What Expansions are left

[EPB]

I would argue that they are already divesting. These multi-resort passes and higher walk-up day tickets force skiers to purchase early. So rather than income based on how good the eastern season is, Vail gets guaranteed income every year in the form of season passes.

The eastern resorts don't matter. Vail knows that the coastal temperatures are the first to fluctuate and that the east coast skiing conditions will suffer. The hope is that passholders will just fly west, where skiing will still exist at higher elevations.

Overall I really don't see a point in East Coast ski area expansions. Now expansions out in Colorado or Utah I could get behind.

Not to sound like a jerk, but you really shouldn't argue they're divesting when Vail bought Peak and Alterra bought Sugarbush in the last few months. That is the polar opposite of what it means to divest.

If eastern places don't matter, Vail and Alterra shouldn't be buying out here. You must think they're compete morons.

Getting people to buy earlier smooths earnings year over year. It doesn't necessarily hurt earnings in the aggregate. Resorts might lose out in big years, but they win out in lean years.

I don't know how long you've skied for, but the snowmaking improvements made in the last ~15 years have made a huge impact on the reliability of conditions by Christmas vacation week. This makes the average consumer more likely to be willing to pre-commit. Not less. Just look at how many trails a place like Hunter has open vs Plattekill. Back in the 90s, Killington and Sunday River were the only two that I can remember who could open significant terrain by Christmas. Now, most "major" resorts can. If you're nostalgic for the good old "pre-global warming" days of the 60s and 70s, I'd implore you to read up on how resorts fared in below average snow years.

Again, not to sound disparaging, but asking why anyone would expand in the east is a bad question. A better one is what will Vail and Alterra do to alieviate crowding at places like Mt. Snow? Will they expand their current mountains, buy more, or do nothing?

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[raisingarizona]

I would argue that they are already divesting. These multi-resort passes and higher walk-up day tickets force skiers to purchase early. So rather than income based on how good the eastern season is, Vail gets guaranteed income every year in the form of season passes.

The eastern resorts don't matter. Vail knows that the coastal temperatures are the first to fluctuate and that the east coast skiing conditions will suffer. The hope is that passholders will just fly west, where skiing will still exist at higher elevations.

Overall I really don't see a point in East Coast ski area expansions. Now expansions out in Colorado or Utah I could get behind.

Exactly. They are going for it right now.

And every ski area is looking at off season alternatives to make more during lean snow years. That is a very real trend right now in the industry.

 

[raisingarizona]

I know I'm just a younger millennial, but I am old enough to remember Boston setting an all time snowfall record just five seasons ago. That's not to say I'm convinced there's no warming, but let's not be ridiculous.

As BG alluded earlier, the ski industry clearly doesn't believe in the type of catastrophic global warning that some here do. If they did, they'd divest themselves of their resorts while they can.

If Epic and Ikon last another 10+ years, they will kill independent places in the Northeast. Global warming won't.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app

As predicted, the pendulum swinging weather patterns become more extreme and unpredictable during rapidly changing climates but yeah.....it’s science that’s stooped.

 

[crazy]

Other expansions include:
Waterville (village gondola/Green Peak phase 2)
Sunapee (West Bowl)
Loon South Peak Beginner area

I just don't understand the point of expanding larger ski areas. Like it takes Killington until January to get Bear Peak open. If there was an interconnect to Pico it still wouldn't be open most of the year. It's not like out west where it snows all at once and you can go right to 100%. Most of the time it's a steady march of snowmaking to get to 100%

Really, I think the IKON and EPIC passes are just redistributing skiers to different mountains, not increasing the total number of skiers. Let's use the NH example: On a weekend, Loon is absolutely insane (IKON Pass), while Cannon is quiet, and Gunstock and Ragged, Tenney and all those southern NH resorts are forgotten.

BTW, I doubt those Southern NH resorts are going to be around much longer. It rarely snows south of Concord NH anymore. And if it does it melts out in 1 or 2 days.

I am not sure that I buy your hypothesis that IKON and EPIC are just redistributing skier visits. They certainly are doing some form of redistribution towards the resorts on their passes, but, at least anecdotally, they are also leading to increased total skier visits. Personally, I am skiing more than I was before the passes, and I am more willing to ski in marginal conditions. I would love to see data on this, because your hypothesis is super interesting.

About Loon and Cannon, that has very little if anything to do with the IKON Pass. Loon has been a madhouse on weekends for a long, long time, given its size and close proximity from Boston, whereas Cannon has always been under the radar. Interestingly, Cannon lowered its season pass prices last year to help it compete with lower season pass prices (ex. Sugarbush) in addition to the lower-priced multi-resort passes. I like hitting up Loon in the early season because it isn't so crowded, and their snowmaking infrastructure is pretty good, but once the season gets going I would much rather be at Cannon. With decent snow (which doesn't come often enough) Cannon holds its own against much bigger, snowier resorts in the East.

 

[EPB]

As predicted, the pendulum swinging weather patterns become more extreme and unpredictable during rapidly changing climates but yeah.....it’s science that’s stooped.

I don't think you're really addressing anything that I said with this. My observation is quite simple: by putting their money where their mouth is, the ski industry is saying they don't believe in catastrophic climate change. If you want to debate that further, be my guest.

Just so I understand, is your prediction that southern NH ski areas will be out of business in 10 years due to global warming?

I'm not a climate expert, so I don't have a differentiated view on climate change and the extent to which it's caused by humans vs natural (I suspect both BTW, just not to the point where I'm going to pretend it doesn't snow in southern NH anymore). If there were a way to bet all the earnings I'll generate over the next 10 years that the weather will not be the reason Ragged can't operate in 2030, I'd gladly do it.

I'd also caution you generally on thinking you have some sort of scientific prowess because you think global warming is a huge problem. As a financial possessional, I can assure you that the general public thinks it's much more adept at understanding finance, accounting and economics than it is. In fact, professional stock market investors essentially made their fortunes outsmarting personal investors until the advent of Vanguard and other passive investment products. Unless you make your hay in climatology, you have no more expertise than anyone here. Plain and simple. Holding up your more steadfast belief in catastrophic climate change than me isn't evidence that you any more adept in the sciences than me (or that you're move of a "believer" in scientific method). It just puts us in different camps that encapsulate wide swaths of people.

By the way, were you the guy that erroneously and without evidence called me an anti-vaccination proponent before on this site? If whoever that person was had any idea the amount of doctors (both medical and PhD) are in my family, they'd immediately understand how asinine an assumption that was.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[raisingarizona]

i don't think you're really addressing anything that i said with this. My observation is quite simple: By putting their money where their mouth is, the ski industry is saying they don't believe in catastrophic climate change. If you want to debate that further, be my guest.

Just so i understand, is your prediction that southern nh ski areas will be out of business in 10 years due to global warming?

I'm not a climate expert, so i don't have a differentiated view on climate change and the extent to which it's caused by humans vs natural (i suspect both btw, just not to the point where i'm going to pretend it doesn't snow in southern nh anymore). If there were a way to bet all the earnings i'll generate over the next 10 years that the weather will not be the reason ragged can't operate in 2030, i'd gladly do it.

I'd also caution you generally on thinking you have some sort of scientific prowess because you think global warming is a huge problem. As a financial possessional, i can assure you that the general public thinks it's much more adept at understanding finance, accounting and economics than it is. In fact, professional stock market investors essentially made their fortunes outsmarting personal investors until the advent of vanguard and other passive investment products. Unless you make your hay in climatology, you have no more expertise than anyone here. Plain and simple. Holding up your more steadfast belief in catastrophic climate change than me isn't evidence that you any more adept in the sciences than me (or that you're move of a "believer" in scientific method). It just puts us in different camps that encapsulate wide swaths of people.

By the way, were you the guy that erroneously and without evidence called me an anti-vaccination proponent before on this site? If whoever that person was had any idea the amount of doctors (both medical and phd) are in my family, they'd immediately understand how asinine an assumption that was.

Sent from my vs988 using alpinezone mobile app

tldr.

 

[EPB]

tldr.

I had to look up what that meant. I doubt it.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[fbrissette]

This is so ridiculous.

And I dont want to bring 'politics' into it, so I'll just point out that even if you do believe in Global Warming 100% hook, line, and sinker, the "negative change" in 100 years from now as predicted by IPCC research & working papers isn't enough to kill eastern skiing, much less make a 2020 investment non-feasible economically in 10 or 20 years from now.

SHORT VERSION: It's absurd how illogically "scared" the media has made people. It's like Y2K fear, but long-term. But if you're going to harbor fear, it makes sense to actually understand the "negative change" predictions. Also would be good to research how the 1990, 2000, 2010, etc. "negative change" predictions have panned out so far.....,cause it aint great, but I'll stop there.

Climate change is a slow moving boat. If you look at the next 10 to 20 years, internal (natural) climate variability will continue to dominate anthropogenic forcing.

What will winter look like in New-England in 2100 ?

Here are hard numbers from observations: the world is about 0.8C warmer than pre-indusdtrial (best estimate). However, northern latitudes are more sensitive, winter sees larger increases than summer, and minimum temperature increase more than maximum (these observations are consistent with climate model projections). Over the past 50 years, Montreal mean annual temperature has increased by 1C, winter mean temperature by 2C. If you look at northern Canada (latitude 60), mean annual temperature is roughly at +3C annually and already at +6C in the winter (these are observations, not climate model projections). In the north, no urban heat island or land use change to complicate the analysis.

Let's say the world is at +3C annual in 2100 (very conservative), New-England will likely be +4C annually, and winter at +6-7C (10-11F). There will still be snow and there will still be skiing, but in the north only. But even there, winter will be at least 2 months shorter.

NOTE: These are rough estimates, backed by science. I am a scientist who has worked in the field of water resources and climate change for the past 20 years. I will NOT discuss politics here (I have before and it is a waste of time). If like BG you don't believe in climate science, disregard this post and move on.

 

[machski]

Sunday River supposedly has a lot more room to expand, right? Wasn’t that Les Otten’s doing/undoing? I know that it has been rumored to be the case that they can keep building out from Jordan on west, but I don’t know the specifics.

Also, if it ever happened (likely won’t), the Balsams?

Finally, sugarloaf could choose to fill in some of Brackett / Burnt with lift / surface lift infrastructure?


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone

Those plans beyond Jordan are still in house but don't expect to see that for a long time. It would be the shoulder where Lolla makes the hard right turn down beyond and west of the Jordan hotel and almost to the golf course. It's good terrain, especially for intermediate cruisers, but on the back burner. Merrill Hill is the new expansion priority. You can already see the first phases of homes on The Glades along ridge run, the new Ski Back trail is in along with Snowmaking pipe (not sure it is connected) that currently starts at the end of one of Yetiville's lines. They own up and over the backside down to Monkeybrook Road for development. Expect two chairs up there primarily for real estate but should be open to general ski public too. They have also talked about adding a few runs between the boundaries before they push out further west. And I would think the full doubling of Snowmaking capacity would be in place before they thought about beyond Jordan.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[BenedictGomez]

I would argue that they are already divesting.

I would argue you dont know what the word divesting means.

 

[EPB]

Climate change is a slow moving boat. If you look at the next 10 to 20 years, internal (natural) climate variability will continue to dominate anthropogenic forcing.

What will winter look like in New-England in 2100 ?

Here are hard numbers from observations: the world is about 0.8C warmer than pre-indusdtrial (best estimate). However, northern latitudes are more sensitive, winter sees larger increases than summer, and minimum temperature increase more than maximum (these observations are consistent with climate model projections). Over the past 50 years, Montreal mean annual temperature has increased by 1C, winter mean temperature by 2C. If you look at northern Canada (latitude 60), mean annual temperature is roughly at +3C annually and already at +6C in the winter (these are observations, not climate model projections). In the north, no urban heat island or land use change to complicate the analysis.

Let's say the world is at +3C annual in 2100 (very conservative), New-England will likely be +4C annually, and winter at +6-7C (10-11F). There will still be snow and there will still be skiing, but in the north only. But even there, winter will be at least 2 months shorter.

NOTE: These are rough estimates, backed by science. I am a scientist who has worked in the field of water resources and climate change for the past 20 years. I will NOT discuss politics here (I have before and it is a waste of time). If like BG you don't believe in climate science, disregard this post and move on.

Your experience sems closely related. Two questions: why does it seem like all the warming happens in the winter and the summer stays about the same?

What technology do you know of that's out there to quell the effects of climate change? I've heard rumblings of a breakthrough in turning CO2 back to O2, but in general, the piece that gets missed from my perspective is the effects of new technologies on assumptions about warming. A great example was back in the early-mid 2000s, people tired telling this gloom and doom story about how oil was going to run out. Then fracking changed everything.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[BenedictGomez]

I am not sure that I buy your hypothesis that IKON and EPIC are just redistributing skier visits. They certainly are doing some form of redistribution towards the resorts on their passes, but, at least anecdotally, they are also leading to increased total skier visits.

He's right, you can just look at the NSAA data & see it's more a redistribution of skier visits and/or same skiers skiing a bit more days, but any potential increase certainly isnt dramatic. If anything, I worry than IKON & EPIC will keep new skiers from picking up the sport.

 

[fbrissette]

There is alot of existing technologies to remove CO2 from the atmosphere. None that makes economic (and political) sense at this point. Like the case of all pollutants, it makes a lot more sense to remove them at the source than have a go at it while diluted in the environment.

Main reason why Northern regions are warming faster is through the positive feedback of gradual loss of snow and ice. Why winters are warming faster than summer is a lot more complex (global heat distribution and energy balance) but is seen in observations and predicted by climate models.

 

[EPB]

There is alot of existing technologies to remove CO2 from the atmosphere. None that makes economic (and political) sense at this point. Like the case of all pollutants, it makes a lot more sense to remove them at the source than have a go at it while diluted in the environment.

Main reason why Northern regions are warming faster is through the positive feedback of gradual loss of snow and ice. Why winters are warming faster than summer is a lot more complex (global heat distribution and energy balance) but is seen in observations and predicted by climate models.

Thanks. I'm actually not a denier like I'm sometimes accused. Most of the time I look into looking into politically charged topics for work, it turns out the risks are usually real but less severe than some headlines would lead one to believe. I suspect the long term ramifications of climate change will be quelled (enough, not completely) by better technology making greener alternatives more economically feasible.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[gregnye]

the ski industry is saying they don't believe in catastrophic climate change.

The ski industry is adapting to offer summer options like Mountain Biking, and making multi-resort passes that are valid out west in higher elevations.


This is the industry recognizing that money must be made in other methods, because east coast skiing will eventually be extremely limited, if not completely gone.

It's the same reason that Tesla is the most popular selling luxury car of 2019, Ford is starting to create electric vehicles, every new Volvo will be either a hybrid or electric by 2025 (Just 5 years from now--crazy to think about!). Industries are already responding.

 

[BenedictGomez]

Climate change is a slow moving boat.

This was a big part of the point of my post & why hyperventilating over there being "no skiing" in 10 years (which to the rational seems ridiculous, but it's a comment or similar made by quite a few people on this board somewhat frequently, and NOT in jest) is patently absurd. It also demonstrates that fear-mongering works. Sadly.

Here are hard numbers from observations

Based on a very short time-frame. And the piece of the puzzle that's never mentioned is that humans may be able to "solve" this potential problem out of existence with new technology, just as we typically solve other problems out of existence with new technology.

If like BG you don't believe in climate science

Also false.

I am skeptical due to how poorly the fledgling field of climate science has fared so far.

I also am fairly certain based on empirical observation that while Global Warming may be true, it is dramatically over-exaggerated, sometimes unintentionally (poor estimates and/or flimsy modeling), sometimes intentionally (outright scientific fraud).

 

[EPB]

FB - I do have another one if you don't mind. What do you think about the notion put forward that the climate swings will get worse in the future? I can't help but think it seems like a way to enable the climatologists the ability to claim they're right no matter what happens.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[BenedictGomez]

The ski industry is adapting to offer summer options like Mountain Biking, and making multi-resort passes that are valid out west in higher elevations.

This is the industry recognizing that money must be made in other methods, because east coast skiing will eventually be extremely limited, if not completely gone.

It's the same reason that Tesla is the most popular selling luxury car of 2019, Ford is starting to create electric vehicles, every new Volvo will be either a hybrid or electric by 2025 (Just 5 years from now--crazy to think about!). Industries are already responding.

I swear you just make up 50% of your posts. The ski industry creating ancillary revenue sources throughout the year has nothing to do with impending Global Warming doom, and everything to do with sound & responsible business practices to maximize revenue. This isnt hard.

And Tesla isnt even close to being the #1 selling luxury vehicle brand. Tesla literally almost went bankrupt less than 6 months ago.

EDIT: Maybe you meant to say 1 particular Tesla vehicle model rather than the Tesla brand?

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/tesl...s9Kp3X5sLEVJI8aJrmlDUqjCdxXxdsnIKKDqshqUkAOpR

 

[EPB]

The ski industry is adapting to offer summer options like Mountain Biking, and making multi-resort passes that are valid out west in higher elevations.

This is the industry recognizing that money must be made in other methods, because east coast skiing will eventually be extremely limited, if not completely gone.

It's the same reason that Tesla is the most popular selling luxury car of 2019, Ford is starting to create electric vehicles, every new Volvo will be either a hybrid or electric by 2025 (Just 5 years from now--crazy to think about!). Industries are already responding.

They're trying to smooth out what is a horrifically seasonal earnings profile and squeeze extra $ out of their properties in under-utilized months - as their investors expect.

The higher elevation point isn't accurate for Vail. Peak and Whistler are two huge recent adds.

The auto industry has no bearing on what the ski industry is telling us though it's acquisitive behavior. I'm perfectly happy to see more electric vehicles if people want them. I get the sense that Ford would chase any tend in the industry to keep relevant. This one happens to be green.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[fbrissette]

Also false.

I am skeptical due to how poorly the fledgling field of climate science has fared so far.

I also am fairly certain based on empirical observation that while Global Warming may be true, it is dramatically over-exaggerated, sometimes unintentionally (poor estimates and/or flimsy modeling), sometimes intentionally (outright scientific fraud).

This is pretty much the definition of not believing in climate science.