Savemeasammy
New member
I would love to see Wildcat as an early season player. The elevation is great, and top-to-bottom early skiing would be great.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
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!
Wildcat behind the pack this year
- Thread starter billski
- Start date
VTKilarney
Well-known member
I'm quite surprised to see that Attitash has no plans for an HSQ to the summit in the near future. I have always felt that this is a real Achilles heel for that resort.
Here are some possibilities on why:
1) I haven't skied Attitash for many years, but I seem to recall some people suggesting that the trail network at the summit just can't handle the extra capacity.
2) Are we seeing a symptom of Peak Resorts dominating the North Conway market? North Conway has TONS of beds, and lots of second home owners. Perhaps they just don't need to put in the quad because they remain competitive without it. Cranmore and Black are smaller mountains. Bretton Woods is far enough away that it will put off a lot skiers. The same can be said of the I-93 resorts.
3) Construction would disrupt summer revenue operations - an area where Cranmore is proving to be quite competitive.
As far as Wildcat is concerned, waiting for a loan to repair and/or improve the snowmaking system is just not an option. Peak needs to divert resources for that project. It's just that simple.
Here are some possibilities on why:
1) I haven't skied Attitash for many years, but I seem to recall some people suggesting that the trail network at the summit just can't handle the extra capacity.
2) Are we seeing a symptom of Peak Resorts dominating the North Conway market? North Conway has TONS of beds, and lots of second home owners. Perhaps they just don't need to put in the quad because they remain competitive without it. Cranmore and Black are smaller mountains. Bretton Woods is far enough away that it will put off a lot skiers. The same can be said of the I-93 resorts.
3) Construction would disrupt summer revenue operations - an area where Cranmore is proving to be quite competitive.
As far as Wildcat is concerned, waiting for a loan to repair and/or improve the snowmaking system is just not an option. Peak needs to divert resources for that project. It's just that simple.
drjeff
Well-known member
Best case with the Grand Summit at Mount Snow capacity wise is 2400/hr (that's if it goes up every chair full without stopping the whole hour - the Bluebird is currently configured to have a max capacity of 2400/hr also - that is only 600 more folks an hour than the old triple. If they ever chose to max out the capacity of the Bluebird by a adding more chairs to the haul rope it could do not 3600/hr. IMHO there's already enough summit capacity at Mount Snow now as is.
No idea why Peak would consider the BB a failure. As someone who has skied Mount Snow probably 90% of the weekends since the Bluebird first opened, it sure has seemed busier than the pre bluebird era
sull1102
Active member
Was at Wildcat and Attitash yesterday and I gotta say Attitash was much more fun. Lapped that triple a good amount and I can see where the anti high speed quad comes from with overloading trails. It would probably make a huge difference to have a mid mountain lift to the summit so you could hit the rather useless Flying Yankee and then go over to a double to the top.
They consider it a failure because it needs to generate enough extra net revenue to cover the debt service and cost of operation. They said that numbers were barely up and certainly not enough to cover the cost of construction.
They said the same is expected with a new Attitash lift. They doubt it would result in an extra $1M a year in ticket sales that would be needed to pay for it.
Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone mobile app
Smellytele
Well-known member
At some point the lift will work in the other way with less and less visits (aka revenue)
drjeff
Well-known member
Which kind of brings me to the biggest beef I have with Peak right now. They're going "all in" with the 18-26 age demographic with cheap pass prices, but the reality is that many of them don't spend very much $$ once at the mountain, thus lowering the daily yield.
Especially with their VT pass products, their KIDS pass prices are in general noticeably above their competitors pass prices, thus driving some of the higher yield family market away :Mad:
xwhaler
Active member
I guess its the long term view though that in order for the business to be healthy/sustainable for the long haul they need to tap into the younger demographic.
They are hoping those kids get jobs, stay loyal to Mt Snow and then bring their families there. It may produce lower revenue/person now but could be good in the long run.
I am surprised kids wouldn't spend much $ at the mtn though---always thought that crowd would be big drivers of the F+B profit center if they were skiing so cheaply.
On your side though I can totally see the frustration in how they have structured their pass prices.
They are hoping those kids get jobs, stay loyal to Mt Snow and then bring their families there. It may produce lower revenue/person now but could be good in the long run.
I am surprised kids wouldn't spend much $ at the mtn though---always thought that crowd would be big drivers of the F+B profit center if they were skiing so cheaply.
On your side though I can totally see the frustration in how they have structured their pass prices.
They are in the ballpark for their NH kids pass prices. $399 ages 6-29. For the kids in that range they are more expensive than Crnamore, on par with Bretton Woods at first glance (but much expensive given the FREE season passes they give out, and a bit cheaper than the Super Pass.
Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone mobile app
Peak resorts have a problem with what direction they want to go . They are waiting lender approval to get funds for a snowmaking pump for Wildcat, but are starting Zip line construction in a couple of weeks at Attitash? It appears to me summer business is more important than winter business. That why no pass for this guy at Wildcat/ Attitash next year.
Apprarently
Just to put numbers in perspective, the Gunstock zip line cost $1.5M to construct. The zipline at Attitash is supposed to be even longer, so presumably it will cost even more to construct than Gunstock's.
I do know that Gunstock's zip exceeded profit expectations considerably. So, it's probably a sound investment for Attitash to build this thing.
.....but, most skiers would rather see that 1.5M go towards snowmaking improvements at Wildcat......or a down payment on a new summit lift at Attitash
If by summer being more important you mean more profitable then yes absolutely it is. In attempt at placating the crowd they said that adding the zipline was one way to increase revenue enough to cover the debt service on a new summit lift. I doubt this is true though. I see no reason that they would use summer profit to subsidize winter operations. They are getting a lot of summer competition from Cranmore and I expect them to keep expanding attractions.
Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone mobile app
drjeff
Well-known member
To further this school of thought, I know when Mount Snow's GM was asked at a meeting I attended a few weeks ago, if Peak had any intention of adding some "summer" attractions (ziplines/mountain coasters/etc) to Mount Snow, even as part of their master redevelopment plan over the next 10+ years, the answer was "no" and the Peak had decided that their core focus of expansion of summer attractions would be in the North Conway area as there is a significantly greater draw of people to that area in the summer already and a chance to capitalize on those people already in the area
Interesting to hear that. Summer and Fall are the peak tourist season in the Mt Washington Valley, and I mean by a large margin. Winter is relatively quiet in the valley. I can only assume the opposite is true in Vermont ski towns.
Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone mobile app
VTKilarney
Well-known member
That makes sense. North Conway is a zoo in the summer now.
One problem they have with Cranmore is that Cranmore is in a better location for summer activities. It's closer to town and it's not along a busy state highway. I've always felt that Attitash's summer operation looked more like a roadside attraction.
One problem they have with Cranmore is that Cranmore is in a better location for summer activities. It's closer to town and it's not along a busy state highway. I've always felt that Attitash's summer operation looked more like a roadside attraction.
drjeff
Well-known member
Attitash just needs to get themselves a big 'ol snazzy billboard just before the 16/302 junction coming from North Conway to "convince" a few parents with car loads of kids heading for Storyland to go to Attitash instead
From both having experienced Storyland 1st as a kid in the late 70's/early 80's and then as a parent with young kids a few years ago, the thought of alpine slides, zip lines, water slides and mountain coasters is WAY more appealing than a day on the tea cups and with big fuzzy fairy tale characters walking around!
Last thing NH needs is more billboards. Personally I'd like to see legislation like Vt and Me has outlawing them.
MadMadWorld
Active member
Are billboards even effective anymore? I would have guest they became useless with the invention of the Internet and GPS
Savemeasammy
New member
The world would be a better place without billboards.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They already have one about a mile down the road in Intervale at the junction with 16A near the Dunkin' Donuts.
Similar threads
