What do Franz Heinzer, Kjetil Aamodt, Tomas Fogdoe, Anita Wachter, Katja Seizinger and Carole Merle have in common? Are they household names—celebs whose every move is breathlessly followed by millions of adoring fans?
Well, hardly. Yet they are the current crop of top ski racers as determined by World Cup standings.
And where were the Americans? As usual, mostly nowhere. The U.S. Ski Team (USST) ranked eighth in the Nations Cup last season, roughly where it has been for the past eight years. In final World Cup standings the best American in men’s overall standings was Tommy Moe in 31st. place, and best in women’s overall was Julie Parisien in 27th. (Yes, AJ Kitt was robbed of a couple of victories by outrageous FIS officiating, but even crediting him with those races doesn’t basically alter the picture.)
To all of which we have two questions: So what? and What’s wrong?
Since we feel the success or failure of USST has little to do with the health of the overall U.S. ski industry, or to the well-being of the ski consumer, our response to the first question is “So what, indeed?” and to the second, “Who cares?”
Oh yes, the case is always made that: 1) racer input is essential to the continued advances being made in equipment design; 2) ski technique for the public evolves from racing technique; 3) creation of home-grown heroes attracts new generations of skiers to the sport; and 4) American resorts gain international stature and credibility from the racing scene.
True, some equipment suppliers—those committed to the USST equipment pool—want U.S. winners, as do a few resorts. Certainly, the international reputation of Vail, for instance, is enhanced by its recognition as a venue for major international ski competition. But the same can hardly be said for the more than four hundred other ski areas in the country. For most of them, racing is more a matter of accommodating those customers who simply want to race—club, collegiate, sectional, and the biggest of them all, NASTAR. Collectively, this constitutes sort of a niche market.
The point forgotten by many is that most of the skier population is not into ski racing, either as participants or as fans. Americans may love their cars, but that doesn’t mean they’re all into Formula 1 racing.
Still, many would argue that the ski world’s most important mission is to create a winning ski team in order to attract more sponsors and bigger dollars, thereby generating bigger heroes, who in turn will attract more exposure which, feeding on itself, will create more fans, some of whom may even become skiers. That looks like delusion to us. Further, it’s a whole other world from the splendid home-grown hotbeds of community-supported ski racing in some mountain ski towns—Aspen, Stowe, Mammoth Lakes, Ketchum come to mind—where so many of our greats have come from in the past, and which are likely, some day, to produce more.
Listen, for a moment, to some other relevant voices. Cheryl Grace, for instance, program manager for ESPN, who says ski racing gets low TV ratings, and that they are sinking. She thinks there’s already more ski competition programming than is needed. “However,” she says, “our viewers like the ‘mountain thrills and spills’ sections we put together out of our ski footage. It’s sort of highlights of crash ’n burn.”
Right. And mud wrestling and demolition derbies, too. We find it significant that ESPN absolutely cannot tell, and declines to estimate, how many of their viewers of ski programming are skiers. Until shown otherwise, we’re skeptical about that audience as skier potential.
Or listen to Editor John Fry, who says, “Ski racing scores very low with readers of Snow Country; furthermore,” he continues, “research by Ski Business among retailers showed little interest in reading about ski racing and little interest in its use to help sell products.”
Fry also likes to point to Japan, one of the most dynamic ski markets in the world, which is barely visible on the international race scene, and where retailers sell vast amounts of equipment without benefit of home-grown ski heroes.
Much of the sports scene today is dominated by sports marketing, something that really wasn’t a factor when our earlier ski heroes were arriving on the scene—the likes of Billy Kidd, Penny Pitou, Buddy Werner.
Today, sports marketing is a very real and growing world of big business, big dollars, big greed. Of big egos, too. Of merchandisers, marketers, lawyers, flacks and personal coaches. A world where sponsor is king.
Sports marketing is about entertainment, not participation. It is about paid performers and non-participant fans to buy the products the super-heroes endorse.
So where does skiing fit into this picture?
The fact is that, feeble as it is, the U.S. Ski Team is responsible for gross revenues that dwarf the combined revenues of SIA, NSAA, PSIA, NSP and CCSAA. But it seems it’s not enough.
Right now, U.S. Skiing, the umbrella organization over USST and U.S. Ski Association, is in the final stages of finding a new CEO. It is widely rumored the job carries big-time bucks—the sort to attract big-time talent from outside the ski world. Here is part of the job description: “…leader and manager whose past experience demonstrates proven ability to develop and grow a mid-sized sports business in revenues, profitability, image, awareness and results of its athletes.” The expectations become even clearer with the recommendation that the candidate should have “managed or been personally involved in the many facets of the sports business, including sponsorship sales, fund-raising, licensing, broadcast, media finance, legal, event management or other task-specific duties.”
Yes, it is clear that our sport is buying into the strategy of “growing the business.” What is not clear is whose business is being grown. Who benefits? The athletes? The agents? The sponsors? Where and how does the skiing public benefit? Where and how does the ski business benefit? The area operators, the ski retailers?
Wrote Rossignol’s VP for Racing and Promotion, Daniel Mornet, to the USST board in June: “The sport of skiing needs a strong leader to produce skiing role models that will build excitement and develop fan loyalty.” He also poses that, “There is absolutely no reason that the U.S. cannot be the best in the world, or at least in the top three.”
Should that sort of preeminence on the international racing circuit really be our priority as a sport and an industry?
For our part, we just hope that area owner Nick Badami (Alpine Meadows and Park City), who takes over as chairman of U.S. Skiing next February, will nudge that organization into a role beyond that of creating a financially successful sports business around a competitively successful ski team. We hope, for instance, that USS will work with NSAA by lending a powerful consumer advocacy voice on matters of fundamental importance to the future of the sport.
Now that could make us cheer again for the team!
—A SAM editorial
