Gore Early Season Plan 15-16

So they have less snowmaking capacity and more terrain than they used to.  Makes no sense to me.  I guess I'll just keep going to Hunter until late January.  No sense in driving extra hours to have so much of the mountain closed.

Spongeworthy wrote

Snowballs wrote

I've seen those units over at Gore's maintenance building before. They used to use them.

Until they could no longer afford the diesel to run them.

The large diesel compressor that you're talking about is old and very inefficient to operate.  Mike Pratt told me three years ago it needed to be replaced.  I don't know how much of Gore's 27K cfm compressor capacity comes from that unit, it is one of I believe 7 compressors.  The others are all electric, and they are located elsewhere on the mountain.  A modern, efficient diesel compressor should be no more costly (and probably less costly) to operate than an electric compressor.  And we all know what has happened to the price of diesel over the past year.  
Because that diesel compressor is rarely if ever used, Gore probably isn't hitting its 27K maximum compressed air output or its 30 acre/feet/day theoretical maximum snow output.  That compressor needs to be replaced.  

billyymc wrote

Different funding sources. Different financial objectives. Different stakeholders.

As for cheaper to rent - that's  operating budget, while purchasing a compressor and new building is capital budget. While they are both money, they are different colors with different real costs depending on the organizations structure.

You might think you have all the answers because you've memorized some facts. Memorizing facts is easy, solving problems with real-world workable solutions isn't.

So exactly why do you think Snoloco's idea of renting compressors is unworkable for Gore?

snoloco wrote

I remember seeing a bunch of these at Killington and hearing the near deafening hum coming from them. Have no idea if they were rented.

Curious to know the cost to buy and rent those things. Seems unlikely to me that ORDA never imagined renting compressors, but I suppose anything is possible.

Be interesting to ask Mike (or any GM): If you were given $5M that you had to spend on infrastructure next year, how would you spend it? My guess is that the High Peaks Chair would be on Mike's list.

snoloco wrote

So they have less snowmaking capacity and more terrain than they used to.  Makes no sense to me.  I guess I'll just keep going to Hunter until late January.  No sense in driving extra hours to have so much of the mountain closed.

Sno, Stratton already has all the snowmaking, grooming and amenities that you wish Gore had. Since the travel time from Exit 23 on the Thruway is about the same, why isn't Stratton a suitable early season option for you?

Of course it would be nice to have more early season terrain but they have been making steady improvements in snowmaking. They have also made some significant improvements in mid week lift openings over the last couple of years. Lift 6 is almost always open every weekday and North and Burnt ridge are open some of the days. That's quite an improvement from a few years ago.

tom

Harvey wrote

Seems unlikely to me that ORDA never imagined renting compressors, but I suppose anything is possible.

I’m sure it has been considered.  I imagine the decision process goes something like this:
- Can we make snow using the compressors that we already have?  Yes.
- Can we make as much snow as we need to open all of our trails using the compressors we already have?  Yes.
- OK.  Let’s move on to the next agenda item.
Let’s face it, air compressors don’t have the same kind of visibility and sex appeal that a new lift, new trails, new groomers, or even new snowguns have.  Compressors, pumps and pipes are just considered necessary infrastructure. Spending any money at all is politically unpopular, and this is an easy expenditure to just ignore or defer.

That said, I agree 100% with Tomcat:

TomCat wrote

Of course it would be nice to have more early season terrain but they have been making steady improvements in snowmaking. They have also made some significant improvements in mid week lift openings over the last couple of years. Lift 6 is almost always open every weekday and North and Burnt ridge are open some of the days. That's quite an improvement from a few years ago.

The proof that Gore has made improvements in snowmaking and lift operations lies in these numbers here, and I think Gore deserves a lot of credit for the improvements they've made.
I love the page from ORDA’s annual report that I linked in my blog post for two reasons:
- The chart demonstrates significant, measurable improvements in Gore’s energy efficiency.  
- The chart and accompanying text links increased snowmaking and lift operations to increased revenue.
The second point is key to this discussion and is the reason why Snoloco is right.  More snowmaking = more revenue, and the more that Mike can do (the chart is his) to demonstrate that snowmaking investments pay off in ticket sales, the more likely it is the ORDA board (and by extension, the state legislature) will come around with additional funding for the improvements that need to be made.

Adk Jeff wrote

So exactly why do you think Snoloco's idea of renting compressors is unworkable for Gore?

It's not some new idea nobody's thought of before. It's most likely been considered, discussed, and dismissed as just not worth it.

Snoloco wrote

If they spent a million dollars on renting the compressors and operating them each year, they could probably make up for that in Christmas week revenue that they got from being fully operational.

That is pulling numbers out of one's ass. If I did that in my job, I'd have a lot more days available to ski. And a lot less money to purchase lift tickets.

Every organization has to decide if the cost of doing something is worth it - and usually that means in terms of added revenue and ultimately bottom line profit. The cost side of the equation to add compressors would be relatively easy to estimate accurately. But the benefit side would be a total crapshoot. And any decent executives or directors would see that. You could make up numbers to make it look profitable - but that's all it would be - made up.

ORDA is not a normal organization. Decision making there has to be more complex than decision making at a privately owned or corporate entity.

Adding compressor capacity can put more snow on the trails, but at what cost, and at what benefit, and who do you have to convince?

EDIT - ok, so I woke up this morning and decided to take a look at ORDA's annual report. First thing I see is that Gore's annual revenue is under $10M. So Snoloco casually suggests it's just dandy to increase Gore's operating budget by $1M per year?  No, the kid is not informed. He has no clue about how real life works, about how businesses work, about how quasi governmental organizations work. He has memorized or recorded some facts about lifts, that is it.

Anyone know the profit or loss at Gore annually? Didn't see that in the report - and don't' really care to research it any further.

I keep hoping for Platty to open with the double. If they could get some snowmaking on upper Twist and Ridge Run, it would be very doable. That side is more enjoyable to lap in my opinion. I'll ask Laz

snoloco wrote

In the past, Gore has always opened with the gondola serving Sunway to Quicksilver.  I was there opening day this past season with those terrain offerings.  When I was there, I saw that the AE2 was still a work in progress and not quite ready to run.

This coming season, 15-16, the AE2 will be able to run opening weekend as they won't be finishing installing it.  Does anyone think it makes sense to start with the AE2 next season instead of the gondola?  I think it does make sense for a couple reasons.

1.  With only one lift open, you are lapping it every run.  It is a pain in the neck to take skis and boards off every run to lap a gondola.  With a chair, it is so much more enjoyable to lap runs, and early season, the cold isn't as much of a factor.  Plus, one can always wear an extra layer if it is a colder day.

2.  The runs that the gondola gets you that the AE2 doesn't (Foxlair, Ruby Run, and Fairview) are quite possibly the lamest runs on the entire mountain (aside from Lower Cloud, Cedars, and Pipeline).  They are nothing more than superhighways to get the masses of humanity from the top of the gondola to the front side where the real runs are rather than runs that one actually skis for the enjoyment of it.  All 3 also require a large amount of snow to make skiable which could be better used by opening an extra route from the AE2.

So, do people agree with my reasoning?  Also, what does everyone think they'll actually do?

I don't always agree with your reasoning, but I like the depth of thought you put into it. When you've finished your education do you plan on working in the ski industry? You certainly seem to have a passion for it.

I'm hoping to be the next Les Otten (without going bust in the end).