An industry opportunity
However, we are inclined to agree with Colorado Ski Country executive, Tod Martin, that the hearings should be viewed as a good opportunity for our industry to marshal our facts and present the real facts of the real world to the public at large.
To date, our industry has done a singularly poor job of public relations. We are still viewed as grasping profiteers by the skiing public, and every lift ticket increase confirms this impression. The public does not see our economic studies or read our balance sheets or pay our fuel bills.
We have no idea what Senator Haskell is up to, though it has all the earmarks of that old political game where incumbents hold well-publicized hearings at public expense to enhance their standing with their constituents. Why shouldn’t it be good politics for Senator Haskell to twist the same ski industry tail that helped Dick Lamm become the Governor of Colorado?
But whatever his purposes, we will have a marvelous chance to put our best foot forward. We are delighted that the very able Garry Mitchell, formerly of Copper Mountain, is organizing the initial ski industry response. We are very sure it will be a reasoned, reasonable and effective one.
A SAM editorial
Support for Ski Team
This past year has brough the U. S. Ski Team to a new high in world ski competition with respect to rankings and depth. Immense progress has been made and the United States skiers have good reason for confidence in reaching even higher plateaus in the forthcoming Olympic year and future.
The ski-area operator and the equipment supplier has a big stake in that success. At recent NSAA meetings we have spent much time in talking of the need to broaden the base of our ski market. One thing is sure . . . we can expect many times more national ski coverage and exposure through a winning U. S. Ski Team.
As everyone knows, the U. S. Ski Team, unlike our European competitors, receives no Government subsidy. Funding of the team is entirely dependent upon contributions from private individuals, corporations, and the ski industry.
The success of the U. S. Ski Team development has been sparked by volunteer organizers combined with a professional staff. This has produced the fine coaching, programmed training, and carefully planned schedules that have improved the general depth of ability, as well as producing the top performances by such people as Greg Jones, Geoff Bruce, Andy Mill, Cary Adgate, Cindy Nelson and Lindy Cochran.
The team that began with only two members who had ever previously scored in World Cup Competition, compiled an impressive record. By the end of the 1975 season, eight women placed in the top ten in World Cup competitions twenty-two times, and seven men scored eleven times. This was not a question of blind luck, but rather the result of a strong national program with talented athletes.
The greatest deficiency of the U. S. Ski Team is a fund of money on which they can depend. The national programs cost — very legitimately and realistically — $1,000,000 a year, and the U. S. Ski Educational Foundation is, in effect, trying to run these programs with no working capital. This organization has the burden of having to “pass the hat” every single year, and what’s more, these people do the fund raising on a volunteer basis.
I think you can understand why I am asking each NSAA member to give financial support to this program. A five-year annual pledge can provide the funds and achieve the continuity so important to our U. S. Ski Team by allowing them to plan, budget, forecast, and execute programs with efficiency and cost effectiveness.
Now I realize that not all ski areas or suppliers can afford to help; but most could do something in the way of financial support, and a good portion could contribute more generously.
It is appropriate that ski areas help with the funding for our national ski athletes. The image of American skiing and the publicity that is developed for the sport (not to mention potential publicity), is important to every NSAA member. By helping the U. S. Ski Team, you are helping your business.
Please take the time to make a financial commitment now, or if it has to go before your Board of Directors, put it on the agenda now. Your contribution will be vital to our sport of skiing and the future of the United States’ outstanding national program.
Help make a winner — it is in your ski interest! Mail your pledge to:
United States Ski Educational Foundation, P. O. Box 100, Park City, Utah 84060.
Preston Smith, Chairman
NSAA Competitions Committee
Let’s not knock freestyle
Many people feel that freestyle skiing is hurting the reputation of the sport. They say that some people refuse to learn to ski, because hotdoggers make the sport look difficult and dangerous.
Each time a young skier is out of control he is instantly called a “hotdogger.” Ten years ago he was called a “downhiller.” In those days many people used to refuse to learn skiing because downhill racers used to make the sport look dangerous. Many well-meaning people tried to make downhill training illegal. Today, many people are trying to prevent hotdoggers from freestyling.
Doing daring things has been part of skiing ever since it started. Skiing is speed, it’s exciting and sometime dangerous. Young people like it that way and they are the ones who bring the most money to the sport.
Calling an out-of-control skier a downhiller or a hotdogger might be wrong, because those skiers (downhillers and hotdoggers) usually ski very well and even if they go fast, they are usually in control. Accidents caused by downhillers or hotdoggers are few compared to those caused by beginners and intermediates. Furthermore, professional racing and freestyle on television has done a lot towards giving the sport exposure.
Making skiing safer is definitely a good idea, but preventing young people from doing their thing is the wrong step towards a healthy business. Imagine how some mountain managers would run a swimming pool with a diving board. There would be a chain and a sign: “Diving only allowed to registered junior divers, under supervision of the coach.” To register, one would have to go through spring training, be a club member and have an Eastern Association card. Would swimming be any safer because of it? Would more people learn to swim? Chances are, more people would stop swimming because well-meaning safety people castrated the sport.
In skiing, times have changed. There are now millions of skiers looking for exciting trails, while the industry is doing more and more to make skiing less exciting. Many areas are still designing trails like turnpike highways. Modern skiers are looking for moguls, drops, ridges, run-outs and kick-offs.
Less than 10 years ago, many ski teaching popes were busy explaining that the general public will never learn to shortswing. Now the same kind of people are busy saying that freestyle is not for the enjoyment of the general public. We introduced commercial ski school freestyle at Mount Snow last winter and sold 2,500 lessons. Repeat business was good, everybody had a good time and nobody got hurt. In the meantime, the mountain manager was busy destroying moguls and roping off jumps. He succeeded in stopping the program by spring time.
What skiers need is an opportunity to practice their favourite skiing style in safety. Small jumps with steep landings should be provided. Mogul skiing can best be learned on man-made moguls that are built in regular succession.
The sport will grow best if skiing is exciting as well as safe. Keeping freestyle on network TV certainly won’t hurt business, especially if the viewers know that the excitement is available to them, too.
Rudi Wyrsch
On municipal ski center
Ski area operators have finally come to recognize the municipal ski center as an asset to the sport. Indeed, acceptance of skiing at the community level must be looked upon as one of the best methods of expanding the skier market on a national basis.
When examining the wants and needs of the recreating public we find that he is moving away from the gym and into the real world of lifetime individualised activities. The standard municipal recreation package of ten years ago no longer appeals. In order to meet the needs of today’s taxpayer, a number of municipalities are jumping into the ski business.
Since these centers play a major role in new skier development, it is time to look at their contributions to the industry, and expand upon the positive aspects. First, a new segment of the market has been reached that would not normally have been touched by conventional marketing efforts.
Secondly, the user base has been expanded to include the very young and older customers, who might not normally have turned to skiing as a regular recreational activity. It also introduces the sport to people who might not have tried it because of the cost factor. Once introduced, these people may well later become commerical ski resort customers.
And this, of course, applies to all municipal skiers. Once their ability improves they will be looking for other resorts to test the newly-acquired skills. This means business for the established areas.
And let us not forget that the municipality offers one of the largest information and promotion systems, and it can be used to promote the sport of skiing to many thousands of potential skiers, many of whom are not being reached by our existing promotional methods or campaigns.
Dan Matthews
Ski & Resort Management Information Services
