If you look at that Kottke data, you'll see that national skier visits rarely deviate by as much as 10% from the trend of recent years. The exceptions are in unusually bad snow years (PNW in 2004-05 being the most recent example). As in my data, in most years good regions offset bad ones and the national total is smoother. You have to go back to 1980-81 to see a year where bad conditions were so widespread as to put a big dent in the total numbers. I can't see any economic effect in that past data. Not saying it won't be different this time. I will say that the recession will have to be very severe in order to move the skier visit numbers noticeably. I'd say the "normal" number is around 57M. That number might be spun as economic because last year was 60M, but the record high 60M was due to snow. I'd say less than 55M would be a clear sign of economy if snow is average or better.
Tony Crocker wrote:This would be particularly true as an economic indicator in Utah and Colorado, which were the strongest regions snow-wise this season.
Admin wrote:Tony Crocker wrote:This would be particularly true as an economic indicator in Utah and Colorado, which were the strongest regions snow-wise this season.
According to the NSAA data released today snowfall the Rocky Mountain region as a whole (not just CO and UT) was down 14.2 percent this year.
Admin wrote:See the original link, for it's all in there. In the Rocky Mountain Region as a whole, visits were up 1.3% and snowfall down 14.2%, both from 10-year averages.
Admin wrote:rfarren wrote:Where, in particular, was the snowfall lower than average?
According to the NSAA, "in the Rocky Mountain Region as a whole."
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest