Although certain resorts are becoming like the Titanic (massive class stratification), some are much worse than others. Park City looks pretty bad in that respect because you can pay to cut the lift lines. I'm sure there are others out there that are similar. I'd just not go to those mountains. Stowe gets the reputation of having lots of class stratification, but really if you can afford a lift ticket, you're going to get pretty much the same skiing experience regardless of wealth, and skiing is what really matters. All the extra trills and frills are there if you want them, but if not, just get back on the lift, ski, and ignore them.
Now I'll explain my view on lodges/base facilities. Lodge and lodging are two different things. Anyone skiing at a mountain can go in the lodge. For many mountains, having a fancy lodge (like Mountain Creek's Red Tail Lodge or Stowe's Spruce Peak Lodge) shows that the resort cares about the guest experience for all guests. A lodge should be a prerequisite to lodging. Therefore, if I was running a ski resort, I'd be building a new base lodge/cafeteria before I build a luxury slopeside hotel. That shows that the resort cares about all guests. Building a luxury hotel while you have a lodge that hasn't been renovated in 30 years, or is way too small for the crowds shows that a resort only cares about those who can afford the hotel and not all that can afford to ski there in any means.
I've lived in New York my entire life.
|
In reply to this post by PeeTex
I guess it really depends on the lifestyle you want to lead in retirement. To be honest, it feels like Retirement Planning is being misrepresented by the Financial Services sector. We are being brainwashed into constant consumption. Constant consumption reinforces the assumption that you'll need a mountain of money before you can retire. Obviously, this works very well for the Financial Services industry business model. IMO: If you manage expenses well, and consciously consume less, your retirement dream can be realized with a much smaller sum in your account. Of course, if you are trying to manage a low expense retirement plan, the "Luxury Skiing" option is off the table. That said, luxury is very subjective. I personally find huts and yurts to be very luxurious... in comparison to a tent. I agree Healthcare is the wildcard. In our current environment, if you are not healthy, your dream is dead. |
My son and I did the ski with Lindsey & Johnny weekend at Vail last winter. It was cool and my son thought Johnny (Mosley) was a true "ski dude". Lindsey gave some good tips.
|
In reply to this post by Marcski
Yes. Yes. Yes. |
In reply to this post by Benny Profane
I wonder though, is it the industry not caring to get middle class family's skiing or is it that middle class people just aren't interested enough to make it a priority? Something that sort of irks me a little is the fact that ski resorts mostly are ran on public lands but then make the product so expensive it's only available for the wealthy. |
In reply to this post by lolkl
Wow, I would love to know what a 29 dollar grilled cheese sandwich tastes like. It must be incredible.
|
Alta all day long...who the heck needs any foo foo crap? I heard from a friend a few weeks back about the non-premier lot parking fees at some of the CO resorts. Really? Totally goes against my grain. It would be hard for me to patronize any place like this. Combo of money I wouldn't want to part with and most of all the principle governing this.
One of my fav moments ever was watching the valet in the drop off area at Deer Valley give my friend living in PC and working there at the time, the awkward eye when we rolled up in his beater Suby. Guess my friend wanted my sons and I to get a good laugh. Snowbasin used to be nice and rustic before the 2002 Olympics..the last time I was there the caf served food on china. Bummer this place made the transition...however, terrain is still nice.
"Feets fail me not"
|
In reply to this post by raisingarizona
I think one of the problems is that snowmaking and grooming are expensive and the hills that haven't made the big investment seem to struggle to survive. There are exceptions like Platty and MRG, but not many. Those that make the big investment need to charge a lot to re-coop it - but they seem to be thriving. The overall cost to ski 2-3 weekends a year is really high when you include lodging, meals, rentals, lessons then then lift tickets. Even if the ticket price was reduced 25% it is still a very expensive weekend. For someone making plans now for a weekend, I think they rather pay a bit more and go somewhere that will likely have nice conditions. No doubt the middle class is being priced out which may be a long term problem for the industry. tom |
In reply to this post by Jon951
A lot of these foo foo places offer discounted lift tickets, every now and then it's fun to be pampered. The caf food at Deer Valley and Snowbasin are around the same price as the slop served at WF and Gore. But the quality is miles apart. The bathrooms at Snowbasin are worth the trip.
"Peace and Love"
|
Administrator
|
In reply to this post by TomCat
IMO Platty and MRG aren't really good examples. Mad is subsidized by the Coop. It seems to me that, for the time being, they can suffer some really bad snow years and survive. As long as the member remains so passionate. Platty is working extremely hard to upgrade snowmaking, spending what they can in years when they make a small profit. They look for solid value in used equipment. Still I hear people here give them a hard time about ticket and pass prices. This is why Laz says that $20 powder hounds aren't the solution. He needs those, like Marcski, who value the experience and see the value in a $59 ticket or $680 pass for the experience.
"You just need to go at that shit wide open, hang on, and own it." —Camp
|
We have been having these types of discussions since before the internet became a way to discuss skiing.
In the early 1980s Okemo had mostly pomas with weak snowmaking. During the 1981-82 season Okemo drew 86,000 skiers with an $18 ticket. The Muellers bought it during the summer of 1982, and after adding some chairs and boosting the snowmaking they drew 320,000 (about a $30 ticket) during the 1986-87 season. They added what some, at the time, considered luxuries. This is the accepted way to try and make money at a ski area. Sometimes we forget that the object of 99% of all ski areas is to make money. When my parents booked ski weekends for our family during the 1970s, we mostly went to Mt Snow and Killington with occasional late season visits to Okemo (all those pomas made for a cheap lift ticket). The reason was Mt Snow and Killington had the most reliable snowmaking. Places like Stratton had Sugarbush had marginal snowmaking. Gore was not even on the radar (that has not changed for the NY metro area). If ski areas figure out new ways to extract money and provide what some of us would consider ridiculous services, who can fault them? There are still many reasonably affordable places to ski, including the so called luxury places like Stratton. |
Banned User
|
In reply to this post by Harvey
Why not just charge a premium price for powder days? The people looking for it aren't going to be concerned with cost.
|
In reply to this post by Jon951
Ha. Funny you bring up Snowbasin. Had the pleasure of experiencing it just before the Olympic transition, during a three day powder dump. After all this time, the finest powder storm I have ever experienced. I remember a somewhat grizzled patrol guy telling me that he really did not want this treasure known to the world, thank you. Just like an older transplant skier at Powder up the road on the back of the cat a few days later.
funny like a clown
|
Unless you are using it as a necessary form of transportation, any type of skiing qualifies as "luxury". It's just a matter of degree. If you have the time, $, health, skills, etc to participate in the sport, it's all milk and honey, so try to enjoy it.
|