Why people don't ski Killington

[KingsFourMan]

Good thread with some good comments in it.

I started skiing Killington in March of 1979 and quickly fell in love with the place and made it my skiing home for the better part of 25 yrs. What I loved about it was:

1. It’s awesome size and great diversity of terrain.
2. It’s relentless commitment to snowmaking. It was a given that Killington had the best snow and most open terrain in the east.
3. The Access Road nightlife not to mention The Kings Four happy hours.
4. The fact that you could always get away from the crowds at places like the South Ridge, Devils Fiddle and Old Sunrise Mnt on the busiest of holiday weekends.
5. The longest ski season in the east.
6. It was just a hardcore skier’s mountain and always had such a great buzz. There was always something cool happening and they were always getting bigger and better.

Then came ASC who are the ones that destroyed Killington, all POWDR has done is stick a fork in it. Regardless of who did it, these are the reasons we don’t ski Killington anymore:

1. Average, at best, snow quality from massive snowmaking and grooming cutbacks.
2. They decapitated Rams Head destroying the awesome cruising terrain that mountain had to offer.
3. They closed old Sunrise Mountain and lost some of the most interesting, and scenic, terrain at Killington. It was a great place to retreat to on cold, windy, or crowded days and the Back Behind Saloon was a blast for liquid lunches.
4. They stopped running the South Ridge triple regularly forcing you to ski Falls Brook and ride 2 lifts to get back to the top of that area, and making it a pain in the ass to get from the Bear side to Basin side making it necessary to hoof it around the KBL.
5. Pico became completely neglected.
6. The place became very run down and shabby.
7. The customer service sucked.
8.The pricing, especially for kids programs, is not in line with the quality of the experience they are providing.
9. POWDR’s attitude and approach to things especially when it comes to the locals.

So, we left. Not whining, just stating facts and reasons. We weren’t happy, so we took are business elsewhere after 25+ years of skiing Killington almost exclusively. It’s a bummer because Killington should be so much more. Pres Smith made that place great and someone could have come in and taken it to the next level instead of running it into the ground like ASC did.

[Gutts]

Good thread with some good comments in it.

I started skiing Killington in March of 1979 and quickly fell in love with the place and made it my skiing home for the better part of 25 yrs. What I loved about it was:

1. It’s awesome size and great diversity of terrain.
2. It’s relentless commitment to snowmaking. It was a given that Killington had the best snow and most open terrain in the east.
3. The Access Road nightlife not to mention The Kings Four happy hours.
4. The fact that you could always get away from the crowds at places like the South Ridge, Devils Fiddle and Old Sunrise Mnt on the busiest of holiday weekends.
5. The longest ski season in the east.
6. It was just a hardcore skier’s mountain and always had such a great buzz. There was always something cool happening and they were always getting bigger and better.

Then came ASC who are the ones that destroyed Killington, all POWDR has done is stick a fork in it. Regardless of who did it, these are the reasons we don’t ski Killington anymore:

1. Average, at best, snow quality from massive snowmaking and grooming cutbacks.
2. They decapitated Rams Head destroying the awesome cruising terrain that mountain had to offer.
3. They closed old Sunrise Mountain and lost some of the most interesting, and scenic, terrain at Killington. It was a great place to retreat to on cold, windy, or crowded days and the Back Behind Saloon was a blast for liquid lunches.
4. They stopped running the South Ridge triple regularly forcing you to ski Falls Brook and ride 2 lifts to get back to the top of that area, and making it a pain in the ass to get from the Bear side to Basin side making it necessary to hoof it around the KBL.
5. Pico became completely neglected.
6. The place became very run down and shabby.
7. The customer service sucked.
8.The pricing, especially for kids programs, is not in line with the quality of the experience they are providing.
9. POWDR’s attitude and approach to things especially when it comes to the locals.

So, we left. Not whining, just stating facts and reasons. We weren’t happy, so we took are business elsewhere after 25+ years of skiing Killington almost exclusively. It’s a bummer because Killington should be so much more. Pres Smith made that place great and someone could have come in and taken it to the next level instead of running it into the ground like ASC did.

Boy I would love to have been there back in the day when Sunrise was open and I could walk on in to the Back Behind Saloon. One of my favorite places.

[Dwight]

Marketing 101, let's say, third day of class: It is easier and less costly to retain existing customers than to obtain new ones.

Obviously, K-Marketing skipped class that day. (Or skipped the course entirely.)

It is Marketing's job to bring in the customers, it is operations job to retain them. While I enjoy all the K-Marketing bashing there is really only so much that they have control over. The on-mountain experience is pretty much out of their hands. If you look at the mix of first time killington skiers to return skiers each year you would see that the marketing team does a pretty good job getting new people to the mountain.

Killington attracts the occaisonal skier because of the name it had/has (not here to argue that point). No matter the perception in the minds of the avid skiers (the members of this board, etc...), I believe it still has an image of the "beast" to many that do not take this sport so seriously. To that point, the perception remains of Killington being over crowded to those same people.

It is a place that everyone who likes to ski needs to experience at least once. Those that can look past some of the short comings and learn to find their way around (the access road and the mountain) come to really appreciate what Killington is all about. Those that don't move on and find their place elsewhere. Killington is certainly not for everyone. It is not a sterotypical Vermont getaway, it is not your luxury weekend retreat or the perfect family vacation, it doesn't claim to be. But what it lacks it those areas it makes up for in others.

I think that getting to know Killington requires effort on the customer's part. For a lot of people effort is not something they want on vacation. If you want to zone out, go on a cruise but If you want to challenge yourself physcially and socially check out Killington.

[Bubba]

Marketing 101, let's say, third day of class: It is easier and less costly to retain existing customers than to obtain new ones.

Obviously, K-Marketing skipped class that day. (Or skipped the course entirely.)

It is Marketing's job to bring in the customers, it is operations job to retain them. While I enjoy all the K-Marketing bashing there is really only so much that they have control over. The on-mountain experience is pretty much out of their hands. If you look at the mix of first time killington skiers to return skiers each year you would see that the marketing team does a pretty good job getting new people to the mountain.

Killington attracts the occaisonal skier because of the name it had/has (not here to argue that point). No matter the perception in the minds of the avid skiers (the members of this board, etc...), I believe it still has an image of the "beast" to many that do not take this sport so seriously. To that point, the perception remains of Killington being over crowded to those same people.

It is a place that everyone who likes to ski needs to experience at least once. Those that can look past some of the short comings and learn to find their way around (the access road and the mountain) come to really appreciate what Killington is all about. Those that don't move on and find their place elsewhere. Killington is certainly not for everyone. It is not a sterotypical Vermont getaway, it is not your luxury weekend retreat or the perfect family vacation, it doesn't claim to be. But what it lacks it those areas it makes up for in others.

I think that getting to know Killington requires effort on the customer's part. For a lot of people effort is not something they want on vacation. If you want to zone out, go on a cruise but If you want to challenge yourself physcially and socially check out Killington.

Dwight, that's all well and good, but senior management/new ownership made a clear decision to drive out the lower paying customers last year and now they, through Marketing, have to spend more money trying to attract them back. That's the key point. I don't actually blame Marketing for the decision made last year but that extremely shortshighted decision will be hurting Killington for the next few years at least.

[Mister Moose]

It is Marketing's job to bring in the customers, it is operations job to retain them. While I enjoy all the K-Marketing bashing there is really only so much that they have control over. The on-mountain experience is pretty much out of their hands. If you look at the mix of first time killington skiers to return skiers each year you would see that the marketing team does a pretty good job getting new people to the mountain.

Killington attracts the occaisonal skier because of the name it had/has (not here to argue that point). No matter the perception in the minds of the avid skiers (the members of this board, etc...), I believe it still has an image of the "beast" to many that do not take this sport so seriously. To that point, the perception remains of Killington being over crowded to those same people.

It is a place that everyone who likes to ski needs to experience at least once. Those that can look past some of the short comings and learn to find their way around (the access road and the mountain) come to really appreciate what Killington is all about. Those that don't move on and find their place elsewhere. Killington is certainly not for everyone. It is not a sterotypical Vermont getaway, it is not your luxury weekend retreat or the perfect family vacation, it doesn't claim to be. But what it lacks it those areas it makes up for in others.

I think that getting to know Killington requires effort on the customer's part. For a lot of people effort is not something they want on vacation. If you want to zone out, go on a cruise but If you want to challenge yourself physcially and socially check out Killington.

Very well said. Although I'm not so sure Marketing can absolve itself from retaining customers. Coke and Budweiser seem to spend and believe in brand awareness to keep loyalty. Marketing is the mouthpiece. Do Bud drinkers drink Bud because they like the taste so much better? Or is it because they would be embarrassed to be caught serving Schlitz, which is perceived to be not as good?

[Dwight]

Dwight, that's all well and good, but senior management/new ownership made a clear decision to drive out the lower paying customers last year and now they, through Marketing, have to spend more money trying to attract them back. That's the key point. I don't actually blame Marketing for the decision made last year but that extremely shortshighted decision will be hurting Killington for the next few years at least.

I was not repsonding to any recent resort decisions or market trends, just making a general point about the nature of Killington throughout the years.

I don't believe it was a short sighted decision to try and make the on-hill experience better (thus hopefully increasing retention) by reducing crowding. Historically that has been one of Killington's biggest issues. You read through this forum and some people seem to believe it still is an issue. The crowding also leads to worse surface conditions, less attention paid to each customer, etc. The yield vs. skier day argument is a fight that goes on at every ski resort out there. There is more to the decision that they made than "let's drive out the lower paying customer". It's short sighted to view what they did as driving out the riff-raff. I bet if you polled the satisfaction of the first time skier to Killington last year vs. the prior there was a significant increase YOY.

They could not forsee the drastic economic downturn, but give them credit they have done what they can to adjust. They have also continued to adjust their business plans in other areas and I guarantee they will continue to tweak and change in the future.

[Bubba]

Dwight, that's all well and good, but senior management/new ownership made a clear decision to drive out the lower paying customers last year and now they, through Marketing, have to spend more money trying to attract them back. That's the key point. I don't actually blame Marketing for the decision made last year but that extremely shortshighted decision will be hurting Killington for the next few years at least.

I was not repsonding to any recent resort decisions or market trends, just making a general point about the nature of Killington throughout the years.

I don't believe it was a short sighted decision to try and make the on-hill experience better (thus hopefully increasing retention) by reducing crowding. Historically that has been one of Killington's biggest issues. You read through this forum and some people seem to believe it still is an issue. The crowding also leads to worse surface conditions, less attention paid to each customer, etc. The yield vs. skier day argument is a fight that goes on at every ski resort out there. There is more to the decision that they made than "let's drive out the lower paying customer". It's short sighted to view what they did as driving out the riff-raff. I bet if you polled the satisfaction of the first time skier to Killington last year vs. the prior there was a significant increase YOY.

They could not forsee the drastic economic downturn, but give them credit they have done what they can to adjust. They have also continued to adjust their business plans in other areas and I guarantee they will continue to tweak and change in the future.

I agree the on-hill experience is better than it was. Killington is a disaster on 20,000 skier Saturdays. Knock 5,000 of them off through blackout days, however, and it's a much better experience. Clearly, the All4One Pass and its pricing caused massive crowds, especially early season, but the All4One Pass automatically went away with the demise of ASC when Killington became a stand alone ski area once again. So, all they had to do was raise the price of the season passes (as they did) and gradually raise the price of kids programs. The Ski Council debacle, however, along with the unheard of pricing for kids programs is where they made their huge mistakes. Ski club members and families started going elsewhere and now they're trained to go elsewhere. Now it costs a lot of marketing dollars to try to win them back.

I also agree with Mister Moose - Marketing is not absolved from retention. Marketing creates "the brand" and we all know what Killington's brand was and should still be. Instead we see Killington, through management and marketing decisions, trying to play on everyone else's turf. Killington is trying to compete by being like everyone else, only bigger. Not only that, they've been confusing the brand for years, i.e. trying to attract families but selling themselves as Bourbon Street North. Gillis, for all his faults as Marketing VP, finally hit it right in his last couple of years - you sell the mountain and segment the experience. Then, before long, they changed it again and failed again. Killington needs to create buzz - to get people here and to keep them here. It's a Marketing function to have events every weekend that are fun and get people here. It's a Marketing function to have bands and DJs in the base lodges or to have clowns and other kid friendly stuff down at Snowshed and Ramshead so people stick around a little longer at the end of their ski day and contribute to F&B sales. It's a Marketing function to come up with the ideas for non-skiing activities that keep things lively. Killington is a high energy place that, at the moment, has zero buzz.

Anyway, this is the "Why people don't ski Killington" thread, not the "Let's pick Marketing apart" thread, and my goal was to try to identify reasons people either no longer ski K or what they hear from others about why they don't ski K.

[Geoff]

I don't believe it was a short sighted decision to try and make the on-hill experience better (thus hopefully increasing retention) by reducing crowding. Historically that has been one of Killington's biggest issues. You read through this forum and some people seem to believe it still is an issue. The crowding also leads to worse surface conditions, less attention paid to each customer, etc. The yield vs. skier day argument is a fight that goes on at every ski resort out there. There is more to the decision that they made than "let's drive out the lower paying customer". It's short sighted to view what they did as driving out the riff-raff. I bet if you polled the satisfaction of the first time skier to Killington last year vs. the prior there was a significant increase YOY.

They could not forsee the drastic economic downturn, but give them credit they have done what they can to adjust. They have also continued to adjust their business plans in other areas and I guarantee they will continue to tweak and change in the future.

That's my view as well.

I've been using the term "they detoxed Killington" for the last 15 months. I think it's great. Killington with those $349.00 blackout passes sucked. It was jammed every weekend when historically you used to have slack weekends before Christmas and in January other'n MLK weekend when the place was relatively empty. I guess I'm in the minority that I think they could charge even more for season passes. By historical levels, the break even is still very low compared to the 20-ish days of the Preston Smith era. You also couldn't get a cheap ticket back then and comp tickets were tough to come by.

This thread is "Why people don't ski Killington". I think the main reason is that the ASC Killington was a horrible experience and chased the premium day ticket people away. I don't see Killington getting the word out that it ain't like that these days. Using word of mouth, it will take many years to fix that damage. I think the price level POWDR set for kid programs and learn-to-ski is unfortuate and bad for the sport. Other'n that, I have no issue at all with their ticket pricing.

[aware4444]

They could create an gigantic buzz if they were allowed to announce that the Killington Ski Village was going to commence. The new customers would compliment the less is more philosophy and the buzz would be real and not created from polishing the the horse poop.

[Dwight]

It's a Marketing function to have events every weekend that are fun and get people here. It's a Marketing function to have bands and DJs in the base lodges or to have clowns and other kid friendly stuff down at Snowshed and Ramshead so people stick around a little longer at the end of their ski day and contribute to F&B sales. It's a Marketing function to come up with the ideas for non-skiing activities that keep things lively. Killington is a high energy place that, at the moment, has zero buzz.

Actually, the bands and DJs are an F&B function. While Marketing does hire the clowns, magicians, etc.. it is up to the operations staff to pull it off and make it a success. Marketing can come up with tons of ideas for non-skiing activities but ultimately it is not them who are on the hill managing the experience. Yes, Brand does have quite a bit to do with retention. I did not mean to imply that marketing has no part in retention. That is certainly not the case. It is up to marketing to portray the experience and operations to deliver it. You miss in either one of these areas and you have issues.

In my initial post I was trying to say that I believe no matter how great a job marketing does (or even ops) there are inherent issues with Killington (the resort and town) that lead to a lower retention rate. It's just not for everyone.

[KBL Ed]

They could create an gigantic buzz if they were allowed to announce that the Killington Ski Village was going to commence. The new customers would compliment the less is more philosophy and the buzz would be real and not created from polishing the the horse poop.

What planet are you living on? That won't happen for 10-15 years, if ever. We're at the beginning stages of a depression, in case you were unaware.

[Bubba]

They could create an gigantic buzz if they were allowed to announce that the Killington Ski Village was going to commence. The new customers would compliment the less is more philosophy and the buzz would be real and not created from polishing the the horse poop.

So what you're saying is that Killington is currently horse poop? Gee, for a while there you were talking like an employee.

As for the village creating buzz and driving significant skier visit growth, I'll bet you even Nyberg doesn't believe that. In fact, I'll bet he's concerned about day skiers and worried about inconvenient mountain access once he loses the Snowshed and Ramshead parking lots.

[aware4444]

Respectfully no, I'm not saying it's horse poop. What I am saying is that all of the conversation here is the same; marketing should do this and that over and over again. One can't keep talking about how ASC lost customers a few years ago and how the ticket prices are too low or too high and expect anything positive to come of it. There is only so much mkt. can do without something more substantial to tie into. I happen to think the mountain and the lifestyle here is great and yes I am a big supporter but no, and I won't protest too much, I'm not one of the worker bees, promise.
A village in my opinion would bring in some new blood and I think they would have money to spend here, plain and simple. As far as access, I've been to many ski areas that have solved their access problems, much easier than finding some spenders.

[Bubba]

Respectfully no, I'm not saying it's horse poop. What I am saying is that all of the conversation here is the same; marketing should do this and that over and over again. One can't keep talking about how ASC lost customers a few years ago and how the ticket prices are too low or too high and expect anything positive to come of it. There is only so much mkt. can do without something more substantial to tie into. I happen to think the mountain and the lifestyle here is great and yes I am a big supporter but no, and I won't protest too much, I'm not one of the worker bees, promise.
A village in my opinion would bring in some new blood and I think they would have money to spend here, plain and simple. As far as access, I've been to many ski areas that have solved their access problems, much easier than finding some spenders.

Why can't you expect anything to come of it? I agree, Marketing can only do so much, but when Marketing is the public face of the resort, they're going to take the rap. Tom has to be out front because most times Chris Nyberg talks in public he creates more problems than he solves.

[aware4444]

Tom does PR.... not marketing. Why not a little support for the mountain and not just bad rapping all of the tactics. It's easy to be super critical, it's difficult to come up with some supportive ideas and why not it's our mountain. The better they do the better it is for us, we'll always have a mountain no matter who runs it. Nyberg loves the sport as much as anyone, if he was here in 1958 he would have been digging holes and planting lift poles.