J2Ski Holiday 2014

I appreciate that some resorts can look a bit bland and dull, but surely for a ski holiday it is the actual ski area which must account for most of the reason to go. As long as the resort has great skiing, and some decent bars and eateries, I don't really mind if it looks like the famed ferrier estate in kidbrooke.

Far Queue wrote:I appreciate that some resorts can look a bit bland and dull, but surely for a ski holiday it is the actual ski area which must account for most of the reason to go. As long as the resort has great skiing, and some decent bars and eateries, I don't really mind if it looks like the famed ferrier estate in kidbrooke.

Sorry mate don't agree with that one ..... I do like a rustic village feel when I'm walking about resort,
If you take Avoriaz there is some wonderful skiing to be had, but the place is as dull dish water infact I would much prefer dish water.

daved wrote:I, personally, preferred the La Plagne side to Les Arcs but I thought the main accommodation areas were soulless ..Monchavin and Champagny were more traditional and the former is right in the middle of the full area

I've just been reading up on Monchavin - isn't it a little low - at 1250? It does sound nice though, as it's a traditional village. What happens if there's not enough snow to ski back to it? Do you just go down in a gondola or something?

It seems La Plagne is made up of 10 villages.

Far Queue - I can survive hideous architecture myself (surely La Plagne/Les Arcs can't be worse than Val Thorens?) but seem people might not be able to. For me, the ski area and how well connected it is etc. is far more important than what the buildings look like.

AllyG wrote:

Far Queue - I can survive hideous architecture myself (surely La Plagne/Les Arcs can't be worse than Val Thorens?) but seem people might not be able to. For me, the ski area and how well connected it is etc. is far more important than what the buildings look like.

Agreed.

I like the traditional look but it doesn't bother me if it looks like Flaine. The architecture is not the driving force in my choice of destination, the ski area is.
At the risk of being flamed i would say that Avoriaz is very high on my go to list and it will probably happen next year unless i find a cheap Austrian venue.

If I had to choose and it was between say Flaine and Samoens I would choose Samoens.
Same ski area, totally different places.

This year we went to Les Houches, nothing there.
Few shops, no atmosphere in village.

Admittedly late in season, but we've been to S at same time and it's been really buzzing.
We like to take something home for the house, but there was nothing in LH except the usual keyrings and penknifes.

Of course if you want ski in, ski out you won't get that in S, but I would choose a village with a great ski area and a heart for a 'holiday'.

I've been to La Plagne and Les Arcs and both are pretty souless but good skiing.

The resort I remember as having a bit of both was Alpe D'Huez. A traditional village with a big ski area and a modern bit above it. Only problem here is that it is South facing, so we would have to go mid season to be sure to avoid the slush.

Well, if it was a choice between ugly or slush, I think I would pick ugly

However, it's not really that simple, because we might be able to find a pretty, interesting village amongst all the ugliness of a snow-sure resort - like Daved's Monchavin in La Plagne or Did's Samoens next to Flaine.

Dids - does Samoens get slushy in the main season?

Felthorpe - do you reckon Alpe d'Huez deserves to go on the potential list of resorts?

Ally - yes I would like to add it, even though I have been there before, it is somewhere I would happily go back to. It does provide an extensive and varied ski area with lots of options for accommodation.

However I am open to try somewhere new and will go with the majority decision on this.