A Great Mountain

[HowieT2]

Hawk wrote--"Before all that, we skied all the same terrain and the mountain was a family of skiers with mostly locals, long timers and the day trippers that were not a huge factor. The mountain was mostly untracked on pow days at first lift and the vibe was very laid back."

I believe that mountain was insolvent.

exactly.

[MntMan4Bush]

so now we are basically back to the snow making debate. I dont feel comfortable expressing an opinion on the quality of the snow that sb makes. But they have been buying new snow guns, year after year, which are rather expensive. So its not like the equipment is old and out of date. Do these new guns make bad snow??? is sugarbush the only resort to have purchased these devices? the answer is obviously, no. So why all the complaints about the quality of the snow that was made. Are they intentionally making bad snow? that would be odd. Is it cheaper to make bad snow instead of good snow? I would find that hard to believe.
Is there some type of skill or experience making snow that SB lacks which results in bad snow? That could be.

I've seen the new guns. I've seen them repair/replace busted lines and pipes. They absolutely have spent some money on this issue. Is it enough to keep up with other comparable resorts in the NE? I don't feel it is, but I'm not the guy shelling out coin for it.

I have never made snow. I don't know what goes into making snow (apart from air, water and energy) and I am pretty far from an expert on how to do so correctly. However as a consumer I can speak with some expertise about the experience. Our man made snow is not good. I'd take the blind folded Taster Choice Challenge any day with other mountains in our area. As for why I have no idea. I can only guess. So a few guesses.

- If you are only going to budget for $X worth of snow in a given season and that amount is much lower than your competitors who plan on staying open as long as you do then when you make snow make enough to get the trails open, then blast it with wet glop that will freeze over night and become rock hard. Now you have a much more rigid base that I'm guessing takes longer to thaw. As such you can stay open as late as other resorts when Mother Natures takes her summer vacation and you didn't spend nearly as much money. Other mountains on the other hand may do this on day one to fill in the cracks, but then they change over to skier friendly snow that is loose granular and fun to ski on. It probably doesn't last as long into the season and skis off a bit quicker so they have to make it more often, but the skiers enjoy it while it's there and they keep making more so it's always there. Skier experience = Happy Face. I mean Killington made snow the week before the last huge storm. I bet it wasn't because they love to spend money. Although who doesn't.

- Maybe the new low E guns looked great on paper. Maybe they promised lower costs, were on clearance at Filene's Basement, came with some free snake oil. I have no idea, but it's possible that a poor purchase was made. Or maybe a good one. Maybe the guns produce the same snow as the others but for less annual cost so they they turn them on a bit more, but it's only marginally so and they look good but it doesn't cost much more. I will say that Killington and Stowe have quite a few Fan Guns. These bad boys put out volume. It is amazing to watch. I know we bought one or two of them. I don't see them out very often lately, but that could be more to do with my timing.

- Not keeping up with the times. I often see Win quote. "Well we made X amount more than last year". If you're one of the bottom tier snow makers then that isn't much of a statement. You need to look at your competitors and compare. In the last 2 years Stowe has bought 445 HKD Tower Guns, 150 Land Guns and 20 Fan guns. (Or possibly some of that is being bought this summer too. I know some was bought last summer) Plus a new reservoir and lots of pipeline. In any case that seems pretty significant.

- Training could be an issue too. I don't know. I have no idea what makes good snow. I know they work hard, but if they don't have proper technique I'm sure it makes a huge difference.Or maybe they're under staffed and can't be running the lines all day/night to make sure one gun isn't hosing down a slope or aimed at a tree. Maybe that can be addressed by making sure all mountain employees (Patrol, ambassadors, lifties enjoying a quick break, Win's dog Rumble) get some rudimentary training of what to look for and what good snow is like and call in any time they notice a gun going wrong. (Maybe that is already done) Or maybe they are trained exactly as the mountain wants and doing exactly as they are told by guess number 1 made by me.

Anyways it's only a guess by me of course and has no basis in fact. I only know what I experience and can hands down say that our snow making is lacking and not of the quality most people enjoy on a daily basis as compared to other mountains. I don't care to pull up stakes and move to another mountain. I've been coming to the valley and central VT since I was a kid. I'm here, but while here I want to see it better and I'll make sure to lend a voice to it until I do. When this forum started we were the small mountain with low vistor-ship I mentioned. Most of the posts then were all happy Go Win Go! Was it long term viable? Maybe not. So Win stepped in and changed the mountain and in most ways good ways. I'm sure his heart was all in the right place and we've all enjoyed some nice perks as a result. Whether you use the lodge or not, or any of the other facilities they were well thought out and not monstrosities and I imagine most woudl agree good things. The issue was that when a change was made it impacted a lot more then snapping fingers to profitability and the mountain has to keep up on the new demands being made of it and the marketplace.

[Hawk]

Your responses are always so well thought out. Damn. OK it's a draw or mayber you won? IDK We don't see eye to eye is all. I respect that. It comes down to this. You love what they have done and I say for the money they spent, they could have done so much more. Different and better! Yes I know, it's not my money or my resort. It's just an opinion as is yours. I'm certainly not loosing sleep over it and I will still buy you a drink in our cozy crowded bar. By the way there is now enough snow for that adventure you and I have been talking about. We should talk when I get back from Jackson.

QUOTE=HowieT2;223071]So basically you should go ski mad river. really, its so close and cheaper, why wouldnt you? obviously, because its only been open for about 10 days this whole season. and cant wait to hear your complaints about the lift line at the single on a powder day.

Just because there are other like minded individuals does not make your position valid. need I cite the litany of widely held beliefs that are demonstrably wrong. and just stating that this is your opinion doesnt make it reasonable. SV took over a neglected resort, which is why there were no crowds back in the day and we had this gem of a mtn to ourselves. They have made significant capital investments in facilities, lifts, snowmaking and grooming. You can reasonably argue the merits of those investments, but saying they havent done "anything" is wrong.[/QUOTE]

[Fourwide]

MM4B wrote: "My issue is that we are seeing increased skier visits, therefore increased revenue, but we are not seeing the same put back into the day to day operations of the mountain. OK sure. We got a a new lodge and the ski school. However possibly a bit of a different motive there. I mean how many Claybrook units would you sell if the base lodge was an extended tent? Sure we all get the benefit of it and it is much nicer so thanks. But don't make it seem like it was all done for the skier base. It was done as an investment to make sure that returns on real estate investments paid off. Smart move and I don't question it. However let's focus on the skier niceties now."

Not sure if that's a fair critique. Whatever the reason, the improvements were made.

"I'm talking about more extensive lift maintenance. I'm not asking to replace all the lifts, but how about a radical overhaul of the main offenders and maybe a more rigorous off season maintenance plan to prevent the issues we've been plagued with the last couple of years, and especially this year. It's clear more is needed. Maybe you're just having bad luck, but an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Make some changes. It's clear they are needed. As I mentioned before I expect my car to start 100% of the time I turn the key. If one out of a hundred times my car didn't start or it died on me while driving I wouldn't find that acceptable. In fact I do regular maintenance to ensure it doesn't happen and when a more expensive part is required I pony up and buy it or replace the car if it's a lemon. If someone were paying me to drive them around, expecting a service, and that's how I made money I'd do even more than I do today."

This is a good point. I'm no engineer, but I can't believe these lifts are that complicated. Lots of wear and tear, sure, but not overly engineered. Whenever a lift part malfunctions, it seems that the replacement part must be shipped in from Saskatoon. I'd also guess that the software is ancient, befitting an ancient device.

I don't have a view on the snowmaking debate. Your points certainly could be valid. I'm looking forward to seeing Win's promised posting on that.

[HowieT2]

Your responses are always so well thought out. Damn. OK it's a draw or mayber you won? IDK We don't see eye to eye is all. I respect that. It comes down to this. You love what they have done and I say for the money they spent, they could have done so much more. Different and better! Yes I know, it's not my money or my resort. It's just an opinion as is yours. I'm certainly not loosing sleep over it and I will still buy you a drink in our cozy crowded bar. By the way there is now enough snow for that adventure you and I have been talking about. We should talk when I get back from Jackson.

QUOTE=HowieT2;223071]So basically you should go ski mad river. really, its so close and cheaper, why wouldnt you? obviously, because its only been open for about 10 days this whole season. and cant wait to hear your complaints about the lift line at the single on a powder day.

Just because there are other like minded individuals does not make your position valid. need I cite the litany of widely held beliefs that are demonstrably wrong. and just stating that this is your opinion doesnt make it reasonable. SV took over a neglected resort, which is why there were no crowds back in the day and we had this gem of a mtn to ourselves. They have made significant capital investments in facilities, lifts, snowmaking and grooming. You can reasonably argue the merits of those investments, but saying they havent done "anything" is wrong.

[/QUOTE]

dude, who needs the bar when you have the woods. I dont agree with all they have done. for example, I think they made a mistake not building a bigger schoolhouse with a cafeteria for the blazers and space for day care. and I dont understand why they didnt buy some fan guns (although that isnt an issue this year because it was so cold).
and I was lucky that the worst weekends at sb, I was out in BC. I'm still on cloud 9 from that so I dont have your frustration level.

seriously-you think there's enough snow for a trip to the holy land??? I'm not so sure. I think we lose some on friday and then have to build back up.

[Benski]

I've seen the new guns. I've seen them repair/replace busted lines and pipes. They absolutely have spent some money on this issue. Is it enough to keep up with other comparable resorts in the NE? I don't feel it is, but I'm not the guy shelling out coin for it.

I have never made snow. I don't know what goes into making snow (apart from air, water and energy) and I am pretty far from an expert on how to do so correctly. However as a consumer I can speak with some expertise about the experience. Our man made snow is not good. I'd take the blind folded Taster Choice Challenge any day with other mountains in our area. As for why I have no idea. I can only guess. So a few guesses.

- If you are only going to budget for $X worth of snow in a given season and that amount is much lower than your competitors who plan on staying open as long as you do then when you make snow make enough to get the trails open, then blast it with wet glop that will freeze over night and become rock hard. Now you have a much more rigid base that I'm guessing takes longer to thaw. As such you can stay open as late as other resorts when Mother Natures takes her summer vacation and you didn't spend nearly as much money. Other mountains on the other hand may do this on day one to fill in the cracks, but then they change over to skier friendly snow that is loose granular and fun to ski on. It probably doesn't last as long into the season and skis off a bit quicker so they have to make it more often, but the skiers enjoy it while it's there and they keep making more so it's always there. Skier experience = Happy Face. I mean Killington made snow the week before the last huge storm. I bet it wasn't because they love to spend money. Although who doesn't.

- Maybe the new low E guns looked great on paper. Maybe they promised lower costs, were on clearance at Filene's Basement, came with some free snake oil. I have no idea, but it's possible that a poor purchase was made. Or maybe a good one. Maybe the guns produce the same snow as the others but for less annual cost so they they turn them on a bit more, but it's only marginally so and they look good but it doesn't cost much more. I will say that Killington and Stowe have quite a few Fan Guns. These bad boys put out volume. It is amazing to watch. I know we bought one or two of them. I don't see them out very often lately, but that could be more to do with my timing.

- Not keeping up with the times. I often see Win quote. "Well we made X amount more than last year". If you're one of the bottom tier snow makers then that isn't much of a statement. You need to look at your competitors and compare. In the last 2 years Stowe has bought 445 HKD Tower Guns, 150 Land Guns and 20 Fan guns. (Or possibly some of that is being bought this summer too. I know some was bought last summer) Plus a new reservoir and lots of pipeline. In any case that seems pretty significant.

From my expeareance the newer the guns the quieter they are and the better the snow. The only bad experience i have had with snowmaking have been skiing under the old ratnicks which Win has been replacing with the low e guns. Also most of the new low e tower guns at sugarbush were made by HKD so Stowe is likely buying the same guns as us.

[chrisinvermont]

My comment on the snowmaking is best stated by the soft wipes on the thumbs of my gloves. Couldn't figure out why they are destroyed until I was wiping the snow making glop off of my googles. They consistently blow a wet slop that freezes instantly on the lens. It's like sandpaper when you try and remove it, it just shreds the wipe. Can't avoid it when it blows straight into the lift.

[Hawk]

Did some recon this weekend. There is about 40"+ of base out there now. it is settleing and compressing as we speak. My Brother in law said they have had snow all this week to the tune of about a foot total. That is also going to compress. Today and tomorrow into Saturday they are talking about Snow, sleet, freezing rain. I am thinking we will get a net gain 0 on this event as the freezing rain may sheild the snow underneith and furthe compress it. So all we need it a coating on top and Boom! Next storm and that may be soon as the pattern is active. That is how I see it.

Seriously-you think there's enough snow for a trip to the holy land??? I'm not so sure. I think we lose some on friday and then have to build back up.[/QUOTE]

[MntMan4Bush]

From my expeareance the newer the guns the quieter they are and the better the snow. The only bad experience i have had with snowmaking have been skiing under the old ratnicks which Win has been replacing with the low e guns. Also most of the new low e tower guns at sugarbush were made by HKD so Stowe is likely buying the same guns as us.

That may be true. I don't know enough about gun specifics to comment. I remember us getting these guns a while back, but haven't seen them much lately (this year). Perhaps I have not been on a trail that one was being used on. Did anyone see any of these newer guns this year? When we first got them they were pretty recognizable and prominent. Though I do recall they didn't seem to put out much snow and if I also recall had issues if it was too cold or too warm that limited their usage and was different form existing guns, but I could be wrong. Maybe Low-E also means lower output? Or maybe because they were a lot quieter it was an optical illusion on volume.

If Low-E does mean less volume and output then I have a suggestion. Can we get High-E guns? This is where I toss environmentalism out the door. If gross energy consumption gets us yards of snow a day then I am all for giant fuel guzzling guns. I'm talking dirty diesel. None of that clean crap. Pure dinosaur blood. Hook that thing up to a kitten's heart if you have to and feed it orphan souls. Make the nozzle out of right whale bone and maybe make the packaging it comes in disposable and made of Bicknel Thrush feathers.

But I guess the environment is good to have too and all......Just saying.

[Hawk]

The low-E guns are environmental correct because they use less air pressure to make snow and thus less energy. The energy they save is the power that is used to run the compressors that make the air. In our case these are totally electrical. We do not run any diesel powered air compressors. Again I will state what the actual issue is. We have only a limited amount of air that the system at Sugarbush can produce. This amount is partially depleted because the aging system leaks. Leaks come in all sizes, some big that they fix some small that they don't fix because they don’t know or they can't see because they are remote or underground. Either way that detracts from the overall production. If you buy more low-e guns logic would say you can run more because you use less air. But what happens at sugarbush is that they run to many or they fail to adjust the pressures as the temp rises or they add guns. The result is wet guns. This also happens when new leaks occur. The pressure drops and the guns get wet. Either way the product gets wet. The only way to combat this is to adjust the production constantly or shut off some guns. They do neither as far as I can tell. I am the polar opposite of Ben. I think the new guns make no real difference on the quality or production of the snow.

[HowieT2]

The low-E guns are environmental correct because they use less air pressure to make snow and thus less energy. The energy they save is the power that is used to run the compressors that make the air. In our case these are totally electrical. We do not run any diesel powered air compressors. Again I will state what the actual issue is. We have only a limited amount of air that the system at Sugarbush can produce. This amount is partially depleted because the aging system leaks. Leaks come in all sizes, some big that they fix some small that they don't fix because they don’t know or they can't see because they are remote or underground. Either way that detracts from the overall production. If you buy more low-e guns logic would say you can run more because you use less air. But what happens at sugarbush is that they run to many or they fail to adjust the pressures as the temp rises or they add guns. The result is wet guns. This also happens when new leaks occur. The pressure drops and the guns get wet. Either way the product gets wet. The only way to combat this is to adjust the production constantly or shut off some guns. They do neither as far as I can tell. I am the polar opposite of Ben. I think the new guns make no real difference on the quality or production of the snow.

Win said when we had this debate last year, that as a result of the more efficient guns, they were maxing out on water such that the air was no longer a limiting capacity. That is why we dont see rented diesel compressors. Water capacity is a complicated issue because it not only involves how much water can physically be pumped but also how much can legally be pumped pursuant to permit.
But again I dont think the complaints lie with how much snow was made since all the snowmaking trails were open, but in the quality of that snow.
There are different guns that they have invested in over the last years. there are the low e guns which you see on the towers and the snologic guns which are mostly free standing but also on towers. The latter are supposedly extremely efficient in the prime wet bulb temperatures. My observation of the snow they were putting out when the the temps were right, was that they made a ton of silky snow. If there is a problem with those guns it is at suboptimal temperatures and that they are unwieldy to move around.
I think the "bad" snow people are complaining about are from the the old ratnik ground guns (the ones we see with hoses on the ground) and the old tower guns which they seem to be replacing. I believe it was stated here last year that they still use those because they are easier to move into certain locations.

[Ride Delaware ?]

In fact, most of the ground guns you see now are actually SR-7 guns, not Ratniks (unless Ratnik makes the SR-7s). The Low E guns run somewhere around 5 cfm air while the SR-7s are somewhere around 20 times that. That being said, the production of the SR-7 guns is unparalleled. The new low E guns just can't produce that much in the same amount of time.

If I remember from previous discussions, the LP system can do 4,000 g of water while the ME system can run 2,000 g of water. If they have cut down enough from using SR-7s to Low E, it's totally possible that they maxed on water. There is a permit amount of water and they can only pump that amount and only when the river is at x level. But once again, I think this is mostly about quality, not quantity. Just thought I would add some info.

[MntMan4Bush]

As mentioned Stowe made a whole new reservoir to supply water, though I'm sure the building of it required permits galore.

Quality is certainly a problem. Perhaps quantity is a poor choice of words. Using it means you can qualify it as sufficient quantity because a trail was opened. Just because a trail is open does not mean there is enough snow produced on a regular basis to make it stay enjoyable. I.e. we opened Jester. Let's turn off the guns and move them. A couple days later you have a hard pack ice luge that will take a pretty bad thaw to get rid of. Technically the trail is open. Even a place like Killington that makes nice snow has to keep touching up as it is skied off and at the end of the week/month they would end up similar to us I'm sure. It's what happens in between that matters. The touch ups or dressing. So rather than say quantity perhaps we should say frequency?

No idea which guns are which. Haven't stopped to read the labels. But if I hear you correctly the tripod stand looking ones pump out some volume. Most of it seems wet though. Again this could be intentional to create a longer lasting base and overall cost less money because they have to make less "frequently".

The ones on the ground that look like cheap knock off space guns from a mystery science theater 3000 episode I haven't seen used in a while and they don't seem to put out a lot of volume. Again it could be perception as they are quieter.

So looking at competition and their investments, Stowe is addressing lack of water with a giant reservoir. They are addressing air with replacing miles of pipeline. They are probably addressing a bit of each with an automated system. I'm not saying Win should dig into his wallet today and fire up the backhoe and start digging a new lake. Or that they shuld stop putting duct tape on the pipes in an attempt to keep them going. I'd love to hear:

1) That he recognizes there is an issue as compared to other regional mountains and that they are behind in keeping up with the times.
2) What the plan is to catch up and the time frame. If he says it's going to take 5 years to catch Stowe and in year one they plan and get money. Year 2 they replace pipeline. Year 3 add more pipeline. Year 4 dig a reservoir and year 5 go ape on buying new guns then problem solved for me. I know the problem is recognized and a plan is in place. If it spills over to 6 years and the fall behind I'm fine and sticking it out.

I just hate the "Everything is great and everyone tells me it's excellent" approach. That scares me. That means I have no plans for significant change.

Lastly I don't care if our guns don't run off dirty diesel. We should drill holes in them and top them off anyways. It can't hurt. If Gillette can figure out how to add a 5th blade to a razor then by god we can figure out how to consume more fuel.

[HowieT2]

As mentioned Stowe made a whole new reservoir to supply water, though I'm sure the building of it required permits galore.

Quality is certainly a problem. Perhaps quantity is a poor choice of words. Using it means you can qualify it as sufficient quantity because a trail was opened. Just because a trail is open does not mean there is enough snow produced on a regular basis to make it stay enjoyable. I.e. we opened Jester. Let's turn off the guns and move them. A couple days later you have a hard pack ice luge that will take a pretty bad thaw to get rid of. Technically the trail is open. Even a place like Killington that makes nice snow has to keep touching up as it is skied off and at the end of the week/month they would end up similar to us I'm sure. It's what happens in between that matters. The touch ups or dressing. So rather than say quantity perhaps we should say frequency?

No idea which guns are which. Haven't stopped to read the labels. But if I hear you correctly the tripod stand looking ones pump out some volume. Most of it seems wet though. Again this could be intentional to create a longer lasting base and overall cost less money because they have to make less "frequently".

The ones on the ground that look like cheap knock off space guns from a mystery science theater 3000 episode I haven't seen used in a while and they don't seem to put out a lot of volume. Again it could be perception as they are quieter.

So looking at competition and their investments, Stowe is addressing lack of water with a giant reservoir. They are addressing air with replacing miles of pipeline. They are probably addressing a bit of each with an automated system. I'm not saying Win should dig into his wallet today and fire up the backhoe and start digging a new lake. Or that they shuld stop putting duct tape on the pipes in an attempt to keep them going. I'd love to hear:

1) That he recognizes there is an issue as compared to other regional mountains and that they are behind in keeping up with the times.
2) What the plan is to catch up and the time frame. If he says it's going to take 5 years to catch Stowe and in year one they plan and get money. Year 2 they replace pipeline. Year 3 add more pipeline. Year 4 dig a reservoir and year 5 go ape on buying new guns then problem solved for me. I know the problem is recognized and a plan is in place. If it spills over to 6 years and the fall behind I'm fine and sticking it out.

I just hate the "Everything is great and everyone tells me it's excellent" approach. That scares me. That means I have no plans for significant change.

Lastly I don't care if our guns don't run off dirty diesel. We should drill holes in them and top them off anyways. It can't hurt. If Gillette can figure out how to add a 5th blade to a razor then by god we can figure out how to consume more fuel.

just note that 2 years ago SB replaced all the pipe on the access road and german flats, I believe. They have been adding new guns every year. additional compressors arent necessary because they have sufficient air and even if they didnt they'd be better off with fan guns which have onboard compressors.
As for the snowmaking pond, it was rebuilt after irene to its maximum permitted capacity.

I dont think anyone is arguing that there is no need for capital improvements. there surely is and they know that. its also somewhat unfair to compare SB to stowe. stowe has development on a scale which was rejected at SB in the ASC years so they have significantly more capital to play with.

[angler]

The issue at hand is while the mountain as been successful in driving sales (aka skier visits) the infrastructure needed to handle the increase hasn't been able to keep pace. Every aspect of this issue has been discussed in this thread. So the key question is what is the plan for ownership to be able to keep up with their competition and provide a quality experience when there is no snow or after a rain event followed by sub freezing temps?

Using Stowe for an example they are transparent in their plans for the mountain a couple of years out. By doing this they instill confidence to their pass holders and ticket holders that they are committed to continual improvement of the guest experience. Three seasons ago after a bad snow year they decided if they wanted to be a world class resort they needed to be able to create their own mountain and not just rely on mother nature so they put out a 3 year plan on snowmaking improvements that total 10 million dollars. Final phase this summer. This is just one example of many I could give you where they acknowledged they had a problem and addressed it. I call this having your "actions in concert with your words."

The issue IMO @ SB is the fact that ownership has not demonstrated that type of commitment to improving the "on mountain experience" like (in this case Stowe) their competition. Lets face it one could argue that the mountain needs at least four new lifts, better snowmaking plan with quality, quantity, and the willingness to go back and resurface trails on an ongoing basis. This is the cost of admission to compete with the other regional mountains. I understand that SB does not have the deep pockets like a Stowe or Killington. With that being said they still need to have a plan to address these issues as the skier experience has been denigrated since they started to sell lift tickets at all costs, which I believe was the original point of this thread.