Small Resorts in the West in Jeopardy (WSJ)

[Goose]

Actually, I think the intermediate preference for lots of different runs is built-in. A big part of the fun for them is exploring the different areas of the mountain. An expert is much more likely to be happy hammering one perfect run over and over again.

I don't think that only applies to experts at all. Many people of different abilities often find an area or run they prefer to hit over and over. I been doing that most my skiing life even before my skills progrssed. Outside of exploring and familiarizing myself with a new resort I usually end up with a favorite area or run of the day. It can (at the same resort) change from one visit to the next and is usually based on a happiest obtainable medium between conditions, crowds, and desired terrain, etc..

The smaller the hill the less possible to avoid crowds and lines of course and sometimes that ends up determining just where I ski on the hill that day and what I do. And often either of those three things might be sacrificed to some degree due to the other two or just one being far too poor or far too good.
There are days (especially at smaller hills) where the crowds dictate where I ski even at the sacrifice of desired terrain. Conditions can do the same to either of the other two so it becomes about all of them and finding that happy medium (if possible). At least is how I go about it.

A day at Camelback this season (and I horribly realized why I havnt been there in probably 20 yrs) was so terribly crowded and ice crusted. The black and also longer runs from the top of the small resort where just not worthy of the lift lines. So My buddy and I found a mid chair with little lines, better conditions blue runs. It wasn't my desire that day when we started the day but the crowds and conditions dictated what the happiest place was to be and that was it. So I made very many more runs than we otherwise would have and had the better available conditions. That's where (all things considered) the most obtainable happiness was in skiing that hill that day.

 

[tball]

There are a couple groups I ski with that regularly visit Summit County. It's interesting how they need to ski Breck, Keystone, Copper, Vail and Beaver Creek to feel like they had the full experience. Meanwhile, I spend nearly all my days at Copper, mostly on the same dozen or so runs.

 

[Posaune]

For me the big difference between local hills and mega-resorts is the convenience factor. If terrain type and snow are equal, I tend toward the smaller areas mostly because I hate big, crowded places. My examples are my home hill of Mt. Baker and the mega resort up the road, Whistler. Both places have incredible terrain, WB just has lots more. However, the hassle factor at Whistler is way higher than at Baker.

The one big problem at Baker is the windy highway up there, it takes longer than I would like and it requires one to pay attention the whole way. Once I get there the crowds are low no non-existent and weekday lift lines only happen before opening on a powder day.

Whistler has the same drive problem (but with much more traffic to make up for less severe curves) as well as a parking problem (this one I have fixed, though), the large crowds, huge cost, and commercial patina over everything. Once I get through all of this, the skiing is great, though.

I guess it shows my feelings about the places when I note that even though W/B is close enough to me to day ski in a pinch, I didn't go there once this season while I've hit Baker 45 days so far.

 

[Monique]

The money is in intermediate families. They often prefer groomed runs. And they like a lot of different groomed runs. This contributes to a preference for larger ski areas.

Actually, I think the intermediate preference for lots of different runs is built-in. A big part of the fun for them is exploring the different areas of the mountain. An expert is much more likely to be happy hammering one perfect run over and over again.

There are companies in all industries that make money by serving niche markets. It sounds like there are a few, rare, cases like that in the ski area industry.

That being said, there are also industries where niche services have failed. So, ymmv I guess ...

There are a couple groups I ski with that regularly visit Summit County. It's interesting how they need to ski Breck, Keystone, Copper, Vail and Beaver Creek to feel like they had the full experience. Meanwhile, I spend nearly all my days at Copper, mostly on the same dozen or so runs.

Hmm. I probably could name a dozen runs at Breck where I find myself spending 90% of my time. Even fewer if Horseshoe Bowl counts as only one, and if the lines directly below Whale's Tail count as one.

Eric was strongly committed to staying at Breck. Creature of habit. These days I'm pondering Copper and Loveland. Though I guess then I might have to add A Basin for the spring. But if I DID choose Copper and Loveland, I'd need an enormous amount of tour guiding to stashes before I would feel like I could get the same value out of them that I get at Breck. Until I gained that familiarity, I'd feel that Copper and Loveland are limited because I haven't really seen all that they have to offer ... from which I could pick and choose my handful of 90% runs.

 

[David Chaus]

This mega-resort vs small ski area dichotomy overlooks the places that are in-between, the “2nd tier” resorts that have plenty of amenities, infrastructure and terrain that are typically seen at large destination resorts, but are more off the beaten track. For me, this is the sweet zone. Instead of being near a major gateway like SLC or Denver, you might need a connecting flight.

For example: Schweitzer, Sun Peaks and for that matter most of the BC resorts fit this category. In his unofficial guide, @Jim Kenney described Revelstoke as a mega- resort-sized place with a local’s vibe. These other in-between resorts feel like that to me as well. I’ve been going on longer ski trips the last 5-7 years because I had never done that before in my life, and of course to enjoy the social aspect of the Gatherings, but I’d be perfectly happy taking trips to Bachelor, Schweitzer, Sun Peaks, Red Mountain and other destinations that are within a day’s drive.

 

[tball]

Eric was strongly committed to staying at Breck. Creature of habit. These days I'm pondering Copper and Loveland. Though I guess then I might have to add A Basin for the spring. But if I DID choose Copper and Loveland, I'd need an enormous amount of tour guiding to stashes before I would feel like I could get the same value out of them that I get at Breck. Until I gained that familiarity, I'd feel that Copper and Loveland are limited because I haven't really seen all that they have to offer ... from which I could pick and choose my handful of 90% runs.

My initial thought is the seasonal lesson program you've enjoyed so much at Breck isn't available at Copper or Loveland and not having that would be a big change. That lesson program is a great example of how the economics of a resort the size of Breck allows them to do things others can't.

You'd easily figure out Loveland and Copper in a season. There are plenty of us to show you around, and it's always fun to learn a new mountain! Spending money to ski A-basin when your pass becomes worthless each spring is annoying, though.
Start a thread to discuss if you are up for it!

 

[Monique]

My initial thought is the seasonal lesson program you've enjoyed so much at Breck isn't available at Copper or Loveland and not having that would be a big change. That lesson program is a great example of how the economics of a resort the size of Breck allows them to do things others can't.

You'd easily figure out Loveland and Copper in a season. There are plenty of us to show you around, and it's always fun to learn a new mountain! Spending money to ski A-basin when your pass becomes worthless each spring is annoying, though.
Start a thread to discuss if you are up for it!

Yeah, definitely way OT, but something I'd like to noodle around about. But there are a lot of factors at play, not least that right now I can't even muster the energy to ski, which makes it hard to predict what I'd want in the future.

BUT .. way OT for this thread! I may hit you up on PM, though, to noodle just a little in private. (That sounds dirty ...)

 

[Slide of Hans]

A new lifeline for Tamarack Resort in Idaho. Investor deadlines to get the mid mtn lodge finished by 2024 and have the repossesed lower Wildwood lift that.serves good fall line runs, installed by 2020.

https://boisedev.com/news/2018/11/20/tamarack-resort-imperium-blue-mmg/

 

[Talisman]

I rode a lift with a long-time Monarch pass holder at Copper Mountain last week. He said it was a rough year for snow at Monarch. Lots of bare spots where coverage is usually good, and he heard rumors of possible investment in snowmaking for the first time.

He said Copper Mountain's conditions were WAY better than Monarch, which is why they were up using their three reciprocal days. Here's the current snow report where that difference isn't really obvious::

View attachment 43333

The more northerly Colorado resorts had a much better snow year, so Monarch missed many storms. It just really surprised me to hear of possible snowmaking at Monarch. If they need it, I can't imagine how the other smaller resorts can survive without snowmaking.

Snowfall can be fickle for even well positioned resorts. I enjoy skiing Monarch and have been fortunate to be there for various days with fantastic conditions. A few CO skiers asked me "why did you ski Monarch, it is so small?". To me Monarch skis like the top half of a CO ski resort with a good variety of runs, deep powder (when i was there) and not crowded. No offense to larger CO ski areas, but it was great not to have the long flat run outs to get back to the lift.

 

[Mike Rogers]

It's tough for the smaller resorts.

In Alberta we lost a legendary small resort, Fortress Mountain, 15ish years ago. I skied Fortress a bunch as a kid, and have great memories of deep days and steep, but short runs. Unfortunately, many visitors found the access road to be scary, and the ancient lifts even scarier. Fortress was never really able to sustain an independent run. It has allied with various big groups, like Aspen, Blackcomb and Lake Louise/RCR, but with the possible exception of Aspen, none of them gave Fortress love. With no new investment, it was hard to bring in new skiers.

Two groups have bought Fortress since. One was able to get a half season out of the hill beofore being forced to sell. The current group runs cat skiing on the old terrain and has grand plans for a major resort, but is perpetually 2 years away from spinning lifts. Big expansions at Fernie, the introduction of Kicking Horse and Revelstoke, and the addition of steep terrain at Lake Louise and Sunshine all take away from Fortress' slice of the pie. Even the rising popularity of our other "small hill", Castle, doesn't help.

But Castle is also struggling. People in the know tell me if they can get 100k skier visits a year, things they can start building / maintaining. For now, crowds show up on Powder days, but it is quiet most of the time. They're staying above water, but barely. The infrastructure is ancient, and cannot handle bigger days. Snow making is virtually non-existent, making the season the shortest (by far) in Alberta, and making the threat of drought/warm weather very serious...with delayed openings and early closing (February a few years back). The fact that wind often shuts down the upper mountain, and there isn't an alternate way to access the terrain, also turns off many skiers.

I lived in Southern Alberta, and had a pass to Castle for a couple of years, but I am no longer a regular. For an extra 100, I can get a Louise pass and have a scheduled (and more reliably on schedule) season that lasts 11 weeks longer. I no longer have to worry about long drives that end in skiing the tiny lower mountain due to wind-closures. I still pick my days, and some of my best days every year are at Castle, but I don't think the pass is a good value. And I love Castle, and I like supporting smaller businesses.

As bigger resorts become more affordable for passholders, and all resorts become unaffordable for daytrippers (Castle's lift ticket is up to $95/day), the little guys get squeezed. I wish Castle all the best, but I won't be trading in my 5 area pass (Louise, kicking horse, fernie, and kimberly) for a short, variable-quality season at Caslte.
I think a lot skiers feel this way.

 

[noncrazycanuck]

your last paragraph pretty much nailed it.
I have always loved my road trips. Every year do at least one loop, usually more, but with today's cheap local passes it's harder to convince others to join me.
similar to your Castle comments I rarely get my buddy down to Baker which is exactly the same distance as Whistler and he even has a cabin there

Along with Whistler a number of once small inexpensive resorts like Fernie (snow Valley) Kicking horse (whitetooth) Revelstoke (mackenzie) and all the Okanogan hills expanded. Now all have a large local pass holder bases, keep upgrading and increasing their base. There are only so many of us

it's hard to convince those who "ski for free" on their local hill to try something different, at a greater cost, if the skiing potentially is only as good

 

[Sibhusky]

it's hard to convince those who "ski for free" on their local hill to try something different, at a greater cost, if the skiing potentially is only as good

Amen. Any trip from here is an undertaking that not only involves buying another ticket, but even lodging. Plus the loss of ski time driving. I have a huge capacity for boredom, having skied on a season pass at Camelback for 17 seasons.

 

[noncrazycanuck]

your out of my league for staying power.
I get restless with just this region.

 

[Sibhusky]

I used to be a belt notch-er, but I was younger then

 

[Slide of Hans]

Article on Teton Pass Ski Area MT. Still closed and for sale. Rather than do a nonprofit, the local ski community is trying to help any new owner with services

http://www.choteauacantha.com/news/article_8048026c-0d30-11e9-969b-e33596ca5a7a.html

 

[wyowindrunner]

I try to hit a small indy every westerm trip. I just stopped in at Pebble Creek id last week
On a JHole, targhee trip. Great old school vibe, cheap and steep, reminded me of the indy Magic Mtn VT.

Good for you. Another in this area is Kelly Canyon. Family owned since opening in the 50's I believe..Closed on Sundays. Beaver Mt is also family owned.

 

[Posaune]

Right now I'm on a trip where all of the eight ski area we're visiting have been and will be small independent places. So far it's been a great trip with lots of seriously good skiing.

 

[New2]

Article on Teton Pass Ski Area MT. Still closed and for sale. Rather than do a nonprofit, the local ski community is trying to help any new owner with services

http://www.choteauacantha.com/news/article_8048026c-0d30-11e9-969b-e33596ca5a7a.html

It's buried in the article, but it's there... asking price is at $375,000. We've got a lot of people on this forum who could scrounge up that kind of money. Of course, then you have the ongoing losses to factor in, but still... your own rocky mountain ski area for less than the cost of a condo in Denver!

 

[DanoT]

But Castle is also struggling. People in the know tell me if they can get 100k skier visits a year, things they can start building / maintaining. For now, crowds show up on Powder days, but it is quiet most of the time. They're staying above water, but barely. The infrastructure is ancient, and cannot handle bigger days. Snow making is virtually non-existent, making the season the shortest (by far) in Alberta, and making the threat of drought/warm weather very serious...with delayed openings and early closing (February a few years back). The fact that wind often shuts down the upper mountain, and there isn't an alternate way to access the terrain, also turns off many skiers.

A few years ago I was at Castle and talked to the guy plowing the parking lot who was one of the 125 associates that own Castle. He told me that the majority of the associate owners like the mountain just the way it is (the greatest mountain in North America that you have never heard of) and they do not want to upgrade or expand the place. Castle gets from me for being the anti Whistler.

Castle gets around 100k skier visits annually and that is not enough to break even. However the resort owns the water/sewer system for the houses, town homes and cabins at the base and that revenue makes up the cash needed for the mountain to break even.

 

[dbostedo]

...your own rocky mountain ski area for less than the cost of a condo in Denver!

Sounds cool... but the operating costs...