87% of beginners FAIL! - Page 2

How ironic you guys had the NSAA convention in San Antonio! Haha. My old snowless stomping grounds! I'd have to say that most of the peeps I know didn't return because (A) Cost (they just don't make it a priority), (B) Time (again, not a huge priority to them), and (C) Lack of lessons (see below).

Being that it's so rare for them to actually get out to the mountains, they say they don't want to "waste their time with lessons." Those fools (friends of mine) refused to take lessons, tried learning from a friend (aka another Texan), had a bad experience/didn't really learn how to ski/got injured, which of course discourages them from trying again. I always tell my friends from back home that "Friends don't let friends teach friends how to ski." Saw that on a bumper sticker in CO a few years ago.

Some resorts are really fantastic about promoting cheap lesson packages. I've had deals where you basically just rent the skis and buy a lesson, and get a free lift ticket included, or the other way around. I believe that if people were better about starting their trips out with a lesson or two, they would enjoy skiing much more, and it would make them want to return that much more! Some resorts understand this concept well. Hook a newbie up with some free lessons/lift tix/rentals, and it will not only make them more inclined to return to the sport, but will also encourage them to return to your resort.

People don't necessarily want to ski; they want to have the ski lifestyle.  

So up at Tahoe, that means many people go up for the weekend, but maybe get to the slopes by 11 on saturday or halfday.   Altitude hits a lot of out-of-shape people, so after a few runs, time to hit the lodge for a tasty beverage.

Then head to reno/southlaketahoe to hit casinos/nightlife; or if they are a little more laid back, take it easy in the rental cabin, just have a casual dinner and drinks Sat. night.  Then sleep in for part of Sunday (or watch football), maybe brunch and head back to the Bay Area.  Somewhat  like Thanksgiving.

It's still a good time, but it's more the relaxing atmosphere rather than the skiing itself.

It's the same as any vacation where you choose to sleep in and just chill/relax or you force yourself to have an itinerary and agenda of things to do to make the most of the trip but end up more tired then before the vacation.

Plus, the costs, pain and effort to do the snowsport is pricey;  so you do weigh hitting the slopes versus having a lobster dinner.

With these barriers, it's hard for them to break through the beginners stages and get to a stage where they're having fun and not just feeling like work.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nolo 

According to statistics presented at the NSAA Meeting at San Antonio yesterday, "87% of first time skiers do not return."

 

That's a tasty stat, but I wonder...

 

How does it compare to other active sports?

Does this statistic represent a worsening in the retention of beginner skiers?

Why do so few people who try skiing stay with it? 

What can be done about it?

Is the fact that the sport only retains around 15% of people who try a bad or a good thing for current skiers?

 

What do you think? 

1. I dunno how it compares to other "active" sports. Many more questions arise.

  What would you call an "active" sport? Golf? Baseball? Bicycling? Tennis? Whitewater kayaking? Flatwater kayaking? Cross-country mountain biking? DH mountain biking with air?

  In any given sport, what is the perceived risk? What is the cost? What is the learning curve before "fun" happens? Who finds it fun? Who doesn't? What cultural influences are present?

  Any or all of these can contribute to a low return rate for beginners. Golf is not generally considered a high-risk sport, so it may be more acceptable to some personalities. Despite the amount of patience I've shown in learning how to ski, I don't seem to have the same level of patience for learning to play golf. To me, it seems slow and boring, and on the few times I've played it, I have spent most of my time looking for the ball. But then, I don't know much about playing golf.

2. From what little I remember from, oh, 15 years ago, this doesn't really represent a worsening of retention. But I could be wrong. I often am.

3. See question #1. It doesn't really appeal to a lot of people who might get talked into trying it because of family or social pressure. It has a high perceived risk. It's expensive. It has a learning curve that is not well matched to current expectations. If retention has gotten worse, it's kind of amazing that it hasn't gotten much worse, given the modern preferences for immediate satisfaction and sedentary forms of recreation.

4. What can be done? Does anything need to be done? Why are we expecting something different from many other activities that people try and then don't pursue? How many treadmills and exercise bikes sit unused in basements? How many expensive gym memberships are used only once or twice? How many people jog a mile or two and then find something they'd rather do? How many fancy DSLRs sit at home while their owners take pictures with their phones?

In fact some of these examples suggest cost is not the problem, if there is a problem. People spend a lot of money on treadmills and gym memberships and cameras, and then they don't use them.

5. Good because there are already too many people poaching powder that was put there for MY PERSONAL USE! Bad because there aren't more beginners and intermediates out there motoring around the hill in places I'm not interested in anyway and making their contribution to helping ski areas keep their cost per skier (and lift ticket prices) down.

I think...NSAA has to keep marketing - aggressively - just to stay even. I think building a new ski resort is a good way to lose your shirt (Jumbo developers, are you listening - You're going to go broke!! ). I think skiing, along with many other sports and activities, will always have a low return rate. But (back to first one) NSAA has to keep pushing. Without a presence in people's minds, the sport will disappear or become a smaller niche than it is already. Some high-profile "adventure" sports have very few actual participants despite the amount of press they get, but they don't require the infrastructure that downhill skiing requires.

Some people are grabbed by it on the first day. Some give it a few more days before deciding. Most won't find it all that attractive, but at least they showed up for a day. And if your "failure" rate is 87%, at least you have 13 new, and presumably at least occasional, skiers out of every 100 that gave it a try. In this era of overweight kids with decreasing life expectancies, that's a win.

Many adults who do not ski associate it with the death of celebrities who die on the hill.  That's the most memorable thing they have heard about the sport.  

That first experience for an adult learner has several things about it that might discourage a second day on snow:

       They get cold because they come without the proper clothing, expecially gloves.

       Their feet hurt because the boots don't fit, and their toes freeze.  Why endure such discomfort?

       By the end of the day they are so sore they can't move; it's even worse when they wake up the next morning.  

       They are shocked at how much emotional stress and physical effort is involved in that first lesson.

       They are overwhelmed by the total cost of the day, and realize that if they continue they are going to need to spend even more.

       It comes as a shock to them that after that first day's lesson they still can't ski the mountain, so why continue to throw money at this enterprise?  They may not even have gotten to ride a chairlift, if the lesson was short.

I used to teach a lot of beginner lessons and it was rare that anyone "failed". I mean they generally had fun, learned to slide down the hill, make a few wedge turns, control their descent and learned to stop. They rode the beginner lift and were well set up to continue skiing if they wished to. Occasionally there was a 300 lb person who just wasn't going to be able to do it without some serious conditioning and weight loss but, in general, I don't think the experience was the decider. I do think the ski area could do more to provide an amenable environment, more beginner terrain, more amenities in an area separate from advanced skier traffic. My ski area had a small separate trail complex centered around a double chair that was ideal for level two and three skiers. I kept suggesting that management move the level one learning area and lift over there and construct a small base lodge so that skiers new to the sport could have their own micro ski area and a comfortable non-intimidating environment for new skiers to develop their skills but what did I know, I was only a ski instructor. My sense was that most of these folks never had any intention or desire to take up skiing. Now and then there were a few who experienced a kind of epiphany and discovered they really loved it. A certain number of my students always seemed to be there because of friends and significant others and these came with a certain commitment to learning the sport and becoming skiers. If they did not have a terrible time you knew they were coming back. For many though this was just a novelty. They drove up for the day, took advantage of our learn to ski package, had fun, laughed at themselves a bit, and went home with the memory of a pleasant experience and something to talk about. No doubt they were pleasantly surprised to discover this was something they could do but odds are they will not take up the sport. Skiing is a huge commitment in terms of time and expense. Equipment, travel, Lift tickets and all the rest cost a lot of money and real income for average Americans has been declining not increasing for 35 or 40 years. Is it any wonder that the many small ski areas have been disappearing and skiing has become a leisure activity of the upper crust?

When I took up skiing as a youngster it was just something you did that in time became a passion.There was a ski area nearby, it was inexpensive, equipment was cheap and transportation to and from the ski area was free for school children. Parents didn't have to think twice about it, they just bundled the kids onto the bus with a brown bag lunch and at the end of the day they came back with happy glowing faces. Hardly any of us locals took ski lessons. We taught ourselves to ski and local ski clubs provided race coaching. My little local ski area almost always had a few skiers on the Olympic ski team. In many ways it was almost the reverse of what we see today. Affluent people from the urban areas with their expensive clothing and ludicrous hats hardly ever became competent skiers, no matter how many lessons they took. Nowadays it is only the children of the affluent who take up skiing, even at our local mountain. The bulk of skiers are from the wealthy urban neighborhoods and suburbs of our cities. Olympic ski racers are the product of expensive mostly private coaching and families who can devote time, transportation and expense.  Skiing itself has contracted to a smaller number of well financed resorts with elaborate lifts and services surrounded by expensive second homes for the well heeled.

I'm pretty sure that if you could do a quick interview and a financial background check on your students before the lesson you could pretty much predict which ones were going to take up skiing. That's if you did a good job with them of course. If you screwed up than even some of these might not become skiers. Unfortunately most ski areas tend to put their least experienced, least well trained instructors in front of beginning skiers with somewhat predictable results.

So, yes ski areas could improve the retention rate  a bit but it may be naive to think that a ski lesson is going to overcome socioeconomic reality.

Don't discount the effect of too big and often painful rental beginner boots.  Skiing is a balance sport and it can be awkward to balance when your foot is "swimming" in a ski boot.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by cantunamunch 

 

Did you fly or did someone else fly (tandem)?

Static-line.

With the summer games so close at hand, I am reminded how little interest I have in any of the sports featured.

I do like to ski,   however......I have little interest in "lessons".

Perhaps interest is different for others...;)

cheers

I am amazed at the 87% fail statistic, but my wife and kids tried it, didn't like it, so just dad kept going. I do find it puzzling though, as skiing and surfing are the two activities I love most in the world.  Whatever, I guess I am one of the lucky ones.

for the 87%, it may be easier to look at the 13% staying with it.

for them it's likely they had a mix of "good" or successful mix of events. 

• good instructor
• decent boots/fit
• reasonable expectation - time and learning expectation
• family (parents) who already ski and simply say ... we're going (lesson or not)
• some cash (in most cases)

the others, well, I would venture to bet the bang for buck is just not there.  There's a significant investment and I'll guess a big chunk of those not continuing haven't family members or close friends who give them a justifiable reason to continue.

I'd dismiss out of shape folks make up a big percentage of those even trying, just looking at the lesson takers indicate most are in fair shape.  Location is a killer for most, even if in Denver, your an 1hr+ from most slopes (though they sure are nice).  Most sports or activities do not require travel or overnighting just to participate.  If my spouse didn't announce that her 1/8 Norwegian heritage demanded a once yearly family week long trip, I never would of signed up for 4 days of lessons.  Even 12 yrs ago, this was pricey but I had a vested interest and love to be outdoors. 

I figure kids make up most those continuing, mine may of quit long ago if not for us simply saying there were expected to learn.  They love it now but they were told to expect X number of days every yr knowing neither my wife nor I could teach em.  Today they're far better than me but I too knew what to expect.  It's a lot of time and money offset by a lot of hand me downs, in my case.  Biking, skating, swimming, baseball, even golf and it's fees are cheaper and as noted above, often have local programs to offset the cost.... you won't find too many of those offered by skiing.  Lesson/rental packs are one of the few things one might save some money on.

Colorado has a great program with their 5th and 6th grade ski free program.  Sure, it's free but it gets newbies out to try as well as letting parents save a bit.  Sure there are ways to learn for less, but I doubt most beginners have cheap options.

Distance is definitely, if not cost, the next big killer of folks continuing.  I doubt I would of continued if I had to travel 1hr + just to learn.

Haven't seen it mentioned yet, but in addition to financial costs, there's also an opportunity cost, in terms of our free time.  There's a lot of things I'd love to do, given unlimited free time: snorkeling, kayaking, hiking, tennis, inline-skating, rock climbing.  And that's only in sport-related activities.  I also enjoy concerts, nice restaurants, etc. Given that my finances and my free time are limited, I prioritize skiing over all of these activities, my wife would rather go to a museum.

Every year I hear the 87% statistic, and it's thrown as a challenge to us instructors: make it better.  I don't buy it.  First of all, I don't believe that the industry can even measure the retention rate with any accuracy.  Second, I have no idea what the target should be.

I still want to make every lesson the best possible lesson, and an on-snow experience, for my students, but I'm realistic.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nolo 

 

I'm afraid that promotional messages for skiing in the media sell unrealistic expectations, especially for novices.

 

The promotional messages are fine.    

Novices have perfectly realistic expectations.    The expectation novices have is "I'll suffer for a few hours without dying and then I'll be able to say I did it and that's it".

And that's exactly what happens.

The unrealistic expectations are being held by the peers  that induced that novice into the sport.  

Novices don't watch skiing promo messages.   The promo messages  do just fine to lure those who are casually engaged back (and away from all the other distractions).

Quote:

Originally Posted by epic 

 

Static-line.

Which, of course, is the magic carpet of skydiving.     Sounds like you got the safety bit; hope you got a little bit of playful experience under the canopy, 'coz you missed out on the big fun.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cantunamunch 

 

 

Which, of course, is the magic carpet of skydiving.     Sounds like you got the safety bit; hope you got a little bit of playful experience under the canopy, 'coz you missed out on the big fun.

I don't really care about going to the top of the hill though. All I'm sayin' is I don't view my non-return as a failure on anyone's part. I've never gone SCUBA diving at all. Is that afailure for SCUBA diving?

As far as the beginner skiing experience goes, I can only do my best with what is right in front of me, and I do. The generalizations that we see about beginner lessons are just that. At Stowe, almost all of the beginner ski instructors are L3s, and there are quite often 2 or 3 Ed Staff working line-up. We all teach never-evers.

I wonder if TV is the only activity that doesn't have a high "fail" rate.

Skiing has a reasonable retention rate. Mountains are busy enough to be a hotspot. There is a mix of ages on the hill. Many skiers do have true passion for the sport (as evidenced by so many partipants on these forums - what percentage of skiers visit here?). The sport is not dying.

Other sports are dying. The pilot population average age increases by one year every year. Waterskiing is shrinking. Beach volleyball is a shell of its former self. Is the Wii video game movement based console still selling? Poker dominates the off peak TV sport coverage hours. The sedentary direction our society is heading is scary.

Physical activity does have a visceral pleasure. Skiing, when presented properly, offers this physical reward. Instruction, marketing and peer pressure can create the environment that retains participants. We should not give up or accept these failure numbers. Just make sure our responses don't make things worse.

Eric

Quote:

Originally Posted by epic 

 

I don't really care about going to the top of the hill though. All I'm sayin' is I don't view my non-return as a failure on anyone's part.

Of course.           My point in the other post  is that neither do most skiing never-nevers, and that this indicates completely realistic expectations on their part.

So if we're trying to put a true name to this "87% failure" statistic, we can only be justified in calling it "a failure to exceed expectations".

Pretty sure that the Wii is still selling.

http://www.screwattack.com/news/wii-still-selling-hotcakes

http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/43299/nintendo-wii-sales-records-smashed

In fact, Wii Skiing might be the reason that folks don't come back to the slopes: it's cheaper and you can do it in the comfort of your own home.

Warren Miller once said it was stretch pants, which, even though I'm a woman was analogous as to why I came BACK to the sport. 

I had a weeklong (20 hours) lesson in Austria for my Junior year abroad Christmas vacation.  Long skis with cable bindings, leather boots.  Hated it!!!!!!!!!!!!

Two years later I was working some place that the cute guys were all arranging a bus for a ski trip.  Cute guys?  I was going to be on that bus!!  Fortunately for my skiing career, GLM was being taught.  I got some short skis on my feet, had another quickie lesson and in the PM was on my way down from the top of the mountain, only fell three times.  I was hooked.  After all, this is where the guys were (well, in the lift lines) and boy was it fun.  By the end of that season I'd bought myself equipment and the next season spent every weekend driving to a ski area BOTH days.  

It's now 40 years later and I skied 83 days last season.  Only difference is that I'm not there for the cute boys anymore.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philpug 

I look at peoples first experience/exposure to the sport. They usually are created by the lowest paid and least trained/experienced people at the resorts. The are put into a cattle line to get the worst and lowest quality equipment that is usually one to two sizes too big fitted by unqualified employees with one to two hours of minimal "training". From that point they either A. go to the ski school and taught by the first year instructors, B. Go over to the hill and taught by a boyfriend/girlfriend/friend/family member who is a self proclaimed "expert" or C. Head up to the hill to figure it out for them selves. I am more surprised that we have 13% that actually come back for a second fay...other than the ones that have a 2 day package. 

I agree that happens at many and perhaps most hills, but there are also resorts that place the customer experience above everything else.  These resorts have figured out how to make learning to ski fun for kids, and offer "Never Ever" and similar programs to bring new adult skiers into the sport.   To me, it is all about the customer.  IMHO large resorts and small ski hills simply have to define what experience they want the first time skier to have, and then follow through.  If the ski areas want the first time skier to come back, they have to act like it.

BTW, I can usually tell how badly a ski area wants my business when I do my business...in the restroom.  Clean restrooms are usually an indication of the rest of the ski area, and that includes the ski school, quality of the food, friendliness of staff, etc.

I'm 87% sure that my return rate is 87%  

I was blessed in that my first ski experience was at the Ernie Blake Ski School at Taos, NM. They did an outstanding job, and my first experience with them made me crave more. Gave me an unquenchable thirst to get back to the mountains as much as I could. They had a blend of great value, fantastic instruction for first-timers, and a super fun vibe overall. Helped that that the mountain is superb in it's own right.

There has traditionally been some truth to this.  I find at my resort that our rental skis (JH Sports) are pretty good, Rossi E-72, and the rental staff is well trained.  Rental boots will always be a problem and one that I don't know how to fix, but most of my students in rental gear at least have the appropriate size boots.  Granted, I teach primarily levels 7-9 and most of my students have their own stuff.  I help with the greeting and do teach a few lower level privates and see very few "screw-ups" coming out of Jackson Hole Sports.  

As for the level of the instructors....  It is true that many of our newer instructors start teaching levels 1-3.  I believe that our training program is pretty good and it's currently hard to get a job in my school.  You have to be a decent skier and have solid communication skills to even get in the door these days.  In fact this past season we only hired 3 new adult instructors out of our hiring clinic.  All of them were solidly middle aged and very good candidates.  Two of them I patrol with at Snow King, one of those has been a JHMR employee for about 18 years and has teaching experience with NSP, Red Cross, and Paragliding.  The other is very successful in real life and has become a "driving wheel" in our volunteer patrol as an officer and a trainer.  The third had been a pro patroller at JHMR for about 20 years.  These are very solid people who give a shit about what they do.  They were good out of the gate and will only get better.  All of our other new hires went to the kids ranch and there weren't that many of them.  Believe me....  The Kids Ranch is a great place to learn to teach skiing.  There are a lot of very experienced people there to mentor new instructors, it is a fun environment and there is a sense of community and esprit de corp that is not as strong in the adult segment.  A good number of our current top tier instructors started at the Kids Ranch and then moved to private adult lessons and camps without ever doing the adult group lesson line-up.  We also have a few long time older instructors who, by choice, primarily teach level 1 & 2 adult group lessons.  

Some people just won't like skiing or won't be able/willing to commit to the sport long term no matter who teaches them or what equipment they are on.  Can we do better across the industry?  Probably Yes.  In my world we are doing a good job.

I was, IMO, a very good instructor my first year.  Six full time seasons later I am so much better as a skier and an instructor that I "almost" feel bad for my early students.  One of my new hire friends is a little bummed that he is teaching all low levels his first year.  He rips and has an Air Force patch, he spends his working days teaching wedge turns in a line up of other instructors that he can easily out ski.  There is a reason why new instructors need to start low and work up.  I learned so much about movement by watching the 1-3 skiers.  I started to see patterns, cause & effect, and from demonstrating the "basic" moves over and over began to ski better from my own foundation.  Yes...  I could have taught higher level lessons sooner, but I wouldn't have the foundation in my MA, skiing, communication about movements, and understanding of fear that I gained from working up from the bottom.  I spent 1 year basically doing 1-3 and another year doing 1-6 and in my third year got to move up to 7 & 8.  Now I do more 8s than anything else.  I also do local kids groups and could start with camps if I wasn't already committed to my local groups every Saturday.  My point is that there is a reason why new instructors teach lower levels and just because someone is new doesn't mean they have to suck.  I am ready to teach any level, but am kept busy where my experience level is needed the most.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philpug 

I look at peoples first experience/exposure to the sport. They usually are created by the lowest paid and least trained/experienced people at the resorts. The are put into a cattle line to get the worst and lowest quality equipment that is usually one to two sizes too big fitted by unqualified employees with one to two hours of minimal "training". From that point they either A. go to the ski school and taught by the first year instructors, B. Go over to the hill and taught by a boyfriend/girlfriend/friend/family member who is a self proclaimed "expert" or C. Head up to the hill to figure it out for them selves. I am more surprised that we have 13% that actually come back for a second fay...other than the ones that have a 2 day package. 

Though I agree with the premise that a first time skier may quit the sport if some part of his/her experience is sub-optimal, I'm not sure the ski industry can do a whole lot to impact that.  Obviously a great ski school experience makes a difference (though I never really had that), but so much is simply out of control of the industry or the individual resort or Mountain.  Skiing is a "learning curve" sport.  IMHO you have to make progress up the first part of the learning curve to begin to reap the rewards and fun.  In my estimation, that comes when one can ski all the greens and most of the blues on a Mountain.  At that point, a good 70% of the mountain is open to the skier for exploration and skill development without being terrified.  One can compress that learning curve quite a bit via good instruction, but it will still be up to the individual skier to do the work and get the reps out on the mountain.  Just like anything in life, it takes persistence, commitment and simply being unwilling to quit.  I can see why a lot of people quit and choose to invest their time and money elsewhere, but I feel sorry for them for not getting to experience how sublime a great POW day is when you know how to ski. 

There was some earlier discussion about managing newbie's expectations better and I think that's key.  Expecting to look like you are in a Warren Miller movie on your 3rd day isn't very realistic, hoping to link some turns together on a gentle slope probably is.  One another thing makes a big difference as well...that is making the environment not intimidating in terms of how people are welcomed to the sport.  The best teachers I have ever worked with were absolutely ripping skiers, some of them even Olympic caliber, but as teachers they brought no ego to the game.  They met me right where I was in my own skiing ability and never made me feel like I was flailing around (which I was) and really gave me the tools and confidence to build on the foundation they gave me.  It is intimidating to step into something completely new like skiing (especially as an adult),  the more folks are met with encouragement and sense that they belong and that they can get to a level of competence, then the more likely they will to love it and commit for life. 

There's some great points here, but I think we're missing the real answer...

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayT 

There's some great points here, but I think we're missing the real answer...

...

That didn't stop any of us !

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philpug 

to get the worst and lowest quality equipment that is usually one to two sizes too big fitted by unqualified employees with one to two hours of minimal "training".

I once had a ski club lesson kid come out of the rental shop wearing two left boots  never did figure out who had two right boots

One thing to consider is that there may not be much in the way of comparable sport-like activities.  It seems to me, most sports or 'active' pastimes require a lower energy barrier.  If I want to go cycling, I grab my bike and go out the front door; If I want to play tennis, I find a local public court and grab a friend; If I want to go for a swim, I find a local lake or pool (or ocean if you are so lucky).  The point is, most other activities can be done in a way that is low overhead and on your own time.  Skiing on the other hand requires significant planning and requires the use of a resort.  In this sense it may be more like going to an amusement park than going for a bike ride (for the first timer).  If you take this mentality and then add to it the cost of renting equipment and the learning curve of skiing, most people are going to chose something else.  Even if you do have an amazing first day, the mental, physical, and monetary costs add up.  I think this is a large part of why many people only go once.  

Golf may be the closest example, but it seems to me that golf courses are more accessible (at least geographically) to more more people.