As many of you New Hampshire skiers know, the state is looking very seriously at the privatization of Cannon Mountain and the topic has ignited lively debate. Here's a letter I wrote that was published in the local paper, The Courier:
To the editor,
In a recent issue of The Courier, a letter writer argued that the privatization of Cannon Mountain Ski Area might boost season pass prices to $1,000 and cause Cannon to lose its "real skier" salt-of-the-earth flavor. I'd like to comment.
Anyone who pays attention to the ski and snowboard industry knows that season-pass prices have been coming down, not going up. The current trend is to price day tickets higher and season passes lower, and to thereby convert more occasional skiers and riders to season pass holders. For 05/06, Booth Creek sold the "Threedom" season pass (good at Waterville, Cranmore and Loon) for less money than the state charges NH residents for a season pass at Cannon. Under private management, Cannon's season pass could actually become less expensive than it is now.
As for the supposedly down-to-earth clothes that characterize the "real" skiers at Cannon... who cares about clothes? Real skiing and riding aren't about old wool pants. They're about skiing and riding. And the skiing and riding experience at Cannon could be vastly improved were the mountain managed by a private firm.
The employees of ski area management firms are business and ski/snowboard-industry experts with outstanding training and experience. They are often avid, lifelong skiers and riders who hold college and graduate school degrees in marketing, operations, accounting, technology and even industry-specific subjects, and they have tremendous industry experience. For a good example of just such a team, look at the one that currently runs Bretton Woods. Look, too, at the awards and national recognition that area has recently won. And look at the fact that Cannon's own native son, Bode Miller, is the poster boy for Bretton Woods, rather than the poster boy for his own home mountain.
Privatization could bring to Cannon a sophisticated marketing and PR effort that could boost revenues. The added revenues could fund trail, snowmaking and grooming improvements, and might even bring the Mittersill annexation project to fruition, a project on which the state has been dragging its feet for more than 15 years.
It's also likely that Cannon's events, activities and programs would take on a greater variety, vitality and scope under private management, because top industry professionals know that lively events and programs bring energy, enthusiasm and life to a ski area. Those professionals also know how to develop the funds necessary to support events, activities and programs.
Most of the arguments area residents make against privatization boil down to two unworthy and prejudiced concerns. Firstly, current and former Cannon managers don't want to be outdone by a more capable, private management team. Secondly, many of the area's residents want to resist any change that might bring more "flatlanders" to town, because these area residents simply don't like flatlanders. But shouldn't we have enough maturity to look at a bigger picture than this?
The privatization of Cannon could make it the best ski area in the state, perhaps the best in New England. That could mean more terrain, better snow, better equipment and facilities, and more exciting activities and programs. In other words, a better, more enjoyable skiing and riding experience for a greater number of people. Wouldn't that be worth putting aside petty resentments?
Cannon's terrain has so much potential, so much more potential than, say, an unremarkable little hill like Bretton Woods. Wouldn't it be wonderful if Cannon also had the resources to bring that potential to life? Privatization could provide us with those resources.
H. David Haller
To the editor,
In a recent issue of The Courier, a letter writer argued that the privatization of Cannon Mountain Ski Area might boost season pass prices to $1,000 and cause Cannon to lose its "real skier" salt-of-the-earth flavor. I'd like to comment.
Anyone who pays attention to the ski and snowboard industry knows that season-pass prices have been coming down, not going up. The current trend is to price day tickets higher and season passes lower, and to thereby convert more occasional skiers and riders to season pass holders. For 05/06, Booth Creek sold the "Threedom" season pass (good at Waterville, Cranmore and Loon) for less money than the state charges NH residents for a season pass at Cannon. Under private management, Cannon's season pass could actually become less expensive than it is now.
As for the supposedly down-to-earth clothes that characterize the "real" skiers at Cannon... who cares about clothes? Real skiing and riding aren't about old wool pants. They're about skiing and riding. And the skiing and riding experience at Cannon could be vastly improved were the mountain managed by a private firm.
The employees of ski area management firms are business and ski/snowboard-industry experts with outstanding training and experience. They are often avid, lifelong skiers and riders who hold college and graduate school degrees in marketing, operations, accounting, technology and even industry-specific subjects, and they have tremendous industry experience. For a good example of just such a team, look at the one that currently runs Bretton Woods. Look, too, at the awards and national recognition that area has recently won. And look at the fact that Cannon's own native son, Bode Miller, is the poster boy for Bretton Woods, rather than the poster boy for his own home mountain.
Privatization could bring to Cannon a sophisticated marketing and PR effort that could boost revenues. The added revenues could fund trail, snowmaking and grooming improvements, and might even bring the Mittersill annexation project to fruition, a project on which the state has been dragging its feet for more than 15 years.
It's also likely that Cannon's events, activities and programs would take on a greater variety, vitality and scope under private management, because top industry professionals know that lively events and programs bring energy, enthusiasm and life to a ski area. Those professionals also know how to develop the funds necessary to support events, activities and programs.
Most of the arguments area residents make against privatization boil down to two unworthy and prejudiced concerns. Firstly, current and former Cannon managers don't want to be outdone by a more capable, private management team. Secondly, many of the area's residents want to resist any change that might bring more "flatlanders" to town, because these area residents simply don't like flatlanders. But shouldn't we have enough maturity to look at a bigger picture than this?
The privatization of Cannon could make it the best ski area in the state, perhaps the best in New England. That could mean more terrain, better snow, better equipment and facilities, and more exciting activities and programs. In other words, a better, more enjoyable skiing and riding experience for a greater number of people. Wouldn't that be worth putting aside petty resentments?
Cannon's terrain has so much potential, so much more potential than, say, an unremarkable little hill like Bretton Woods. Wouldn't it be wonderful if Cannon also had the resources to bring that potential to life? Privatization could provide us with those resources.
H. David Haller
. i'll lose a ton of money for sure, but it will be worth it not to have to ski with racers anymore :roll: