SKIING Magazine, R.I.P
- Thread starter Tony Crocker
- Start date
Marc_C
Active member
And the corollary being: people will pay for on-line content when:Admin":6dyx77mj said:
* that content is perceived as valuable
* the content is not available anywhere else
However, they are generally not willing to pay rates that are similar to what was the norm for printed media. That's part of the problem the NY Times, et al have experienced. NYT thought their on-line content was worth (print price)*0.75, but consumers put it more like print*0.075.
Patrick
Well-known member
The resort guide is a survey of SKI mags readers. The methodology is sound (unless they changed it since the mid 90s), it's just a survey of their reader's favorite based on areas they skied. It's weighted (was before) by which variables they perceive as important then they would rate these. This was by non means a survey of experts in the field, but by the general readers of THAT magazine. I'm sure the same public opinion would do the same exercise using the same methodology and the clients from Powder mag and the results would be entirely different.Tony Crocker":2ags0t6s said:
No it's not. SKI Magazine supplies 17 categories, readers vote on them and SKI weights the categories equally.Patrick":3rtg7y7f said:
Categories and Deer Valley October 2009 Rank (NL = not in top 10)
Snow 10
Grooming 1
Terrain Variety NL
Terrain Challenge NL
Value NL
Lifts 2
Service 1
Weather 3
Access 2
On-Mountain Food 1
Lodging 1
Dining 1
Apres-Ski 9
Off-Hill Activities 8
Family Programs 2
Scenery NL
Terrain Parks NL
The SKI readers are not all dilettantes. Those ranks are generally reasonable. SKI Magazine biases the results by choosing those categories and weighting them equally. In the survey they also ask each reader to rate the importance of each category. So they have the capability of weighting the categories by importance for a true overall rating, but choose not to do that.
Here's a clue for SKI Magazine: They also asked readers to rate overall satisfaction.
1 ) Alta
2 ) Jackson Hole
3 ) Whistler Blackcomb
4 ) Deer Valley
5 ) Aspen Highlands
6 ) Telluride
7 ) Mammoth
8 ) Vail
9 ) Powder Mt. !!!
10 ) Snowmass
Patrick
Well-known member
Tony Crocker":3d6k8adu said:
Like I said... :roll:
Patrick":3d6k8adu said:
I had fun going over the data when I was working at a Public Opinion firm in the mid90s. I could do it back because they had the actual score for each place for each categories. If you read in the archives from FTO, I had fun stripping out all the stuff I didn't care and rated terrain, challenge, etc equally and the Eastern results made sense to me then.
SKI magazine note about the survey: October 1995
I don't know about now, because I couldn't really care about SKI magazine or their survey of their subscribers, if someone did the same exercise of subscribers to Powder, Skiing, Ski Canada, SBC Skier, The Ski Journal or First Tracks Online for that matter...I would definitely be interested in the results (maybe for one year, not every year). Like we know that for rfarren, accessibility is real important because he'd rather be on a plane toward the West than to go to Sugarloaf. :lol:
I bought the October 1995 issue because they had the actual score for each area and category plus included the weights.
Found it...from the first annual mega Killington is closing bitching season, before Tony became the mad moderator reorganizing everything in the proper topic...voici part of my post from May 2003:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5088&p=21494#p21494
Patrick":3d6k8adu said:
* places I've skied back in May 2003
As you can see, the results are different, some are surprising, but remember we are talking about SKI subscribers after all.
I can't speak for the 1990's, but I'm fairly sure the categories have been weighted equally by SKI Magazine for some time.
Some of you may recall that SKI and SKIING used to be very similar. I recall a Powder satire of them as Tweedledum and Tweedledee. Over the last decade the publisher tried to differentiate them, pushing SKI in the direction of the old Snow Country and SKIING in the direction of Powder. This was not successful in terms of broadening readership. A few years ago I saw that demographics of SKI and SKIING subscribers were nearly identical in terms of average age, annual income and number of days skied per season (23 I think).
With regard to that differentiation, note what categories SKI has added since Patrick's review of 1995.
A second terrain category
Terrain parks
But also:
A second food category
Grooming
Service
Off-Hill Activities
Family Programs
Scenery
Some of you may recall that SKI and SKIING used to be very similar. I recall a Powder satire of them as Tweedledum and Tweedledee. Over the last decade the publisher tried to differentiate them, pushing SKI in the direction of the old Snow Country and SKIING in the direction of Powder. This was not successful in terms of broadening readership. A few years ago I saw that demographics of SKI and SKIING subscribers were nearly identical in terms of average age, annual income and number of days skied per season (23 I think).
With regard to that differentiation, note what categories SKI has added since Patrick's review of 1995.
A second terrain category
Terrain parks
But also:
A second food category
Grooming
Service
Off-Hill Activities
Family Programs
Scenery
Bluebird Day
New member
I now have an IPAD and love it. No need for print media anymore.... I do remember the excitement of getting the September issue of SKI and the equipment guide in the good old days. Those Olin Mark IV's always looked so cool in print. Oh yah, and Suzi Chapstick, too. Man, I am frickin old!! :shock:
berkshireskier
Active member
Bluebird Day":3kemkaoi said:
Olin skis. There's a blast from the past. I used to own a pair of Olin Comp SL skis - 205's - stiff as a solid piece of hardened titanium. I once tried to ski 2 and 1/2 feet of new, fairly heavy powder at Alpine Meadows on those skis. Could not buy a turn in that snow and just eventually went straight down and would fall down when I wanted to stop.
EMSC
Well-known member
So somehow SKI mag thinks I've paid them for a subscription (for many years into the future based on the expiration on the mailing label). Anyway the relevant topic at hand is an advert for the new online only Skiing magazine that came as an insert in SKI. They want you to fork over $20 for 10 'issues' per year of Skiing online. Or almost double the $10/year subscriptions you used to be able to get for the print version (only 8 issues per year). Yikes! what are they thinking?
Tony Crocker":2d0wnhk7 said:
Here's the outcome:
http://www.firsttracksonline.com/News/2 ... ms-Movies/
FYI I was at a media event last night hosted by Bonnier/SKI Magazine and some of the high end resorts in Jackson Hole last night. There is going to be direct air service from LA to Jackson this season, so they want to promote to travel agents and media in SoCal. I asked one of the reps from Bonnier what was happening with Warren Miller, and she said, "we won the arbitration in April, but it will first be in the press (she suggested Denver Post) today October 15."
Despite the headline, "Arbitration Panel Sides with Warren Miller Entertainment," the full article seems to indicate a more nuanced result. The arbitrator affirmed WME's exclusive rights in ski films and magazines but did not award damages, "as WME could not prove that Miller's appearance in Refresh caused any harm to WME." Warren Miller is quoted as being pleased with the latter finding "that I did not breach any contract."
The arbitration resolves the dispute between WME and Warren Miller but says nothing about the original lawsuit against Level 1 Productions, the producer of Refresh.
Despite the headline, "Arbitration Panel Sides with Warren Miller Entertainment," the full article seems to indicate a more nuanced result. The arbitrator affirmed WME's exclusive rights in ski films and magazines but did not award damages, "as WME could not prove that Miller's appearance in Refresh caused any harm to WME." Warren Miller is quoted as being pleased with the latter finding "that I did not breach any contract."
The arbitration resolves the dispute between WME and Warren Miller but says nothing about the original lawsuit against Level 1 Productions, the producer of Refresh.
Patrick
Well-known member
Really wants me to go see the next WME movie, right? :roll:
I know of at least 3 non WME ski movies where Warren Miller appeared or will appear.
The Level 1 movie, Swift Silent Deep, and the upcoming Legends of Aahhss. Two of these are what I would call Ski Documentary, but that quote above would seem to be pretty far reaching. I know Warren Miller published/participated in at least one book that, I don't think, related to WME.