Is Alta Egalitarian?
- Thread starter snowboard247
- Start date
It's not that it's impossible for snowboarders. Given the much greater effort required for snowboarders vs. skiers to access Alta's best terrain, the boarders will tend to favor other Utah ski areas.
snowboard247
New member
i cant wait to posthole all your precious traverses! \
/
/
As in other threads it's important to evaluate ski areas in their regional context. Given the abundance of options in Utah, I can't get too worked up about snowboarders not being allowed at Alta, particularly since there are some layout/terrain issues.
Taos was another story. It stands head and shoulders above its in-state competition in terms of both snow and terrain, so I always felt there was a fairness issue in denying it to local and drive-up snowboraders. Contrary to prevailing opinion here, 60% of Taos' business is drive-up. After my extended interview with Adrianna Blake in 2007 it did not surprise me at all when Taos lifted the ban a year later.
Taos was another story. It stands head and shoulders above its in-state competition in terms of both snow and terrain, so I always felt there was a fairness issue in denying it to local and drive-up snowboraders. Contrary to prevailing opinion here, 60% of Taos' business is drive-up. After my extended interview with Adrianna Blake in 2007 it did not surprise me at all when Taos lifted the ban a year later.
That was clear from my discussion with Adrianna Blake. The 40% of visitors that fly in were strongly in favor of retaining the snowboard ban. Taos closely studied their drive-up market from New Mexico and Texas every year in order to estimate how much business they might be losing.
baldyskier
Member
rfarren":3ual95xs said:snowboard247":3ual95xs 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).
Be careful; in the PC climate that prevails now, personal choices made about sexual preference have been elevated to the same status as racial distinctions. Perhaps the tendency to prefer snowboarding above skiing is really a genetic trait that the boarder has no control over. It wouldn't be fair to exclude boarders from Alta's wondrous terrain, then, would it?
When I met her in February, she mentioned that the overall clientele is 21% boarders and that the resort is now 10% busier than before the ban.Tony Crocker":k5cfmyh5 said:
I predicted an ultimate level of 15% boarders at Taos. The 21% is still below the national average of 1/3 and the Rockies average of 1/4. Time will tell whether the 21% will grow into the Rockies average (maybe some didn't get the word the first year) or was it a blip upward in that first year and some of them may not come back due to the terrain/layout issues.