Only $20 per run. Photo: Jeffrey Brandjes The family-owned, Lake Tahoe-area resort Donner Ski Ranch recently threw shade at Palisades Tahoe with a Facebook photo of its nonexistent lift line on a “busy day at 11:30 a.m.,” writing that “if you are paying $250 for a lift ticket, plus parking, to be stuck in terrible traffic then stand in long lift lines, you might want to rethink your priorities.” Facebook users commented in agreement, saying things like, “Love the small resorts. Forget the corporations,” “Don’t forget to support a local mountain and not a lame Corpo mountain,” and “there are never lift lines there, I love that.” For comparison, Palisades Tahoe currently charges between $188 and $289 for a single-day lift ticket, with prices varying depending on the day of the week. (The weekend is more, and weekdays are less.) And that’s pretty much become the standard at large resorts across the country. While Donner Ski Ranch and the many people in the comment section are justified in their opposition to large resorts, which come with exorbitant lift ticket prices that have only skyrocketed in recent years, I would argue that the issue stems from the ski industry itself as opposed to the individual consumer. While it’s true that skiing at smaller mountains is more affordable, skiers shouldn’t be forced to pay insane amounts of money to access challenging terrain in the first place. Specifically, weekend warriors, middle-class skiers, and families who live in neighboring cities should be able to ski Palisades Tahoe without breaking the bank. Is this a radical statement? Or just common sense? In fairness, one of the obvious opposition arguments – that I’ll address – is that consumers do have a choice to opt into resort skiing in the first place. Backcountry skiing is an option for those unwilling to pay large resort prices. Plus, backcountry skiing certainly has its advantages: it offers more freedom, more connection with nature, and more pristine powder. However, backcountry skiing shouldn’t be treated as a viable option for everyone. Avalanche safety courses and equipment are a must (and they come with a high price tag). Plus, it’s unsafe to backcountry ski alone and in certain conditions. Backcountry skiing requires a lot more investment, time, and expertise than resort skiing, making it potentially more expensive and even more difficult for everyday consumers to break into. All in all, the real issue here is the ski industry’s unwillingness to address its high prices. With lift tickets for big-name resorts in the hundreds (up to $300 on peak days), paid parking systems, resort dining options, and equipment rentals, a single weekend of skiing can quickly add up to thousands of dollars for individuals and families who don’t live in a mountain town or own their own gear. In other words: anyone who’s not rich or willing to make their entire life revolve around skiing is barred from enjoying the mountains. To gain insight into the ski industry pricing out everyday consumers, I spoke to the head of the National Ski Areas Association, Mike Reitzell. Surprisingly, Reitzell more or less repeated what Donner Ski Ranch announced to its online audience, saying, “lift ticket and season pass pricing varies greatly by region and ski area size. Typically, the lowest-priced lift tickets can be found at small ski areas.” In other words, the NSAA excuses the high prices of larger ski resorts. Then, Reitzell explained that it’s his job to protect ski resorts, reiterating that costs have gone up for resorts due to rising costs of operation, as if this excuses the 546 percent appreciation of lift ticket prices in North America during the last four decades. “The cost of running a ski resort has gone up as resorts spend to maintain terrain and create compelling benefits for employees,” Reitzell said. But has it gone up 546 percent? Let me paraphrase Reitzell: the ski industry is not coming to save us. And, at least in the near future, the ski industry is not going to become more affordable. Corporations, besides being “lame-o” or whatever the Facebook commenter said, play a notable part in this conversation. Corporations tend to homogenize resorts, so skiing’s base lodges, chairs, and even maps begin to feel one in the same. Corporations are behind mega passes such as Epic and Ikon. I’ll add that the invention of the mega pass has changed skiing as we know it. Until mega passes came into the picture, skiers and riders picked their closest mountain, spent a couple hundred bucks on a season pass, and that was that. Now, skiers and riders must choose between spending a couple hundred bucks per day or spending a thousand dollars if they’re going to ski more than five days. I’m not bringing this up to criticize mega passes or the consumers who decide to purchase them (can you blame anyone?), but to illustrate how the ski industry has changed dramatically over the past few decades. Mega passes have their advantages: skiing across the country is possible for those who have the time and already own the pass. Instead of spending $500 to purchase your home resort’s season pass, you can spend a little more and gain access to a slew of other mountains. But again, for everyday, middle-class consumers, is this really useful, or is this simply a ploy to push people to buy the more expensive option that they’ll never reap the full benefits of? With blackout dates on the base passes, there becomes even more pressure to spend more and more money until it’s no longer any sort of “steal.” So, what’s next? It seems unlikely that prices will decrease in the next few years without some kind of mass consumer strike or protest. So, what are skiers and riders to do? It’s a tough question, and it depends on who’s asking. Beginners and families looking for the skiing experience but are willing to sacrifice challenging terrain (because you don’t need couloirs and cliffs to learn how to link turns) can go to smaller, independently operated resorts. Individuals who are extremely invested in skiing and want to challenge themselves may opt to go off-piste, take avalanche safety courses, and build their network of fellow backcountry skiers and riders. The real challenge here presents itself for the middle ground (and the vast majority) of skiers and riders frequenting resorts. The demographic who is most affected by the rising prices, and the ski industry’s inability to address them, are those who work full-time jobs, may not have enough money to invest in a brand-new backcountry skiing or riding setup, or may not have the time to go touring instead of riding the lifts. It is clear change is needed in the ski industry. I’m not opposed to mega-passes, and I’m not opposed to big-name resorts. But at the end of the day, it may be corporations driving the ski industry, and not skiers and riders, who need to rethink their priorities. When skiing risks pricing out many of its consumers by implementing prices and systems that simply aren’t conducive to the everyday rider, the industry can, and will, face the consequences. And if resorts continue to alienate those customers, the sense of community so cherished in snowsports will be dead – not to mention, there won’t be any skiers left to purchase the $300 day passes.

With Lift Ticket Prices Exorbitantly High, the Ski Industry Needs to Rethink Its Priorities

Then, Reitzell explained that it’s his job to protect ski resorts, reiterating that costs have gone up for resorts due to rising costs of operation, as if this excuses the 546 percent appreciation of lift ticket prices in North America during the last four decades. “The cost of running a ski resort has gone up […]

With High Ticket Prices, Is It Skiers or the Ski Industry That Needs to Rethink Priorities?

Then, Reitzell explained that it’s his job to protect ski resorts, reiterating that costs have gone up for resorts due to rising costs of operation, as if this excuses the 546 percent appreciation of lift ticket prices in North America during the last four decades. “The cost of running a ski resort has gone up as resorts spend to maintain terrain and create compelling benefits for employees,” Reitzell said. But has it gone up 546 percent? Let me paraphrase Reitzell: the ski industry is not coming to save us. And, at least in the near future, the ski industry is not going to become more affordable.

To gain insight into the ski industry pricing out everyday consumers, I spoke to the head of the National Ski Areas Association, Mike Reitzell. Surprisingly, Reitzell more or less repeated what Donner Ski Ranch announced to its online audience, saying, “lift ticket and season pass pricing varies greatly by region and ski area size. Typically, the lowest-priced lift tickets can be found at small ski areas.” In other words, the NSAA excuses the high prices of larger ski resorts.
While Donner Ski Ranch and the many people in the comment section are justified in their opposition to large resorts, which come with exorbitant lift ticket prices that have only skyrocketed in recent years, I would argue that the issue stems from the ski industry itself as opposed to the individual consumer. While it’s true that skiing at smaller mountains is more affordable, skiers shouldn’t be forced to pay insane amounts of money to access challenging terrain in the first place. Specifically, weekend warriors, middle-class skiers, and families who live in neighboring cities should be able to ski Palisades Tahoe without breaking the bank. Is this a radical statement? Or just common sense?
Only per run. Photo: Jeffrey Brandjes
The real challenge here presents itself for the middle ground (and the vast majority) of skiers and riders frequenting resorts. The demographic who is most affected by the rising prices, and the ski industry’s inability to address them, are those who work full-time jobs, may not have enough money to invest in a brand-new backcountry skiing or riding setup, or may not have the time to go touring instead of riding the lifts.
I’ll add that the invention of the mega pass has changed skiing as we know it. Until mega passes came into the picture, skiers and riders picked their closest mountain, spent a couple hundred bucks on a season pass, and that was that. Now, skiers and riders must choose between spending a couple hundred bucks per day or spending a thousand dollars if they’re going to ski more than five days. I’m not bringing this up to criticize mega passes or the consumers who decide to purchase them (can you blame anyone?), but to illustrate how the ski industry has changed dramatically over the past few decades.
Corporations, besides being “lame-o” or whatever the Facebook commenter said, play a notable part in this conversation. Corporations tend to homogenize resorts, so skiing’s base lodges, chairs, and even maps begin to feel one in the same. Corporations are behind mega passes such as Epic and Ikon.
In fairness, one of the obvious opposition arguments – that I’ll address – is that consumers do have a choice to opt into resort skiing in the first place. Backcountry skiing is an option for those unwilling to pay large resort prices. Plus, backcountry skiing certainly has its advantages: it offers more freedom, more connection with nature, and more pristine powder.
All in all, the real issue here is the ski industry’s unwillingness to address its high prices. With lift tickets for big-name resorts in the hundreds (up to 0 on peak days), paid parking systems, resort dining options, and equipment rentals, a single weekend of skiing can quickly add up to thousands of dollars for individuals and families who don’t live in a mountain town or own their own gear. In other words: anyone who’s not rich or willing to make their entire life revolve around skiing is barred from enjoying the mountains.
So, what’s next? It seems unlikely that prices will decrease in the next few years without some kind of mass consumer strike or protest. So, what are skiers and riders to do? It’s a tough question, and it depends on who’s asking. Beginners and families looking for the skiing experience but are willing to sacrifice challenging terrain (because you don’t need couloirs and cliffs to learn how to link turns) can go to smaller, independently operated resorts. Individuals who are extremely invested in skiing and want to challenge themselves may opt to go off-piste, take avalanche safety courses, and build their network of fellow backcountry skiers and riders.
The family-owned, Lake Tahoe-area resort Donner Ski Ranch recently threw shade at Palisades Tahoe with a Facebook photo of its nonexistent lift line on a “busy day at 11:30 a.m.,” writing that “if you are paying 0 for a lift ticket, plus parking, to be stuck in terrible traffic then stand in long lift lines, you might want to rethink your priorities.”
Mega passes have their advantages: skiing across the country is possible for those who have the time and already own the pass. Instead of spending 0 to purchase your home resort’s season pass, you can spend a little more and gain access to a slew of other mountains. But again, for everyday, middle-class consumers, is this really useful, or is this simply a ploy to push people to buy the more expensive option that they’ll never reap the full benefits of? With blackout dates on the base passes, there becomes even more pressure to spend more and more money until it’s no longer any sort of “steal.”
Facebook users commented in agreement, saying things like, “Love the small resorts. Forget the corporations,” “Don’t forget to support a local mountain and not a lame Corpo mountain,” and “there are never lift lines there, I love that.” For comparison, Palisades Tahoe currently charges between 8 and 9 for a single-day lift ticket, with prices varying depending on the day of the week. (The weekend is more, and weekdays are less.) And that’s pretty much become the standard at large resorts across the country.
However, backcountry skiing shouldn’t be treated as a viable option for everyone. Avalanche safety courses and equipment are a must (and they come with a high price tag). Plus, it’s unsafe to backcountry ski alone and in certain conditions. Backcountry skiing requires a lot more investment, time, and expertise than resort skiing, making it potentially more expensive and even more difficult for everyday consumers to break into.
It is clear change is needed in the ski industry. I’m not opposed to mega-passes, and I’m not opposed to big-name resorts. But at the end of the day, it may be corporations driving the ski industry, and not skiers and riders, who need to rethink their priorities. When skiing risks pricing out many of its consumers by implementing prices and systems that simply aren’t conducive to the everyday rider, the industry can, and will, face the consequences. And if resorts continue to alienate those customers, the sense of community so cherished in snowsports will be dead – not to mention, there won’t be any skiers left to purchase the 0 day passes.