On the other hand allowing the high window prices and holiday pricing are what drive the ability for these companies to make the massive capital investments that they have, while season pass prices have plummeted for anyone local that actually skis a lot. It's not just rent seeking; a lift ticket today is fundamentally a far superior product to what was being sold in the 70s, and nobody but gapers are paying full retail. Let them subsidize it for us I say.
Not true. If you're on vacation looking to ski for 3 days, you're right in the crosshairs of the ski resort's price model, and you're not getting around it.
I also don't see how the product is superior to what was offered prior
This is an issue with all kinds of products and services, from residential university education to cars to restaurant food.
Expensive options with lots of extras that not everybody wants—and some may actively dislike—replace broadly affordable options with fewer bells and whistles. Everyone is catering to the whales and, thanks in part to our robust lending industries, trying to convince the minnows that they can be a whale too.
It's an issue with inflation calculation too. Sure, product X (house, car, whatever) is twice as big, but now it also costs twice as much - can we really say that doesn't represent inflation when the smaller, cheaper version is no longer being made?
Yes, exactly. Same issue with cellphones: They’re more powerful and have better cameras, but many people are paying more to use the same apps they used a decade ago, even though inflation numbers say they’re getting a better deal.
Not true. If you're on vacation looking to ski for 3 days, you're right in the crosshairs of the ski resort's price model, and you're not getting around it.
That's exactly my point. If you take a 3 day family ski vacation once a year, you are the demographic whose money keeps the whole industry afloat, and allows the $600 season passes to exist.
I also don't see how the product is superior to what was offered prior
Lifts today are a completely different thing from the 70s. You were talking single speed doubles and T-poles back then for basically everything, and there was nowhere near as much terrain developed. Getting six digit vertical days was completely unheard of. Now you take a high-speed detachable quad from base to the top, and have vastly more terrain available. Practically every major ski area has expanded massively since then.
FYI - I deleted my response after reading the post better. While as far as I can tell there has not been massive expansion in Western WA skiing inthe past 25 years, you were comparing with 1970s. I really have no idea how skiing was in Western WA in 1970s, thus I deleted my response.
How are you avoiding full retail prices? Curious since where in western WA state where I live the only alternative to day prices are season passes (and I stopped buying season passes due to climate change. For example: last season at Snoqualmie was absolutely horrible- I skied only 1 day)
Skiing more than 3 days a year. Pass prices are trivial at that point. The entire business model of the resorts is based around the family that goes once a year for 3-5 days, so if you're in that group it kind of just is what it is; an expensive luxury vacation.
Still looking not to pay retail prices, but if the only way to save on the daily ski cost is to get a season pass and ski 13 days in a season I will pass- there are not that many good skiing days in a season in Western WA any longer because of climate change.
if the only way to save on the daily ski cost is to get a season pass and ski 13 days in a season I will pass- there are not that many good skiing days in a season in Western WA any longer because of climate change.
I say this with the utmost respect, and not trying to put you down here, but serious skiers are literally just getting warmed up for the season at 13 days, even if the snow is crap.
Skiing has always has been the prototypal "rich person" vacation because it is and always has been prohibitively expensive to casual folks for whom it competes with other vacation options. But the developments in the industry over the last 30 years from capital improvements funded by them have been an absolute godsend to locals who live the lifestyle.
I agree with everything you said except for "Skiing has always has been the prototypal "rich person" vacation".
At least in western WA from 2000 till 2010 I could ski for a day for less than the price of gas to get there. I skied like that at Baker and Stevens. Day passes at Whistler in 2004-ish were about $70CAD - very reasonable even for Canadian customers.
Not anymore. Skiing (like a lot of other things) started going back to being a rich people hobby in the past 10 years or so.
Comments
On the other hand allowing the high window prices and holiday pricing are what drive the ability for these companies to make the massive capital investments that they have, while season pass prices have plummeted for anyone local that actually skis a lot. It's not just rent seeking; a lift ticket today is fundamentally a far superior product to what was being sold in the 70s, and nobody but gapers are paying full retail. Let them subsidize it for us I say.
Not true. If you're on vacation looking to ski for 3 days, you're right in the crosshairs of the ski resort's price model, and you're not getting around it.
I also don't see how the product is superior to what was offered prior
This is an issue with all kinds of products and services, from residential university education to cars to restaurant food.
Expensive options with lots of extras that not everybody wants—and some may actively dislike—replace broadly affordable options with fewer bells and whistles. Everyone is catering to the whales and, thanks in part to our robust lending industries, trying to convince the minnows that they can be a whale too.
It's an issue with inflation calculation too. Sure, product X (house, car, whatever) is twice as big, but now it also costs twice as much - can we really say that doesn't represent inflation when the smaller, cheaper version is no longer being made?
Yes, exactly. Same issue with cellphones: They’re more powerful and have better cameras, but many people are paying more to use the same apps they used a decade ago, even though inflation numbers say they’re getting a better deal.
That's exactly my point. If you take a 3 day family ski vacation once a year, you are the demographic whose money keeps the whole industry afloat, and allows the $600 season passes to exist.
Lifts today are a completely different thing from the 70s. You were talking single speed doubles and T-poles back then for basically everything, and there was nowhere near as much terrain developed. Getting six digit vertical days was completely unheard of. Now you take a high-speed detachable quad from base to the top, and have vastly more terrain available. Practically every major ski area has expanded massively since then.
FYI - I deleted my response after reading the post better. While as far as I can tell there has not been massive expansion in Western WA skiing inthe past 25 years, you were comparing with 1970s. I really have no idea how skiing was in Western WA in 1970s, thus I deleted my response.
How are you avoiding full retail prices? Curious since where in western WA state where I live the only alternative to day prices are season passes (and I stopped buying season passes due to climate change. For example: last season at Snoqualmie was absolutely horrible- I skied only 1 day)
Skiing more than 3 days a year. Pass prices are trivial at that point. The entire business model of the resorts is based around the family that goes once a year for 3-5 days, so if you're in that group it kind of just is what it is; an expensive luxury vacation.
This would not work in Western WA.
Snoqualmie (the shittiest snow in western WA) offers 4 day passes for $229 (https://www.summitatsnoqualmie.com/tickets/flex-ticket-packs...) or season pass for $759 (https://shop.summitatsnoqualmie.com/l/all-passes/downhill-pa...). Both options exclude Alpental
Mount Baker (the only ski-able place last winter. I skied there 5 times) season pass for returning pass holders is $1,200 (https://www.mtbaker.us/tickets-and-passes/season-passes/any-...) for new skiers is $1,300 (https://www.mtbaker.us/tickets-and-passes/season-passes/any-...). Day passes though are $100.
Still looking not to pay retail prices, but if the only way to save on the daily ski cost is to get a season pass and ski 13 days in a season I will pass- there are not that many good skiing days in a season in Western WA any longer because of climate change.
I say this with the utmost respect, and not trying to put you down here, but serious skiers are literally just getting warmed up for the season at 13 days, even if the snow is crap.
Skiing has always has been the prototypal "rich person" vacation because it is and always has been prohibitively expensive to casual folks for whom it competes with other vacation options. But the developments in the industry over the last 30 years from capital improvements funded by them have been an absolute godsend to locals who live the lifestyle.
I agree with everything you said except for "Skiing has always has been the prototypal "rich person" vacation".
At least in western WA from 2000 till 2010 I could ski for a day for less than the price of gas to get there. I skied like that at Baker and Stevens. Day passes at Whistler in 2004-ish were about $70CAD - very reasonable even for Canadian customers.
Not anymore. Skiing (like a lot of other things) started going back to being a rich people hobby in the past 10 years or so.