« Previous Story | The Industry Report Home Page | Next Story »

What's In Your Wallet?

By Craig Altschul
October 16, 2006

Are our customers facing sticker shock once again? Every generation of writers who covers skiing and travel raises the issue: Is the mountain resort industry pricing itself out of the market for all but the wealthy? Are we, by default, segregating our mountain trails?

We'd like to have you weigh in on the subject in our blog. Just respond in the box and our readers will know what you think.

But, here's the issue in a nutshell: Lift tickets at some resorts ticket windows (at least during the holidays) are approaching the century mark. That's the number media use to make their point. To take a family of four skiing even for a day at a non-destination resort, some complain, represents an outrageous cost.

Many skiers and skiing families look at the mountain real estate ads and know they won't have to double check their bank balances to understand that the a million dollar slopeside condo is just a bit too rich for their blood.

Getting there is no longer half the fun. Put your boots in the overhead and the flight attendant will toss you out the Emergency Exit Row door. The airline prices are pretty good one day, but scary the next. Just try to use your frequent flyer points to Denver International Airport during peak season.

Yet, there is another side of the argument. We can, indeed, blame the media. But, is it fair? Anna Olson, Jackson Hole Resort's respected communications director, thinks it's more than fair.

"Like many sectors of the travel industry, the media tend to focus on the luxury angles only for ski. We can be our own worst enemy to this end," Olson told The Industry Report. "I truly believe there are affordable options, but you also cannot get away for the fact many of the well-known destination vacations require air, a complete set of equipment, clothing, and access that you don't need for the rest of the year."

However, she points out that Jackson Hole has lift/lodging packages starting at $69 per person. That price, however, is based on quad occupancy, though valid for the whole ski season except for major holiday periods. It is, by the way, available at the ski-in, ski-out Village Center Inn.

She also points to what she terms an "incredible package" for skiers that includes lodging, lift tickets, and the intensive four-day Steep and Deep Ski Camp that starts at $1,140 per person based on double occupancy. Still, that's $2,280 before they hit Mickey D's.

Olson thinks much of the affordability problems come when people have to travel over holiday periods. Otherwise, she says "deals are there to be had in our experience, by looking at Cen Res options, Web deals, and direct from the resorts."

Since we are looking at both sides of the coin here, the fact is ski vacationers truly have to search for bargains. The industry does not normally tout bargain-basement sales. Flip that coin over, however, and it's the same for hotels, airlines, cruise ships, and Disneyland. Have you checked the cost of hockey, pro football or basketball ducats lately?

You don't have to tell us what's in your wallet. Just tell us if you think our industry is becoming more and more a playground only for those who can afford to play. Or not.

« Previous Story | The Industry Report Home Page | Next Story »

Email To A Friend

Comments

Years ago, SKI ran a feature called "What Ever Happened to the $10 Lift Ticket?" I read it several times and seem to recall a reference to an earlier piece called "What Ever Happened to the $5 Lift Ticket?" Truth is that long distance phone calls and technology that did not exist in the $10 days, everything costs more than it used to. There's enough "blame" to go around. >Father Time. When I was a kid visiting NY, $1 bought 6 subway tokens and a dime. Now? $1.50 a ride. >Customer Wants (whether resort marketing-driven or not). Esp at large destination resorts, people "want" high-speed lifts, even if many/most can't ski a full day anymore. They "want" fancy slopeside lodging, either condo units that have more square footage and better fixtures than most people's homes or luxury hotels with we ski valets, fabulous spas and 500-count Frette sheets on the beds. They "want" meticulously groomed slopes. They "want" and want and want -- and everything they want, or think they want, costs a lot of money to build and maintain. That level of luxury and service attracts a certain well-heeled clientele, and everyone else has to deal with the side effects on the average vacation budget. >The Media. Indeed, the ski media tends to focus on the highest single-day lift ticket prices that they can find. The cost/value equation rarely enters into the equation. Sure, stories appear about budget skiing, but not as often as luxury skiing. Also, the same media that reports the top price for a single-day lift ticket doesn't report on how much you can possibly spend to fly first-class between NY and CA or between NY and London. >Wall Street. Public companies must show a profit or their stockholders start whining and the top brass doesn't get it's big bonuses.

Posted by: Claire Walter | October 16, 2006 10:33 AM

La plus ca change, la plus le meme chose. That's French for 'the more things change, the more they remain the same.' A few years back, while still working in the maw of A Very Large Publicly Traded Skicorp, I ran an analysis that showed skiing today, adjusted for inflation and the rise in American disposable income, actually costs less than it did shortly after World War II. And that's raw dollars, not incorporating costs related to new technologies which make skiing better - lifts, grooming, snowmaking, etc. - nor did it incorporate the incredible costs savings offered by the el-cheapo season passes. Skiing, like it or not, has ALWAYS been an expensive sport. And, as the late (and wonderful) I. William Berry once so tersely noted: "The problem with ticket prices isn't the $30 lift ticket. The problem is that there are no $100 lift tickets." Berry's point was this: people expect to pay through the nose for the privilege of playing a round at Pebble Beach. Meantime, there are plenty of municipal courses where you could get in a round for a double sawbuck. Yeah, the muni course might not be as brilliant or beautiful, but it was still a game of golf. In other words, what's wrong with aspiring to Mount Gigundo for a once-in-a-lifetime blowout, as long as you can still have a good time all winter at Neighborhood Hill?

Posted by: Skip King | October 16, 2006 10:43 AM

Hi there! Ticket prices at Whistler are as low as $44 CAD per day if you book by November 15. Accommodation and tickets can be as low as $69 CAD per person per day. I think that the travel hassles and fuel prices are an impediment. IMHO, I also think that if ski resorts focussed less on peddling real estate and more on developing their mountain product, that more people would be skiing and riding today. Currently, most resorts have more accommodation & infrastructure supply than demand (excluding peak periods). Building demand through a better product that recruits more people into the sport would have been a wiser move.

Posted by: Sue Chappel | October 16, 2006 02:32 PM

Sue is right! The average ski area in the US operates at some 34% of capacity. The average ski area recieves 50% of their published top ticket price, due to various discounts. With even more selective pricing, including Berry's premium ticket, along with attractive mid-week discounts, coupled with more time-sharing dwelling units, skiing can continue to be available to the median income family. The key to continued facility growth is better utilization. At present new ski capacity is seen as a "lost leader" to sell real-estate. The challenge to the nation's operators is to develop programs to fill unused capacity. Ski areas are economicall feasible operations at 40% utilization.

Posted by: Ted Farwell | October 17, 2006 08:07 AM