Introducing Mountain Rider's Alliance

soulskier":1ifk3n0c said:
As far as me and my Bros hanging at Squaw on big days, I've actually been sneaking over to Alpine Meadows on some of the bigger days and hiking/traversing choosing quality over quantity.
Click to expand...
During huge Sierra storms so much of Squaw and Alpine are closed that I question you'll be getting much of either. Better to be getting a full day of lightly contested powder somewhere else IMHO. In general Alta and Snowbird can get a higher proportion of terrain open on storm days than Squaw/Alpine or Mammoth. But even there road and crowd issues can reach the point where it's better IMHO to go somewhere else.

soulskier":1ifk3n0c said:
Therefore, I stand behind my assessment that many of the Corporate Ski resorts (and Tahoe is currently ground zero of the Corporatization) are focusing on more out of boot amenities, real estate offerings and theme park attractions than offering new and exciting terrain expansions.
Click to expand...
I suspect that California is one of the most hostile environments anywhere to get expansion of ski terrain approved. Thus we have seen much more of those expansions in Utah, Colorado, Canada.

I'm glad soulskier agrees with me that recent terrain expansions in the West, though modest in number, have overall been advanced/expert oriented.
soulskier":1ifk3n0c said:
Also, with the new ski technology, many more skiers are seeking steeper and more exciting terrain, not more low angle, gladed tree skiing.
Click to expand...
I think during the flat skier visits years of the 80's and 90's average ability of patrons increased due to drastically reduced influx of new skiers/riders vs. the high growth years of the 60's and 70's. This combined with the equipment upgrades has driven terrain expansions in the more advanced/expert direction.

I read of the Jumbo approval shortly after it was announced March 20, checked over the weekend that it was not yet in admin's news but didn't recheck yesterday.

I read about Fortress in Kootenay Culture Magazine when I was most recently in Canada, tried to find a online reference to the MRA-type philosophy of the owner.
 
rfarren":1lh7ax0h said:
soulskier":1lh7ax0h said:
Also, we have every intention of making a profit, we aren't a charity. However, we want to do so in a values based manner. Time will tell if that's possible.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, but based on your writings it certainly seems you value locals over tourists. That's fair, and will certainly sit well in any community that is around your mountains, but given the cost quoted in your most recent article for start up fees I remain skeptical that it is great business model. That being said my knowledge on the ski mountain economics is small at best.
Click to expand...

Without knowing where the funds would be allocated, I'm not sure how you could gauge if it's a good business model or not.

As I've stated before, there is much more to our organization than is available online.
 
Tony Crocker":1cwaj7j2 said:
soulskier":1cwaj7j2 said:
As far as me and my Bros hanging at Squaw on big days, I've actually been sneaking over to Alpine Meadows on some of the bigger days and hiking/traversing choosing quality over quantity.
Click to expand...
During huge Sierra storms so much of Squaw and Alpine are closed that I question you'll be getting much of either. Better to be getting a full day of lightly contested powder somewhere else IMHO. In general Alta and Snowbird can get a higher proportion of terrain open on storm days than Squaw/Alpine or Mammoth. But even there road and crowd issues can reach the point where it's better IMHO to go somewhere else.
Click to expand...

Tony, KT at Squaw offers up some of the best storm riding on the planet. So while statistically speaking, only a portion of the mountain is open, the terrain accessed from the lift is quite sufficient.

The current issue is that with the cheap passes, many people now ski on storm days.
 
soulskier":4j9kq1cu said:
Without knowing where the funds would be allocated, I'm not sure how you could gauge if it's a good business model or not.

As I've stated before, there is much more to our organization than is available online.
Click to expand...
Hence I wrote this:
rfarren":4j9kq1cu said:
That being said my knowledge on the ski mountain economics is small at best.
Click to expand...

I'm just saying that most of your writings turn me off a bit. They make me feel like an outsider, and I'm way more passionate about this sport than most people who live in big cities away from the mountains... I think you come off as extolling a holier than now attitude that mountains are the domain of the locals, and marginalize tourists and seasonal guests. If I were you I would talk more about the positives of the future MRA rather than everything you think that's wrong with present model. You needn't always frame your argument as a comparison. There are more than enough positive attributes in what you're trying to achieve. There is also plenty of room for both models.

Also, when you write a "values based" model, you understand you are basing it on your values... what you see fit,... others may disagree. I don't fundamentally disagree with your vision. As far as I'm concerned we all want empty powder havens that cost very little with lots of terrain. According to your vision that is possible if you cut down on the frills. I think that's great for skiers and boarders who are only concerned with skiing and boarding. My only contention is that many people ski and board for less than a week a year, and those people truly appreciate the "frills", whether or not you like them. You don't have to target them as costumers, but it would be stupid to close yourself off to potential clients, especially in a seasonal business like skiing.... Perhaps, you should work with a different pr agency on how best to market yourself in a positive light, one that doesn't politicize a sport like skiing.
 
soulskier":f8vhyoty said:
The current issue is that with the cheap passes, many people now ski on storm days.
Click to expand...

I thought one of the problems that MRA wanted to address is the economics of skiing, making it cheaper for the average folk? This is one of the conundrums in skiing: the cheaper it is, the more skiers there are. The more skiers there are, the more degraded the experience becomes. Tricky economics by my measure... I'm not sure how it all works out, where the balance is between the bottom line and on mountain experience.
 
rfarren":1a8e49ym said:
soulskier":1a8e49ym said:
Without knowing where the funds would be allocated, I'm not sure how you could gauge if it's a good business model or not.

As I've stated before, there is much more to our organization than is available online.
Click to expand...
Hence I wrote this:
rfarren":1a8e49ym said:
That being said my knowledge on the ski mountain economics is small at best.
Click to expand...

I'm just saying that most of your writings turn me off a bit. They make me feel like an outsider, and I'm way more passionate about this sport than most people who live in big cities away from the mountains... I think you come off as extolling a holier than now attitude that mountains are the domain of the locals, and marginalize tourists and seasonal guests. If I were you I would talk more about the positives of the future MRA rather than everything you think that's wrong with present model. You needn't always frame your argument as a comparison. There are more than enough positive attributes in what you're trying to achieve. There is also plenty of room for both models.

Also, when you write a "values based" model, you understand you are basing it on your values... what you see fit,... others may disagree. I don't fundamentally disagree with your vision. As far as I'm concerned we all want empty powder havens that cost very little with lots of terrain. According to your vision that is possible if you cut down on the frills. I think that's great for skiers and boarders who are only concerned with skiing and boarding. My only contention is that many people ski and board for less than a week a year, and those people truly appreciate the "frills", whether or not you like them. You don't have to target them as costumers, but it would be stupid to close yourself off to potential clients, especially in a seasonal business like skiing.... Perhaps, you should work with a different pr agency on how best to market yourself in a positive light, one that doesn't politicize a sport like skiing.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback and critique Rob.
 
soulskier":3fdp2g0n said:
The current issue is that with the cheap passes, many people now ski on storm days.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a hypocritical elitist to me. You should buy a trophy home at Yellowstone Club to keep the riff-raff off your soulful powder.
 
Hello FTOL Friends,

Tonight I will be doing a live video discussing the future of skiing with Peak 38 Mountain Division.

http://p38mtn.com/LiveChat.aspx

I'd love to have you guys send your questions and participate. Hope to see you there.

Interview-tomorrow.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top