or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Big news for Tahoe next season???
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Big news for Tahoe next season??? - Page 2

post #31 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by davluri View Post

Squaw doesn't need Alpines weak attitude toward opening their mountain (not at all like the 80's), their crappy road issues (avi blasting) and lousy parking, their traversing skiers, their constant worrying about avalanche danger (or the calling on it for an excuse), their short pitches with long runouts through intermediate terrain with fussy, fussy skiers complaining about people skiing too fast when you're just trying to get WAY back to Summit; it goes on and on. It IS possible to take on a new place that is just a problem; and again, who's to say there won't be far more flow toward Squaw  than the other way around; Alpine skiers have already flocked to Squaw for the new pass, saying: "At that price, how could I pass it up?" Who wants a core ski population with that attitude anyhow?? Don't encourage them any further. "Excuse me, which run is Funnel?" 


Is it true Alpine requires all skiers to use a Ski-Tote?  roflmao.gif

357216920_o.jpg

 

post #32 of 142

Umm... you realize everyone is talking about Squaw buying Alpine, not the other way around, right?  Alpine's current owner's attitude about opening their mountain would be irrelevant if they don't own it.  And in terms of them worrying about avy danger, well, 1983 is all I have to say about that.

 

All of these Squaw vs. Alpine generalizations are pretty ridiculous... I've seen all types of skiers/riders at both places.  There are a few grains of truth to a small degree, but it's mostly just BS.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by davluri View Post

Squaw doesn't need Alpines weak attitude toward opening their mountain (not at all like the 80's), their crappy road issues (avi blasting) and lousy parking, their traversing skiers, their constant worrying about avalanche danger (or the calling on it for an excuse), their short pitches with long runouts through intermediate terrain with fussy, fussy skiers complaining about people skiing too fast when you're just trying to get WAY back to Summit; it goes on and on. It IS possible to take on a new place that is just a problem; and again, who's to say there won't be far more flow toward Squaw  than the other way around; Alpine skiers have already flocked to Squaw for the new pass, saying: "At that price, how could I pass it up?" Who wants a core ski population with that attitude anyhow?? Don't encourage them any further. "Excuse me, which run is Funnel?" 



 

post #33 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaytierney View Post

 

All of these Squaw vs. Alpine generalizations are pretty ridiculous... I've seen all types of skiers/riders at both places.  There are a few grains of truth to a small degree, but it's mostly just BS.
 



 


Well, where is the fun in...."HEY!!!! your mountain has some kickass stashes and most of the skiers are pretty damn good skiers! Oh YEAH????? Well your mountain has some killer steeps and super chutes and the skiers are GNAR!

 

 

 

 

 

post #34 of 142

What Jay said (except that it was '82).

 

As for the other issues besides avy control, well, you might feel better after a cup of coffee.

post #35 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDad View Post

What Jay said (except that it was '82).

 

As for the other issues besides avy control, well, you might feel better after a cup of coffee.



Decaff at that. 

post #36 of 142

I think Squaw's got their work cut out for themselves just improving what they've already got.  I agree that the lifts could use some real attention.  I'd be hard-pressed to decide which lifts to replace first.  I mean, do you address the oldest lifts, the slowest lifts, the breaking-est lifts, the ones with the longest lines?  For my tastes, I'd hit Squaw Creek, Silverado and Granite Chief before I did anything with Siberia.  And what's with Cornice II?  Either run it or remove it.  For some strange reason, I'd leave Olympic Lady alone, but it should run more.  Similar with Broken Arrow.

 

Anyway, does anyone know the practical maximum number of lifts they could replace over a single summer?  It's my guess that even if they wanted to spend the whole $50 million on new lifts, they couldn't get it done too quickly.

post #37 of 142

I thought I'd heard Siberia was definitely getting replaced... pretty sure one of Squaw's marketing folks on Facebook alluded to that after the last evacuation incident back in February or March.

post #38 of 142

Well, skilifts.org does list Siberia, but I'm not sure I'd treat that as fact:

 

http://www.skilifts.org/forum/index.php?app=ccs&module=pages&section=pages&id=56&category=3

post #39 of 142
Thread Starter 

Well, making Siberia a six-pack will be pretty stupid.  First of all, this lift never has a huge line and is a high-speed quad already. Second, it serves a wide-open smooth weather-exposed bowl which is the first place on the mountain to become unskiable when the weather moves in.  You just cannot ski Siberia on a storm day or in fog unless you like to ski by touch.  

 

The lifts that needs to be replaced are Granite, Red Dog, Squaw Creek, and Silverado.  All those lifts become big bottlenecks at some kind of conditions.  

Red Dog will relief the crowding on KT-22 on storm days, 

Squaw Creek is the only lift that serves good terrain that typically runs in any weather.  

Silverado has unbearable lines on a bluebird powder day, and the capacity of the lift is far below the amount of terrain it serves.  Squaw should use Silverado more, period.  

Everyone who spent any time in a Granite line would welcome a high-speed quad there (I would probably differ because it will likely make the bowl a lot more crowded and dangerous).

 

Here is the Silvy line on a pow day this year. I just entered the corral and this is a slow three-person fixed chair, so the wait in that line was easily 40 min. 

Sylvy_line.jpg

post #40 of 142

At the risk of hijacking this thread, I've got to jump in re which lifts need attention first.  Putting myself in KSL's shoes (er, boots?), and going with their stated goals of increased lift capacity at the bottom of the mountain and increased terrain/capacity for intermediates, there's a glaring and relatively easy fix I hope they will jump on.  Its called Broken Arrow, and to me at least, its a no f___ing brainer.  Imagine a chair (not necessarily a high speed quad but something functional; I'm trying to be realistic so fix and use the old Red Dog chair when you replace that) that unloads where BA unloads now but runs more or less parallel along the north side of the face of Tower 16 and loads somewhere near the Waterfall/summer road/sunnyside way down the mountain (I'm not tallking about all the way down the mountain; say somewhere below Headwall but next to sunnyside).  You now would have the ability to ski all the Tower/Sun chute runs, as well as the actual BA stuff to the north without having to ride two chairs (and this is really good terrain that is "under-skied" because of the price you pay with the lift the way it is now).  No more near crashes as you try to get to the bottom of Headwall now and no more near crashes as you try to get across the bottom of Siberia and High Camp to load where BA is now.  IMHO the day this lift opened it would become the third best lift on the mountain and would obviously take pressure off of KT and Headwall.  It would also provide good and easy access to a nice intermediate run starting just below the Baileys/Links chairs and down through this years bear territory.  And all of this would orient more traffic to the northern terrain and get more people on the relatively empty sunnyside way down the mountain.  Seems like it should be able to run on storm days and it doesn't strike me as being very expensive.  I get they've got other priorities but I really hope they do this someday soon.   

post #41 of 142

Alex, I remember that line.  It looked really bad as I cut it with my instructor, repeatedly.

 

SquawBrat, that's a pretty good idea.  I've often wondered about the alignment of Broken Arrow.  My guess is that your idea would help most in spring and not much on a storm day.  Along those lines, though, there are some real holes in the "getting around the mountain" department.  Getting to Silverado from the base is a pain, as is anything involving the Cable Car.  It would be nice to have "lap" access to Poulsen's Gully.  Squaw One Express is an interesting lift, but it doesn't always run and I'd rather have it unload at the top of Broken Arrow.

post #42 of 142

Any chance that this union could have something to do with the bid for hosting the Olympics? 

 

The last time Squaw hosted the olympics was in the 1960's.  Demands on infrastructure and accommodations have changed a lot in 40+ years.  The union with AM won't help the infrastructure demands, but it may help the demands on other aspects.

 

post #43 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xela View Post

It would be nice to have "lap" access to Poulsen's Gully.  Squaw One Express is an interesting lift, but it doesn't always run and I'd rather have it unload at the top of Broken Arrow.


I have asked about this for years; how hard would it be to cut a small fire road from say 2/3rd of the way down Poulsons to be able to catch Red Dog?  Talk about help on storm days.
 

 

post #44 of 142
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xela View Post

Alex, I remember that line.  It looked really bad as I cut it with my instructor, repeatedly

 

SquawBrat, that's a pretty good idea.  I've often wondered about the alignment of Broken Arrow.  My guess is that your idea would help most in spring and not much on a storm day.  Along those lines, though, there are some real holes in the "getting around the mountain" department.  Getting to Silverado from the base is a pain, as is anything involving the Cable Car.  It would be nice to have "lap" access to Poulsen's Gully.  Squaw One Express is an interesting lift, but it doesn't always run and I'd rather have it unload at the top of Broken Arrow.

 

Xela-  smile.gif Yes I saw you and our wife on that day... As I was standing in that line I was already on my run #3 on that day, so I really had no right to complain- I barely made the first box up that day, and the first run down untracked Gate 5 was probably one of the best runs of the year for me.  

 

I like the idea of making Broken Arrow a major run, that terrain is definitely under-served; the flipside is that the snow quality often sub-par relative to the rest of the mountain.  BTW, Broken Arrow provides easy access to Silverado through Gate 8 that has some really nice areas, so re-routing Squaw One to the BA top would be sweet.  I never understood the grand purpose of Squaw One, other than a quick non-obvious route to Palisades and BA or a sneaky way to get to Headwall when KT is backed up.    But this is all kind of an empty talk- there was a persistent rumor this winter that KSL hired mountain planners to come up with the development plan and that the only conditions they had was not to touch the terrain on KT, Headwall and Silverado (do I understand that Granite terrain  is in danger of being "intermedified"?)  So I won't be surprised if new lifts are just the beginning.

 


 

 

post #45 of 142

I might have been there that day. I bailed after one run. I think Silverado is unlikely to be replaced first. It is not run as often and it is harder to dig out after a storm. I like the idea of realign Squaw One to the top of BA. It will need additional grooming to connect to Mountain run to make it accessible by intermediates.

 

post #46 of 142

Squaw Brat,

The problem with making Broken arrow, a better chair is it doesn't pass the party line of Squaw, is that we need more intermediate terrain.

post #47 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexzn View Post

I like the idea of making Broken Arrow a major run, that terrain is definitely under-served; the flipside is that the snow quality often sub-par relative to the rest of the mountain.  BTW, Broken Arrow provides easy access to Silverado through Gate 8 that has some really nice areas, so re-routing Squaw One to the BA top would be sweet.  I never understood the grand purpose of Squaw One, other than a quick non-obvious route to Palisades and BA or a sneaky way to get to Headwall when KT is backed up.


Hmmm.  One of the reasons BA is fun is that it's underutilized.

 

As for Squaw One, I've always thought of it as the alternative to the Funitel.  They seem to only run it on busy days, so my assumption is that if it's running, I'd rather ride it than wait in the line for the Funi or KT.  The easy access was a nice plus when we used to stay at the Squaw Valley Lodge.

post #48 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ske-Bum View Post

Squaw Brat,

The problem with making Broken arrow, a better chair is it doesn't pass the party line of Squaw, is that we need more intermediate terrain.


On the contrary, all of that terrain just below the gate at the bottom of Baileys Beach (where the bears where this year) is accessible from the top of BA.  It would certainly be better than Gold Coast; perhaps not as good as Squaw Creek but the way BA loads now its not skied unless you are headed down the mountain (of course it would have to be groomed periodically).  As for the snow quality, its better than you think on the actual BA side (to the north).  And lastly, running BA from the bottom of the mountain doesn't lay out (as much as I wish it would).

 

The thing is, there are all kinds of things short of new quads and six-packs that KSL could do now that they've attracted the masses; Alex pointed out fixing Poulsons so you could lap it from Red Dog.  Here's another easy improvement; for Silverado add a mid station where the terrain flattens out (that big meadow like area that you cross from the Land Bridge).  If you assume KSL will do nothing else with that chair (I think a reasonable assumption), it effectively upgrades what's there by cutting off the lower "throw away" part of the chair and terrain.  It won't help on those powder days but every other day of the year it would make riding that chair a whole bunch easier to stomach.  Even midweek my wife and I rarely go over there now because that chair ride puts us to sleep.
 

 

post #49 of 142


all these comments from people who have declared they have no loyalty to a ski area, or are not based at a ski area. well I am very much committed to a ski area, thus have more interest in keeping those qualities in tact that I have appreciated for decades.

 

And I dislike the idea of Squaw buying into all of Alpine's problems and lifestyle preferences. Like a day when Alpine's road is closed, those peeps will show up at Squaw. very bad deal for us.

 

Any of you who suppose that Squaw buying Alpine will not downgrade the Squaw skiing experience are seeing it from a way different point of view than I do. That's all. Quit your condescending.

 

 

 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDad View Post

What Jay said (except that it was '82).

 

As for the other issues besides avy control, well, you might feel better after a cup of coffee.



 

post #50 of 142

From a Squaw skier perspective, that's a very good point.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by davluri View Post

And I dislike the idea of Squaw buying into all of Alpine's problems and lifestyle preferences. Like a day when Alpine's road is closed, those peeps will show up at Squaw. very bad deal for us.

 



 

post #51 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by davluri View Post


all these comments from people who have declared they have no loyalty to a ski area, or are not based at a ski area. well I am very much committed to a ski area, thus have more interest in keeping those qualities in tact that I have appreciated for decades.

 

And I dislike the idea of Squaw buying into all of Alpine's problems and lifestyle preferences. Like a day when Alpine's road is closed, those peeps will show up at Squaw. very bad deal for us.

 

Any of you who suppose that Squaw buying Alpine will not downgrade the Squaw skiing experience are seeing it from a way different point of view than I do. That's all. Quit your condescending.

 

 


To quote one of the most quotable movies ever....

 

 

Lighten up, Francis. nonono2.gif

 

 


Edited by Philpug - 6/5/11 at 11:05am
post #52 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post




To quote one of the most quotable movies ever....

 

 

Lighten up, Francis. nonono2.gif

 

 



I love that movie; I once saw an "EM 50" license plate on a motor home and couldn't stop laughing.  Since davluri seems to be having problems with this thread maybe we should talk about movies.

 

post #53 of 142

The biggest change in Squaw is the cheap pass and that has already happened. If I had to worry about crowd, I would not worry about the existing pass holders from Alpine and Squaw. I would worry about the new crowds they plan to go after.

 

Bronze pass get less blackout dates this year. This is after they increase the price and blackout dates from the year before. My guess is that they did not sell as many Bronze passes. The Gold pass price has been reduced; my guess again is that they did not sell that many to begin with. Squaw has the RFID gates and they can figure a lot of things out from the visit log to help maximize profit. They should know Kirkwood is also selling cheap tickets to Squaw pass holders to attract the Squaw blacked-out pass holders. Those are money in Squaw’s pocket that let slipped away. That maybe why they let passes holders to buy discount ticket next year during blackouts.

 

I think Squaw gets a large share of local skiers. I say this because I notice the lift lines get significantly less after a few hours in a good weather day after a storm. People left because the snow got tracked out.

 

People complain about not being able to ski Squaw because lift closure AND lift line too long during storm days. In reality, both can’t be true the same time. I know of one day that Northstar was closed while KT still spinning. Most of my best days at Squaw are storm days. My best hour at Squaw is a blue bird day after storm.

 

post #54 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by hellside View Post

The biggest change in Squaw is the cheap pass and that has already happened. If I had to worry about crowd, I would not worry about the existing pass holders from Alpine and Squaw. I would worry about the new crowds they plan to go after.

 

Bronze pass get less blackout dates this year. This is after they increase the price and blackout dates from the year before. My guess is that they did not sell as many Bronze passes. The Gold pass price has been reduced; my guess again is that they did not sell that many to begin with. Squaw has the RFID gates and they can figure a lot of things out from the visit log to help maximize profit. They should know Kirkwood is also selling cheap tickets to Squaw pass holders to attract the Squaw blacked-out pass holders. Those are money in Squaw’s pocket that let slipped away. That maybe why they let passes holders to buy discount ticket next year during blackouts.

 

I think Squaw gets a large share of local skiers. I say this because I notice the lift lines get significantly less after a few hours in a good weather day after a storm. People left because the snow got tracked out.

 

People complain about not being able to ski Squaw because lift closure AND lift line too long during storm days. In reality, both can’t be true the same time. I know of one day that Northstar was closed while KT still spinning. Most of my best days at Squaw are storm days. My best hour at Squaw is a blue bird day after storm.

 

I'm not saying that Squaw is bad on storm days, but I can't imagine any day that N* was closed while KT was still spinning(at least for the 2010-11 season).  There was one day that they ended up shutting down some of the lifts at N* including the backside chair, but Lookout and several others were running.  That was the worst weather day at N* this season.


 

 

post #55 of 142
Thread Starter 

David- Sure, I have less aggregated loyalty to Squaw than you do, but give me some timecool.gif....   Given that both Xela's family and my family will have two kids in the race program next year on top of two adult season passes, that makes us pretty respectable contributors to Squaw's bottom line, and I think that also makes us keenly interested in making sure that the place stays a great place to ski.  I also do appreciate that as weekenders we both have a different perspective than someone who is skiing every day (can you detect a hint of jealousy? smile.gif, again, give me time...)

 

I think the main change has been the sale of  the area from local ownership to KSL, and whether we like it or not, the prevailing business sense in Tahoe now that a ski area needs to become a destination resort to survive.  I am not sure I buy this theory, and I have said this before, but my opinion's weight in KSL's plans is exactly zero.   If Squaw buys Alpine, at least the combined area will gain the intermeadiate terrain that it needs to attract destination crowd and maybe KSL will leave the proper Squaw alone (do you really want to see mountain planners transforming Granite Chief? I kinda like it is-is).   I would not worry about Alpine guys coming over to Squaw, with the pass prices like they have been in the last couple of years everyone who wanted to come, came already, and people who stay at Apline are the same die-hards, so they could not care lessa bout the access to the place over the ridge.  The NStar crowd is not moving either, they love their social mountain and could not care less about GNAR.  I'd really love Squaw to find a solution to the weekend storm day recurring cluster-f&ck, again if you can ski midweek storms you care less about 40min+ lines on a weekend.  I can find my way to the good snow, thank you very much, but I do need to get up top for that...  

 

I think we are really worrying about the wrong things here.  I sometimes feel that the current trends is skiing leave me figuratively in no-man's land... At one side the industry is increasingly focusing on the intermediate skier who flies twice a year to a destination resort, on the other side the focus is increasingly shifting to pro athletes oing stupid risky stuff that only serves to drive traffic to blogs and ski sites.  Vanessa Aadland is getting huge publicity for skiing naked one morning and no one fully noticed her before that, and last time i checked she was alegitimate competitive freerider.   Given how much the blogs exploded after seeing that,  I am sure we will see a lot more BNs, male and female, next season.  Shane is increasingly remembered for BNs and these stupid GNAR extra credits.  What happened to "sliding on the snow, flying through the air" bit?    The guy was so much more than his jokes, and it is increasingly looks like his buddies chose to cash in only on that part of his legacy.  I think if Squaw manages to keep its skiing culture through all these changes, we will be lucky; and Alpine skiers are not a threat to that.    OK, I am ranting now, so I should stop...  

post #56 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexzn View Post

If Squaw buys Alpine, at least the combined area will gain the intermeadiate terrain that it needs to attract destination crowd


Hmmm.  Do you mean that the combined intermediate terrain will be greater?  I mean, it's not that Alpine doesn't have fine blue squares, but -- like Squaw, Snowbird, and a handful of other resorts -- blue squares at Alpine are often black diamonds elsewhere.  

 

And I've said this before, but one of my favorite things about skiing Squaw as my wife and kids were gaining competence was that the lower mountain (especially Red Dog and the Resort lift) has a number of nice blue groomers with advanced and expert options in the adjacent off piste.  We could start and end runs together, and I could duck off for some challenge in between.

 

post #57 of 142

The interesting thing about both Alpine and Squaw is that they both have some incredible butt pucker terrain and it takes some time to find your way around so you don't get in over your head.  Love them both and looking forward to many more seasons enjoying both whether they're united or not.

 

post #58 of 142

I don't know, I think people will always remember McConkey for his Spy Who Loved Me antics... it's just that it takes some serious balls and know-how to emulate the whole ski off a cliff with a parachute thing that not many people are going to pay tribute that way.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexzn View Post

Shane is increasingly remembered for BNs and these stupid GNAR extra credits.  What happened to "sliding on the snow, flying through the air" bit?    The guy was so much more than his jokes, and it is increasingly looks like his buddies chose to cash in only on that part of his legacy.



 

post #59 of 142

Well, the beginnings probably started under Nancy with the cheap season passes.  At this point, the writing's on the wall.  If Squaw doesn't change at all, it won't survive.  Vail is on the offensive with Northstar & Heavenly.  The bar is rising and it's expensive to keep up.  Frankly, I'd rather see a changed Squaw than a bankrupt Squaw, if those are the choices.  With luck, concerned skiers may be able to provide feedback to KSL and avoid the worst of it.

post #60 of 142

Alexn stated "I think the main change has been the sale of  the area from local ownership to KSL, and whether we like it or not, the prevailing business sense in Tahoe now that a ski area needs to become a destination resort to survive" and " At one side the industry is increasingly focusing on the intermediate skier who flies twice a year to a destination resort". I agree that this may be misguided - and even from a money position. Intermediates are important for business but usually the serious skiers make the destination choice. Entice the serious skiers with the Squallywood lines (from Alexn again "the other side the focus is increasingly shifting to pro athletes (d)oing stupid risky stuff that only serves to drive traffic to blogs and ski sites") and those high level skiers will bring their blue friends with them. Especially if there is a reasonable amount of intermediate terrain for them. Squaw (especially the lower mountain) has limited terrain for intermediates (and no amount of grooming will make a steep run easy for intermediates).

 

If Squaw and Alpine combine, there will be enough intermediate terrain for destination skiers who get dragged there by their GNARly friends. Good business!

 

Eric

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Big news for Tahoe next season???