or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Robbery in progress - Page 5

post #121 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by teachskiljp
The people that take 2 or 3 runs on the green and blue groomers and then go sit in the lodge sipping hot cocoa and other beverages or go to their slope side condo and sit on their decks for wine and cheese.

The people who go out and buy the most expensive equipment and clothing money can buy before they even know how to ski a green trail.

People who look down on places like Bromley, Magic, Burke, Bousquet and Butternut because they do not have the fancy lodges, the latest lift, slope side condos and ultra groomed, ego building black diamond trails.

Do you get the idea now?
Tell you what, you guys stay at your cheap, small, close to home ski areas.

I will take the big fancy smancy mountains where the visitors infuse and drive the industry with their money for new equipment and there will be more room on the hill since they only take 2-3 runs on trails I do not ski on.

I guess I like the ego boosting black and double blacks.

This argument is going nowhere.

What do you guys want?

A private ski mountain to sprout up next to your house and offer you free lifetime passes?

Skiing in the Northeast is a pain and it is expensive but it is still skiing and I would not give it up no matter what. Unfortunately it is our only option.

Become an instructor or go work at a ski area part time.

Take up a second job.

Take up snow shoeing or cross country skiing.

Those are free to do (mostly) and it still gets you out in nature in the winter.
post #122 of 149
Phil comes in...sniffs the bait...swims away.
post #123 of 149
You're THICK!

It's not worth my time and effort!
post #124 of 149
With the price of a day pass at most hills with any decent vertical, many people cannot afford to ski. That's sad. It's especially sad for families, especially families with 2 or more children.

I would be happy skiing somewhere where the only amenities would be lockers, a big heated area where people could warm their feet and eat their lunch, and maybe a greasy burger and fries counter. If they could cancel the rest of the "resort" and lower the price of admission, that would be good for me and for a lot of families. I don't think it will happen because people invest in businesses to make money, and there is little money to be made that way.

EDIT: A lift would be good to have too.
post #125 of 149

Thank you Ghost!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost
With the price of a day pass at most hills with any decent vertical, many people cannot afford to ski. That's sad. It's especially sad for families, especially families with 2 or more children.

I would be happy skiing somewhere where the only amenities would be lockers, a big heated area where people could warm their feet and eat their lunch, and maybe a greasy burger and fries counter. If they could cancel the rest of the "resort" and lower the price of admission, that would be good for me and for a lot of families. I don't think it will happen because people invest in businesses to make money, and there is little money to be made that way.
You understood what I was saying!
post #126 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost
With the price of a day pass at most hills with any decent vertical, many people cannot afford to ski. That's sad. It's especially sad for families, especially families with 2 or more children.

I would be happy skiing somewhere where the only amenities would be lockers, a big heated area where people could warm their feet and eat their lunch, and maybe a greasy burger and fries counter. If they could cancel the rest of the "resort" and lower the price of admission, that would be good for me and for a lot of families. I don't think it will happen because people invest in businesses to make money, and there is little money to be made that way.
There is a place like that...Hickory Ski Hill. Check it out. It makes Mad River Glen look like Stratton.
post #127 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by teachskiljp
You're THICK!
Is that a compliment?

For someone who posts alot of opinions you sure are sensitive to someone elses.
post #128 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by teachskiljp
You understood what I was saying!
I understand too.

There are places like that.

Cannon is one of them and there are a few others.

I love Cannon

This thread is named "Robbery in Progress" not "Why is Skiing so Expensive in the East?"

It started out with good intentions but now all you guys are doing is bashing larger areas.

I think everyone here would agree that we all want skiing to be cheaper.

I want real estate in Boston to be cheaper but I still live here.
post #129 of 149
The prices at Okemo and Stratton have gone up because their owners have made a lot of investments in their resorts. They have improved things like lodging, snow making systems, and lifts. They have also expanded their terrain and are still trying to expand more. Not to mention they have considerable operating costs, things like rent, taxes, fuel, staff, etc. Many of these costs increase every year. I know some of these things you'd like to do without, like lodging, but our friends from the south (that support our local economies) need places to stay when they visit. Those visitors pump enough money back into the resorts to help pay for things like snow making and expanded terrain.

Do any of us like paying $60+ for lift tickets? Of course not, but instead of complaining we find ways to cut our costs elsewhere.

In case you didn't notice, everything in New England costs more money. I'd like to be able to buy a moderate sized condo in Boston for less than $400k, but I can't so you know what instead of complaining about it, we're probably going to move.
post #130 of 149

re:....

Here's a simple example...prioritizing of one's finances....
*Not trying to make a statement.... I think it really shows how the "little things", done daily, can add up....

My (used to be)daily DunkinDonuts Ice Coffee: $1.80/day
bought every morning............................... ....(365 days) = $657.00 :
post #131 of 149
Teachskijlp says=

"The snow bunnies . The people that take 2 or 3 runs on the green and blue groomers and then go sit in the lodge sipping hot cocoa and other beverages or go to their slope side condo and sit on their decks for wine and cheese.

The people who go out and buy the most expensive equipment and clothing money can buy before they even know how to ski a green trail.

People who look down on places like Bromley, Magic, Burke, Bousquet and Butternut because they do not have the fancy lodges, the latest lift, slope side condos and ultra groomed, ego building black diamond trails.

Do you get the idea now?"

No, you lost me. Sounds like you just have a problem with folks with disposable incomes. This is why the East caters to snobs? I have news for you, Eastern areas cater to whomever will show up. People won't show up at Magic, cause frankly nobody knows they're still open. You think there aren't snobs at Bromley? Or brownbagging cheap hardcore skiers at Stratton? Think again. Your brush is painting broad strokes.

Stratton and Okemo offer a very refined product. People are willing to pay for that product. I think a better question, one which may lend some validity to Bonni's argument, would be wether they are losing skiers due to their higher prices. And if they are losing skiers, are those skiers really worth pursuing; did they spend money at the lodge, did they rent or buy real estate, did they come back regularly?

I'm with Scalce, this was never intended to be an inquiry.
post #132 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomB
Bonni, Skier_J

Here is the answer to your question:Supply and demand. When demand is high prices usually go up! The East is very crowded and the business model supports raising prices far beyond many Western resorts.

Teachskiljp,

You said Skiing in New England is geared to the snobs. Common people who want to ski just can't afford to.

I have to disagree with this. Always remember that skiing is a luxury! Some can afford it, some cannot. As long as Eastern resorts remain crowded, I have to assume that prices will remain high.
Now we are getting back on target.

I know about supply and demand. As a concept at least. And it is sort of born out by JeffW's stats from a few pages back. Lots and lots of land area and a very thin population density in the west and just the opposite in the East.

Do you think that supply and demand is really the only reason there are some areas that can charge and get the extremely high price?

To me, while it makes sense to use supply and demand -- it strikes me as an excuse rather than a reason.

I also agree with Tom that skiing is a luxury activity. I suppose that Deer Valley is similar in the west as a resort that tries to break away from the norm and bill itself as a "luxury resort".

Thats fine and dandy if thats how they want to market themselves. And fine too if thats how the Mueller's want to market themselves.

BTW, I happen to feel that the owners have done a hell of a job at Okemo---it is one of my favorite places to ski now, contrasted to the mid 70's when it was less than memorable.

In my view this thread was never about any particular resort, just a general question that got distorted over time.


So lets see, so far we have as reasons.

"Because they can"

And

Supply and demand.

I'm still not sure I believe either is a reason, but both certainly are the reality!

Edit for spelling
post #133 of 149
Ya know, why can't some of these differences be part of the reasons?

xrisi421 says the owners have invested tons in upgrades---

That makes sense to me.

I say, Bousquet has not--- again, makes sense to me.

One has a higher cost to the comsumer, to offset the cost of improvements.

Is infrastructure the only reason?

Scalce makes the point that spending money greases the entire wheel---R & D as well and the dining room---making the experience better for everyone

Teachskilp made the excellent point that many spend gob's and tons of money on equipment that they will likely never get the most out of. Why? because they have the means to buy the stuff.

What is the worth of a place that caters to their relatively inexperienced needs and skill's?

I suppose thats where the value gets added, in my view at least. A place that caters to the needs of those that are willing to pay for it.

MRG has a mistique about it that you've just got to go and ski it at least once in your carreer! You probably won't find too many of the folks described above at Mad River.


Any other thoughts?
post #134 of 149
Exit 54, skiing should not be reserved for the rich! That is my point. I am not rich, in fact, I am far from it, but I ski and I need to ski. I make sure that I am able to ski. If I have to go to a place like Magic or other areas that are not all hyped up, then I am going to. I am not saying that I will not ever go to the other areas, I will. I am saying, however, that they are not just charging day by day skiers for their skiing, they are charging them to pay for their seasons pass holders and for the construction of resort features they will never use. I did not ask some of my old favorites to build slope side rentals, big luxury motels, shopping villages and fitness centers on them.

The fact is, ski areas are not being run by skiers, they are being run by corporations that are only out to make money. Sure, some of them might ski too, but they are not running ski areas for the purpose of skiing and recreation, they are only looking to make a buck. They are targeting Bostonians and New Yorkers...People who are willing to pay 400K for a moderate Condo when they can get a much better one for 100-200K outside the city. They certainly do not give a damn about people who do not make at least 120K a year(which by the way is most of the population).

Sure, I could probably find a better paying job than I have, but I like what I do. Sure, if I worked in Boston I'd make more at what I do, but I'd also pay a lot more than I do for housing and other expenses (Boston is not big enough for everyone to move there either-not that I would ever want to.)

I just feel that some of the areas are starting to go way overboard with the development of the fringes.
post #135 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by teachskiljp

The fact is, ski areas are not being run by skiers, they are being run by corporations that are only out to make money.
Look out people, business owners want to make money :-o

Quote:
Originally Posted by teachskiljp
People who are willing to pay 400K for a moderate Condo when they can get a much better one for 100-200K outside the city.
Wish we could afford the condo but can't that's why we'll move (maybe if we didn't ski ) Teach, please do tell where I can buy a condo in the greater Boston area for 100k - 200k? You know what - don't, because it's not the point of the thread.

Even because you don't enjoy or utilize the lodging or other enhancements ski resorts have made, doesn't mean that many others don't. And you're still forgetting that all those people who stay on mountain spend money in our local economies which means more business which means more jobs to the locals. Yeah, everybody hates tourists, but we all need them!
post #136 of 149
I just don't think that the cost of these things should be paid by the day skiers...they should be paid by the people that use the things.

I have nothing against business owners making money if they pay their employees accordingly and if they do not get so greedy that all they are seeing is $$$$$$$.

There are plenty of condos and houses for sale in the western part of the state, you know, that part west of 128...oh wait, the western part is not there, it's really further west past Worcester. The places I am talking about are closer to Framingham and in parts of the south shore. I know someone who just bought a nice house in the Quincy area for $250,000.

Now back to the skiing issue....
This is a plea to the owners/operators of the resort ski areas...Please don't put them out of reach of the day skiers... I speak only for myself when I say...I like to ski more than one area and not be locked into certain areas and corporations by a seasons pass...I should not be charged extra to defay the costs of those willing to sacrifice variety and commit to just one area.
post #137 of 149
Now I'm done.

Tried to steer this back on track---can't quite get it back! Momentum is too great.

Adios folks.
post #138 of 149
Maybe Okemo and Stratton should lower their day rates to $15 per day...go bankrupt...and then we can move this discussion over to "new England's Lost Ski Areas"
post #139 of 149
I never said they should only charge $15 a day and I never said that I wanted to see them on NELSAP. I never said that people shouldn't ski at the areas...I never said that I wouldn't either...

Edited to remove some comments.
post #140 of 149
This has been beat to death but I would like to comment.

For those who say that skiing costs too much, I, for one, think that you are right - most of the time. I've been to Vail and Beaver Creek only because I had a free condo. At over $70.00 for a lift ticket and nightly condo rates at about $400 or more at Christmas, they are not trying to attrack poor people. But that is OK. They are successful at what they do. For those who enjoy going there, more power to them - go for it.
I prefer to go the the places that concentrate on skiing and not on shopping, night life, etc which is fortunate and convenient since I can't afford those places.
It is not however much different from other forms of entertainment. Football games are now out of reach of Joe Average. Basketball and Hockey tickets also cost $70.00 for a good seat. Even golf is out of hand. The winner gets a million dollars, paid for, in large part, by corporate ticket purchasers and Joe Average ($40,000/yr) who listens to the TV commercials.
I have to go now - the football game is on!
Wish I were rich like my neighbors.
post #141 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil Pugliese
There is a place like that...Hickory Ski Hill. Check it out. It makes Mad River Glen look like Stratton.
Conveniently located a half hour from me....if that.

I need to get up there more this season.
post #142 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scalce
Tell you what, you guys stay at your cheap, small, close to home ski areas.


I guess I like the ego boosting black and double blacks.
"Ego boosting" because they generally aren't all that challenging. Amazing what will pass for a "double black" at some of these places.

I work in the industry, so I usually end up at the big fancy ass places. I use literally zero of the frills. I put gear on at car, grab ticket, ski, go home. Lodges are for wusses and old people. Crowded with fat slow people that can't walk in ski boots.

MRG and Hickory and Magic and Bromley all kickass. If I had my druthers, I'd hit those places up all the time.

Southern Vermont traps like Okemo do not have a terrain advantage on Bromley, for instance. Traps like Killington do not have a terrain advantage on say, MRG.

Now, MRG or the Bush? The latter. Big "frills" advantage on bony days in the form of snowmaking and quick lifts.

But seriously, talking about Stratton, of all places, as if its "got something" on the "no frills" places is lunacy. Specifically when you mention terrain.
-Garrett
post #143 of 149
The east is not the sole realm of snobs. I remember the one day I skiied at Vail. First odd thing, a parking garage, umm malls have parking garages not ski hills. Second odd thing, I walk out of the parking garage dressed to ski and find myself in the middle of a town clearly designed for shopping. Suddenly I feel out of place. Third odd thing, there is 2 feet of light powder covering the slopes. Yet very few people are skiing and the ones that are skiing are complaining, why? While it is a bluebird day, the temperatures are in the teens, far too much suffering for 2 feet of freshies. While Vail may have good season pass deals , I believe their day passes are up there with the most expensive in the country. Oh and as the ski Swami put it you pay all of that for Concave slopes.

Alfonse
post #144 of 149
Yes. Stratton and PCMR also have parking garages. When I worked in PC, I shamelessly used the parking garage. It was cool...

I would never pay for such nonsense though.
post #145 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by skiingman
"Ego boosting" because they generally aren't all that challenging. Amazing what will pass for a "double black" at some of these places..
Yeah the only hard runs that I really like at ones at Cannon, Sugarbush, Sugarloaf, and Sunday River. The cheesy blacks and doubles at some mountains are fun to rip on and do some carving though.

I haven't been to MRG, Stowe, or Jay but I am sure there is plenty of terrain to kick my butt.
post #146 of 149

"money is never a consideration"

Quote:
Originally Posted by teachskiljp
Based on trip reports from JD on various sites, it seems that money is never a consideration. We are talking about a well traveled skier here, one who takes several larger trips annually, trips that I would consider once in a lifetime trips. Not everyone has the money to take these kind of trips.
Teachski, you might want to reconsider ascribing characteristics to people you don't know. I may be many things, but rich ain't one of them. As a card-carrying member of the "bankrupt jet set" for a good part of my adult life, I figured out ways to swing all sorts of trips that I had no business going on. Others have already pointed out that lift ticket and/or accommodations deals for east, west, and european ski areas are out there, but sometimes you have to be pro-active about finding them. The second step is milking frequent flyer awards for otherwise unaffordable flights.

Ditch the "I am a victim" mindset, use some common sense about when and where to go, and lots of options open up.

BTW, here's a thread I started about EC prices exactly two years ago:
http://forums.epicski.com/showthread.php?t=5682
post #147 of 149
I didn't say you were rich, I said it seems like money isn't a consideration. The price of skiing doesn't seem to effect you, if you want to ski you do no matter what it costs. For all I know you could have 10 or 12 credit cards all maxed out. I did say that you seem to take quite a few big trips, trips that for me would be once in a life time trips.

I am a money conscious person, I don't do credit. I own a house and a car. I am single and only have one income coming in. The promotional deals you highlighted are great...if you can ski mid-week, I can not (most of them are mid-week). I have a local enterteinment book, but most of the coupons in there are for mid-week as well.

Right now is a really tough time for me financially. I just had to have a root canal and a crown (no dental insurance), a large tree limb crashed through my roof and my refrigerator went. All this in a period of 4 days. This is weighing heavily on my mind. I can not go to the ETU because I can not afford it. This has heightened my awareness of just how high ski tickets have risen.

I'm sorry that you took what I said the wrong way. Reading it over now, it does give the impression that I was saying that you were rolling in the dough, but that was not what I meant.
post #148 of 149
There are deals out there if you look for them. This sport's definitely about being choosey if you want to ski the name resorts.

BTW, why does everybody assume that wealthy people aren't money conscious. How do you think they became wealthy? Believe it or not, they all didn't inherit daddy's money.
post #149 of 149
Actually, wealthy people are stingy by design.

The upper middle class are the worst tippers on earth, ask any waitress/waiter. They find the damndest reasons not to leave a good tip...and their idea of a "good" tip is flawed.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion