Is it the clubs and pass holders or the weekend masses that bring in the most money?

[Goose]

here is the reason im asking. And so a recent Sunday day at a pa ski hill. Was ion the lift talking with my brother as the morning was turning into mid day and the zoo was beginning to pile up. There was something we were not too upset about but we did speak of it. It was about how a tad annoying it is that not only do we have to deal with the zoo but adding to that whole undesirable situation is the local clubs which close off sections of an already crowded and small hill. They do this (like anywhere I suppose) of course to race and or practice racing.

I understand it. I mean where else are they going to do this and when? Kids have school during the week and they cant do it at night I suppose. In a way its like many iother sports kids play where things take place on weekends.

That said,....this was a holiday weekend and the zoo was a zoo and a half. But there was also three different black runs closed off on a relatively small hill. As lift lines build you now have all these herd of season holders and racers who get to jump to line fronts. Then you finally get upo to ski and find runs are not only crowded to begin with but now even more so due to the closures.

So yea, it was worth discussing and being a tad annoyed with it.

On the chair with us was an individual who I think "use to" work there. And as he heard as chatting he joined in buy trying to tell us that we should understand how the local clubs are the main supporters of the hill. The season passes and are in the lodges supportiung the place all season. And without them this wouldn't exist. Actually the way he said it was kind of in a rude way. So I said are you telling me the weekend masses (like myself) are not paying the most money per ski visits , consist of the largest population , and spending the most money per visits in the lodges? The chair ride hand come to an end so the conversation (or argument) never continued.

But I find that disturbing to hear. Firstly there may be more top dollar paying customers on the hill on the weekends spending more money than there are entire ski weekday visitors and season holder customers and clubs sending money all week long. Plus a huge percentage of them are brown baggers with nothing but parent table squatters.

I get the whole season pass holder and clubs thing is a guaranteed sale income. Any resort would certainly need that imo. But honestly a huge percentage of them are spending less there per visit. For many the season pass may be about the only thing they actually spend on. Imo its the masses on the weekend (most usually paying top dollar) for the lift ticks, and spending most in the lodges. The sheer population of it alone imo would over shadow the other by far.

So who is it that supports the hill more? And is it really so correct to have such a chunk of the hill closed off for the clubs while at its most crowded and financially supporting prime time zoo is to be expected? Not to mention having less runs to ski but also waiting longer on lines due to those same clubs getting the priority?

Im not saying what is right or wrong but asking for opinions. I certainly don't want to hurt the kids in these clubs. But imo there needs to be some better alternative than to close too much of a small hill on the most crowded days. What do you think of all this?

 

[VickieH]

the local clubs are the main supporters of the hill ... without them this wouldn't exist.

So I said are you telling me the weekend masses (like myself) are not paying the most money per ski visits ... and spending the most money per visits in the lodges?

The 2 views above may not be referring to the same things. "Support" not = $$$

The clubs may provide services in exchange for certain benefits. Those services could reduce the overall operating cost which, in turn, allows the business to continue. Think -- club members/parents arriving early and cleaning up the lodge or staffing Guest Services or whatever. Or maybe supporting youth qualifies the business for some type of grant or low-interest loans or tax breaks?

Maybe have a conversation with someone there -- with the objective of learning, not arguing -- and discover what the clubs do to support the mountain.

 

[Goose]

The 2 views above may not be referring to the same things. "Support" not = $$$

The clubs may provide services in exchange for certain benefits. Those services could reduce the overall operating cost which, in turn, allows the business to continue. Think -- club members/parents arriving early and cleaning up the lodge or staffing Guest Services or whatever. Or maybe supporting youth qualifies the business for some type of grant or low-interest loans or tax breaks?

Maybe have a conversation with someone there -- with the objective of learning, not arguing -- and discover what the clubs do to support the mountain.

Oh...our/my intent was never to argue. In fact my brother and I weren't even very angrywith it but was just something we found just annoying enough to converse about. The other fellow on the chair was the one who intervened which neither one of us would have minded but he did so with a real attitude. I didnt write down the entire short conversation. We didn't like the way he intentionally made things sound as though we meant nothing to the hill and they meant everything. It was honestly a bit offensive. And my brother is not as passive as I and he was about to give the guy his attitude right back into his face.

But im not looking to argue here. And I just wanted opinions on the subject.

 

[Sibhusky]

Having had a daughter on a race team both here and at Camelback, I feel I have seen both sides. In both cases, parents are paying a pretty heavy load. It was far far heavier here than it was at Camelback.

Now you have not said whether this was PRACTICE or a race, and I feel it makes a huge difference. I don't recall ever having Camelback close off more than one side of a run for practice. And it was also closed off for Nastar as well, because that's where the timing shack was, so it wasn't closed off for just the ski team. I don't see a thing wrong with this. Here, they have way more real estate available and they will shut off one and occasionally two runs for practice, plus they have a devoted T-bar. But again, way more real estate available. Plus they pay to man that lift.

What you are describing sounds more like it's for a race itself. Not just the one club, but visiting clubs from across the state. And I remember races at Big Boulder where they took over one or two rooms at the lodge and had multiple runs shut off. But you're talking a different thing entirely now. You could easily have 200+ kids, their coaches, their parents, their siblings, all buying tickets, plus race fees. And the food they buy. Figure conservatively 400 people who mostly would not be there otherwise. Maybe even more. Of course they want that event. I'm sure they'd prefer it on some "off weekend", but they have to take it when it can be arranged with the divisional schedule. Not every ski area can host a race any weekend they choose, it'll divide the field.

Here they used to hold the NorAm race and it was a much bigger issue. Weeks preparing the course, and then the location severed the front of the mountain interfering with a bunch of other trails, it was always iffy aside from the prestige thing. And finally that race was abandoned. Current races are smaller events over in the training section. They made the business decision to get out of the major race circuit because it wasn't bringing in the money that justified the hassle.

And I'm sure it's the same for Big Boulder or Jack Frost or wherever you're talking about. They see the money. The resort will only go so far with "supporting racing" until it doesn't pay. They see value. Otherwise, the hassle factor and listening to complaints would cause it to end.

I find it unlikely that you saw just regular practice closing off three runs. Because there just wouldn't be enough kids to make that profitable.

 

[Josh Matta]

One thing to note is most clubs pay the resort far more money than the season passed they buy. Like in some cases Millions of dollars to have that slope closed for racing and I wouldnt be surprised if that number is at least 6 figures at smaller but crowded mountains in the mid Atlantic(Catskills,Berskires, Eastern Pa, elect)

 

[Fishbowl]

I don't mind admitting that race days bug me and distract negatively from my experience, Yes, this is pure selfishness, I confess. If there are others who feel as I do, it could mean less ticket and pass sales, and not just on race day.

 

[Goose]

Interesting posts. Id have to say that day in question was racing with multiple teams/clubs and probably some sort of an event. I guess its sort of a damned if they do damned if they don't scenario. Don't know if there is really any sound alternative that works well. I suppose its more about the available real estate of a small Pocono resort and its zoo like weekend vs what is available elsewhere. I mean those same 30 acres of skiable terrain mean so much more a sacrifice at a resort that may only have 150 vs a place that has 1500 or whatever. I mean hence the problem to begin with I suppose.

Its not just the acreage taken but its also the added wait on already crowded lift lines. The parent squatters and loads of baggage sucking up all the lodge tables, etc,etc,.

I mean I get the whole thing being for the kids just like any other sports. Im not against it at all. But difference being that most those other sports are not intertwined with the masses the way it is on a ski hill. especially a small one at prime time..

I do feel that the weekend zoos do also mean a whole lot to the hill as for income. And it just seems something isn't quite right about the way it can often be. or perhaps better said can seem unfair. But as said I suppose it boils down to lack of real-estate and lifts of the small hills that makes it the issue it is more than anything else especially in weekends and holidays. In a way it is unfair given the time efforts and money the weekend masses spend hitting the slopes, And what is for many of them is very valuable because they don't get to hit it all that much and pay top dollar for it when they do. Then again the others are there all season and often.

So here I go sort of seeing both sides and damned if do damned of don't scenario. We are all just victims of where we live. Highest populations and small hills can make for a lethal combination. What can ya do?? but move...lol

 

[ScotsSkier]

yes, it is quite ridiculous that the race teams that invest a lot of money up front for training and hill space are given priority over the day trippers who may or may not decide to turn up occasionally and buy a ticket.... what on earth are management thinking preferring some guaranteed income

 

[Eleeski]

Because I ski at Squaw, I don't get it. Even when they had the World Cup races there blocking off a LOT of acreage, there was still too much terrain to choose from.

Race teams are the vehicle to develop skiers or in the case of Masters racing, keep skiers engaged. There is great value in races, both for the resort and the general skiing population.

Sometimes the clubs need to be sent to their private jail area. For their safety and ours. We try not to be that organized to be sent to a special area for the clubs with the groups that visit us. Police haven't been called (yet). Clubs were fun when I was starting to ski so I accept their value.

Eric

 

[Goose]

yes, it is quite ridiculous that the race teams that invest a lot of money up front for training and hill space are given priority over the day trippers who may or may not decide to turn up occasionally and buy a ticket.... what on earth are management thinking preferring some guaranteed income

Why such the sarcastic offensive post? One thing to kid with friendly sarcastic humor. But this post basically says Im an idiot for bringing up the topic and even questioning it. I mean talk about "ski talk at a higher level" huh. .

 

[ScotsSkier]

not sarcastic, realistic. You seem to think that mountains should base their model to cater for those who may or may not turn up ...

 

[Goose]

not sarcastic, realistic. You seem to think that mountains should base their model to cater for those who may or may not turn up ...

Ok. so realistically I was an idiot for questioning the topic? but there was a much more respectful way to say what you wanted without doing it that way you did is all. But no worries. Its over

As for your point? I I never at all said they should base all their interest on the weekend masses. Its why Im asking opinions about it. The weekend and holiday masses do show up nearly all the time around here and most of which spend top dollar to ski and visit the bar/s and the food line. There is a lot of worth in that. Just by sheer numbers its a lot. I highly doubt they wouldn't care if they lost the weekend and holiday masses. They too would have to be a very important and significant part of income for the resort.

 

[Sibhusky]

Unfortunately, PA has mostly tiny hills with no real estate for racing. And you can't shrink the race course to take up only a small percentage of that real estate. And you can't run a race season and expect all the kids to take off from school for midweek races. Hell, PA is lucky that there are so many resorts that are day trips, instead of here in Montana where a "local" race besides your own resort is three hours away. (That was an eye opener, that every race would be a major travel expense and a LOT of missed school..)

But one thing you as a skier can do is actually go to a resort's website, and look at their events calendar before picking that resort for the weekend. Because these events are moving around. There's some resort that won't have a race that weekend. Those 300-400 people are going to descend on a different resort the next weekend. In the Poconos, almost every resort will eventually be on the calendar, because I think you've lost the smaller areas that couldn't host events to bankruptcy. So acting all huffy about places holding these events and saying you'll go elsewhere? Tough in your area. Because of your proximity to metro areas, there's PLENTY of kids that compete, enough so that every hill can field a team. Which means they will want to hold a "home" race. In Montana, there's less people, therefore the smaller hills cannot afford to pay race coaches and run events for their five kids who can afford to get involved in this sport. So, easy to find a race free hill here. But then the hills that do have races don't have that many people there anyway, so the race is no biggie.

You need to move.

 

[VickieH]

Knowing in advance about events was critical when I was in the mid-Atlantic. Skiing that day at that location was not worth the hassle.

I knew it was expensive for parents to support their kids' racing. I had no idea it was as costly as alluded to here. In a lot of sports - maybe all - it is the leagues and the reliable income from them that supports the business. Not really surprising that it's the same with skiing, though I'd never thought about it before.

 

[Ogg]

You need to move.

I was going to post pretty much the same thing. I don't think I could stand skiing the Poconos. I'm utterly baffled by people driving from where I live to places like Camelback when much better areas in VT or NY are pretty much the same drive.

 

[Jilly]

I feel the same way as @Goose some days at Tremblant. The race teams takes up some really nice runs for practice on weekends. We have a lot of real estate, but when it's your favourite run, yah. But it's posted on the website as racing or training, so are warned.

As for money from these teams, I'm not sure that the parents are paying anymore than the coaching fees and uniform. It's part of the snow school actually. Coaches are paid by the resort. Bringing in anymore money.....probably not really. Most bring their own lunches as the North side chalet is devoted to them and anyone else who brings their own. So parents buy a season pass, (which includes 10 free hot chocolates and 10% off food), a uniform (ski suit which doesn't change, so can pass on or down) coaching fees, and maybe the express pass. Then maybe the odd the meal. They hardly ever go out for après, So I don't think Tremblant is making money on them. Yes, they got money upfront from the pass sale. But, I really think they are making more money from the visitor. Lift ticket, food, rentals, etc.

Oh, and Erik Guay would close off a run for practice, but usually not on a weekend.

Also an interesting story, years ago, Owl's Head in the Eastern Township decided to get the locals, especially the more mature, retirees to the hill on Tuesdays. Lift tickets were $5. The owners expected that they could make up the money by food and beverages. Most took their lunch, maybe bought a coffee or soup, but not a $20 lunch or spent any time in the bar after skiing. I don't think the new owners are doing this now.

Years ago one of the ski rep's told me they were seeing a decrease in racing and freestyle/park was the thing. Not sure I'm seeing that. But freestyle is coming on strong at Tremblant. And they don't close a run for them. They have their own that us common mortals don't use.

 

[Sibhusky]

As for money from these teams, I'm not sure that the parents are paying anymore than the coaching fees and uniform. It's part of the snow school actually. Coaches are paid by the resort. Bringing in anymore money.....probably not really. Most bring their own lunches as the North side chalet is devoted to them and anyone else who brings their own. So parents buy a season pass, (which includes 10 free hot chocolates and 10% off food), a uniform (ski suit which doesn't change, so can pass on or down) coaching fees, and maybe the express pass. Then maybe the odd the meal. They hardly ever go out for après, So I don't think Tremblant is making money on them. Yes, they got money upfront from the pass sale. But, I really think they are making more money from the visitor. Lift ticket, food, rentals, etc.

Certainly most of that is true for practices, but the OP has admitted that what he saw was probably a race event. Also, here, when the team was part of the ski school (and it is no longer) the parents subsidized the coaching salaries to attract the right coaches, because these guys just don't get even remotely the tips that instructors get. We had a number of big fundraising events every year to defray costs for fees charged by the resort for use of the area and the coach salaries and for the upkeep of the team van, wax expenses, a tech to help with tuning the kids' skis for away races, the list goes on. And the team fee wasn't cheap, but it didn't begin to cover costs. Now not all that money ended up going to the resort, but a good portion of it.

Nowadays the team is completely on its own and has to negotiate with the mountain for its events just like Special Olympics, the slopestyle events, the freestyle events, the snowboard events, etc. The coaches are definitely not part of the ski school anymore. Certainly it is still a friendly-business relationship most of the time. But the resort has made clear it is no longer a charity.

I think race prorgams grow and shrink normally. I know the last time I heard numbers, the team was really more than double the size as when my daughter was on it, with a growth in coach numbers to go with it. I would guess it has continued to grow with the Lindsey Vonn/Mikaela Shiffrin news features. It is also much younger than it used to be, which requires different coach ratios. The runs where they train look to be closed when they are in use, which is close to every day as some kids are in an academy program. They used to not be roped off so clearly, but jerks from the general public would treat the gates like a free course, jumping in and out as it suited them, tearing up the course for the kids and many times causing hazards. So I see it is now fully closed most of the time. It is far safer fully closed than expecting racers to use a half a run and allow the public alongside, ducking a flimsy rope as it suits them.

 

[Fishbowl]

yes, it is quite ridiculous that the race teams that invest a lot of money up front for training and hill space are given priority over the day trippers who may or may not decide to turn up occasionally and buy a ticket.... what on earth are management thinking preferring some guaranteed income

It is this attitude of self importance that turns so many off from the racing set. Perhaps I’m being oversensative, but there is clear condescendence in this post, and I believe that also shows up in the lodge take overs, the line cutting, on the slopes, in the parking lot and at the ski shop.

I’ll give two examples;

First is being cut in front of at the lift line on a powder day, on a lift that does not serve the race course. When you question this with the lift attendant, you are told they have the right to go first because they paid more for their passes than you did.

And there’s the mom in the lodge, saving a ten person table with gear, on a day where the lodge is standing room only. She has a gear bag at each seat and a crock pot buffet on the table. You ask if you can share the table for a few minutes to eat lunch and are told no, this table is for the race team only.

But, despite who thinks they are more important, the question is still which group actually brings in more profit to the resort, racers, pass holders or day trippers?

 

[Sibhusky]

I've definitely seen that behavior in the Poconos. Here I might not see it because I don't eat in the lodge closest to the race course, I eat elsewhere. Once again, a real estate issue. We've got multiple eating establishments, most not by the course. But then on busy days, they have been known to go around picking up bags left on tables and even on hooks and throw it all in a pile so that others can use the facilities. Other hills will have rules about where to park and where to eat and where to put stuff if you are there for a race. Maybe your hill needs to enforce some rules.

 

[Tricia]

But, despite who thinks they are more important, the question is still which group actually brings in more profit to the resort, racers, pass holders or day trippers?

The answer is, all of the above.

I've been at resorts where there is a clear preference to the race courses, and I've seen areas where the clear preference is the vacationer.

I think it was last year when we were at A-Basin, which was the only game in town at the time, a bunch of race kids came into the lodge and took over the whole end of the A-Frame. Someone of authority came in and told them to go up stairs. Good for A-Basin.

When Northstar was Shaun White's training ground, they would close off a huge section of the mountain to the lookers left of the Park for his training. This was during a slow snow year. That irked me.