(what I understood to mean fresh powder or well preserved powder)
Note the phrase "well-preserved," which is nearly an oxymoron in the East. Last weekend in Utah was Exhibit A for enjoyable skiing on well-preserved snow, a week after the last significant new snow. The previous weekend at Mammoth, 3 weeks after last major snow, was a bit firmer but would qualify as good-to-excellent by eastern standards as there had still been no melt/freeze on 80% of terrain.
The top 10-20% of the range of snow conditions is fresh powder by most people's definitions, thus involves weather predictions, which I am outspoken in not believing more than about a week ahead. The best utility of my historical snow analyses is "how to minimize your chances of disappointing conditions." By that I mean the chances that the terrain you want to ski will not be covered (such as Taos or Crested Butte early season) or will have unpleasant snow conditions (such as Jackson Hole in late season).
Due to the frequency of rain/freeze and thaw, I believe the East has what most of us would define as "disappointing conditions" close to 1/3 of the time (based upon the eyewitness reports I read here on FTO), and Mt. Baldy well over half. Therefore I view such ski areas as attractive to drive-up locals but not to those who must commit more than a week ahead.
Well, he did include the phrase "interesting terrain". I don't know about Big Bear...
Worth one or two days a season; I'd get bored pretty fast if it were much more than that. I've put enough pics on FTO for most of you to form opinions I think. I found Stoneham to be a close analogy if that helps.