The business of skiing has been called a “boom” industry. Millions of dollars are invested in facilities and thousands are employed to provide slopes, lifts, lodging and entertainment for skiers. There is little doubt that participation in the sport is growing, the question is “how fast?”; “How many skiers are there?”; “How often do they ski?”; “Who are they?”
The market research project “The Skier Market—Northeast North America” was designed to provide some answer to these and other questions. Here for the first time are data on a segment of the skier market. During the winter of 1962-63 Sno-Engineering conducted a comprehensive study of the skiers served by the ski industry in the northeastern United States and Canada. The study, sponsored by the New Hampshire State Department of Resources and Economic Development, was financed by the U.S. Department of Commerce, Area Redevelopment Administration.
The report of findings contains over 100 pages of data presented in many ways. I shall discuss some of these facts and evaluate their meaning to the industry.
The study’s most significant findings concerned the size of the present market. We determined statistically that there are approximately 447,600 skiers who skied at areas in Northeast North America (NENA) during the winter of 1962-63.
This finding clashes somewhat with what was popularly believed to be a market of considerably more. The disagreement may well be caused by a mere definition. “Skiers” as defined in our research must have been participating during 1962-63 and using a ski lift. These are the skiers who support the ski industry. There may be many additional people who ski in their back yards or who have skied at sometime, but in measuring the commercial market those skiers are only potential customers.
In discussing this finding with members of the ski industry and noting reviews of the findings in ski publications, I detect a feeling of alarm. It seems to me that discovering that a market is smaller than estimated should bolster optimism. These 447,600 skiers spent over $143,000,000 for transportation, lodging, entertainment and lift tickets to ski in NENA during 1962-63. They represent less than 1% of the total population in the geographic region which leaves a very large untapped potential.
Of course the actual potential is not this large. Skiing will never attract a large share of the population because of the nature of the sport. Skiing requires physical ability, time, some travel, and it is relatively expensive. The study shows that 28.8% of the NENA market are students. Of the non-students 62.6% are college graduates, 39.9% have incomes over $10,000 annually and 49.5% are from the professional and managerial occupation groups.
In contrast to these indications, New England uphill capacity in lineal transport feet per hour, showed a ten year rate of growth of over 20% per year. This trend appears to be continuing. The uphill capacity, as measured in Vertical Transport Feet/hr, in NENA increased by over 20% this past year.
The market potential can logically be narrowed to this group, which may be estimated from economic facts concerning households. Sales Management’s “Survey of Buying Power for 1963” shows almost 3,000,000 households in the NENA region with cash incomes of over $10,000. Since skiing attracts the highly educated, typical young professional, middle management group, time to ski is an important limiting factor. Time in the form of increased vacation appears to be moving in the favor of the ski industry. Trends are for longer vacations. The Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Committee projects lengths of average vacations from 2 weeks in 1960 to 3.9 weeks in 2000.
These 447,600 skiers report spending 7,920,000 skier-days on the slopes during 1962-63 or an average of 17.7 each. Of course usage was heavier during the peak weekend and Holiday periods with vacation skiing accounting for only 13.8%.
| Total Skier-days | % | |
|---|---|---|
| Weekend & Holiday Skiing | 4,950,000 | 62.5 |
| Mid-week skiing | 1,880,000 | 23.7 |
| Vacation skiing (both mid-week & peak periods) | 1,090,000 | 13.8 |
| 7,920,000 | 100% |
Thus it appears that the ski industry caters to a high degree of repeat business, and once a person becomes a skier he means a lot, economically, to the industry. Using our slide rule once more, the average skier spends $18.06 per day for 17.7 days or a total average of $319.66 per season, exclusive of clothing and equipment purchases.
With the impact of one skier so great it is not only important to introduce skiing to a broader market, but it behooves the industry to expend effort to keep the skiers they have on the slopes.
Growth:
The number of skiers is growing at some rate not in excess of 16.7% annually. Chart 1 shows the 1962-63 NENA market in terms of the number of seasons skied.
This measure is not net growth since no measure of the skiers who have ceased to participate is included. This “dropout” rate is important, not only to growth statistics, but also because of the importance of repeat business.
There are several other rough indications of growth that serve to support this finding. The USEASA is growing at a 20 year rate of 13.3% annually. Growth in membership in recent years has been greater with a rate of 16.2% since 1955. Figures on the attendance at ski areas on National Forest lands in the Front Range of Colorado show a 9 year growth rate of 12% annually.
These various measures of growth would seem to indicate a rate of ski area development and expansion exceeding growth in demand. However, the facts show that very few ski areas have ceased to exist. What this may indicate is that many operations are marginal, depending wholly upon peak day business just to keep them solvent. Results of this research along with several years of observation lead me to conclude that demand or usage of ski facilities during peak weekend and Holiday periods is increasing at a rate of 20% or better annually. It is the midweek usage that holds net growth at a lower rate. My “guesstimate” at midweek growth is around 8% per year. The problem, obviously, is to find a solution to the increasing over-capacity in midweek facilities. Operators can increase promotional efforts or cease mid-week operations to cut operating costs. The fact remains that if current trends continue the problem will become more acute.
Geographic Distribution:
The study has an excellent breakdown of where skiers reside in relation to where they ski. The report shows 15 skier source regions and 11 destination groups. As was expected, the bulk of the NENA skier market resides in the larger metropolitan centers. Southeast New York, including New York City and Long Island have 17.7% or 79,100; Eastern Mass. and Rhode Island with Boston, Providence and Worcester have 17.4% or 77,800; Quebec with Montreal has 11.1% or 49,900 and Conn. with Hartford, New Haven and the Stanford-Bridgeport suburbia has 11.6% or 52,100.
The importance of access can be seen by noting that 55% of the skiing done by Eastern Mass. and R.I. residents (Boston-Providence) is in New Hampshire while the residents of Southeast New York do 57.6% of their skiing in Vermont.
Vacation Skiing:
39.2% of the skiers reported taking a winter ski vaction in 1962-63 averaging 7.8 days long. It is this segment of the ski business that accounts for the all-important mid-week revenue, especially among the major areas that are significantly distant from population centers. Over 60% of the 1962-63 market did not take a ski vacation and thus represent an immediate potential. These skiers need motivation, they require selling, but should be relatively easy to persuade as they are already sold on the sport. The vacation market is the key to the largest problem facing the industry, midweek over-capacity.
Costs of Skiing:
NENA skiers report spending an average of $18.06 skier-day when on a typical weekend ski trip with 10.5% spending over $30 per skier day. In answer to the question, “Assuming a surface lift were satisfactory, are you willing to pay an additional 20% fee to ride up a ski slope on a chair lift?”, 40.9% answered “yes.” In addition, 81.9% said they would pay a 10% premium for not having to wait in a ski lift line over five minutes. From these responses it appears that skiers may not be overly cost conscious.
This is not to say they will absorb general price increases, but that they are not, as a group, looking for cut rate facilities or discount house operations. They will pay for extra services and pay for increased enjoyment. Operators will do well to upgrade facilities, groom and maintain slopes better and provide more apres ski activities to present a greater leisure package in lieu of reducing rates. Here too is an indication of the direction to move to combat the midweek doldrums.
Summary:
This study has measured and described the NENA skier market. These are the facts about your customers. Much of this data needs further expansion and these facts should be periodically upgraded in order to keep abreast of changes and spot trends. In defining the market for the Northeast we have established a benchmark, we have shown the untapped potential and I have indicated where some effort is needed. The market is growing. There are signs that it could explode.
Barring national catastrophe the trend is toward increased leisure time, more discretionary buying power, greater need for outdoor activity, easier access to mountainous terrain and an increasingly active population. All these factors will help the ski industry to grow.
The as-yet-unanswered question, and the one I continue to pursue is “How fast should facilities
