Resort Rankings

The Ski Mag top Resorts is for the folks that don't ski much...before Bonnier screwed up and made Skiing an online magazine just compare the top resorts and see where you fit in.  I had been a subscriber to both since the 70's and Skiing, I will admit got too racing for me for a while (although my kids race I could care less) but it got back to the real essence of skiing...but since Skiing went interactive (sic) they gave my remaining years as SKI and it is toatlly not me.  I have tried to get rid of it and I am still subscribed thru the 2014 season.   My Eastern Favs  MRG(the single) Sugarbush(Castlerock although if I drive that far now i am going to MRG) Jay (don't know it as well but it is awesome) Sugarloaf(Same as Jay) Tied for 5th Cannon/Hickory (both old time skiing but one is a bit bigger than the other)

Nationally...I think it is safe to say I will never ski Deer Valley nor Beaver Creek.  I feel Whistler Blackcomb is the best resort I have ever been to but a lot has to be said for Vail (as a resort)  I've never been to Jackson or Big Sky and want to get there before I ....well you know...but you never see ski include Washington and Skiing used to have Crystal and Baker in the top 25...It's all about the almighty dollar...which, considering I don't have...I would rather ski A-Basin than D-Valley!  Can't wait for Gore :-)
Another great day in paradise
however...

Well said, sir.

x10003q wrote

If you are a regular poster on Harvey Rd there is a good chance you are hardcore.

Well I post pretty regularly here, but not all the time. Maybe I’m in between a hardcore and recreational skier. I may be wrong, but it might entail something more than posting on Harvey Road. In your posts several of you have made the distinction between hardcore and rec skiers. Will someone please explain to me what the differences are? I need to know so I can categorize myself.

mattchuck2 wrote

While the lifts at Smuggs are a little outdated, the places they take you are awesome (and it gets even better if you start hiking).

I too really like Smuggs alot, but the lifts where "a little outdated" in 1990.

sorry for the thread drift.
As a family we take a ski vacation over Christmas break every year. Last year we went to Quebec. That cost us around 2500 for 5 nights. We stayed in a nice hotel but nothing over the top.
This year for 1500 more we are going to Mt Bachelor. We looked into Colorado the kids and wife wanted to go to one of the well know resorts..The prices were outrageous. Lift tickets a lone are between 90-100 pp a day..
Mt Bachelors prices are almost half that and so is the lodging. If you stay away from the top ten list , you can save some money..

JasonWx wrote

sorry for the thread drift.
As a family we take a ski vacation over Christmas break every year. Last year we went to Quebec. That cost us around 2500 for 5 nights. We stayed in a nice hotel but nothing over the top.
This year for 1500 more we are going to Mt Bachelor. We looked into Colorado the kids and wife wanted to go to one of the well know resorts..The prices were outrageous. Lift tickets a lone are between 90-100 pp a day..
Mt Bachelors prices are almost half that and so is the lodging. If you stay away from the top ten list , you can save some money..

More thread drift ...

Just as a heads-up, for lift tickets, I went to Park City last year and we stopped at the Costco in Salt Lake City on our way from the airport. They had unrestricted passes in 5 packs for around $260 for Park City, and a similar package, though I don't remember the details, for The Canyons.

There are deals out there if you look for them!

The Ski survey reflects its readers, and suggests that, in purely a business sense, those folks know what they're doing. Look at the ads and the magazine: Many are selling things that have only a tangential, at best, connection to the sport, such as cars and clothes, and the editorial content increasingly has almost nothing to do with skiing. In some issues, there's more about real estate, architecture, decorating, food and dining and fashion than skiing. And what skiing content there is is mostly obvious and rehashed and not useful. There is very little in it to actually read. They've gone overboard on the keep-it-short and quick-read trend. The resort issue is the same as the gear issue: not much use. But the thing is stuffed with ads. Bonnier probably sells blocks of space across its titles. Ski delivers the audience advertisers want.
(And my snowboarding teenage daughter, who loves to look at the ads and editorial copy about big western resorts and dream! "Dad can you take me to Whistler for my 18th birthday?" "Sure, honey, as long as you don't need your first year of college tuition.")

Bonnier got both Ski and Skiing after some consolidation in the magazine industry and needed to differentiate the two. Skiing went for a younger, more-partying, closer-to-hardcore market, while Ski went to an older, wealthier, less hardcore readership. They couldn't support both, evidently. I'd prefer Skiing. I clicked "yes" when asked online if I'd like a new print Skiing; haven't seen it yet. Another factor, probably, was that the younger audience is less inclined to print loyalty, though I suspect many readers are not that young.

I've only sampled Powder. I liked it, but it seemed too western-oriented, and I simply cannot afford plane fare out west. I can barely afford lift tickets and a pass to my local molehill. (Which is one reason I'm pursuing backcountry skiing, but I digress.)

So my questions to Harvey Road readers is this: Would you be interested in an exclusively Eastern-oriented skiing print publication? One that is focused on the sport? I've seen some attempts and admire the effort but was disappointed. I'm not sure it can be viable, and I'm not in a position to do it now, but it is in the back of my mind. Next time you're in the Greens, pick up Vermont Sports. Would something like it, but more skiing focused and on the East in general, be of interest?

David wrote

Would you be interested in an exclusively Eastern-oriented skiing print publication? ... Would something like it, but more skiing focused and on the East in general, be of interest?

This has been around for years, and given out free: Snow East Magazine

sudsnbumps wrote

Nationally...I think it is safe to say I will never ski Deer Valley nor Beaver Creek.

Don't knock Deer Valley until you've tried it. I have skied there many times, the most recent being President's Week '10 and it was great.  The conditions were perfect and we never waited on a lift line.  The lower level skiers tend to congregate on one or two of the 5 or so peaks, leaving the rest of them wide open.  And, they don't allow snowboarding. Although they are known for their grooming, the majority of the advanced trails are not groomed, so we wore ourselves out on the moguls.  It's a little pricey but really no different than the other neighboring mountains, and you get a lot more bang for your buck.  Our trip to Deer Valley cost a lot less than one we took a few years ago to Steamboat, and the skiing and overall experience was much better - great skiing, great food, super friendly staff, and no crowds.

Highpeaksdrifter wrote

How do I know if I'm hardcore or recreational?

In my ever on going quest for the truth, I Googled " Hard core skier " and the following appeared.......


    So, It must be true, Skiing = MC2 !

riverc0il wrote

The typical skiing family is probably spending $500-1000 for a weekend ski vacation if they don't try to cut corners, find deals, go cheap, etc. More than that if they are flying. I probably spend $1000 per season counting everything... tickets, gas, lodging (i.e. none), food, etc. but I get 30-40 days on a lift each season.

I also get Ski free - i know why

River I suggest that if you really are skiing 30+ days per yr you are way underestimating what you spend our our obessive sport.  A pass is at least $400 and gas, amortiazed equipement, lunch, etc puts your way over a grand for a season even if all you eat is peanut butter and ride a  bus to the mountain.  If your boots cost 500 bucks and skis 800 and assuming each is good for 100 days each day costs you $13 for your equipment so 30 days plus cost you about 400 for equipment pro rated.

I have a wife and son.  We ski 50-60 days each per year on season passes.  I buy a pair of skis each season and boots every other year, my wife skis every 2 and boots every 3, my son needs skis every year plus boots.  We go out west for a week every year  but i use frequent traveler miles and hotel points to cover the flights and hotels.  that still costs a grand for lifts plus another for food and rental car.  We have ways to mitigate the cost that I'll not elaborate on here.  We spend more on skiing than anything except car payments, food and the mortgage and we do it the lowest possible way I know how.  This is a way of life and that does not come cheap.

My point is that if we are not the target market for ski for no other reason that we the hardcore conusme equipement (along with the ocassionaly trip) which is the major advertiser for thier magazine in a way that pales in comparison to the non committed then the magazines are sadley mistaken.

Snowballs wrote

Highpeaksdrifter wrote

How do I know if I'm hardcore or recreational?

In my ever on going quest for the truth, I Googled " Hard core skier " and the following appeared.......


    So, It must be true, Skiing = MC2 !

Damn! I tried that and it didn't work.  Oh well.

I do agree, though, that the "recreational" skier is more marketed to than a "hardcore" skier.

mattchuck2 wrote

Damn! I tried that and it didn't work.  Oh well.

I think he got us. I tried too.

ausable skier wrote

I have a wife and son.  We ski 50-60 days each per year on season passes.  I buy a pair of skis each season and boots every other year, my wife skis every 2 and boots every 3, my son needs skis every year plus boots.  We go out west for a week every year  but i use frequent traveler miles and hotel points to cover the flights and hotels.  that still costs a grand for lifts plus another for food and rental car.  We have ways to mitigate the cost that I'll not elaborate on here.  We spend more on skiing than anything except car payments, food and the mortgage and we do it the lowest possible way I know how.  This is a way of life and that does not come cheap.

My point is that if we are not the target market for ski for no other reason that we the hardcore conusme equipement (along with the ocassionaly trip) which is the major advertiser for thier magazine in a way that pales in comparison to the non committed then the magazines are sadley mistaken.

You are clearly hardcore and therefore not the SKI mag target. You know more about skiing than the average skier. You are to be commended for getting to do something you enjoy so many times in a season that can last a little more than 4 months.

Highpeaksdrifter wrote

x10003q wrote

If you are a regular poster on Harvey Rd there is a good chance you are hardcore.

Well I post pretty regularly here, but not all the time. Maybe I’m in between a hardcore and recreational skier. I may be wrong, but it might entail something more than posting on Harvey Road. In your posts several of you have made the distinction between hardcore and rec skiers. Will someone please explain to me what the differences are? I need to know so I can categorize myself.

HPD I sense you are teasing, but I'll bite. I'm fairly sure that X isn't saying that you must post on NYSB to be considered hardcore.  That would be silly. The point is the people who post in the forum (or any ski forum) are probably among the hardcore, especially those who post in the off-season.  I don't think he was laying it out as a requirement.

As to what the requirements are ... who knows. For me, it's my favorite activity. It may be considered non-essential for life itself, but I won't give it up, regardless of how hard it becomes (economically) to keep skiing.

I don't read SKI but it sounds like the readers of SKI may not fall into that category. (?)

Substitute the word "enthusiast" in for "hardcore". Same denotation, different connotation. It is semantics. Let's not get bogged down in word choice but rather focus on the substance of the point.

MadPatSki wrote

The list is accurate. Not my list, but if you read the fine print (I did years ago when I was working in the public opinion research) is a scientific survey of the SKI magazine subscribers. Am I one of them? Hell, no. Are you? Most of them wouldn't even consider MRG.

This pretty much nails it. These subscriber surveys call to mind those ads where people -- people I don't even know from a hole in the ground -- rave about a movie they just saw. So what? Are their tastes in cinema anything like mine? I may not always agree with Roger Ebert, but he at least provides a reference baseline with which I'm familiar. Mr. & Mrs. Joe Blow in those ads, as in those subscriber surveys, mean nothing to me. Just opinions with no meaningful context (remember, opinions are like a-holes, everyone has one, etc.). I never have been surveyed by any skiing magazine, most likely never will, and don't really care.

I do try to get my hands on whatever gear guide is put out each year (Ski, Skiing, Powder, Ski Press), and that's it. The better guides make distinctions along the lines of the eminently qualified testers based on their size, gender, etc. (at least they used to do that). For example, a pair of skis loved by the tester who's 6'4" and 250 lbs. is not one I'd even consider.

My own rankings depend on whichever has the best snow (especially in the trees) when I show up. That's why Jay and MRG are near the top of my list. Whiteface can be spectacular (I so regret not making it up there this past season), but it also can be horrible. I love Stowe, but not on a Saturday when the Quad liftline is like an old Soviet breadline. Though I've had many great days there, I don't care if I ever ski Killington, Mount Snow, Sugarbush, Hunter, Windham or Sunday River ever again. Out west, I've loved Aspen, Aspen Highlands, Snowmass, Alta and Snowbird, but I just can't afford it anymore and the thought of flying, especially with ski gear in tow, is as eagerly anticipated as a clumsily performed prostate exam. For a skiing mountain, Big Sky, hands down, was the absolute best, but it takes forever to get there.

My cabin is seven miles from the Gore parking lot. Gore usually gets good snow, they've added a lot over the years, it has great tree skiing (on and off map), it handles crowds quite well, and I really like the Tannery and the people who work and imbibe there. So, Gore for me is number one, and the fact that it doesn't rank on any subscriber or reader lists is a big positive.

Spongeworthy wrote

My cabin is seven miles from the Gore parking lot. Gore usually gets good snow, they've added a lot over the years, it has great tree skiing (on and off map), it handles crowds quite well, and I really like the Tannery and the people who work and imbibe there. So, Gore for me is number one, and the fact that it doesn't rank on any subscriber or reader lists is a big positive.

Well said - bravo

Hardcore to me = committed.  I've met people that like to ski but the difference is that they are not nearly as commited as i am.  This is my life - I can't fathom life without skiing.  That means I ski when it rains or when its 20 below and blowing.  It means i moved my family 7 miles from WF.  It means skiing at least once a week on my lunch break even if its only a few runs and I don't get to eat lunch.  I love this blog because i sense an equally committed group or those that wish they could be.

ausable skier wrote

Hardcore to me = committed.  I've met people that like to ski but the difference is that they are not nearly as commited as i am.  This is my life - I can't fathom life without skiing.  That means I ski when it rains or when its 20 below and blowing.  It means i moved my family 7 miles from WF.  It means skiing at least once a week on my lunch break even if its only a few runs and I don't get to eat lunch.  I love this blog because i sense an equally committed group or those that wish they could be.

Nailed it. End of thread.