snowboard247
New member
rfarren":2u5qrsef said:
except alta is one of those non-egalitarian ski resorts.... who dont think skiers and snowboarders are equal!
Is Alta Egalitarian?
- Thread starter snowboard247
- Start date
except alta is one of those non-egalitarian ski resorts.... who dont think skiers and snowboarders are equal!
snowboard247
New member
Admin":2i5c1d4g said:
](*,)
snowboard247
New member
ill just do it like the burton poachers with a split board hehehe :stir:
rfarren
New member
snowboard247":1jf4ub6q said:
I don't think egalitarian is the word you are looking for, that is unless you can prove that snowboarders are generally poorer or than skiers. A snowboarder can slap a pair of skis on their feet and ski the famed slopes of Alta. I don't know why boarders would want to bother with Alta anyways.... too many traverses, no park, and flat areas in the middle. :wink:
On a more serious note, I've never understood the whole "free Alta" movement. It is a business decision, and clearly it's working for them. I for one agree with the decision, in large part because post holes are really annoying, and I don't want to deal with them on any of the traverses. Furthermore, it's not in violations of anyone's rights (nobody is born with a snowboard for legs).
snowboard247
New member
rfarren":7gr1mdn7 said:snowboard247":7gr1mdn7 said:
I don't think egalitarian is the word you are looking for, that is unless you can prove that snowboarders are generally poorer than skiers. A snowboarder can slap a pair of skis on their feet and ski the famed slopes of Alta. I don't know why boarders would want to bother with Alta anyways.... too many traverses, no park, and flat areas in the middle. :wink:
egalitarian is the right word....equality of all people, esp. in political, economic, or social life.
I don't wanna ski the famed slopes of Alta because I can not ski. I'm good on 1 plank, not 2. I don't need a park to have fun, the whole mountain is a terrain park! And traverses don't bother me, go do the Dragons Tail traverse at Mammoth, thats a fun one. Flat spots don't bother me either, go ride June Mountain and you'll see why. I have fun on whatever terrain I'm given.
Yea the business model seems to work for them, but for how much longer? Taos caved in last year, deer valley and MRG next? I'm sure DV or Alta will be the last to go.
rfarren
New member
Egalitarian:adj. Affirming, promoting, or characterized by belief in equal political, economic, social, and civil rights for all people.snowboard247":2idklkw2 said:
I agree with your definition of egalitarian. Just where does a snowboard fit in there? You and I are equals. You just chose to snowboard. I could chose to snowboard if there were a resort that only allowed snowboards.
I don't see where you think the model for Alta wouldn't work in the future. Taos switched because it was catering to families, and it's economic model is completely different to the resorts in Utah, and for that matter in vermont. Taos being the only destination resort in that area means it has to bring people in.
I actually think more people go to Alta and Deer Valley in light of the fact that there are no snowboarders. Again, traverses may not bother you, but post holes bother me. So, enjoy snowbird while I ski alta. :sabre fight:
snowboard247
New member
rfarren":3jkb8xo0 said:
I was using egalitarian in the sense of equality, the equality of skiers and snowboarders at all resorts, loose association i know, but that's what I was going for.
I'll have fun snowboarding Mammoth till at least June 14th this season, while you have fun sking alta
Deer Valley gets lots of families. I could see eventual pressure to change there, but snowboard numbers are stabilizing. So if the pressure isn't happening now, it might not for a long time. Alta and MRG, I don't see change at either of those.
Taos's snowboard ban was extensively debated here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=196
And the lifting of that ban here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6044
Taos's snowboard ban was extensively debated here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=196
And the lifting of that ban here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6044
salida
New member
If you'd been there, you'd know. You just couldn't board the place. You'd never make it to the goods without walking, or having a hundred skiers piling up behind you wacking you with their poles.
As for the places financial viability, I think they are doing just fine. It's not Taos (in the middle of no where new mexico).
Alta capitalizes on a niche in the market. This board just so happens to cater to that niche too.
So, yes, I guess they are Altatarian.
As for the places financial viability, I think they are doing just fine. It's not Taos (in the middle of no where new mexico).
Alta capitalizes on a niche in the market. This board just so happens to cater to that niche too.
So, yes, I guess they are Altatarian.
Marc_C
Active member
Just to emphasize the point: quite a number of the traverses at Alta have either level or up-hill sections that require double poling and/or side stepping on skis. The issue is magnified greatly on powder days. Hence, the usual comments about how boarders would destroy these traverses with post-holes.salida":1p9qfprs said:
snowboard247
New member
Marc_C":3904c2jn said:
Simple enough, the few boarders that do end up at Alta, obviously wouldn't be doing those post-thole traverses.
snowboard247":37j1sepq said:
I have to disagree. The majority of the goods at Alta require the aforementioned traversing. The temptation of all of that terrain would be too much to ignore and anyone who ignores the traverse-to terrain at Alta is largely relegated to a handful of groomed runs. Witness the gradual slightly-uphill Honeycomb Traverse at Solitude -- it's pretty much the only long traverse at Solitude and the only way to access Honeycomb Canyon's west wall, which is some of Solitude's more interesting terrain, yet it usually looks like a herd of moose followed it. Once that refreezes it's hell on earth. For the life of me I never understood why folks don't establish two side-by-side traverses in those situations -- one for skiers, one for boarders. I mean, no one with any etiquette walks in a skin track, so why do it in a traverse?
I have nothing against snowboards per se -- I have plenty of friends who ride instead of ski and it's all about sharing a love of using snow and gravity, after all -- but I nonetheless fully appreciate the advantages that a skier's-only mountain provides.
And as far as predictions as to which ski area, if any, will cave next, my money's on Deer Valley. It's that whole family thing again. Alta has developed a core skiers-only following and actively promotes its skier-only status (the slogan "Alta Is For Skiers" appears on everything), and MRG will never cave as long as the co-op runs the place and its membership votes on that decision. There are no more dedicated traditionalists out there than Mad River co-op members.
Admin and I see it the same way. Deer Valley might change eventually, but it would take a currently unforseeable revolution in thinking to move Alta or Mad River.
I continue to believe that the worry about traverses/snow conditions is overstated. That type of terrain deters 95+% of snowboarders, so they self select away from areas where it predominates. My apologies for assuming snowboard247 lived in SoCal instead of Mammoth. But I again hold up Mt. Baldy (~1/3 boarders in a market that is overall at least 2/3 boarders) as an example. And when you're at Baldy, how many boarders do you see in South Bowl with that Alta-like 1/4 mile traverse with the occasional step-up to get back to the Thunder lift?
Taos has many of the same terrain/layout issues as Alta with a far more delicate snowpack due to half as much snowfall. So it should be illuminating to hear reports from Taos over the next few years on conditions vs. the years when snowboarding was banned.
I continue to believe that the worry about traverses/snow conditions is overstated. That type of terrain deters 95+% of snowboarders, so they self select away from areas where it predominates. My apologies for assuming snowboard247 lived in SoCal instead of Mammoth. But I again hold up Mt. Baldy (~1/3 boarders in a market that is overall at least 2/3 boarders) as an example. And when you're at Baldy, how many boarders do you see in South Bowl with that Alta-like 1/4 mile traverse with the occasional step-up to get back to the Thunder lift?
Taos has many of the same terrain/layout issues as Alta with a far more delicate snowpack due to half as much snowfall. So it should be illuminating to hear reports from Taos over the next few years on conditions vs. the years when snowboarding was banned.
SoCal Rider
New member
Grrr, that South Bowl hike; not so bad from The Tube. I assume someone like 24/7 - with more days in one season than I have in my life - would do fine, though.
My point exactly. How many boarders would we see on the High T, Devils' Castle, etc.?
Bobby Danger
New member
any boarder on the high-t would be fair game on a powder day. they'd probably just push you out of the way on the castle traverse. it can get pretty heated on those traverses some days when it's busy.