Cannon Could Go Private

I'm getting sick of this endless circle debate over seeded bumps. I'm starting a new thread for everyone who want to discuss it HERE This thread is about the possibility of Cannon being operated by some entity other than the State of NH.
((*
*))NHPH
 
riverc0il":3w16bkpa said:
(and end up at Cannon for just a fraction of the year, as Rivercoil does)
Click to expand...
nearly 50% of my 28 lift serviced days last year were at cannon. not quite a fraction.
Click to expand...

Actually, Rivercoil, 50% can be expressed as a fraction. It's 1/2.
And 1/2 of 28 is 14 days.
Spend 50 or 70 or 100 days at Cannon and then tell me Cannon's small snowmaking budget couldn't use a shot in the arm.

-Dave Haller
 
salida":1k0rbx5k said:
...However, I believe that if a private entity were to lease cannon, they would not be doing it to improve conditions they would be doing it to set up realestate at mittersill The real money in the place would be to expand Mittersill and build a big base over there.
Click to expand...

Porter,

You're talking about two different things here:
1) a new base lodge
2) further development of Mittersill real estate

On the first topic: Cannon needs a new base lodge. There's already not enough brown-bag seating capacity for the bigger weekends of the year. (And Cannon's big weekends aren't even that big.)

On the second topic, I have a question: How could Mittersill real estate be further developed to any big degree? The Eastern border of Mittersill is hemmed in by a steep, unbuildable hill, Tucker Brook, and Rt 18. The northeastern edge borders the new Tuckerbrook development that is a done deal (houses are built, etc). Of course, the southern and western borders mostly butt against state and federal land. Is there room for further development on the northwestern side somewhere? If so, on whose land? Seems like they could squeeze in only a couple more houses down there, if any at all.

-Dave Haller
 
HDHaller":3ngp4qhp said:
Actually, Rivercoil, 50% can be expressed as a fraction. It's 1/2.
And 1/2 of 28 is 14 days.
Spend 50 or 70 or 100 days at Cannon and then tell me Cannon's small snowmaking budget couldn't use a shot in the arm.
Click to expand...
what is this, a math lesson? 50% = 1/2, either way, my statement reads the same and anyone can deduce from '50% of 28' that last year i logged 14 days at cannon, more than just a fraction as dan believes. though i guess someone skiing professionally probably views 14 lift services days as a fraction of their time.

i never said their snow making system is perfect. i don't think it is that bad that a lease is needed and i don't think the problem is as excessively horrible as you believe. it's not like i hand pick my days at cannon, i've been there on opening day, i've been there when no natural snow has fallen in over a month, i have been there when no natural snow trails have been open and contented myself on the groomers.
 
On the first topic: Cannon needs a new base lodge. There's already not enough brown-bag seating capacity for the bigger weekends of the year. (And Cannon's big weekends aren't even that big.)
Click to expand...
HD, i don't mean to be rebutting every point you make, but i have had different experiences at cannon. even on super bown sunday two fer day i have always found some space to brown bag it and i always bring my lunch when skiing cannon. i think the current lodging can get a tad crowded at the busiest of times, but no where near what i have seen or come to expect at other mountains and resorts. i don't remember the last time i couldn't find a seat within 30 seconds of walking into any of cannon's lodges. i guess i need to ski there more to get a better impression though.
 
NHPH.. it's not about seeded bumps.. it's about skiable bumps.. seeding them may be one aspect, but the issue of the thread seemed to evolve around cannon's viability and one of the issues is the snowmaking issue. i know the seeded bumps thing has been beaten.. maintained and seeded are not the same thing. maintained, i believe is more about committed snowmaking on a hill that GETS NO SNOW. some people on this thread have expressed a point of view that advocates not maintaining certain runs in any way. either with snowmaking, seeded whatever... that's a nice idea in theory. but that idea has to be elastic in bad snow years... LIKE THE LAST 3 YEARS IN A ROW . we all know natural snow is better and maintains it's surface better .. but there is a problem with that.. what if you don't have any? what's the attitude , unless you are a local and can ski 50 days a year and pick and choose your days and can wait it out, u are S@#t out of luck for that season. YA HAVE TO TAKE THE GOOD WITH THE BAD? well right now , it's about as bad as it gets man. give me a break. we are not in mammoth here. if people/ ski management were not so stupid, the areas would blow the hell out of the runs in bad winter years, deal with the icy conditions resulting from the fake in jan and feb, pay for it by stopping this silly cheap season pass stuff where people like me average about 8 bucks a day to ski, and then really promote through advertising the best time to ski :shock: , april and may and make some money back that way when all the fake hardpack turns to corn. oh wait a minute, that might mean that people might actually have to learn how to ski bumps 8) . why anyone would bring their family skiing now in this crap during this vaca week instead of april vaca week is beyond me :roll:
 
and another thing, i said this when they did it.. how many days of the year has that foolish tram line trail at cannon been skiable since they plowed all that money into clearing it. :roll: IT'S CANNON MAN THEY GET ABOUT A BUCK 40 A YEAR IN SNOW... it's about calculated decisions. it doesn't appear to me that they have made good ones.
 
riverc0il":1jmi2yta said:
On the first topic: Cannon needs a new base lodge. There's already not enough brown-bag seating capacity for the bigger weekends of the year. (And Cannon's big weekends aren't even that big.)
Click to expand...
HD, i don't mean to be rebutting every point you make, but i have had different experiences at cannon. even on super bown sunday two fer day i have always found some space to brown bag it and i always bring my lunch when skiing cannon. i think the current lodging can get a tad crowded at the busiest of times, but no where near what i have seen or come to expect at other mountains and resorts. i don't remember the last time i couldn't find a seat within 30 seconds of walking into any of cannon's lodges. i guess i need to ski there more to get a better impression though.
Click to expand...

But Super Bowl Sunday's are "two-fers" because they're typically low-turnout days! And the two-fer deal doesn't make it a crowded day.

Yes, you do need "to ski there more to get a better impression." The next time you're looking for a place to eat your brown-bag lunch on a crowded Cannon day (brown bags eat in the Notchview / Old Peabody Lodge), pretend you're looking for seating for you, a wife and several kids. Rivercoil, current Cannon managers themselves admit to needing more lodge space, for crying out loud.

I don't find it hard to believe that you've "clashed" with ski area managers, or anyone else, in the past.

-Haller
 
Jeez, I haven't seen this contentious an argument around here in a while (although it's still rather well-behaved compared to some ski "communities" out there), and in the middle of February no less. Folks aren't usually this cranky in August. Can't tell it's a rough snow year back east, can ya?? :roll:
 
Admin":13lbmqk2 said:
Jeez, I haven't seen this contentious an argument around here in a while (although it's still rather well-behaved compared to some ski "communities" out there), and in the middle of February no less. Folks aren't usually this cranky in August. Can't tell it's a rough snow year back east, can ya?? :roll:
Click to expand...

Yep, right now most trails are natural "bump" runs. The bumps, unfortunately, are also called rocks.
 
i think everyone is a little on edge with the current conditions. i don't think there's any doubt though that we could all ski together and have a good time if the opportunity ever presented itself :wink:
 
I concur we could have a great time skiing together... PS Outerlimits and Devil's fiddle had some nice bumps this weekend (at k-ton)... they might groom them flat, OL looked like it was about to be seeded (they have the US comp coming up in late March).

-Porter
 
Hee Hee! WOW, I knew this was gonna be a good thread!

I come from Hunter mountain, a hill that literally lives on its' snowmaking. Literally. The Slutsky's spend a ton of $ on it, and they make snow better than anyone else. Sure, I skiied more than a few ice bumps this past weekend, but Hunter always manages to resurface everything during the cold and by the end of the weekend we had several expert trails with lots of good snow, several trails with bumps everywhere, and a developing bump course on Eisenhower. And now they're blowing the snot out of upper and lower K27.

No, it isn't natural snow, not even close. But I had a vast variety of terrain and conditions to play on this past weekend, because Hunter blows alot of snow.

The weather being even (Hunter only got 5" out of the great blizzard last week), I'd rather drive 5 1/2 hours from Cannon to ski Hunter than vice versa conditions being what they are now.

My point? Snowmaking is a good thing. It's SNOW. We need that. In my newbie opinion, having skiied Cannon a whopping 3 times in marginal conditions, I think more snowmaking would help Cannon alot. Just a little more, well placed and used in a dedicated fashion.

Forget about terrain or snow choices for a second and stick to the "making more snow" argument...wouldn't it be nicer to resurface terrain than mercilessly groom it?

I think it's hard to argue against it.
 
agreed, more snow making is a good thing so long as they leave some trails o' natural (hards and paulie's for sure, the others i am certainly open to and of course they can't blow on the glades or tramline). the question is whether it is worth a lease for what cannon could potentially lose and whether a company operating with a lease would significantly invest in more snow making, these two factors are the big issues here. i would be curious what cannon's short and long term plans are for their snow making system. it may be they are already budgeting for improvements? do just don't know.
 
A resorts lack/limit of snowmaking may save it money in a year where other resorts lose thier shirt because they made so much snow but it washed away.
I still feel the skiing expierience will be lost when a CEO can make more money if he comes in under budget. Cannon is State owned and should be State manageged, even if the current administration cant figure out how to make it work doesnt mean we have to sell our souls to the devil for the next 10 years and not give the next administration a chance. call your local represetative and let them know how you feel! That is what this thread has made me want to do!
((*
*))NHPH
 
NHpowderhound":zpw19lks said:
A resorts lack/limit of snowmaking may save it money in a year where other resorts lose thier shirt because they made so much snow but it washed away.
((*
*))NHPH
Click to expand...

Hunter has had at least 3 major meltdowns this season, yet they are currently 90% open with great conditions. The money they may have lost on melted snow has been more than made up for with increased skier visits in recent weeks. People who want to ski go where there is going to be snow. Hunter has a good rep for the snowmaking, and they profit from it.

But I will mention that Hunter's snowmaking is state of the art. The efficiency with which they make the snow makes the operation profitable. From what I've read here, Cannon's snowmaking system is pretty old. In that case, your comment that not making snow saves money probably holds true.

But is that a benefit to skiers in poor snow years like this one (so far)?
 
riverc0il":1jdtq6hz said:
agreed, more snow making is a good thing so long as they leave some trails o' natural (hards and paulie's for sure, the others i am certainly open to and of course they can't blow on the glades or tramline).
Click to expand...

Even Hunter has a few. In my first post in this thread, I agreed with you on this point and went so far as to say I wouldn't change the current layout of Cannon, or change its' trails.

But as you can see, there are alot of other interests, some of which I also agree with strongly, that utilize the ski area. Many of those interests would be best served with increased snowmaking, even if it is limited. Applied judiciously, it would serve those interests without changing our experience or breaking the bank (theirs and ours).

It may in fact enhance those things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top