Idea to Improve Ski Bowl Usage at Gore

I have said in the past how the Ski Bowl expansion has not exactly worked out well.  I think that they would have been better off not building it and focusing on improving the rest of the mountain first, but we have it, so we may as well think of ways to use it.

I think that a great way to improve Ski Bowl usage is to use it to convert Gore from a single base area mountain into a 2 base area mountain.  They need to expand the ski bowl lodge so that it has rentals and kids/learning programs.  Also, add a couple magic carpets in the base area.  That way they could move some kids programs over there, or add some more.  This would free up some congestion at the main base and the learning facilities there.  The ski bowl has the perfect learning slope since it is wide, open, and not too steep.  It is also served by a triple chair which is good because one instructor can take 2 kids on the lift at once.  It is also less of a step up from the Village Chair to the Hudson chair than it is from the Sunway Chair to the AE2.  Because the Ski Bowl is isolated, unlike the trails served by the Sunway chair, there is no expert, fast skiing, upper mountain traffic going back down to the base that will merge with the people who are learning how.  Seems like a good idea to me.

Do you have any facts that the expansion hasn't worked out? I personally love it and helps bring me to Gore. So surely your opinion is not the only one.

As far as rentals/kids programs/the lodge goes, I also can't recall if the little chair is sufficiently flat for beginners. WF has an excellent beginner area because it's flat and long. To really compete for the beginner market you need carpets and beginner trails as long as a football field with almost no pitch and then every angle from there up. The trails at the bowl are narrow and squirrely. Hunter has a great beginner area for instance.

I haven't seen the internal beginner options at Gore already and love the idea of segregating beginners as much as they must appreciate skiing off the summit and being where everyone else is, so there are clearly competing interests here.

Um. How about NO.

Good idea for a thread.

snoloco wrote

convert Gore from a single base area mountain into a 2 base area mountain

Gore is a two base area mountain.  There is a base at 1500 feet and another one at the Ski Bowl. A base is an area where you can park, get on a lift and access the mountain.  The only other thing that, IMO that you could require for the definition would be the availability of lift tickets. Gore took the first step toward that last season by selling Bowl only tickets. I believe full ticket functionality will come.

You've said before that you don't think a project should be started if you can't do it "all the way."  As I've said before IMO that's just not realistic.  I've seen the way Gore is improved, incrementally, one big project at a time. And the progress is astonishing.

The Gondola was built in 1999 and Topridge, which dramatically improves the usefulness of the Gondola, didn't come until two years later.  Does that mean the Gondola shouldn't have been built?

I guess you are saying that the Ski Bowl work shouldn't have been started yet. Or are you saying they shouldn't have replaced the Adirondack Express to pay for the magic carpets etc?  Or the maybe you should have waited on the $700k snowgun addition, that only cost $350k. Who knows if that grant would be available in the future.

Want to crush all future improvements at Gore?  Put out a plan for 250 million dollars to do everything all at once and say to the legislature, here it is, all or nothing, take it or leave it.

I ski at the Ski Bowl much more, now that there is a lift there, and many of my best ski days have started there. Some of my best days were spent at the bowl and Burnt Ridge entirely.  

Personally I think, for the skiing public, snowmaking on 46er is way more important than any of the amenities you mention.  Much of the very expensive pipe that was needed, and purchased for the purpose was actually used to extend the Foxlair line down Sunway to improve Gore's ability to open for Thanksgiving. It's a crucial time of year where there is money to be made, and IMO it was a good call.

I think snoloco has a point about the beginner area. The village chair gets very little traffic and the section of the hill on skiiers right is almost empty which is nice for beginners. Sunway is nice, but there are  a lot of yahoos. My kids are now grown, but I recall really liking an area where the beginners were separated in some way from the main mountain.

But a carpet would be needed which would be more investment.

I think if they want to get more skiers there a regular trail is needed to avoid pipeline. Pipeline is just too painful unless conditions are really fast.

tom

I don't mind the flat sections (people need to toughen up or buy Tele skis), but I don't like the dangerous spots on pipeline: the spot where barkeater dumps out, the hard left turn over the bridge (why didn't they angle it better?), the narrow corridor that never has enough snow right after that. Although you'll never hear me seriously complain about getting there because...

I like that the Ski Bowl doesn't get a lot of use. It's a great place to go to escape the crowds of the upper mountain. I know Harv has put some days in that include only the Ski Bowl and the Burnt Ridge lift. This small section certainly has more interesting terrain than all of Mountain Creek. If you named it something like "Mittersill" it would have its own devoted following of people who would go there for the novelty, the emptiness, the personalized tree shots, the cozy little lodge, tubing hill, outdoor party area, and funky yurt.

Don't fret, snoloco. As soon as there is enough money to be made, the entire Ski Bowl will be transformed into a Stratton-esque faux village with overpriced condos, shops, and bars. You know about the Front Street thing, it's just a matter of time before it comes. In the meantime, just let us enjoy the peace and quiet of the place while we still have it.

I think the terrain off the village chair is decent for beginners but for total beginners you'd need a carpet or poma.

Not sure why but our daughter was never put on the carpet, and she was three? She went right to the poma.  The bearcub run is really nice.  We liked having her at the main area as we could ski our own stuff while she was in lessons and show up (sneaking down Lower Sunway) at the end of her lesson to watch her progress.

Back to order of ops though... Rentals, lessons, you'll need a bigger lodge... do that before replacing High Peaks?  I mean those Ski Bowl improvements might actually drive more business, but it would also be a bit of a black eye if the HP chair failed beyond repair.

Also we aren't really privy to what else needs money... compressors etc.

Ski Bowl was one of the first places I ever skied.

We'd have family reunions at the  base lodge.

If anything it should revert back to the good ole days ------ I wouldn't change a thing

From a ski school management perspective it makes no sense to split up the beginner programs into two locations.  Less paying customers in lessons lower profitability.  It costs a lot of money to gave staff, management etc in two spots.  Say you needed more staff in one of the two locations it would take over a half hour to get them there.  WF base areas are much closer together so moving staff around is not that difficult.

Coach Z wrote

From a ski school management perspective it makes no sense to split up the beginner programs into two locations.  Less paying customers in lessons lower profitability.  It costs a lot of money to gave staff, management etc in two spots.  Say you needed more staff in one of the two locations it would take over a half hour to get them there.  

Imagine a family with 2 kids, one in Mountain Adventure up at the main base, another in a beginner program down at the ski bowl.  Or one kid in the day care up at the main base and the second kid down at the ski bowl. It simply wouldn't work - juggling kids at a single location is hard enough.  

Now, if they ever put in that 2-stage gondola connecting the ski bowl to the BRQ base to the main base....

mattchuck2 wrote

has more interesting terrain than all of Mountain Creek.

mountain creek!

snoloco wrote

I have said in the past how the Ski Bowl expansion has not exactly worked out well.  I think that they would have been better off not building it and focusing on improving the rest of the mountain first

disagree totally. the ski bowl represents the history of Gore , a throw back to the origins of lift served skiing. it has character , a vibe that hsq's cannot replicate. sno when you realize that skiing isn't just about quantity ,but quality ,comraderie ,friendships, then maybe along with your passion for skiing you will too will have soul

It be really cool if they turn it into a night skiing only area. Light the crap out of it and groom all day. Then they can keep people there into the night with freshly groomed slopes

freeheeln wrote

disagree totally. the ski bowl represents the history of Gore , a throw back to the origins of lift served skiing. it has character , a vibe that hsq's cannot replicate... realize that skiing isn't just about quantity ,but quality ,comraderie ,friendships...

+1.  I learned this by taking a deep breath and actually thinking about what fun is to me.

For a lot of reasons Zelda didn't ski much last year.  She got just a few days at Gore.  On one of them, at busy Saturday, we were in the Gondi line when the AE1 went down.  We were halfway in the middle of a long line, Neve was fidgety and Zelda looked at me with her head tilted and said... I don't really like this, can we go home and cross country ski? I said OK. But instead, I drove to the bowl and we skied Ski Bowl, BR, and Northside all day. After that she only agreed to go to Gore if we went from the Bowl. And I totally get it.

FACT: I did not ride the Gondola from 12/27/13 until 4/10/14. Not once.

I got in trouble once before by suggesting that sno ski with a bunch of guys from the internet, so I won't go there.  But if a skier comes to the Yurt before first chair on a day when the bowl is running, you'll find a group of friends who love to slide on natural snow.  The word camaraderie is spot on.  Those lucky enough to ski with that group odds are likely to find the best skiing on the hill that day, where ever it may be.

freeheeln wrote

snoloco wrote

I have said in the past how the Ski Bowl expansion has not exactly worked out well.  I think that they would have been better off not building it and focusing on improving the rest of the mountain first

disagree totally. the ski bowl represents the history of Gore , a throw back to the origins of lift served skiing. it has character , a vibe that hsq's cannot replicate. sno when you realize that skiing isn't just about quantity ,but quality ,comraderie ,friendships, then maybe along with your passion for skiing you will too will have soul

All I'm saying is that it needs to be open consistently on a full time basis.  None of this "oh it will open when mother nature gives us the goods" nonsense.  It would be nice to have every lift a high speed, but it obviously isn't practical due to that small money thing.  No ski area in the east should need anything from nature to open an entire section of a mountain.  To me, sufficient snowmaking capacity means having the ability to open every section of the mountain by 12/26 in all but the worst Decembers with no natural snow at all.  No vacationer wants to spend hundreds and hundreds of dollars and find out that the mountain they went to is half open.  I can remember the Ski Bowl's opening days for every season since it first opened.

10-11:  January 28 (first opening, I believe due to a snowstorm)
11-12:  3/3 (only open 2 days entire season)
12-13:  12/28 (big snowstorm)
13-14:  2/8 (only opening on snowmaking I can think of)

None of these days are acceptable opening dates for a large chunk of the mountain.  Look at this and tell me that they don't need to upgrade snowmaking over there.

freeheeln wrote

disagree totally. the ski bowl represents the history of Gore , a throw back to the origins of lift served skiing. it has character , a vibe that hsq's cannot replicate. sno when you realize that skiing isn't just about quantity ,but quality ,comraderie ,friendships, then maybe along with your passion for skiing you will too will have soul

BC comin' in hot with words of wisdom!

snoloco wrote

All I'm saying is that it needs to be open consistently on a full time basis.  None of this "oh it will open when mother nature gives us the goods" nonsense.  It would be nice to have every lift a high speed, but it obviously isn't practical due to that small money thing.  No ski area in the east should need anything from nature to open an entire section of a mountain.  To me, sufficient snowmaking capacity means having the ability to open every section of the mountain by 12/26 in all but the worst Decembers with no natural snow at all.  No vacationer wants to spend hundreds and hundreds of dollars and find out that the mountain they went to is half open.  I can remember the Ski Bowl's opening days for every season since it first opened.

10-11:  January 28 (first opening, I believe due to a snowstorm)
11-12:  3/3 (only open 2 days entire season)
12-13:  12/28 (big snowstorm)
13-14:  2/8 (only opening on snowmaking I can think of)

None of these days are acceptable opening dates for a large chunk of the mountain.  Look at this and tell me that they don't need to upgrade snowmaking over there.

So confident yet so clueless. Ski areas are BUSINESSES. Businesses exist to make money. Take an economics class.

I highlighted your most humorous statement.

ScottyJack wrote

mattchuck2 wrote

has more interesting terrain than all of Mountain Creek.

mountain creek!

x10003q wrote

snoloco wrote

All I'm saying is that it needs to be open consistently on a full time basis.  None of this "oh it will open when mother nature gives us the goods" nonsense.  It would be nice to have every lift a high speed, but it obviously isn't practical due to that small money thing.  No ski area in the east should need anything from nature to open an entire section of a mountain.  To me, sufficient snowmaking capacity means having the ability to open every section of the mountain by 12/26 in all but the worst Decembers with no natural snow at all.  No vacationer wants to spend hundreds and hundreds of dollars and find out that the mountain they went to is half open.  I can remember the Ski Bowl's opening days for every season since it first opened.

10-11:  January 28 (first opening, I believe due to a snowstorm)
11-12:  3/3 (only open 2 days entire season)
12-13:  12/28 (big snowstorm)
13-14:  2/8 (only opening on snowmaking I can think of)

None of these days are acceptable opening dates for a large chunk of the mountain.  Look at this and tell me that they don't need to upgrade snowmaking over there.

So confident yet so clueless. Ski areas are BUSINESSES. Businesses exist to make money. Take an economics class.

I highlighted your most humorous statement.

What's so funny about having capacity to open all sections of the mountain by one of the busiest times of the year?  I  would book a vacation at a mountain that I knew could do that.  I sure would not book a vacation that time of year at a mountain that I knew had a hard time doing that.

Sno is the canary in the coal mine - listen.

He is right in that having a pretty high probability that the entire mountain is open would be a draw, the pull through to the rest of the season helps business. Many western resorts never open fully for winter break, charge premiums and are very crowded. This is the time for the east to shine.

But let's be clear - my vote is for less snow making rather than more, but I am not the general population.