Passholder loyalty -- and vice versa.

<br>I'm sure there are more than a few season passholders out there that sunk a ton of change into a whole lot of nothing. With that in mind, read the following management decisions on what happens next...<br><br>www.stevenspass.com/html/misc/gm_letter_to_passholders.shtml

www.summit-at-snoqualmie.com/info/winter/seasonpass.asp

So, where will you be spending your money next year?
As I read it, not at Stevens.

<br>I'm sure there are more than a few season passholders out there that sunk a ton of change into a whole lot of nothing. With that in mind, read the following management decisions on what happens next...<br><br>www.stevenspass.com/html/misc/gm_letter_to_passholders.shtml

www.summit-at-snoqualmie.com/info/winter/seasonpass.asp

So, where will you be spending your money next year?
As I read it, not at Stevens.

<br><br><br>Yea, Snoqualmie wins out big on this PR move.

As a pass holder at Stevens for the last four years the 'Chump Change' they are handing out is a bit, cough, cough, of a slap in the face compared to Snoqualmie and indeed points out that the bottom line is more important then the pass holders. &gt;

Keep in mind that Booth Creek is a much larger company and one that had a very successful year at some of their other resorts - Northstar and Sierra-at-Tahoe among them. They can absorb a larger hit, though having some insight into the number of season passes they sell, I can assure you it's big money.

Mt Hood Meadows is responding similiarily to Stevens, though I believe they were open significantly more (in fact they re-opened today!). They are:<br>- Letting us buy passes next year at the same price we bought them this year, which is $25 less then next year's price.<br>- Giving us a $40 gift card that can be used at any of their restaurants, retail shops, rentals, demos, etc.<br>- Claiming they are "deeply in the red" and that over the summer they spent, "$5,000,000 on capital improvements", with the new lift costing $3,000,000. They stated this has compounded their financial problems.<br><br>Their letter to pass holders is here:<br>www.skihood.com/Pricing/SeasonPasses/SPletter.aspx

I wish they were doing more for us but that's *sigh* not going to stop me from buying a pass again next year.

Edit to add: For those curious, MHM has been open 69 days (and counting) this season. Most of which were pretty lackluster.

Sure, Stevens' stinginess looks bad compared to Snoqualmie's generosity. But considering how few days their areas operated, did Snoqualmie really have any choice but to extend their passes to next season? Here's a list of roughly how few days the Snoqualmie areas operated in 2004-5:<br><br>West: 16 days, 1/1 - 1/16, plus maybe 1/20?<br>Central: 9 days, 1/8 - 1/16<br>East: 0 days<br>Alpental: 2 days, 1/15 - 1/16<br><br>vs. Stevens Pass: 40 days<br><br>It's really unbelievable that ski areas with an average annual snowfall of 440" (i.e. Summit West and Alpental) could ever have a season so bad that they operated only 2 weeks or 2 days. The average season at those areas is roughly 135 days (Dec 1 to mid-April), and maybe about 150 days at Stevens (just estimates, I don't have the actual numbers).<br>

That is very impressive what Snoqualmie pass is doing. The other resorts should follow in thier example.

That is very impressive what Snoqualmie pass is doing. The other resorts should follow in thier example.

<br><br><br>I was very surprised at what the Summit decided to do as well. I was hoping for just a cut in next years ticket (maybe $100 or something) but to make it a freebie is very cool. <br><br>Stevens was open more this year, but they never were at full operation. I don't believe the backside ever opened and from what I hear only a few of the chairs ran on the frontside. I was not there myself, I'm just repeating what I have heard from others.<br><br>I only rode one day on the lifts on the one weekend Alpental ran. It was not that great, but I guess it was something. I had also hiked up at Hyak a couple times in January and actually the conditions on those runs was much better. Guess I'll get my turns in when they open Chinook Pass in a couple weeks. They should have a lot of fresh snow after these few storms that have come through.

<br>I think it is great too, but I am quite sure a team of MBAs crunched alot of numbers and they came out on top doing it this way. Notice also how long they waited, to see what Stevens etc was going to do and win the PR battle. I think the conglomeration of ski areas is bad for skiers, but w/o that kind of leverage, Snoq would be deeply in the red after a season like this....

<br>I think it is great too, but I am quite sure a team of MBAs crunched alot of numbers and they came out on top doing it this way. Notice also how long they waited, to see what Stevens etc was going to do and win the PR battle. I think the conglomeration of ski areas is bad for skiers, but w/o that kind of leverage, Snoq would be deeply in the red after a season like this....

<br><br>Not sure how the conglomeration of ski areas can be a bad thing when it gives them the leverage to allow season pass holders to have an extra season on their ski pass. I used to think the corporate owned ski area was a bad thing too, but after this past season I can see how it can also be a good thing. <br><br>Booth Creek has worked out their layout of ski areas well so that they spread themselves out over the USA so they are not hard hit like a regional area in the PNW would have been this year. I know in years past the Summit has been the money maker when some of their other resorts struggled. Now it is the Tahoe resorts that brought in the $$$ this season. I don't think you'll find many Snoqualmie Pass season pass holders complaining about this corporate owned ski area. At least not for the next 12 months.....

I suppose the MBAs may have crunched numbers, and maybe LL Bean and REI crunched numbers to come up with their generous return policies, but that seems fine to me if what the numbers told them was how to satisfy their customers so well they'll be loyal. At the end of the day, any number crunching had to be based on a projection of the future, a projection based on assuming that building goodwill is important to the business. Yay for number crunching, I say, when these kind of assumptions feed into it.

<br>That is just my point... they are sure they will get more benefit from the consumer PR in the long run (say 5-10 yrs) than the actual $ they are losing on the deal. They are not being "nice" or feeling "bad" about a bad snow year; it is a calulated move to benefit their bottom line in the seasons to come... damn, I sound so cynical!<br><br>That said, I am cheering the move, as I was debating whether or not to buy another one for next season, there couldn't be two garbarge years in a row, right?<br><br>Also, they really were never open- there was never any expert terrain open at all (well Alpental for 16 hrs?), and all the days Central was open and most of the days West was were simply a dismal P-tex-fest!<br><br>When do we start the snow dance?

My inner cynic (as the spouse of a plaintiff's complex litigation attorney) wonders if Booth Creek had a chat with their lawyers about the likelihood of a class action if they didn't offer next season free or cheap to passholders, particularly given the fact that they practically didn't operate this season.  If 3000 people spent 300 bucks each on 04/05 passes, the money might have been big enough for the respectable local complex lit. groups to go after.<br><br>Maybe Stevens had the same chat with their attorneys and decided that 40 days with more than half of their lifts turning was enough to dissuade litigators from trying to make a case.<br><br>At any rate, if I was a pass holder at Stevens I'd be pissed, and as a pass holder at Snoqualmie I'm really happy.  Plus I rode many great days on Booth Creek's dime in Alaska and California this year.  And now I feel great about the Summit, even if they can't afford enough rope to straighten out the cluster-f at the bottom of chair 2.<br><br>

<br><br><br>Does anyone have a (guess)estimate on the number of passes sold? And do resorts count on passholder income to get ready for a season, or is it just gravy?

I'm not sure how many passes the Summit usually sells, I thought I had heard as many 10,000-20,000. It's definately more than gravy. At Alpental I would say that even on weekends it is probably 80%+ passholders, probably at least 95% on weekdays.

I heard once the Summit sales close to 30,000.

korup - I think it's hard to know what the full range of intentions were w/o talking to said MBAs. My assumption is that they're in the ski business because they love skiing and want to be part of making lots of people happy about skiing, and because they also want to make money. But if it were purely about the money, I'm guessing there are higher margin businesses they could have gone into. So maybe they really DID feel bad about the season, and wanted to be nice to their customers, and perhaps even skewed their business analysis toward assumptions that would allow them to do this. <br><br>Giving is a funny thing - if you want to, you can often reduce it to a skeptical view that it's all about what you think giving is going to get you, even in the case of couples who love each other (if I do this "selfless" thing for you, you'll continue to keep me from being lonely, etc). MBAs are just people too (I'm not an MBA, for the record, but have no problem with MBAs who have decent values, just the same as any other people I run across). Thank goodness for MBAs who run ski areas well...

I suppose the MBAs may have crunched numbers, and maybe LL Bean and REI crunched numbers to come up with their generous return policies, but that seems fine to me if what the numbers told them was how to satisfy their customers so well they'll be loyal.

<br><br>Skiing and riding In my opinion is an addiction! There are exceptions, but most addicts sooner or later return to the dealer.<br><br><br>My personal feeling is that purchasing a season pass is a risk much like buying stock. We purchase the stock/Pass in hopes of it paying off in big dividends. Lots of skiing for one set price. So I see it as a calculated risk. If I get little or nothing out of my investment that is tough luck. It's not like I make a lot of money to just throw it away, but I understand that I buy it to use the heck out of the pass and get real value out of it. If the resort is willing to give me anything in return that is great. The pass at Crystal is over $900 bucks. I used it maybe 15 times and (13 to just get one ride easy access to the BC).<br><br>Maybe I am a little harsh, but I hear the bullwheels turning at the ski resort of Self Pity. The ski areas did the best they could with what they were handed by nature. If the resorts are the patsy for our investments and disappointments in a lousy snow year then lets hang em all. As long as we choose to ride the chairs of Self Pity and blame the areas for being cheap we will all be avalanche victims of our own disappointments.<br><br><br>FYI-Ski areas encourage people to buy passes to pay the start up costs until they can open the tills and food service and make the real cash.<br><br>Thats my take-<br>Joe<br><br><br>

I'm with you Joe! I forgot the $189.00 I threw down long ago. I looked at it like ski area charity. Now I'm pleasently surprised, but would have returned to Alpental next year regardless.

Joe - I also agree with you. I'm impressed by the gesture by the Snoqualmie owners. I skipped buying a pass this year due to the predictions of a sketchy season, but if I had bought one, I'd have bought another next year even if they hadn't offered such a great deal.<br><br>I suspect the owners/managers are in the business due to a love of the sport first, and as a business second. Having seen areas close due to repeat bad seasons, I feel for them (and for all their employees) more than I feel for the passholders this season. I hope they can all feed their kids right now.

I concur with Jim on the class act of The Summit! Also the trickle effect of the industry to employees and those who feed off of the giant. EG.. sports shops, small stores on the routes, the maintanence employees that rely on the income of the ski area on a year round basis.<br>On the other hand if you need a boot fitting you don't have to wait long to get the service done. <br>Although limited terrain aspects-I have hiked to ski some pretty great snow in this otherwise brutal ski season. I have not skiied as much (lift access), but what I have skied (BC) has been rather good! If I focus on the skiing/hiking-experience, not the lack of snow- it has been a great season! This season has created much thought on avalanche conditions, route finding, and safe access and exits. Closely monitoring weather and wind has kept me in the grins more than the frowns. Areas open or closed.

How many of the "addicted" will wait to buy your pass next year?<br><br>As for me, I'll be buying my Crystal pass at the same time as always. What are the chances of this happening two years in a row? <br><br>If this happens again next year it's time to move......

As for me, I'll be buying my Crystal pass at the same time as always.  What are the chances of this happening two years in a row?  <br><br>If this happens again next year it's time to move......

<br><br>jinx alert!<br>

What are the chances of this happening two years in a row?

<br>Quote from Stevens Pass Letter to Pass Holders:<br>

History shows we don't have two low snow years in a row. That's good news for next season.

<br><br>Apparently, the Stevens Pass management is failing both the generosity test and the history test (and maybe math, too).<br><br>The last time there were two consecutive very low snow years (under 50-60% of normal) in the WA Cascades was 1940-41 and 1941-42, with 1940-41 being much worse. However, 1939-40 was also quite poor, about 70% of normal, so it was actually 3 bad years in a row. Data for Stevens Pass is available back to 1939. See the facts at www.skimountaineer.com/CascadeSki/CascadeSnowNWAC.php .<br><br>So it is unlikely, but not inconceivable, that next season could also be far below normal for snowfall in the WA Cascades. The probability of that happening is roughly a few percent. However, the probability of next season being below normal is about 50% (roughly half the seasons must be below normal, right?). Unfortunately, it's really even more than that, since about 55-60% of seasons fall below the average (mean) in the type of probability distribution that snowfall stats have. In other words, the median value is less than the average, which is skewed upward by the occasional huge snow years.<br><br>Sorry for talking about math and stuff.<br>

Thanks Amar for the great detective work as usual. Thank goodness I think in math.<br><br>My new powder skis put a jinx on this season, how many times can you jinx before you runout? I'm not worried but if next year is bad you'll know why.

<br>So it is unlikely, but not inconceivable, that next season could also be far below normal for snowfall in the WA Cascades. The probability of that happening is roughly a few percent. However, the probability of next season being below normal is about 50% ...............

<br><br>So that means there is about a 50% chance of it being a good snow year too. ;D<br><br>Look whats happened over the last weekend, new snow! Maybe more this weekend, if that keeps up we may be able to knock out the ski-fest after all <br><br><br>

I have not skiied as much (lift access), but what I have skied (BC) has been rather good! If I focus on the skiing/hiking-experience, not the lack of snow- it has been a great season!..........Closely monitoring weather and wind has kept me in the grins more than the frowns. Areas open or closed.

<br><br>Yes indeed, it has been an interesting snow year. The snow that has fallen has been really pretty good and we have had a great time finding it and playing in it, and even had time to find those new areas that we have wanted to check out over the years. So all is not lost in our treasure hunt. Hats off to the ski areas for giving back to the season passholders, it's better than the odds in Vegas. <br><br>

<br>Well, I'm actually much more optimistic than the cold hard stats make it seem. In the Cascades, even most of those seasons which are statistically "below normal" are pretty good or even great for skiing. Since I moved to Seattle in 1994, only two seasons (2000-2001 and this one) would fail to meet my definition of "good" or better. So I'd say that over 80% of seasons are good here, with typically only 1 or 2 fair-poor seasons per decade. And even in those years, there's plenty of worthwhile skiing to be found.<br><br>

My advice is to go backcountry skiing and forget Stevens Pass. If you want a quality ski area experience, go to a place not owned by Harbor Properties.<br><br>There is perhaps a 30% to 50% chance that you will have quality skiing at Stevens Pass even when in full operation, in my view. One of the last tickets that I bought there a few years ago was full price, even though the full area did not open until 2 PM (with a 2:45 PM Mill Valley closure) on a powder day. The Area Manager at the time, Tom Fortune, who now runs Schweitzer, was quite confident in his decision to keep the full ticket price- chest-beating proud that he held the line. Aside from that, I would make unfavorable comparisons of grooming and winch cat use to other maritime climate ski areas, not to mention the poor customer service that is often encountered.<br><br>There is probably a 100% chance that the management and owner (Harbor Properties) of Stevens Pass are not in it for the love of skiing. Harbor appears to be in it for the cash cow benefit. In the past Harbor has apparently invested the sizable profits from Stevens Pass (a user of your National Forest) into real estate ventures in downtown Seattle. It appears that such investment was made even during the seven year absence of lift building or improvement during the 1980s. In fact, it would appear that there is a 100% chance that Stevens Pass could care less if you ski, or live or die, except when you spend money for its benefit. <br><br>On an historical note, after Harbor purchased Mt. Ashland, OR and made some improvement, bad snow years prevented the obscene profits, such as are made at Stevens Pass. Harbor actively made plans, then, in the absence of a buyer with the right price, to remove the ski area and restore the land according to the requirements of the USFS. The locals in Ashland organized and the ski area was bought, and continues to operate. After (Harbor) buying into Mission Ridge ski area, the scheme for a recreational housing subdevelopment on adjacent land fell through, and guess what? Harbor wanted out, and briefly made hints about closing down Mission Ridge. Fortunately, an individual with some level of appreciation of the resource bought Mission Ridge. Harbor has put its money into improving Schweitzer- where it can make more profit from real estate development opportunities. <br><br>The owners of Stevens Pass neglected many opportunities for terrain expansion that were available during the 1970s- 1990s. Such lack of terrain expansion probably does not harm the bottom line. More lodges were built, food and drink prices, ticket prices, etc., were increased. The amount of lift-skiing in WA generally is limited by available terrain- Forest Service Permitted terrain. During the past decades local demand for skiing increasingly exceeded the supply. As a result, the greedy slugs who were given control of the resource (your National Forest land) just rake in more and more profits, while offering no more actual skiing. An Intrawest salesman once made the claim to me that 67% of Whistler skier visits are from WA. I would attribute this to both a lack of intelligent development here and also the difficulty in developing, especially since the 1990s. Meanwhile, Harbor just rakes in more profits from increasingly overcrowded skiing terrain.<br><br>Oh well, at this stage in my post lift-skiing life, I am glad that terrain was left out of a ski area. Let's just go ski touring and forget those greedy slugs.

My advice is to go backcountry skiing and forget Stevens Pass. If you want a quality ski area experience, go to a place not owned by Harbor Properties.<br><br>. . .<br><br>An Intrawest salesman once made the claim to me that 67% of Whistler skier visits are from WA. I would attribute this to both a lack of intelligent development here and also the difficulty in developing, especially since the 1990s. Meanwhile, Harbor just rakes in more profits from increasingly overcrowded skiing terrain. <br><br>Oh well, at this stage in my post lift-skiing life, I am glad that terrain was left out of a ski area. Let's just go ski touring and forget those greedy slugs.

<br><br>"Randonnee", if you're going to post an angry diatribe, you ought to at least sign your name to it and not hide anonymously. But this forum really isn't the place for attacks against anyone or anything, including Stevens Pass. I have tried not to unfairly attack Stevens in my previous posts in this thread.<br><br>Also, some of your statements are just absurd . . . do you actually believe that 67% of Whistler skiers could come from WA? The true numbers are that about 1/3 are from the US, with roughly 1/9 from WA. Check the facts before angrily typing away.<br>

On an historical note, after Harbor purchased Mt. Ashland, OR and made some improvement, bad snow years prevented the obscene profits, such as are made at Stevens Pass. Harbor actively made plans, then, in the absence of a buyer with the right price, to remove the ski area

<br><br>This story has a happy ending to it:<br>

In February 1991, Stevens Pass put the ski area up for sale with the condition that if the ski area would not sell within one year they would remove the lifts and install them at the Stevens Pass ski area in Washington. Among the reasons for the sale were centralization of holdings, two consecutive poor snow years and frustration in regard to the slow planning process caused by controversies. As of early January 1992 no buyer for the ski area had been found and the reality of not having a ski area set in. At that time, Stephen Jamieson, a Medford attorney and an avid skier, stopped by Bob Matthews' Rogue Ski Shop in Medford and discussed the idea of forming a fundraising group and to purchase the resort for the people of Southern Oregon and Northern California. Following this conversation, Mount Ashland Ski Association (MASA) was born. When Harbor Properties heard of the community's action, they reduced the resort's price to $1.4 million and extended the sale deadline to April 6, 1992. <br><br>The newly formed organization faced a seemingly insurmountable fundraising task. In less than three months they had to raise $1.7 million - $1.4 million for the resort purchase and $300,000 for operating funds. The effort gained credibility by convincing the City of Ashland to serve as the purchasing entity and fundraising recipient. Another exciting turning point arrived when local Rotary Clubs raised over $500,000 and when Governor Barbara Roberts approved an economic development State Grant in the same amount. Citizens contributed $675,000 with two thirds of the amount coming from non-skiers. On July 1, 1992 MASA donated the assets of the ski area to the City of Ashland. In turn the city leased the facility to a newly formed non-profit corporation by the name of Mt. Ashland Association dba. Ski Ashland for $1 a year under a 25 year lease. Ski Ashland established a board of directors who hired a management team to operate the resort. The Internal Revenue Service approved the ski area's application to become a 501(c)3 Non-Profit Organization. Mt. Ashland Association is a non-profit corporation organized under the laws of the State of Oregon exclusively to provide educational and recreational opportunities in Jackson County, Oregon to members of the general public. <br><br>On December 10, 1992 the Mt. Ashland Ski Area opened it's door for it's first day of operations under public ownership. In accordance with it's mission statement, Ski Ashland is offering an array of complimentary and highly discounted ski and snowboard programs which feature healthy, educational opportunities for youths and families. Public ownership also rekindled the skiing consciousness in the local communities. For example, participation in the After School Ski Program - a highly discounted learn-to-ski program for young students - grew from 900 student in the 91/92 season to 2300 in 98/99.<br><br>Since the buyout the ski area has had eleven successful seasons of operations in black ink. The generated revenues have allowed for ongoing quality maintenance of the facility, a total modernization of it's snow grooming fleet and vast improvements in summer slope grooming.

<br>That's from: www.mtashland.com/Page.asp?ID=51

It was for the better that Harbor sold the resort. The Ashlanders I've met are very proud of their community-owned ski area.