1) There is no reason to take the bait just because someone makes up facts in this and other threads.
2) Foreigners who ski have many other reasons to visit the USA. I suspect (but have no stats) that many who vacation here spend more than a few days at a single location.
3) Utah is Utah, and that makes it a double-edge sword due to the perceptions of those who never visited the state. We know that the Olympics were a game changer for the state in terms of skier visits and tax revenue. The topic concerns what One Wasatch can do if ever implemented.
4) Certain aspects of One Wasatch are coming even without being labeled as One Wasatch or considered part of it on the website. The DV-Main St. gondola (I assume it is a gondola) is an example. The PCMR-Canyons lift may come in time for 2015-2016.
5) The people behind One Wasatch know more about the seven ski areas in questions than we do. They are the owners and operators of these areas, and most have been around the ski industry for a long time. The ski industry consists of a relatively small universe of leading people, and most know each other. They have already figured this thing out because whatever knowledge they didn't have has come from paid consultants. In other words, they already figured out how to get wayward skiers home at the end of the day, how to rapidly move people from point "A" to point "C", what to do with the snow boarders, how to split revenues, how to shuttle skiers close to a lift connecting Canyons to PCMR, what the likely benefit will be in terms of skier days, etc. This is what these people are paid to do.
6) Some people hate expansion at any cost and will naturally oppose One Wasatch. Others hate the "Evil Empires" of business and will oppose One Wasatch. Most people will form opinions and/or change them depending upon the facts. For example, most locals supported PCMR at the beginning of the lease dispute until facts regarding the backdating came out (then the newspaper threads took a decisively different tone). Another environmental study or two will obviously be done to put the issue of the watershed either on the front page or to bed. People, and this includes those in charge of issuing permits, will take the upcoming study or studies seriously. If the study paid for by the backers of SkiLink proves to be accurate, there will be little effect to SLC in terms of the watershed.
7) I'm not spending time posting again unless there is something newsworthy to report. There are more productive things to do while waiting for the snow.