Aren't they all money pits? None of them turn a profit so why not Tupper as well.
I've heard Gore does turn a profit, and the money is used to help fund everything else. For all the money I spend at Gore I should get some free bobsled rides or something
Tupper sounds like it would be another drain if it can't be operated at least at cost. Again, why don't the signatories form a coop, put their money where their mouth is and collectively buy it out and run it like MRG.
Tupper has been totally screwed over the last 25 years by Orda, by the ambulance chasers at Protect, the APA for allowing Protect to drain the developer, and by the developer themselves that dragged it out when they knew they didn’t have the funding to pull it off. Tupper needs something good to happen and Orda has a dual mission of bring winter sports to the region and economic development .
There are some major hotel developments going into Saranac Lake and Tupper would be closer to them than WF. I think it would add much needed green and blue terrain to Orda as well. Orda is spending money on stupid things let’s spend it on skiing instead. It would make sense if Tupper could offer some night skiing.
I could definitely see Clarkson and STL training SL there at least part of time to cut down On their drives if Nysef sets up shop at Tupper as they now have down at Belleyre.
Tupper gets more lake effect than WF as well.
if You French Fry when you should Pizza you are going to have a bad time
I don’t know all the ins, outs, nuances and history regarding Big Tupper.....but fact seems to be (for whatever reasons) Tupper was just not a viable ski area. Are you sure it’s in the State’s best long term interests to just throw money at a new venue that has already proven to be a failure?
I was going to ask the same thing. Would the other 3 ORDA venues "fail" if we didn't pump in millions each year?
I mentioned that I've heard that Gore is generally profitable, I wouldn't be surprised if Belle was as well - that place was a zoo when I visited on a non holiday weekend, lots of day trippers from NYC. It's probably just WF that loses money YoY on average.
The "millions" that we pump into it is really just for major capital improvements - new lodges, snowmaking improvements, etc. If the three mountains were privately owned they might get those investments as well, just through debt instead of government grants. That debt would then get added to the balance sheet and effect yearly profitability. Would Gore and Belle still be profitable if they had to pay for their own MCIs? It's definitely possible.
This is all just conjecture as I've never seen an ORDA financial statement.
Like I said, I don’t know exactly what befell Big Tupper. I do know that it failed as a going concern. Was it all just finances, or did it suffer from lack of traffic, lack of snow/conditions, or something else? Throwing money at a failed area is not always guaranteed to solve the problems.
Heck, take Whiteface for instance. We all know it didn’t start out as Whiteface. Marble Mountain was a failure for several reasons that buckets of money never would have overcome. That’s why they abandoned it and moved to a more suitable location in 1960.
Big Tupper averaged 90 inches of snowfall a year....ten years ago. What with global warming it’s probably less now. When it was open it may have had a following, but the skier visits probably weren’t there. Sometimes you have to put the nostalgia aside and objectively look at why it failed, and ask if throwing money at a losing proposition is the best use of financial resources.
Maybe Tupper would be a good reason to siphon off funds from other venues, but I haven’t seen that case made yet.