So I see where the Bush is marketing "the most open trails in the east". This includes, the trails off the Rock, even tho the lift is not spinning. Should trails you have to hike up be counted in your "open trail" count.

I kinda have a problem with this and feel this is counter to what SV has done marketingwise especially when compared to the voodoo marketing of the ASC days. What do you think?

Well, it's not up to get to Castlerock, it's across. You can make it in about 20-30 minutes going slow, which darn close to the amount of time you might wait for a chair and spend on the lift ride, plus you get some exercise instead of sitting on your butt getting cold.

Count or no count? Who cares as long as its skiing great? Personally, I'd love to see either HG or CR lifts closed on alternate days so there is always something to hike for. But that's just me.

John

I think that the lift is not running for other reasons...terrain can't handle the traffic was mentioned.

I do agree though that this is a tough call. Some could see it as deceptive and I would avoid that if at all possible.

This falls under the same vein as to saying Sugarbush has "115 trails open" on a weekday and not running the Slide Brook. Some would assume, and pay for, those 115 trails are accessible without taking off skis. Simple solution: "Sugarbush Mt Ellen has 45 runs, LP has X."

summitchallenger wrote:

I think that the lift is not running for other reasons...terrain can't handle the traffic was mentioned. I do agree though that this is a tough call. Some could see it as deceptive and I would avoid that if at all possible. This falls under the same vein as to saying Sugarbush has "115 trails open" on a weekday and not running the Slide Brook. Some would assume, and pay for, those 115 trails are accessible without taking off skis. Simple solution: "Sugarbush Mt Ellen has 45 runs, LP has X."

Personally, since Slide Brook is a lift and all 115 trails are lift served without SB I don't think that is a problem. Stowe doesn't qualify their trails open that you have to take off your skis if you want to ski Big Spruce from the main mountain nor should they. I think people DO assume that if a trail is open they can access it from a lift not have to hike it.

This is a little grey for me. I have no problem with the trails being listed as open while the lift doesn't run. I've made the hike (funny story - a buddy was trying to get us back to a tree run he had done, it was taking a long time, and I jokingly said "if we end up at the top of CR...", and of course 2 minutes later that's where we were. However, I think if you want to market as "the most open trails in the east", then I think you should step up and spin the chair.

The greyness gets greyer, depending on the media...I think it's OK to note on their website that they have "the most open trails in the east", but wouldn't want to see/hear that claim in an email/radio ad. Call me wishy-washy I guess.

Interesting question.

I'm kinda ambivalent. I can see where some people might be upset with trails being listed that are not lift accessible.

On the mountain's side, they are patrolling the area and there is a separate listing for lifts that are closed. It is clearly marked.

Now, I haven't heard this marketing, but it is an odd enough situation to require an asterisk.

And I think it could be sold as ??? trails open, including our famed Castlerock area, which is only available by hiking.

I'm absolutely sure most of the people that hiked over there would rather they were open. And the fact that they are hard to get to... well, all the open trails aren't really accessible to all the people that come up. I know a lot of people it would be funny to see on Moonshine, let alone Ripcord.

Still, I could see some saying it is unfair to say they are open, when they aren't lift served.

It's cool that they're opening them and not running the lift, but I don't think it should be counted in the overall trail count. It's like when a lift is on windhold and the resort still counts those trails in the daily trail count. Kinda shady if you ask me.

skibum1321 wrote:

It's cool that they're opening them and not running the lift, but I don't think it should be counted in the overall trail count. It's like when a lift is on windhold and the resort still counts those trails in the daily trail count. Kinda shady if you ask me.

The windhold comparison is a fair analogy for me. I have no problem with them mentioning that Castlerock is open, but it shoudn't be a part of the trail count. 90% of the skiing public expects X number of trails in the ski report to be lift-serviced.

This all brings up the issue which was raised here a few months back - should SB invest in a small snowmaking coverage expansion to cover the in-run to Castlerock and the bottom pitch of Liftline and/or Troll Road so as to extend Castlerock's season and avoid the rock-strewn mess when accessing the lift from Downspout? Obviously this will be a sensitive issue when talking about snowmaking and the Rock int he same sentence, but it don't think this is a lsippery slope. SV is smart enough to know that this would be as far as they should go on CR. I think it would make an appreciable, positive difference in the experience for most people without any adverse impacts to the experience of Castlerock.

Tin Woodsman wrote:

SV is smart enough to know that this would be as far as they should go on CR. I think it would make an appreciable, positive difference in the experience for most people without any adverse impacts to the experience of Castlerock.

I agree 1000% If SV didn't appreciate CR for what it is, they never would have installed that double with the chairs spaced out like they did. I'm all for it!

ski_resort_observer wrote:

summitchallenger wrote: I think that the lift is not running for other reasons...terrain can't handle the traffic was mentioned. I do agree though that this is a tough call. Some could see it as deceptive and I would avoid that if at all possible. This falls under the same vein as to saying Sugarbush has "115 trails open" on a weekday and not running the Slide Brook. Some would assume, and pay for, those 115 trails are accessible without taking off skis. Simple solution: "Sugarbush Mt Ellen has 45 runs, LP has X." Personally, since Slide Brook is a lift and all 115 trails are lift served without SB I don't think that is a problem. Stowe doesn't qualify their trails open that you have to take off your skis if you want to ski Big Spruce from the main mountain nor should they. I think people DO assume that if a trail is open they can access it from a lift not have to hike it.

I think that the biggest distinction between these examples is that Sugarbush installed the Slide Brook and markets the two areas as one, or it did at one time. Stowe has always had two isolated areas, as has Snow. So when I look at trail maps as an unknowing consumer, and pony up the $60+, I expect that I am going to get that access. Minor point I know, but it still seems like they want to have it both ways--state "we have two interconnected areas with lots of skiing..." and then save $$$$ by not running that lift and forcing folks to do the pre-1995 method: drive between the two.

summitchallenger wrote:

ski_resort_observer wrote: summitchallenger wrote: I think that the lift is not running for other reasons...terrain can't handle the traffic was mentioned. I do agree though that this is a tough call. Some could see it as deceptive and I would avoid that if at all possible. This falls under the same vein as to saying Sugarbush has "115 trails open" on a weekday and not running the Slide Brook. Some would assume, and pay for, those 115 trails are accessible without taking off skis. Simple solution: "Sugarbush Mt Ellen has 45 runs, LP has X." Personally, since Slide Brook is a lift and all 115 trails are lift served without SB I don't think that is a problem. Stowe doesn't qualify their trails open that you have to take off your skis if you want to ski Big Spruce from the main mountain nor should they. I think people DO assume that if a trail is open they can access it from a lift not have to hike it. I think that the biggest distinction between these examples is that Sugarbush installed the Slide Brook and markets the two areas as one, or it did at one time. Stowe has always had two isolated areas, as has Snow. So when I look at trail maps as an unknowing consumer, and pony up the $60+, I expect that I am going to get that access. Minor point I know, but it still seems like they want to have it both ways--state "we have two interconnected areas with lots of skiing..." and then save $$$$ by not running that lift and forcing folks to do the pre-1995 method: drive between the two.

Let's not forget that it was ASC that installed Slidebrook. I wonder if SV would have if ASC had not...

Greg wrote:

summitchallenger wrote: ski_resort_observer wrote: summitchallenger wrote: I think that the lift is not running for other reasons...terrain can't handle the traffic was mentioned. I do agree though that this is a tough call. Some could see it as deceptive and I would avoid that if at all possible. This falls under the same vein as to saying Sugarbush has "115 trails open" on a weekday and not running the Slide Brook. Some would assume, and pay for, those 115 trails are accessible without taking off skis. Simple solution: "Sugarbush Mt Ellen has 45 runs, LP has X." Personally, since Slide Brook is a lift and all 115 trails are lift served without SB I don't think that is a problem. Stowe doesn't qualify their trails open that you have to take off your skis if you want to ski Big Spruce from the main mountain nor should they. I think people DO assume that if a trail is open they can access it from a lift not have to hike it. I think that the biggest distinction between these examples is that Sugarbush installed the Slide Brook and markets the two areas as one, or it did at one time. Stowe has always had two isolated areas, as has Snow. So when I look at trail maps as an unknowing consumer, and pony up the $60+, I expect that I am going to get that access. Minor point I know, but it still seems like they want to have it both ways--state "we have two interconnected areas with lots of skiing..." and then save $$$$ by not running that lift and forcing folks to do the pre-1995 method: drive between the two. Let's not forget that it was ASC that installed Slidebrook. I wonder if SV would have if ASC had not...

Very true Greg. I don't think they would have. Since the sale, they have attacked the SB Express repeatedly as something that "is not used." Well, take it off line as much as they do and I wonder why it is not used

summitchallenger wrote:

and then save $$$$ by not running that lift and forcing folks to do the pre-1995 method: drive between the two.

point of order....there is free dedicated MadBus service between the two base areas 7 days a week. But I know what you meant.... (I promise, no sugarcoating here)

OK, I'm gonna be bold here: Slidebrook is a gimmick, and it's really not all that useful.

Yes, it will get you from South to North or vice-versa without taking your skis off. If you're having lunch in the Gatehouse, decide you want to ride over at North you have to:
ride Gatehouse chair
ride Slidebrook chair
then you have a choice, but typically if you want to ski you would
ride North Ridge Chair

That's 3 rides before you get to any decent skiing! Add to that fact that the Slide Brook ride can be quite windy/cold, and you've got a potential warmup/pitstop to deal with. I think I'd rather take a shuttle bus - still don't have to take your boots off. I like the view from Slide Brook on a clear warm day, but generally I make a choice - either Norht or South. Can't say I blame SV for not running the chair. Think about the last time you rode it, and try to remember how many people you saw going the other way? I don't think you can blame lack of ridership on the fact that the lift gets closed midweek.