Vote for Utah ski bus

[thetrailboss]

Politician mind thought here.... (and I am not a poltician, but dealt with way too many of them via some professional associations I have been a part of over the years)

Keeping it Utah focused here.

How is asking the tax payers to foot some of the bill for the proposed LCC Gondola, something that certainly not every UT resident will use, but likely will help drive tourism dollars for the state and its residents as well as "help" with a traffic situation that much different than the tax payers of UT footing the bill for say a convention center and the associated infrastructure needed for it down in say St. George's? Again, not something that by any means all UT tax payers would use, but it helps drives tourism dollars which does benefit the state and it's residents?

Thinking like a politcian is DEFINITELY a warped way of thinking of things for sure, as often it defies logical thought processes

News flash: the proposal is for taxpayers to FULLY fund it. And again it’s Snowird asking for $500 million to $1 billion. That’s quite an ask.

And Snowbird is creating this problem.

Speaking of politics John Cumming is a big supporter of the Democratic Party. Bright red Utah ain’t going to like that.

 

[thetrailboss]

If we’re paying half a billion to get people up the canyon, there’s one thing we need, Editorial Board writes

Time for Utah to be open about its great wide open, the Editorial Board writes

www.sltrib.com

At the core of it all is the natural tension between public and private interests. Owners of ski resorts — Alta and Snowbird in Little Cottonwood Canyon and Park City Mountain Resort in Summit County — of course want to attract as many paying customers as they possibly can. Public officials are left with the responsibility of reviewing, designing, building and paying for the supporting infrastructure, mostly highways or some alternative.

What those public officials may need to be reminded of is the fact that their primary mission is to serve the larger interests of the public and not, necessarily, the interests of the private developers and landowners. At least not when the two sets of interests conflict.

 

[JimG.]

If we’re paying half a billion to get people up the canyon, there’s one thing we need, Editorial Board writes

Time for Utah to be open about its great wide open, the Editorial Board writes

www.sltrib.com

We all know how that plays out when the choice is between monied interests and the greater good of the general public.

 

[thetrailboss]

Ultimately what it gets down to, is as a whole, the ski industry has been essentially flat in it's growth for the last 20 odd years (sure there are some resorts that have grown and others that haven't and or gone out of business but ultimately the industry has been flat growth wise). Now, it's trying to grow a bit, and certainly that does present some challenges on various fronts, but the industry needs to grow as many of it's current customers are far closers to aging out of the physical requirements that skiing/riding demand, and will be leaving the sport, and those people need to be replaced. That is just a simple fact.

Now as the industry tries to grow, there are some consumers, who really dislike this concept as it changes what they're used to. It may mean that yes, there will be more people at their favorite resort more days of the season, and that can make them feel like their resort doesn't appreciate them like they used to.

It's not an easy situation to navigate, as with any type of changes, regardless of it's an industry growth thing or something else, change isn't always easy to accept for all, however underneath it all, we all want a strong, healthy, vibrant ski industry that we can enjoy for decades to come, and that's going to mean that there will be some changes to address the fact that long term growth is needed, and when you factor in the push by so many for what is perceived as some Green initiatives to "help" the growth potential, you bring in an entirely different level of costs and complexities often, such as how to get more people up LCC to meet the demand that various pass participation and pricing structures and population growth in the greater SLC area over the last few decades has created, above and beyond the tourism factor. And I don't think that it's as simple as say "double the cost of a pass/day ticket and only have 1/2 the folks on the hill" as an answer since that affects the number of lessons/rentals per day and the food and beverage revenues as well... It's a complex problem for sure, but one that needs to be handled for the sustainability of the sport

The other comment I will make is that you are taking what Vail, Alterra, and POWDR are saying at face value in terms of "gee, we need to grow the industry in order to survive and discount passes is the only way". I know folks in the Vail Sucks Thread have indirectly and directly pointed out that a "race to the bottom" is not ideal for folks on this board who ski a lot.

As relevant in this thread, when Dick Bass and Ted Johnson built Snowbird they KNEW that the road was a chokepoint and that relying on more people coming was simply not realistic considering the topography in what is a narrow, steep, dead-end canyon. Snowbird struggled financially for a long time and Dick had many issues in trying to make it self-sustaining. I recently read about Dick's issues in the 1980's with refinancing debt and how deals either fell through or came close to it. Relying on a growth business model in an avalanche prone box canyon does not work.

As I've frequently commented (and have been as equally ridiculed as you but as to IKON) is that Alterra ain't doing anything unique and simply said, "we're doing EPIC on a bigger scale". Alterra, and the "partner" resorts, seem to think that they have to act like Vail in order to beat Vail. Frankly I think that's nonsense. I don't think completely destroying the ski experience we've had by selling discount multimountain passes that raise a lot of $$$$ for Vail and Alterra, but result in overcrowding and actually decrease yields is the answer. The race to the bottom is not sustainable. And, as the Trib Editorial I just posted mentions, Vail and Alterra are now making it too expensive for the 3-5 day a season skier and rider who are not going to buy a pass, even if it is an endless buffet of resorts around the world. That pricepoint is too high despite the value proposition. Additionally, newbies AREN'T going to buy an IKON or EPIC pass if they don't know if they are going to even like the sport. So Vail and Alterra, for the first time I can ever remember, seem content on burning the future to save the present. I've never see the ski industry just simply give up on getting new participants like that. A learn to ski or ride package at Snowbird last year for one person for one day was almost $300.00. And I can personally attest that Snowbird's Ski and Ride School is a shadow of its former self.

Personally, our family has cut-back about 80% of our spending at Snowbird simply because it has sucked so bad. Last year we were asked to provide DIRECT feedback to Snowbird and it was negative but constructive. Obviously John Cumming can't read or is too arrogant to change. He has consistently made bad business decisions and then when he suffers the consequences he doubles down and continues to lose. As I pointed out, simply running the place AS IT WAS would get him $10 mill in season pass business every season. All he had to do was turn on the lifts and he fucked that up. But apparently a $20 per day per IKON pass deal was just too good for him and a good portion of that book of business is now gone. So asking me to pay more for terrible service, and to pay more taxes to subsidize his bad business decisions by allowing him to get more people up in the Canyon is apparently his new answer.

Full disclosure: I started out PRO-Gondola but the self-dealing, terrible PR and treatment by Snowbird, and the facts as to how limited the system would actually operate and actually help the problem (no consideration for hiking and BC folks who use multiple trailheads) put me in the solid "hell no" camp. It takes real skill for someone to piss off folks as much as John does.

 

[raisingarizona]

The other comment I will make is that you are taking what Vail, Alterra, and POWDR are saying at face value in terms of "gee, we need to grow the industry in order to survive and discount passes is the only way". I know folks in the Vail Sucks Thread have indirectly and directly pointed out that a "race to the bottom" is not ideal for folks on this board who ski a lot.

As relevant in this thread, when Dick Bass and Ted Johnson built Snowbird they KNEW that the road was a chokepoint and that relying on more people coming was simply not realistic considering the topography in what is a narrow, steep, dead-end canyon. Snowbird struggled financially for a long time and Dick had many issues in trying to make it self-sustaining. I recently read about Dick's issues in the 1980's with refinancing debt and how deals either fell through or came close to it. Relying on a growth business model in an avalanche prone box canyon does not work.

As I've frequently commented (and have been as equally ridiculed as you but as to IKON) is that Alterra ain't doing anything unique and simply said, "we're doing EPIC on a bigger scale". Alterra, and the "partner" resorts, seem to think that they have to act like Vail in order to beat Vail. Frankly I think that's nonsense. I don't think completely destroying the ski experience we've had by selling discount multimountain passes that raise a lot of $$$$ for Vail and Alterra, but result in overcrowding and actually decrease yields is the answer. The race to the bottom is not sustainable. And, as the Trib Editorial I just posted mentions, Vail and Alterra are now making it too expensive for the 3-5 day a season skier and rider who are not going to buy a pass, even if it is an endless buffet of resorts around the world. That pricepoint is too high despite the value proposition. Additionally, newbies AREN'T going to buy an IKON or EPIC pass if they don't know if they are going to even like the sport. So Vail and Alterra, for the first time I can ever remember, seem content on burning the future to save the present. I've never see the ski industry just simply give up on getting new participants like that. A learn to ski or ride package at Snowbird last year for one person for one day was almost $300.00. And I can personally attest that Snowbird's Ski and Ride School is a shadow of its former self.

Personally, our family has cut-back about 80% of our spending at Snowbird simply because it has sucked so bad. Last year we were asked to provide DIRECT feedback to Snowbird and it was negative but constructive. Obviously John Cumming can't read or is too arrogant to change. He has consistently made bad business decisions and then when he suffers the consequences he doubles down and continues to lose. As I pointed out, simply running the place AS IT WAS would get him $10 mill in season pass business every season. All he had to do was turn on the lifts and he fucked that up. But apparently a $20 per day per IKON pass deal was just too good for him and a good portion of that book of business is now gone. So asking me to pay more for terrible service, and to pay more taxes to subsidize his bad business decisions by allowing him to get more people up in the Canyon is apparently his new answer.

Full disclosure: I started out PRO-Gondola but the self-dealing, terrible PR and treatment by Snowbird, and the facts as to how limited the system would actually operate and actually help the problem (no consideration for hiking and BC folks who use multiple trailheads) put me in the solid "hell no" camp. It takes real skill for someone to piss off folks as much as John does.

They know there isn’t much of a future for mass market ski business in another 20 or so years so they’re getting what they can now.

 

[machski]

The other comment I will make is that you are taking what Vail, Alterra, and POWDR are saying at face value in terms of "gee, we need to grow the industry in order to survive and discount passes is the only way". I know folks in the Vail Sucks Thread have indirectly and directly pointed out that a "race to the bottom" is not ideal for folks on this board who ski a lot.

As relevant in this thread, when Dick Bass and Ted Johnson built Snowbird they KNEW that the road was a chokepoint and that relying on more people coming was simply not realistic considering the topography in what is a narrow, steep, dead-end canyon. Snowbird struggled financially for a long time and Dick had many issues in trying to make it self-sustaining. I recently read about Dick's issues in the 1980's with refinancing debt and how deals either fell through or came close to it. Relying on a growth business model in an avalanche prone box canyon does not work.

As I've frequently commented (and have been as equally ridiculed as you but as to IKON) is that Alterra ain't doing anything unique and simply said, "we're doing EPIC on a bigger scale". Alterra, and the "partner" resorts, seem to think that they have to act like Vail in order to beat Vail. Frankly I think that's nonsense. I don't think completely destroying the ski experience we've had by selling discount multimountain passes that raise a lot of $$$$ for Vail and Alterra, but result in overcrowding and actually decrease yields is the answer. The race to the bottom is not sustainable. And, as the Trib Editorial I just posted mentions, Vail and Alterra are now making it too expensive for the 3-5 day a season skier and rider who are not going to buy a pass, even if it is an endless buffet of resorts around the world. That pricepoint is too high despite the value proposition. Additionally, newbies AREN'T going to buy an IKON or EPIC pass if they don't know if they are going to even like the sport. So Vail and Alterra, for the first time I can ever remember, seem content on burning the future to save the present. I've never see the ski industry just simply give up on getting new participants like that. A learn to ski or ride package at Snowbird last year for one person for one day was almost $300.00. And I can personally attest that Snowbird's Ski and Ride School is a shadow of its former self.

Personally, our family has cut-back about 80% of our spending at Snowbird simply because it has sucked so bad. Last year we were asked to provide DIRECT feedback to Snowbird and it was negative but constructive. Obviously John Cumming can't read or is too arrogant to change. He has consistently made bad business decisions and then when he suffers the consequences he doubles down and continues to lose. As I pointed out, simply running the place AS IT WAS would get him $10 mill in season pass business every season. All he had to do was turn on the lifts and he fucked that up. But apparently a $20 per day per IKON pass deal was just too good for him and a good portion of that book of business is now gone. So asking me to pay more for terrible service, and to pay more taxes to subsidize his bad business decisions by allowing him to get more people up in the Canyon is apparently his new answer.

Full disclosure: I started out PRO-Gondola but the self-dealing, terrible PR and treatment by Snowbird, and the facts as to how limited the system would actually operate and actually help the problem (no consideration for hiking and BC folks who use multiple trailheads) put me in the solid "hell no" camp. It takes real skill for someone to piss off folks as much as John does.

I would only add that I agree Ikon's current day pass product is overpriced for the 3-5 day a year skier set. That said, Vail's Epic Day option is very affordable for the 3-5 day crowd, especially as you can tailor it to fit the areas you intend to ski and potentially save even more. Of course, you have to know this exists and pre-buy for the season ahead of time. If we are talking pure walk up rates, yeah that's gone. But let me ask, when is the last time you walked up to an airline ticket counter and bought last minute at "the window"? If it's been a while, let's just say you'd probably faint at the ask there.

 

[MadPadraic]

Do we have a sense as to why it is so expensive? Steamboat's Wild Blue appears to be much cheaper per mile, and I would have thought that cost per mile would decrease with length (assuming a lot of the cost is taken up by the end stations)? Maybe that is a very naive assumption? Is it a Gondola or a Funitel? Is it just that the government is involved so the bidding system makes it more expensive?

 

[thetrailboss]

Do we have a sense as to why it is so expensive? Steamboat's Wild Blue appears to be much cheaper per mile, and I would have thought that cost per mile would decrease with length (assuming a lot of the cost is taken up by the end stations)? Maybe that is a very naive assumption? Is it a Gondola or a Funitel? Is it just that the government is involved so the bidding system makes it more expensive?

Two or so miles versus eight is a huge difference. Different systems I think too. Wild Blue is a 10-person gondola. Last I heard about LCC it was more of a 3S system.

 

[ss20]

Two or so miles versus eight is a huge difference. Different systems I think too. Wild Blue is a 10-person gondola. Last I heard about LCC it was more of a 3S system.

Yes this is a 3S system. Higher capacity, able to run in higher wind speeds, a ton more tech specs even well beyond me.

Essentially comparing a Maserati vs a Ford.

 

[MadPadraic]

Two or so miles versus eight is a huge difference. Different systems I think too. Wild Blue is a 10-person gondola. Last I heard about LCC it was more of a 3S system.

The Steamboat one is over 3 miles not 2.

Yes this is a 3S system. Higher capacity, able to run in higher wind speeds, a ton more tech specs even well beyond me.

Essentially comparing a Maserati vs a Ford.

Which one is the Ford? I assume it must be the LCC Gondola due to higher capacity and all weather requirements?

 

[bigbob]

I would think that tower construction and placement so avalances wouldn't take them out would add to the cost.

 

[ss20]

You can see some pics here- https://www.doppelmayr.com/products/3s-gondola-lift/

The towers are essentially tram towers and not pylons you see on a standard monocable gondola. The cabins generally hold 25+ people rather than up to 12 on a monocable. 3S lifts combine the capacity benefits of a gondola with the minimal ground disruption of a tram, while also being able to run in higher winds, and maintain much higher speeds than a traditional detachable lift. It is the current peak of lift design. It is honestly not even the same category as a monocable gondola.

 

[bigbob]

Maybe the billion doallars would be better spent on refilling the lake first!

Letter: Forget the gondola. If we don’t save the Great Salt Lake, it will be useless.

Putting the cart before the horse …

www.sltrib.com

 

[thetrailboss]

Who is paying to push for and against the Little Cottonwood Canyon gondola?

Two organizations — Gondola Works and Friends of Little Cottonwood Canyon — have emerged in recent years on either side of the Little Cottonwood Canyon gondola debate.

www.sltrib.com

 

[tumbler]

Jackson Street Apartments break ground

While national and international media descended on Teton County for Tuesday’s primary election, a well-dressed crowd walked across a nearly empty lot in the center of town to celebrate something

www.jhnewsandguide.com

 

[tumbler]

No TB love for the Cummings family?

 

[thetrailboss]

Wow, this is a surprise. The legislature has the final say though. It ain't over.....

UDOT backs gondola option for Little Cottonwood Canyon

The Utah Department of Transportation is backing a gondola option to solve Little Cottonwood Canyon's transportation and congestion problems, FOX 13 News has confirmed.

www.fox13now.com

 

[jimmywilson69]

Increased bussing is great, but you still need to have parking at the bottom and limit people from going up the canyon. The Gondola makes the most sense. Sure there appears to be some shadiness with properties at the bottom, but does it really affect the environment more than a bunch of busses?

This has the potential to be a game changer that we've not typically seen in the US with accessing Ski areas. Also it could open the door for future connections to big cottonwood and over to PC. They only people really bitching about that are the BC people who don't want to share their stashes which are probably already tracked out...

 

[thetrailboss]

Increased bussing is great, but you still need to have parking at the bottom and limit people from going up the canyon. The Gondola makes the most sense. Sure there appears to be some shadiness with properties at the bottom, but does it really affect the environment more than a bunch of busses?

If they are NG or electric buses than yes, it has more of an impact.

This has the potential to be a game changer that we've not typically seen in the US with accessing Ski areas. Also it could open the door for future connections to big cottonwood and over to PC.

A big issue is that this is NOT about the canyons as a whole--it is only a solution for ONE canyon.

They only people really bitching about that are the BC people who don't want to share their stashes which are probably already tracked out...

Not exactly. There are lots of others who are impacted.

And the bigger question is should the State taxpayers be giving in excess of $500 million to ONE private business who created this crowding problem themselves?

 

[machski]

If they are NG or electric buses than yes, it has more of an impact.


A big issue is that this is NOT about the canyons as a whole--it is only a solution for ONE canyon.

Not exactly. There are lots of others who are impacted.

And the bigger question is should the State taxpayers be giving in excess of $500 million to ONE private business who created this crowding problem themselves?

So, let me get this straight, only Powdr is to blame for crowding up LCC? Alta and its parent have no complicity in the crowding issues as well? AFIK, they are both for profit operations and adding skiers (skiers and riders in the case of the Bird) is part of the game in increasing revenues and profits. Look TB, we all know how much you despise Powdr, especially at the Executive levels. But to just blame them for increased crowds up LCC is stretching it. Alta may not have the Tram, but they have been investing heavily in on mountain lift upgrades over the last decade or so as well.