# Ski areas with buyer's remorse



## podunk77 (Dec 20, 2014)

Not to dwell on the negative, but anyone have examples of things that ski areas invested in that they probably wish they hadn't?  Bolton Valley's trailside lodging is probably one example, and I often wonder whether Wachusett would install the Vickery Bowl lift if they had to do it over again (seems like they just wanted to win their pissing contest with the environmentalists by putting SOMETHING there).


----------



## ss20 (Dec 20, 2014)

This is going to be a fun thread.  

Here's some general regrets for all resorts:

Not building big enough base lodges.
Participating in the battle for "widest slope in the east" that destroyed many trails at many ski resorts, most notably Killington.  
A lack of beginner terrain.  I'm sure most resorts would've benefited if they adapted the Prez Smith idea of having beginner terrain off of every lift.  Beginner areas need to be larger.
I'm sure buying new snow guns every ten years to stay up to date is painful.  
Not building grand villages or terrain expansions when there were more lax regulations in the 60s and 70s.  
Investing in massive terrain parks when that was the trend 3 years ago.  Now the parks are being sized-down and there's lots of equipment going unused (pipe groomers, rails, boxes).

More mountain-specific regrets:

Someone can write a book on Killington for this, but I don't have 2 hours to type all the regrets management must have.
Mount Snow- taking out every cool thing from the 60s, not having large enough snowmaking reservoirs, building the Grand Summit Express
Okemo- Putting in those slow base area quads, doing the same at Jackson Gore, 
Sugarbush- Not hiring a better lift maintenance department, taking out the summit gondola
Jay Peak- EB-5, falling through on Bonnie Quad replacement
Jiminy Peak- Stupid setup on Widow's Peak that leaves that terrain underutilized. 

Future regrets mountains will have:
Having massive terrain parks
Too much snowmaking= lack of variety, too much maintenance, too much labor, not enough ROI
Not building slopsside lodging or housing
Not building any summer attractions 
Building intricate lift systems that require many lifts running midweek
Too much uphill capacity
*Quantity over quality *


----------



## Tin (Dec 20, 2014)

ss20 said:


> This is going to be a fun thread.
> 
> Here's some general regrets for all resorts:
> 
> ...


----------



## Scruffy (Dec 20, 2014)

ss20 said:


> This is going to be a fun thread.



*NOT.*  This is just yet another one of those "if I ran the world, things would be different threads". Do you people actually ski? Or do you just sit around pontificating how things could/should be better at you favorite hill?  There's more damn threads on this forum cutting ski areas down for what they do wrong, then praise for what they do right. Talk about the biting the hand that feeds you. Get out and ski! and stop the politics. Jeeze Louise.


----------



## ss20 (Dec 20, 2014)

Scruffy said:


> *NOT.*  This is just yet another one of those "if I ran the world, things would be different threads". Do you people actually ski? Or do you just sit around pontificating how things could/should be better at you favorite hill?  There's more damn threads on this forum cutting ski areas down for what they do wrong, then praise for what they do right. Talk about the biting the hand that feeds you. Get out and ski! and stop the politics. Jeeze Louise.



Don't get your panties in a bunch.  I didn't whine or bitch, I made a list of things resorts regret.  That's not complaining.  Complaining is writing a paragraph on one thing that doesn't add to the discussion at all... sounds familiar does it not?  And saying that we shouldn't discuss ski politics on a ski forum?  What do you want us to talk about?  How awesome conditions are and how right and dandy everything is in the ski world?  

Personally, I think its fun to discuss skiing politics.  Many on this board agree.  We've been around the sport a long time and like to share and discuss our knowledge and opinions, good or bad.  If you don't want to get negative or technical, don't.  Posting is optional, not mandatory.


----------



## Scruffy (Dec 20, 2014)

ss20 said:


> Don't get your panties in a bunch.  I didn't whine or bitch, I made a list of things resorts regret.  That's not complaining.  Complaining is writing a paragraph on one thing that doesn't add to the discussion at all... sounds familiar does it not?  And saying that we shouldn't discuss ski politics on a ski forum?  What do you want us to talk about?  How awesome conditions are and how right and dandy everything is in the ski world?
> 
> Personally, I think its fun to discuss skiing politics.  Many on this board agree.  We've been around the sport a long time and like to share and discuss our knowledge and opinions, good or bad.  If you don't want to get negative or technical, don't.  Posting is optional, not mandatory.



Like you know the resorts regrets. Whatever, have fun with your resort bashing politics. I'm sure BG will be in here before long with his EB5 shit. Me, I'd rather discuss skiing, techniques, gear, where the goods are, etc.. On TGR, you be called a douchnozzle for even bring it up, so you got that going for you.


----------



## boston_e (Dec 20, 2014)

ss20 said:


> A lack of beginner terrain.  I'm sure most resorts would've benefited if they adapted the Prez Smith idea of having beginner terrain off of every lift.  Beginner areas need to be larger.



Funny I was actually going to call this a regret… while every resort needs good beginner areas for sure, I think one of the worst things about Killington is the gajillion traverses / dangerous intersections / interrupted trails / crossovers etc that result from having the green (now labeled as blue) trails wind down from the top disrupting other blue square and black diamond terrain.

I'd bet current K management wishes this was never done.


----------



## ss20 (Dec 20, 2014)

boston_e said:


> Funny I was actually going to call this a regret… while every resort needs good beginner areas for sure, I think one of the worst things about Killington is the gajillion traverses / dangerous intersections / interrupted trails / crossovers etc that result from having the green (now labeled as blue) trails wind down from the top disrupting other blue square and black diamond terrain.
> 
> I'd bet current K management wishes this was never done.



It was certainly a good concept, but you're right, it did cause lots of problems once skier visits started going up.  Sunday River's area off the Chondola, Stratton's Tamarack area, and the trails off of Bucksaw at SL are decently sized beginner areas.  

Always liked Copper's idea of having terrain that's secluded from separate ability levels.  That's what beginners need- more of their own space away from the masses that use beginner trails to get to the goods.


----------



## VTKilarney (Dec 20, 2014)

Scruffy said:


> Like you know the resorts regrets. Whatever, have fun with your resort bashing politics. I'm sure BG will be in here before long with his EB5 shit. Me, I'd rather discuss skiing, techniques, gear, where the goods are, etc.. On TGR, you be called a douchnozzle for even bring it up, so you got that going for you.


The last time I checked, an Internet forum was a place to express opinions.  If that's not appealing to you in the context of this thread, perhaps you should just stick to threads that aren't so upsetting.  It's better than insisting on what the boundaries of the sandbox must be.  If TGR is more to your liking, it's up to you where to spend your time.  I hope you find happiness wherever you wind up.


----------



## Scruffy (Dec 20, 2014)

VTKilarney said:


> The last time I checked, an Internet forum was a place to express opinions.  If that's not appealing to you in the context of this thread, perhaps you should just stick to threads that aren't so upsetting.  It's better than insisting on what the boundaries of the sandbox must be.  If TGR is more to your liking, it's up to you where to spend your time.  I hope you find happiness wherever you wind up.



It's disrespectful to *this web site* to be constantly creating threads that go on for ad nauseum bashing ski areas decisions, some of these ski area advertise here and support this site. It's not easy to run a ski resort anywhere, least in the NE USA. Why don't guys create some threads praising the good work they do so your lazy asses can be swept up the mountain on a lift and you can ski man made snow when mommy nature is having a play break. 

Opinions? About a ski area's regrets? Unless your connected with the management of a resort, you don't have an opinion about their regrets, you have an opinion about your regrets. Spare me. 

Me, I'm going tomorrow to a ski resort, that most love to bash here, and I'm gladly paying to have my lazy ass hauled up the mountain, and will be happy to ski on a mix on man made and natural snow. I'm happy they're there, in business, surviving in the thin margin world of ski resorts, so I can have fun.


----------



## VTKilarney (Dec 20, 2014)

Rather than demanding censorship and usurping the role of the moderators, perhaps you should just not read this thread.  Just a thought.  I hope you find peace.  If you believe that ski areas should be perpetually unaware of what their customers' opinions are, then this thread will make you upset.


----------



## Scruffy (Dec 20, 2014)

You seem to think I'm upset, usurping someone's role, or demanding something... haha ... silly boy. Look, you want to continue to turn this site into Alpine Ski Politics Zone, it's on you. I've seen bigger sites than this dragged down the gutter till they finally pulled the plug, because it just became a cesspool and shell of it's former self. 

And, you seem to think the resorts are hanging on your every word. That Jay Peak Bomb shell thread, which you probably have more than half the posts in is really fixing things up there, isn't it?


----------



## VTKilarney (Dec 20, 2014)

If anyone relies on my word for most things that I say they are a fool.  I've never suggested otherwise.  

It boils down to this.  Apparently you believe that pedantic complaining about the flavor of ski discussion in a ski forum is more important than actual ski discussion.  Either that or you have extremely thin skin.  Again, it's best to avoid this thread if it bothers you.  It's kind of like a child learning not to touch a hot stove after experiencing pain from that stove.

If you aren't bothered, then your comments are truly irrational and you are just a troll.


----------



## abc (Dec 20, 2014)

Scruffy said:


> It's disrespectful to *this web site* to be constantly creating threads that go on for ad nauseum bashing ski areas decisions, some of these ski area advertise here and support this site. It's not easy to run a ski resort anywhere, least in the NE USA. Why don't guys create some threads praising the good work they do so your lazy asses can be swept up the mountain on a lift and you can ski man made snow when mommy nature is having a play break.
> 
> Opinions? About a ski area's regrets? Unless your connected with the management of a resort, you don't have an opinion about their regrets, you have an opinion about your regrets. Spare me.
> 
> Me, I'm going tomorrow to a ski resort, that most love to bash here, and I'm gladly paying to have my lazy ass hauled up the mountain, and will be happy to ski on a mix on man made and natural snow. I'm happy they're there, in business, surviving in the thin margin world of ski resorts, so I can have fun.


There're plenty of thread praising ski resorts doing thing right. You're the only one who focus on the negative ones. 

You think those threads are disrespectful? Take a look at the tone of your own post!


----------



## Scruffy (Dec 20, 2014)

"Apparently you believe that pedantic complaining about the flavor of ski discussion in a ski forum is more important than actual ski discussion." :lol:  No, apparently reading comprehension is not your strong suite. 

OMG ... just give it up already.  And, yeah, I got it two replies ago, you're suggesting I change the channel if I don't like the show .. Thanks Pops, never occurred to me. 

Have fun with this thread, it's right up your alley.


----------



## VTKilarney (Dec 20, 2014)

Scruffy said:


> No, apparently reading comprehension is not your strong suite.


Strong suite?????


----------



## abc (Dec 20, 2014)

VTKilarney said:


> Strong suite?????


You two, get your own room... I mean, your own suite!


----------



## deadheadskier (Dec 20, 2014)

I hope someone didn't fast forward to August.  Sure seems like an August thread.


----------



## Not Sure (Dec 20, 2014)

abc said:


> You two, get your own room... I mean, your own suite!



Ha ha , I suck at spelling and still caught that one " Suit"


----------



## mister moose (Dec 21, 2014)

Pretty sure the Plausteiners regret installing the HSQ at Ascutney.


----------



## skiNEwhere (Dec 21, 2014)

Not a complaint against a specific ski area, but I wish ski areas cut really narrow trails similar to rumble at sugarbush instead of the wide boulevards....those trails are pretty good at seeing how good you and your technique really are vs. what you perceive them to be.

Blue hills has one to the skiers right of big blue, unless they've widened it now. Winter park has a blue that's 8-10 feet wide max (wide as an average traffic lane) with BUMPS! Hardest blue ever lol

And def has the feel of an August thread....but so what?


----------



## VTKilarney (Dec 21, 2014)

But do ski areas regret cutting wider trails?  On the one hand, casual skiers seem to like them.  On the other hand, they seem like they are harder to keep snow on.


----------



## ss20 (Dec 21, 2014)

VTKilarney said:


> But do ski areas regret cutting wider trails?  On the one hand, casual skiers seem to like them.  On the other hand, they seem like they are harder to keep snow on.



I remember reading a quote from Sugarloaf's GM that said (s)he regretted taking down so many trees over by timberline in the 80s.  I'm sure K regrets destroying Double Dipper and North Glade since neither is much of a "glade" anymore.


----------



## MadMadWorld (Dec 21, 2014)

Killington needs the wide trails. The problem is that very few ski areas can expand into additional terrain so they just widen the crap they already have.


----------



## Scruffy (Dec 21, 2014)

abc said:


> There're plenty of thread praising ski resorts doing thing right. You're the only one who focus on the negative ones.
> 
> You think those threads are disrespectful? Take a look at the tone of your own post!



Ok, I'm sorry for my tone. Shouldn't post after drinking a few :lol: I still think there are too many resort "second guessing" and finger pointing blame threads on this forum, but that's just my opinion. If that's what floats your boat, go for it.


----------



## xlr8r (Dec 21, 2014)

Lifts:

Jay Peak-Buiding the freezer longer than the original Green Mountain Boys double
Sugarbush-Moving the original GMX to Northridge, so much remorse that they fixed their mistake under new ownership.
Killington-Building Devils Fiddle in a very odd location before Parker's Gore fell through.  Possibly shortening Rams Head when the quad was put in.
Stratton-Building the Shooting Star where it is instead of replacing Kidderbrook with it.
Loon-Building the current gondola with cabins that only fit four people.
Waterville-Building the White Peaks quad to the summit, another example that has already been fixed under new ownership.

Layout/Trails:
Sunday River-OZ and White Cap trails cut far too wide.
Killington-Double Dipper and Ovation cut too wide.  Half of Ovation's width is no longer used and left for regrowth.
Okemo-South Ridge Layout.
Jay Peak-Can-Am cut too wide.
Cannon-Profile cut too wide.
Sugarloaf-Building the West Mountain pod.  The lift ride is ride far too long and there is only one trail.

Other:
Sunday River-Building the Jordan Grand in its isolated location.


----------



## Savemeasammy (Dec 22, 2014)

xlr8r said:


> Cannon-Profile cut too wide.



I don't ski Cannon a lot, but to me, Profile (Cannonball) looks like such an uninspiring run.  I don't understand why they don't let it bump up (I will qualify this by saying I've never seen bumps on it when I've been anyway).


Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## jack97 (Dec 22, 2014)

I heard that cannonball/profile was a surface lift, back then, they had to make them wider. Maybe that's why it has no character. 

imo, letting it bump won't help. That trail has too much exposure to winds ....essentially no cover to protect the bumps.


----------



## joshua segal (Dec 22, 2014)

Savemeasammy said:


> I don't ski Cannon a lot, but to me, Profile (Cannonball) looks like such an uninspiring run.  I don't understand why they don't let it bump up (I will qualify this by saying I've never seen bumps on it when I've been anyway).


I was at Cannon last spring and they did let Profile bump up.  The moguls turned a pretty blah run into something pretty good.  However, to groom or not is a day-to-day policy issue - and if they had any regrets, they can fix this problem by literally doing nothing!

One of skiing's great problems: In the 60s and 70s,weekend liftlines were epic - often over an hour, but once at the top, the trails weren't crowded. As lift capacity was increased, trail capacity was not.  I cite Killington's North Ridge where the 700 person per hour poma was replaced by a 2100 person per hour triple without adding any trails.

I suspect the shortening of Ramshead may be regretted by a bunch of Killington old-timers, but I doubt Killington regrets it.  There was not a lot of trail capacity at the top of Ramshead and going from a double to a quad, doubled the uphill capacity with no increase in downhill capacity.

I'd vote for the carpet at the entrance to the Grand Express at Mt. Snow as one of the biggest wastes, (although Mt. Snow's management may not agree with me).  With detachables, there's not problem getting into place to load the chairs and it doesn't permit them any extra uphill capacity.  Those things are most effective on FGs which they can run a bit faster.

Mt. Ascutney's management may regret the purchase of their HSQ, because it may well have pushed them over the fiscal cliff.  I suspect that ASC has enough fiscal regrets to fill a book!


----------



## Smellytele (Dec 22, 2014)

jack97 said:


> I heard that cannonball/profile was a surface lift, back then, they had to make them wider. Maybe that's why it has no character.
> 
> imo, letting it bump won't help. That trail has too much exposure to winds ....essentially no cover to protect the bumps.



The top of cannon had 2 t-bars separated by a thin line of trees/shurbs . When they put in the quad in 1990 they decided to put the trail in as well widening it to the ugliness that it is. They should let a 10ft line of trees grow in-between the lift and the trail.
It does bump up quite a bit.


----------



## Savemeasammy (Dec 22, 2014)

Smellytele said:


> It does bump up quite a bit.



I guess I've been unlucky on my visits.  

I know it's not Cannon's m.o., but that seems like it would be a good run for seeded bumps.  



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BenedictGomez (Dec 22, 2014)

Scruffy said:


> Like you know the resorts regrets. Whatever, have fun with your resort bashing politics. I'm sure BG will be in here before long with his EB5 shit. Me, I'd rather discuss skiing, techniques, gear, where the goods are, etc.. *On TGR, you be called a douchnozzle *for even bring it up, so you got that going for you.



That's clearly where you belong.

Though I do have to give credit where credit it due, as you are an extremely talented troll.   

HighwayStar is way too obvious, but you, even though > 1/2 of your posts on this board are intentionally argumentative or inciting, you even have all the mods on this board totally fooled, and _that_ it the true mark of excellence in trolling.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Dec 22, 2014)

xlr8r said:


> Lifts:
> 
> Jay Peak-Buiding the freezer longer than the original Green Mountain Boys double



I'd add the way it's orientated as well, I cant imagine there wouldn't have been a better buildable alternative.

I'd also add the complete removal of the double to the summit.   This is the most obvious ski enhancement Jay Peak could make.


----------



## steamboat1 (Dec 22, 2014)

xlr8r said:


> Lifts:Killington-Building Devils Fiddle in a very odd location before Parker's Gore fell through.


Devils Fiddle lift was put in as a way to access the rest of the mountain from the Northeast Passage entrance. Without Northeast Passage there is no need for Devils Fiddle.


----------



## steamboat1 (Dec 22, 2014)

joshua segal said:


> I suspect the shortening of Ramshead may be regretted by a bunch of Killington old-timers, but I doubt Killington regrets it.  There was not a lot of trail capacity at the top of Ramshead and going from a double to a quad, doubled the uphill capacity with no increase in downhill capacity.


Trail capacity wasn't the issue for shortening Ramshead. There were/are 4 maybe 5 trails off the summit, more than there are now from the top of it's present location. The reason they shortened the lift was the difficulty of the trails above it's present top. They wanted to cater to more low intermediate skiers & the top section of the old Ramshead was far to difficult to accomodate them. I miss Vagabond from the top of old Ramshead, it's not even half the trail it used to be now.


----------



## freeski (Dec 22, 2014)

Profile adds a little variety to Cannon's trails. Yes it's a little too wide, but this allows a lot of skiers to go fast making GS turns and yea they let it bump up sometimes. I would guess it was Canons answer to Outer Limits and White Heat. I used to ride the two T-bars and they were fun and fast (good memories). Planting some trees to the right of the lift would help with wind scouring the trail and protect the chair, but growing trees up there takes a long long time. A nice island of trees at the top of the trail would be nice too. You'd have to have something to protect them from the wind and harsh conditions to get them started.


----------



## C-Rex (Dec 22, 2014)

How about those stupid loading/unloading conveyor belts?  If they don't regret those, they sure should.  I don't see it helping anyone.  In fact, I think it just weirds people out and they actually end up having a harder time of it.  

I also disagree with the idea of having beginner terrain off every lift.  I think it's better for beginners to have their own area where they aren't getting buzzed and feeling like they're in the way, or being laughed at by the more skilled crowd.  However, I do understand the need to have an easy trail down from the summit.  Most beginners want to go all the way up at some point to see the view and be able to say they skied the whole way down.


----------



## deadheadskier (Dec 22, 2014)

Loading Conveyors make a significant difference in ride time on fixed grip chairs.  It brought the Spillway Chair at Sugarloaf from a 12 min ride, down to about 8.   At Shawnee Peak in now takes only 9 minutes to get to the top when it used to be almost 14.


----------



## C-Rex (Dec 22, 2014)

deadheadskier said:


> Loading Conveyors make a significant difference in ride time on fixed grip chairs. It brought the Spillway Chair at Sugarloaf from a 12 min ride, down to about 8. At Shawnee Peak in now takes only 9 minutes to get to the top when it used to be almost 14.



So they actually run the lift faster when using the conveyor?  It doesn't seem to at Mount Snow or Okemo.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Dec 22, 2014)

Is this what you're talking about?  I've never skied anywhere that had one of these.


----------



## deadheadskier (Dec 22, 2014)

At Sugarloaf and Shawnee they do.  The chairs fly for fixed grips and the conveyor makes for a soft loading so the lifty doesn't need to bump the chair.  At both ski areas they went the conveyor belts instead of HSQ to prevent wind holds and as its much cheaper.


----------



## Jully (Dec 22, 2014)

I'm an enormous fan of conveyors. Skyline is a great lift, clearly has an impact on the ride time. I think they improve the stop rate too for the lift. The ski resorts all claim this and spillway used to stop pretty frequently. The conveyor might be unsettling to load at first, but you get used to it.

More and more of these keep cropping up every year with at least two that i know of this past summer and even the Hermitage club installed a sky trac.


----------



## steamboat1 (Dec 22, 2014)

C-Rex said:


> How about those stupid loading/unloading conveyor belts?  If they don't regret those, they sure should.  I don't see it helping anyone.  In fact, I think it just weirds people out and they actually end up having a harder time of it.


I don't like them either & find them harder to load or at least strange. The only ones I've encountered so far is the one at Okemo & the new Metro quad at Stowe. I didn't really notice the chairs running any faster. In fact the two lower side by side chairs at Okemo still seemed to run the same speed. One has conveyor loading & the other doesn't.


----------



## manhattanskier (Dec 23, 2014)

xlr8r said:


> Lifts:
> 
> Possibly shortening Rams Head when the quad was put in.



That is one of the best things they have ever done, they needed a dedicated next step up for beginners from Snowshed.


----------



## stephan.tyler11 (Dec 23, 2014)

Well! I just hope that it's going to be for the better.


----------



## joshua segal (Dec 23, 2014)

manhattanskier said:


> That is one of the best things they have ever done, they needed a dedicated next step up for beginners from Snowshed.



I nominally agree.  I suppose they could have put in a mid-station, but too many of the beginners coming off Snowshed would panic and not get off.  (In addition, that would require an extra operator.)  

I mentioned earlier, that doubling the traffic (i.e. going from a double to a quad) without increasing the downhill capacity would create a bottleneck at the top and someone took exception to that saying there were no more routes down from the current top than there were from the old top.  While this is true, the fact is the beginners at the old top would freeze (creating a bottleneck) when they looked down what they perceived to be cliffs.

I am amused that at least IMO half of the proposals are Skiers' remorse and not managements' remorse.


----------



## Skimaine (Dec 23, 2014)

Jully said:


> I'm an enormous fan of conveyors. Skyline is a great lift, clearly has an impact on the ride time. I think they improve the stop rate too for the lift. The ski resorts all claim this and spillway used to stop pretty frequently. The conveyor might be unsettling to load at first, but you get used to it.



I agree.  In addition to running the line faster, the carpet greatly reduces problems loading and this greatly reduces the stop rate.  That lift just keep chugging along.  

Putting a fixed grip with a carpet loader is one of the best decisions for Sugarloaf.


----------



## MadMadWorld (Dec 23, 2014)

joshua segal said:


> I nominally agree.  I suppose they could have put in a mid-station, but too many of the beginners coming off Snowshed would panic and not get off.  (In addition, that would require an extra operator.)
> 
> I mentioned earlier, that doubling the traffic (i.e. going from a double to a quad) without increasing the downhill capacity would create a bottleneck at the top and someone took exception to that saying there were no more routes down from the current top than there were from the old top.  While this is true, the fact is the beginners at the old top would freeze (creating a bottleneck) when they looked down what they perceived to be cliffs.
> 
> I am amused that at least IMO half of the proposals are Skiers' remorse and not managements' remorse.



Mid station for beginners? Yea that would be a horrible idea! I can picture that and all the chaos that would go along with it.


----------



## C-Rex (Dec 23, 2014)

Jully said:


> I'm an enormous fan of conveyors. Skyline is a great lift, clearly has an impact on the ride time. I think they improve the stop rate too for the lift. The ski resorts all claim this and spillway used to stop pretty frequently. The conveyor might be unsettling to load at first, but you get used to it.
> 
> More and more of these keep cropping up every year with at least two that i know of this past summer and even the Hermitage club installed a sky trac.



The opposite seems to be true at Mount Snow.  The Grand Summit Express stops a lot and doesn't appear to run any faster than before.  I guess it depends on what the general crowd is used to.  I'm fine with it but from my experience they don't seem to help.  Maybe people in Maine are just more adaptable.


----------



## drjeff (Dec 23, 2014)

C-Rex said:


> The opposite seems to be true at Mount Snow.  The Grand Summit Express stops a lot and doesn't appear to run any faster than before.  I guess it depends on what the general crowd is used to.  I'm fine with it but from my experience they don't seem to help.  Maybe people in Maine are just more adaptable.



Mount Snow put the conveyor in on the Grand Summit, not to increase the speed at which the lift operates (It's already at the maximum when it's running that the lift is rated for), but to help put 4 people on the load line at the same time.  The "problem" with it that many people have, is that they don't read and follow the directions for it's use.  If you lean on the gates, as it tells you to, and then just stand still on the conveyor, you're going to end up where you need to be, when you need to be to load the chair, and you WON'T slide off the front of the loading area (at least my in full gear, 250lb self, even on freshly waxed skis on a carpet that has some snow/ice on it, has yet to slide off the front of the loading area in the probably 250 or so times I've ridden in since the carpet was installed 

Far too often, the cause of the "problem" is that people either hang back from the gate and then try to shuffle through it when it opens and get caught as it closes back up (the gates are only open for about 3 seconds so if you're not right there and ready, a problem can arise) and then once a person gets onto the carpet, rather than just standing still, they try and shuffle their feet, and unlike on a snow surface, that carpet is actually rather grippy, and people semi stumble and/or bump into who's standing next to them, which creates problems.

It's just getting people to be ready, and pay attention to the instructions, and then you get 4 people on the chair every 6 seconds via the conveyor belt


----------



## joshua segal (Dec 23, 2014)

MadMadWorld said:


> Mid station for beginners? Yea that would be a horrible idea! I can picture that and all the chaos that would go along with it.


I think Waterville Valley has a mid-station on an FG lift for Lower Level skiers to get off - and the "lesser skiers" going up the MRG Single Chair, are supposed to get off at the mid-station.


----------



## ceo (Dec 23, 2014)

Both lower-mountain lifts at Cannon had beginner midstations back in the day, right about where the top of Eagle Cliff is now. The top of the old New Peabody/Hong Kong/Gremlin chair can still be seen to the right of the Peabody quad a little above there. At the time they had no other beginner terrain other than the Pony Lift slope. My last time there before they replaced those lifts, I got recruited to escort a 4-year-old in ski school up the lift and help him off at the midstation.


----------



## MadMadWorld (Dec 23, 2014)

joshua segal said:


> I think Waterville Valley has a mid-station on an FG lift for Lower Level skiers to get off - and the "lesser skiers" going up the MRG Single Chair, are supposed to get off at the mid-station.



Well I don't think the midstation at MRG is meant for that. That is what Sunnyside is for and most of the intermediate and beginner terrain below the mid station can be accessed from the double. The midstation is more for people that want to download to do laps on Liftline or upload and rip bumps on Chute. I think they also for saw it as a late season option to keep the upper mountain skiable. Chute holds amazing snow in spring time.


----------



## joshua segal (Dec 23, 2014)

Granite Gorge, I think, also has a mid-station for lower mountain access.


----------



## Rowsdower (Dec 23, 2014)

ss20 said:


> Too much snowmaking= lack of variety, too much maintenance, too much labor, not enough ROI



I agree with pretty much everything but this. Considering the weather we get, how do you propose mountains operate if they can't consistently get terrain open with man-made snow? It's an absolute necessity at this point to sustain a modern ski resort.


----------



## ScottySkis (Dec 23, 2014)

Putting a lodge and parking lot on the middle of the hill taking away from what could have been OK experience at Bellaire in the Catskills.


----------



## moresnow (Dec 23, 2014)

ScottySkis said:


> Putting a lodge and parking lot on the middle of the hill taking away from what could have been OK experience at Bellaire in the Catskills.


I don't think you are missing out on much because of the lodge.  It gets pretty flat below it.  That is where they have their beginner terrain. The run out to the super chief I could do without.


----------



## ss20 (Dec 23, 2014)

Rowsdower said:


> I agree with pretty much everything but this. Considering the weather we get, how do you propose mountains operate if they can't consistently get terrain open with man-made snow? It's an absolute necessity at this point to sustain a modern ski resort.



The biggest changes that get the general population talking are the ones you see on a trail map.  Look at the recent success from Mount Snow (and so far) Okemo with their bubble chairs.  They are things that are tangible.  Every guest will see and ride those lifts, remember them, and come back next time because they were warm and unique.  Brand identity.  Do modern snow guns throw out a better product than ones from 10 years ago?  Yes.  Will the general public notice a difference?  Not likely, as far as I know.


----------



## Jully (Dec 23, 2014)

It's not the better product modern guns throw out that makes people buy them. It's higher operational temperatures of high twenties wet bulb, more production and less energy used. SIGNIFICANTLY less energy. We're talking 10% or less. New guns that produce more snow at higher temperatures and use much much much less energy. The guns pay for themselves with energy savings in very short time


----------



## DoublePlanker (Dec 23, 2014)

It seems like ski areas have invested more in snowmaking in recent years than anything else.  Clearly, the resorts feel it is important to invest in the latest technology to cut energy costs and improve snow quality.  This implies a good roi for them.


----------



## steamboat1 (Dec 24, 2014)

drjeff said:


> Mount Snow put the conveyor in on the Grand Summit, not to increase the speed at which the lift operates (It's already at the maximum when it's running that the lift is rated for), but to help put 4 people on the load line at the same time.  The "problem" with it that many people have, is that they don't read and follow the directions for it's use.  If you lean on the gates, as it tells you to, and then just stand still on the conveyor, you're going to end up where you need to be, when you need to be to load the chair, and you WON'T slide off the front of the loading area (at least my in full gear, 250lb self, even on freshly waxed skis on a carpet that has some snow/ice on it, has yet to slide off the front of the loading area in the probably 250 or so times I've ridden in since the carpet was installed
> 
> Far too often, the cause of the "problem" is that people either hang back from the gate and then try to shuffle through it when it opens and get caught as it closes back up (the gates are only open for about 3 seconds so if you're not right there and ready, a problem can arise) and then once a person gets onto the carpet, rather than just standing still, they try and shuffle their feet, and unlike on a snow surface, that carpet is actually rather grippy, and people semi stumble and/or bump into who's standing next to them, which creates problems.
> 
> It's just getting people to be ready, and pay attention to the instructions, and then you get 4 people on the chair every 6 seconds via the conveyor belt


Putting a carpet load on a detachable quad has got to be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.


----------



## steamboat1 (Dec 24, 2014)

Lot's of lifts had mid stations in the past. Quite a few still do.


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Dec 24, 2014)

steamboat1 said:


> Putting a carpet load on a detachable quad has got to be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.



Yeah, that just doesn't make any sense. There's no reason, with as slow as detach chairs move thru the lower station, that all seats aren't easily filled. If they aren't, it sounds like a liftie problem. They definitely work well on fixed chairs though.


----------



## goldsbar (Dec 24, 2014)

I agree with some of the terrain park stuff.  The resorts spent tons on half pipes and I hardly see anyone riding in them.  On the other hand, how much can some rails cost?  Most people don't ride the ones over 1 ft high, but they spend plenty of time thinking about riding them.


----------



## mriceyman (Dec 24, 2014)

goldsbar said:


> I agree with some of the terrain park stuff.  The resorts spent tons on half pipes and I hardly see anyone riding in them.  On the other hand, how much can some rails cost?  Most people don't ride the ones over 1 ft high, but they spend plenty of time thinking about riding them.


Yea most rails dont take that much to build if you have an experienced welder which most do. The halfpipes i agree dont see the ROI as they can be very intimidating to novices


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## Jully (Dec 24, 2014)

A few places are beginning to remove their halfpipes ever so slowly realizing they just take up space and cost a lot of money


----------



## steamboat1 (Dec 24, 2014)

Pretty sure K gave up on their large half pipe over at Bear. They didn't build it last year & I haven't seen any signs of them building it this year. They did build a smaller half pipe over at Ramshead last year & heard they plan on doing the same this year. They also built a small half pipe near the Superstar chair going towards Snowshed which I saw last week. First time I've seen one there.


----------



## MEtoVTSkier (Dec 24, 2014)

Visible from the umbrellas? Should be some good entertainment! :razz:


----------



## joshua segal (Dec 24, 2014)

steamboat1 said:


> Pretty sure K gave up on their large half pipe over at Bear. They didn't build it last year & I haven't seen any signs of them building it this year. They did build a smaller half pipe over at Ramshead last year & heard they plan on doing the same this year. They also built a small half pipe near the Superstar chair going towards Snowshed which I saw last week. First time I've seen one there.


Their published comment was that they spent their snowmaking budget on multiple resurfacings due to early season thaw/freeze cycles.

I don't think it was a permanent decision, but I agree with several posters: I don't think halfpipes are cost effective - and in recent years, the interest has been more focused in parks.


----------



## steamboat1 (Dec 25, 2014)

joshua segal said:


> Their published comment was that they spent their snowmaking budget on multiple resurfacings due to early season thaw/freeze cycles.
> 
> I don't think it was a permanent decision


Pretty sure you won't see one over at Bear again unless of course the Dew tour comes back & pays a couple of million bucks for it.


----------



## drjeff (Dec 25, 2014)

steamboat1 said:


> Putting a carpet load on a detachable quad has got to be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.



Main reason why it was done at the time is to facilitate getting groups of beginners and/or instructors with lower level kids to the proper space on the load line in groups of 4 more reliably - from that perspective, it worked.  For the general public, it wasn't as well received


----------



## machski (Dec 25, 2014)

Carpet load fixed grips do tend to be run faster than non carpet, but Okemo and Stowe's may not be run faster as they both serve beginner/novice terrain.  (This would allow for an even easier load experience for newer skiers).  I know Loon's seven brothers and Sunday River's spruce triples are run faster and they work great (along with the new purpose built skyline quad at Sugarloaf).
As for new snow guns, they do not necessarily work better than older guns at warmer temps, but they do save a ton of energy on the air side.  The other reason much had been spent on them is that resorts have been getting energy efficient grants to offset some of the purchase costs over the last several years in many states.


----------



## Rowsdower (Dec 25, 2014)

goldsbar said:


> I agree with some of the terrain park stuff.  The resorts spent tons on half pipes and I hardly see anyone riding in them.  On the other hand, how much can some rails cost?  Most people don't ride the ones over 1 ft high, but they spend plenty of time thinking about riding them.



The problem with the parks and pipes is that there was a push to build the biggest of each. But then you're spending the most money on features that the fewest riders will ever benefit from. Building smaller, progressive features that appeal to a wider range of skiers and snowboarders is still pretty good for business, it's just the over-the-top superparks and halfpipes that didn't make as much sense. Some places still have them, but only at the resorts which were known as terrain park destinations, and in my experience most of those mountains are out west where most of your pro and sponsored riders end up living. Otherwise the "superpark" idea seems more of a gimmick at most East Coast resorts.


----------



## Blanton (Dec 26, 2014)

Rowsdower said:


> The problem with the parks and pipes is that there was a push to build the biggest of each. But then you're spending the most money on features that the fewest riders will ever benefit from. Building smaller, progressive features that appeal to a wider range of skiers and snowboarders is still pretty good for business, it's just the over-the-top superparks and halfpipes that didn't make as much sense. Some places still have them, but only at the resorts which were known as terrain park destinations, and in my experience most of those mountains are out west where most of your pro and sponsored riders end up living. Otherwise the "superpark" idea seems more of a gimmick at most East Coast resorts.




The 25 foot half pipe at Seven Springs comes to mind.


----------



## ss20 (Dec 26, 2014)

Rowsdower said:


> The problem with the parks and pipes is that there was a push to build the biggest of each. But then you're spending the most money on features that the fewest riders will ever benefit from. Building smaller, progressive features that appeal to a wider range of skiers and snowboarders is still pretty good for business, it's just the over-the-top superparks and halfpipes that didn't make as much sense. Some places still have them, but only at the resorts which were known as terrain park destinations, and in my experience most of those mountains are out west where most of your pro and sponsored riders end up living. Otherwise the "superpark" idea seems more of a gimmick at most East Coast resorts.



Exactly.  The small feature parks are the ones most used, yet they're usually the smallest park on the mountain.

The "superparks" were like the battle in the 80s and 90s for "longest, widest, steepest" trail.  They were both unsuccessful fads that every mountain tried, but only a few mountains actually benefited from.


----------



## jerseydaze (Dec 27, 2014)

Mountain Creek
putting tower guns on granite view,cutting in a super pipe,cutting a trail halfway from south to granite and giving up,the hotel.


----------

