We have a suggestion for Dr. Kottke, one which we have made before: there should be less emphasis on comparisons with the previous year’s stats. In a weather-dependent business like ours, there is bound to be the occasional weird skewing, and 1990-91 had more than its share. This caused Dr. Kottke to have to footnote like crazy to explain away seemingly wacky — but mathematically correct — results. By using a five- or ten-year floating average as the point of comparison with the current year, the industry would get a much more useful picture and could avoid cycles of doom and triumph over statistical comparisons that are essentially meaningless.
For instance, the report and the press releases based on it cite a 6.6 percent drop in skier visits — meaning a drop from the 1989-90 figures. But that wasn’t much of a year, either. On the other hand, we had an 8.2 percent drop from the 10-year averages and that’s a much more realistic and meaningful number.
For the flip side, supposing the 1991-92 season is a totally average season. What you would see next June is the mindless trumpeting of a “robust nine percent increase over the previous year,” rather than the reality of its averageness.
The indexing used by Dr. Kottke is good, even though most people really don’t like (don’t understand?) it. The press doesn’t like it either because, being lazy, we have to explain it.
So, to improve this otherwise excellent service, we do not advocate dropping the indexing; we do advocate substituting a floating average for the previous year’s numbers as the basic comparison. Last year’s numbers are there for anyone who wants to look them up and make the comparison.
