J2Ski Forum Posts and Replies by Dave Mac

I understand that there is a lot of available data. What would concern me, is how one could sensibly apply that data.

Piste shapes/slopes/fall lines vary hugely. It would be possible to stand in one spot on the piste, and see two or three fall lines radiating out from that point.

Like me, I am sure you have been on pistes that are steep, tight, and only one skier wide.
Equally, we have all skied on wide open pistes, where twenty skiers can comfortably ski side by side.
Are these two conditions equitable?
We have skied on pistes where the left hand side is a totally different run from the right hand side ~ such a condition exists in Niederau, where there is a line on one run called "Mel's run" and one on the other, called "Mac's run"
On the Skiwelt there are areas with wide pistes that are split into three runs by a narrow band of trees. I have experienced exactly the same in the Coffee glade runs in Vale.
There is also my previous point about shared pistes ~ what counts as a run?
Hence my proposal that pistes should be measured in acreages, (Andymol misread the point)
Also, I would like to add in this point. We have all been in resorts where the blue runs are created by a grader as a virtually flat road width run. There is a case for some of these, but it is an easy way to add km to a resort. These are needed as roads for farms in the summer anyway, so what once was a farm track is just doubled in width. Voila! No GPS fall line issues here! Loads of "creative" km marketing though.

This has been on the cards for some time, as Harriet Green has got to grips with the mess she inherited.
One area that I was disappointed in was the slow pace at which they have moved with shop closures. We still have two shops 150 yrds apart in our local town. It is daft. I raised that issue with a manager, with whom I have been friends for 30 years. He said "We are both profitable" I suggested that with one base in the town, they would be even more profitable, and hence, more secure.

I now understand the reason, as yesterdays presentation by HG ~ she has assembled a team to move TC into internet sales.

There is good scope here. I know from experience this week, there is room for a big improvement in the current travel set-ups.

The debt is not as reported by Admin. By November, last year, it had fallen to £788m, ie halved in one year. That is not to say that TC are not in jeopardy, because they still have a D/E ratio of 150% ~ with some intangible assets of £3bn. Emphasise "intangible"!

Certainly the shareholders are convinced. Had you bought TC shares a year ago, when the issue was first raised, and when I defended TC's possible outcome, you would have quadrupled your money.

Certainly it forecast that, but things change. LOTA, if you are in Niederau, it now looks like a couple of snow days, then bluebird days ~ perfect. Ski Girl is there just now, I met her at the weekend.
Hey, ski well!

I first read this in January on Blick. Some of the resort list is different but the main ones are there.
Also in January, I had a reason to try and obtain as accurate run distance as possible for a couple of runs.
I quickly discounted any app info ~ some of these were giving distances shorter than the length of the lift!
I used the lift length + cartographical info + 15% turn/route variation. There was no specified run length for comparison, but the result pretty well agreed with what I would have expected from normal speeds.
I don't think we can accuse the Bergbahns of being deceitful. If there is no standard common measurement, then the resorts are free to choose the most advantageous method.
What about when three runs have different start points, join into one, then split into two routes home? It is easy to see how operators can arrive at different methodologies.
We see the same differences in snow depth depiction, both as stated/experienced, and in resort variations.

I have never been convinced, either, by the American use of "enclosed acreage". As a guess most skiers would not be using muchof the off piste acreage. Of those that do, I am less convinced that they would be using a significant percentage. Hence, that method is suspect, too.
Perhaps a more acceptable method would be an acreage measurement of piste area, and maybe an indicator of the off piste cover. I understand there will be some areas that are off piste dominant, but this will identify the area correctly.

I had a try at SB's train suggestion, but couldn't make it work.
Also had a look at car hire ~ could see a 9 seater minibus for under £600/week. You can get two 5 seater car for about £310 each.
Route planner shows aboute 1.5 hour drive.

Snapzzz wrote:Dave, please don't take offence to this comment, i really don't mean it the way it may sound.

But a fall at 100kph for a man of your later years is bloody scary. Glad you are ok.

No offence taken at all, Snapzzz. I usually find that if you ignore age, it has little effect, except to give an opportunity to keep learning.
It is only 2 years since my Niederau day run record was broken by two 18 year old Austrian lads.
However, there was some solace in that in the same season, I had my fastest ever run down the mountain!
Is it not the case that only people in their 30s and 40s only worry about age? -)

No Wanderer, I don't do sarcasm. Within reason, my view is that there is a freshening effect when operating on machine snow base, that has mixed with natural, and converted to spring snow.
The effect is like skiing on a couple of inches of fresh snow, it's very enjoyable. Plus the slopes are empty!

Wanderer wrote:Glad you were ok :wink:. At that speed, it could have been very nasty :evil:

Thank you, Wanderer. I'm Ok now, but I was a bit sore for a couple of days.
However, with one of the instructors, I managed a sub 3 minute Run 19 this morning!