Facts and Figures
This publication has consistently urged on the ski area industry the importance of developing facts and figures to guide ski areas in their operations and expansion plans. As expressed in a letter from Ted Farwell, of Sno-Engineering,” . . . The point is, we don’t have the facts! What is needed is an objective, unbiased measure of ski area performance. A cold look at the figures will allow us to see where we are, and perhaps, where we are going.”
It is possible to find economic studies in reputable journals which leave the impression that ski areas rival the electronic and space age industries as investment opportunities. Contrarily, one may read an article in Wall Street Journal headlined, “Slim Profits Despite the Boom in Skiing,” in which one prominent area operator is quoted as saying, “It will take four or five years for the skiing population to catch up with lift capacity.”
Wherein lie the facts? They lie potentially in the accumulation of data available only from the ski areas themselves. They lie in the publishing of a ski area industry equivalent of the reports prepared by more mature industries, such as “Air Transport Facts and Figures,” and “American Trucking Trends.” Such statistics for the ski area industry would not only act as directional beacons for existing areas, but would also help to staunch the proliferation of financially ill-conceived new areas.
As outlined by Ted Farwell, whose pioneering work in this field is well known, the ski industry reports will cover such items as: 1) Capacity and usage, using the common measure of a skier/day; 2) Percentage breakdowns of the average revenue dollar vs. expense dollar; 3) Comparisons of cash flow to total invested capital, and ticket income to unit capacity; 4) Various load factors, graphs of growth in capacity, dollar volume and dollar per operating day. Data from individual areas will, of course, be confidential, and only composite summaries will be published.
Farwell now has some funds with which to expand his studies—this time to investigate the health, growth and economic impact of the ski industry throughout the Midwest. A parallel study in the West is also under way.
The necessary questionnaires will take time and effort to complete, but there are few worthwhile things which come without such effort. As Farwell says, “The usefulness of the data is directly proportionate to the response and cooperation received from the area operators. I believe the industry is ready for this step.”
We agree. Thus, we urge the regional area associations to get behind these efforts, and we urge NSAA to lend its weight in coordinating these efforts with an eye to the vital ski industry facts which can result.
Again, to quote Farwell: “What is the growth in usage of facilities? How does this compare with the growth in supply? Does the annual net cash flow justify the capital invested in facilities? What is the economic impact of a ski area? Are skiers being subsidized or milked? We, as an industry, need the answers to these and many other difficult questions. We, the industry, are the only ones who can supply the necessary information.”
Better Press
Another job for NSAA is to work for better relationships between ski areas and the daily press. One problem is snow reporting. Through disunity among area operators, each of whom adamantly pushes his own favorite theory on the best system, the press and wire services have been able to impose their own solutions, which, in some cases, have ill served the areas and the skiing public alike. For instance, the press generalized with a “no-ski” report for New Hampshire in mid-February, when, in fact, the areas of the Mt. Washington Valley were offering fine skiing. As Bill Whitney wrote, “Not only were tens of thousands of skiers misled into cancelling and deprived of their wonderful skiing opportunity; but thousands are being deprived of their livelihood—not by an act of God, but by a stroke of the pen.”
The industry should make its voice heard to eliminate this sort of nonsense.
Another example is found in the northwest where the Monday Seattle papers print the names of skiers who sustained skiing injuries over the weekend. The areas tried to shut off this morbid and harmful information at its source, but backed down when the papers in effect threatened, “No injury list—no snow reports or publicity!”
Again, this sort of nonsense must be stopped—somehow!
Professional Racing
Finally, a word about a hopeful development. Eight prominent ski areas have banded together to sponsor professional ski competition in North America. (See item on Page 13.) In the long pull, professional racing, attractively packaged, will command considerable TV air time, and television can do for the ski sport what it has so successfully done for golf. SKI Magazine is very happy to be associated with this program as the donor of prize money for the top professional skiers of the year.
In taking this step we believe that we are supporting the industry we serve. We further feel that we are supporting the best interests of amateur competition, which, especially in Europe, has hitherto been too lucrative for the individual “amateur” to give up. We are completely satisfied that the ranks of young, genuine amateur skiers cannot be touched, thanks to the league’s stringent rules. We feel that the development of professional racing in Europe will make it possible for our amateur athletes soon to compete on more even grounds with their European counterparts.
For the altruistic reason, then, that American amateur skiing will be strengthened; and for the commercial reason that a sound professional ski racing program will be an effective tool in broadening the base of recreational skiing, we are pleased that SKI will be in the forefront of this new and healthy program. D. R.
