# Saddleback Meeting



## skicub (Aug 22, 2019)

Anyone going to the Arctaris meeting on Saddleback tonight? Please report back if you go! [emoji120] thanks


----------



## skicub (Aug 23, 2019)

Hostel Maine has some videos from the meeting posted on their story. https://instagram.com/hostelofmaine?igshid=eq5yr44jczja


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## Edd (Aug 25, 2019)

Not seeing any news about the results of this meeting. 


Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone


----------



## Sirbannedalot (Aug 25, 2019)

I read a release from them they are going to attempt to open this season limited to holidays and weekends.  And then fully become operation the next season.


----------



## Smellytele (Aug 25, 2019)

What were the plans for a lift?


----------



## thetrailboss (Aug 27, 2019)

Smellytele said:


> What were the plans for a lift?



Exactly.  Isn't their main lift out of the base area out of commission?


----------



## skimagic (Aug 27, 2019)

thetrailboss said:


> Exactly.  Isn't their main lift out of the base area out of commission?



This article says recertify all lifts.  Has there been maintenance on them since nthe shutdown? 

https://www.newenglandskiindustry.com/viewstory.php?storyid=782


----------



## skicub (Aug 28, 2019)

I thought the video said that they were only likely to get the TBar replaced before the season? I’m assuming they couldn’t get much more than this, but maybe I’m wrong. 


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## machski (Aug 28, 2019)

skicub said:


> I thought the video said that they were only likely to get the TBar replaced before the season? I’m assuming they couldn’t get much more than this, but maybe I’m wrong.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


I think the two newer Quads could be brought up to speed and recertified fairly quickly for this season (Kennebago being one of them).  They should be in decent shape by no way the Double could be certified or replaced this season 

Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Edd (Aug 28, 2019)

machski said:


> I think the two newer Quads could be brought up to speed and recertified fairly quickly for this season (Kennebago being one of them).



What other quad are you referring to? I’m only aware of the Kennebago.


----------



## Newpylong (Aug 28, 2019)

South Branch Quad...

The Berry's grew weary of maintaining Rangley - a 53 year old lift. I have not heard of any catastrophic issues with the lift, other than it may not make sense depending on work needing to be performed. Remember, a lot of work goes into keeping lifts running. Bullwheel bearings, gearboxes, footing issues, comm line replacements, etc are all major. Then you have all your yearly line work, etc. The lift does have only 15 year old terminals though. 

They would not be able to replace even the Cupsuptic T-Bar if they haven't started yet, plain and simple. If they operate on a limited basis this season it will need to be on existing lifts.

Hope to see some progress soon for Rangley's sake.


----------



## thetrailboss (Aug 28, 2019)

skicub said:


> Hostel Maine has some videos from the meeting posted on their story. https://instagram.com/hostelofmaine?igshid=eq5yr44jczja
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone



Maybe I am missing something, but I only see pictures and no video.


----------



## cdskier (Aug 28, 2019)

thetrailboss said:


> Maybe I am missing something, but I only see pictures and no video.



Glad I'm not the only one. I thought maybe I just was doing something wrong yesterday when I went to look. (And there's still a chance that's the case as I'm not much of an Instagram user)


----------



## thetrailboss (Aug 28, 2019)

cdskier said:


> Glad I'm not the only one. I thought maybe I just was doing something wrong yesterday when I went to look. (And there's still a chance that's the case as I'm not much of an Instagram user)



I'm interested in hearing what happened.  I hope that they can get it going again.


----------



## machski (Aug 28, 2019)

South branch quad on lower mountain.  Basically a beginner lift but a newer quad IIRC

Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## skimagic (Aug 28, 2019)

Article with a 5 year plan .  Closing is Nov. 4 so I don't think much will happen for this season.


https://www.theirregular.com/articles/community-voices-saddleback-mountain/


----------



## machski (Sep 13, 2019)

Latest article. 

https://www.sunjournal.com/2019/09/06/saddleback-update/

Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Edd (Sep 14, 2019)

machski said:


> Latest article.
> 
> https://www.sunjournal.com/2019/09/06/saddleback-update/
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app



Sounds splendid. I wish them all the luck.


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Sep 14, 2019)

It would be nice to see something actually happen this winter.


----------



## machski (Sep 14, 2019)

If they are not closing until 11/4 and Cup T-Bar needs to be replaced, doesn't sound promising unless we have a warm fall and late start to winter.  They did say they want to promote uphill skinning so maybe they can set up a couple big weekends of that in the least.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Edd (Sep 20, 2019)

Lift Blog tweeted this alarming news about the deal being dead. Haven’t confirmed it otherwise. Hope this is incorrect. 

https://twitter.com/liftblog/status/1175096888866947079?s=21


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## mgalluzz (Sep 20, 2019)

Well this is awful.


----------



## AdironRider (Sep 20, 2019)

On the irrational confidence scale, the Berry family has to be running at like a 9 out of 10 if they thought they could welch on this deal in hopes of spawning a bidding war, after this mountain has sat closed for so long.


----------



## Edd (Sep 20, 2019)

AdironRider said:


> On the irrational confidence scale, the Berry family has to be running at like a 9 out of 10 if they thought they could welch on this deal in hopes of spawning a bidding war, after this mountain has sat closed for so long.



Yeah, that’s why I’m struggling with the accuracy of this. It’s a uniquely delicate business situation soooo...., would they jeopardize that? Seems weird.


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Sep 21, 2019)

Well, they don't seem to have much of a track record for making sensible decisions...


----------



## mbedle (Sep 21, 2019)

I wonder if the current sale of Jay Peak has brought some new interest in Saddleback.


----------



## x10003q (Sep 21, 2019)

The Berrys just being the Berrys.


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 21, 2019)

These people are idiots. It's unfortunate the tax bill isn't high enough that they have incentive to sell while it's not generating revenue. 

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## VTKilarney (Sep 23, 2019)

Whether or not they are idiots in this particular situation remains to be seen.  You can hardly blame them if they enter into a deal to sell the mountain for more money than Aretaris put on the table.


----------



## EPB (Sep 23, 2019)

VTKilarney said:


> Whether or not they are idiots in this particular situation remains to be seen.  You can hardly blame them if they enter into a deal to sell the mountain for more money than Aretaris put on the table.


That depends on the status of the exclusivity agreement they had in place (it's unclear if it lapsed from my read). The letter alleges that the Berrys got greedy and tried to start a bidding war despite signing a contract explicitly saying they would do nothing of the sort. 

Putting the ethics of this aside (if true, this is obviously unethical), it could open the Berry family up to damages from breaking the exclusivity agreement, it could make other buyers not want to work with them (i.e. if the new buyers didn't know the Berrys were potentially breaching an exclusivity agreement), and it is difficult to know if the new buyers were anywhere near as serious about buying as Aretaris was (bird in the hand vs. two in the bush).

As a side note, maximizing the value of your assets within three confines of your country's ethical and legal practices is a much better strategy than acting as you suggest. The biggest reason to do this is because business is a repeat game (albeit this is less relevant for the Berrys in this case). Furthermore, the more complicated/long the transaction process, the more likely that one's unethical behavior is likely to come to light and hurt them.


----------



## AdironRider (Sep 23, 2019)

VTKilarney said:


> Whether or not they are idiots in this particular situation remains to be seen.  You can hardly blame them if they enter into a deal to sell the mountain for more money than Aretaris put on the table.



The place has been shuttered for 5 years, they aren't getting anything better.


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Sep 23, 2019)

AdironRider said:


> The place has been shuttered for 5 years, they aren't getting anything better.



4 years. They operated thru the 14-15 season.



> In July of 2015, the Berry family announced Saddleback would close if they could not obtain financing for a new quad chairlift.


----------



## AdironRider (Sep 23, 2019)

They aren't opening this year. Mark it 5 dude.


----------



## Cat in January (Sep 23, 2019)

The recent turn of events stinks a lot more on the Arctaris side than the Berry's from my outside point of view.

Why put out the letter you know will become public, but not make a public statement?

If you have the parameters in place to complete a sale, why not continue forward and close the deal?

Unless Arctaris can step up and provide some more details, I think they are just waging a propaganda war.


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Sep 23, 2019)

AdironRider said:


> They aren't opening this year. Mark it 5 dude.



Never said they were. Just pointing out your in-accuracy. It'll be 5 years next spring. [*starting to feel like 10 though*]



> *has been *shuttered for 5 years


----------



## AdironRider (Sep 23, 2019)

The place is screwed due to the Berry's but keep on arguing semantics like they matter champ. Whether they have been closed for 4.34 years or 5 is irrelevant, what isn't is why, and the why is the Berry family.


----------



## EPB (Sep 23, 2019)

Cat in January said:


> Why put out the letter you know will become public, but not make a public statement?



They appeared to be building a rapport with the town of Rangeley as part of their investment/redevelopment strategy. They know full well that the Berry's have run a clown show of a sales process up there including what will be at least 5 years of idle operations and trying to get in bed with a fraudster from Australia. Putting social pressure on the Berry's is perhaps their best option. We have no idea what legal remedy they might have, but it could be expensive and fruitless to go down that path. Let's say they get an award and are owed money from the Berry's - what are the chances they never sell the place and can't pay up anyway?



Cat in January said:


> If you have the parameters in place to complete a sale, why not continue forward and close the deal?



What do you mean by this? Do you think they can still compete the deal when the Berry's are holding out for more from a mystery bidder they were allegedly prohibited from seeking?



Cat in January said:


> Unless Arctaris can step up and provide some more details, I think they are just waging a propaganda war.



I suspect there are legal/non-disclosure reasons to not spill the beans in painstaking detail.

Are the buyers innocent in this? Who knows, but my hunch is that this is the fault of a seller with a clear and demonstrated history of delusional behavior.


----------



## Cat in January (Sep 23, 2019)

I believe the family has not done a good job hiring people to represent them.  This has led to many public guffaws and a poor showing in trying to sell the place.  They have done an exceptionally poor job as have the people working for them.

I don't think they have had many good offers on the table.  The community funded purchase wallowed as they tried to find clarity and there was not a lot of knowledge in the group what was involved in making a ski area work.  The offer from the jerk from Australia was a desperate attempt to sell the area.  No surprise that went South.

My read is Arctaris was looking for public funding and this is a ploy to get folks to petition state government to underwrite the sale.  I don't think the Berry's would hold back from the sale based on the agreed upon parameters.  I view Arctaris as the bad guys here trying to manipulate public opinion.  We are all on the outside looking in, but that is my take


----------



## EPB (Sep 23, 2019)

Cat in January said:


> I believe the family has not done a good job hiring people to represent them.  This has led to many public guffaws and a poor showing in trying to sell the place.  They have done an exceptionally poor job as have the people working for them.
> 
> I don't think they have had many good offers on the table.  The community funded purchase wallowed as they tried to find clarity and there was not a lot of knowledge in the group what was involved in making a ski area work.  The offer from the jerk from Australia was a desperate attempt to sell the area.  No surprise that went South.
> 
> ...


Understood. From what very little I know about the fund, they definitely want some element of public help. Much like with the Balsams, they appear to use their leverage as a potentially outsized investment into a struggling rural community (if some taxpayer help is provided) to get the deal over the finish line. It's a tough balancing act for all parties involved. The Balsams and saddleback might never be viable without a kick in the pants from the government. The question is whether the elected officials in each respective area want to play ball. I'm frankly conflicted as to whether they should. The libertarian in me says no way, but this could be a much cheaper fix in the long run than never having saddleback to provide income/jobs for the town again. I just don't know.

Also, it's clear from this letter that the Berry's and the buyer had a major disagreement about how far the mountain was from operation. I think the "getting the mountain ready for this year" thing was ultimately about forcing the Berry's putting their money where there mouth was about the place being ready to go. Clearly, it isn't. I also find it funny that they don't want to have any risk going forward. Sell for less money if that's such a concern. They're sitting on a place they couldn't justify offering. If they don't get the type of free and clear offer they want, it shouldn't be a surprise.


----------



## Cat in January (Sep 23, 2019)

The hangup all along has not been the ski area, it has been the real estate surrounding it.  Expensive condos were built which were never sold and the Berry's are still holding them and the land around the area.   

What bothers me is it really is about the real estate.  The mountain has been a money looser for everyone who has owned it.  I have not heard one person say the mountain can turn a profit.  Not a fan of state money (Maine is a poor state with a lot of infrastructure and small towns) being used to prop up real estate.  

Not a fan of the Berry's and definitely have had issue with some of the advice they have followed.  Arctaris seems to be playing the game too.  When they had their big public meeting to announce the purchase they skipped over the public funding part.  To me, it seems they are trying to drive that now in a not upfront way.


Rangeley as a town has suffered, but relative to other Maine towns is doing pretty well.  Unemployment in the county like the rest of the state has steadily declined since Saddleback was shuttered.  Seasonal wages at a ski area don't seem like the best place for the state to be putting its money.


----------



## EPB (Sep 23, 2019)

Cat in January said:


> The hangup all along has not been the ski area, it has been the real estate surrounding it.  Expensive condos were built which were never sold and the Berry's are still holding them and the land around the area.
> 
> What bothers me is it really is about the real estate.  The mountain has been a money looser for everyone who has owned it.  I have not heard one person say the mountain can turn a profit.  Not a fan of state money (Maine is a poor state with a lot of infrastructure and small towns) being used to prop up real estate.
> 
> ...



I agree directionally. To me, the issue with the Berry's is them acting like they're sitting on some kind of gold mine when they're not. The real estate is a crucial element of it. 

Sounds like we agree that the whole state of Maine is likely to struggle from urbanization trends - not just the rural areas.


----------



## thetrailboss (Sep 23, 2019)

AdironRider said:


> The place is screwed due to the Berry's but keep on arguing semantics like they matter champ. Whether they have been closed for 4.34 years or 5 is irrelevant, what isn't is why, and the why is the Berry family.



Agreed that the Berry's really are acting like 2-year olds here.  Remember how they tried to play Maine and private and public lenders by holding the community hostage in order to get money to replace the double chair.  Lame.  Then they lined up a con artist to take over things and let the guy drag things out for years.  Even worse.  Now apparently they are ditching Arctaris for some "other" potentially interested parties.  That's just terrible business.  I hate to say it, Berry Family, but there ain't nobody else interested in dealing with you.  As much as you might hate it, THIS was your best option NOW.  Apparently a bird in the hand is not worth two in the bush here.  But hell, let the place go NELSAP for your egos and see if it makes you feel any better.


----------



## thetrailboss (Sep 23, 2019)

Cat in January said:


> The recent turn of events stinks a lot more on the Arctaris side than the Berry's from my outside point of view.
> 
> Why put out the letter you know will become public, but not make a public statement?
> 
> ...



I disagree.  Arctaris had a deal and now the Berry's are trying to still hold-out hope for some "other" party that does not exist.  The intent of the letter was two-fold--one to diplomatically educate a major local stakeholder as to the situation in order to try to get them to push the Berry's to live up to their end of the bargain; two, to diplomatically save face for other deals.  From what I understand this fund is not JUST all about making tons of money, but is interested in improving communities.  If I had to guess they offered the Berry's a low, but reasonable, offer and the Berry's just ain't having it and are playing hardball tactics to try to get more money.  

I feel less and less for the Berry's because, admittedly, it was an investment, but not all investments are successful.  Their timing sucked.  They should have gone ahead here and get what they could instead of letting it continue to sit.  With the economy running on adrenaline, if there are no other serious buyers in the last year or so, then there aren't going to be any, especially when this economy slows down.  But hell, what do I know?  

I hear that this guy Ariel Quiros has a lot of cash to invest into ski areas.  Maybe they should call him or look for another fraudster.  

Again, holding the locals hostage.  Nice folks.  :roll:


----------



## EPB (Sep 24, 2019)

Lol on Quiros. I could see the Berry's trying to sell to him for 1% more than a legitimate offer...

I agree that the buyer was in the right to tug at the community's heartstrings. It's gotta be much better for the locals when people come to the area ~all year round vs. summer and fall. Not that the place booms in winter from what I could observe, but shutting off the weekend winter traffic must make it hard to justify opening tourism-based businesses in winter at all. Finding a new owner would be of benefit to the community and they must be sick of the Berry's. IDK if they show face in town around the, but IDK how they could.

From the Berry's letter, it seems that they represented to the seller that the resort is much closer to opening than it was. The whole point of a first offer is to say "I'll buy for $x for the business if what you're telling me about a wide range of operational issues is true (subject to diligence of said issues)." It seems that the buyer found out that years of deferred maintenance of some old infrastructure made the price to open far exceed their expectations - as represented by the Berry's. My read is they rightly asked the Berry's to bridge the gap between what they represented and what the reality in the ground is.

As an example - say you agree to pay $200k for a chalet in the woods that you know needs work. You say you'll buy it assuming the seller's estimate that it will cost $x to fix some damage and get the electric and sewer hooked back up. You agree to the $200k under the condition that you'll get an estimate for the required work. The estimate comes back and it turns out that the fixes will cost $x + $50k instead. It sounds like the buyer asked the Berry's to kick in the hypothetical $50k, and the Berry's are some combination of unwilling and/or unable to do so. Big surprise.

When Cat in January argues the buyer should pony up and pay, he's saying his ethics suggest that he would still pay the $200k for the hypothetical chalet in the woods rather than $150k. I don't buy it.


----------



## x10003q (Sep 24, 2019)

The Berrys first mentioned that Saddleback was for sale 12/2012 for $12million after claiming to have spent $40 million over the previous 10 years of ownership. They also claimed to have spent $13 million on the base lodge, despite the fact that the main double was 50 years old and needed to be replaced. They claimed in summer of 2015 that they could not open until they found some financing to replace this same double. 

After Saddleback was closed for a few years, they managed to sell the place to a clown from Australia. Anybody with an internet connection could see Majella had no money and no clue about ski areas - anybody except the Berrys and their advisors. Was anybody surprised when that deal failed?

Now we see another deal fall apart with competing claims of not holding to the deal. Are we really to believe that the Berrys are once again just innocents who are getting the shaft again?

The Berrys are lucky anybody is interested in taking on the Saddleback. It is a money pit now, and, thanks to the Berrys, needs millions of $$$ to reopen. They want to control the place even after they sell it. The Berrys are proof that money does not make you smart, it only makes you rich.


----------



## thetrailboss (Sep 24, 2019)

x10003q said:


> The Berrys first mentioned that Saddleback was for sale 12/2012 for $12million after claiming to have spent $40 million over the previous 10 years of ownership. They also claimed to have spent $13 million on the base lodge, despite the fact that the main double was 50 years old and needed to be replaced. They claimed in summer of 2015 that they could not open until they found some financing to replace this same double.
> 
> After Saddleback was closed for a few years, they managed to sell the place to a clown from Australia. Anybody with an internet connection could see Majella had no money and no clue about ski areas - anybody except the Berrys and their advisors. Was anybody surprised when that deal failed?
> 
> ...



Agreed.


----------



## EPB (Sep 24, 2019)

x10003q said:


> After Saddleback was closed for a few years, they managed to sell the place to a clown from Australia. Anybody with an internet connection could see Majella had no money and no clue about ski areas - anybody except the Berrys and their advisors.



Anyone who has ever watched an interview on CNBC would instantly know that Majella clown was not r hotshot real estate investor he pretended to be.


----------



## x10003q (Sep 25, 2019)

The only way the Berrys get rid of Saddleback is if they give it away with a $5 million sweetner and $5 million might not be enough. Despite the awesome terrrain, no ski area operator will buy the place. All you need to know is Alterra, Epic (Peak), and CNL/Boyne (Sunday River/Sugarloaf owner/operator) have passed. When well funded ski resort companies, who have access to capital and room for error pass on SB, we have proof that Saddleback is not capable of operating in the black.

The Berrys intent was noble, but their tactical and strategic deployment of their funds was poor. Now that SB has sat unused since 2015, there are a host of other issues with the operating lifts, snowmaking, and lodge. It is unfortunate for all involved and skiing public.


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Sep 27, 2019)

It's too bad that they never built a limited access highway between I95 and Gorham NH.


----------



## machski (Sep 27, 2019)

MEtoVTSkier said:


> It's too bad that they never built a limited access highway between I95 and Gorham NH.


Be careful, you are about to stir up a hornet's nest.  It's not for lack of proposals.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## VTKilarney (Sep 27, 2019)

x10003q said:


> After Saddleback was closed for a few years, they managed to sell the place to a clown from Australia. Anybody with an internet connection could see Majella had no money and no clue about ski areas - anybody except the Berrys and their advisors. Was anybody surprised when that deal failed?


It is entirely possible that the Berrys knew this, but it was worth the long shot.  If they weren't getting any other offers, I can hardly blame them. 



x10003q said:


> Now we see another deal fall apart with competing claims of not holding to the deal. Are we really to believe that the Berrys are once again just innocents who are getting the shaft again?
> 
> The Berrys are lucky anybody is interested in taking on the Saddleback. It is a money pit now, and, thanks to the Berrys, needs millions of $$$ to reopen.


Your last paragraph is some of the best evidence that the Berrys really are dealing with problem purchasers.  I'm not saying that the Berrys have made all of the right decisions - but it is definitely possible that that the problem with the last two deals really was the buyers - and that the Berrys have to live with a crappy pool of potential buyers.


----------



## thetrailboss (Sep 27, 2019)

machski said:


> Be careful, you are about to stir up a hornet's nest.  It's not for lack of proposals.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app



Right.  There was a private toll road proposal in NNE recently IIRC.  That got shot down.


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 27, 2019)

I don't believe the proposals I've seen would benefit Rangeley much.  The most recent one I'm thinking of went from Calais to Coburn Gore.  

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 27, 2019)

I discussed SB with Boynes Director of marketing at an AZ summit a few years back and he had said their main concern was profitability. Same thing with all the other major players.  SB probably needs several hundred more housing units to be able to make it like Sugarloaf as a resort type model in a remote area. You need that critical mass of season pass holders there every weekend.  

Now operating bare bones with a limited schedule like Magic?  That might be possible.  

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## machski (Sep 28, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> I don't believe the proposals I've seen would benefit Rangeley much.  The most recent one I'm thinking of went from Calais to Coburn Gore.
> 
> Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


Yeah, I saw a lot of lawn signs opposing it several years ago up in Abbott.  I seem to recall it was primarily thought of to link Quebec to Northern Maine as a lot of trade occurs between the two.  Seemed like most Northern Mainers liked their quiet, hard to get to/from lifestyle just as it was without an expressway through the woods.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 28, 2019)

Yes that's what I recall.  Trying to better leverage Eastport, which is the deepest on the East Coast, but underutilized as there's no rail or good road infrastructure for trade. 

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Sep 28, 2019)

machski said:


> Yeah, I saw a lot of lawn signs opposing it several years ago up in Abbott.  I seem to recall it was primarily thought of to link Quebec to Northern Maine as a lot of trade occurs between the two.  Seemed like most Northern Mainers liked their quiet, hard to get to/from lifestyle just as it was without an expressway through the woods.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app



Yeah, that would have been too far north out of the way to do much good for Western Maine skiing. I just get tired of running Rt 2 from Newport ME to Gorham NH...


----------



## machski (Sep 28, 2019)

MEtoVTSkier said:


> Yeah, that would have been too far north out of the way to do much good for Western Maine skiing. I just get tired of running Rt 2 from Newport ME to Gorham NH...


I agree.  Heck, I'd love to ski Sugarloaf more from our condo at SR, but it just takes too damn long (like1:45 each way in good weather).  I love Bracket but it is just too hard to justify that drive after driving 3 hours to get to the condo.  But with all the road mileage Maine already has to upkeep, I just don't see that corridor ever getting better unless the state population explodes.

Sent from my SM-T830 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## x10003q (Sep 28, 2019)

uphillklimber said:


> At a town hall meeting, back when I worked there, Boyne did look at buying it. Their first concern was monopoly laws, they already own the two largest in Maine. I'm not saying there were other issues or not, just that was the first concern they related to us.



The 'monopoly' argument gives them a reasonable out without looking like all they care about is money - which is all they care about. A monopoly would be much more preferable than the current situation and I doubt there would be much opposition to a monopoly.

There is nothing wrong with making money and that explains why these other offers are not from the big ski groups or any ski groups who actually understand what it takes to operate a ski area with the hope of making some money. 

If SB was a turnkey operation today and the Berrys sold SB for small money like  $1 million, you might be able to make it work. The amount of money that is currently needed to get SB operating should make a buyer extremely wary and the rest of us extremely sad.


----------



## Newpylong (Sep 28, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> I discussed SB with Boynes Director of marketing at an AZ summit a few years back and he had said their main concern was profitability. Same thing with all the other major players.  SB probably needs several hundred more housing units to be able to make it like Sugarloaf as a resort type model in a remote area. You need that critical mass of season pass holders there every weekend.
> 
> Now operating bare bones with a limited schedule like Magic?  That might be possible.
> 
> Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app



A mountain of that size and infrastructure really by default rules out the "bare bones" model. This was why I was skeptical that the Friends of Saddleback really had a chance of success (if they acquired it). You COULD try to operate it bare bones ie 1 lift, limited schedule, minimal snowmaking to keep costs down, but you would then likely lose what draw the place has.


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 29, 2019)

Newpylong said:


> A mountain of that size and infrastructure really by default rules out the "bare bones" model. This was why I was skeptical that the Friends of Saddleback really had a chance of success (if they acquired it). You COULD try to operate it bare bones ie 1 lift, limited schedule, minimal snowmaking to keep costs down, but you would then likely lose what draw the place has.


Well, perhaps a better comparison is Pico. However, now that Magic has three chairs, the infrastructure at SB is pretty similar, just a bit more trail acreage. 

Looking at a Pico comparison, SB has less infrastructure than Pico in terms of lifts.  SB receives the same amount of snow as Pico, but holds what they get far better, so the snowmaking need is less.  I just think short of a massive increase in accommodations like Sugarloaf has, running a 4-5 day a week schedule except for holidays, making a minimal amount of snow and having a mid-December to April 1st season length makes sense operationally considering their location.  Running 7 days a week and into late April if not May like the Berry's did doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. 

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## EPB (Sep 29, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> Well, perhaps a better comparison is Pico. However, now that Magic has three chairs, the infrastructure at SB is pretty similar, just a bit more trail acreage.
> 
> Looking at a Pico comparison, SB has less infrastructure than Pico in terms of lifts.  SB receives the same amount of snow as Pico, but holds what they get far better, so the snowmaking need is less.  I just think short of a massive increase in accommodations like Sugarloaf has, running a 4-5 day a week schedule except for holidays, making a minimal amount of snow and having a mid-December to April 1st season length makes sense operationally considering their location.  Running 7 days a week and into late April if not May like the Berry's did doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.
> 
> Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app



Agreed. The tough part about comping SB to other areas is its remoteness. I'd (sadly) add the Balsams and Big Squaw to the list of places that are most similar to SB.


----------



## EPB (Sep 29, 2019)

VTKilarney said:


> I'm not saying that the Berrys have made all of the right decisions - but it is definitely possible that that the problem with the last two deals really was the buyers - and that the Berrys have to live with a crappy pool of potential buyers.



I've probably mentioned this before, but I think the most likely explanation is that the Berry's are suffering from a severe case of what behavioral economists call the Endowment Effect. I tried linking a Wikipedia article to this but was having trouble on my phone.


----------



## Newpylong (Sep 29, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> Well, perhaps a better comparison is Pico. However, now that Magic has three chairs, the infrastructure at SB is pretty similar, just a bit more trail acreage.
> 
> Looking at a Pico comparison, SB has less infrastructure than Pico in terms of lifts.  SB receives the same amount of snow as Pico, but holds what they get far better, so the snowmaking need is less.  I just think short of a massive increase in accommodations like Sugarloaf has, running a 4-5 day a week schedule except for holidays, making a minimal amount of snow and having a mid-December to April 1st season length makes sense operationally considering their location.  Running 7 days a week and into late April if not May like the Berry's did doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.
> 
> Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app



Magic is still not a good comparison because all of Magic can be skied with one lift - everything funnels to one location. They can reduce to 1 lift on slow days, and only make snow on core routes if need be.

Pico is a better comparison physically - but organizationally and regionally (location) are far different.

Saddleback is really a unique situation and unfortunately I think that is why things went the way they have.


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 29, 2019)

Just to be clear, I'm merely suggesting SB runs with a similar schedule and snowmaking philosophy as places like Magic /PICO.   That's what I mean by bare bones. As compared to trying to run it like Sugarloaf. 

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## EPB (Sep 30, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> Just to be clear, I'm merely suggesting SB runs with a similar schedule and snowmaking philosophy as places like Magic /PICO.   That's what I mean by bare bones. As compared to trying to run it like Sugarloaf.
> 
> Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app



I agree with you on the operating schedule and think that your comp set is totally reasonable. There's no such thing as two perfectly comparable companies.

I wouldn't even be surprised if Vail finds an excuse to not run both Attitash and Wildcat on quiet midweek periods.


----------



## machski (Sep 30, 2019)

eastern powder baby said:


> I wouldn't even be surprised if Vail finds an excuse to not run both Attitash and Wildcat on quiet midweek periods.



I don't think that fits Vail in anyway.  I do not believe they run an area they own only on certain days.  They are all 7 days/week operations.  I could perhaps see them runni g only the HSQ at Cat on slow days in the future, but I don't see them splitting days between Cat and Attitash. 

Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## EPB (Sep 30, 2019)

machski said:


> I don't think that fits Vail in anyway.  I do not believe they run an area they own only on certain days.  They are all 7 days/week operations.  I could perhaps see them runni g only the HSQ at Cat on slow days in the future, but I don't see them splitting days between Cat and Attitash.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app



I've heard they frequently come up with excuses to shut down Kirkwood midweek - a friend of mine based in SF is leery of going there midweek for that reason. I'm sure they advertise being open seven days a week though. 

Granted, this is hearsay, but I could see them becoming even quicker to pull the trigger on Wildcat than even Peak was.


----------



## Newpylong (Sep 30, 2019)

They are not going to do that.


----------



## Edd (Sep 30, 2019)

Newpylong said:


> They are not going to do that.



Do you mean close Wildcat midweek? Maybe I’m not understanding the previous post.


----------



## Newpylong (Sep 30, 2019)

Correct.


----------



## snoseek (Sep 30, 2019)

eastern powder baby said:


> I've heard they frequently come up with excuses to shut down Kirkwood midweek - a friend of mine based in SF is leery of going there midweek for that reason. I'm sure they advertise being open seven days a week though.
> 
> Granted, this is hearsay, but I could see them becoming even quicker to pull the trigger on Wildcat than even Peak was.



While they may not run chair 4 on the backside as often as people like sometimes it has nothing to do with saving money if they decide to shut the mountain...its all weather. That's coming from someone that is extremely critical of vail as a company specifically in regards to Kirkwood. 

I don't see them shutting any of their properties midweek.


----------



## EPB (Sep 30, 2019)

snoseek said:


> While they may not run chair 4 on the backside as often as people like sometimes it has nothing to do with saving money if they decide to shut the mountain...its all weather. That's coming from someone that is extremely critical of vail as a company specifically in regards to Kirkwood.
> 
> I don't see them shutting any of their properties midweek.


I trust you know better than me. My info is third hand.


----------



## EPB (Sep 30, 2019)

Newpylong said:


> Correct.



We'll see. There are probably a good dozen of places with 1k vert that works be better off not running 7 days a week (non-holiday). I can't imagine places like either of the Black mountains, Burke, Ragged, Bromley, MRG, Smuggs, Mt. Ellen, any Maine resort that doesn't have night skiing, and a few Québécoise places would hurt themselves by taking 1-3 midweek days off.


----------



## 2Planker (Sep 30, 2019)

eastern powder baby said:


> We'll see. There are probably a good dozen of places with 1k vert that works be better off not running 7 days a week (non-holiday). I can't imagine places like either of the Black mountains, Burke, Ragged, Bromley, MRG, Smuggs, Mt. Ellen, any Maine resort that doesn't have night skiing, and a few Québécoise places would hurt themselves by taking 1-3 midweek days off.



No way.  The Cat only closes for weather.  
Either 50+ crosswinds, torrential rain or the dreaded 2-3 day ice storm like last year.

Many of the smaller places have contracted weekly groups or schools on weekdays.


----------



## EPB (Sep 30, 2019)

2Planker said:


> No way.  The Cat only closes for weather.
> Either 50+ crosswinds, torrential rain or the dreaded 2-3 day ice storm like last year.
> 
> Many of the smaller places have contracted weekly groups or schools on weekdays.


I'm failing to see how this addresses what I said. Cut off is 1k vert. Which places probably should close at least a day midweek? Small hills are generally the last ones that would make sense for that very reason. Peak had a quicker trigger with Wildcat than the old owners by all accounts I've heard. I think this was smart. I'm going a step further by suggesting they'd probably come out ahead by saying they're no longer operating on Wednesdays period. As a suburbanite, this would have zero bearing on my decision to purchase a pass.


----------



## Cat in January (Oct 1, 2019)

eastern powder baby said:


> We'll see. There are probably a good dozen of places with 1k vert that works be better off not running 7 days a week (non-holiday). I can't imagine places like either of the Black mountains, Burke, Ragged, Bromley, MRG, Smuggs, Mt. Ellen, any Maine resort that doesn't have night skiing, and a few Québécoise places would hurt themselves by taking 1-3 midweek days off.



Black Mountain of Maine is closed M-Th except school holidays and Mount Abram in Maine is closed M-W.


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Oct 1, 2019)

Bigrock is closed Monday-Tuesdays unless holiday/vacation (US or Canada)


----------



## deadheadskier (Oct 1, 2019)

eastern powder baby said:


> We'll see. There are probably a good dozen of places with 1k vert that works be better off not running 7 days a week (non-holiday). I can't imagine places like either of the Black mountains, Burke, Ragged, Bromley, MRG, Smuggs, Mt. Ellen, any Maine resort that doesn't have night skiing, and a few Québécoise places would hurt themselves by taking 1-3 midweek days off.



I disagree with MRG, Mt Ellen and Smuggs.  All have a pretty good local following Midweek from the Burlington area as well as people in the MRV or Jeffersonville that work weekends supporting the resorts.  Not saying they make a ton of money those days, but reducing their schedules would very much upset me if I were a local or second home owner in the area.  

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## cdskier (Oct 1, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> I disagree with MRG, Mt Ellen and Smuggs.  All have a pretty good local following Midweek from the Burlington area as well as people in the MRV or Jeffersonville that work weekends supporting the resorts.  Not saying they make a ton of money those days, but reducing their schedules would very much upset me if I were a local or second home owner in the area.



I'd also think Smuggs would be hurt trying to attract the "family vacation for a week" crowd if they were closed mid-week. Personally if I was planning a trip to Smuggs, midweek is exactly when I'd want to be there.

Agree on MRG and Mt Ellen getting a lot of pushback too if they closed mid-week. Mt Ellen has to open at least partly anyway for GMVS (the fact that they were opening a lift early for GMVS midweek is why they ended up making Mt Ellen open early mid-week to the public at 8am too if locals want to grab a few runs before going to work).


----------



## EPB (Oct 1, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> I disagree with MRG, Mt Ellen and Smuggs.  All have a pretty good local following Midweek from the Burlington area as well as people in the MRV or Jeffersonville that work weekends supporting the resorts.  Not saying they make a ton of money those days, but reducing their schedules would very much upset me if I were a local or second home owner in the area.
> 
> Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app



I'd say Smuggs was the biggest stretch of the lot because they are touted as being a great place for families to stay. That means they probably keep their bed base at reasonably high occupancy. 

If the MRG cooperative said they needed to cut Wednesdays, I can't imagine masses complaining. They have as much cred as anyone I can think of (of size) in that region given their ownership situation.

Mt. Ellen is the easiest - deem that your ME pass works on midweek closure days at Lincoln.

I'm general, being closed on a midweek powder day could pull demand the following day from other resorts. If you're MRG and you close Wednesdays, a Tuesday night/Wednesday storm means you are THE place to hit that Thursday.

Re: second homeowners. Unless your job situation is different from mine, you're probably not skiing many Wednesdays anyway. If your job is like mine (normal hours), you'd just work around it (take Thursday though Sunday off or buy a Wednesday ticket in advance elsewhere). I've never been a local, so I can't comment as readily. That said, I'd be hard pressed to believe enough local Burlington/MRV skiers would switch allegiances to move the needle.


----------



## EPB (Oct 1, 2019)

Smuggs would need to partner with another area to offer Wednesday skiing.


----------



## Edd (Oct 1, 2019)

2Planker said:


> No way.  The Cat only closes for weather.



Hope that continues. Skiing there midweek is blissful.


----------



## machski (Oct 1, 2019)

eastern powder baby said:


> We'll see. There are probably a good dozen of places with 1k vert that works be better off not running 7 days a week (non-holiday). I can't imagine places like either of the Black mountains, Burke, Ragged, Bromley, MRG, Smuggs, Mt. Ellen, any Maine resort that doesn't have night skiing, and a few Québécoise places would hurt themselves by taking 1-3 midweek days off.


You are totally contradicting yourself.  You say 1K vert would be the cutoff but then throw in Black NH (is greater than 1K vert), and obviously Ragged/Burke/Ellen/MRG/Smuggs are ll greater than 1K vert.  There would be a lot of pissed off passholders at all these areas if they cut out 1-3 days a week.

Sent from my SM-T830 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## deadheadskier (Oct 1, 2019)

eastern powder baby said:


> I'd say Smuggs was the biggest stretch of the lot because they are touted as being a great place for families to stay. That means they probably keep their bed base at reasonably high occupancy.
> 
> If the MRG cooperative said they needed to cut Wednesdays, I can't imagine masses complaining. They have as much cred as anyone I can think of (of size) in that region given their ownership situation.
> 
> ...


I was a local UVM student who has Bush pass one year and a Stowe resident for six years. I also used to get the Smuggs bash badge for cheap midweek tickets.  I can tell you tons of local college students try and set up their winter class schedule to be either Tues/TH or M,W,F to open up midweek skiing opportunities. As a resort worker living in Stowe, I only skied midweek.  When I skied all those areas midweek back then, they had reasonably sustainable midweek traffic.

I just think it's penny wise and pound foolish to close any of those three some midweek days outside of very early season or mid-March on.  With Epic being so cheap, all three run the risk of people switching to Stowe.   

Plus Sugarbush and Smuggs aren't just locals hills, they are major resorts that do a ton of business.  Their reputations would both take a huge hit.  MRG might make a little more sense, but they have some of the lowest operating costs in the East.  If they're not spending hardly any money on snowmaking or grooming, I don't think running three lifts and offering minimal F&B is gonna kill them.  No way I see the coop going for that.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## VTKilarney (Oct 1, 2019)

Bolton Valley is a candidate for mid-week closure.  

Burke should close mid-week (e.g. Tuesday and Wednesday) but the hotel has painted them into a corner.


----------



## EPB (Oct 1, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> I just think it's penny wise and pound foolish to close any of those three some midweek days outside of very early season or mid-March on.  With Epic being so cheap, all three run the risk of people switching to Stowe.
> 
> Plus Sugarbush and Smuggs aren't just locals hills, they are major resorts that do a ton of business.  Their reputations would both take a huge hit.  MRG might make a little more sense, but they have some of the lowest operating costs in the East.  If they're not spending hardly any money on snowmaking or grooming, I don't think running three lifts and offering minimal F&B is gonna kill them.  No way I see the coop going for that.



The college angle is interesting. Stowe's college pass is very expensive relatively speaking, so I don't see that as a viable substitution unless the pass money is no bother to one and their college friends anyway. 

Taking Wednesdays away from college kids could move the needle and make the math work out more in favor of opening 7 days at MRG and Smuggs - fair point (however, emphasis on the conditional tense). 

ME is a different ballgame. SB could easily send that traffic to Lincoln on any of the midweek days I've been there. Not opening the lodge and running just enough to keep the racers on the hill would definitely save $$$. If your downside is that you MUST ski Lincoln on Tuesdays or Wednesdays, color me unsympathetic.


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Oct 1, 2019)

VTKilarney said:


> Bolton Valley is a candidate for mid-week closure.
> 
> Burke should close mid-week (e.g. Tuesday and Wednesday) but the hotel has painted them into a corner.



Except Burke can open the whole mountain with only 2 major lifts. Limit the F&B and how bad can it be?


----------



## VTKilarney (Oct 1, 2019)

MEtoVTSkier said:


> Except Burke can open the whole mountain with only 2 major lifts. Limit the F&B and how bad can it be?



They are still losing money on those days.


----------



## deadheadskier (Oct 1, 2019)

eastern powder baby said:


> The college angle is interesting. Stowe's college pass is very expensive relatively speaking, so I don't see that as a viable substitution unless the pass money is no bother to one and their college friends anyway.
> 
> Taking Wednesdays away from college kids could move the needle and make the math work out more in favor of opening 7 days at MRG and Smuggs - fair point (however, emphasis on the conditional tense).
> 
> ME is a different ballgame. SB could easily send that traffic to Lincoln on any of the midweek days I've been there. Not opening the lodge and running just enough to keep the racers on the hill would definitely save $$$. If your downside is that you MUST ski Lincoln on Tuesdays or Wednesdays, color me unsympathetic.


Thing is you have people who prefer North to South.  It's a minority for sure, but I'd definitely be one of those people.  They'd save some money closing North, but a lot of people would be pissed. 

What if Attitash closed Bear Peak midweek?  People would also be pissed. And Attitash does far less business than SB.

I just think this conversation about reducing operations should be limited to either places that are small or very remote such as SB.    

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## JimG. (Oct 1, 2019)

As a retiree, I would not consider a pass to any resort(s) that limited weekday operations in any way.

My example is Plattekill which is my favorite Catskills mountain. Don't ski there much though because they are closed M-Th barring powder daize.


----------



## cdskier (Oct 1, 2019)

eastern powder baby said:


> ME is a different ballgame. SB could easily send that traffic to Lincoln on any of the midweek days I've been there. Not opening the lodge and running just enough to keep the racers on the hill would definitely save $$$. If your downside is that you MUST ski Lincoln on Tuesdays or Wednesdays, color me unsympathetic.



You still need to at least partially operate ME for GMVS...so what are you really saving? And to someone else's point, that absolutely hurts your image and marketing firepower. Plus ME is where your terrain park is so chances are they want to keep that open to avoid alienating that group.



deadheadskier said:


> Thing is you have people who prefer North to South.  It's a minority for sure, but I'd definitely be one of those people.  They'd save some money closing North, but a lot of people would be pissed.
> 
> What if Attitash closed Bear Peak midweek?  People would also be pissed. And Attitash does far less business than SB.
> 
> I just think this conversation about reducing operations should be limited to either places that are small or very remote such as SB.



Agreed. If you want to reduce operations at a large resort, you do so by cutting out non-essential lifts and reducing F&B options mid-week. Closing an entire mountain (or section of the mountain) sends the message that you're cheap and/or in financial trouble.

FWIW, Sugarbush received a lot of flack when they used to close the Slidebrook chair midweek. Now they run it 7 days a week as long as conditions permit. I don't see how closing ME midweek would go over well at all.


----------



## EPB (Oct 1, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> What if Attitash closed Bear Peak midweek?  People would also be pissed. And Attitash does far less business than SB.
> 
> I just think this conversation about reducing operations should be limited to either places that are small or very remote such as SB.
> 
> Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app



I presume you're taking about different SBs. I think Attitash and wildcat could certainly do more to pare back operations. No flying Yankee on quiet midweek days would be a start. I could see no ticket booth or food ops at Bear, too. Maybe a cashier for snacks/hot chocolate. They might need to run the Abenaki the way their agreement with Bearfoot Creek works - not 100% though. At that point, I'd say it's worth it to run the Bear. If they haven't already, they should operate just one beginner area - most likely the one at Attitash.

People get pissed when the industry changes, but I'd rather places run well for the long haul. It was awesome when places made a ton of snow and closed with wall to wall coverage. Im glad they save the money now. I thick places should decide for their own whether operating all the days from Tuesday-Thursday makes sense. It's not a slam dunk for each place I mentioned, but could very well be the best way forward I'm the long run.


----------



## EPB (Oct 1, 2019)

cdskier said:


> You still need to at least partially operate ME for GMVS...so what are you really saving? And to someone else's point, that absolutely hurts your image and marketing firepower. Plus ME is where your terrain park is so chances are they want to keep that open to avoid alienating that group.



No lodge, no high speed quads or fixed grip summit and terrain park lift. Obviously no staff needed to run all the lifts and less ski patrol, too. Terrain park is a fair call. Would be a downside to need some jumps on Lincoln side or to go without a day or two midweek. 

Not to be a jerk, but I gotta call BS on the marketing firepower thing. Is running a limited ME schedule going to materially impact the visitors who really pay the bills? I have my serious doubts. I'm what ways does it hurt marketing firepower? If anything, less opex at ME saves money to spend on marketing to the population centers.


----------



## deadheadskier (Oct 1, 2019)

eastern powder baby said:


> I presume you're taking about different SBs. I think Attitash and wildcat could certainly do more to pare back operations. No flying Yankee on quiet midweek days would be a start. I could see no ticket booth or food ops at Bear, too. Maybe a cashier for snacks/hot chocolate. They might need to run the Abenaki the way their agreement with Bearfoot Creek works - not 100% though. At that point, I'd say it's worth it to run the Bear. If they haven't already, they should operate just one beginner area - most likely the one at Attitash.
> 
> People get pissed when the industry changes, but I'd rather places run well for the long haul. It was awesome when places made a ton of snow and closed with wall to wall coverage. Im glad they save the money now. I thick places should decide for their own whether operating all the days from Tuesday-Thursday makes sense. It's not a slam dunk for each place I mentioned, but could very well be the best way forward I'm the long run.


close the Yankee midweek? Are you nuts or trolling????  I mean no disrespect and you're entitled to your opinion, but you clearly don't know the Attitash clientele all that well.  The number ONE complaint at that mountain is the slow ass Summit Triple.  It might be the most universally loathed chair in all of the East.  Now you're going to suggest Attitash present it as the only option along with the equally painfully slow double doubles that serve 600 vertical?

That idea would not go over like a fart church, it would go over like someone taking a steaming dump on the altar. 

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## EPB (Oct 1, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> close the Yankee midweek? Are you nuts or trolling????  I mean no disrespect and you're entitled to your opinion, but you clearly don't know the Attitash clientele all that well.  The number ONE complaint at that mountain is the slow ass Summit Triple.  It might be the most universally loathed chair in all of the East.  Now you're going to suggest Attitash present it as the only option along with the equally painfully slow double doubles that serve 600 vertical?
> 
> That idea would not go over like a fart church, it would go over like someone taking a steaming dump on the altar.
> 
> Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app



I grew up skiing there, most of my friends who ski I met there, and I've probably put over 500 days on snow there. You could say I have a basic understanding of the clientele, although it's turned over somewhat in the years since I've left the area. I wouldn't run the double doubles either, BTW-maybe the one with the mid unload.

Where I disagree with most here is that outrage in the locker room at Attitash (where my family had one for 20 years) turns into $ out the door. I've heard a lot more talk than I've seen walk in my life when it comes to this stuff. Offering the summit triple only (and the carpet or learning center or east double) on Wednesdays would probably be more of the same.


----------



## deadheadskier (Oct 1, 2019)

Well,

I can tell you that BW up the road isn't cutting corners like that.  I think you're wrong about locker room talk not having a negative impact.  Just look at the decline in the number of skier visits at Attitash.  They used to average about 200k, now it's more like 150.   Also, cutting back the Yankee means the middle lower trails aren't that accessible except if you ski Upper Ptarmigan, which is way above the skill level of many people.  Getting to Moat or Grand Stand from Tightrope or Northwest Passage would be a pain in the ass. 

You are curiously passionate about scheduling cutbacks at areas that really aren't hurting financially.  I totally get the idea for local hills that struggle or remote places like Burke and Saddleback that traditionally lose money and are at risk of going under.  But resorts that do well such as Sugarbush, Smuggs, Attitash, Ragged?  Cut backs don't make too much sense to me at those locations.  

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## cdskier (Oct 1, 2019)

eastern powder baby said:


> No lodge, no high speed quads or fixed grip summit and terrain park lift. Obviously no staff needed to run all the lifts and less ski patrol, too. Terrain park is a fair call. Would be a downside to need some jumps on Lincoln side or to go without a day or two midweek.
> 
> Not to be a jerk, but I gotta call BS on the marketing firepower thing. Is running a limited ME schedule going to materially impact the visitors who really pay the bills? I have my serious doubts. I'm what ways does it hurt marketing firepower? If anything, less opex at ME saves money to spend on marketing to the population centers.



"Sugarbush has 111 trails and 2600' of vertical including the highest chairlift in Vermont*" (*Except Tuesdays and Wednesdays when we close over 1/3 of our terrain, have 200' less vertical, and don't operate the highest chairlift in Vermont). Sounds like a great marketing strategy!

Also forgot that Vermont Adaptive calls Mt Ellen home and is their northern Vermont base of operations. That's another factor limiting your ability to close ME midweek.


----------



## EPB (Oct 1, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> Well,
> 
> I can tell you that BW up the road isn't cutting corners like that.  I think you're wrong about locker room talk not having a negative impact.  Just look at the decline in the number of skier visits at Attitash.  They used to average about 200k, now it's more like 150.   Also, cutting back the Yankee means the middle lower trails aren't that accessible except if you ski Upper Ptarmigan, which is way above the skill level of many people.  Getting to Moat or Grand Stand from Tightrope or Northwest Passage would be a pain in the ass.
> 
> ...



I wouldn't say passionate. It's a fun debate, albeit a tough one without hard numbers. I think the bleeding at Attitash would have been quelled with a summit HSQ install ~15 years ago. I would have traded it for a shorter ski week. Attitash probably would have increased it's visits if it installed the quad and never operated again on non holiday Tuesdays and Wednesdays (Cannon and BW used to run promos those days anyway). That place is dead midweek - great when you can get it.

With turkey chute, you'd really only miss cathedral with no Yankee, btw.


----------



## EPB (Oct 1, 2019)

cdskier said:


> "Sugarbush has 111 trails and 2600' of vertical including the highest chairlift in Vermont*" (*Except Tuesdays and Wednesdays when we close over 1/3 of our terrain, have 200' less vertical, and don't operate the highest chairlift in Vermont). Sounds like a great marketing strategy!
> 
> Also forgot that Vermont Adaptive calls Mt Ellen home and is their northern Vermont base of operations. That's another factor limiting your ability to close ME midweek.



You should have led with the last point - it's a legitimate operational concern. "Come stay on site and walk to the only slopes you're likely to ski anyway!" Would do the trick just fine.


----------



## 1dog (Oct 1, 2019)

if secular growth - the number of new skiers/riders that exceed the number of people who don't ski anymore - is the problem (isn't the industry numbers flat for the last 10-15 years?) , growing the nunbers starts at feeder hills. 

unlike the 50's, 60's, 70's pre NELSAP, we have liability - greatest existential threat, evironmental (human nature suggests we always go too far with the pendulum swing), and competition from other sports that were not available in large quanities back then, feeder hills have got to be ramped up. 
Only way that seems feasible are larger hills partnering with the local hills. 

I'm not a government grant advocate but maybe a local or regional relief for those places that offer after school programs and access to experiencing the great sport. Fun in the cold. Its social, its exercise, it's a reason to get off the couch , off video, and to a couple generations in the NE it would be novel. Most here know it doesn't have to be expensive. Tickets can be the most expensive part of the sport - and they've come down under pressure.  

Just typing out loud - its a short season - but its a sport that has so much potential. hiked the northeast since I was a 9 year old - all those trailheads are far busier than at anytime in the past - sure its cheaper - but its outdoors - should be growth in newbies each year.

Organized team sports are having same competition issues with video, soccer, lacrosse, but individual sports ( ike this one) are growing, so why not? 

Just to throw a wrench in the above discussion - there are far fewer M-F 8-5 jobs than there were 20 years ago - flex schedules mean working from the lifts, lodges, and ski houses, with some turns 9-1 or 1-4.  Everyone has WIFI.

And once they can develop solar to power generators to make snow. . . . . . . . .  

3-6" predicted for Mt Washington Friday. . . .  developing. . . . .


----------



## bdfreetuna (Oct 2, 2019)

Good grief what's wrong with you people?

Yeah let's promote/advocate/discuss all the best low key NE mountains closing midweek, when all the retirees, powder chasers, irregular work-shedule folk and crowd-haters enjoy their sport. Thank God for you retirees keeping the pressure on.

I thought we were talking about trying to OPEN a mountain here!


----------



## EPB (Oct 2, 2019)

bdfreetuna said:


> Good grief what's wrong with you people?
> 
> Yeah let's promote/advocate/discuss all the best low key NE mountains closing midweek, when all the retirees, powder chasers, irregular work-shedule folk and crowd-haters enjoy their sport. Thank God for you retirees keeping the pressure on.
> 
> I thought we were talking about trying to OPEN a mountain here!



You people! You act as though I'm a snowboarder worth discriminating against in the MRV!

The crux of the matter is understanding if any money is lost on certain days of the week (and where). 

I cheer on prudent financial decision-making at every turn and think it wouldn't hurt to get more creative being midweek costs down industry-wide. I like my favorite businesses to be in as strong of financial shape as possible. You, on the other hand, cheer "keeping the pressure on" so you have the option to go ski somewhere on a day the business will probably lose money. If that makes me the one with something wrong, so be it.


----------



## EPB (Oct 2, 2019)

Back to the topic, I hope SB finds an owner. It's a real gem. Limited snowmaking and schedule would be prudent.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Oct 2, 2019)

eastern powder baby said:


> You people! You act as though I'm a snowboarder worth discriminating against in the MRV!
> 
> The crux of the matter is understanding if any money is lost on certain days of the week (and where).
> 
> I cheer on prudent financial decision-making at every turn and think it wouldn't hurt to get more creative being midweek costs down industry-wide. I like my favorite businesses to be in as strong of financial shape as possible. You, on the other hand, cheer "keeping the pressure on" so you have the option to go ski somewhere on a day the business will probably lose money. If that makes me the one with something wrong, so be it.



OK so it's just you cheering on ski area closings then, in some sort of ironic misplaced sense of responsibility for the financial wellbeing of smaller players in the ski industry? Nevermind.


----------



## EPB (Oct 2, 2019)

bdfreetuna said:


> OK so it's just you cheering on ski area closings then, in some sort of ironic misplaced sense of responsibility for the financial wellbeing of smaller players in the ski industry? Nevermind.



No - you've utterly missed the point. I don't know how you picked any of that up from anything that I said here. If it makes you feel better to twist yourself into a metal pretzel over my alleged irony and feeling of responsibility (to think I fno responsibility for any ski area is hilarious, but I'm not stupid enough to think I can interact with a business that losses money on serving me empty terrain on Wednesdays), be my guest.


----------



## JimG. (Oct 2, 2019)

eastern powder baby said:


> No - you've utterly missed the point. I don't know how you picked any of that up from anything that I said here. If it makes you feel better to twist yourself into a metal pretzel over my alleged irony and feeling of responsibility (to think I fno responsibility for any ski area is hilarious, but I'm not stupid enough to think I can interact with a business that losses money on serving me empty terrain on Wednesdays), be my guest.



Perspective is the issue here.

esb is clearly a mostly weekend skier; midweek closings have no impact (or little impact) on him.

tuna often keeps a weekday ski schedule and would sorely miss weekday access.


----------



## EPB (Oct 2, 2019)

JimG. said:


> Perspective is the issue here.
> 
> esb is clearly a mostly weekend skier; midweek closings have no impact (or little impact) on him.
> 
> tuna often keeps a weekday ski schedule and would sorely miss weekday access.



I get the emotional reaction, I really do. I'm just saying IF we assume 1-4 midweek days are losers (depending upon the area, of course), it should set off alarm bells on our head that 7 day operations isnt a good long term strategy. This should not be controversial and one shouldn't need to ascribe any ulterior motives to my thinking on it.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Oct 2, 2019)

It's just backwards logic to say the way to keep ski resorts sustainable in the long term is to start closing them down half the days even when snow is good and the seasonal workers are already lodging there.

Suggesting Bolton Valley should close weekdays, for example, seems like a total surrender move. We're talking about the snow globe of the Northeast right there -- Top 5 highest snow amounts on most years. Small staff, a few slow lifts, minimal snowmaking...

EPB -- the fact you begrudgingly mentioned Mad River Glen and your inability to ski it makes me wonder if you can really claim no ulterior motives. Seems to me the places you don't like to ski should just be closed when you don't want to ski them.


----------



## machski (Oct 2, 2019)

eastern powder baby said:


> I get the emotional reaction, I really do. I'm just saying IF we assume 1-4 midweek days are losers (depending upon the area, of course), it should set off alarm bells on our head that 7 day operations isnt a good long term strategy. This should not be controversial and one shouldn't need to ascribe any ulterior motives to my thinking on it.


So, by this thinking, Delta/American/United and any other airline should discontinue Saturday flying because it is mostly non business travelers on cheap fares and likely a money loosing day.  That sound about right?

Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## bdfreetuna (Oct 2, 2019)

JimG. said:


> tuna often keeps a weekday ski schedule and would sorely miss weekday access.



Jim G...

If the scenario ever takes place that all the Indy resorts are closed, everything is "EPIC" and closed mid-week, I'll switch to 100% XC / backcountry / touring.

Skiers like me who go cheap on weekdays and buy a couple drinks & lunch at the bad/restaurant are precisely who keeps ski areas able to stay open for the duration of the natural ski season. Works for everyone. If it doesn't, the business model is flawed.

Pico loses quite a few visits (from me) on this account, when I see a powder day and realize they aren't even an option. No, I don't want to ski a bunch of manky "untracked" chowder 3 days later lol


----------



## EPB (Oct 2, 2019)

machski said:


> So, by this thinking, Delta/American/United and any other airline should discontinue Saturday flying because it is mostly non business travelers on cheap fares and likely a money loosing day.  That sound about right?
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app



This is really off topic, but SW does fly a reduced schedule on weekends (they're the last airliner I flew and I picked Friday night for that reason). Weekend fares are generally lower, but are we sure they're below breakeven on a $per seat mile basis? Aren't there logistical constraints that airlines face, too? For example, every so often a plane flies with one passenger on it because it must go from city A to city B to pick up a full plane of people. 

I'll make this really simple. If you're a business and you consistently lose money on a customer account, would you continue to do business like that forever, or would you attempt to renegotiate the terms or drop the customer? Most would try to change the status quo in the long run.

I'm plenty capable of talking other businesses - I've got a resume and some expensive pieces of paper that say as much, but I don't really want to do that here. I'm sure you understand.


----------



## Smellytele (Oct 2, 2019)

Weekend fares are not cheaper on sw. usually Tuesday thru Thursday are


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## EPB (Oct 2, 2019)

I didn't even say that, but I can see why you thought that - I actually saved some points switching the flight, but that's nether here nor there. This is WAY off topic.


----------



## JimG. (Oct 2, 2019)

bdfreetuna said:


> Jim G...
> 
> If the scenario ever takes place that all the Indy resorts are closed, everything is "EPIC" and closed mid-week, I'll switch to 100% XC / backcountry / touring.
> 
> ...


 
It bothers me that eastern skiing in general is almost assigned second class status with these arrangements and the main focus is to drive eastern skiers out west. I don't see how any of this benefits eastern skiing in any appreciable way. That's regardless of anything we are discussing here.


----------



## Smellytele (Oct 2, 2019)

eastern powder baby said:


> I didn't even say that, but I can see why you thought that - I actually saved some points switching the flight, but that's nether here nor there. This is WAY off topic.



Ummm?




eastern powder baby said:


> This is really off topic, but SW does fly a reduced schedule on weekends (they're the last airliner I flew and I picked Friday night for that reason). *Weekend fares are generally low* but are we sure they're below breakeven on a $per seat mile basis? Aren't there logistical constraints that airlines face, too? For example, every so often a plane flies with one passenger on it because it must go from city A to city B to pick up a full plane of people.
> 
> I'll make this really simple. If you're a business and you consistentlyer, lose money on a customer account, would you continue to do business like that forever, or would you attempt to renegotiate the terms or drop the customer? Most would try to change the status quo in the long run.
> 
> I'm plenty capable of talking other businesses - I've got a resume and some expensive pieces of paper that say as much, but I don't really want to do that here. I'm sure you understand.


----------



## EPB (Oct 2, 2019)

Smellytele said:


> Ummm?



I meant re: Delta/United. Again, not clear. I see why you thought I meant SW.

The point of caveating the SW point is that their model is different: decentralized routes, all 737 fleet, limited international, no assigned seats (fastest load in biz), no first class, etc. They classically have the lowest costs to fly per seat mile because of this... Hopefully this clears things up so we can move on. This is a Saddleback thread. Nobody is flying there on SW unless they live in a city that flies to Portland (assuming they still do).


----------



## deadheadskier (Oct 2, 2019)

Eastern Powder Baby

We've had our back and forths about the midweek operations topic along with several other members chiming in their points of view.  

One thing that hasn't been mentioned so far in this discussion and quite frankly, it's the number one variable outside of typical work/school schedules of skier patrons; the weather!

As a former frequent midweek skier, the weather is probably the number one reason a major resort can't just pick "Wednesday" as a day to be closed or severely limit their offerings and how great their experience can be.

Happens all the time in New England.  We get a well forecasted 8-16" storm midweek, the resorts are reasonably to sometimes very busy the day of the snow and then BAM! The very next day it's either rainy and warm or it's bitterly cold and the mountain chairlifts are all on windhold. 

That's the number one reason why major resorts can't just pick Wednesday to shut down.  Gotta have the staff scheduled a week in advance for the good day to pop. 

I'll bring up one more thing being a former F&B manager at ski resorts and it extends across all departments.  It's pretty easy to schedule staff for the following week and if the weather looks like shit the following day, you call them off.  That's the operating cost mitigating strategy employed by resort managers. 

Good fucking luck calling in extra help on staff scheduled days off when you need the extra help on a powder or Sunny warm day.  Those days you're just praying the staff you actually had scheduled even show up to work and not call out powder sick 

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## EPB (Oct 3, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> Eastern Powder Baby
> 
> We've had our back and forths about the midweek operations topic along with several other members chiming in their points of view.
> 
> ...



I hear you. I didn't mention this because I don't know how places like magic pull it off - I'm pretty sure they have a "no midweek except for powder days" policy. 

Each situation is unique, but Sugarbush could probably pull off opening Ellen on short notice - maybe a progressive opening as they shuffle resources around. MRG because of the Coop might also be able to pull it off - isn't their "labor" at least partly Coop members chipping in, or am I all wet on that? Many others would realistically have to take the L in the situation you outlined. However, when the weather doesn't immediately turn to sh!t on Thursday, you'd become THE day trip spot in your region. Definitely some pros and definitely some cons. Again, without knowing how the numbers break down, this is all highly speculative.


----------



## Newpylong (Oct 3, 2019)

It would be very difficult to open something like Mount Ellen on short notice. That's 6 lifties (3 each for GMX and Summit), 4 patrollers absolute minimum (more like 6), lift mechanic, lift supervisor, lodge staffing, etc. Not even Killington has that many people sitting around waiting for the call or floating staff to reshuffle. 

If they decided to shutter Ellen midweek (they never will, not sure why there is even discussion), it is a decision that will likely stick. There is plenty of terrain to be had on a pow day at Lincoln.


----------



## EPB (Oct 3, 2019)

Newpylong said:


> It would be very difficult to open something like Mount Ellen on short notice. That's 6 lifties (3 each for GMX and Summit), 4 patrollers absolute minimum (more like 6), lift mechanic, lift supervisor, lodge staffing, etc. Not even Killington has that many people sitting around waiting for the call or floating staff to reshuffle.
> 
> If they decided to shutter Ellen midweek (they never will, not sure why there is even discussion), it is a decision that will likely stick. There is plenty of terrain to be had on a pow day at Lincoln.



It's a drawn out hypothetical at this point. Practically, I bet SB is now more likely to operate all week at ME because they probably feel compelled to put their best foot forward to compete within the Vail/Ikon superpass landscape. The reason it's come up is because I mentioned it as part of a long list of places with 1k+ vertical in the Northeast that likely lose money on their midweek operations and could potentially be closed a few days midweek to boost profit for SB overall. Initially, it was a fun hypothetical on my end, but I'm now exhausted by it and am pulling away from this one.


----------



## raisingarizona (Oct 4, 2019)

JimG. said:


> It bothers me that eastern skiing in general is almost assigned second class status with these arrangements and the main focus is to drive eastern skiers out west. I don't see how any of this benefits eastern skiing in any appreciable way. That's regardless of anything we are discussing here.




Well it’s not like we are flying out east to spend lots of money on a week long ski vacation.


----------



## JimG. (Oct 4, 2019)

raisingarizona said:


> Well it’s not like we are flying out east to spend lots of money on a week long ski vacation.



That would be strange.

I have no issue with anyone who prefers skiing out west; but I would prefer to live there and not have to go thru the travel.

Maybe I should just be happy lots of folks go out west.


----------



## snoseek (Nov 7, 2019)

https://www.sunjournal.com/2019/11/...Mw-OjN4uxq3M-GQwcD8inIlHCZa9Rixgn5FAIa78fHy50


----------



## thetrailboss (Nov 7, 2019)

snoseek said:


> https://www.sunjournal.com/2019/11/...Mw-OjN4uxq3M-GQwcD8inIlHCZa9Rixgn5FAIa78fHy50



So after all of the latest drama it is now one again closer to happening.  I bet that for all that griping they only got a few dollars more and pissed off more people.  I would imagine that the Berry's are not done yet with the shenanigans.  This seems like another case of "OK, Boomer" mentality.


----------



## Edd (Nov 8, 2019)

Nice news as always....again. 

Surprised to read about plans for the base lodge. That’s the best base lodge in Maine. 


Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone


----------



## jimmywilson69 (Nov 8, 2019)

What weird way this thing has progressed since Day 1.   I hope it actually goes through and these folks have a good product.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Nov 8, 2019)

Sounds pretty set in stone to me... if they do open for 20/21 season I won't miss it


----------



## bdfreetuna (Nov 8, 2019)

Edd said:


> Surprised to read about plans for the base lodge. That’s the best base lodge in Maine.



Agree... it reminds me of Bretton Woods lodge quite a bit. But it's only new bathrooms and kitchen so I guess we won't miss it.


----------



## Edd (Nov 8, 2019)

bdfreetuna said:


> Agree... it reminds me of Bretton Woods lodge quite a bit. But it's only new bathrooms and kitchen so I guess we won't miss it.



That kitchen made poutine with duck fat which I still reminisce about.


----------



## Killingtime (Nov 8, 2019)

If they do open I'll stop in and support them too. 

https://www.newenglandskiindustry.com/viewstory.php?storyid=796

Saddleback Sale Agreement Announced
The defunct Maine ski resort could reopen next year.
Friday, November 8, 2019, NewEnglandSkiIndustry.com
Saddleback Base Lodge, March 20, 2018


According to a press release posted on Saddleback's web site, Arctaris has reached an agreement to acquire the defunct Maine resort. An estimated completion date of the transaction has not been announced.

Based out of Boston, Arctaris Impact Fund was formed in 2018 to "invest in Low and Moderate Income communities throughout the U.S., addressing underserved and underbanked businesses that are poised for growth." The fund is a subsidiary of Arctaris, which was founded in 2009. According to the company's web site, Arctaris's co-founder is Jonathan D. Tower, who worked for Fidelity and IBM. Former Maine Winter Sports Center (Big Rock, Black Mountain, and Quoggy Jo) CEO Andy Shepard will serve as CEO of Saddleback.

Arctaris had entered into an agreement to purchase Saddleback in June with an estimated completion date in November, however talks broke down in September. At the time, Arctaris was planning to reopen the defunct ski area this winter. According to the Portland Press Herald, Arctaris is now aiming for a 2020-21 reopening.

According to the Portland Press Herald, planned 2020 improvements include a high speed quad replacing the main Rangeley double chairlift, as well as a new T-Bar. Base facility improvements are also planned.

Sandy Chairlift, July 2019
Sandy Chairlift, July 2019


Background
The Saddleback saga dates back to July 2015, when the Berry family, owners of the ski area since 2003, announced the Rangeley double chairlift was "at end of its useful life" and that operations would cease if the lift could not be replaced. The lift was not replaced and the ski area sat idle for the following two winters.

On June 28, 2017, the Berry family announced Saddleback was being sold to the Majella Group. At that time, Majella announced the sale would be completed later in the summer and the area would reopen with a new fixed grip quad chairlift and T-Bar. The deal was never completed, the lifts never installed, and the area never reopened. Majella CEO Sebastian Monsour was arrested for alleged investor fraud June 2018. Majella's Portland, Maine development company, 32 Thomas Street LLC, filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy in February 2019. Majella branding has been removed from the Saddleback web presence.


----------



## thetrailboss (Nov 9, 2019)

Newpylong said:


> If they decided to shutter Ellen midweek (they never will, not sure why there is even discussion), it is a decision that will likely stick. There is plenty of terrain to be had on a pow day at Lincoln.



Yes, everyone should go ski LP on a powder day.  Nothing to see at ME.  

Signed,

Former Sugarbush North Homer


----------



## thetrailboss (Nov 9, 2019)

jimmywilson69 said:


> What weird way this thing has progressed since Day 1.   I hope it actually goes through and these folks have a good product.



Agreed.  

I am not going to believe it until the closing is done.  Hate to say it, but the family has really lost all credibility.


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Nov 10, 2019)

I'll believe when we're sitting at the bar in the lodge, after lapping the Rangley replacement chair.:grin:


----------



## WinS (Nov 11, 2019)

Newpylong said:


> It would be very difficult to open something like Mount Ellen on short notice. That's 6 lifties (3 each for GMX and Summit), 4 patrollers absolute minimum (more like 6), lift mechanic, lift supervisor, lodge staffing, etc. Not even Killington has that many people sitting around waiting for the call or floating staff to reshuffle.
> 
> If they decided to shutter Ellen midweek (they never will, not sure why there is even discussion), it is a decision that will likely stick. There is plenty of terrain to be had on a pow day at Lincoln.



You don't run a business successful with that type of thinking. Not only to we want the both areas open but we also want to run Slide Brook every day if we can. Pinching pennies is not a long-term strategy. Creating value and getting paid for it is.


----------



## Cat in January (Nov 11, 2019)

Likelihood of this deal closing is very high.  Opening top to bottom next year is high.  Ever turning a profit after expenses and debt service, imo low.


----------



## Newpylong (Nov 11, 2019)

WinS said:


> You don't run a business successful with that type of thinking. Not only to we want the both areas open but we also want to run Slide Brook every day if we can. Pinching pennies is not a long-term strategy. Creating value and getting paid for it is.



Exactly why I said the decision to do that would never occur!


----------



## EPB (Nov 12, 2019)

Newpylong said:


> Exactly why I said the decision to do that would never occur!


It's funny your quote was singled out considering I was the one who had the audacity to wonder aloud whether Wednesday operations at a slew of eastern ski areas is profitable. 

This is basically the response I would expect - Sugarbush is a premium resort in the east and positioning itself as such is a sensible way to communicate with customers as it competes with the mega passes. Best of luck to them. North and South are both phenomenal. 

More topical, this is good news for Saddleback and the region. Hopefully the deal reaches a final closing soon. Seems unlikely they'd alert the press unless it was very close to done. With this saga, I'll wait to believe anything until the final contacts are signed.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## p_levert (Nov 12, 2019)

I'm not sure why they need to spend money on an HSQ when a fixed grip quad would do the job and be more wind resistant.  I assume that cash will be an issue for the first few years, if not forever.  Follow the Magic model!


----------



## mister moose (Nov 12, 2019)

p_levert said:


> Follow the Magic model!


And not the Ascutney model.

Ascutney's problem was low natural snowfall and small size, but right next to an interstate.  SB is the exact opposite, great snowfall and terrain, but in the state of Mainada.  They need to be realistic about skier visits, and consequently debt and operating costs.


----------



## jimmywilson69 (Nov 12, 2019)

I'm guessing that they want to show off a brand new shiny toy to attract people up there.

Can that Bubble Chair at Haystack work?


----------



## EPB (Nov 12, 2019)

p_levert said:


> I'm not sure why they need to spend money on an HSQ when a fixed grip quad would do the job and be more wind resistant.  I assume that cash will be an issue for the first few years, if not forever.  Follow the Magic model!



I tend to agree. HSQs are ~2x as expensive to build and I've heard they can be even more than 2x as expensive to run. It sure seems like a big undertaking, but it's sure to draw more people than a FGQ. That doesn't mean it will draw enough (see: Ascutney). Reasons for optimism include:

-The tbar will also be replaced. I presume this will be the weapon of choice for midweek ops over the quad. The old plan was to have one that ran up to 700 feet per minute, which is about halfway between HSQ and FGQ speed.
-The Rangeley double's drive was replaced in '04 and could be used to upgrade the Sandy double, if necessary (needed to access the tbar from the base).
-The wind isn't as bad an issue there as it is at Sugarloaf though - tbar also helps here. I have heard that the Kennebago was more wind resistant than the double, so tbar-Kennebago quad days used to happen. Hopefully, keeping the lift low to the ground would mostly do the trick.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## EPB (Nov 12, 2019)

jimmywilson69 said:


> I'm guessing that they want to show off a brand new shiny toy to attract people up there.
> 
> Can that Bubble Chair at Haystack work?


That would be awesome

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Edd (Nov 12, 2019)

eastern powder baby said:


> -The tbar will also be replaced. I presume this will be the weapon of choice for midweek ops over the quad. The old plan was to have one that ran up to 700 feet per minute, which is about halfway between HSQ and FGQ speed.
> 
> Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app



This midweek skier does not like that idea, unless the T-bar footprint goes higher than the existing one. I don’t see that happening. If your primary lift is an HSQ, you run it every day the hill is open.


----------



## EPB (Nov 12, 2019)

Edd said:


> This midweek skier does not like that idea, unless the T-bar footprint goes higher than the existing one. I don’t see that happening. If your primary lift is an HSQ, you run it every day the hill is open.


With what money? There's no chance they can afford to run a HSQ 7 days a week in that remote a location. You can ski the tbar  to the Kennebago quad. I've skied that place once ever on a Friday, and I can assure you I'd take the tbar setup over the place being closed 100 times out of 100. 

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Edd (Nov 12, 2019)

eastern powder baby said:


> With what money? There's no chance they can afford to run a HSQ 7 days a week in that remote a location. You can ski the tbar  to the Kennebago quad. I've skied that place once ever on a Friday, and I can assure you I'd take the tbar setup over the place being closed 100 times out of 100.
> 
> Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app



I can’t answer the money question but can you think of a ski area with a primary HSQ that does not run it every day they’re open?


----------



## EPB (Nov 12, 2019)

Edd said:


> I can’t answer the money question but can you think of a ski area with a primary HSQ that does not run it every day they’re open?


Sunday River (North Peak) at least used to run a limited schedule/at half speed from what I understand. I haven't been in quite a while.

It would be unusual, I agree. It just really seems like the plan is not to run it all the time. Why waste money on the tbar? From my limited understanding, Saddleback is fairly well protected from wind and I was certainly happy to lap Kennebago most the day, anyway. A fast tbar to get there would be an improvement over the double from my perspective.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Edd (Nov 12, 2019)

North Peak is not SR’s primary lift by a long shot. 

I agree with your concerns about the cash flow but it’s tough to imagine them investing in an HSQ to replace the Rangeley and only run it during the busy times. The footprint of that lift provides maximum vertical access to the blue trails, which is where the $ is at for ski areas. Maybe you’re right and they’ll go that route but it sounds highly unusual. 


Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone


----------



## EPB (Nov 12, 2019)

Edd said:


> North Peak is not SR’s primary lift by a long shot.
> 
> I agree with your concerns about the cash flow but it’s tough to imagine them investing in an HSQ to replace the Rangeley and only run it during the busy times. The footprint of that lift provides maximum vertical access to the blue trails, which is where the $ is at for ski areas. Maybe you’re right and they’ll go that route but it sounds highly unusual.
> 
> ...


I'm not sure about it by any stretch. They could just be over building, too. Just trying to read the tea leaves. It could work given (at least) the following:
-The clientele is leveled with and understands that the crowd needed to run the thing can't be achieved all the time
-Midweek tickets are relatively cheap
-Three sweet spot of skiers that are too advanced for the base area but aren't advanced enough to lap the summit area all day aren't too large of a contingent to screw up the math

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## crazy (Nov 12, 2019)

mister moose said:


> And not the Ascutney model.
> 
> Ascutney's problem was low natural snowfall and small size, but right next to an interstate.  SB is the exact opposite, great snowfall and terrain, but in the state of Mainada.  They need to be realistic about skier visits, and consequently debt and operating costs.



https://www.zrankings.com/ski-resorts/122-saddleback-maine

I'm not sure if I would all 175 inches "great snowfall." It's the same as what Sugarloaf gets, and it's totally fine, but it's far less than the Vermont resorts with comparable glade skiing like Jay, Stowe, Smuggs, Sugarbush, and MRG.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Nov 12, 2019)

Sure seems like they get way more than that...

Maybe it's the total lack of melting?


----------



## EPB (Nov 12, 2019)

crazy said:


> https://www.zrankings.com/ski-resorts/122-saddleback-maine
> 
> I'm not sure if I would all 175 inches "great snowfall." It's the same as what Sugarloaf gets, and it's totally fine, but it's far less than the Vermont resorts with comparable glade skiing like Jay, Stowe, Smuggs, Sugarbush, and MRG.



Do you have any idea how that site arrives at its figures? The totals seem directionally accurate, but a tick under where places usually advertise.

So this goes back to expectations of skiing fresh powder in the glades. Saddlebacks lodge is at about 2400 feet and ME/NH snowfall is generally denser than what you get in VT. I think you'd find substantially more snow in the woods at Saddleback than you would at Ascutney. Once you get halfway down the mountain, you'd probably find as much snow at Saddleback in the woods as you would at places like Sugarbush.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## EPB (Nov 12, 2019)

bdfreetuna said:


> Sure seems like they get way more than that...
> 
> Maybe it's the total lack of melting?


I've asked this before here or elsewhere. The feedback I remember is Saddleback gets 200-220 vs 180-200 at Sugarloaf (better exposure to North/West). Someone showed some stats to suggest that there's as much water in 200 inches of snow at Sugarloaf as there is in 300 inches say Stowe.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## deadheadskier (Nov 12, 2019)

I think they advertised 225" before they closed.  What you accumulate is important, but so is what you maintain.  Sugarloaf averages 200" and almost every spring they have more base left over than mountains in Northern VT that claim 300".



Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## mister moose (Nov 12, 2019)

crazy said:


> I'm not sure if I would all 175 inches "great snowfall." It's the same as what Sugarloaf gets, and it's totally fine, but it's far less than the Vermont resorts with comparable glade skiing like Jay, Stowe, Smuggs, Sugarbush, and MRG.


I was comparing Ascutney to SB.  That's 80 inches at Ascutney (and a lot more rain events) vs 175" at SB.  If you want to get  technical, Mt Baker comes in 1st at 655", little Tug Hill even gets more at 200", and there is no such state as Mainada.


----------



## Edd (Nov 12, 2019)

bdfreetuna said:


> Sure seems like they get way more than that...
> 
> Maybe it's the total lack of melting?



That is precisely what it is. Also, less than average skier traffic no doubt helps.


----------



## crazy (Nov 12, 2019)

eastern powder baby said:


> Do you have any idea how that site arrives at its figures? The totals seem directionally accurate, but a tick under where places usually advertise.
> 
> So this goes back to expectations of skiing fresh powder in the glades. Saddlebacks lodge is at about 2400 feet and ME/NH snowfall is generally denser than what you get in VT. I think you'd find substantially more snow in the woods at Saddleback than you would at Ascutney. Once you get halfway down the mountain, you'd probably find as much snow at Saddleback in the woods as you would at places like Sugarbush.
> 
> Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app



This site gets its snowfall data from a guy named Tony Crocker, who is an expert on ski area snowfall. Most resorts overestimate their snowfall, which is why Zrankings is going to have smaller numbers than what the resorts claim. Personally, I believe the 175" number because it's about what Sugarloaf tends to get.

I agree with some of the points made here:

- Saddleback's snow will be a bit denser than what you see in Vermont
- Saddleback's top elevation is around 4,100 feet, which is higher than anything in Vermont short of Killington, and it faces NW
- Saddleback will see less skier traffic than places like Stowe or Sugarbush

These are the reasons why its snow should preserve well because these are all of the same reasons that Sugarloaf preserves its snow fantastically.


----------



## EPB (Nov 12, 2019)

crazy said:


> This site gets its snowfall data from a guy named Tony Crocker, who is an expert on ski area snowfall. Most resorts overestimate their snowfall, which is why Zrankings is going to have smaller numbers than what the resorts claim. Personally, I believe the 175" number because it's about what Sugarloaf tends to get.
> 
> I agree with some of the points made here:
> 
> ...


I'll check his stuff out. Should be interesting - thanks.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## EPB (Nov 12, 2019)

Duplicate


----------



## bigbob (Nov 12, 2019)

mister moose said:


> I was comparing Ascutney to SB.  That's 80 inches at Ascutney (and a lot more rain events) vs 175" at SB.  If you want to get  technical, Mt Baker comes in 1st at 655", little Tug Hill even gets more at 200", and there is no such state as Mainada.



Mainada, this is the part of Maine referred to as occupied Canada, so yes, it does exist!


----------



## jimk (Nov 13, 2019)

WinS said:


> You don't run a business successful with that type of thinking. Not only to we want the both areas open but we also want to run Slide Brook every day if we can. Pinching pennies is not a long-term strategy. Creating value and getting paid for it is.



Best wishes in your new business model with Alterra and Sugarbush.  Thanks for all you did over the years to make Sugarbush great again!


----------



## danimals (Nov 15, 2019)

https://www.skijournal.com/new-owners-hoping-to-make-saddleback-one-of-the-top-resorts-in-the-east/

Some good stuff here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## bdfreetuna (Nov 15, 2019)

They have my total support! 

Interesting about the "opportunity zones". Maybe rural areas should qualify as well as mismanaged urban areas?


----------



## 2Planker (Nov 15, 2019)

bigbob said:


> Mainada, this is the part of Maine referred to as occupied Canada, so yes, it does exist!



Haven't heard that term in 20+ years...
  But, YES  Mainada is indeed real.  Our neighbor was born and raised 30 miles north of Rangely.  
Most speak French in them parts....   
World's Best Poutine is from the Bistro !!


----------



## mister moose (Nov 15, 2019)

2Planker said:


> Haven't heard that term in 20+ years...
> But, YES  Mainada is indeed real.  Our neighbor was born and raised 30 miles north of Rangely.
> Most speak French in them parts....
> World's Best Poutine is from the Bistro !!



I've been to Ft Kent, St Andrews, Eastport, to name a few blended towns.  I've also been to Machias Seal Island, the last disputed territory between the US and Canada.  That would be the real Mainada.

Very interesting history.  A larger than life Mainer by the name of Barna Beale ran off the British in the war of 1812, and from then on it was the US.  In the later 1800s Canada asked to put a light house there, (for shipping routes up to New Brunswick) and the US said sure.  So the Canadians have had a lighthouse keeper in residence there since it was built.  Still does.  None of this mattered much until 12 mile territorial fishing rights were established.  Canada said it's ours, we have had possession for over a hundred years.  The US said no way, we just let you use it.  

And so every day a descendant of Barna Beale goes out to the island with the biggest flag you ever saw on a 40 foot fishing boat.  And in an age of solar cells and automated lights, Canada keeps the light manned.


----------



## thetrailboss (Dec 14, 2019)

Bump.  

Looks like Arctaris bought the place for $6.5 million?!

And they are asking locals to each "donate" $5,500 each to a non-profit for the area that will go towards the purchase.  That is concerning.  

They are still committed to $38 million in new infrastructure, no HS lifts are coming.  

https://bangordailynews.com/2019/12...owners-to-pitch-in-on-resorts-revitalization/


----------



## Smellytele (Dec 14, 2019)

thetrailboss said:


> Bump.
> 
> Looks like Arctaris bought the place for $6.5 million?!
> 
> ...



Actually asking the condo owners not really the “locals” but still concerning.


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## thetrailboss (Dec 14, 2019)

Smellytele said:


> Actually asking the condo owners not really the “locals” but still concerning.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone



True.  Sounded like condo owners and others who rely on the resort.


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## WinS (Dec 15, 2019)

jimk said:


> Best wishes in your new business model with Alterra and Sugarbush.  Thanks for all you did over the years to make Sugarbush great again!



Thank you.


----------



## thetrailboss (Dec 20, 2019)

According to LiftBlog.com, Arctaris has announced that the closing for the deal has been postponed now until January.  

Hope that is not a bad sign.


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Dec 20, 2019)

From SnowJournal:



> The Finance Authority of Maine (FAME) was scheduled to review  Saddleback’s request to participate in FAME’s commercial loan guaranty  program in support of this transaction.  Given the complexity of this  transaction involving support from both federal and state government  partners, FAME requested that the Berrys and Arctaris consider advancing  this discussion from their December meeting to their January board  meeting.


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 11, 2020)

Looks like things are pushing forward.....

https://www.theirregular.com/articles/saddleback-update-fundraising-goals-outlined/


----------



## Newpylong (Jan 11, 2020)

Promising!


----------



## jimmywilson69 (Jan 13, 2020)

I hope this works for them, but $5 million in "donated" money is a lot to ask for...  Hitting their first goal is good.  Doubling that in the next 18 days seems aggressive.


----------



## NYDB (Jan 14, 2020)

I don't get the donation thing.  Why does the new biz need 'donations'?

Why didn't people donate 5 mil years ago.  Possibly could have kept the place open


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 20, 2020)

Looks like another delay.

https://www.centralmaine.com/2020/01/15/saddleback-loan-guarantee-meeting-postponed/


----------



## EPB (Jan 21, 2020)

thetrailboss said:


> Looks like another delay.
> 
> https://www.centralmaine.com/2020/01/15/saddleback-loan-guarantee-meeting-postponed/



Sounds like a smaller scale Balsams saga all over again.


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Jan 21, 2020)

thetrailboss said:


> Looks like another delay.
> 
> https://www.centralmaine.com/2020/01/15/saddleback-loan-guarantee-meeting-postponed/



Same article that was posted on the 15th. Reads more like it is on FAME's end, wanting more info, than anything. Should be interesting if they reach their fundraising goal by the end of January...


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Jan 27, 2020)

Loan approved. Closing by the end of the week.

https://www.boston.com/news/skiing/2020/01/27/heres-the-latest-on-saddleback-mountain-in-maine


----------



## Edd (Jan 27, 2020)

[emoji106]


Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 27, 2020)

MEtoVTSkier said:


> Loan approved. Closing by the end of the week.
> 
> https://www.boston.com/news/skiing/2020/01/27/heres-the-latest-on-saddleback-mountain-in-maine



Good news.  Fingers and toes crossed for Saddleback folks.  They've had to endure a lot of pain.


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Jan 27, 2020)

Now, if someone could just win the Powerball, and hand them the Barnstormer 6. :grin:


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Jan 27, 2020)

https://www.famemaine.com/news/fame-and-mrda-approve-saddleback-financing/


----------



## EPB (Jan 28, 2020)

MEtoVTSkier said:


> https://www.famemaine.com/news/fame-and-mrda-approve-saddleback-financing/


Good luck to them. I'll try to support them by getting up the first season they open (and hopefully many more).

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 28, 2020)

MEtoVTSkier said:


> Now, if someone could just win the Powerball, and hand them the Barnstormer 6. :grin:



Yeah, I just don't see a need for that lift there.  Maybe you know something I don't.  

Looks like Boyne is positioning itself to get it.  Where it goes is anyone's guess.  Assuming Boyne gets it, I'd guess Sunday River.


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Jan 28, 2020)

If they replace the Rangely with a fixed quad, nobody is gonna want to go there in the numbers they'll need to succeed. The manufacturers already saying they want to get away from building quads and smaller chairs. Might as well do something to create the desire to visit, that will put bodies on the chairs and slopes.


----------



## EPB (Jan 28, 2020)

MEtoVTSkier said:


> If they replace the Rangely with a fixed quad, nobody is gonna want to go there in the numbers they'll need to succeed. The manufacturers already saying they want to get away from building quads and smaller chairs. Might as well do something to create the desire to visit, that will put bodies on the chairs and slopes.


This is THE infrastructure question from a skiing perspective in my book. Is a fixed quad enough, will a detachable lift be too expensive, or will either/neither work?

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 28, 2020)

MEtoVTSkier said:


> If they replace the Rangely with a fixed quad, nobody is gonna want to go there in the numbers they'll need to succeed. The manufacturers already saying they want to get away from building quads and smaller chairs. Might as well do something to create the desire to visit, that will put bodies on the chairs and slopes.



You do realize that a HS lift not only costs more to install, but requires much more $$$ in electricity, maintenance, and operating costs, right?  If they have the demand and enough revenue, sure I can see it working.  But if they are not sure about revenue and want to be conservative, then a reliable fixed grip can be a good option.  

And the demand for HS lifts by bigger resorts has created a business opportunity for fixed-grip lifts.  You are right that the two big manufacturers would LOVE to sell HS lifts because of more maintenance contract opportunities, but they still very much sell fixed grip lifts, often at a competitive price in order to get more business.  And there is one or two other companies trying to get that fixed-grip market.  So, there are a lot of good opportunities to get a fixed-grip replacement for less cost.

I know that portions of the market will always want HS lifts at EVERY resort, but there are portions of the market that assess an area not only on lifts but on the terrain and experience.  Look at Magic.  They are slowly building it back into a sustainable business by using fixed-grip lifts instead of going into debt to get new HS lifts.  Obviously that example has some major differences, but there is something to be said about not blowing the bank on a single lift when you have a lot of other things that need to be addressed.  Also, for all the hype about HS lifts, the impact to the quality of the snow and terrain is indeed noticeable.  In my many years skiing at Burke, I can say that the snow quality in the era pre-MidBurke Express and after is very noticeable, even with that place being sub-100k skiers a year.  The reason is that folks get MANY more runs in on a single day and the terrain sees more traffic as a result.  I was pretty surprised to see that firsthand.  

If I am understanding "what" Saddleback "was", and "what" they want it to "be", then they may not need a HS lift in that position.  Would it be nice?  Sure.  Is it necessary?  I personally don't know, but I believe that their skier days were not "that" high to justify one.


----------



## deadheadskier (Jan 28, 2020)

I think the Rangeley is way too long of a chair to stick with a Fixed Grip.  

Magic is a good point, but their location I think allows them to go the FG route a little easier.  They're located in day trip range of millions of people.  They have four of the busiest resorts in the East all within 45 minutes to try and syphon some folks off to ski try it. 

SB is a much greater commitment to get to due to their remote location.  You kind of have to have the shiney thing to get people to commit to an overnight ski trip up there vs Sunday River or Sugarloaf.

There's a risk no matter what they do with the lift.  They did get up to around 100k skier visits prior to closing.  



Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## machski (Jan 28, 2020)

The Rangley chair is about 5000' long, so in my book is right at the boarder line of when a Detach vs FG chair becomes highly relevant.  If it was twice the cost of acquisition of a FG only (IE operational costs were the same) then yes, you would go detach.  But since operational costs are at least double that of a FG, not sure you can justify that difference right now at Saddleback.  I personally think a FG (toss the carpet on for that slight speed bump perhaps) is logical for them right now.  They might skip the carpet, especially if they are installing it with the potential possibility of moving it for a Detach in say 7-10 years down the road.  In any event, it is returning from dormancy and I don't think a HSQ would attract enough new and sustained business to be cost effective.  Would something like Barnstormer?  Maybe, but for me being an expect level skier and just wanting access to Kennebago Chair, I just need a reliable out of base chair.  I wouldn't be lapping whatever goes in for Rangley much.

Edit: Rangley is only 4550, doesn't need to be detach.  Basically a 9 minute ride FG.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## x10003q (Jan 28, 2020)

The Rangeley Double is 4717 feet length/1177 feet vertical. A FGQ would be a fine replacement for the current lift and handle most crowds. However, are you going to convince the masses to show up in the middle of nowhere for a FGQ? If they want to try and survive they need the marketing effect of a HSQ. Magic's location allows them to skip the HSQ and draw visitors.

https://skimap.org/data/446/7/1257035266.pdf


----------



## EPB (Jan 28, 2020)

x10003q said:


> The Rangeley Double is 4717 feet length/1177 feet vertical. A FGQ would be a fine replacement for the current lift and handle most crowds. However, are you going to convince the masses to show up in the middle of nowhere for a FGQ? If they want to try and survive they need the marketing effect of a HSQ. Magic's location allows them to skip the HSQ and draw visitors.
> 
> https://skimap.org/data/446/7/1257035266.pdf


Per NE ski history, here are the lifts since 2010 that are roughly the length of the Rangeley chair:

Fixed grip:
Magic quad (used) - ~5000 feet
Spruce triple (one-for-one replacement) - 4400 feet
Green peak (relocated) - 4400 feet
Mittersill double (required to be a double?) - 4000 feet
Shawnee peak triple (used) - ~4100 feet

Detachable:
Stratton Snow Bowl - 4600 feet
Snowdon six - 4400 feet
Barnstormer six - 5450 feet
Sun bowl (relocated) - 4300 feet

All the fixed grips over 4000 feet were built under extenuating circumstances.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## bdfreetuna (Jan 28, 2020)

My vote would be a fixed grip chair as low to the ground as possible (windproof). Pretty important unless you want big lines on the T-bar.


----------



## deadheadskier (Jan 28, 2020)

bdfreetuna said:


> My vote would be a fixed grip chair as low to the ground as possible (windproof). Pretty important unless you want big lines on the T-bar.


What T Bar?

The remaining one is dead from what I've heard.  And that T Bar only served like  600 vertical of uninspiring terrain.  

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## EPB (Jan 28, 2020)

deadheadskier said:


> What T Bar?
> 
> The remaining one is dead from what I've heard.  And that T Bar only served like only 600 vertical of uninspiring terrain.
> 
> Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


There were plans to replace the existing t bar at one point. 

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 28, 2020)

machski said:


> The Rangley chair is about 5000' long, so in my book is right at the boarder line of when a Detach vs FG chair becomes highly relevant.  If it was twice the cost of acquisition of a FG only (IE operational costs were the same) then yes, you would go detach.  But since operational costs are at least double that of a FG, not sure you can justify that difference right now at Saddleback.  I personally think a FG (toss the carpet on for that slight speed bump perhaps) is logical for them right now.  They might skip the carpet, especially if they are installing it with the potential possibility of moving it for a Detach in say 7-10 years down the road.  In any event, it is returning from dormancy and I don't think a HSQ would attract enough new and sustained business to be cost effective.  Would something like Barnstormer?  Maybe, but for me being an expect level skier and just wanting access to Kennebago Chair, I just need a reliable out of base chair.  I wouldn't be lapping whatever goes in for Rangley much.
> 
> Edit: Rangley is only 4550, doesn't need to be detach.  Basically a 9 minute ride FG.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app



My thoughts exactly as to cost concerns.


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 28, 2020)

x10003q said:


> The Rangeley Double is 4717 feet length/1177 feet vertical. A FGQ would be a fine replacement for the current lift and handle most crowds. However, are you going to convince the masses to show up in the middle of nowhere for a FGQ? If they want to try and survive they need the marketing effect of a HSQ. Magic's location allows them to skip the HSQ and draw visitors.
> 
> https://skimap.org/data/446/7/1257035266.pdf



Yeah, this touches on what I was saying about "what" people will come to SB for--is it the terrain, the experience, the location?  Would the HS lift be "the" thing that changes the equation in terms of attracting more business?  I don't know.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Jan 28, 2020)

deadheadskier said:


> What T Bar?
> 
> The remaining one is dead from what I've heard.  And that T Bar only served like  600 vertical of uninspiring terrain.



Cupsuptic T-Bar is the only T-Bar at Saddleback, I have no idea if it still works. It was however the last lift I rode (for most of the day actually) in April 2015 just before they closed. You can access quite a bit of good terrain off it too-- Wooly Bugger woods, Golden Smelt, Blue Devil, Thrombosis glades for example.

The Rangely double was on wind hold and people were taking the Cupsuptic over to the Kennebago Quad which wasn't as affected by the wind.

An awkward situation they'd be wise to avoid. I guess ideally the T-Bar could be replaced with a cheap double chair for better access to that zone and better redundancy.

Re: thetrailboss

When Saddleback re-opens it will be our family's #1 choice for winter vacation. The condos are cheap to rent and extremely luxurious for the price. The terrain and affordability are the primary draws. As long as the chairlifts function I don't care much what they are. Saddleback is a Top 5 in the East for me on terrain and avoids the crowds and expense of other top rank resorts.


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 28, 2020)

eastern powder baby said:


> Per NE ski history, here are the lifts since 2010 that are roughly the length of the Rangeley chair:
> 
> Fixed grip:
> Magic quad (used) - ~5000 feet
> ...



...and ALL the HS lifts you cite were installed by bigger corporate resorts.  The only exception that you didn't cite was Burke and its HSQ that it installed in 2011.  There are some parallels between Burke and Saddleback--a locals place that always wanted to be bigger and more of a destination, a family with relatively deep pockets that improved things to a point and then had to get out, similar size of skier days.  But the Burke HSQ was "complicated" to say the least--it was initially a reinstall of an older CTEC HSQ from Ascutney that fell apart, some of the financing from the State was tied to a renewable energy incentive program (hence, the wind turbine), some of the financing came from mentioned "angel" backer to help the mountain and BMA, and some of the impetus we now know was to make the mountain more marketable for a buyer...who came in 2012 in the form of the dreaded Q.  

Here, from my 30,000 foot view, these folks have a pretty clean slate.  They're going in a new direction and some patient money to work with.  The priorities depend on what else needs to be done to upgrade or repair facilities, that have sat UNUSED for what, now five years?  That can be a lot, as we saw with Tenney (albeit there was some pretty bad vandalism and theft there).  But, assuming that repairs are relatively minor in other areas, I can see that investing in a new HSQ gives them market cache ("hey, we're serious about making this place go") and certainly puts them in a spot to handle growth as opposed to responding to it.


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Jan 28, 2020)

Let's be honest. No one wants 10+ minute chair rides anymore. And you can't realistically install a fixed grip, just to possibly move it later, because realistically there isn't another location at Saddleback that it would be needed.

It was the biggest complaint about the Snowdon Quad. Too long, too cold... the masses cried and bitched, until finally we now have the Snowdon 6, and it's 5.5 minute ride. Killed 2 birds with one stone, as Nyberg was too stupid to either fix/update the Southridge Triple, or install a replacement immediately. The result being that it drastically changes how large numbers of skiers/riders now flow around the mountain, and the resort handles busy days much better.

Look at this example. Assuming they just install a HSQ in place of the Rangley double. What are you more apt to go ski: The SuperQuad/Timberline combo at Sugarloaf, or the Rangley Express/Kennebago combo? Terrain wise, it should be a no-brainer.

Trailboss, remember riding the old double at Burke? Long and cold as I remember. Did turning it into the Willoughby Quad improve that experience? Not much, but it did help with lift lines...  now today we are fortunate that they (by means of a truly generous soul) were able to install the MidBurke Express. Making the experience there pretty darn awesome in my eyes and experience. It's now back to being a place I truly love to go out of my way to be at. As a bonus, Burke can essentially operate, just running that one lift, and not to many ski areas can operate that way, or almost completely with just the two chairlifts. But once again, they have 2 chairlifts installed, that people will come out of their way to utilize even if some of the other amenities of the resort may not be top of the line. IF the Mid-BurkeX had never been installed... I have doubts that Burke would even be open today. At least not to the Public, maybe just in some capacity for BMA. 

Saddleback almost completely falls in the same category, as you can ski the majority of the hill off the one lift. Obviously Kenebago quads territory are going to encourage your expert and tree skiers to show up as well, but on a year like this, where there are days of only skiing the trails with snowmaking, one lift will get you by on mid-week days until the other terrain is ready for access. 

Yep, gonna cost more, gonna be more maintenance, more electric ect. ect. It's a given. But like Burke, give me a REASON why to go back. It won't take much to make people happier than the offerings at Sugarloaf, and Sunday River is going to be fighting the same battle as other sideways resorts, with TOO many lifts to worry about. 

We are talking ONE lift here, that is going to either make or break Saddleback forever. I hope they put in something that ensures success.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Jan 28, 2020)

Fixed grip chairs don't necessarily have to be that slow.

Question: Do detachable HSQ necessarily have to be more prone to wind holds?

I would not be less likely to visit Saddleback with a slow quad, but if they start having wind holds I'd think twice about making such a long trip up there without access to the mountain again.


----------



## snoseek (Jan 28, 2020)

Man I'm just happy to hear this news. I hope it pulls in a profit enough to keep open.

I will say it's super cold up there. A fast lift would be much appreciated from me personally. I wish they had kept the tbar up high and dealt with the lower lift a long time ago.


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 28, 2020)

Some very good points that make the conversation interesting.  



MEtoVTSkier said:


> Let's be honest. No one wants 10+ minute chair rides anymore. And you can't realistically install a fixed grip, just to possibly move it later, because realistically there isn't another location at Saddleback that it would be needed.



The more I think of it, the more I am brought back to what I said what they want Saddleback to be--locals spot that is sustainable or a larger destination resort/locals place that has the potential to be bigger than it is now.  I think that they are looking at the latter that is sustainable, hence the local "buy-in".  

One example though of another kind of similar place in terms of location and market is Ski Discovery that I just visited in Montana.  Hear me out.  

https://www.skidiscovery.com/

Place started in '74 for the local mining communities.  Mining ends, ownership falls into debt, sells to the current family who have over a period of time made various improvements using "hand-me-down" fixed grip lifts.  They've turned a 1,300 or 1,400 vertical mountain with one side into a place with three (or four) different aspects, 88 trails, 2,400 acres, 2,380 vertical feet and a loyal following.  No hotel, no big restaurants, no real estate.  Just the ski area.  They have laid the framework for a new base area on the back side to access the "hip" Philipsburg area.  All triples and doubles, some older ones too.  Max is 10 minute lift ride.  It works, but again, probably a different strategy than here.  



> It was the biggest complaint about the Snowdon Quad. Too long, too cold... the masses cried and bitched, until finally we now have the Snowdon 6, and it's 5.5 minute ride. Killed 2 birds with one stone, as Nyberg was too stupid to either fix/update the Southridge Triple, or install a replacement immediately. The result being that it drastically changes how large numbers of skiers/riders now flow around the mountain, and the resort handles busy days much better.



I get your point, just don't think that Snowdon is the best example for many reasons, namely that it endured so long and was a back-up to the triple.  Hell, Snowdon was also built from like two or three older lifts and was a weird frankestein lift.  :lol:  But yes, POWDR finally saw the light that this 30-or-so year relic needed to be replaced to move more traffic into this underused area and conveniently it solved both problems with "Frankenlift" living on in a different spot.  :lol:  Did that one lift make or break Killington?  I don't think so.  But it did help to repair some of their image issues and improve traffic.  



> Trailboss, remember riding the old double at Burke? Long and cold as I remember. Did turning it into the Willoughby Quad improve that experience? Not much, but it did help with lift lines...  now today we are fortunate that they (by means of a truly generous soul) were able to install the MidBurke Express.



I'm not old enough to have skied the original Willoughby.  :lol:  The Quad certainly moved skiers, slowly but steadily.  And, yep, it is a similarly central lift that is about the same length and certainly was a huge improvement. 



> Making the experience there pretty darn awesome in my eyes and experience. It's now back to being a place I truly love to go out of my way to be at. As a bonus, Burke can essentially operate, just running that one lift, and not to many ski areas can operate that way, or almost completely with just the two chairlifts. But once again, they have 2 chairlifts installed, that people will come out of their way to utilize even if some of the other amenities of the resort may not be top of the line. IF the Mid-BurkeX had never been installed... I have doubts that Burke would even be open today. At least not to the Public, maybe just in some capacity for BMA.



I remember us all saying that IF Willoughby was a HSQ that "for sure it would make this place grow" and attract attention.  I was in that school too.  Well, now 9 years later, I don't know if it was the silver bullet that we thought it would be.  The skier days have gone up some, from what I understand, but not a whole lot.  Of course there are a NUMBER of other factors at play including another fraudulent owner that pissed off folks, some bad winters, etc.  And of course Kingdom Trails has played a HUGE role in making things four-season.  Hell, the place is now much more of a summer destination than a winter one.  :blink:  The lift alone certainly makes it better for folks like me who, regrettably, are now only once or twice a year visitors, but has it driven more people to come?  I don't know.  Seems like the answer is "no".  But Burke also was behind in terms of lodging, snowmaking, and amenities whereas SB may not be.  

I just wonder if folks are doing the same here with SB by saying, "Jezum crow, a HSQ WILL bring more people" and be that silver bullet.  If Burke is a lesson, that reasoning doesn't always apply.  

Does anyone know if Crotched has "grown" in terms of skier and rider days AFTER adding their HSQ?  That may be a better comparison because that was the "only" big change they made with that place in recent years.  



> Look at this example. Assuming they just install a HSQ in place of the Rangley double. What are you more apt to go ski: The SuperQuad/Timberline combo at Sugarloaf, or the Rangley Express/Kennebago combo? Terrain wise, it should be a no-brainer.



I think that is a good point, assuming that they market that to folks.  That is an advantage.  



> Saddleback almost completely falls in the same category, as you can ski the majority of the hill off the one lift. Obviously Kenebago quads territory are going to encourage your expert and tree skiers to show up as well, but on a year like this, where there are days of only skiing the trails with snowmaking, one lift will get you by on mid-week days until the other terrain is ready for access.



Agreed.  



> Yep, gonna cost more, gonna be more maintenance, more electric ect. ect. It's a given. But like Burke, give me a REASON why to go back. It won't take much to make people happier than the offerings at Sugarloaf, and Sunday River is going to be fighting the same battle as other sideways resorts, with TOO many lifts to worry about.
> 
> We are talking ONE lift here, that is going to either make or break Saddleback forever. I hope they put in something that ensures success.



And I think you really highlight how important THIS issue can be for SB at this time.  The signals they have been sending have been slow and conservative moves.  I see one guy saying, "great, let's hope they survive", but these moves just keep things where they were and status quo.  But with this resort, with its own unique set of factors, will this one decision to go HS make or break the place?  It is hard to know.  Certainly if you have $30 million or so in the bank, I think you really need to seriously consider making "that" move to HS for this lift to generate interest, break the status quo, and then to bring new folks in to see that there is so much more than this one lift.  The up-front cost is more of an investment to say, "hey, we mean it and we are committed", rather than hedging.  

Certainly good conversation and things to consider.  Maybe Arctaris is reading.


----------



## x10003q (Jan 28, 2020)

thetrailboss said:


> Yeah, this touches on what I was saying about "what" people will come to SB for--is it the terrain, the experience, the location?  Would the HS lift be "the" thing that changes the equation in terms of attracting more business?  I don't know.



If they took the new lift to the top (near the top of the Kennebego Quad), the lift would be about 6000 ft long. This would need to be a HSQ. Maybe a new line would allow for less wind holds. This would allow them to run all the good stuff on one lift.


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Jan 28, 2020)

snoseek said:


> Man I'm just happy to hear this news. I hope it pulls in a profit enough to keep open.
> 
> I will say it's super cold up there. A fast lift would be much appreciated from me personally. I wish they had kept the tbar up high and dealt with the lower lift a long time ago.



Oh yeah, some really cold days. Most definitely a major brain cramp on replacing the t-bar before the double, but if I remember right, a lot of it had to do with making it easier/more accessible for the Boarders to get to that terrain.


----------



## deadheadskier (Jan 28, 2020)

snoseek said:


> Man I'm just happy to hear this news. I hope it pulls in a profit enough to keep open.
> 
> I will say it's super cold up there. A fast lift would be much appreciated from me personally. I wish they had kept the tbar up high and dealt with the lower lift a long time ago.


Agreed.  One wonders if they left the T Bar as is and replaced the Rangeley instead back in the day, maybe they wouldn't have had to close at all.  The Rangeley and the terrain it serves is far more critical than the Kennebago steeps.  

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## EPB (Jan 28, 2020)

deadheadskier said:


> Agreed.  One wonders if they left the T Bar as is and replaced the Rangeley instead back in the day, maybe they wouldn't have had to close at all.  The Rangeley and the terrain it serves is far more critical than the Kennebago steeps.
> 
> Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


Yeah that was an odd move. They bought a new drive for the double in the 2000s, too, which obviously cost $$$. I wonder if that drive gets repurposed since it's relatively new.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 28, 2020)

FWIW Liftblog.org still has the replacement as a fixed-grip quad and a new T-Bar for the other lift.  No manufacturer yet.  It obviously is still all up in the air.

https://liftblog.com/2020-new-lifts/


----------



## jaytrem (Jan 28, 2020)

Discovery did try to buy the repo'd HSQ at Tamarack.  Love that place!


----------



## thetrailboss (Jan 29, 2020)

jaytrem said:


> Discovery did try to buy the repo'd HSQ at Tamarack.  Love that place!



Really?  Interesting.  They lost out to Brian Head IIRC for that lift.


----------



## Hawk (Jan 29, 2020)

bdfreetuna said:


> Fixed grip chairs don't necessarily have to be that slow.
> 
> *Question: Do detachable HSQ necessarily have to be more prone to wind holds?*
> 
> I would not be less likely to visit Saddleback with a slow quad, but if they start having wind holds I'd think twice about making such a long trip up there without access to the mountain again.



The general answer is yes.  This is what the old head Lift Mechanic at Sunday River told me.  There are several reason that they are prone to wind closures.  First, because they have that mechanical grip system that requires maintenance to adjust the pressure and is more fragile and susceptible to slippage than the fixed mechanisms, the manufactures recommends that the lift not run if the chairs swing a certain distance back and forth.  It causes irregular chair spacing and possibly failure in extreme conditions.  Also the detachable quads have a shit ton of sensors that sense all kinds of things include cable tension and chair spacing.  These tend to trip more in the wind forcing the operators to shut the lift down instead of stopping and starting the thing many time each hour.


----------



## machski (Jan 29, 2020)

Hawk said:


> The general answer is yes.  This is what the old head Lift Mechanic at Sunday River told me.  There are several reason that they are prone to wind closures.  First, because they have that mechanical grip system that requires maintenance to adjust the pressure and is more fragile and susceptible to slippage than the fixed mechanisms, the manufactures recommends that the lift not run if the chairs swing a certain distance back and forth.  It causes irregular chair spacing and possibly failure in extreme conditions.  Also the detachable quads have a shit ton of sensors that sense all kinds of things include cable tension and chair spacing.  These tend to trip more in the wind forcing the operators to shut the lift down instead of stopping and starting the thing many time each hour.


Not to mention there is a maximum lateral chair swing allowance when chairs/cabins enter the terminal

Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## machski (Jan 29, 2020)

Look, I know a whole bunch of folks think a HSQ for Rangley is best.  I can see some attraction for that but me personally, I don't care what is there as it is just an access lift to where I want to spend my day at Saddleback.  I also think you have to look at the situation and the signals Arctaris is sending: they want it to be a local area, sustainable within that model, they wanted/needed the Maine government loan backing action (IE, they weren't ready to fully leap in on their own).  To me, this spells the most financially responsible lift going in factoring acquisition cost and long range operating costs.  Given that, I would fully expect it to be fixed grip.

Someone mentioned extending Rangley to the Ridgeline, which would put it somewhere around 6000'.  Now you are in the range of length where HSD lifts are more of an expectation in my mind.  The problem with this idea is you spend all that money to probably watch your investment sit idle all too often due to wind issues with the new summit exposure.  So that won't happen.

And comparing the old Slowdon quad is not fair, that lift was (still is in Southridge) horribly slow, even for a FGQ.  They are normally a bit faster even without a carpet.  The only FGQ I know that is that painfully slow is Aurora at SR.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## EPB (Jan 29, 2020)

machski said:


> Look, I know a whole bunch of folks think a HSQ for Rangley is best.  I can see some attraction for that but me personally, I don't care what is there as it is just an access lift to where I want to spend my day at Saddleback.  I also think you have to look at the situation and the signals Arctaris is sending: they want it to be a local area, sustainable within that model, they wanted/needed the Maine government loan backing action (IE, they weren't ready to fully leap in on their own).  To me, this spells the most financially responsible lift going in factoring acquisition cost and long range operating costs.  Given that, I would fully expect it to be fixed grip.
> 
> Someone mentioned extending Rangley to the Ridgeline, which would put it somewhere around 6000'.  Now you are in the range of length where HSD lifts are more of an expectation in my mind.  The problem with this idea is you spend all that money to probably watch your investment sit idle all too often due to wind issues with the new summit exposure.  So that won't happen.
> 
> ...


Last I heard, they scaled back the plan to a fixed grip. 

Their money situation is interesting. It seems they wanted to minimize their upfront investment check as much as possible to goose their return prospects (obviously, they're promising quite a bit in the firm of follow-on investments in infrastructure). Perhaps this was the only way they could justify making the investment. 

What's clear to me at this stage is that they're going to try to lean on non-equity funding no matter how they can get it, and beyond just debt - tax breaks reserved for low income and/or rural areas and "donations" from locals/ property owners. 

I'm less sold on the extent to which this means they will go cheap at every turn or not. That's not a prediction, I'm just saying it might be too early to tell. It seems possible they publicly scaled plans back to drive more donations/tax breaks/guarantees to get them as better deal (by making people nervous they were getting cold feet). Hard to say.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## mister moose (Jan 29, 2020)

machski said:


> this spells the most financially responsible lift going in factoring acquisition cost and long range operating costs. ​



I'll take standard business practices for $600, Alex.
​


machski said:


> And comparing the old Slowdon quad is not fair, that lift was (still is in Southridge) horribly slow, even for a FGQ.  They are normally a bit faster even without a carpet.  The only FGQ I know that is that painfully slow is Aurora at SR.


I remember timing the no stop ride on the Snowdon quad, it was 9 1/2 minutes, which works out to standard speed.  The real issue was frequent stopping, not line speed.


----------



## jaytrem (Jan 29, 2020)

thetrailboss said:


> Really?  Interesting.  They lost out to Brian Head IIRC for that lift.



That's where it ended up.  Thr manufacturer bought it, fixed it up and resold.


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Jan 29, 2020)

mister moose said:


> I'll take standard business practices for $600, Alex.[/FONT][/COLOR]
> 
> 
> I remember timing the no stop ride on the Snowdon quad, it was 9 1/2 minutes, which works out to standard speed.  The real issue was frequent stopping, not line speed.




Yes Moose, almost everyone knows you didn't want it replaced. And how often did it really ever run without stopping? I don't think I EVER, even mid-week, Ever had a ride on it, the last 2-3 seasons before replacement, where it didn't at least pause at least once.

Once again, my point is that something should go there that the masses will want to use. That lift will be getting lapped A LOT by everyone that doesn't plan on skiing the Kennebago Steeps exclusively. Most skiers on here wont' care, because they'll ride it once or twice a day to get up top and that's it, but the masses will tire of a long cold ride and end up bailing for better options elsewhere.

I'm sure we'll know what's going to be installed in the next 30-60 days, if they plan on having it ready for the start of next season.

And Attitash should keep the Triple too right? :roll:


----------



## deadheadskier (Jan 29, 2020)

MEtoVTSkier said:


> Yes Moose, almost everyone knows you didn't want it replaced. And how often did it really ever run without stopping? I don't think I EVER, even mid-week, Ever had a ride on it, the last 2-3 seasons before replacement, where it didn't at least pause at least once.
> 
> Once again, my point is that something should go there that the masses will want to use. That lift will be getting lapped A LOT by everyone that doesn't plan on skiing the Kennebago Steeps exclusively. Most skiers on here wont' care, because they'll ride it once or twice a day to get up top and that's it, but the masses will tire of a long cold ride and end up bailing for better options elsewhere.
> 
> ...


+1

And I'd venture to say the terrain off the Rangeley is more suitable for 75% of the market than that off the Kennebago.   It's the area of the mountain with the greatest amount of sustained vertical cruising terrain.  Kinda like the Superquad terrain at their neighbor to the east.  

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## bdfreetuna (Jan 29, 2020)

Hawk said:


> The general answer is yes.  This is what the old head Lift Mechanic at Sunday River told me.  There are several reason that they are prone to wind closures.  First, because they have that mechanical grip system that requires maintenance to adjust the pressure and is more fragile and susceptible to slippage than the fixed mechanisms, the manufactures recommends that the lift not run if the chairs swing a certain distance back and forth.  It causes irregular chair spacing and possibly failure in extreme conditions.  Also the detachable quads have a shit ton of sensors that sense all kinds of things include cable tension and chair spacing.  These tend to trip more in the wind forcing the operators to shut the lift down instead of stopping and starting the thing many time each hour.



Thanks great reply. I wonder if that's what seems to happen with Mount Snow's Bluebird 6 pack, where some days it just keeps stopping unusually. Hopefully FBGM can clarify that one.


----------



## Terry (Feb 1, 2020)

Done deal. The sale went through yesterday. They were dancing in the streets in Rangely last night!


----------



## Edd (Feb 1, 2020)

Terry said:


> Done deal. The sale went through yesterday. They were dancing in the streets in Rangely last night!



Holy shit! Where’d you hear that?

Edit: Never mind, found something. 

https://www.pressherald.com/2020/01/31/investment-firm-completes-saddleback-mountain-purchase/


----------



## thetrailboss (Feb 1, 2020)

Edd said:


> Holy shit! Where’d you hear that?
> 
> Edit: Never mind, found something.
> 
> https://www.pressherald.com/2020/01/31/investment-firm-completes-saddleback-mountain-purchase/



So the article says an HSQ is in the plans.  The more I look at the map and layout, the more an HSQ makes sense.  

And I can't believe that $6.5 million bought it.  I imagine five years of closure might have pushed the value down a lot.


----------



## Edd (Feb 1, 2020)

It’s a tough call on the HSQ but I’m thinking they need to have it. It’s what the consumer wants. 

I ponder how Smuggs gets away with it, being remote also. But, northern VT has many winter attractions, catering to huge population centers. Sugarloaf aside, Saddleback is all alone up there. 

Edit: What’s the feasibility of Saddleback getting on the Ikon Pass?


----------



## bdfreetuna (Feb 1, 2020)

Smuggs barely gets away with it, the only excuse is "low skier traffic". Which, given the size of Madonna and the terrain off the double isn't a good argument when you consider the lift lines which move very slowly and can easily exceed capacity.

They're pushing it with the double on Sterling as well.

MRG and Smuggs are 2 places I won't be returning to on a weekend. I love the single chair at MRG and IMO it shouldn't be replaced because it's special, and there's no lines on weekdays, but Smugglers could do a fixed grip quad (needs to be very windproof up there) with chairs close together and have 3-4x uphill capacity on the main mountain. This would also relieve lines at Sterling because people would take more runs on Madonna.

That double is also painfully slow.

Just a matter of time.


----------



## EPB (Feb 1, 2020)

Edd said:


> It’s a tough call on the HSQ but I’m thinking they need to have it. It’s what the consumer wants.
> 
> I ponder how Smuggs gets away with it, being remote also. But, northern VT has many winter attractions, catering to huge population centers. Sugarloaf aside, Saddleback is all alone up there.
> 
> Edit: What’s the feasibility of Saddleback getting on the Ikon Pass?



I agree. They should probably bite the bullet and go high speed. I've said this several times in various places, but I'd love to know how much revenue Attitash has lost in the last 20 years due to the summit triple. People absolutely expect it.

I've only been to Smuggs once, but my sense is a combination of:
-some of the top terrain/snowfall in the east
-reputation for family programs (which likely means good value on family ski trips)
-proximity to Burlington and perhaps Montreal
-value vs. Stowe and Lincoln Peak
-allowing snowboarding vs.MRG

I think a Sterling high speed lift would be great. Nothing worse than waiting behind intermediates to get on low capacity lift to the best terrain (looking at you, Jay Peak)

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## sull1102 (Feb 1, 2020)

This won't be a popular opinion here, but as a late 20's snowboarder I personally would need some serious convincing to go to a mountain with no high speed lift. Even Attitash has lost my day ticket revenue because of the summit triple. If it had a quad, a bubble, or a Gondi then it would be much higher on my list. I look at Crotched and see the spot they carved out in the market and can’t help thinking that the Rocket has helped them out a lot. Attitash is such a major missed opportunity I feel like. 


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## gregnye (Feb 1, 2020)

sull1102 said:


> This won't be a popular opinion here, but as a late 20's snowboarder I personally would need some serious convincing to go to a mountain with no high speed lift. Even Attitash has lost my day ticket revenue because of the summit triple. If it had a quad, a bubble, or a Gondi then it would be much higher on my list. I look at Crotched and see the spot they carved out in the market and can’t help thinking that the Rocket has helped them out a lot. Attitash is such a major missed opportunity I feel like.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone



For me it depends on the mountain. Only if the mountain has a retro-vibe or the expert trails to make up for the slow lifts then is it worth it.

Mountains worth it:
Smuggs
Magic Mountain
(Never been to mad river--but I will go because I've heard it's worth it).

The worst is a slow lift on a wide intermediate trail. There is no excuse for those anymore. I refuse to go back to Atti-Trash until that lift is upgraded. Just like I had no interest of returning to Sunapee until the Sunbowl Lift was upgraded.


----------



## EPB (Feb 1, 2020)

gregnye said:


> For me it depends on the mountain. Only if the mountain has a retro-vibe or the expert trails to make up for the slow lifts then is it worth it.
> 
> Mountains worth it:
> Smuggs
> ...


I'd recommend Saddleback though. The advanced sector up top is worth it. ~1000 feet of vertical on a fixed quad that's under 3000 feet long. No run-out and the lift ride is ~6 minutes. The issue is keeping intermediates happy and getting to the expert area if it's your cup of tea.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## kbroderick (Feb 1, 2020)

If there's enough ungroomed skiing, a slow ride up doesn't seem so bad. MRG is a classic example, but I'd put Bolton Valley in the same category--the ratio of ski time to lift time doesn't feel out of whack if you're lapping trees, and if you ski hard, the recovery time is kinda nice. 

Doing groomer laps is another story. Very few places are big enough that a two-minute descent is unreasonable, and pairing that with a twelve-minute ride kinda sucks because we are spoiled by faster lifts.


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 1, 2020)

sull1102 said:


> This won't be a popular opinion here, but as a late 20's snowboarder I personally would need some serious convincing to go to a mountain with no high speed lift. Even Attitash has lost my day ticket revenue because of the summit triple. If it had a quad, a bubble, or a Gondi then it would be much higher on my list. I look at Crotched and see the spot they carved out in the market and can’t help thinking that the Rocket has helped them out a lot. Attitash is such a major missed opportunity I feel like.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


Attitash used to average around 200K skier visits a season 20 years ago.  Now it's around 150k.  I place a huge part of that decline on them doing basically nothing for improvement in 25 years, especially the triple.   All their primary competition has invested substantially on infrastructure in that time.  Hopefully Vail sees this and quickly replaces the triple.  The terrain off the top is quite good, but nobody wants to ride a 15 minute lift to ski it.

HSQ at Crotched was a game changer.  I skied it twice before they put that lift in.  850 vertical off an almost ten minute ride was lame. 950 off a four minute ride works well for them.  

I tolerate MRG and Smuggs slow lifts on non-weekend days because the terrain off Madonna and the Single is the best advanced terrain in New England and you get 2k vert. 

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## EPB (Feb 1, 2020)

deadheadskier said:


> Attitash used to average around 200K skier visits a season 20 years ago.  Now it's around 150k.  I place a huge part of that decline on them doing basically nothing for improvement in 25 years, especially the triple.   All their primary competition has invested substantially on infrastructure in that time.  Hopefully Vail sees this and quickly replaces the triple.  The terrain off the top is quite good, but nobody wants to ride a 15 minute lift to ski it.
> 
> HSQ at Crotched was a game changer.  I skied it twice before they put that lift in.  850 vertical off an almost ten minute ride was lame. 950 off a four minute ride works well for them.
> 
> ...


This is the key (at least for Smuggs - where I've been). Not to converge thread ideas, but places on super passes might seem every bit as unnavigable in the not too distant future. 

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Terry (Feb 2, 2020)

Arctaris Impact Fund, LP, successfully completed the purchase of Saddleback Mountain on Friday, January 31st and will immediately begin preparations for re-launching ski operations for December 2020.


We’d like to thank the Berry family for their commitment to the mountain as we look forward to finishing the job they started.


Our focus will now shift to launching the redevelopment effort, completing our philanthropic campaign to fund the mountain improvements, placing the order for a detachable-grip quad chairlift, building a more powerful and efficient snowmaking system, and renovating the lodge.


With the purchase transaction complete, Arctaris can also begin to work in earnest with the State of Maine and other interested parties to develop solutions for affordable housing, affordable daycare, workforce development, transportation and access to healthcare benefits.
Just saw this on a Facebook post from Saddleback.


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Feb 2, 2020)

Terry said:


> Arctaris Impact Fund, LP, successfully completed the purchase of Saddleback Mountain on Friday, January 31st and will immediately begin preparations for re-launching ski operations for December 2020.
> 
> 
> We’d like to thank the Berry family for their commitment to the mountain as we look forward to finishing the job they started.
> ...



Where was that published? Still looking for confirmation right from the Horse's mouth, that it'll be a detach instead of a fixed grip Rangely replacement.


----------



## SkierDude (Feb 2, 2020)

MEtoVTSkier said:


> Where was that published? Still looking for confirmation right from the Horse's mouth, that it'll be a detach instead of a fixed grip Rangely replacement.



Friends of Saddleback Mountain Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/groups/277158955983493/permalink/1043194702713244/


----------



## machski (Feb 2, 2020)

Hmmm, originally they said HSQ, then it went to firmly a FGQ, now back to a HSQ?  When a manufacturer is selected and the order shows up (and Peter puts it down for his 2020 I stalls on LiftBlog) then I'll believe what it will actually be.

Can't really compare Attitash's summit Triple to Rangley for two reasons.  First, Summit is 6200' or so, well in the range where a detach is fully expected.  The second is that Attitash has two other shorter lifts that are already Detach's that adds to the Summit's frustration.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Feb 2, 2020)

SkierDude said:


> Friends of Saddleback Mountain Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/groups/277158955983493/permalink/1043194702713244/



Right from Andy. Good enough for me!


----------



## Newpylong (Feb 3, 2020)

A fixed grip would be a grave mistake. For an entity stating  they want to grow the business, a 4500' signature lift needs to be high speed or they'll suffer the same fate. This would also open the summit up to non-winter activities.


----------



## EPB (Feb 3, 2020)

Newpylong said:


> A fixed grip would be a grave mistake. For an entity stating  they want to grow the business, a 4500' signature lift needs to be high speed or they'll suffer the same fate. This would also open the summit up to non-winter activities.


If they really plan to spend $38 million, that leaves $31.5 million left over after the purchase. I'd imagine a high speed lift is an incremental ~$3 million of investment over a fixed lift. Setting up the intermediate section of the mountain right is probably worth it. 

Just look at how Peak operated. They basically neglected expert terrain in the early season (and in some instances, entirely) to ensure their blue terrain was open at places like Attitash and Hunter. It's not ideal for me, but I think it speaks to the importance of catering to the blue square skier. 

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## bdfreetuna (Feb 3, 2020)

Newpylong said:


> A fixed grip would be a grave mistake. For an entity stating  they want to grow the business, a 4500' signature lift needs to be high speed or they'll suffer the same fate. This would also open the summit up to non-winter activities.



Good point about the advantage detachables have loading mountain bikes


----------



## machski (Feb 3, 2020)

Well, let Saddleback go detachable on Rangley.  Better hope they start pulling upwards of not North of at least 125K visits/year or they will likely be headed back towards NELSAP.  The amount of extra yearly maintenance/operational costs of a detach vs FG will require that.  And before some note examples like Burke with 2 detaches, they have been owned by Jay and thus could cost/revenue share across the group prior to receivership (and probably still within it as well).  A better example may be Ascutney.  They put in a HSQ and it wasn't long before they were gone and they were much closer to population bases than Saddleback.  What did Saddleback peak out at under the Berry's for annual skier visits?  Did they ever hit 100K?

Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## EPB (Feb 3, 2020)

machski said:


> Well, let Saddleback go detachable on Rangley.  Better hope they start pulling upwards of not North of at least 125K visits/year or they will likely be headed back towards NELSAP.  The amount of extra yearly maintenance/operational costs of a detach vs FG will require that.  And before some note examples like Burke with 2 detaches, they have been owned by Jay and thus could cost/revenue share across the group prior to receivership (and probably still within it as well).  A better example may be Ascutney.  They put in a HSQ and it wasn't long before they were gone and they were much closer to population bases than Saddleback.  What did Saddleback peak out at under the Berry's for annual skier visits?  Did they ever hit 100K?
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app



Ascutney is the cautionary tale. Burke is indeed more complicated (I thought the lower high speed lift was pre Jay though). I hear you that this raises the visitor visit bar to justify the investment and related maintenance.

The pro-detachable argument is that a shiny toy is needed to lure enough intermediate-heavy skiers up to Rangeley (and past so many other options) to justify operating the business. To bring me onto your side of the fence, I'd need to understand why you think enough people would show up for a fixed grip option. As you well know, Saddleback is outside of day trip range for much of it's target visitor base. Good infrastructure is important to get people to make that type of a commitment. I'd gladly ride a fixed lift a few times a day, but I acknowledge that is an obvious sticking point for many.

Regarding visits, I thought I saw 110k was peak for them in the press releases. Don't have time to check though. I know this was mentioned before, but I'd be curious to know if a high speed option helps win a super pass partnership arrangement, too. Saddleback could be attractive to either pass offering to help spread people out. Obviously that would help to get visits/revenue up.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 3, 2020)

Ascutney is a cautionary tale for sure, but they had snowmaking issues and only get 120" or so of natural a year at a much warmer location.  Had they invested equally in snowmaking, they might have made it. 

I do agree for a HSQ to work, you need to be doing 100k skier visits or more a year.  

Wildcat might be a good comp on a low skier visit, low snowmaking budget model mountain with a HSQ that has managed to survive albeit with the financial help of Peak/Vail propping them up lately.  

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## EPB (Feb 3, 2020)

deadheadskier said:


> Ascutney is a cautionary tale for sure, but they had snowmaking issues and only get 120" or so of natural a year at a much warmer location.  Had they invested equally in snowmaking, they might have made it.
> 
> I do agree for a HSQ to work, you need to be doing 100k skier visits or more a year.
> 
> ...


Great call on Wildcat. I was trying to think of a good example and it was right under my nose. 

Another thing I forgot to mention is that they are planning to run a full resort up there. Who is to say that the breakeven skier visit threshold to support Saddleback with a fixed quad would also be enough to support the full resort? Making up numbers, perhaps standalone Saddleback could be viable with 100k visits with a fixed  Rangeley replacement, but the resort build out needs more like 130k. Then a high speed option makes a ton of sense if you 
can fit it in your budget. 

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Feb 3, 2020)

Newpylong said:


> A fixed grip would be a grave mistake. For an entity stating  they want to grow the business, a 4500' signature lift needs to be high speed or they'll suffer the same fate. This would also open the summit up to non-winter activities.



According to SB the Rangley is 4717' in length, with 1177' vertical.


----------



## machski (Feb 3, 2020)

deadheadskier said:


> Ascutney is a cautionary tale for sure, but they had snowmaking issues and only get 120" or so of natural a year at a much warmer location.  Had they invested equally in snowmaking, they might have made it.
> 
> I do agree for a HSQ to work, you need to be doing 100k skier visits or more a year.
> 
> ...


Wildcat might be comparable to a point, but it is much closer to both Boston metro and a large resort area (North Conway) than Saddleback is.  Wildcat's HSQ is also almost 2000' longer line length and replaced a Gondola (albeit an ancient, two seater).  The other thing that makes Wildcat's HSQ unique is that they didn't just let the Gondola go, the HSQ converts over to a Gondola in the summer to keep the scenic lift business going.  

Look, Saddleback could be well served with a HSQ up the Rangley line.  But at less than 5000' line length, it is in the length where the debate about detach vs fixed grip is at its peak.  5000 + and not a specialized terrain pod, usually you go detach.  Less length and that is where the debate heats up.  They need to be clear on which way they are going and stick to that.  A detach asks a lot, they had better have solid snowmaking from day 1 to back that asset up if they go that route.  They need to draw skiers from a large distance there, and there is a resort just up the ridgeline that has solid snowmaking and resort base already.

Sent from my SM-T830 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## bdfreetuna (Feb 3, 2020)

Anything less than an 8 pack Bubble Lift is mentally insane and career suicide for the new owners.

Oh but we'll go ski MRG and Smuggs without complaining

We already know they're putting a new lift there. How about some terrain expansion plans?


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Feb 3, 2020)

bdfreetuna said:


> Anything less than an 8 pack Bubble Lift is mentally insane and career suicide for the new owners.
> 
> Oh but we'll go ski MRG and Smuggs without complaining
> 
> We already know they're putting a new lift there. How about some terrain expansion plans?



I'm the opposite. It's the first thing I look for, especially if it's a longer lift. But remember, you are not a "Terminal Intermediate" like a large share of the masse are. You are gonna be on Expert terrain or in the trees, not lapping groomers all day...



> *Wildcat  Mountain is the only place in North America where you’ll find the  unique lift conversion from a high-speed Quad in the winter to a scenic  gondola in the summer. To view the Best Scenery in the East (SKI  Magazine 2014), ride aboard our four-person enclosed scenic gondola to  Wildcat Mountain's 4,000+ foot summit. Fresh Lunch & Ride packages  are available for you to enjoy a unique picnic experience while taking  in 360 degree views at the summit.*



That could be an interesting addition down the road for them, depending on what they end up doing for summer activities. (Peak wedding chapel?) As long as the quad is engineered for the gondi's right from the get-go. You don't have to do the gondi car investment until year(s) down the road if you don't want to, as long as they can swap right into the system at that point.

I don't think they need to worry about terrain expansion anytime soon, at least not in the first 5 years. Lots of great terrain there already to keep most everyone from becoming bored.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Feb 3, 2020)

Do you think Saddleback is going to start attracting the casual skier crowd though? Did they ever, besides some locals?

Due to the distance most people have to travel, and the world-class tree skiing and moguls, I figured the most they can realistically hope for is good skiers coming up with their families on a "advanced skier vacation".

I kind of figured I'm exactly who their target market is. "Expert"/tree-loving skier with a family, willing to drive there once every couple years, and ready to rent a slopeside condo if they're close to the price they used to be.

They have some nice groomers but the mountain is mostly woods and bump runs.


----------



## EPB (Feb 3, 2020)

machski said:


> Wildcat might be comparable to a point, but it is much closer to both Boston metro and a large resort area (North Conway) than Saddleback is.  Wildcat's HSQ is also almost 2000' longer line length and replaced a Gondola (albeit an ancient, two seater).  The other thing that makes Wildcat's HSQ unique is that they didn't just let the Gondola go, the HSQ converts over to a Gondola in the summer to keep the scenic lift business going.
> 
> Look, Saddleback could be well served with a HSQ up the Rangley line.  But at less than 5000' line length, it is in the length where the debate about detach vs fixed grip is at its peak.  5000 + and not a specialized terrain pod, usually you go detach.  Less length and that is where the debate heats up.  They need to be clear on which way they are going and stick to that.  A detach asks a lot, they had better have solid snowmaking from day 1 to back that asset up if they go that route.  They need to draw skiers from a large distance there, and there is a resort just up the ridgeline that has solid snowmaking and resort base already.
> 
> Sent from my SM-T830 using AlpineZone mobile app



Wildcat is a better comp than I had initially realized because:

1) While being closer to North Conway and Boston, we know that it's not a high traffic area (I've got plenty of theories for why that's the case, but it distracts from the point). In some ways, it's like Ascutney. Tons of people are skiing within a 20-30 mile radius, but most go elsewhere.
2) The weather is pretty similar. 200ish inches of snow and 1900+ foot bases mean snowmaking is important for intermediate trails, but less necessary on black terrain than most places.
3) Saddleback does want to use the resort in all seasons, and weddings are on the table. Having a detachable setup makes life easier in the summer, too.

It's not a slam dunk either way which is precisely what makes it a fun debate.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## EPB (Feb 3, 2020)

bdfreetuna said:


> Do you think Saddleback is going to start attracting the casual skier crowd though? Did they ever, besides some locals?
> 
> Due to the distance most people have to travel, and the world-class tree skiing and moguls, I figured the most they can realistically hope for is good skiers coming up with their families on a "advanced skier vacation".
> 
> ...


I think the place is likely to continue to skew more advanced, but that permanent intermediate class is just so large by comparison that it probably makes sense to do enough to take a bite from that demographic.

Regarding your idea on more terrain, they used to have their proposed lifts on their trail map. I always thought that the relatively new drive terminal on the Rangeley double would make a nice starting point for a budget west/backside lift. Probably a pipe dream though.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## thetrailboss (Feb 3, 2020)

SkierDude said:


> Friends of Saddleback Mountain Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/groups/277158955983493/permalink/1043194702713244/



Well, that confirms their intent.


----------



## thetrailboss (Feb 3, 2020)

machski said:


> Well, let Saddleback go detachable on Rangley.  Better hope they start pulling upwards of not North of at least 125K visits/year or they will likely be headed back towards NELSAP.  The amount of extra yearly maintenance/operational costs of a detach vs FG will require that.  And before some note examples like Burke with 2 detaches, they have been owned by Jay and thus could cost/revenue share across the group prior to receivership (and probably still within it as well).  A better example may be Ascutney.  They put in a HSQ and it wasn't long before they were gone and they were much closer to population bases than Saddleback.  What did Saddleback peak out at under the Berry's for annual skier visits?  Did they ever hit 100K?
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app



Neither Burke lifts were installed by Jay; both were by the previous owner (Lubert Adler).

Ascutney, as said, looks like a comparative but as DHS said there are other complicating factors including location, lack of snow, lack of snowmaking, etc.  The bad management/ownership also played a very significant role in killing what traffic they had.

I agree with the Wildcat comparison.  FWIW the family that owned the resort installed that lift and continued to hang on, but barely.  Peaks had a lot of work to do on the snowmaking IIRC.  So not a bad comparison.


----------



## LoafSkier19 (Feb 17, 2020)

They officially announced the purchase of new high speed quad for the Rangeley at the party they held in the lodge yesterday. Even had the Doppelmayr rep there. Video of it can be found here on the Friends of Saddleback FB page (most recent video) 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/277158955983493/?ref=share


----------



## Smellytele (Feb 17, 2020)

Yeehaw. Speculations over. Detachable quad. Nice!


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## Edd (Feb 17, 2020)

LoafSkier19 said:


> They officially announced the purchase of new high speed quad for the Rangeley at the party they held in the lodge yesterday. Even had the Doppelmayr rep there. Video of it can be found here on the Friends of Saddleback FB page (most recent video)
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/groups/277158955983493/?ref=share



Incredible news!


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Feb 17, 2020)

LoafSkier19 said:


> They officially announced the purchase of new high speed quad for the Rangeley at the party they held in the lodge yesterday. Even had the Doppelmayr rep there. Video of it can be found here on the Friends of Saddleback FB page (most recent video)
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/groups/277158955983493/?ref=share


----------



## bdfreetuna (Feb 17, 2020)

eastern powder baby said:


> I always thought that the relatively new drive terminal on the Rangeley double would make a nice starting point for a budget west/backside lift. Probably a pipe dream though.



I'll smoke a pipe to that dream!

Great news about the new lift. Could care less what it is -- but this means: IT'S HAPPENING !


----------



## Smellytele (Feb 17, 2020)

bdfreetuna said:


> I'll smoke a pipe to that dream!
> 
> Great news about the new lift. Could care less what it is -- but this means: IT'S HAPPENING !



So you care somewhat if you could care less


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## bdfreetuna (Feb 17, 2020)

no I mean between a fixed grip and detach quad I had zero concern either way aside from banter's sake. I might be a minority on this forum but I actually have less expertise when it comes to lifts than the engineers at Poma, Dopplemayr, etc

I will absolutely be at Saddleback for re-opening year


----------



## Smellytele (Feb 17, 2020)

bdfreetuna said:


> no I mean between a fixed grip and detach quad I had zero concern either way aside from banter's sake. I might be a minority on this forum but I actually have less expertise when it comes to lifts than the engineers at Poma, Dopplemayr, etc
> 
> I will absolutely be at Saddleback for re-opening year



Then you couldn’t care less not could.


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## EPB (Feb 17, 2020)

Love this!

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 17, 2020)

Happy to hear they went HSQ.  I would've been happy with anything that got them back open, but I really feel a HSQ is needed if they want to syphon off skier visits from their primary competition in Sunday River and Sugarloaf.

This maybe an unpopular opinion, but I also feel they should push hard to get on the Icon Pass.  At least for the first few years they need to drive traffic there by any means possible and get word of mouth out. 

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Edd (Feb 18, 2020)

deadheadskier said:


> This maybe an unpopular opinion, but I also feel they should push hard to get on the Icon Pass.  At least for the first few years they need to drive traffic there by any means possible and get word of mouth out.
> 
> Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app



Agree. I hope they do that also. For a ski area in Saddleback’s position, that has a ton of marketing value.


----------



## Whitey (Feb 18, 2020)

I am so pumped to ski Saddleback with a HSQ instead of the Rangely double!     I have said many times in the Saddleback threads that the replacement of the Rangely double was absolutely essential to bringing back Saddleback.   But also that I thought I'd never see it happen.     Glad to be wrong on that one.    The amount of skiing you'll be able to get in with 2 HSQs there will be amazing.   Such a great mountain.  

100% agree that getting on Ikon or the independent pass is necessary to bring back the skiers.  

Anybody know what happened to Salsgang?   He should be dancing in the snow right about now.


----------



## WoodCore (Feb 18, 2020)

Whitey said:


> The amount of skiing you'll be able to get in with 2 HSQs there will be amazing.



?????


----------



## jimmywilson69 (Feb 18, 2020)

While IKon is a bad word around these parts, that would be a good angle for them.  SB also fits their MO of "unique" resorts.


----------



## Edd (Feb 18, 2020)

WoodCore said:


> ?????



Pretty sure only one HSQ. 2 quads, though.


----------



## Whitey (Feb 18, 2020)

WoodCore said:


> ?????



What's wrong with my statement?    The Rangeley double was painfully slow and on weekends that would cause a long liftline.   Not unusual for it to be a half hour or more to go from getting in line to getting to the top.   With an HSQ there will be much smaller lines and a faster ride.   Combined with the Kennebago quad - that's great capacity and speed to cover a large moutain.       What's to question there?


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 18, 2020)

The number of HSQs I believe is what's being questioned.  The summit quad is fixed grip

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Whitey (Feb 18, 2020)

Edd said:


> Pretty sure only one HSQ. 2 quads, though.



Sorry, you're right.   Kennebago is a FG.    It wasn't really my point anyway & I wasn't really thinking about Kennebago quad.  Kennebago was never an issue for Saddleback.    Removing the chokepoint of the Rangeley double will really change that mountain and allow you get a lot of skiing in.    My point is still valid even if I mistakenly lumped the Kennebago quad in as a "HSQ".   It's a newer and relatively fast chair.  

Skiing Saddleback on weekends, even with the low # of skier visits, the Rangeley double was a bitch.   With a liftline it wasn't unusual for you to get just 1 run/hr off of that lift.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Feb 18, 2020)

deadheadskier said:


> This maybe an unpopular opinion, but I also feel they should push hard to get on the Icon Pass.



It's not a bad idea for them

However I *will* be purchasing an Indy Pass next year and Saddleback would the the cherry on top, and I'd be willing to pay more. I will likely *never* buy an Ikon pass or any pass that demotivates me to ski independent and low-crowd ski areas.

May my virtual vote be recorded by the new management... I want Saddleback to be a place I visit each year but for me that means getting on one or more of the popular combo & discount cards and/or Indy Pass which needs to get our support as well.

or deals like I had in 2014 with $79/night luxury slope side condos and tickets included at that rate


----------



## machski (Feb 20, 2020)

Well, this is an interesting article.  Tries to make the Berry's sound like the good guys.  They may have held off of selling  to buyers who may have pieced out the resort, but try telling that to the business owners in Rangley who have held on by threads the last several years.

https://www.mainebiz.biz/article/saddleback-sellers-buyers-say-rangeley-region-community-came-first

Sent from my SM-T830 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## bdfreetuna (Feb 20, 2020)

^
Good on them getting a chance to defend themselves and put forward a positive case on their behalf, including the historical perspective.

20/20 hindsight they made the right call with Arctaris and the mountain now has an apparently secure future. IMO if the locals want to blame someone for a few years of hurt income they should point fingers at Magella Group for essentially making a fraudulent offer and wasting a lot of time.

We all thought this would "happen quicker" but NELSAP was also a possibility.


----------



## sull1102 (Feb 20, 2020)

In the article the Berry family says they felt they needed another 10-15k skier visits annually to break even or at least be sustainable. With the excitement of new owners and the new detachable quad I think they have a real good shot at getting those additional visits in year two of being reopened. 


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## bdfreetuna (Feb 20, 2020)

idk maybe, depends how they market it. Keep in mind that closing for several years will see a loss in visits due to people changing their habits as necessary. How many of their "regulars" found a new home mountain in that time span? We'll see.

As someone who works in marketing/online advertising, they need to kick ass right out the gate with a strong campaign and a website that makes it look super appealing to various types of skiers. It would not be difficult to set Saddleback apart and convince people to go there with next-level web presence and cross-marketing. Unfortunately there are a lot of hacks in this business and even many of the major resorts get suckered by marketing hackery.

They will need it. If I wasn't booked out for the next year+ I'd have already made a call to Arctaris. Or maybe not, high maintenance accounts don't really help my bottom line.

This alone may not even be enough and IKON pass might be good business sense


----------



## Hawk (Feb 20, 2020)

Based on the reaction of all my Maine friends, I think that Saddleback will see a huge uptick in visits.  There are a ton of people that really miss Saddleback and are basically sick of Boynes legacy at the loaf and sunday river.  If they play it right and don't cost themselves out, they could find themselves as the place the Mainers go.  I would market that.


----------



## KustyTheKlown (Feb 20, 2020)

i lived in a piece of shit random craigslist roommate apartment on metropolitan avenue at berry street in brooklyn. when i went to view the apartment for the first time, i noticed tons of grateful dead, disco biscuits, and saddleback stickers on one of the bedroom doors. i asked 'whose bedroom is this, whose stickers are these?' and the roommates all shrugged and said the stickers were there before any of them lived there. i took it as a sign and took the shithole apt. it also helped that i got to pay $850 a month in williamsburg for a year.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Feb 20, 2020)

KustyTheKlown said:


> craigslist
> disco biscuits



Did you check under the floor board heaters for "rollaway" Purple Mitsubishis? Those double stacks just keep on truckin once you lose 'em.


----------



## KustyTheKlown (Feb 20, 2020)

yea, that apartment was definitely full of bad behavior. 

i saw pink heisenbergs less than a week ago. i havent seen a dang roll before that in like 5+ years.


----------



## Hawk (Feb 20, 2020)

Purple Mitsubishis  HA!  Wrong Era.  More like Purple microdot or just plain Mushrooms.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Feb 20, 2020)

Depends if the Dead fan or the Biscuits fan was the one with a shaky hand

I hope the roommate with the Saddleback sticker held true to his roots. I lost a whole decade of skiing in my otherwise-prime due to "music bands". Basically first Phish festival I went to I probably forgot skiing was even a thing for another 12 years. Could have been worse!


----------



## jimmywilson69 (Feb 20, 2020)

zero chance I roll the dice with a pressie nowadays...


----------



## bdfreetuna (Feb 20, 2020)

jimmywilson69 said:


> zero chance I roll the dice with a pressie nowadays...


----------



## machski (Feb 20, 2020)

sull1102 said:


> In the article the Berry family says they felt they needed another 10-15k skier visits annually to break even or at least be sustainable. With the excitement of new owners and the new detachable quad I think they have a real good shot at getting those additional visits in year two of being reopened.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


That"s a nice thought but misplaced.  They may have needed 10-15K more visits before, but add in the cost to acquire and operate/maintain a HSQ, you probably at least doubled the amount of additional skiers/riders to break even.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## jimmywilson69 (Feb 20, 2020)

bdfreetuna said:


>




:lol: :lol:


----------



## thetrailboss (Feb 21, 2020)

machski said:


> Well, this is an interesting article.  Tries to make the Berry's sound like the good guys.  They may have held off of selling  to buyers who may have pieced out the resort, but try telling that to the business owners in Rangley who have held on by threads the last several years.
> 
> https://www.mainebiz.biz/article/saddleback-sellers-buyers-say-rangeley-region-community-came-first
> 
> Sent from my SM-T830 using AlpineZone mobile app



That is the biggest issue in my mind.  But I do understand that it is a lot of pressure for the family.  That said, the whole thing began because of a game of chicken with the State over funding for the new lift.  I just have scratch my head on that one.  Seems awful petty and really shortsighted.  



uphillklimber said:


> I agree, it would be hard to tell business owners there about the desires to keep the ski resort as a ski resort. But at any given time, anyone could have attempted to buy the ski area and run it themselves and show how good all their business acumen was.
> 
> I'll give the Berry's the benefit of the doubt on this one.



Another big thing is that after they closed the Berry's remained quiet for so long.  I get not wanting to show their hand and trying to get a deal going, but the silence caused a lot of speculation and negativity.  

The other thing that they "kind of" explained is how they invested $60 some odd million (supposedly) into the place as "charity".  Otherwise, spending $60 million to get $6 million back sounds like bad business decisionmaking.  Granted though they invested a lot of the revenue from the venture into it, but it sounds like they lost a lot of money.

It just all seems so odd to me still.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Feb 21, 2020)

overall I think given the positive eventual turnout, the Berry's should be given every benefit of the doubt. While many of us were criticizing them and assuming their motivations were compromised, it seems they played the right hand not only for themselves (which is and should be their primary priority; being a landowner and tourism driver doesn't make you *personally* responsible if things turn south -- especially after the contributions they've already made).

Not odd... rather clear to me now. Thank you Berry's for being wise enough to ensure this mountain has a future. You didn't owe anybody anything but the end result is best for both the ski community and local economy.

Many of us, in their shoes, could have done a lot worse


----------



## x10003q (Feb 21, 2020)

machski said:


> Well, this is an interesting article.  Tries to make the Berry's sound like the good guys.  They may have held off of selling  to buyers who may have pieced out the resort, but try telling that to the business owners in Rangley who have held on by threads the last several years.
> 
> https://www.mainebiz.biz/article/saddleback-sellers-buyers-say-rangeley-region-community-came-first
> 
> Sent from my SM-T830 using AlpineZone mobile app



There is lots of revisionist history in that article trying to make the Berrys look better after the multiple bad decisions they have made while owning SB.

They first put SB up for sale 8 years ago, not 5 years ago. They were asking $12 million for just the 400 acre ski area, which was absurd. The Berrys wanted to keep the other 7600 acres out of the sale. They closed the mountain because they claimed the Rangeley Double needed to be replaced. How much is a ski area in the middle of nowhere worth that needs to replace the main lift? It was clear that they were in no hurry to sell or find a real buyer by asking for $12 million.

The Berrys have also repeatedly claimed they spent $13 million on the lodge, not the $10 million that is mentioned in the article. The idea of spending $13 million on a lodge at a ski area that might see 80k visits in its best year is the very definition of a bad business decision. They should have taken some of the money spent on the lodge and replaced the Rangeley Double with some kind of quad chair. Any person visiting the resort could see the Rangeley double as a gigantic bottleneck, yet somehow the Berrys missed it.

The Berrys claim they where waiting for the right buyer and then made a deal in the summer of 2017 with an Australian "developer" named Sebastian Monsour and the Majella Group. We all know how this turned out. Anybody with an internet connection could see this guy was at best a fraud, just based on what he was doing in Portland. It turned out he was a criminal. I guess the words due diligence are not in the Berrys vocabulary. This further delayed the sale.

We should all notice that the current buyer is running some kind of weird deal that includes donations and grants. We see zero mention of the current ski area resort companies as interested buyers. This is important to note as SB is a big time mountain, yet none of the big time players want it.

The Berrys get credit for pouring their own money into Saddleback in a vain effort to make it work. They have proved the old adage - "How do you make $6.5 million in the ski industry? Start with $60 million."

https://www.pressherald.com/2012/12/14/saddleback-for-sale-berry-family/


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 21, 2020)

x10003q said:


> There is lots of revisionist history in that article trying to make the Berrys look better after the multiple bad decisions they have made while owning SB.
> 
> They first put SB up for sale 8 years ago, not 5 years ago. They were asking $12 million for just the 400 acre ski area, which was absurd. The Berrys wanted to keep the other 7600 acres out of the sale. They closed the mountain because they claimed the Rangeley Double needed to be replaced. How much is a ski area in the middle of nowhere worth that needs to replace the main lift? It was clear that they were in no hurry to sell or find a real buyer by asking for $12 million.
> 
> ...


+1

I think their two biggest mistakes were prioritizing the Kennebago replacement over the Rangeley and spending too much on the lodge.  Had they done the Rangeley first and gone with a modest lodge, they might've made it work. 

Also very much agree about the $12M ask for 400 acres. That was ridiculous. And you're right about all the major players kicking the tires.  I recall having a conversation with Sugarloaf's Director of marketing and he said as much. They, Vail, Powdr and all the big players took a look and didn't see an ROI with the infrastructure needs and acquisition cost in such a remote location.  

I'm thrilled it sold and the HSQ is going in, but it's no given they survive long term.  It's certainly a bit suspect the new owners don't have what appears to be very deep pockets.  

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## thetrailboss (Feb 21, 2020)

x10003q said:


> There is lots of revisionist history in that article trying to make the Berrys look better after the multiple bad decisions they have made while owning SB.
> 
> They first put SB up for sale 8 years ago, not 5 years ago. They were asking $12 million for just the 400 acre ski area, which was absurd. The Berrys wanted to keep the other 7600 acres out of the sale. They closed the mountain because they claimed the Rangeley Double needed to be replaced. How much is a ski area in the middle of nowhere worth that needs to replace the main lift? It was clear that they were in no hurry to sell or find a real buyer by asking for $12 million.
> 
> ...



Agreed.  Thanks for reminding us of the other issues.  I think the "charity" line was in part to save face.  It did seem to me that they were not very business savvy.  I forgot how they got their money--was it an inheritance?  Sale of a family business?


----------



## x10003q (Feb 21, 2020)

thetrailboss said:


> Agreed.  Thanks for reminding us of the other issues.  I think the "charity" line was in part to save face.  It did seem to me that they were not very business savvy.  I forgot how they got their money--was it an inheritance?  Sale of a family business?



Insurance company heirs. They paid $8 million for SB in 2003.


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 21, 2020)

From New England Ski Industry website:


In 1971, the U.S. Investment Corporation was founded, which would include Mount Vernon Fire Insurance Company and US Underwriters Insurance Company. On August 8, 2000, Berkshire Hathaway acquired the U.S. Investment Corporation for an estimated $160 million in stock, mainly transferred to the extended Berry family.


They purchased Saddleback in 2003 including 8000 acres for $8M.  Even that was probably an overpay.  They only did 16k skier visits in 2002 and the Breens said they were going to close it. 

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## x10003q (Feb 21, 2020)

deadheadskier said:


> From New England Ski Industry website:
> 
> 
> In 1971, the U.S. Investment Corporation was founded, which would include Mount Vernon Fire Insurance Company and US Underwriters Insurance Company. On August 8, 2000, Berkshire Hathaway acquired the U.S. Investment Corporation for an estimated $160 million in stock, mainly transferred to the extended Berry family.
> ...



They got fleeced.


----------



## snoseek (Feb 21, 2020)

That old tbar worked just fine at the time. 

Base lodge needed work for sure but was way overkill.


----------



## thetrailboss (Feb 22, 2020)

deadheadskier said:


> From New England Ski Industry website:
> 
> 
> In 1971, the U.S. Investment Corporation was founded, which would include Mount Vernon Fire Insurance Company and US Underwriters Insurance Company. On August 8, 2000, Berkshire Hathaway acquired the U.S. Investment Corporation for an estimated $160 million in stock, mainly transferred to the extended Berry family.
> ...





x10003q said:


> Insurance company heirs. They paid $8 million for SB in 2003.



Very interesting.  Thanks guys.


----------



## kbroderick (Feb 24, 2020)

deadheadskier said:


> They purchased Saddleback in 2003 including 8000 acres for $8M.  Even that was probably an overpay.  They only did 16k skier visits in 2002 and the Breens said they were going to close it.



That's an interesting number to put things in perspective with respect to the SR/Loaf comparisons. Didn't Dana Bullen say 15k visits at Sunday River on a busy Saturday in the Storm Skiing podcast?


----------



## Hawk (Feb 24, 2020)

Wow a busy day at Sugarbush is 6,000 to 7,000.  I can't imagine !5,000


----------



## 1dog (Feb 24, 2020)

Hawk! 

SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Mar 12, 2020)

From Facebook



> SADDLEBACK’S FAIR TICKET PRICING PLAN
> At Saddleback, we  believe pricing in the ski world has become far too complicated and  leaves most people with the feeling – and rightfully so – that the  person on the lift next to them probably paid a lot less for their  ticket. We don’t believe you should have to know how to game the system  to get a fair price. We believe there is a better way – the Saddleback  way.
> With our new high speed detachable quad, the improvements we’re making to the  lodge and a significant investment in our snowmaking system, we’re  excited about what we’re going to be offering. Instead of all sorts of  discounting that leaves some people paying full price and others, on  that same day, paying far less, we’re going to give the same discount to  everyone. Our Fair Ticket Pricing Plan, is intended to make skiing more  accessible and fair to everyone, but is also intended to allow the  mountain to be sustainable.
> We will be able to take season pass orders next week through our  website and wanted to notify you today of our pricing plan. Be looking  for www.saddlebackmaine.com going live on March 18th.
> ...


----------



## Smellytele (Mar 12, 2020)

Day price look good


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## Edd (Mar 12, 2020)

uphillklimber said:


> I can't wait to check out Saddleback next year!



Yes, Saddleback is a must-hit next season. That’s ski money well spent. 

I like Sugarloaf, but I’m done with lodging there. It’ll be nice to stay somewhere off-property and have Loaf and Saddleback to bounce between.


----------



## Smellytele (Mar 12, 2020)

Already planning our guys weekend for next year. Friend of one of the guys has a place at the loaf he usually rents for 550 a night on line. Really nice sleeps 10. Getting it for <200 a night.
Will do 2 days there and 1 at saddleback.


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## machski (Mar 12, 2020)

Hmmm, 2 days at Jay off SB's season pass.  Does that mean Arctaris is in on the Jay sale???  Would be one heck of a combination.

Sent from my SM-T830 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## tipsdown (Mar 19, 2020)

Saddleback's temp website is up and running and season passes have officially gone on sale for the 20/21 season. 

https://saddlebackmaine.com/


----------



## Zand (Mar 19, 2020)

Never got to try it in its old incarnation so I'm excited to get another chance. Always heard great things. Will be great to pair with a Sugarloaf trip. Went snowmobiling in Rangeley 15 years ago, lovely town.


----------



## Cornhead (Mar 22, 2020)

Zand said:


> Never got to try it in its old incarnation so I'm excited to get another chance. Always heard great things. Will be great to pair with a Sugarloaf trip. Went snowmobiling in Rangeley 15 years ago, lovely town.


I was there twice, closed once, wind, lower mountain only the other. Stoked to ski it some day.

Sent from my Moto E (4) Plus using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## skicub (Mar 24, 2020)

What a saddleback like? Compared to sugarloaf? it seems to have a kind of similar layout/trail scheme? Or comparison to a different NE mountain? Can’t wait to get there next season.


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 24, 2020)

skicub said:


> What a saddleback like? Compared to sugarloaf? it seems to have a kind of similar layout/trail scheme? Or comparison to a different NE mountain? Can’t wait to get there next season.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


It's pretty unique.  I'd say Burke is a decent comparison, only Saddleback is steeper and slightly larger.  Also better snow as it's higher in elevation and further North, so you get fewer rain/thaw events. 

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## EPB (Mar 24, 2020)

deadheadskier said:


> It's pretty unique.  I'd say Burke is a decent comparison, only Saddleback is steeper and slightly larger.  Also better snow as it's higher in elevation and further North, so you get fewer rain/thaw events.
> 
> Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


It's funny, I was actually thinking of starting a thread about which places are most alike others. Not sure if it would be of interest, but could be fun given how unique each area is. 

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Whitey (Mar 24, 2020)

Uphillklimber did  a good job of describing.    

I will only add that if you love tree skiing, Saddleback is it for the east.   I'd place it above Sugarloaf and on par with Jay.   I skied there about 4-5 times over 3 yrs before they closed.   Casablanca gets a lot of attention and is great but I also found that the non-casablanca glades are really great.   Intimidator, Nightmare, Thrombosis, Dark wizard are all great tree skiing runs.  The mountain has a nice consistent fall line and the spacing of the trees is good.    I skied there on some trips where the conditions weren't that great but somehow we always found great stuff in the trees.   

I think the combination of the laid back vibe that a lot have referenced with the large percentage of good tree skiing creates an experience that is unique in the east.    

Once you've skied it, you'll understand.    And as I've said before - getting rid of that awful slow double for a HSQ = that's going to take the mountain up another notch or two from where it was.


----------



## Edd (Mar 24, 2020)

On this board, the expert terrain pod gets most of the attention but I love the way the primary trail pod skis. Decently long runs with variety. A HSQ on that pod is going to be sick. 

Saddleback has the presence of a big eastern ski area. The overall width and look of it reminds me of Lincoln Peak at SB for some reason. Not the trails but the mountain itself. 


Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone


----------



## jimk (Mar 24, 2020)

Whitey said:


> Uphillklimber did  a good job of describing.


+1


----------



## thetrailboss (Apr 9, 2020)

Bump.

Saddleback is moving full steam ahead on removing the double.  Hope it works out!

https://www.facebook.com/SaddlebackMaine/videos/vb.43267888509/3451081578251957/?type=2&theater


----------



## Edd (Apr 9, 2020)

Man, that’s the best ski area news I’ve heard in weeks. 


Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone


----------



## thetrailboss (Apr 9, 2020)

Edd said:


> Man, that’s the best ski area news I’ve heard in weeks.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone



Sounds like they got a firm order in place and are far enough along that it will work.  I give them credit for moving forward and showing folks that they are indeed serious.  Their timing may work out well because, with everyone else cancelling, the manufacturers will have the resources and motivation to get this project done quickly and done right.  SB may even save some coin.


----------



## EPB (Apr 9, 2020)

thetrailboss said:


> Sounds like they got a firm order in place and are far enough along that it will work.  I give them credit for moving forward and showing folks that they are indeed serious.  Their timing may work out well because, with everyone else cancelling, the manufacturers will have the resources and motivation to get this project done quickly and done right.  SB may even save some coin.


Agreed. This is a great example about how tough a business ski lift manufacturing is. I don't recall seeing announced lifts get cancelled like this before, but waiting to build a new lift is a no brainier if you need to save money fast.

Very glad to see they're going full steam ahead and hopefully everything is up and running for next winter.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Newpylong (Apr 9, 2020)

They have nothing to lose by removing it - it wouldn't operate even if the new lift doesn't make it in for next season.


----------



## machski (Apr 9, 2020)

Newpylong said:


> They have nothing to lose by removing it - it wouldn't operate even if the new lift doesn't make it in for next season.


^^^^^This

Also note that some lifts are not canceled, only delayed a year on install.  Boyne's two lifts fall in this category.  In Swift Current 6's situation, the lift is fully fabricated already in Austria and will ship to the US as planned.  Boyne already owns that lift, they are delaying install due to uncertainty on construction schedules now for this year and a risk of having no lift in those alignments.  This is unlike Vail that has outright canceled the lift orders.

Sent from my SM-T830 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------

