Peak Resorts Reports Results

wedeler wrote

"Natural snow is overrated and obsolete".   Not sure whether to laugh or cry.

We all deserve an apology for soiling our eyes with that statement.

ml242 wrote

snoloco wrote

In the east, snowmaking is ALL that counts.

For you, maybe.

snoloco wrote

Natural snow is overrated and obsolete.

Bannable offense.

snoloco wrote

TL;DR;

please stop.

learned many decades ago that snowmaking is the only game in the East that can be driven to from Boston or the tri-state.  I remember when the guns were put away the day after President's Monday, some years were saved by a storm some died quickly. This is reality.

Unless you ski at Plattekill on a powder daize, or get lucky and go the day of the storm and no one else comes, there's no powder days, it's powder hour if you're lucky.

I remember a day a while back when I was at Hunter the day after they got a foot.  Woke up early and drove through the storm to get there at open like we usually do expecting fewer people to come out due to the road conditions.  As we pulled in the parking lot, we soon "got the shaft" with a line already out of the ropes for the 6-pack... at 7:45am.  When they opened the lift, the lifties who dropped the rope nearly got trampled and people were pushing each other out of the way.  The powder lasted an hour, and then got skied down to ice, as always.  I'd take a day after they resurfaced all their trails with snowmaking over that shit show any day.  I guess I learned my lesson that I should go to Plattekill instead if there's fresh snow.

snoloco wrote

Unless you ski at Plattekill on a powder daize, or get lucky and go the day of the storm and no one else comes, there's no powder days, it's powder hour if you're lucky.

 

Bwahahahahahahaha --- you're doing it wrong

Way wrong.

snoloco wrote

I remember a day a while back when I was at Hunter the day after they got a foot. The powder lasted an hour, and then got skied down to ice, as always.

So you're saying that the mountain with the world's best snowmaking was nothing but ice under the fresh natural snow?

pro2860 wrote

snoloco wrote

I remember a day a while back when I was at Hunter the day after they got a foot. The powder lasted an hour, and then got skied down to ice, as always.

So you're saying that the mountain with the world's best snowmaking was nothing but ice under the fresh natural snow?

OH SNAP

FTW!

It was early season.  Always icy then just about everywhere.  If you go to Hunter the day after they've resurfaced all their trails, the conditions will be great all day.

Really? Then why would you say...

snoloco wrote

The powder lasted an hour, and then got skied down to ice, as always

Your words, not mine...

This is going to be one f'ing long summer.

billyymc wrote

This is going to be one f'ing long summer.

Hahaha!!  Both literally and figuratively.

billyymc wrote

This is going to be one f'ing long summer.

One can only hope!

snoloco wrote

 Always icy then just about everywhere.  

Fify


I will admit, though, that I have been there twice with a nice 12-18-24 on top of the usual stuff, and those were very challenging conditions one finds nowhere else. Powder turn, powder turn, the, sheeeeeeek, bam. Ouch. Looked nice, though.

The vexing about this ongoing, never-ending discussion is that sno just doesn't get that most/many/some are not AGAINST snowmaking.

For me it is a means to an end. It allows me to "ski" on many days when I would not otherwise be able. And on the odd chance that natural snow falls, in increases the chance that I can ski that too.

The difference is that I want snowmaking systems to be powerful enough to ski all of a mountain's terrain, not just select trails.  Also needs to get all the lifts running by Christmas to handle the crowds.  I view it as the primary source of snow on the ec, not an insurance against a dry year.  It's insurance for a dry year out west.  Steamboat had already been done with snowmaking for the season over a week before I arrived.  The natural covered  everything more than sufficiently this year, but it doesn't do that every year, so they can make snow on a good number of trails to keep people from cancelling their Christmas vacations.

snoloco wrote

The difference is that I want snowmaking systems to be powerful enough to ski all of a mountain's terrain, not just select trails.  Also needs to get all the lifts running by Christmas to handle the crowds.  I view it as the primary source of snow on the ec, not an insurance against a dry year.  It's insurance for a dry year out west.  Steamboat had already been done with snowmaking for the season over a week before I arrived.  The natural covered  everything more than sufficiently this year, but it doesn't do that every year, so they can make snow on a good number of trails to keep people from cancelling their Christmas vacations.

Son, let me tell you the story I tell everyone about the luxury, yes, luxury of snowmaking. A long time ago, I walked up to the window at Killington on, oh, I think, Nov. 12 or close. They were charging nearly full price at such an early moment of the season. A sign was posted on the window of the only booth: "Snowmaking is Expensive".

Eco 101: Money does not grow on trees.

Harvey wrote

For me it is a means to an end. It allows me to "ski" on many days when I would not otherwise be able. And on the odd chance that natural snow falls, in increases the chance that I can ski that too.

The best use for snowmaking in the east is to establish a base for when the real snow comes during January, Feb and early March. After that it is to have the depth to have good spring conditions. As a primary surface it sucks unless you are racing gates. Go ski the High peaks (no snow making), the conditions can be fantastic. I can honestly say, the best season at Gore was the season Sagamore had no snowmaking - it was a blast when the rest of the mountain was hard pack. Snowmaking is great, and 12" of fresh over a groomed flat man made base is great, but nothing beats 100% mother nature.

That's a more precise way of saying what I was trying to communicate.

I agree that first season that Sagamore was all natural was fun as hell.

That was ONE season that was:

-MANDATORY as money was not available for snowmaking
-APPRECIATED by a passionate minority
-A ONE TIME OCCURANCE, never to be repeated

...and is considered a mistake by snoloco.  

Just have to agree to disagree I guess.

I didn't consider that a major mistake, since it was already planned to be added the next year anyways.  I did consider it a major mistake not to up air/water capacity to support both expansions, have only 2 trails on Burnt Ridge, and have no easy connection to the Ski Bowl making it a useless out of the way lift/trail section that requires a mile long flat skate to get into and 2 full runs and lift rides to get out of.