Next Upgrades at NY Ski Areas

I still think I would put my focus on the Ski Bowl. Put a lodge at that base, have a lift connecting into town, and run a gondola up to BR. Open up some new runs, have a tubing park there, a huge terrain park, maybe night skiing and zip lines. Make it the place to be, get visitor dollars into town, have events and live music, contests and the like. And what some have said about BR makes sense. It looks like a nice continuos long pitch of moderate terrain, perfect for the majority of visitors. It should have more trails for average sliders.

Or....keep the place quiet and simple with a shit ton of glades all over. It probably won't make any money but hopefully enough to stay afloat. If I actually skied there I would prefer the latter but if I were interested in creating something super successful because I was part of their management team I would want to go big. Of course this is all hypothetical and imaginary, my ideas are also based on if the ski area was bought by Vail from the state and there was unlimited funding to build and to pay whomever whatever it would take to get rid of the silly trail milage limit.  

I think Gore is interesting and makes for a fun "what if" discussion just because I think a lot of us agree it could be something or should be something that is regarded as one of the most premier ski areas on the east coast. An area that has a complete package, it's a shame if the state doesn't see that.

raisingarizona wrote

I still think I would put my focus on the Ski Bowl. Put a lodge at that base, have a lift connecting into town, and run a gondola up to BR. Open up some new runs, have a tubing park there, a huge terrain park, maybe night skiing and zip lines. Make it the place to be, get visitor dollars into town, have events and live music, contests and the like. And what some have said about BR makes sense. It looks like a nice continuos long pitch of moderate terrain, perfect for the majority of visitors. It should have more trails for average sliders.

Ski Bowl has a simple lodge that is adequate for the amount of parking there. (And a yurt! where the cool kids hang).  New runs are drawn, actually they are old runs to be recut. The oldest lift-served runs in NY from the 30s.  Current runs are on town (not state) land and new runs are, I think, on land owned by the developer.

There is night skiing (with very little vert, less than 200) and tubing. They do have events there, mostly in summer as it is the town's park. MTB was added to the Bowl last summer.

Everything you describe is the vision for the Ski Bowl (don't call it the Sno Bowl that is in VT!). I don't think it's fair to say the state doesn't see it. They have been steadily improving and upgrading the place.  The only reason the place isn't 100% snowmaking is they have added so much terrain so fast. My list, again, for the last 15 years:

2-3 new peaks added
2 used fixed grip lifts
3 new high speed lifts
New or refurbed? magic carpet
700 High E snowguns
Permitting and connection to draw 9000 gpm from the Hudson River
Ski Bowl pumping station
Tons of added steel/plumbing to connect it all
10 miles (?) of new trail
Several new glades including the longest in NY
2 or 3 new parking lots
New learning center lodge, dramatically increased sitting area by moving lessons, rentals, ski shop out of main lodge

That is just what I can think of, what am I missing?  It has to be well over 100 million bucks.

Everything sno wants makes sense. There is a reason why every single private ski does it.  It's the best way to maximize revenue, by packing the place to capacity.  Post some more of your 45 minute lift wait pics sno.  That's the way to print money.

When it's all in at Gore there is no way to ski everything in a day.  When there is new snow and the trees are in play the place is a adventure that you will never forget. Sugarbush is like that, fucking huge.

Look all three state mountains do ok but I don't think combined they are revenue neutral. They cost money to operate. From what I've seen they operate on somewhere between 25-30 mill and bring in maybe 20-25.  It not a huge cost to drive the economies of those areas. And it does drive them.

Right now it's against the law to put that Stratton hotel that snoloco wants at Gore.  When you ski in Southern Vt and you get off a summit lift you look out and you see development. Other ski areas, towns, road, parking yadi yadi. From the top of Gore and Whiteface you see wilderness. It's awesome. Why does every goddamn ski area have to fit snoloco's dream?

Like I said 10 times before, eventually it will.  The constitution will be changed, the hotels will be there, glades will be cleared, lifts will be highspeed, valet parking, liftlines will be long and the whole damn thing will be a quasi-privatized corporation. Lots of people will be having fun. But it will be the same experience you can buy in many other places.  

I get that it "makes sense" but you can't make me want it. Hopefully by then I be retired and out in the woods or maybe dead.

Sorry to repeat my stupid pov over and over. Gore still retains it's old school culture. It's one reason I settled there.  The other is all that old school wilderness. It's priceless and I love it.

Harvey wrote

I get that it "makes sense" but you can't make me want it. Hopefully by then I be retired and out in the woods or maybe

Harvey wrote

Like I said 10 times before, eventually it will.  The constitution will be changed, the hotels will be there, glades will be cleared, lifts will be highspeed, valet parking, liftlines will be long and the whole damn thing will be a quasi-privatized corporation. Lots of people will be having fun. But it will be the same experience you can buy in many other places.  

I think Gore is almost built out and that will be it. I doubt anyone has the stomach to go after another amendment to the article that regulates it, and the private Catskill areas would fight it tooth and nail. Although I don't know this for a fact, my intuition tells me that the primary reason Gore expanded was because it's manager proved he could make it make money for ORDA and ORDA desperately needs funding to maintain the old Olympic Venues which are it's responsibility to do. As long as Gore can show that they can make more money for ORDA by making more improvements they will be allowed to do so. Yes, ORDA also is chartered with helping the Park economy - and these two are synergistic.

North Creek on the other hand is a mess. There are a very few business people who are working very hard and methodically to make it better but for the most part it is a town barely holding it's own. Gore really can't help them too much. Most of the North Country is still sliding down from the 2008 recession. The real estate market has still not found it's bottom yet. You have properties that have been on the market for 5 years or more - not ridiculously over priced, but over priced in the current market. As was mention, the Ski Bowl Condos never sold a unit and were a bust (and I hear the idiots are building more), the other Condos are back to the price levels they were in 2004 and still sliding.

Until North Creek get's a 4 season draw, and mountain biking alone won't get you there - it's destined to continue the slow deadly spiral. When the grocery store packs up and leaves and the hardware store and ski train experiments are done then all you'll have left is a few noisy runs of a gravel train and a couple of red neck bars and the town will go the way of Indian Lake or Pottersville and fade into history and Gore's fortunes will turn down as well and it will revert back to what it was in the 90's. You will get your wish. The future of North Creek and thus the future of Gore lies with the APA because you can't do anything until you start there.

When ASC/Talisker/Vail built The Canyons, they did these things from 1997-2010:

3 brand new gondolas
7 brand new HSQ's (1 was removed)
1 brand new 6-pack to replace a HSQ
8 fixed grips, some new, some used
Almost quadrupled the amount of terrain
New slopeside hotels, base village, new lodges, ski in ski out gated community.

These things destroyed ASC, but they built the largest resort in Utah.  However, this terrain is consistently open unlike Gore's expanded terrain.  Expansion isn't too amazing if it is never open, which in Gore's case, the Ski Bowl and even BR are closed more than they're open.

You can't compare western expansion to Gore because Utah does have to make snow

The Canyons imo is only marginally better than PC.  Same low altitude with about half the annual snow fall compared to LCC.  Way to many traverses and it does ski as big as it should because Otten built it like it was an eastern area.  I agree that this was his Waterloo that ruined ASC.

I'm sure with time Gore will have more snowmaking at the Ski Bowl.

snoloco wrote

When ASC/Talisker/Vail built The Canyons, they did these things from 1997-2010:

3 brand new gondolas
7 brand new HSQ's (1 was removed)
1 brand new 6-pack to replace a HSQ
8 fixed grips, some new, some used
Almost quadrupled the amount of terrain
New slopeside hotels, base village, new lodges, ski in ski out gated community.

These things destroyed ASC, but they built the largest resort in Utah.  However, this terrain is consistently open unlike Gore's expanded terrain.  Expansion isn't too amazing if it is never open, which in Gore's case, the Ski Bowl and even BR are closed more than they're open.

How many times have you skied the Canyons?

Coach: What do you mean that Otten built The Canyons like an eastern ski area?

I have never skied there, but I hope to at some point.  The terrain looks better than Park City and I hear it's never crowded.

I have heard the Canyons skis terribly, this is from some very good skier friends that I have a lot of respect for and their opinions. It's one of those mountains you feel like your are always on your way to the skiing but you never actually get there.

It does look like it was built like many of Otten's east coast areas. It's spread out among a lot of smallish peaks and built with a real estate intention instead of a skier focus but that's just my opinion and not based on anything really.

The proposed maps of Otten's new resort, The Balsams, look almost exactly the same.

raisingarizona wrote

I have heard the Canyons skis terribly, this is from some very good skier friends that I have a lot of respect for and their opinions. It's one of those mountains you feel like your are always on your way to the skiing but you never actually get there.

It takes a day or two to figure it out. If you accept that, you can find some absolutely great skiing there. If you go in with your mind made up that it sucks, because other people say it sucks, it will suck because you think it will suck and that sucks.

PeeTex wrote

I think Gore is almost built out and that will be it. I doubt anyone has the stomach to go after another amendment to the article that regulates it, ....

Agreed. People would get a major bitch going over any amendment changes.

PeeTex wrote

Until North Creek get's a 4 season draw, and mountain biking alone won't get you there - it's destined to continue the slow deadly spiral.

IMO, there's too much other stuff to do off season in the area that NC would have to over come. Plus people travel to the ocean, etc in the summer. Travel around the ADKs and you see closed down Mom and Pop cabin rentals that used to get summer visitors back in the day but are now long defunct.

I still think it has potential but I'm not a beach person, never have been. I think it could be done but it would take some deep pockets and some serious marketing strategy. The area looks beautiful, you just need the product and the right salesmen.

raisingarizona wrote

I still think it has potential but I'm not a beach person, never have been. I think it could be done but it would take some deep pockets and some serious marketing strategy. The area looks beautiful, you just need the product and the right salesmen.

I can have fun anywhere if there is a small chunk of something steep and interesting. I often spend ski days lapping the same thing over and over again anyways. This is coming from LCC skiers though and comparing the Canyons to Snowbird is not really fair. I can't imagine spending the money on a lift ticket at Canyons though, especially with Snowbird not far away.

Then again I'm a very poor ski bum and I see things probably a lot different then a vacationing skier out of the tri state areas that makes a good income every year. Paying 100 bucks for a day of skiing is out of the question for me so I look for places I know someone, can get a pass for at least 50% off and have a guide so I don't waste my time looking for the goods. Membership does have it's privileges! :)

PeeTex wrote

I think Gore is almost built out and that will be it.

Hope you are right.

PeeTex wrote

North Creek on the other hand is a mess.

Disagree.

If you could take any mountain/ski town from NY or VT and drop it in in place of North Creek which one would you choose?

raisingarizona wrote

I can't imagine spending the money on a lift ticket at Canyons though, especially with Snowbird not far away.

You will find untracked lines at the Canyons long after it's been shredded to bits at Snowbird.

I'm amazed at how many people crap on the Canyons despite never having skied it.

snoloco wrote

Coach: What do you mean that Otten built The Canyons like an eastern ski area?

I have never skied there, but I hope to at some point.  The terrain looks better than Park City and I hear it's never crowded.

I think RA has it nailed

The Otten model is to build short section with lots of traverses with the idea to build hotels and homes.

As he says it feels like you are going somewhere but never get to the good skiing

The Canyons is laid out as a bigger version of Sunday River where he first made his bones as a supposed ski area GM

Go look at both trail maps so you can see what I am talking about

Harvey wrote

PeeTex wrote

I think Gore is almost built out and that will be it.

Hope you are right.

PeeTex wrote

North Creek on the other hand is a mess.

Disagree.

If you could take any mountain/ski town from NY or VT and drop it in in place of North Creek which one would you choose?

Ellicottville & Old Forge to name two.

PeeTex wrote

Ellicottville

It was kind of a trick question, that's why I put "mountain" in there.  All that preserved land in the Adks and Cats makes it harder to produced a economically thriving town.

VT is bit better in that way, but personally I'm not fan of Rutland, The K Access Road or Stowe. I do like MRV.

Harvey wrote

PeeTex wrote

Ellicottville

It was kind of a trick question, that's why I put "mountain" in there.  All that preserved land in the Adks and Cats makes it harder to produced a economically thriving town.

Yes - and that's exactly the point I was making, whether it's North Creek, Tupper, Long lake, Newcomb ...

Another thing I would do if I could would be to put a greater emphasis on spring skiing.  Gore has a great layout for spring skiing as it is easy to avoid going to the bottom.  I'd use the following lift closure plan using the dates from this year as an example.

3/29:  Ski Bowl Lodge, Hudson Chair, Village Chair, all Ski Bowl trails, and tubing will all close.

4/5:  Burnt Ridge Quad, all Burnt Ridge trails, Sunway Chair, surface lifts, and Kid's programs will close.  No beginner terrain available after 4/5.

4/12:  Close AE2 and shift focus to upper mountain terrain.  This means don't groom as many trails and offer gondola downloading as an option.  Plow one of the Topridge Trails if necessary to put more snow on Tannery for a reason mentioned later.

4/19:  North Quad, all North Side trails, and Saddle Lodge will close.

Following 4/19:  Run Gondola, Topridge, Straightbrook and High Peaks.  If the lower mountain has rotted out, the upper mountain can still be open as long as there is snow on Tannery so one can access the Topridge Triple to go to the gondola for downloading.  This is why it might have been necessary to plow one Topridge Trail earlier.  Using this year's dates, Gore could stay open till 4/26 or 5/3 snow-permitting.