 Poster: A snowHead
|
rob@rar,
Glading a slope and opening it up for sking or cutting it all down and grooming it isnt really any difference. Its just two ways to prepare the mountain for skiers. The difference is that if a resort glades its runs its gonna attract far less people and hence be far less crowded then the resort that has the big groomers.
Take a mountain like Castle Mountain (dieing to get there this year) it does just that and it sells about 100.000 day tickets per season. Compare that to the Val Thorens what 10.000 beds.
Tex
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| TexMurphy wrote: |
rob@rar,
Glading a slope and opening it up for sking or cutting it all down and grooming it isnt really any difference. Its just two ways to prepare the mountain for skiers. The difference is that if a resort glades its runs its gonna attract far less people and hence be far less crowded then the resort that has the big groomers. |
What about just leaving the trees as they are? Plenty of off-piste availability through the trees in Les Arcs (in comparison to other high altitude resorts in that part of the world) and if the trees are closely spaced the normal policy is to tighten your turns rather than start up the chainsaw!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Fine, very nice. I've had times not so dissimilar to that in the French resorts that you damned out of sight earlier in this thread. For example, a terrific day in early March off the Grand Col chairlift in Les Arcs. The black and red pistes had some people on it, but not so many, and the off-piste around the ridge had about six people on it, one of whom was me, skiing fresh tracks until my legs gave out at about 3pm. If I'd taken a guide and hiked for 15 minutes over the col I would have had a vast amount of untracked mountain and over 6,000ft of vertical essentially to myself.
TexMurphy I have no issue with whatever preferences you have, but in my experience your sweeping generalisations just don't stand up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| rob@rar wrote: |
| TexMurphy I have no issue with whatever preferences you have, but in my experience your sweeping generalisations just don't stand up. |
No generalization is ever true I know that everyone knows that. But on a conceptual level several resorts can be grouped into a cathegory. For example resorts in sweden focus stricktly on families. Its true for quite alot of resorts but obviously not every single resort. French resorts focusing on a broad audience and planing logisticaly so that they can consume a huge ammount of people isnt untrue either. Canadian resorts niching on smaller customer segments isnt untrue either. But ofcourse there are exeptions to all of that Whistler for example is a broad audience resort, Riksgränsen (Sweden) is a offpist resort and La Grave isnt a broad audience resort.
So the correct answer to the topics question from my point would be.
"I have no interest in returning to the huge french resorts that focus on a broad audience and that have villages that are more or less just hotels. I dont enjoy these because the number of people there is just too hgih and as a result of that the stress level. I also enjoy the sking in Canada better (in the resorts niched for terrain sking) because the mountain is more prepared to my taste. Further I do firmly belive that food in french tourist places sucks be it Val Thorens or Lacanau."
sounds more ok?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| TexMurphy wrote: |
"I have no interest in returning to the huge french resorts that focus on a broad audience and that have villages that are more or less just hotels. I dont enjoy these because the number of people there is just too hgih and as a result of that the stress level. I also enjoy the sking in Canada better (in the resorts niched for terrain sking) because the mountain is more prepared to my taste. Further I do firmly belive that food in french tourist places sucks be it Val Thorens or Lacanau."
sounds more ok? |
Yup, if you'd written that in the first place I don't think I'd have commented. I disagree, but we're all entitled to our opinion.
However, I do think you overlook the range of skiing available in some of the large, purpose built resorts. As I think I showed above, places like Les Arcs have wonderful off-piste opportunities to serve the 10% market segment (much more like 3% or 4% IMO) if you know where to go or better still take a guide (essential for parts of Les Arcs because it covers a National Park). These opportunities are often overlooked exactly because the resort has the reputation as being created to served the other 90% market segment in a great big people moving operation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TexMurphy,
| Quote: |
I have no interest in returning to the huge french resorts that focus on a broad audience and that have villages that are more or less just hotels. I dont enjoy these because the number of people there is just too hgih and as a result of that the stress level. I also enjoy the sking in Canada better (in the resorts niched for terrain sking) because the mountain is more prepared to my taste. Further I do firmly belive that food in french tourist places sucks be it Val Thorens or Lacanau."
|
a) I don't like making sweeping generalisations;
b) you could not find a more committed francophile than me - the maternal side of my family is all France-based, I am nearly bilingual, I nearly emigrated there and have still not excluded that possibility altogether, and if I could only travel in one single foreign country it would be France, without contest;
c) I can't comment much on Canada, because I have only skiied in Whistler and Panorama.
But, subject to all of these things, I agree with you! Like you, I had been avoiding Swiss ski resorts for some years: this year I have found that they offer better value for money all round than France, better/less surly service, more trees/beautiful views and incomparably better mountain-top food.
All that said, I have had some fabulous times in Chamonix, Meribel, Morzine and Vaujany and their respective surrounding areas over the last few years. But if I were going to make a generalisation about French mega-resorts, it would be as you say.
Excusez-moi, mes amis!
|
|
|
|
|
|
brian
brian
Guest
|
|
Hurtle, just out of interest, whereabouts in Switzerland did you go ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
I have no problems with Tex's comments, its a personal opinion, not gospel.
I would just say that I hope to get a goooooodd look around the area (BSM) this year and by that, I mean to use the main lift/lifts up from the valley.... and I know it is a huge valley...... and then I am away...hopefully..!! I'll see the crowds at the beginning and end of the day..if that..!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
| However, I do think you overlook the range of skiing available in some of the large, purpose built resorts. As I think I showed above, places like Les Arcs have wonderful off-piste opportunities to serve the 10% market segment (much more like 3% or 4% IMO) if you know where to go or better still take a guide (essential for parts of Les Arcs because it covers a National Park). |
One of the drawback of flying all the way over the pond to ski in N. America is the expensive flight. (the other drawback being the time in transit)
However, for those who prefer their piste un-pisted, aka off-piste. One must also consider the expense of having to hire guides for sking off-piste in the Alps. Especially if one is travelling alone or as the lone off-piste skier within a group, the expense of hiring guides for such a small party can be quite significant.
The expanse of in-bound off-piste in N. America makes guiding unneccessary. That, off-sets the guide expense in Alps and to some degrees makes up for the expense of the flight.
And the relatively un-crowded lift lines make up, for a smaller degree, of the extra long transfer time. Resulting in reasonable actual skiing time.
I can see why TexMurphy prefers a long flight over the pond than the close-by resorts in France. The bigger real reason can be glimped by his mentinoing of one lone French resort: La Grave, which is essentially lift-serviced back country skiing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
brian, Zermatt and Verbier this year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| abc wrote: |
| And the relatively un-crowded lift lines make up, for a smaller degree, of the extra long transfer time. Resulting in reasonable actual skiing time. |
At the risk of repeating myself (Ed. too late) it's not necessary to skip the big resorts of Europe to avoid long lines, other than for two or three weeks in February. I'm sure the are many good reasons for flying across the Atalantic for skiing, but uniquely short lines is not one of them. The amount of times I queued for more than 10 minutes last season can probably be counted on my fingers and toes, and mostly there were no more than four or five chairs/gondolas' worth of people ahead of me. I have no reason to believe that my experience is unique in that respect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
abc, There is a interesting equation to alps vs canada financially.
Flight tickets are obviously a huge base cost for canada. Lift tickets are much more expencive in canada (not to talk about US, phuuu). Canada and US also most often require some form of car.
Its much easier to find cheap housing in north america due to the fact that there are quite few "resorts" and more towns with near by lift systems.
Food is MUCH cheaper in Canada and US. (for a europe trip I budget for food, for a canada trip I dont as my food costs are LOWER then at home).
The cheaper housing and food infact make up for the flight AND more expencive lift tickets if you make a longer vacation.
Ive done a few 10 day vacations to SLC and thats too short imho and iirc these vacations cost me around 1600-1700 Euros (inkl everything) which ofcourse is more pricey then a alps trip. On the other hand matching the 2700 Euro budget Im on for this years five week trip to fernie would be hard in europe.
Tex
|
|
|
|
|
|
brian
brian
Guest
|
|
Hurtle, can't go wrong with either of those. I didn't go to Switzerland between the mid 90s and 2003 and was amazed at how much value seemed to have increased over that period. Not sure if that's cos France caught up and overtook CH or the CHF/£ rate got better, suspect a bit of both.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| rob@rar wrote: |
| abc wrote: |
| And the relatively un-crowded lift lines make up, for a smaller degree, of the extra long transfer time. Resulting in reasonable actual skiing time. |
At the risk of repeating myself (Ed. too late) it's not necessary to skip the big resorts of Europe to avoid long lines, other than for two or three weeks in February. I'm sure the are many good reasons for flying across the Atalantic for skiing, but uniquely short lines is not one of them. The amount of times I queued for more than 10 minutes last season can probably be counted on my fingers and toes, and mostly there were no more than four or five chairs/gondolas' worth of people ahead of me. I have no reason to believe that my experience is unique in that respect. |
You know its not so much the 5-10 min in a line its what it brings in form of atmosphear (note spelling:) )...
Its hard to explain if you havent experienced it but Ill try.
In a place that doesnt have lift lines and I really mean doesnt have (because you basicly round up your gang at the gate), there is no stress, none what so ever. You say hi to the people that you meet down at the lift and you share sking tips with them about what part of the mountain is good and what isnt. You interact with people in a relaxed and positive way (at least imho).
In a place that does have liftlines that are longer then a few min (dont know exactly when this phenomena starts to kick in) people start to push and shove each other which imho creates a stressfull environment. At least its lot less friendly then the chat at the other place. Also in the more crowded place you are gonna see the same thing happening at the food line in the lodge, by the restaurnats in the village and in the stores.
The wait in it self I dont mind because I need it to catch my breath anyways but its the atmosphear it builds that I dont like.
Tex
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| TexMurphy wrote: |
The wait in it self I dont mind because I need it to catch my breath anyways but its the atmosphear it builds that I dont like.
Tex |
OK, that's a very fair point. How do large North American resorts compare with the small resorts in this respect?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Whistler has more liftlines then the interrior BC resorts. Its also a busier atmosphere in the village and lift areas. It is definatly more stressfull then a small place like Fernie, Alta or Brighton. But I would say its more layed back then same size EU places. Canadians are (wooo oooh Im generalizing again) in general very layed back and so are Aussies and Kiwi´s that make up a big percentage of the crowed.
The only bigger US place Ive skiied is Snowbird but that still falls in the uncrowded cathegory unless you hit a presidents day weekend or something like that. But since Ive mostly skied Alta on big weekends I cant really comment. Thing with Alta is that they only sell a certain number of tickets per day and then they are "sold out". This is to ensure that the place doesnt get too crowded. Season tickets for example are a lottery that you enter and if you win you get the right to buy one.
Tex
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
TexMurphy, thanks for that. Have you skied any of the smaller French resorts? Wondering how they compare on your "stress meter" with the big French resorts?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Quote: |
Canada and US also most often require some form of car.
|
Travelling alone, that is definitely a significant extra expense. Though for groups and families, the expense of car is not any worse than whatever ground transfer cost per person in getting to the resorts in Europe.
Gasoline is considerably cheaper the US, though Canada is almost the same as in Europe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Chamonix is the smallest Ive skiied in france and since it consists of several small it would be the closest.
Id say its better then Val Thorens but still the number of people per mountain is so much higher that it cant be compared.
Its hard to compare because a resort of size X is less crowded in north america then a european resort of same size. By size I mean a combination of vertical meters, number of lifts and groomed runs. This is not really a good formula due to the skiable inbounds offpist in north america making them non compareable on inbounds skiable terrain. But anyways same size mountain less people on it on that side of the pond.
Part of this is due to the lack of vacation americans and canadians have. Your never gonna build mass ski tourism in countries tht just have 2-3 weeks vacation for the population below 40. Even though more and more europeans go there to ski we are never gonna hoard there due to the lenght in flight and the fact that one needs at least 2 weeks. The ski tourism that is hits Whistler quite hard as its one of the more crowded ones but then its basicly regional weekend skiiers+kiwis+aussies+stray euros.
Tex
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
TexMurphy, I spent an absolute fortune on meals in Whistler. Not in Banff though, but Whistler was horrendously expensive compared to Serre Chevalier.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
brian,
| Quote: |
Not sure if that's cos France caught up and overtook CH or the CHF/£ rate got better, suspect a bit of both
|
Agreed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Hurtle wrote: |
brian,
| Quote: |
Not sure if that's cos France caught up and overtook CH or the CHF/£ rate got better, suspect a bit of both
|
Agreed |
France got a tad more expencive with the euro but french resorts have become more expencive over the last 10-15 years... huge difference between my first france trip in what 92-93ish (Val Thorens) and my latest one (Chamonix) in 04..
But for us non euro countries the exchange rates play a huge part.
Tex.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Quote: |
Chamonix is the smallest Ive skiied in france and since it consists of several small it would be the closest.
|
If you're talking about crowded, busy, and stressed, Chamonix is where it's at. Chamonix is, by most ways of measuring these things, a mega resort, even if the skiing is in a number of separate areas. It has everything, and lots of it. It's busy all year round (in another thread we were talking about the very big lift queues you can find there) and a world class mecca for mountains and everything which goes with them. I'm not a fan, in part because I'm not a good enough skier to appreciate its comparative advantage in super challenging territory, in part because I like quiet places. I think the truth is that you haven't yet experienced any small French resorts so - naturally - you don't know whether you'd like them or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| abc wrote: |
However, for those who prefer their piste un-pisted, aka off-piste. One must also consider the expense of having to hire guides for sking off-piste in the Alps. Especially if one is travelling alone or as the lone off-piste skier within a group, the expense of hiring guides for such a small party can be quite significant.
The expanse of in-bound off-piste in N. America makes guiding unneccessary. That, off-sets the guide expense in Alps ............ |
No one has to hire a guide. They do so because mostly the guide will take them to High alpine terrain and/or on a glacier and the only time you will come across other people is when you cross a lift system. You hire them to have a skill and expertise that you don't but I agree that that can be relative
I don't think you can compare inbounds Off-piste in NA with Off-piste in the Alpes. Nobody will stop you going anywhere but your stupid self.
Of course, this isn't an invitation to start up the Pond Wars..
Rob Are you going to hook up with BC this year...particuarly March..?
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| JT wrote: |
| Rob Are you going to hook up with BC this year...particuarly March..? |
Yes, hoping to as I need all the handholding I can get for off-piste. At the moment my only plans for March are to be in Les Arcs for the first week.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JT, fair comments, but I would say a guide is a very good idea for someone who wants to ski off piste in Europe but who has only ever skied inbounds in North America
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Does anyone have any data on the number of days skied per year comparing the Alps to North America
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Arno,
Certainly, I was hoping my catch all " that can be relative" bit might deal with that but your point is a very good one clarified..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Chamonix/Argentiere great fun, Kitzbuehel well worth going to, Muerren/Wengen beautiful, Vail a bit dull, anodyne, so high you are constantly exhausted and takes about 25hours stuck in a tin can to get there.
Forgot St Anton- fabulous skiing but not too good for the liver, love Lech. Basically anywhere with good skiing and reasonable mountain eateries - another area where Vail is sorely lacking. When I was there I met a scot in the chalet who had been going for 14 yrs and reckoned once you had been to Vail you would never go anywhere else. I've been there and don't intend to go back.
Last season, with "no snow" I was skiing beautiful knee-deep pow in glorious sunshine in, you guessed it, Kitz! (Don't know how to post photo to prove it).
Last edited by Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person on Wed 12-09-07 16:54; edited 2 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
JT wrote:
| Quote: |
No one has to hire a guide.
|
Except it invalidate (most) insurance!
There's no comparison of N. American inbound off-piste to the Alps. The same idea doesn't really exist in the Alps.
| Quote: |
I would say a guide is a very good idea for someone who wants to ski off piste in Europe but who has only ever skied inbounds in North America
|
The "life-aided touring" type of off-piste in the Alps sounds like it's more similar to out-of-bound touring in N. America. Both requiring guides (and/or snowcats).
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| abc wrote: |
JT wrote:
| Quote: |
No one has to hire a guide.
|
Except it invalidate (most) insurance!
|
Not any insurance I've ever had. Off-piste is covered in most ski-related policies. The only time it is excluded in my policy is when the resort requires the skier to have a guide for off-piste skiing and I decide not to engage one. In my home resort this is only the case for skiing in the National Park off the back of the main peak, and this is a very unusual requirement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
brian
brian
Guest
|
| abc wrote: |
There's no comparison of N. American inbound off-piste to the Alps. The same idea doesn't really exist in the Alps.
|
Itineraries ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| brian wrote: |
| abc wrote: |
There's no comparison of N. American inbound off-piste to the Alps. The same idea doesn't really exist in the Alps.
|
Itineraries ? |
I thought itineraries are mostly un-prepared & un-maintained piste. But still a piste that you have to stick to. Not?
(I've only been on them in Austria, so I don't know for sure. The one I was skiing were indeed basically pistes they didn't bother to groom)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| abc wrote: |
I thought itineraries are mostly un-prepared & un-maintained piste. But still a piste that you have to stick to. Not?
|
Not. You can ski anywhere you like (one or two exceptions like National Parks). No such thing as inbound or out of bounds. It's just mountain, which you ski at your own risk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Quote: |
In my home resort this is only the case for skiing in the National Park off the back of the main peak, and this is a very unusual requirement
|
Where is "my home resort", rob@rar?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| abc wrote: |
| Where is "my home resort", rob@rar? |
Les Arcs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
....are you sure you are not an intern for the US Tourist Board? 
