went to Ragged but almost picked Pats, that place is such a little gem, it’s what’s best about skiing.

Aspirational conditions vs realistic conditions.

I am primarily a weekend warrior and ski about 40 days a season. Unless you are a Northern VT skier or have an extremely flexible schedule, maybe 10 days at best out of those 40 are going to be good to great, natural snow skiing days. I've got the Indypass for those days. For low tide days, I want a place with a fast lift and a decent variety of groomers that that mountain opens as fast as possible early season. Gunstock has that. Ragged does not.

 

[BenedictGomez]

Sundance, down in the Provo market

Sundance is maybe 3 or 4 minutes closer to downtown Provo than to Main Street, Park City. It's a local ski area that pays less than Park City.

And your belief that $2 an hour is somehow going to help "affordability" so a ski patroller can live in Park City, is, in a word, laughable.

It's pretty clear you dont have any idea just how expensive it is in Park City, think: Manhattan in the mountains. It is entirely unaffordable, and $2 an hour from $21 to $23 isnt going to change that. That entire talking point was a red herring or a silly canard. It's a lie. It sucks, but we've arrived at the point where people who work in service in Park City cannot afford to live here. Any ski patroller making net $55,000 - $65,000 a year who somehow owns in Park City (unlikely) has lived here probably a minimum of a decade, probably more honestly. Even the rents on a very meager home are going to be $4,000 a month, charitably, more likely higher. That would eat up your entire salary. So the way I see it you either crowd together and get 3 or 4 ski patrol, liftees, etc... into a house and split the cost (which isnt exactly adulting), live in Vail housing, or do what is increasingly what most are doing - you live on the Wasatch Front, where house prices and rent are 1/2 the cost, and drive 30 to 45 minutes up Parley's to work.

There are some exceptions, for instance, I know a very nice family who do live in Park City, Dad's a professional full-time yearly waiter on Main Street, Mom's a full-time yearly waitress at a resort. Two kids. They live in a townhouse by the outlets, because it's all they can afford. They used to live in a townhouse at Canyons, but got priced out (rent increase) last year. A very common tale. And not exclusive to Park City, but much ski mountain real estate all over America sadly.

 

[Cheetah440]

Aspirational conditions vs realistic conditions.

I am primarily a weekend warrior and ski about 40 days a season. Unless you are a Northern VT skier or have an extremely flexible schedule, maybe 10 days at best out of those 40 are going to be good to great, natural snow skiing days. I've got the Indypass for those days. For low tide days, I want a place with a fast lift and a decent variety of groomers that that mountain opens as fast as possible early season. Gunstock has that. Ragged does not.

Very good post. Spot on. I am a aspirational skier. I just have no interest to go and ski blue groomers. I’d trade 25 days at Sunapee for
One run down rags to riches. Magical run as are all those glades. But you’re right, maybe 5 weekends worth. We will probably hike Castlerock twice on Sat and maybe ski a handful of other non groomers. You pegged it. I’ve skated down Raggedy Andy and Main Street many times, so I get why a groomer skier would think less of a ragged, totally get it.

 

[BenedictGomez]

Hearing things like McConkey's & 9990 may open this weekend.

There's like 4 or 5 feet just sitting up there since the strike started.

 

[NYDB]

Its so expensive here paying them more won't make a difference to them!!

BG is such an expert on everything that he is an expert on other peoples personal finances!

some people really lack empathy

 

[Tin Woodsman]

Sundance is maybe 3 or 4 minutes closer to downtown Provo than to Main Street, Park City. It's a local ski area that pays less than Park City.

And your belief that $2 an hour is somehow going to help "affordability" so a ski patroller can live in Park City, is, in a word, laughable.

It's pretty clear you dont have any idea just how expensive it is in Park City, think: Manhattan in the mountains. It is entirely unaffordable, and $2 an hour from $21 to $23 isnt going to change that. That entire talking point was a red herring or a silly canard. It's a lie. It sucks, but we've arrived at the point where people who work in service in Park City cannot afford to live here. Any ski patroller making net $55,000 - $65,000 a year who somehow owns in Park City (unlikely) has lived here probably a minimum of a decade, probably more honestly. Even the rents on a very meager home are going to be $4,000 a month, charitably, more likely higher. That would eat up your entire salary. So the way I see it you either crowd together and get 3 or 4 ski patrol, liftees, etc... into a house and split the cost (which isnt exactly adulting), live in Vail housing, or do what is increasingly what most are doing - you live on the Wasatch Front, where house prices and rent are 1/2 the cost, and drive 30 to 45 minutes up Parley's to work.

There are some exceptions, for instance, I know a very nice family who do live in Park City, Dad's a professional full-time yearly waiter on Main Street, Mom's a full-time yearly waitress at a resort. Two kids. They live in a townhouse by the outlets, because it's all they can afford. They used to live in a townhouse at Canyons, but got priced out (rent increase) last year. A very common tale. And not exclusive to Park City, but much ski mountain real estate all over America sadly.

Yes of course there isn't an expectation that people live in PC city limits - that POV was never advanced by me so I'm not sure who you're arguing against. If you draw a circle around a 30-45 min drive to PCMR vs. same for Sundance, the avg cost of real estate and availability of same is actually light years different. Talk about a canard.

 

[thetrailboss]

"No questions, please. No questions. I can only say, 'you're welcome!'"

 

[ColdRain&Snow]

.. or do what is increasingly what most are doing - you live on the Wasatch Front, where house prices and rent are 1/2 the cost, and drive 30 to 45 minutes up Parley's to work.

Most everyone has had a commute in that range at some point, this topic came up in the killington thread about employees commuting from rutland. Granted the weather can make driving dicey but who hasn’t wasted one their 9 lives on i95 in ct/ny/nj?

 

[deadheadskier]

Most everyone has had a commute in that range at some point, this topic came up in the killington thread about employees commuting from rutland. Granted the weather can make driving dicey but who hasn’t wasted one their 9 lives on i95 in ct/ny/nj?

I moonlighted as a men's briefs model before sitting in traffic on 95 for years flattened my ass like a pancake .

 

[KustyTheKlown]

when a rutland exists next to a killington, and even more so when a salt lake city lives next to a park city, it seems entirely reasonable that most employees would be expected to (and expect) to live in the population center where there is housing and amenities and commute to work. not so unlike the rest of us schmucks. the resorts can/should facilitate some on-site housing or lodging for essential functions, and definitely should facilitate safe reliable transport up the mountains for employees. but no hourly seasonal employee should EXPECT to be able to live directly in these towns.

 

[AdironRider]

But every ski town person does expect that.

Chalk it up to the vast majority of them being the kids of doctors, lawyers, and business types (remember who even learns to ski, it isn't the trailer park kids) that are getting the cold slap of reality that life choices have consequences and their parents actually had to work pretty hard to make life easy for them.

 

[BenedictGomez]

Its so expensive here paying them more won't make a difference to them!!

BG is such an expert on everything that he is an expert on other peoples personal finances!

It's very easy to smugly demagogue this issue, and play the populist, self-righteous empathetic defender of the common man like you're attempting.

It's much harder to honestly access the economic truths, and the metaphysical reality of the financial situation on the ground.

It is not plausible to say that $23 is a "living wage" in Park City that will enable people to live here, nor should it be the "expectation" that living 2 minutes from the mountain is part of your job. And yes, that is a huge part of their argument, that they cant afford to "live" in Park City.

Ski Patrol can get towards the back of a long line. Teachers & Police etc.... cant afford to live here either anymore (i.e. full-time jobs of people who live here 12 months a year, not merely 4 months, and of which I personally view as more important roles than recreational patrol).

 

[2Planker]

In Boston, New "Low Income housing" being built near our Med Cntr

$95,000 annual income is now considered Low Income for Boston....

We have residents who make $45,000 and are working 80 hours/week

 

[drjeff]

In Boston, New "Low Income housing" being built near our Med Cntr

$95,000 annual income is now considered Low Income for Boston....

We have residents who make $45,000 and are working 80 hours/week

And many likely with 500k in student loan debt as well

 

[KustyTheKlown]

the 'we cant afford to live here' holds a lot more water in the truly remote places. not in the wasatch front.