As usual the Bush has been snubbed by those avid skiers on SKI mag's polling list, but Alpine Zone's website user's poll has the Bush #1, again. (Same last year). Will the power of the web overtake the snailmail PR? Obviously AZ is used by real skiers, SKI mag is a commercial enterprise. So why does it hurt our feelings?

I think that anyone who bothers to peel even one layer of this onion quickly concludes that this survey is a sham with self-selection bias so severe as to be irrelevant. To a large extent, SB doesn't really target the type of skiers who participate in these surveys. To take this line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, I think most of us can agree that MRG offers one of the best pure sking experiences out there when the conditions are good. Yet you won't soon see MRG on the SKI mag list b/c Dentists from Jersey and their families don't know about it and don't want to know about it. SB is naturally more commercial than its neighbor, and certainly does draw in SKI mag readers from the Boston area, but not nearly to the extent that it's competitors to the South and North do.

IMO they are all the best. We ski, we ride, we have fun!!!

notorious wrote:

Obviously AZ is used by real skiers, SKI mag is a commercial enterprise.

Thanks for the kind words, but who said AZ isn't a huge commercial enterprise...

Greg wrote:

notorious wrote: Obviously AZ is used by real skiers, SKI mag is a commercial enterprise. Thanks for the kind words, but who said AZ isn't a huge commercial enterprise...

Your accountant?

Touché!

Regarding Mad River inSKI....MRG in fact was rated #1 in the east for value and for terrain, and I believe for one other category. Both MRG & Sugarbush were listed somewhere between 11-20 overall. I think MRG was #19...can't remember what Sugarbush was.
I'm a subscriber and I get the survey annually. Aside from Sugarbush or MRG, the other resorts I rate never make it to the magazine. Don't know if thats a good or a bad thing!

That's interesting. Sounds like a lot of the "problem" (not really a problem, IMHO) is that SKI uses many non-skiing categories in their survey, thereby putting places like MRG at a disadvantage. No worries - just more snow for the rest of us.

SKI magzaine readers poll for Top 20 Eastern Resorts had Sugarbush at #13 and MRG at #20. There are a LOT of non-skiing / on-mountain factors that determine the results. MRG was ranked #1 for Terrain/Variety with Sugarbush #5 and for Terrain/Challenge #1 MRG and #6 Sugarbush and #1 to MRG for Value.

WWF-VT wrote:

SKI magzaine readers poll for Top 20 Eastern Resorts had Sugarbush at #13 and MRG at #20. There are a LOT of non-skiing / on-mountain factors that determine the results. MRG was ranked #1 for Terrain/Variety with Sugarbush #5 and for Terrain/Challenge #1 MRG and #6 Sugarbush and #1 to MRG for Value.

....and it almost sounds like the valley could be a skiers paradise. All we need now is some fast food joints, big box stores, and outlet stores. Somebody get on it !

I think we're not answering the question asked, which is

Quote:

So why does it hurt our feelings?

For Summit Ventures, the answer is simple. People are being told the place isn't all that hot. People who decide where to spend their vacations by looking to see where the people that answer the survey for Ski magazine think to be best, won't be coming up here to try us out. But how about those of us who enjoy, ski, and/or live here?

I think the answer is in the feeling you have when you tell someone they ought to try Sugarbush. We're not saying it because we need company on the lift. We say it because we like to see people enjoy themselves, and think this is one of those places where their chances are among the best that they'll do just that.

Now we have a "national survey" saying that the place we feel is good... isn't.

It is being exposed to a lack of respect, from some who consider themselves skiers. Luckily, as stated above, we can admit that we're not up to snuff as a resort with a good place like Holiday Valley... And move on, putting up with our... not quite as good place.

And of course the other part of the story (For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction?) is that many of us see it as a survey of the ability and taste of readers of the majority of readers of Ski magazine.

I think the Ski survey is biased towards resorts that have big skier visits number. Holiday Valley surprisingly to many but did you know this small resort does over 500,000 skier visits per year. You do an aggressive marketing campaign to get skiers at the hill to fill out the survey and voila, your one of the top 10 resorts in the east.

I suspect as the Bush's skier visits rise back to where it's used to be, it's place on this list will rise as well.

Let's not forget that in LAST YEAR'S Ski Magazine Reader's Poll, Sugarbush rose to #7 (or something similar, I know it was in the top 10) in the East. Summit Ventures was ecstatic about that (as they should be for all the marketing reasons). Did things really change that much last year that would justify the slip to #13? To me, it points out the arbitrariness of the rankings. MRG didn't make the top 20 at all last year but this year it came in at #20. What changed?

I'd be willing to bet that after this season, with all the Lincoln Peak base area improvements, Sugarbush will make the top 10 in next year's rankings. I understand Lostone's points about it being a rejection of our recomendation of Sugarbush to friends. I will say, however, that the people that I recommend Sugarbush to do not ask where it ranked in the Ski Magazine Reader's Poll before deciding whether to try it out. Most of them usually say "I've heard Sugarbush is a great mountain to ski and I've been meaning to get up there to try it but just haven't been able to yet."

In my mind the Ski Reader's Poll is interesting reading to pass the time in the bathroom or elsewhere but I don't personally place a lot of stock in its conclusions.

madskier6 wrote:

Let's not forget that in LAST YEAR'S Ski Magazine Reader's Poll, Sugarbush rose to #7 (or something similar, I know it was in the top 10) in the East. Summit Ventures was ecstatic about that (as they should be for all the marketing reasons). Did things really change that much last year that would justify the slip to #13?

Must be THE STAIRS.

madskier6 wrote:

In my mind the Ski Reader's Poll is interesting reading to pass the time in the bathroom or elsewhere but I don't personally place a lot of stock in its conclusions.

Yes, the SKI reader's poll definitely has a use in the bathroom, though reading it isn't one of them.