Put it together or get left behind

[daytripper]

Of course all the regular Pico skiers hate the interconnect, if they didn't they would be regular Killington skiers.

[newpylong1]

I completely understand the sentiment for not wanting the interconnect. However my concern would be at what point does Pico become so much of a financial liability and/or drain that it's not viable to continue operating? I do not see it successfully operating independently with the 800 lb gorilla next door. Perhaps I am wrong and the current lack of anything but basic maintenance and snowmaking is the recipe for the mountain holding its own.

[ME2VTSkier]

I completely understand the sentiment for not wanting the interconnect. However my concern would be at what point does Pico become so much of a financial liability and/or drain that it's not viable to continue operating? I do not see it successfully operating independently with the 800 lb gorilla next door. Perhaps I am wrong and the current lack of anything but basic maintenance and snowmaking is the recipe for the mountain holding its own.

Imagine the uprising of the condo owners, if they offered anything less?

[Skivt2]

I completely understand the sentiment for not wanting the interconnect. However my concern would be at what point does Pico become so much of a financial liability and/or drain that it's not viable to continue operating? I do not see it successfully operating independently with the 800 lb gorilla next door. Perhaps I am wrong and the current lack of anything but basic maintenance and snowmaking is the recipe for the mountain holding its own.

What makes you think it's a financial liability? Killington' sewage pipe runs right over the top of Pico. It's useful for that alone. But it's pretty crowded on weekends and holidays. The lodge is full. The parking lot is full. On Fridays the place fills up with local school kids. I think you'd be surprised. It normally runs with three lifts and virtually no snowmaking and with only one groomer. With all the people that are there, no operating costs on tues/Wednesday and only running a season of around 12/15-4/5 each year, it's already run like a K base lodge. It's basically on the same calendar as Bear. No interconnect would change any of that. It would just screw up Pico in a way that would make many who like it leave. Are there enough new Killington Skiers that would show up to balance the loss of the existing customer base at Pico?

[Seacoaster]

I wish they would build the interconnect, my wife and I always say we should go ride Pico, but then I think about getting in a car and driving over there and never end up doing it. If the interconnect exist, I would definitely be in the 49er club as I would start at my house and work my way over there most days. For me its just about convenience, which bums me out as Pico can be a blast.
That being said, going back to the OP, Vail/epic has many downsides as well, it may be cheaper and creates access, but I have buddies who now have to leave their house 45 minutes earlier when they go to their home mountain "stowe". They call it Vail traffic, apparently on a POW or any weekend, if you are not in a lot by 7:30, you run the risk of sitting in traffic on the access road for 45-90 minutes just trying to get in. This was not an issue prior to Vail from what they tell me.

[Skivt2]

I wish they would build the interconnect, my wife and I always say we should go ride Pico, but then I think about getting in a car and driving over there and never end up doing it. If the interconnect exist, I would definitely be in the 49er club as I would start at my house and work my way over there most days. For me its just about convenience, which bums me out as Pico can be a blast.
That being said, going back to the OP, Vail/epic has many downsides as well, it may be cheaper and creates access, but I have buddies who now have to leave their house 45 minutes earlier when they go to their home mountain "stowe". They call it Vail traffic, apparently on a POW or any weekend, if you are not in a lot by 7:30, you run the risk of sitting in traffic on the access road for 45-90 minutes just trying to get in. This was not an issue prior to Vail from what they tell me.

Just a small detail.....I have a 365 pass. I ski Pico enough to be one of the 20 or so people who get 49+ days a year there. There are only 20 or less. To have a day count as a Pico day you have to start your day at Pico. I skied this morning at Killington and took the bus to Pico for a few runs (yes that is a thing...you can bus to Pico and ski back to rams head very easily) but my Pico day count will not include today since I started to k. When I hear someone say it’s too hard to go to Pico I have to think you really don’t love the place because otherwise you would make the time. You drive to Killington. And you can easily take a bus from K and ski back. If you skied it enough you would realize that some of the best trails at Pico will be ruined if there is a connection. Maybe make the 25 minutes to bus over occasionally and get to know it well enough to know what I mean. The bus leaves Snowshed on the hour every hour. You can ski back in about 5 minutes. It’s very easy.

[boston_e]

I wish they would build the interconnect, my wife and I always say we should go ride Pico, but then I think about getting in a car and driving over there and never end up doing it. If the interconnect exist, I would definitely be in the 49er club as I would start at my house and work my way over there most days. For me its just about convenience, which bums me out as Pico can be a blast.
That being said, going back to the OP, Vail/epic has many downsides as well, it may be cheaper and creates access, but I have buddies who now have to leave their house 45 minutes earlier when they go to their home mountain "stowe". They call it Vail traffic, apparently on a POW or any weekend, if you are not in a lot by 7:30, you run the risk of sitting in traffic on the access road for 45-90 minutes just trying to get in. This was not an issue prior to Vail from what they tell me.

If you are ski on / ski off I can totally see this... but if you are somewhere off the access road and driving anyway, is the extra 5-6 minute drive to Pico that much less convenient?

I think you are correct about the risk of increased traffic. I skied Pico both days this weekend and really tried to open-mindedly consider what it might be like with the interconnect, and I honestly just don't see that anything at Pico is equipped to handle more traffic. The parking lot was essentially full both days (I don't think they started parking in the small "second overflow" lot), the bar area was packed as were all the base lodge areas. I saw plenty of rental equipment out on the mountain and lots of kids lessons going on. It was busy but manageable. I'm sure Pico was pulling in some great revenue. If you added even 20% more people, you would need more parking, bigger lodges, wider trails etc etc.... none of which fits into the character of Pico.

[boston_e]

I wish they would build the interconnect, my wife and I always say we should go ride Pico, but then I think about getting in a car and driving over there and never end up doing it. If the interconnect exist, I would definitely be in the 49er club as I would start at my house and work my way over there most days. For me its just about convenience, which bums me out as Pico can be a blast.
That being said, going back to the OP, Vail/epic has many downsides as well, it may be cheaper and creates access, but I have buddies who now have to leave their house 45 minutes earlier when they go to their home mountain "stowe". They call it Vail traffic, apparently on a POW or any weekend, if you are not in a lot by 7:30, you run the risk of sitting in traffic on the access road for 45-90 minutes just trying to get in. This was not an issue prior to Vail from what they tell me.

Just a small detail.....I have a 365 pass. I ski Pico enough to be one of the 20 or so people who get 49+ days a year there. There are only 20 or less. To have a day count as a Pico day you have to start your day at Pico. I skied this morning at Killington and took the bus to Pico for a few runs (yes that is a thing...you can bus to Pico and ski back to rams head very easily) but my Pico day count will not include today since I started to k.

That is a bummer of a detail, and basically kills whatever slim chance I had of becoming part of the "49er club"

When I hear someone say it’s too hard to go to Pico I have to think you really don’t love the place because otherwise you would make the time. You drive to Killington. And you can easily take a bus from K and ski back. If you skied it enough you would realize that some of the best trails at Pico will be ruined if there is a connection. Maybe make the 25 minutes to bus over occasionally and get to know it well enough to know what I mean. The bus leaves Snowshed on the hour every hour. You can ski back in about 5 minutes. It’s very easy.

The bus really is pretty easy... my kids have done it a handful of times. (just the bus over, not the skiing back)

[Skivt2]

I wish they would build the interconnect, my wife and I always say we should go ride Pico, but then I think about getting in a car and driving over there and never end up doing it. If the interconnect exist, I would definitely be in the 49er club as I would start at my house and work my way over there most days. For me its just about convenience, which bums me out as Pico can be a blast.
That being said, going back to the OP, Vail/epic has many downsides as well, it may be cheaper and creates access, but I have buddies who now have to leave their house 45 minutes earlier when they go to their home mountain "stowe". They call it Vail traffic, apparently on a POW or any weekend, if you are not in a lot by 7:30, you run the risk of sitting in traffic on the access road for 45-90 minutes just trying to get in. This was not an issue prior to Vail from what they tell me.

If you are ski on / ski off I can totally see this... but if you are somewhere off the access road and driving anyway, is the extra 5-6 minute drive to Pico that much less convenient?

I think you are correct about the risk of increased traffic. I skied Pico both days this weekend and really tried to open-mindedly consider what it might be like with the interconnect, and I honestly just don't see that anything at Pico is equipped to handle more traffic. The parking lot was essentially full both days (I don't think they started parking in the small "second overflow" lot), the bar area was packed as were all the base lodge areas. I saw plenty of rental equipment out on the mountain and lots of kids lessons going on. It was busy but manageable. I'm sure Pico was pulling in some great revenue. If you added even 20% more people, you would need more parking, bigger lodges, wider trails etc etc.... none of which fits into the character of Pico.

Parking is crazy full at Pico today. There were people parked in over flow at 12:30 today. So I’m guessing those lots got used Saturday and Sunday as well.

[boston_e]

Yeah, yesterday there were cars in the first, but not second overflow lot. Good to see them bringing in some revenue.

[Seacoaster]

I wish they would build the interconnect, my wife and I always say we should go ride Pico, but then I think about getting in a car and driving over there and never end up doing it. If the interconnect exist, I would definitely be in the 49er club as I would start at my house and work my way over there most days. For me its just about convenience, which bums me out as Pico can be a blast.
That being said, going back to the OP, Vail/epic has many downsides as well, it may be cheaper and creates access, but I have buddies who now have to leave their house 45 minutes earlier when they go to their home mountain "stowe". They call it Vail traffic, apparently on a POW or any weekend, if you are not in a lot by 7:30, you run the risk of sitting in traffic on the access road for 45-90 minutes just trying to get in. This was not an issue prior to Vail from what they tell me.

If you are ski on / ski off I can totally see this... but if you are somewhere off the access road and driving anyway, is the extra 5-6 minute drive to Pico that much less convenient?

I think you are correct about the risk of increased traffic. I skied Pico both days this weekend and really tried to open-mindedly consider what it might be like with the interconnect, and I honestly just don't see that anything at Pico is equipped to handle more traffic. The parking lot was essentially full both days (I don't think they started parking in the small "second overflow" lot), the bar area was packed as were all the base lodge areas. I saw plenty of rental equipment out on the mountain and lots of kids lessons going on. It was busy but manageable. I'm sure Pico was pulling in some great revenue. If you added even 20% more people, you would need more parking, bigger lodges, wider trails etc etc.... none of which fits into the character of Pico.

We are essentially ride in, ride out if I were to get in the car, I would be more likely to make the jaunt over the pass. I wish my skinning days counted toward 49'r