Results 51 to 75 of 178
Thread: Save Saddleback, Maine petition
-
09-03-2016, 10:45 AM #51Banned
- Join Date
- Aug 2016
- Posts
- 354
Love the place, but IMO it'll never work. It's just too far outta the way and the mountain skis way small and short compared to Sugarloaf right around the corner. Intermediates have plenty of great options closer to home.
-
09-03-2016, 11:36 AM #52
Hate to agree, but latest effort is coming very late and the hurtles to cross are probably too large. Good chance if a buyer is not found this year, then the Berry's break up the assets and sell it off.
-
09-03-2016, 03:28 PM #53Banned
- Join Date
- Aug 2016
- Posts
- 354
Maybe the town could take over the land and a volunteer crew of sorts could be formed to keep a number of slopes and glades cleared for touring and the top of double chair building could be rented to skiers for the night weekends or weeks. I've poached that building during storms when the mountain was shut down and it's big enough for many to sleep and a nice big wood stove. Money could be raised thru town events to pay for equipment used to keep areas trimmed appropriately. It could make for a very unique experience and could attract backcountry enthusiasts from all over.
A nominal day use fee could be charged I guess.
-
09-03-2016, 05:44 PM #54
An acquaintance of mine that lives in Rangeley and gave ski lessons at SB said there's at least a million dollars of lift work needed (repair or replace, can't recall.)
Silent....but shredly.
-
09-04-2016, 06:34 PM #55
-
09-05-2016, 10:28 AM #56
With the proliferation of backcountry/skinning setups these days, maybe an "earn your turns" sort of co-op could be possible..? Plenty of goods up there on the right days
-
09-05-2016, 10:49 AM #57Banned
- Join Date
- Aug 2016
- Posts
- 354
-
09-06-2016, 10:30 AM #58
Yeah, this is the issue with all of these areas facing trouble and closure. Most of these lifts were installed around a half century ago, when the skiing craze was just taking off with the Boomers and the future looked bright, and now they have reached the end of their life span, like the Boomers, and have to be replaced. No money for that anymore. Welcome to NELSAP.
-
09-06-2016, 10:47 AM #59
What about making it a snowboarder only mountain? Like an anti-MRG?
"timberridge is terminally vapid" -- a fortune cookie in Yueyang
-
09-06-2016, 10:56 AM #60
Worth a go. The attempt at Maine Heli skiing there flopped and I don't think anyone saw that coming
-
09-06-2016, 11:00 AM #61
-
09-06-2016, 11:12 AM #62
-
09-06-2016, 11:38 AM #63“I tell you, we are here on Earth to fart around, and don't let anybody tell you different.”
― Kurt Vonnegut, A Man Without a Country
www.mymountaincoop.ca
This is OUR mountain - come join us!
-
09-06-2016, 11:44 AM #64Banned
- Join Date
- Aug 2016
- Posts
- 354
-
09-19-2016, 10:34 AM #65
Latest update http://www.firsttracksonline.com/201...back-ski-area/
-
09-19-2016, 10:59 AM #66
No real information there. I have not joined the FB group or gone to any of the meetings as I have no funds to give to helping the mountain survive. Really hope it does, but felt disingenuous to stick my nose in at this time. If it comes to be, I will volunteer to help out in ways my skills can be used.
Huge hurdles to overcome even if the funds are generated on such short notice in terms of maintenance, certification, insurance, personal that it will be truly impressive if they pull it off.
-
09-19-2016, 11:11 AM #67
Fitting title to the piece: "NON-PROFIT COULD BUY MAINE’S SADDLEBACK SKI AREA". It's as remote as Balsams but it is close to a magnet ski area...albeit one that has dropped a couple of lift ropes recently.
Surely the new Saddleback could not turn a profit anyway. That is, as a not-for-profit, likely as not they won't even make "gain share".
EDIT: Now that I have read it, they are doomed. A six-pack? In that wind?
Idiotic idea!
They should go back to a surface lift or at least stay with a double. Another thing, they need to do a lot of summertime "erosion control" on the summit trail. Thereby saving the trail for future hikers and, incidentaly, minimizing the water ice sections for summit skinners and walkers.Last edited by robrox; 09-19-2016 at 11:23 AM.
The sad truth is that whine does not age well
-
09-19-2016, 11:21 AM #68
-
10-10-2016, 05:05 PM #69
Been keeping an eye on this. No news is usually good news but not in this case. Opening unlikely. Wonder what the uphill policy will be.
-
10-10-2016, 05:17 PM #70
Good luck. I hope this place can reopen.
-
10-24-2016, 05:22 PM #71
-
10-24-2016, 05:40 PM #72
I very much hope Saddleback survives
Last edited by cat in january; 10-28-2016 at 08:06 AM. Reason: mistaken
-
10-24-2016, 09:16 PM #73Registered User
- Join Date
- Oct 2016
- Location
- CO
- Posts
- 59
I haven't skied there but signed the petition anyway. Good luck!
-
10-25-2016, 11:13 AM #74Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
- Posts
- 37
I agree with you. I love that mountain and I'd love to see it operating again. I've got a ton of customers that are not only bummed out but full on frustrated about the situation and lack of communication from the Berry Family and Saddleback.
I've seen both the survey and proposed plan to operate it as a coop and I have to say, I don't think it's going to work. The people in charge of running the coop are doing great work and a lot more than most of us who simply just kick the can around on the internet. A coop is not going to work for the sole reason that there are not enough people in the region. Granted the Berry's did make some questionable investments in the mountain that may never have been recouped, but they should have been able to operate the mountain in a sustainable manner the last few years (perhaps minus last year). Saddleback is in the middle of nowhere, the families and communities that support the mountain are local to about a 100 mile radius. It is not 25 mins from a major highway, it is not in a state that has some of the highest skier visits in the country; Saddleback certainly is not MRG.
The coop model that is being proposed is not sustainable. The whole model is based around operations being funded by shareholders the first year ($6 million), then hitting everyone up again for more money to make improvements (new lifts and other resort upgrades). There seems to be a continued focus on hitting up shareholders and investors to raise money rather than run a profitable ski resort. The number of shares they are trying to sell is insane, and the assumptions on what they think people are willing to pay for shares is insane.
I will absolutely ski at this mountain if it reopens in any fashion but can't support this coop idea.
-
10-25-2016, 07:06 PM #75
Bookmarks