Interesting Article About Ski Industry Economics

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/02/no-business-like-snow-business-the-economics-of-big-ski-resorts/252180/

Now I will explain some of what is in it, as well as my take on ski economics.  

They explain how very few new ski areas are opening.  The number of skiers is on the rise, but the number of resorts is on the decline.  Also, they explain why so many mountains today are really built up with lots of hotels, condos, houses, and restaurants at the base area.  It is to attract the more casual skier, nonskiers, and families with skiers and nonskiers.  This actually keeps the business afloat.  They say that it would be very challenging to run a ski resort that was only catering to skiers.  I say from this that even if you hate when ski areas are built up, I suggest you embrace it because it keeps the mountains running a much steadier business.  That is why resortified mountains (Stratton, Windham, Okemo, KMart, and many western mountains) do quite well, even in bad winters.  A smaller percentage of their business depends on snow.  Places that have not done this have really bad years in a poor winter and are actually in danger of not opening.  This is also the reason that Whiteface seems much more popular than Gore even though I think that Whiteface is best suited for experts only, while Gore caters to a much wider spectrum of skiers.  They have the off hill and non skiing activities that Gore does not have.  Although anyone who can't ski black diamonds may have a mediocre ski experience there, the off hill activities outweigh the on hill activities.

Good, insightful write up Sno.

Let's see what the others say! Que the curmudgeons.....

@ snoloco, +1 for finding this article.  I'd love to read other articles on this topic.  Even the skiers, most spend only 2.5 hours a day skiing, so they need something else to do at the resort (statistic I read in an article about Whistler many years ago).

the new jay peak is a great example of the new "ski" resort. between the water park and the hockey rink they could probably make money in a snowless year.

Yes they can.  I finished my season there on April 1st 2012 because it was the only game in town.  There were plenty of families there as well as non skiers.  They were definitely making money.

snoloco wrote

  The number of skiers is on the rise, but the number of resorts is on the decline.

That's debatable. The graph in that article looks pretty flat to me. And, I'll bet, if you stopped out snowboarding, skier visits would be way down, but that may be a silly argument, too, because boarders pay the same amount for a ticket as skiers. Then again, I have read recently that snowboarding isn't quite the popular thing to do for a lot of kids these days. Could it be because of the other graph, showing steadily rising ticket prices?

All in all, a good article to point to to support my belief that Vail sucks. Worse than Park City.

I don't know about resort skiers, my friends who work for ORDA tell me that their business is growing but it is because they are taking from the areas in Vermont. I can't speak to the average resort skier, the few people I interact with who are casual skiers are not interested in steep ungroomed terrain, which tends to support the article. What I suspect is that anyone paying today's prices for a lift ticket probably expects a Disney world experience. However I can also say the number of people I see in the back country seems to be rising. I think this is due to the excellent equipment that has come out in the past 10 years, light weight and easy to use. But I doubt that has anything to do with the ski industry, I suspect the people in the BC today are more of the mindset of the people who started skiing in the 30's, they are not looking for a cushy chair ride to the top, climbing the mountain is as much of rush as skiing down it - sometimes even more so. Today's resort skier is a mix of Joe Testosterone who wants to brag about skiing something steep or Ms. Blue Groomer who just wants a nice couple of turns down the hill. Most want drinks at the bar, an expensive meal and some night life. This is not me, give me a -40 degree down bag, a Leanto and a big pot of chili by the fire after a nice day of climbing and a few ski runs to boot. After a day or two I'll pack up my pulk and head back to the car. I only hope my health will allow me to continue to do it for a few more years.

PT - Don't forget the TP. Leaves could be a little rough at -40.

It's never -40, maybe -10 but you need a thick bag to stay warm. It also helps to throw a 2L bottle of hot water into your bag before sleep.

Oh. So do leaves suffice ? .......

Balsam bough ?

Fern ?

I think the Hinterlandians use wolverines. They're too mean for it to stick to their fur. They just gotta make sure they use the proper side. The wolverine's underside has claws and teeth..... gets nasty as the wolverines aren't too fond of the maneuver.

TP - and either burn it in the camp fire or pack it out in a zip lock bag.
Tried a snow ball once, bad idea...
Small critters are too hard or unreliable to find and might bite the danglies.
Leaves & ferns are buried under the snow pack, Spruce bows are a bit prickly and don't do a good job.
What you really have to remember is which bottle you drink out of vs. which bottle you use in the middle of the night so you don't have to leave the shelter. You only make that mistake once.

SNOWBALLS !!!????? HEY !!!!!!!!!

Hope you get your bottles mixed up.

Pack it out ? Bears don't do that. You do know what bears do in the woods ?

I've got a bag made by a Canadian company called Integral Designs. Not sure if they still exist or not.

It's a custom mummy made with LOTS of foot room. I hate having my feet constricted plus you got a lot of chit you got to keep from freezing.  It's rate to -35.

Coldest I was camped was -30, at Buck Meadow and I was with my GF, now wife.  We took three bags.  A +20 mummy for me, the -35 mummy for her and we through a +20 rectangular over both of us.  I'm sure Zelda was good down to -50 in that set up.  Our Northface 2-man was all down inside.

Kinda wierd maybe, been on some two nighters, call of nature never caught up to me.  Just to excited I guess.

Harvey wrote

 Kinda wierd maybe, been on some two nighters, call of nature never caught up to me.  Just to excited I guess.

Is that right ? Ya'll were waiting to be married first ?

Harvey wrote

Kinda wierd maybe, been on some two nighters, call of nature never caught up to me.

Wait till your over 60, your always looking for that next tree.

Hats off to the misses, although I got my bride to move away from civilization - NFW would she go with me on a winter hike/ski. Her response is - tell me when I should call the rangers.

Snowballs wrote

Balsam bough ?

Fern ?

I think the Hinterlandians use wolverines. They're too mean for it to stick to their fur. They just gotta make sure they use the proper side. The wolverine's underside has claws and teeth..... gets nasty as the wolverines aren't too fond of the maneuver.

Wolverines - bah.

True Hinterlandians only settle for the imported fur of the Honey Badger.

PeeTex wrote

Harvey wrote

Kinda wierd maybe, been on some two nighters, call of nature never caught up to me.

Wait till your over 60, your always looking for that next tree.

Over 60 and you'll also be looking that little blue pill for the call of nature. Don't take too much though or you'll have more wood than the whole ADKs. At least that's what SBR claims. Heck, you wouldn't be able to use that " bottle in the sleeping bag trick " and probably couldn't roll over, either.

Where is SBR,,,,, Didn't Al Gore extend the internet up his way ? Maybe SBR used the wrong side of a wolverine.

Snowballs wrote

PT - Don't forget the TP. Leaves could be a little rough at -40.

hahahahahahahahahahahahaa  PT dont forget your TP!  hahahahhahahaahahaah