# Do you guys give your Lift Ticket away?



## MistahTaki (Apr 24, 2010)

no, because im there till it expires. haha. otherwise i'd sell it.


----------



## BurtonAvenger (Aug 14, 2007)

Dolla dolla bills!


----------



## MistahTaki (Apr 24, 2010)

cash rules everything around me.....^


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

Nope (season pass holder).


----------



## john doe (Nov 6, 2009)

If it was possible I would.


----------



## NWBoarder (Jan 10, 2010)

I've never left early enough for this to be a scenario for me. I ride that shit out to the last possible minute.


----------



## bostonboarder (Nov 25, 2008)

I won't sell and won't buy but I'll give it away for free n the occassion I leave early. two years ago at loon a lady offered me her clipped ticket turns out the guy behind her was a mtn rep listening in, I said no and the rep gave me 2 free tickets. lesson learned


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

I always sell my tickets...I've sold them for up to $20. Esp for the early season shit shows around here. Waterville was charging $39 early season for 3 shitty trails and around 12:00 about 50,000 people are there. That's when I peace out and sell that shiz. 4 hrs of riding for $19 aint a bad deal.


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

I always get a season pass, but back in days when I bought day tickets, I was there till they ran me the fuck off!


----------



## tripper (Feb 23, 2008)

I own a season pass for Loon, Sunday River, and Sugarloaf. However, when I ride other places I ALWAYS ask people leaving early for their lift tickets. Some people will just give it to me, others will offer to sell it for 5 or 10 bucks. I can't even remember the last time I paid anything more than $10 for a lift ticket. I don't really enjoy doing this, but am too poor to pay full price.


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

Can't be too poor if you bought a Loon pass...They're like $1300


----------



## tripper (Feb 23, 2008)

Only $300 if your a college student


----------



## Magnum626 (Dec 31, 2009)

If I'm offered money for my ticket I give it for free. If they ask for my ticket without offering money I sell it...lol 

Do resorts lose a lot of money when people give/sell their tickets?


----------



## MistahTaki (Apr 24, 2010)

Magnum626 said:


> If I'm offered money for my ticket I give it for free. If they ask for my ticket without offering money I sell it...lol
> 
> Do resorts lose a lot of money when people give/sell their tickets?


obviously they won't make profit if you get ur ticket from some person in the parking lot. I don't see why they will be hurt by one person getting on the lifts for free. they are constantly operating.


----------



## Snowfox (Dec 26, 2009)

Meh, I don't like the idea...

but if it's a cute girl it does tend to make me sway a little bit.


----------



## Magnum626 (Dec 31, 2009)

I wonder how many people end up riding this way. I don't really feel bad per se. I mean if I saw the same person 3 days in a row I don't know if I'd be giving/selling them to that person.

Do other people feel it's 'ethically' wrong?


----------



## slyder (Jan 18, 2010)

I have never done this.
But if you are leaving early and you paid for unused time then the mountain made more money. Your just using the whole value of your ticket by selling/giving to someone else.
Other side we all know the mountain would have made more had the buyer bought a ticket and you didn't use all your time.
I"m good with the notion of selling the unused time, NEVER have, but good with it.

-Slyder


----------



## HoboMaster (May 16, 2010)

I remember at Mt. Hood during the Summer they actually made you put your ticket on a new hanger, and if it wasn't on a new hanger it was considered invalid. Obviously they started having a problem with people selling/giving tickets away.

I'm a season pass holder, so the only time I ever buy tickets is if I'm at some other resort, which I can't really afford after buying a season pass.


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

Magnum626 said:


> Do other people feel it's 'ethically' wrong?


I think it's wrong to cheat someone out of income, even if you can get away with it. You can justify it all kinds of ways, and say it doesn't happen enough to financially affect the resort, or that the pass is already paid for, but in the end you're still causing a loss of income for the business by allowing some else to not pay their contribution. At month's end it affects the profit & loss statement. Hypothetically if three people in one day sold their pass in the parking lot, at about $70 per full price pass the resort did not make $210 that they would have. That lost income could have employed a lift operator, patrol, maintenance guy, ski school instructor, or kitchen worker for the day. There are worse offenses in the world but it's still cheating the business (theft of services?).

I hope that those people who buy/sell their tickets never complain about shabby facilities, poor maintenance, lack of services, etc.


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

MistahTaki said:


> obviously they won't make profit if you get ur ticket from some person in the parking lot. *I don't see why they will be hurt by one person getting on the lifts for free*. they are constantly operating.


It's never just one person though, and never only once.


----------



## tripper (Feb 23, 2008)

Toecutter said:


> I think it's wrong to cheat someone out of income, even if you can get away with it. You can justify it all kinds of ways, and say it doesn't happen enough to financially affect the resort, or that the pass is already paid for, but in the end you're still causing a loss of income for the business by allowing some else to not pay their contribution. At month's end it affects the profit & loss statement. Hypothetically if three people in one day sold their pass in the parking lot, at about $70 per full price pass the resort did not make $210 that they would have. That lost income could have employed a lift operator, patrol, maintenance guy, ski school instructor, or kitchen worker for the day. There are worse offenses in the world but it's still cheating the business (theft of services?).
> 
> I hope that those people who buy/sell their tickets never complain about shabby facilities, poor maintenance, lack of services, etc.


That's a silly way to look at it. There is a potential loss of income *ONLY *if you assume that person would have paid for a lift ticket. Thus they only lose out on potential income. For example, If I failed to acquire a lift ticket I would just go home. Thus the mountain is not losing out on my income, because it would've never existed in the first place.

I obviously understand that if everyone did this resorts would go bankrupt. However, this is not the same as stealing (where a person actually causes a loss of income). 

Or a another way to look at it is: The resort is making billions of dollars a year, to them $70 is nothing. To me $70 is a LOT.


----------



## Snowfox (Dec 26, 2009)

tripper said:


> That's a silly way to look at it. There is a potential loss of income *ONLY *if you assume that person would have paid for a lift ticket. Thus they only lose out on potential income. For example, If I failed to acquire a lift ticket I would just go home. Thus the mountain is not losing out on my income, because it would've never existed in the first place.
> 
> I obviously understand that if everyone did this resorts would go bankrupt. However, this is not the same as stealing (where a person actually causes a loss of income).
> 
> Or a another way to look at it is: The resort is making billions of dollars a year, to them $70 is nothing. To me $70 is a LOT.


Your numbers are off. I wouldn't be surprised if for the majority they are just scrapping by year by year. 

(Don't always think of it as like at Vail... think about it as if it was your own local mountain that needs every ticket they can get).


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

tripper said:


> That's a silly way to look at it. There is a potential loss of income *ONLY *if you assume that person would have paid for a lift ticket. Thus they only lose out on potential income. For example, *If I failed to acquire a lift ticket I would just go home*. Thus the mountain is not losing out on my income, because it would've never existed in the first place.
> 
> I obviously understand that if everyone did this resorts would go bankrupt. However, this is not the same as stealing (where a person actually causes a loss of income).
> 
> Or a another way to look at it is: *The resort is making billions of dollars a year*, to them $70 is nothing. To me $70 is a LOT.


Who on earth goes all the way to a resort without the intent to buy a pass if necessary??? If I'm going to the trouble of getting my gear together and driving to a resort, then I come with whatever money I might need. Your method would be analogous to going to a restaurant then hoping someone gives you their doggy bag in the parking lot. It works for homeless guys once in awhile but most responsible adults come ready to pay.

A resort makes _billions_ per year? Is that profit or is that gross, before expenses? I don't know about that. I think some are barely making ends meet. Do any industry insiders here know the actual profit margins?

And it's never just one $70 pass one time. Every little thing adds up. One illicit pass here, a stolen candy bar there, a broken chair that needs to be replaced here. Repeat every day of the relatively short season. It has to be hard for a business to be profitable when it's only open for less than half the year.

Edit: what I found on the internet on initial search
http://whistlerblackcombsnowreport.com/for-sale-whistler-blackcomb-ski-resort-1949.htm

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE50M6FU20090128?pageNumber=1

http://investors.vailresorts.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=510443

http://www.bendbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080430/NEWS0107/804300452/1097/PODCASTS


----------



## Sam I Am (Sep 9, 2009)

Agreed

..........


Toecutter said:


> Who on earth goes all the way to a resort without the intent to buy a pass if necessary??? If I'm going to the trouble of getting my gear together and driving to a resort, then I come with whatever money I might need. Your method would be analogous to going to a restaurant then hoping someone gives you their doggy bag in the parking lot. It works for homeless guys once in awhile but most responsible adults come ready to pay.
> 
> A resort makes _billions_ per year? Is that profit or is that gross, before expenses? I don't know about that. I think some are barely making ends meet. Do any industry insiders here know the actual profit margins?
> 
> ...


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

Toecutter said:


> Who on earth goes all the way to a resort without the intent to buy a pass if necessary???


Uphill skinners exempted (but they don't use the lift, obviously and this conversation doesn't really apply to them). They do benefit from grooming and patrol without paying for it though.


----------



## john doe (Nov 6, 2009)

Question from somebody in the midwest. Here our passes are stickers that go on metal hangers. Once they are on you can't get them off with out ruining them. Same thing for the other place I've been and they check to make sure they aren't easy to remove. What are the major resorts using that makes it easy to sell them?


----------



## tripper (Feb 23, 2008)

I see no difference between getting someone's ticket for free and downloading movies on the internet. The resort is losing out on potential ticket sales and the studio is losing out on the potential movie sale/rental.


----------



## Shocktroop531 (Aug 3, 2010)

for the most part ski resorts are owned by mega rich people. I don't feel bad for them. like most American corporations, the money is all funneled to the top. with the ceo's and owners raking in millions upon millions while the average joes working there like lifties and ski patrol are working for minimum wage. fuck those mothr fuckers. steal every penny from them that you can.


----------



## MistahTaki (Apr 24, 2010)

Shocktroop531 said:


> for the most part ski resorts are owned by mega rich people. I don't feel bad for them. like most American corporations, the money is all funneled to the top. with the ceo's and owners raking in millions upon millions while the average joes working there like lifties and ski patrol are working for minimum wage. fuck those mothr fuckers. steal every penny from them that you can.


true. making $45+ from hundreds people that buy a ticket sums up pretty huge, also overpriced food. 3 bucks for a little bottle of water? f that.


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

Here's how it works. Someone buys a ticket that's good for the entire day. What I want to do with my fucking ticket is my fucking business. The ticket is good till it expires and while it still has value I'll sell it for whatever I can get someone to buy it for. 

I buy a car. It's good for a few hudred thousand miles...Should I not sell it while it's still in good condition because it might hurt Volkswagens bottom line?


----------



## S4Shredr (Oct 23, 2009)

Yea I def give it away. Ive both given away passes for free when leaving early and gotten passes for free when arriving late.


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

> That's a silly way to look at it. There is a potential loss of income ONLY if you assume that person would have paid for a lift ticket. Thus they only lose out on potential income. For example, If I failed to acquire a lift ticket I would just go home. Thus the mountain is not losing out on my income, because it would've never existed in the first place.
> 
> I obviously understand that if everyone did this resorts would go bankrupt. However, this is not the same as stealing (where a person actually causes a loss of income).
> 
> Or a another way to look at it is: The resort is making billions of dollars a year, to them $70 is nothing. To me $70 is a LOT.


First, why would anyone venture to a hill to bum some riding time and if they cant, they leave? You've obviously got enough money and time for the travel, why not just fork over the money for a pass?

Second, it is stealing -- it's a theft of services.

Third, as has been said, most resorts are barely making money at all. I would wager that many, in the economy we've had for the past couple years, are actually losing money. Multiple people bumming lift tickets does not equal 70 bucks -- it's much more and will just continue to grow. You know full well that if you can be a bum and get a ticket for free-20 bucks, you're not going to keep that a secret. You're going to tell your friends to try it out too. Now multiply that by every other bum out there.



> for the most part ski resorts are owned by mega rich people. I don't feel bad for them. like most American corporations, the money is all funneled to the top. with the ceo's and owners raking in millions upon millions while the average joes working there like lifties and ski patrol are working for minimum wage. fuck those mothr fuckers. steal every penny from them that you can.


This is horrendous thinking. If you 'fuck those mother fuckers' do you honestly believe that the CEO and owners are going to say 'well damn, we're losing money -- we better pull out of our own pockets to get this hill out of the red and back into the black!' The reality is, if enough tickets are stolen, they lay off/cut the pay/reduce services provided by Average Joe. YOU go from being the 'hero' (why else would you want to 'fuck those mother fuckers'?) who's 'damning the man' to being the reason why Sally the Liftie is no longer employed.



> Here's how it works. Someone buys a ticket that's good for the entire day. What I want to do with my fucking ticket is my fucking business. The ticket is good till it expires and while it still has value I'll sell it for whatever I can get someone to buy it for.
> 
> I buy a car. It's good for a few hudred thousand miles...Should I not sell it while it's still in good condition because it might hurt Volkswagens bottom line?


Two completely different circumstances that are not on equal footing at all. A car is a good -- you bought it, it is now yours. You're free to do what you want with it. Sell it after 5 miles, 50 miles, or 500,000 miles. Volkswagen wont care -- they've already sold the car to the dealership. The dealership wont care, because they've already sold the car to you.

A lift ticket is essentially a sticker that says you can RENT the hill's facilities and services for a specified time period. Whereas you own the car after buying it, you do not own the facilities and services the hill provides after you buy your lift ticket. YOUR lift ticket allows YOU to RENT their services for the time permitted. It does not allow Jim in the parking lot to use the time that the hill allotted to you. YOU rented their services, if Jim wants to use those same services, he'll have to rent it as well.

Think of it as buying a massage -- you've paid for a 1 hour massage from Sarah. After 30 minutes, you have to go -- so on the way out you say to someone walking in 'Hey! I just paid for an hour massage from Sarah but only used 30 minutes so go on in, lay down, and she'll give you a 30 minute massage for free because I already paid for an hour!' You paid for your 1 hour massage, but do you think Sarah gives a shit whether you only used 30 minutes? Do you think she'll be down with giving someone else the remainder of the hour long services for free? She'll tell the person walking in to get fucked.

Services do not equal goods.


----------



## freshy (Nov 18, 2009)

My friend in Whistler rode over 100 days never paying for a pass, he just asked people leaving in the parking lot. I'm amazed people pay the $100 to ride there and take off before noon.

I have no problem doing the same thing, not that I ever have. These days with no seasons pass and only like maybe 5 days of riding available to me you bet I'm going to be there from open to close so no selling my ticket or finding one.

But the big resorts all around here make it so easy how they switched from the metal and sticker lift passes to the plastic paper stuff with the cable tie.


----------



## freshy (Nov 18, 2009)

Biggs said:


> First, why would anyone venture to a hill to bum some riding time and if they cant, they leave? You've obviously got enough money and time for the travel, why not just fork over the money for a pass?
> 
> Second, it is stealing -- it's a theft of services.
> 
> ...


Are you telling me if you park at a meter and there is still an hour left on it you will plug in some more coins because that space was rented to someone else for that allotted time? 
I see free ski passes more like a parking meter with some time left on it. No one is going to lose out on any money if you give your pass away, in fact the mountain might make some more money if the person taking the pass buys something to eat or drink, it will make more money if the the pass giver also had a bite to eat. The way I see if your replacing one body with another. I know technically the pass is not transferable but it's sort of like stealing a loaf of bread to feed your family where the loaf if the pass and your family is you need to snowboard.


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

freshy said:


> ...it's sort of like stealing a loaf of bread to feed your family where the loaf if the pass and your family is you need to snowboard.


Isn't that still stealing, and isn't stealing still wrong? Sure, people need to eat but no one _needs_ to snowboard. That's where your analogy falters. Snowboarding is just recreation, not a matter of life and death.

Since everyone likes analogies, how about, "It's like paying for an all-you can eat buffet then letting the next guy arriving take your place after you're finished eating."


----------



## freshy (Nov 18, 2009)

Toecutter said:


> Isn't that still stealing, and isn't stealing still wrong? Sure, people need to eat but no one _needs_ to snowboard. That's where your analogy falters. Snowboarding is just recreation, not a matter of life and death.
> 
> Since everyone likes analogies, how about, "It's like paying for an all-you can eat buffet then letting the next guy arriving take your place after you're finished eating."


Ugh I was just going to delete that line because I knew it was not right. 
And maybe not the next guy in line buy perhaps your buddy wearing your hat and jacket.

We can go on about this all day. Maybe it like leaving a club and transfering or forging your stamp to let someone else in. Maybe it's like downloading music, someone paid for the album and now their sharing it, can anyone honestly say they have never downloaded music?
It's kind of funny how people views on this subject are so polarized.

My point is some people would love to ride but can't afford it. If you are one of these people go for it.


----------



## HoboMaster (May 16, 2010)

Not all resorts are raking in huge revenue and enjoying huge subsequent profits. Right now there are a lot of resorts that are merely treading water until the economy recovers and ski-vacations become an option for more people. My resort is off the radar and just doesn't get the foot-traffic the big PNW resorts get because of it's location, (and the fact that the population around here is very small, and Idaho's average income is low as hell).

While you can bitch about sticking it to the man all you want, the reality is that the whole concept is juvenile and you honestly don't know who your screwing.

Take for example, let's say you are a waiter in a restaurant. You get paid $3.50 an hour + tips. Tonight is super slow and you only get to wait one table. You find out that the restaurant patrons didn't leave a tip because they are stingy motherfuckers, meaning that during your 6-hour shift you made $21.00. Pretty fucked up huh?

Well it's the same concept as what is being discussed here. The point is that you can try and justify it all you want but if the same thing happened to you, you wouldn't be too happy about it.

Treat others like you want to be treated.


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

freshy said:


> Ugh I was just going to delete that line because I knew it was not right.
> And maybe not the next guy in line buy perhaps your buddy wearing your hat and jacket.
> 
> We can go on about this all day. Maybe it like leaving a club and transfering or forging your stamp to let someone else in. Maybe it's like downloading music, someone paid for the album and now their sharing it, can anyone honestly say they have never downloaded music?
> ...


You've jumped to 'well you cant say you haven't done it!' which isn't the issue here -- for what it's worth, a parking meter is not offering any services -- sure you're paying to park there, but you could just as easily go park somewhere else. Also, that parking space will be there regardless of the parking meter -- after certain hours, you dont have to pay the meter. On certain days you dont have to pay the meter. EVERY day you want to USE a hill/resorts services, you HAVE to pay for a lift ticket. A lift ticket and a parking meter are not one in the same -- as I said before, it's much more in line with paying for a one hour massage but leaving early and expecting the masseuse to be okay with giving the next guy through the door your remaining time. I also liked the buffet analogy -- both are trying to steal services.

It isn't about who has and hasn't done it -- it's about the belief that people think it's okay (which is your prerogative) by likening it to something that really has no correlation at all.

If you want to do it, do it, but don't believe you're 'damning the man' as one poster believed, and don't liken it to something to ease your conscience when the two have nothing in common (such as selling a car after you bought it). It's still stealing, and it's still costing a hill/resort money -- money that goes to grooming, snow making, lifties, etc. Yes the high ups will get rich, but guess what -- they'll still be rich whether you steal from the hill/resort or not -- the only ones you hurt are the services provided, and the people providing those services.


----------



## fredericp64 (Jan 4, 2010)

How do you guys transfer this in the parking lot??

And if that's not what your resort uses, they're kinda asking for it.


----------



## freshy (Nov 18, 2009)

fredericp64 said:


> How do you guys transfer this -- > (http://powdermag.com/features/onlineexclusive/alta2-article.jpg) in the parking lot??
> 
> And if that's not what your resort uses, they're kinda asking for it.


With one of these 









This is what most mountains around here use now, all you need is to go to the ticket booth and get your free cable tie.
http://www.idiotbanter.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/mslm-lift-ticket.jpg


----------



## fredericp64 (Jan 4, 2010)

Well there you go, it's their fault for making it too easy. 

I've never done it and never will but it's easy to understand why some do, it's way too accessible.


----------



## freshy (Nov 18, 2009)

Biggs said:


> You've jumped to 'well you cant say you haven't done it!' which isn't the issue here -- for what it's worth, a parking meter is not offering any services -- sure you're paying to park there, but you could just as easily go park somewhere else.


I only mentioned the "you can't say you havent done it" comment because people are acting like giving or taking a pass will save you a spot in hell for all eternity. You obviously haven't tried to park in downtown Vancouver, sure you can park somewhere else free but you'd have to walk a hour to get where you want to go.

It just not suck a black and white issue for me. Yes it is stealing and stealing is wrong, but sometimes it is wrong in a good way.

And it's not about sticking it to the man like you seem to think, it's about fulfilling ones selfish need to snowboard when you can't afford to.


----------



## freshy (Nov 18, 2009)

fredericp64 said:


> Well there you go, it's their fault for making it too easy.
> 
> I've never done it and never will but it's easy to understand why some do, it's way too accessible.


Yep I agree, save some money on cheap pass materials and lose money on ticket swapping.


----------



## JoeR (Oct 30, 2010)

freshy said:


> I see free ski passes more like a parking meter with some time left on it.


Not a good analogy. Parking meters are pure money-for-time devices; you can't reset them to zero upon leaving, even if you wanted to. Lift tickets are no different from tickets sold for many other events and experiences. What they all have in common is that, although the facility may have defined hours of operation, the ticket does _not_ represent a pure money-for-time transaction; rather, it's money for a personal experience or personal service. Buy a $90 ticket to Walt Disney World; leave after four hours because you're tired. Can you transfer the "unused" eight hours to someone else? No. Buy a $10 movie ticket; leave after 30 minutes because you're bored. Can you transfer the "unused" 90 minutes to someone else? No. 



> No one is going to lose out on any money if you give your pass away


This is a common defense of many types of low-grade consumer fraud. "Well, I wasn't going to ever _buy_ that album, so downloading it for free didn't cost anyone anything." But I think it's clear that while the "freerider" justification may apply in some cases, in many cases it does not, i.e., many freeriders actually would have been paying customers if that had been the only option. In other words, collectively the problem does cause businesses to lose a great deal of money -- the music industry is the obvious example --even if a single individual can claim that he's not causing any harm.


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

freshy said:


> I only mentioned the "you can't say you havent done it" comment because people are acting like giving or taking a pass will save you a spot in hell for all eternity. You obviously haven't tried to park in downtown Vancouver, sure you can park somewhere else free but you'd have to walk a hour to get where you want to go.
> 
> It just not suck a black and white issue for me. Yes it is stealing and stealing is wrong, but sometimes it is wrong in a good way.
> 
> And it's not about sticking it to the man like you seem to think, it's about fulfilling ones selfish need to snowboard when you can't afford to.


I don't think anyone is acting like taking a ticket will get you a first class trip to hell -- most people who are siding AGAINST doing so, are merely pointing out the flaws in the reasoning of the people who are FOR doing it. You all have foolish beliefs in why it's OKAY to steal from these companies, which are simply wrong.

Your belief that stealing is sometimes wrong in a good way does not apply to skiing or snowboarding -- you're stealing from a company who uses those ticket sales (income) to pay for the services they offer. You don't NEED to ski or snowboard to survive, so if you cant afford it, perhaps you should find a cheaper alternative, or go without until you can afford it.

And my 'sticking it to the man' reference was to the poster who said fuck those mother fuckers in reference to the CEOs/owners profiting. He's a fool.

Maybe I'm old fashioned, but it really IS a simple black and white issue -- it's stealing and it's wrong. If you're okay with that, fine, but don't attempt to justify why you do it with silly reasons. You steal because you're cheap.


----------



## ev13wt (Nov 22, 2010)

Ahaha look at the old tech and the hiprocity lol.

Over here in the alps every shit little resort has touch free credit card looking things.

I buy and sell on the parking lot unless its a trip, then I have my 7 or 10 day pass etc.


----------



## notter123 (Nov 11, 2010)

hahahaha this thread makes me laugh!

first off I would like to say I have never done this nor will I ever.

But I am kind of on the fence as to whether this is really stealing or not, my thoughts are that either way, if I were to sell my ticket to someone the resort is expecting to have to pay for a full day of riding for 1 person, and if one person leaves, and another one comes in, then that resort still only has to pay for 1 person to get up the hill and use all the amenities, so really why is the resort losing money? as someone else said really they are making money, because that second person will most likely buy food, meaning the first and second person bought food and the resort only had to pay for 1 person to use the lift.

Does anyone understand what I'm saying? it makes sense to me.. haha


----------



## Karasene (Oct 20, 2010)

I'm not sure how I feel on this issue. I understand why people choose to be cheap when something is so easily accessible. I mean I've been quilty of poaching lift lines a time or two last season. (Mainly because my mentality and wallet were both lacking. I had riden for free all season as a mountain employee but when my mountain closed in spring so did my reciprical passes to other mountains still open.) Could I afford to pay to ride? No. Did I bring the money needed to ride in case I had to? Yes. Do I think stealing is wrong? Yes. 

I do see how the mountain is slightly at fault for making the passes so easily transferable. Even compared to a movie ticket, or a concert each venue takes it upon themselfs to rip the valued half off and leave the purchaser with just a meaningless stub needing a mark or stamp upon re-entry. Maybe mountains should go back to the old school tickets if this is becoming a problem.

You ask "_How do you guys transfer this in the parking lot??"_I mean it only takes me a second to figure out a way this is done. (Not that I have.) Walk up to the ticket counter and say... "I would like to switch to a lighter jacket. May I ask for another pass?" In which case they will have you clip that pass and hand it over and hand you a brand new non-used pass... 

_The mountains make a ridiculous amount of money.... food prices are way too high... a bottle of water cost $3 _
I agree with you. The price of food at a mountain is ridiculous for what you are getting. However because I work in the F&B at the mountain I know the mountain is NOT making much profit off of this. Every resort hires outside contractors (in my case "Centerplate") the same guys that also run F&B at Major league stadiums, amusement parks, etc. to run and operate all F&B facilities on the mountain... meaning the profit of that $3 bottle of water has to be split 2 ways and still be enough to land me my paycheck every week. When you tie that to a short season and the cost of operations you'd be surprised just how little profit there is. In fact I'm pretty certain that my local hill operated at a loss 2 consecutive years and something interesting is that our mountain isn't owned by anyone at all. It's run off of tax payers money which is even more reason to not steal from "the man"... 

But anyway.. I am totally playing devil's advocate here. Again I see both sides of this argument. I lean more towards the "just pay for the damn ticket"side of things. If you're really getting there late enough to buy a used pass... it probably isn't going to kill you to spend an extra $20 and pack a lunch for that half day ticket.. and you will be supporting your local hill that you you so call LOVE soooo much.


This is WAYYY off topic.. but another thing this reminds me of. People who buy goods off the internet. Keep your local board shop in business people. Those die hard core people won't be around to give you one on one advice, and give you the hook up unless you realize how harmful all these online corporations are. OK.. I'm done. Sorry :dunno:


----------



## JoeR (Oct 30, 2010)

notter123 said:


> But I am kind of on the fence as to whether this is really stealing or not, my thoughts are that either way, if I were to sell my ticket to someone the resort is expecting to have to pay for a full day of riding for 1 person, and if one person leaves, and another one comes in, then that resort still only has to pay for 1 person to get up the hill and use all the amenities, so really why is the resort losing money?


It's surprising how many people seem to understand "losing money" only in the very narrow sense of "incurring additional out-of-pocket expenses." Perhaps it's because that interpretation facilitates the freerider justification for theft of services. But look: losing revenue is "losing money." Losing profits is "losing money." You don't have to be able to point to a missing wad of bills to have lost money.

Suppose you are a taxi driver heading across town to pick up a fare. A guy jumps onto the bumper of your cab and clings to the fender until you reach your/his destination, whereupon he steps off and walks away. Would you say you "lost money" on that ride?


----------



## notter123 (Nov 11, 2010)

I totally understand, but what I'm saying, and don't get me wrong, i totally don't think this is right I mean you should just pay the fare but I'm trying to see it from the other peoples point of view, anyways all I am saying is all these people saying the resorts are barely getting by and I agree with that, and I also agree with what your saying when they aren't gaining money because the lazy buyer doesnt want to pay full price for a half day lift ticket so he doesnt buy a ticket off the resort, either way, yes I'm going back to my "narrow minded" thinking but this is not causing the resort to be MORE in the hole.... really people need to stop these analogies, I don't like them and this really is a unique situation I think! Anyways I'm not sure why this is such a big deal anyways, personally the hill that i board at is fine for money, I pay my full day lift ticket every time I go and I dont care if someone else tries to buy a "used ticket"

Anyways I'm done arguing because essentially I do agree with both sides of the story..


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

notter123 said:


> hahahaha this thread makes me laugh!
> 
> first off I would like to say I have never done this nor will I ever.
> 
> ...


It doesn't work that way -- the mountain doesn't simply say 'okay, we've sold 560 tickets today, so we'll blow just enough snow for those 560 people, run the lift just enough to get those 560 people up the mountain throughout the day, we'll only groom 560 people's worth of trail, and we'll only run enough electricity/heat/hot water to keep those 560 people comfortable.

A mountain has the same operating costs whether 1000 people show up or 1 -- the lifts still run, the guys still head out and groom, the lights are still on, the heat inside is still running, they still pay their employees to show up to work for that day. They base the price of their goods and services off of past years and estimated forecasts -- if they have a slow year in terms of attendance or snow fall, you only exacerbate their financial problems by stealing tickets.


----------



## notter123 (Nov 11, 2010)

Biggs said:


> It doesn't work that way -- the mountain doesn't simply say 'okay, we've sold 560 tickets today, so we'll blow just enough snow for those 560 people, run the lift just enough to get those 560 people up the mountain throughout the day, we'll only groom 560 people's worth of trail, and we'll only run enough electricity/heat/hot water to keep those 560 people comfortable.
> 
> A mountain has the same operating costs whether 1000 people show up or 1 -- the lifts still run, the guys still head out and groom, the lights are still on, the heat inside is still running, they still pay their employees to show up to work for that day. They base the price of their goods and services off of past years and estimated forecasts -- if they have a slow year in terms of attendance or snow fall, you only exacerbate their financial problems by stealing tickets.


I can't believe I'm responding again but here goes:

I know that's not how it works, but what your saying about whether 1000 people show up or 1 person, your just proving the point that either way the lifts will be running, and the resort has to pay for everything, they still get the money for the lift ticket and its not like they have to run the lifts more or lnger due to someone buying some elses non expired ticket. 

All I am saying is that they are still getting the money for 1 lift ticket and that's how many people at any given time during the day are using that lift ticket.


----------



## JoeR (Oct 30, 2010)

notter123 said:


> really people need to stop these analogies, I don't like them and this really is a unique situation I think!


Morally and legally, it's not unique. In fact it's a run-of-the-mill situation, very similar to many other kinds of theft of services, as discussed in this thread.



> Anyways I'm not sure why this is such a big deal anyways, personally the hill that i board at is fine for money, I pay my full day lift ticket every time I go and I dont care if someone else tries to buy a "used ticket"


Fair enough. Discussing this issue and having an opinion one way or the other doesn't mean anyone has to become a self-appointed parking lot cop.


----------



## oneshot (Oct 8, 2010)

been yrs, but i sell them..


----------



## notter123 (Nov 11, 2010)

well this isnt quite an analogy but lets put it this way, lets say 1000 lift tickets are sold in a day. so only 1000 people will ever be using the facilities at one time, but lets say at noon, all those tickets are traded to 1000 completly different people, are the expenses of the mountain/resort changed at all? besides the uncontrollable variables such as food consumption?


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

notter123 said:


> I can't believe I'm responding again but here goes:
> 
> I know that's not how it works, but what your saying about whether 1000 people show up or 1 person, your just proving the point that either way the lifts will be running, and the resort has to pay for everything, they still get the money for the lift ticket and its not like they have to run the lifts more or lnger due to someone buying some elses non expired ticket.
> 
> All I am saying is that they are still getting the money for 1 lift ticket and that's how many people at any given time during the day are using that lift ticket.


You're missing the point on economic forecasting for the company -- yes they run everything all day, and the lift ticket prices, food prices, employee pay, employee benefits, etc. are all based on a forecast of how many people they'll be bringing in to PAY FOR TICKETS.

We'll make it real simple (this is drastically simplified): Ski Mountain Resort calculates all of their projected expenses and sets a lift ticket price. To break even, they need to sell 500,000 lift tickets. Profit is any sales beyond 500,000 tickets. 430,000 people buy tickets. 20,000 people steal their services. They've now serviced 450,000 people, only sold 430,000 tickets, and are now losing money.

The repercussions that come with this is what makes it really fun -- next year they check their books and see that they lost a lot of money. How do we fix it? We don't let lifties get free season passes. We let go of a couple staff members. We raise food prices. We raise ticket prices.

So while you enjoy your runs, the mountain is hemorrhaging and everyone who is a 'sucker' and PAYS for their tickets, gets the shaft by having to pay MORE in the years to come.


----------



## notter123 (Nov 11, 2010)

Okay I get what your saying, but like I said earlier, for those tickets that are "stolen" there is still only 1 person on the hill, so financially they arent servicing extra people... yes if people were going on the lifts without tickets at all that would be stealing and servicing extra people. but maybe I am missing something, I understand everything that both sides are saying, all I am saying is that financially whether its timmy or johnny on the hill, their number of people serviced may be changed, but the amount of money they payed to service those extra people did not increase at all..
maybe they did, but I may be uninformed and not understand how their costs have gone up?

maybe I am just missing something, or dont understand something you are trying to say, if so, I'm sorry! haha


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

notter123 said:


> Okay I get what your saying, but like I said earlier, for those tickets that are "stolen" there is still only 1 person on the hill, so financially they arent servicing extra people... yes if people were going on the lifts without tickets at all that would be stealing and servicing extra people. but maybe I am missing something, I understand everything that both sides are saying, all I am saying is that financially whether its timmy or johnny on the hill, their number of people serviced may be changed, but the amount of money they payed to service those extra people did not increase at all..
> maybe they did, but I may be uninformed and not understand how their costs have gone up?
> 
> maybe I am just missing something, or dont understand something you are trying to say, if so, I'm sorry! haha


No reason to apologize -- what I want people to realize is that yes, the mountain will be operating regardless of whether you pay and I steal (bum your ticket half day), I pay and you steal, we both pay, or we both steal. The mountain, on a very simplified level, is going to spend the same regardless.

Where our thinking goes in different directions is found here: long before the season even begins, the mountain has built a forecast on how much they need to bring in from food sales, lesson sales, equipment rental sales, lift ticket sales, etc. They take this forecast and put it up against their projected expenses (electricity, heat, water, snow making, employee pay, employee benefits, etc.) and base the prices of their goods and services from these projections.

So while the mountain will still be operating whether you pay and I bum your ticket after, I pay and you bum my ticket after, we both pay, or we both bum tickets, their income changes. If they needed two ticket sales to make their income match their expenses (thereby breaking even and not making a profit -- simply the amount they made covered the amount it cost the hill to operate that day) but only had one sale (due to either you or I bumming the other's ticket at half day), they have lost money for that day. They still would operate, but they've lost money for that day/season/year.

Lose money each day/season/year and you start firing people, increasing prices, decreasing services, or simply close down altogether.


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

Biggs said:


> Two completely different circumstances that are not on equal footing at all. A car is a good -- you bought it, it is now yours. You're free to do what you want with it. Sell it after 5 miles, 50 miles, or 500,000 miles. Volkswagen wont care -- they've already sold the car to the dealership. The dealership wont care, because they've already sold the car to you.
> 
> A lift ticket is essentially a sticker that says you can RENT the hill's facilities and services for a specified time period. Whereas you own the car after buying it, you do not own the facilities and services the hill provides after you buy your lift ticket. YOUR lift ticket allows YOU to RENT their services for the time permitted. It does not allow Jim in the parking lot to use the time that the hill allotted to you. YOU rented their services, if Jim wants to use those same services, he'll have to rent it as well.
> 
> ...


What the fuck do you mean it's not the same thing...if I sell my used car that means the person buying it doesn't have to buy it new from a dealer. Just like a person who bought my ticket doesn't have to buy a new one at full price from the window. He's happy with the depreciated value of the ticket for the remaining time, just like the remaining depreciated value of a car. As far as I'm concerned its my fucking time and I'll sell it for whatever someone will pay for it. If the resort runs 9 hours and I use only 6 I'll sell it for 3 hrs worth of cash to whoever is in the market that given day. The resort doesn't lose any money because it's an equal exchange.


----------



## JoeR (Oct 30, 2010)

notter123 said:


> maybe I am just missing something


Yes, you are "missing" the difference between *expenses* and *revenues*, as I've already explained to you. Why is this so tough to understand? Increase a company's expenses, and you hurt it. Reduce a company's revenues, and you hurt it. A business is not just the expense side of the ledger.


----------



## crsv619 (Feb 19, 2010)

Biggs said:


> You're missing the point on economic forecasting for the company -- yes they run everything all day, and the lift ticket prices, food prices, employee pay, employee benefits, etc. are all based on a forecast of how many people they'll be bringing in to PAY FOR TICKETS.
> 
> We'll make it real simple (this is drastically simplified): Ski Mountain Resort calculates all of their projected expenses and sets a lift ticket price. To break even, they need to sell 500,000 lift tickets. Profit is any sales beyond 500,000 tickets. 430,000 people buy tickets. 20,000 people steal their services. They've now serviced 450,000 people, only sold 430,000 tickets, and are now losing money.
> 
> ...


thanks for this breakdown. this hadn't occurred to me. most times it's hard to think on a macro level and the effects on the bigger picture. on the micro level, if i sell a pass, all i'll think about is that's $20 bucks back in my pocket. but in any case, i'm a season pass holder and won't have this moral dilemna anymore 

interesting thread/debate yall


----------



## notter123 (Nov 11, 2010)

JoeR said:


> Yes, you are "missing" the difference between *expenses* and *revenues*, as I've already explained to you. Why is this so tough to understand? Increase a company's expenses, and you hurt it. Reduce a company's revenues, and you hurt it. A business is not just the expense side of the ledger.


haha oh man, talkin to me like I'm a little kid eh? yea I may not own my own business or have a business degree, but I know that basic shit...

But you apparently don't understand the point of view that I am trying to explain, no it is not my point of view, I fully understand what your saying, I'm just arguing the other side for the sake of a good conversation. But when someone "steals" a ticket they are not affecting expenses... at all! yes they may not be increasing revenue but since they are not increasing expenses or increasing revenue they are a zero, meaning the bottom line isn't affected


----------



## notter123 (Nov 11, 2010)

Snowolf said:


> I have a question for those who are totally cool with this. Is letting your buddy borrow your pass for the day to go ride okay or is would you consider that theft of service?
> 
> I ask this in all seriousness to see where (if at all) you draw the line.
> 
> Maybe the solution to this problem is that resorts should simply charge you by the hour to use their services....:dunno:


 first off I'm giving my honest opinion here, not the one I have been argueing this whole time, but no thats not right, I would never do that, for one thing all my friends with seasons passes would come with me, and secondly they payed for one person to use the pass so thats the only person who should use the pass! Yes this is different then what I have been saying about the tickets because i really do believe the same goes for lift tickets...


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

Biggs said:


> Where our thinking goes in different directions is found here: long before the season even begins, the mountain has built a forecast on how much they need to bring in from food sales, lesson sales, equipment rental sales, lift ticket sales, etc. They take this forecast and put it up against their projected expenses (electricity, heat, water, snow making, employee pay, employee benefits, etc.) and base the prices of their goods and services from these projections.
> 
> So while the mountain will still be operating whether you pay and I bum your ticket after, I pay and you bum my ticket after, we both pay, or we both bum tickets, their income changes. If they needed two ticket sales to make their income match their expenses (thereby breaking even and not making a profit -- simply the amount they made covered the amount it cost the hill to operate that day) but only had one sale (due to either you or I bumming the other's ticket at half day), they have lost money for that day. They still would operate, but they've lost money for that day/season/year.
> 
> ...


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

Snowolf said:


> I have a question for those who are totally cool with this. Is letting your buddy borrow your pass for the day to go ride okay or is would you consider that theft of service?
> 
> I ask this in all seriousness to see where (if at all) you draw the line.
> 
> Maybe the solution to this problem is that resorts should simply charge you by the hour to use their services....:dunno:


Nope not cool with this...it's not the same as a lift ticket. But I should be able to give it away or sell it if I'm not going to use it anymore.


----------



## killclimbz (Aug 10, 2007)

This one does have a lot of grey areas no doubt. For the dirt bag rider who is just making ends meet, this is a means for some to get a few extra days in. I know I took advantage of this in my college days. Also, if it's such a big deal to resorts, then why in the hell are they using lift tickets that are so easy to swap with another rider? 

As far as season passes go, when you bought it, they were assigned specifically to you. To have that benefit for a season. So yes, lending out your pass is stealing.

Another thing, swapping of lift tickets probably wouldn't be as prevalent if resorts around here weren't ass raping you for over $90 a day for a lift ticket. Some might say the prices have gotten there because of the lift ticket swapping, but then why are season passes so cheap? They will get the lift ticket price and know it. I know the big boys around here are not hurting for money unless it's a bad snow season. So the few dozen tickets that are sold for $10-$20 by the half day riders leaving the resort is probably not killing them. The $10-$20 the seller gets, might make the difference in them coming back for another day too, or maybe it'll cause that liftie to not eat for the night. Life is full of problems...


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

If there is still value in something then it should be freely traded...until we get rid of capitalism then this should apply to all goods and services...so anyone want to buy my Waterville ticket next weekend? I'll be leaving around 12:30pm. Let the bidding begin


----------



## Karasene (Oct 20, 2010)

Waterville Valley's conditions SUCKED last weekend... trust me.
I can't imagine they'd be any better after all this rain and crap ice we've been getting. Not worth it.


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

Karasene said:


> Waterville Valley's conditions SUCKED last weekend... trust me.
> I can't imagine they'd be any better after all this rain and crap ice we've been getting. Not worth it.


It's New England...conditions always suck. But for $70 they better have every damn snow gun blowing every second that temps are under 29 degrees. But Pat's Peak has been great for the last week...too bad for all this rain


----------



## labowsky (Sep 28, 2010)

> Suppose you are a taxi driver heading across town to pick up a fare. A guy jumps onto the bumper of your cab and clings to the fender until you reach your/his destination, whereupon he steps off and walks away. Would you say you "lost money" on that ride?


this, this is smarter than most of your comparisons, this actually makes sense. that person wasn't going to pay in the first place so there is only money gained.





> You're wrong...a day lift ticket was still purchased and used. And only one. The resort would only lose money if that ticket was duplicated. It's the same thing with paper money...paper money is essentially a ticket and exchanged freely for it's value. People need to take economics courses around here.


this as well.


----------



## judoant (Jan 18, 2010)

i give away for free and receive for free or pay a little.


----------



## Music Moves (Jan 23, 2009)

Toecutter said:


> I think it's wrong to cheat someone out of income, even if you can get away with it. You can justify it all kinds of ways, and say it doesn't happen enough to financially affect the resort, or that the pass is already paid for, but in the end you're still causing a loss of income for the business by allowing some else to not pay their contribution. At month's end it affects the profit & loss statement. Hypothetically if three people in one day sold their pass in the parking lot, at about $70 per full price pass the resort did not make $210 that they would have. That lost income could have employed a lift operator, patrol, maintenance guy, ski school instructor, or kitchen worker for the day. There are worse offenses in the world but it's still cheating the business (theft of services?).
> 
> I hope that those people who buy/sell their tickets never complain about shabby facilities, poor maintenance, lack of services, etc.



I've never done this and I am currently a season pass holder, however...

I fully understand this argument and I'm not saying it is wrong at all, but it could also be used for the individual rider. Why should the person that paid for the pass have to pay for any time that he/she is not riding? If the resort is trying to cushion expenses by charging someone full price for a half day when they are only riding for 2 hours, why can't the broke rider cushion his/her cost by trying to get some of the money back?


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

Extremo said:


> What the fuck do you mean it's not the same thing...if I sell my used car that means the person buying it doesn't have to buy it new from a dealer. Just like a person who bought my ticket doesn't have to buy a new one at full price from the window. He's happy with the depreciated value of the ticket for the remaining time, just like the remaining depreciated value of a car. As far as I'm concerned its my fucking time and I'll sell it for whatever someone will pay for it. If the resort runs 9 hours and I use only 6 I'll sell it for 3 hrs worth of cash to whoever is in the market that given day. The resort doesn't lose any money because it's an equal exchange.


The fuck I mean it's not the same thing is simple -- a good is not the same thing as a service. I'll say it again -- a car is YOURS. You can drive it, hump it, sell it, do whatever you want with it. A manufacturer builds it and puts a price on it. A dealership buys it from the manufacturer and puts their own price on it. You buy it from the dealership. It's yours.

A lift ticket is a piece of paper that says you can RENT the mountains services for a specified time period. Whereas you dont own anything on that mountain, you dont have the right to dictate who can use your ticket along with you. I understand where you're coming from (you paid for 12 hours, only used 6, you want to recoup the cash 'lost') but in terms of right and wrong, you dont have the right to dictate what to do with the remaining hours on that ticket. CAN you dictate what to do with it? Sure -- as you've proven, you sell them all the time. Do you have the RIGHT to? Not at all.




> You're wrong...a day lift ticket was still purchased and used. And only one. The resort would only lose money if that ticket was duplicated. It's the same thing with paper money...paper money is essentially a ticket and exchanged freely for it's value.


I completely agree -- a day ticket was purchased and used. Where you're wrong where you state that it's like money -- a lift ticket is merely a piece of paper that says you can RENT the use of their mountain. The mountain owns everything you use and thereby essentially own that time. You buy the ticket and they give you the OK to use that time. Whereas you own nothing there and they essentially own the time, you dont have the right to say what happens to the unused time. Where you're wrong again is in believing that the resort wont lose money. As I stated before, companies do financial forecasting to base the prices of their goods -- if they needed to sell 5 lift tickets to break even for that day, you buy ticket number 4 but sell off the remainder of the ticket at noon, the resort loses money on that day.



> People need to take economics courses around here.


Let's not get into a pissing match. As a financial analyst, this is what I do.

Again -- I'm not saying you're wrong in believing that you CAN sell your ticket (as you've proven to be a capitalist -- you sell your tickets to people who place a value on it), but you dont have the LEGAL or FINANCIAL RIGHT to do so and you MAY cause a loss (I state MAY here because as with all financial forecasts, if a practice of theft of services has been going on for awhile and they know about it, they'll just jack up their prices to compensate). I couldn't care less that people do it (until prices become so ridiculous that it affects my trips) but I personally don't do it.




> Maybe the solution to this problem is that resorts should simply charge you by the hour to use their services....


If you wanted to completely put an end to it, you could require people to pay AT the lift PER ride. THAT would be a nuisance, but you'd never have to worry about it.


----------



## gjsnowboarder (Sep 1, 2009)

I'm not a lawyer, but take in account this scenario. Person A buys a lift ticket and leaves after lunch selling their ticket to person B in the parking lot. Person B goes riding on the hill, and is out of control running into another person(C) causing some body harm to themselves and person C. The person C decides to sue Person B and learns that person A sold them their lift ticket. Now Person B doesn't have a lot and won't be able to cover person Cs bills/etc. Person C then comes after person A since they were the original purchaser of the ticket and assumed liability for riding when the purchased the ticket.

This alone would be enough to keep me from "clipping" and selling. Especially knowing how our legal system sometimes works.

Nevermind the "ethical" issues.


----------



## judoant (Jan 18, 2010)

gjsnowboarder said:


> I'm not a lawyer, but take in account this scenario. Person A buys a lift ticket and leaves after lunch selling their ticket to person B in the parking lot. Person B goes riding on the hill, and is out of control running into another person(C) causing some body harm to themselves and person C. The person C decides to sue Person B and learns that person A sold them their lift ticket. Now Person B doesn't have a lot and won't be able to cover person Cs bills/etc. Person C then comes after person A since they were the original purchaser of the ticket and assumed liability for riding when the purchased the ticket.
> 
> This alone would be enough to keep me from "clipping" and selling. Especially knowing how our legal system sometimes works.
> 
> Nevermind the "ethical" issues.


solid point but you must find person A


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

Biggs said:


> The fuck I mean it's not the same thing is simple -- a good is not the same thing as a service. I'll say it again -- a car is YOURS. You can drive it, hump it, sell it, do whatever you want with it. A manufacturer builds it and puts a price on it. A dealership buys it from the manufacturer and puts their own price on it. You buy it from the dealership. It's yours.
> 
> 
> A lift ticket is a piece of paper that says you can RENT the mountains services for a specified time period. Whereas you dont own anything on that mountain, you dont have the right to dictate who can use your ticket along with you. I understand where you're coming from (you paid for 12 hours, only used 6, you want to recoup the cash 'lost') but in terms of right and wrong, you dont have the right to dictate what to do with the remaining hours on that ticket. CAN you dictate what to do with it? Sure -- as you've proven, you sell them all the time. Do you have the RIGHT to? Not at all.
> ...


Ok stop calling riding lifts a service. A ticket is a good...it is the equivalent of riding lifts for a predetermined period of time. If there is time left it can be sold as a good for the remaining value...

If I buy ticket number 4 and stay all day I use the total value of the ticket...but rider number 6 is only in the market for 3-4 hour tickets but there is no supply of those so he goes home. Here I come and meet that demand. So the resort still sells the 5 tickets they would have...just me and 6 split the cost. 

And who determines right and wrong? God? is god overseeing the ethics of ticket sales at ski resorts? If so tell him to give me my fucking money back for the remaining 3 hours I won't use next weekend.


----------



## Karasene (Oct 20, 2010)

^^^ :thumbsup: 

Lets all Agree to Disagree.

Are we beating a dead horse yet?


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

Extremo said:


> Ok stop calling riding lifts a service. A ticket is a good...it is the equivalent of riding lifts for a predetermined period of time. If there is time left it can be sold as a good for the remaining value...
> 
> If I buy ticket number 4 and stay all day I use the total value of the ticket...but rider number 6 is only in the market for 3-4 hour tickets but there is no supply of those so he goes home. Here I come and meet that demand. So the resort still sells the 5 tickets they would have...just me and 6 split the cost.
> 
> And who determines right and wrong? God? is god overseeing the ethics of ticket sales at ski resorts? If so tell him to give me my fucking money back for the remaining 3 hours I won't use next weekend.



I'll stop calling it a service when it stops being one. You're still too focused on the fact that BECAUSE you can get someone to buy your ticket, it's a legal good. It isnt. I'm greatly pleased that you were able to pay attention in your economics class when they were discussing capitalism and how things can take on a monetary-esque value if you can find someone willing to 'barter' with it. Sadly financial forecasting is covered in Financial Analysis and has little to do with the handing over of X for Y.

Want to know how I know you don't own that ticket or season pass and are merely renting the service? Do something stupid on the hill where Ski Patrol revokes it. Then attempt to tell them that you own those hours on that ticket/season pass and see where it gets you. 

Now do something stupid with your car and see if the dealership comes and takes it away. I'll give you a hint, they wont -- they know that when you bought that car, it became yours. The ski hill is completely different.

You're getting awfully worked up about something that no one is telling you not to do -- I've repeatedly stated if you feel the need, and can find someone to place value on the unused portion of the ticket, be my guest. 'Right and Wrong' are determined by the effects on other people/things. You're potentially causing a loss for a company which will in turn cause 'problems' for other users of that service.


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

Karasene said:


> Are we beating a dead horse yet?


I dont think so -- I think it's a good discussion.

If people want to steal services, they're certainly in their own right to do so. But they should know who and how they're cheating and not accept silly reasoning for why they do it


----------



## JoeR (Oct 30, 2010)

Extremo said:


> Ok stop calling riding lifts a service. A ticket is a good...it is the equivalent of riding lifts for a predetermined period of time.


Technically, a ticket is a license, i.e., permission to enter and do certain things (ride a lift, watch a movie, whatever). It's a right that you have purchased from the owner of the place granting you entry.



> If there is time left it can be sold as a good for the remaining value...


 According to you, but not according to the owner of the facility. The rights you have purchased typically do not include the right to give the license, or some "unused" portion of the license, to someone else; that's why "Not Transferable" is often printed on tickets. Theoretically, you are supposed to have agreed to that limitation when you purchased your ticket.

You are correct that markets often exist for things that are legally not permitted to be traded. But you really shouldn't reason backward from the existence of the market to the legality of the transactions.


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

JoeR said:


> Technically, a ticket is a license, i.e., permission to enter and do certain things (ride a lift, watch a movie, whatever). It's a right that you have purchased from the owner of the place granting you entry.
> 
> According to you, but not according to the owner of the facility. The rights you have purchased typically do not include the right to give the license, or some "unused" portion of the license, to someone else; that's why "Not Transferable" is often printed on tickets. Theoretically, you are supposed to have agreed to that limitation when you purchased your ticket.
> 
> You are correct that markets often exist for things that are legally not permitted to be traded. But you really shouldn't reason backward from the existence of the market to the legality of the transactions.


This is another way to tell that you dont have the legal ownership of those hours or the use of that facility simply because you purchased the ticket. Merely 'renting'.

Perfectly said Joe.


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

I'm not talking about the legality of this. Obviously it's a contract that says I can't resell it. If there were contracts that allowed me to resell I'd buy those instead. But obviously there's some kind of collusion going on that won't let them exist.

So economically I think I'm not doing any harm by splitting a ticket between someone...riders 4 and 6 both get to ride part of the time as opposed to 4 riding all day and 6 going home. 

Ethically, I'm not doing anything wrong, I'm using my 5 hours worth and someone else is using the other 3 alotted hours. We're not using any more than the true value of the ticket. Not to mention the resort is trying to fuck me by charging me 8 hrs worth of riding even though there are times I'll only get to ride for 4...without giving me the chance to negotiate a fair price.


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

Biggs said:


> If you wanted to completely put an end to it, you could require people to pay AT the lift PER ride. THAT would be a nuisance, but you'd never have to worry about it.


Mt. Bachelor used to sell ride passes. You could buy a 10-ride pass, then the scanner would read/deduct one ride when you boarded the lift. It came out to something like $5 per lift ride. I bought those for a couple of seasons but I found myself always running the value of each run in my head rather than enjoying the ride. "That run is short, but that other run is long, so I get more for my money if I go over there even if I would rather hit the windlip on the shorter run." I also found myself being overly attentive to weather conditions, as a $5 ride wasn't worth it for mediocre to poor snow. It got to be a nuisance, so thank goodness for the all-you-can-eat pass.


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

Karasene said:


> ^^^ :thumbsup:
> 
> Lets all Agree to Disagree.
> 
> Are we beating a dead horse yet?


No way! I think this is an excellent debate involving ethics and economics. It's much more thought provoking than that poser/non-poser thread last week, and only a couple of guys have resorted to swearing to get his point across. I don't think anyone has even called anyone else a douche yet.


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

Extremo said:


> I'm not talking about the legality of this. Obviously it's a contract that says I can't resell it. If there were contracts that allowed me to resell I'd buy those instead. But obviously there's some kind of collusion going on that won't let them exist.
> 
> So economically I think I'm not doing any harm by splitting a ticket between someone...riders 4 and 6 both get to ride part of the time as opposed to 4 riding all day and 6 going home.
> 
> Ethically, I'm not doing anything wrong, I'm using my 5 hours worth and someone else is using the other 3 alotted hours. We're not using any more than the true value of the ticket. Not to mention the resort is trying to fuck me by charging me 8 hrs worth of riding even though there are times I'll only get to ride for 4...without giving me the chance to negotiate a fair price.


Economically I'd say you're close to being 'in the clear' -- but you're assuming if rider 4 goes all day, rider 6 is going to go home. As said before, I'm not sure how many people would make the trip to a mountain in the hopes of bumming a ticket, and if they dont get it, they leave -- but it could happen a lot more than I know. If their forecast was too small, you might hurt them. Most big companies will forecast with plenty of 'wiggle room' so to speak.

Ethics are mostly personal -- you either think you're in the clear or you're not. Socially are you -- well, as we've seen here, some say yes, others no. Your statement about resorts fucking you has a lot of value to it -- as I stated earlier, resorts know fully well what goes on -- yes they're hurting financially in these economic times, but they're not stupid either. Their prices are high. Is it justified? In some ways yes, in some ways no.

You're statement about getting the chance to negotiate a fair price brings up some interesting thoughts -- a mountain that had 'condition specific prices' could find itself doing a bit more business year in and year out. Those shitty rainy/dreary days where the riding is no good usually find people not spending full ticket price and going elsewhere not on the hill -- if prices were condition specific, I bet a lot more riders would be willing to pay a discounted price to get out there in shittier conditions. It would act a lot like your preseason madness where only 3 trails are open and whatnot, but you've still got the faithful out there all day on a 12 dollar lift ticket.


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

Toecutter said:


> Mt. Bachelor used to sell ride passes. You could buy a 10-ride pass, then the scanner would read/deduct one ride when you boarded the lift. It came out to something like $5 per lift ride. I bought those for a couple of seasons but I found myself always running the value of each run in my head rather than enjoying the ride. "That run is short, but that other run is long, so I get more for my money if I go over there even if I would rather hit the windlip on the shorter run." I also found myself being overly attentive to weather conditions, as a $5 ride wasn't worth it for mediocre to poor snow. It got to be a nuisance, so thank goodness for the all-you-can-eat pass.


Oh I can definitely see how it could put a damper on riding -- it would cause more headaches than the problem at hand does.

Douche.


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

Biggs said:


> Oh I can definitely see how it could put a damper on riding -- it would cause more headaches than the problem at hand does.
> 
> Douche.


Dammit!!!!


----------



## JoeR (Oct 30, 2010)

Extremo said:


> Not to mention the resort is trying to fuck me by charging me 8 hrs worth of riding even though there are times I'll only get to ride for 4...without giving me the chance to negotiate a fair price.


But I thought you were a capitalist?  Why is the resort "trying to fuck you" when the supply/demand calculation -- the foundation of capitalism -- favors the resort? Don't resorts simply charge what the traffic will bear? Wouldn't cheaper, partial-day lift tickets be more commonly offered if there were great demand for them? I once bought a ticket for just a couple of hours worth of riding at Holiday Valley in NY. It was early April, it was raining, the snow was mushy, and I was the only guy on the hill -- perfect! I was on my way to play at a concert elsewhere in NY, so a quick stop was all I had time for. But you seldom see great deals like that during peak season, and presumably, that's because people are willing to pay top dollar for all-day tickets, whether they need them or not.


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

Biggs said:


> Economically I'd say you're close to being 'in the clear' -- but you're assuming if rider 4 goes all day, rider 6 is going to go home. As said before, I'm not sure how many people would make the trip to a mountain in the hopes of bumming a ticket, and if they dont get it, they leave -- but it could happen a lot more than I know. If their forecast was too small, you might hurt them. Most big companies will forecast with plenty of 'wiggle room' so to speak.


It happens all the time here...there is almost always someone in the parking lot trying to bum tickets. When my friends want me to ride with them at a mountain they ride at with a seasons pass I'll go and get one from someone leaving. And I've always gotten a ticket sometimes for free, sometimes for $10. But the point is the ticket is still only being used by one person. And I don't see how maximizing the value of the ticket is different when it's one person or ten people.

Sorry, I'm assuming rider 4 is going home early and 6 wasn't "forecasted"


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

JoeR said:


> But I thought you were a capitalist?  Why is the resort "trying to fuck you" when the supply/demand calculation -- the foundation of capitalism -- favors the resort?


Not a capitalist...I believe in fair trade.


----------



## freshy (Nov 18, 2009)

Funny how the ethical card is being played so much, how boring would the world be if we did EVRYTHING ethically. If your not causing harm to anyone who really cares. I drank underage, I smoke pot, I drove without a licence, I have rode a dirtbike on the streets, I never have been offered or sold my ticket but I would if there was an opportunity. I do the things I do because I enjoy life and want to live it.

If someone offered me a $10 pass I would definitely take it over the $56 half day rate the mountain offers. I need that money way more than the fucking resort.
You want to talk economics? How is it that a half day ticket is not half the price of a full day? At Big White a full day is $71 half is $56 that's robbery but it also is part of the supply/demand scheme I suppose. If the damn lift tickets weren't so much there would be less of a pass transfer thing going on.

I have 2 friends who both went in on a seasons pass, they both grew the same facial hair as the one in the picture and would take turns using it. I know ethically it is wrong and the mountain supposedly lost a seasons pass sale. In reality they made one sale instead of none and since only one of them was using it at one time the mountain services were not being "abused". Wonder what the consensus is on that one.

Back to ethics, if the resorts were fair in their pricing and the way they treated their staff then yeah I would have a problem with scamming them. But at least my local hill has demonstrated to me that they don't give a fuck about it's employees, and I think it is way overpriced. 

@Snowolf: I have borrowed my brothers season pass and I have lent mine out. I know I run a risk of being blacklisted but I would only have a problem with it if I got caught, then I would deal with my consequences. I have even gone so far as to say I forgot my jacket with my seasons pass and got a day ticket printed out for my friend, mind you that was before they scanned your bar code before every lift.


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

judoant said:


> solid point but you must find person A


Not hard to do if they paid with a credit card. I don't know if I've ever witnessed someone handing cash through that sales window.


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

Music Moves said:


> I've never done this and I am currently a season pass holder, however...
> 
> I fully understand this argument and I'm not saying it is wrong at all, but it could also be used for the individual rider. *Why should the person that paid for the pass have to pay for any time that he/she is not riding? * If the resort is trying to cushion expenses by charging someone full price for a half day when they are only riding for 2 hours, why can't the broke rider cushion his/her cost by trying to get some of the money back?


Isn't that the sales agreement? You pay for a lift ticket and in exchange you get to ride it as many times as you can on the given day? Like I said in another post, Mt. Bachelor used to sell ride passes where you paid per ride. It was good for someone who wasn't planning to ride all day.

Again with the analogies -- buy one trip through the salad bar for $4.99 or all-you-can-eat for $7.49. You choose, and you agree to not swap your jacket and hat with your friend waiting in the parking lot. A day pass is like the buffet.

Maybe I'm coming from the viewpoint of being a business owner (or perhaps mature adult who can afford passes). I try to support businesses rather than try to scam my way through things whenever possible. In Bend the rough economy has tanked local businesses, so I've seen directly how fragile things can be. I know a lot of fellow business owners and also people who have lost their jobs. I would not feel right trying to cheat anyone because in this small community people are more intimately linked than in a big city, and it's easier to see the fallout when someone goes under.


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

Toecutter said:


> Maybe I'm coming from the viewpoint of being a business owner (or perhaps mature adult who can afford passes). I try to support businesses rather than try to scam my way through things whenever possible. In Bend the rough economy has tanked local businesses, so I've seen directly how fragile things can be. I know a lot of fellow business owners and also people who have lost their jobs. I would not feel right trying to cheat anyone because in this small community people are more intimately linked than in a big city, and it's easier to see the fallout when someone goes under.


How will you ever damn the Man with THAT attitude?!


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

Biggs said:


> How will you ever damn the Man with THAT attitude?!


I can still damn the Man! Down with corporations (oh shit, I have a corporation - now what?)!


----------



## labowsky (Sep 28, 2010)

Biggs said:


> As a financial analyst, this is what I do.


dude not to be a dick, but i would not want you to be my analyst.
you need to figure out, that they know not everyone their isn't going to buy a ticket, and they know its not going to make a difference if one person buys a ticket, then gives an hour or whatever to another person, in reality they are still making a profit, its still the same ticket its still the same 50 bucks (how much it costs at my mountain ), the person wasn't going to buy one anyway.

now im not saying its okay to do, i never done it, if i buy a ticket im spending the whole day there.
but if i was there 2 hours before closing, i would totally buy one cause its all paid for, im just using whatever time is on it, i will not pay full price for a ticket im going to barley use.


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

labowsky said:


> you need to figure out, that they know not everyone their isn't going to buy a ticket, and they know its not going to make a difference if one person buys a ticket, then gives an hour or whatever to another person, in reality they are still making a profit, its still the same ticket its still the same 50 bucks (how much it costs at my mountain ), the person wasn't going to buy one anyway.


I had to read that like three times.


----------



## Magnum626 (Dec 31, 2009)

Wow this thread is interesting. Just curious, how many people are actually in the lot that you guys ride that buy these tickets? I've only seen it a handful of times in a season out here by me. When i went out west a few years ago my traveling group always found kids wanting to buy our tickets when we left with 2-3 hours left. But then again those mountains were much bigger than my local ones so I guess it would still be worth it.

I don't think there's an analogy that can win any one argument. If I rode every weekend and saw the same people wanting to buy my ticket I wouldn't sell or give it to them. It's unfair, IMO, to be selling your ticket every weekend or constantly lending out your season pass to someone. 

To me, it's like taking advantage of a company's no questions asked return policy, don't abuse it and you won't ruin it for everyone. :dunno:


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

labowsky said:


> dude not to be a dick, but i would not want you to be my analyst.
> you need to figure out, that they know not everyone their isn't going to buy a ticket


Weird, kind of like what I said:



> Most big companies will forecast with plenty of 'wiggle room' so to speak.


and in regards to this:



> they know its not going to make a difference if one person buys a ticket, then gives an hour or whatever to another person, in reality they are still making a profit, its still the same ticket its still the same 50 bucks (how much it costs at my mountain ), the person wasn't going to buy one anyway.


too many people are assuming that a person who bums a ticket, wouldn't have bought a ticket from the resort if they couldn't bum one. I would be willing to bet that if you could eliminate the bumming, 99.9% of the people who bum these tickets, would buy a ticket from the resort. So no, the resorts aren't making a profit on the riders who bum.


----------



## Psi-Man (Aug 31, 2009)

When I was in Jackson Hole I ate lunch in the parking lot and I was amazed at the number of people that came up to me looking to buy the ticket. I didn't leave early, but I would have given it to a kid looking to ride for an hour or two. Is it wrong, yes, but I remember being young and broke.


----------



## S4Shredr (Oct 23, 2009)

Damn Biggs, do you work for vail resorts?

Selling your ticket benifits both riders, the one selling the ticket gets some money back for what they didnt use that day, and the other person gets a discounted rate for only riding part of the day. Giving it away is even better.

Do you think its fair for resorts to charge $10-20 less for a half day ticket than a full day? I dont, I think its BS, half day should be half price or close to it. I payed $80 for a half day at vail once which is completely absurd.

I used to go to a ski area about an hour away from my house in high school and try to get tickets for the last hour or two so me and my friends could ride when we didnt have money. Most people were happy to give their ticket away, although one person called us A-holes for trying to get passes when they were leaving, lol.

Last season I was at keystone and was asked by two guys if they we were leaving and if they could have our passes since they were tight on cash, me and my buddy gave them the tickets for free.

This whole argument is based on opinion, but personally, I want everyone who is interested in snowboarding or skiing to do it as much as possible and as cheaply as possible. I like helping people out and if someone helps me out its great too.

end rant


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

Psi-Man said:


> Is it wrong, yes, but I remember being young and broke.


I don't think it's wrong. What I do think is wrong is that resorts restrict me from selling MY remaining time.


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

S4Shredr said:


> Damn Biggs, do you work for vail resorts?
> 
> Selling your ticket benifits both riders, the one selling the ticket gets some money back for what they didnt use that day, and the other person gets a discounted rate for only riding part of the day. Giving it away is even better.
> 
> ...


No, I don't work for Vail Resorts.

Whether I think ticket prices are absurd matters neither here nor there (but since you asked, yes I believe ticket prices are absurd in their entirety. Whether it's a half day ticket for 3/4 the price of a full day ticket, or just the basic price of a full day ticket, they're incredibly high. Alas, when something like skiing or snowboarding is more in line with people with a bit of wealth, you're going to have those higher prices.)

I also wish people would stop looking at me like I'm championing to abolish selling your tickets and send you all to hell -- as I said to Extremo, in a capitalist society, he has found people willing to pay HIM for his tickets if he leaves early -- I couldn't care less about it. Until it affects MY ticket prices, he can sell them by the bundle. I don't personally do it and wont do it, but he's free to do as he wishes.

What I do have a problem with is people's silly justifications as to why they do it and who they are/aren't hurting. If you want to do it, do it -- I couldn't care less. But at least understand who you are potentially hurting and the ramifications of those actions as well as the legality in what you're doing.

Again -- if you're cheap and want to bum tickets, bum them. If you're looking to capitalize on selling a ticket, sell it. But don't respond to the original poster's question like there's no way you're hurting anyone in the process and it's totally legit because you have the right to do so. You might be, and it isn't, and you dont.


----------



## wrathfuldeity (Oct 5, 2007)

Season pass here....but GIVE the frickin ticket away... 

stokage + karma = WIN/WIN


----------



## JoeR (Oct 30, 2010)

S4Shredr said:


> Do you think its fair for resorts to charge $10-20 less for a half day ticket than a full day? I dont, I think its BS, half day should be half price or close to it. I payed $80 for a half day at vail once which is completely absurd.


"Fairness" has nothing to do with prices, especially of nonessential, luxury goods (like skiing/snowboarding). There are really only two relevant questions:

Is it rational for the seller to charge that price?
Is it rational for the buyer to pay that price?
The answer to question 1 appears to be _Yes_. That is, while I don't like high lift ticket prices any more than the next customer, I certainly can understand why they are set the way they are. Resorts probably know that an inexpensive half-day ticket will cause many customers to conclude that 4-5 hours are sufficient, and to buy the half-day ticket instead of the full-day. Result: lost revenue. On the other hand, an expensive half-day ticket will cause most of those customers to say, "Oh well, might as well buy the full-day ticket because it's not that much more." Result: increased revenue. And offering a modest discount may mollify those few customers who absolutely will not buy at all without some sort of price cut for the half-day.

This leaves us with question 2. If you don't think it's rational to pay a particular price for a lift ticket, you should not do so. But what we have in this thread is people arguing that because it doesn't make sense for them to pay what they regard as a high price, other means of acquiring access to the resort are justified.


----------



## HoboMaster (May 16, 2010)

From everyone's arguments, it seems like the conclusion to the thread is:

1. Poaching tickets from a business stance is wrong, and probably from a moral stance too.

2. Regardless people are still going to poach tickets, just like people are going to download music albums for free. Some excuses are better then others, but I really don't think any argument is fully justifiable, so if your going to do it, don't try and fool yourself into thinking your the hero and they're the bad guys. I have been guilty of causing media sources of losing revenue because of downloading, however I don't try and justify it, I will simply admit my fault.

People are going to do whatever is in their means, but don't try sprinkle chocolate frosting on a stinky turd.


----------



## JoeR (Oct 30, 2010)

Biggs said:


> Whether I think ticket prices are absurd matters neither here nor there (but since you asked, yes I believe ticket prices are absurd in their entirety. Whether it's a half day ticket for 3/4 the price of a full day ticket, or just the basic price of a full day ticket, they're incredibly high. Alas, when something like skiing or snowboarding is more in line with people with a bit of wealth, you're going to have those higher prices.)


I think of lift ticket prices as very high when I reflect on having to pay them myself. (I started a thread here about the appearance of the $100 lift ticket.) But when I compare them to other prices in the recreation/vacation industry, I can't say that they appear outrageous. I mentioned it elsewhere in this thread, but the price of a one-day adult ticket to Walt Disney World is now $87.33:
Tickets | Passes | Walt Disney World Resort

Universal Orlando is at $82.00 for the same thing:
Tickets and information for the Universal Orlando Resort

Isn't the quality of the experience one gets at a good ski resort comparable, at the very least, to what is available at a major theme park? It's not surprising that these prices tend to rise in concert. And speaking of concerts, check out the prices for musical events, games in major league sports, etc. They're _all_ high.

IMO, one of the reasons for high lift ticket prices is that big resorts have two main classes of customers: locals and tourists. High prices force the locals into purchasing season passes, enabling the resorts to monopolize their ancillary spending for the entire season (food, parking, impulse purchases of gear, etc.). Tourists are so worried about travel costs that lift ticket prices don't intimidate them as much; also, the tickets can be rolled into elaborate packages to reduce or disguise their impact.


----------



## wrathfuldeity (Oct 5, 2007)

JoeR said:


> IMO, one of the reasons for high lift ticket prices is that big resorts have two main classes of customers: locals and tourists. High prices force the locals into purchasing season passes, enabling the resorts to monopolize their ancillary spending for the entire season (food, parking, impulse purchases of gear, etc.). Tourists are so worried about travel costs that lift ticket prices don't intimidate them as much; also, the tickets can be rolled into elaborate packages to reduce or disguise their impact.


Small resorts/ski areas also have the two classes. However, the factor is how the hill is managed financially...lots have leveraged their ass, have corporate expectations of a certain profit margin and some are in the position of having to charge high prices just to keep afloat...btw they would charge more if the market would handle it. The little local hill is fairly financially conservative, have not leveraged their asses; passes and daily tickets are reasonable. I'd imagine, season passes are somewhat like the seasonal bank loan to get things going and daily tickets cover the operational expenses and net profit for capital improvements.

I consider a season pass as my expensive entertainment; and choose to do that instead of going to games, dizzy world and a gym memberships and I think its a heck of a deal considering fun/hour rate.


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

JoeR said:


> I think of lift ticket prices as very high when I reflect on having to pay them myself. (I started a thread here about the appearance of the $100 lift ticket.) But when I compare them to other prices in the recreation/vacation industry, I can't say that they appear outrageous. I mentioned it elsewhere in this thread, but the price of a one-day adult ticket to Walt Disney World is now $87.33:
> Tickets | Passes | Walt Disney World Resort
> 
> Universal Orlando is at $82.00 for the same thing:
> ...


Oh I'm fully aware of my return on investment in terms of enjoyment, but the high prices are still not enjoyable  I'm in agreement with you that the overall 'what you get for what you pay' is vastly better than some of the things you listed -- I could have bought a second house for the amount of 8 dollar beers I've had at Gillette Stadium in Massachusetts  stack on a ridiculous ticket price to begin with and you've got 3.5 hours of fun compared to 8 hours of skiing/snowboarding for slightly less.

Edit: and good lord -- I'd hate to think when I have kids what it's going to cost to get me, the wife, and the kid(s) through Disney. I haven't been there in 15+ years but 80+ bucks per person just to get in is going to be brutal.


----------



## Music Moves (Jan 23, 2009)

Toecutter said:


> Isn't that the sales agreement? You pay for a lift ticket and in exchange you get to ride it as many times as you can on the given day? Like I said in another post, Mt. Bachelor used to sell ride passes where you paid per ride. It was good for someone who wasn't planning to ride all day.
> 
> Again with the analogies -- buy one trip through the salad bar for $4.99 or all-you-can-eat for $7.49. You choose, and you agree to not swap your jacket and hat with your friend waiting in the parking lot. A day pass is like the buffet.
> 
> Maybe I'm coming from the viewpoint of being a business owner (or perhaps mature adult who can afford passes). I try to support businesses rather than try to scam my way through things whenever possible. In Bend the rough economy has tanked local businesses, so I've seen directly how fragile things can be. I know a lot of fellow business owners and also people who have lost their jobs. I would not feel right trying to cheat anyone because in this small community people are more intimately linked than in a big city, and it's easier to see the fallout when someone goes under.


I understand entirely where you're coming from. I was a record (as in vinyl) broker but mp3's have made things nearly impossible. I actually used to make a profit but just stopped trading, buying and selling one day because it became so time-consuming to make it happen... a profit I mean. 

With that, I still think you're missing what I'm saying. The individual is, essentially, the smallest business there is but is looking to save a buck rather than make a buck. In this scenario, selling the ticket may not be "legal" but it is not unethical to me at all. Actually (imo), it's the right thing to do when you consider that 2 of the 3 entities benefit from it and considering that day ticket prices have become super expensive, making half-day that much worse. 

Your statement about the buffet seems a bit out of scope... the price of a buffet is a lot less [proportionately] due to competition and the amount of choices for other food in the area. Conversely, the competition of a resort is minimal in most cases, which is why they have the luxury to only discount a half day at 15% of the full day pass. This to some degree "forces" the ticket buyer to accept the sales agreement without much hope of getting a true deal. 

I agree that places should provide the option of selling by the hour, but until that happens, the I say more power to the broke rider. Everyone is hustlin' out here (haha, Jay-Z), not just the "businesses."


----------



## JoeR (Oct 30, 2010)

Biggs said:


> Edit: and good lord -- I'd hate to think when I have kids what it's going to cost to get me, the wife, and the kid(s) through Disney. I haven't been there in 15+ years but 80+ bucks per person just to get in is going to be brutal.


Kids' tickets cost almost as much as adults' -- close to $80 for a three-year-old.  Enjoy.

However, Disney does employ a strategy similar to the ski resorts' season-pass gambit: the daily rate drops sharply if you buy a multiday pass -- the longer, the better. It's Disney's way of coercing visitors into remaining "on property" as long as possible, and not losing days to Universal or other competitors.


----------



## JoeR (Oct 30, 2010)

Music Moves said:


> Actually (imo), it's the right thing to do when you consider that 2 of the 3 entities benefit from it


This is an interesting form of utilitarianism. I conclude that if 1,000 skiers/riders visit a resort on a given day, we should all just storm the place and ride the lifts for free. That way 1,000 out of 1,001 "entities" will benefit -- surely a compelling ratio!


----------



## Psi-Man (Aug 31, 2009)

Extremo said:


> I don't think it's wrong. What I do think is wrong is that resorts restrict me from selling MY remaining time.


"not following the rules" would have been better wording....


----------



## Music Moves (Jan 23, 2009)

JoeR said:


> This is an interesting form of utilitarianism. I conclude that if 1,000 skiers/riders visit a resort on a given day, we should all just storm the place and ride the lifts for free. That way 1,000 out of 1,001 "entities" will benefit -- surely a compelling ratio!


When separated from the rest of my writing, I can see your point. But as it applies to the rest of what he and I were discussing, you're totally off base. 

And as I read it again, all three entities benefit, because the resort itself has now charged for a full amount of time and a full amount of time has been utilized, minus of course the time during which the business in the parking lot transpired.

Thanks for making my point even better, Joe!

EXTREMO quote:


> I don't think it's wrong. What I do think is wrong is that resorts restrict me from selling MY remaining time.


----------



## loren646 (Dec 9, 2009)

wow, i didn't think this was going to be such a heated conversation. 

i ended up giving my ticket away. I didn't need it anymore. Why not help my fellow man?


----------



## JoeR (Oct 30, 2010)

Music Moves said:


> And as I read it again, all three entities benefit, because the resort itself has now charged for a full amount of time and a full amount of time has been utilized, minus of course the time during which the business in the parking lot transpired.


So we're abandoning the two-out-of-three standard already?  Too bad -- that approach at least had the virtue of making explicit what is implicit in most of the posts defending the freerider position on theft of services, which is essentially, "It helps me, so it's good."

Your backup position -- the resort has charged for a "full amount of time" -- is begging the question. The argument in this thread is about _whether_ the resorts charge primarily by time or by the person. The resorts certainly think they're charging by the person, so it would come as a surprise to them to learn that they have assessed a "full" charge even if two people have used their facilities rather than one.


----------



## Music Moves (Jan 23, 2009)

JoeR said:


> So we're abandoning the two-out-of-three standard already?  Too bad -- that approach at least had the virtue of making explicit what is implicit in most of the posts defending the freerider position on theft of services, which is essentially, "It helps me, so it's good."
> 
> Your backup position -- the resort has charged for a "full amount of time" -- is begging the question. *The argument in this thread is about whether the resorts charge primarily by time or by the person.* The resorts certainly think they're charging by the person, so it would come as a surprise to them to learn that they have assessed a "full" charge even if two people have used their facilities rather than one.


Certain the title of this thread nor the OP indicate such things, but...

If they think they're charging by the person, then why don't they indicate that in some way? Otherwise, it would seem to me that they are charging by time since it is a "day" pass and not a "JoeR" pass.

I know, "time constraints," "costs," etc, etc...


----------



## Music Moves (Jan 23, 2009)

Also... and I'm sure you're going to mention that people selling their passes is a reason for this, but...

http://www.snowboardingforum.com/snowboarding-location-reviews/32422-100-lift-ticket-sight.html

I say get it back if you need it. And that is how I started my part of this discussion. My stance is akin to taxes... some have to pay more than others and I'm not one of the ones selling my pass in the lot, so I must be doing my part socially, yeah?


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

Music Moves said:


> Certain the title of this thread nor the OP indicate such things, but...
> 
> If they think they're charging by the person, then why don't they indicate that in some way? Otherwise, it would seem to me that they are charging by time since it is a "day" pass and not a "JoeR" pass.
> 
> I know, "time constraints," "costs," etc, etc...


The time associated with the pass has nothing to do with the fact that when they predict their income for the coming year (and thereby look at their cost cutting measures based on expected profits/losses), it's based on how many lift tickets they'll sell, not how long people will be using their facilities.


----------



## JoeR (Oct 30, 2010)

Music Moves said:


> If they think they're charging by the person, then why don't they indicate that in some way?


Are you familiar with the words "Not Transferable"? What do you think they mean?

I have to echo Biggs' lament about the feeble nature of some of these arguments. It's one thing to say, "Hey, I sell/buy used lift tickets because it saves me money; fuck the resorts." A few people have said that here. It's dishonest, but it's honest.  But saying, "Er, the resort never told me that each person was supposed to buy his own separate lift ticket" strikes me as pointlessly disingenuous.


----------



## SteadyHigh (Dec 12, 2010)

freshy said:


> Are you telling me if you park at a meter and there is still an hour left on it you will plug in some more coins because that space was rented to someone else for that allotted time?
> I see free ski passes more like a parking meter with some time left on it. No one is going to lose out on any money if you give your pass away, in fact the mountain might make some more money if the person taking the pass buys something to eat or drink, it will make more money if the the pass giver also had a bite to eat. The way I see if your replacing one body with another. I know technically the pass is not transferable but it's sort of like stealing a loaf of bread to feed your family where the loaf if the pass and your family is you need to snowboard.


im on what page and your the first person to actually think that way, i think this is the most logical


----------



## SteadyHigh (Dec 12, 2010)

some of you guys need to chill out, is this what you do when you cant board damn


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

SteadyHigh said:


> im on what page and your the first person to actually think that way, i think this is the most logical


We addressed this. It isn't the same situation.


----------



## MistahTaki (Apr 24, 2010)

How about this, those of you that think it;s morally wrong then don't give/sell your pass. those that don;t have problem with it give/sell your pass. problem solved. it's inevitable, so let it be.


----------



## Justin (Jun 2, 2010)

Good arguments on both sides. But if you think its ok to sell tickets then go start a resort where your tickets are transferable and try to grow your investment. Making money does not make a person or company evil and becuase a company doens't have a face (like an individual does) doesn't mean its ok to fuck them over. Everyone tries to make money and if all of your basic needs are met then maybe you should turn down the next raise coming your way.

The worst argument in here is that its the resorts fault for making it easy to transfer the ticket HAHHAHAHAHA. I shouldn't get in trouble for drinking and driving cause it was easy to do, they sold the beer at the gas station. Why should the resort have to worry about people transfering after they agreed not too? Sooooooooo weak.


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

Justin said:


> I shouldn't get in trouble for drinking and driving cause it was easy to do, they sold the beer at the gas station.


I learned from one of the posters on this thread that it (drinking and driving) would be okay as long as it's not hurting anyone.


----------



## Tarzanman (Dec 20, 2008)

Hmm. I haven't read the entire thread, but I think that the moral question is an interesting one.

This is my opinion:

The resort makes money by selling lift passes for one person per pass to ride the mountain and the lifts. The mountain doesn't charge less money when the lines are long, nor when some of their lifts are out of service or broken.

If I give away my pass (or sell it), then the mountain is not actively losing money because *I* am not riding the mountain or the lifts anymore. The person who has my lift pass acts as my proxy, reaping the remaining value from the lift pass which has been fully paid for. The resort isn't incurring any extra operating cost from a lift pass being used from open till close by one person at a time.

I have never done this, but if I did, I would probably throw a few bones the resort's way by eating one of their $15 cheeseburgers or drinking their $4 sodas


----------



## ev13wt (Nov 22, 2010)

Toecutter said:


> I learned from one of the posters on this thread that it (drinking and driving) would be okay as long as it's not hurting anyone.


Can't buy beer on the highway in the Netherlands. And your statement is bullshit. You could compare the ticket giving away to running a red light i the middle of the night in a small town and no traffic at all. 



This argument is such bullshit. The ticket trading and giving away hurts no one, probably affect about 5% of the daily cash flow. Its not gonna put Pete the lift boy out of a job. I'm so tired of hearing that shit argument. Pete should move his ass to school and get a real job anyways. 

The *only* place that those 5% would go to is the marketing budget to get even more litterbugs on the mountain, or towards the expansion of the resort. And expansion of the resort is done only for PROFITS sake. Go ahead resort, cut down trees, fawk up the soil, *damage nature*. Not very environment friendly for a sport that calls itself "non-motorized". Ever seen a mountain off season? All the snickers wrappers would reach to the moon and back ffs.

And then the offroad people get hated on and trails get closed down and you can't ride anywhere with your snowmobile any more because it "damages nature"? The double standard is killing me here.


----------



## ev13wt (Nov 22, 2010)

Snowolf said:


> I have a question for those who are totally cool with this. Is letting your buddy borrow your pass for the day to go ride okay or is would you consider that theft of service?
> 
> I ask this in all seriousness to see where (if at all) you draw the line.
> 
> Maybe the solution to this problem is that resorts should simply charge you by the hour to use their services....:dunno:


I don't see a problem with this at all. 95% of the time the buddy will have a ticket anyhow. If not, I payed for it, and am not riding, so now I am shoving free cash up the resorts butt. Many resorts in Europe take a picture of you and its printed on the lift pass. So you must wear full shiny goggles or something so you don't get caught.

I draw the line in sharing season passes. Why? A: Season passes are actually a fair price to ride. B: Because I only buy from my local shop and not the Internet. Weird argument ok fine, but it works for me.



JoeR said:


> Yes, you are "missing" the difference between *expenses* and *revenues*, as I've already explained to you. Why is this so tough to understand? Increase a company's expenses, and you hurt it. Reduce a company's revenues, and you hurt it. A business is not just the expense side of the ledger.



And the problem with this is what? Maybe they should learn to run the business differently or more effectively? Its NOT a non profit organization you know...


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

The bottom line is you're either pro buisness or pro consumer. On the pro buisness side you're all for making the consumer pay as much as you can for any unused time and restrict them from selling the remaining value of the ticket. On the pro consumer side you support the selling of the remaining time on the open market. Right now resorts are benefitting at the expense of the rider. So the only alternative to paying is to go home....or sell the ticket "illegally" (legally resorts can fuck me). So is it ethical that they make me pay for unused time? 

As far as season passes go it's a tough decision. I borrow my friends season tickets to the celtics games occasionally for free and it's allowed. Is it the same thing...probably not...but maybe close.


----------



## Music Moves (Jan 23, 2009)

Biggs said:


> The time associated with the pass has nothing to do with the fact that when they predict their income for the coming year (and thereby look at their cost cutting measures based on expected profits/losses), it's based on how many lift tickets they'll sell, not how long people will be using their facilities.


Lol, I haven't been discussing financial projections... this is definitely Debbie Gibson. Again, in case you didn't read my other posts, I don't do this, but I say get away with it if you can because the fact that it is a "legal" agreement does not necessarily mean it's right.



JoeR said:


> Are you familiar with the words "Not Transferable"? What do you think they mean?
> 
> I have to echo Biggs' lament about the feeble nature of some of these arguments. It's one thing to say, "Hey, I sell/buy used lift tickets because it saves me money; fuck the resorts." A few people have said that here. It's dishonest, but it's honest.  But saying, "Er, the resort never told me that each person was supposed to buy his own separate lift ticket" strikes me as pointlessly disingenuous.


Again, because it's a "legal" agreement does not mean it's right. And I never made that last statement. Of course they expect each to buy his or her own ticket, but imo, that still does not mean it is right to charge someone full price for 2 hours of riding. And that's my point. 

And yes, I understand very well the approach to making profits, but why should that come at an exorbitant expense to the rider who wants to ride for two hours? You guys MUST be from the States because you are certainly in touch with your capitalistic side. 

Both of you are thinking within the pretext of the law, rules that have been set for you. I say get it back if you can. And no, I don't always live by the law .

You cats are actually making me want to start selling spare time if I ever actually get any...

Apart from your references to the law, which was Gerbered to you, do you think you may have a thought of your own?

I have one. I paid for my time, so I'll sell it if I want. I'm assuming you have never gone above the speed limit or broken any laws with these arguments............................

Are we gonna start talking about Jesus next?

I just think that there is a better way to handle this. It is obvious that if someone wants to ride for 2 hours, they will have to pay more than they should at any resort unless there is an hourly charge in place. Until then, farewell to the scalping broke riders and goodbye to any of you who disagree with it.


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

JoeR said:


> Yes, you are "missing" the difference between *expenses* and *revenues*, as I've already explained to you. Why is this so tough to understand? Increase a company's expenses, and you hurt it. Reduce a company's revenues, and you hurt it. A business is not just the expense side of the ledger.


Joe, apply the same philosophy to the consumer...Increase a consumers expenses and you hurt them, reduce a consumers revenue, and you hurt them. The relationship between consumer and buisness goes both ways. It has already been pointed out in this thread that an individual is the smallest buisness in an economy. So by a resort placing restriction on consumer to sell something they bought, something they should rightfully own, for whatever it's valued for on the open market, you're hurting the individual by reducing their potential revenues and increasing their expenses. If buisnesses aren't going to respect the consumer how can they expect the consumer to respect them?


----------



## Music Moves (Jan 23, 2009)

Extremo said:


> Joe, apply the same philosophy to the consumer...Increase a consumers expenses and you hurt them, reduce a consumers revenue, and you hurt them. The relationship between consumer and buisness goes both ways. *It has already been pointed out in this thread that an individual is the smallest buisness in an economy.* So by a resort placing restriction on consumer to sell something they bought, something they should rightfully own, for whatever it's valued for on the open market, you're hurting the individual by reducing their potential revenues and increasing their expenses. If buisnesses aren't going to respect the consumer how can they expect the consumer to respect them?


Yes, I pointed it out and this is the point I've been trying to make, that it works both ways. :thumbsup:


----------



## JoeR (Oct 30, 2010)

Extremo said:


> Joe, apply the same philosophy to the consumer...Increase a consumers expenses and you hurt them, reduce a consumers revenue, and you hurt them. The relationship between consumer and buisness goes both ways. It has already been pointed out in this thread that an individual is the smallest buisness in an economy. So by a resort placing restriction on consumer to sell something they bought, something they should rightfully own


"Should rightfully own"? According to whom? We don't get to redefine agreements we make in whatever way is most advantageous to us. When we buy a lift ticket, we don't own anything, so we don't have anything to sell. Sorry, but that's how it works. We have a limited right (limited by time, and also by our conduct, i.e., they can throw us out if necessary) to use the resort's facilities, and that's it. If we don't like the deal the resort is offering, we can go to another resort, or we can snowboard in the backcountry, or we can not snowboard at all. It's our choice. No one is forcing us to agree to anything -- we're not talking about a starving man stealing a loaf of bread.

Just because we all place a high value on snowboarding doesn't mean that lift ticket price gouging by resorts is making us into the moral equivalent of homeless people, or freezing seniors in an unheated apartment, or policyholders cheated by stonewalling insurers, or children without medical care. I think that if people who don't care about snowboarding or skiing read this thread, a lot of it would seem like car buyers grumbling about how unfair it is that they can't afford a Lexus.


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

Music Moves said:


> Lol, I haven't been discussing financial projections...


...but you were. Your exact words were:



> If they think they're charging by the person, then why don't they indicate that in some way? Otherwise, it would seem to me that they are charging by time since it is a "day" pass and not a "JoeR" pass.


They don't 'think' they're charging by the pass, they are. In fact that ticket says you cant transfer it -- no matter the time you've used on it. It's a ticket for YOU only. At the beginning of the year, they don't sit around and say 'we're going to base these potential profits/losses on how long our facilities were used. As long as they're used 8 hours a day, no matter the amount of ticket sales, we're golden.' If that were the case, by your reasoning, ONE ticket could be sold PER DAY and used by as many people who could switch in and out using that one ticket, and the company would be fine due to all 8 hours being used. That's completely inaccurate. And foolish to believe.



> Again, in case you didn't read my other posts, I don't do this, but I say get away with it if you can because the fact that it is a "legal" agreement does not necessarily mean it's right.


I never said you did do this -- in fact I've made it clear I don't care who does. But the LEGAL agreement makes it so. If you're okay with breaking that LEGAL agreement, do so. But don't act like you're doing the resort a favor. You're potentially hurting them.




> And yes, I understand very well the approach to making profits, but why should that come at an exorbitant expense to the rider who wants to ride for two hours? You guys MUST be from the States because you are certainly in touch with your capitalistic side.


I dont think anyone here has been debating whether ticket prices are 'fair' (although if you go back and read it again, Joe made excellent points as to why those prices are indeed 'fair' IE: people are willing to pay for them).



> Both of you are thinking within the pretext of the law, rules that have been set for you. I say get it back if you can. And no, I don't always live by the law .


Odd, the pretext of law. That thing that most people adhere to, most of the time. Yup you got me, I adhere to it. For what it's worth, I don't adhere to the legalities of the ticket just because it says 'Non Transferable' on the back, I adhere to it because I understand where a business is coming from and I support that business. If I didn't want to support that business, I wouldn't steal from them, I simply wouldn't go there. To each their own.



> You cats are actually making me want to start selling spare time if I ever actually get any...


As I said many times before, be my guest.



> Apart from your references to the law, which was Gerbered to you, do you think you may have a thought of your own?
> 
> I have one. I paid for my time, so I'll sell it if I want. I'm assuming you have never gone above the speed limit or broken any laws with these arguments............................


I said earlier, I don't follow it because it's a hard written rule on the ticket not to transfer it, I do so because I support the hill. If I didn't, I wouldn't go there. And I love when people get all defensive with 'well you must have never gone above the speed limit' or 'so if you find a parking meter with time on it you wont use that time' -- we seem to have struck a chord. Again, we're not telling you NOT to do it, we're pointing out the foolishness in the defenses for WHY you do it. If you need to point fingers to ease your own self as to why you do it (well you must break a law here and there too!!!) then do so, but at least admit and accept the fact that you aren't a saint for fleecing the company.

And again, as I've said before -- selling 'YOUR' time is incorrect. That time is not yours whether you want to cling to that or not. Your ticket is an agreement for YOU to use THEIR facilities for a specified amount of time. You dont own those hours and you cant legally delegate what to do with those remaining hours. 

You would all discover that you don't own those hours if there was a way to eliminate lift tickets as a physical object. You're all way too stuck on the fact that because you bought this physical object (the ticket) that you own those hours when in fact, they simply are forced to give you a physical object representing THEIR hours because they have no other way to monitor who is on the mountain. Theoretically if they face scanned/finger print scanned/eye scan/whatever you want at the lift line in place of a physical lift ticket, none of you would say one word about owning those hours. If you left early, you lost out on additional time. You wouldn't be griping about 'YOUR' hours.




> Are we gonna start talking about Jesus next?


Still defensive, but if you'd like to.


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

Music Moves said:


> Yes, I pointed it out and this is the point I've been trying to make, that it works both ways. :thumbsup:


But it doesn't. One more time: you do NOT own the hours on your lift ticket. If they could eliminate the lift ticket, you would see that you 'own' NOTHING at the mountain. A lift ticket is a physical representation of a rental agreement. You agree to buy a ticket, they agree to let you use their mountain facilities. That's all it is. With no lift tickets (replace it with face scans/eye scans/finger print scans/whatever as I said above), what would you all say about 'YOUR' hours?

If you go to a club and get a hand stamp, when you leave do you grab another guy in line and say to the bouncer 'Hey! I paid my cover charge but I'm leaving. But hey! The club is still open so just give this guy a stamp cause he'll just replace me in the club' that's essentially what you're saying here. 

You're all clinging way too tightly to the belief that because you have this physical thing (a ticket) that you own those hours. You don't.


----------



## ev13wt (Nov 22, 2010)

If I do not "own" the hours, basically the resorts are ripping us of from the start.


----------



## gjsnowboarder (Sep 1, 2009)

So what I understand that it is alright to to take it to the "man" that makes it possible for you to ride the snow without having to hike it. That puts in the time and money to build the runs, the buildings, purchase/run/maintain the equipment, get various approvals to run the mountain on typically forest service land. Do any of you actually have any idea how much it takes to purcahse let alone run a lift, a cat, a pipe dragon? let alone all the other "stuff" a mountain has too do. Most resorts operating cost of the mountain itself are really tight. They typically make their money not with the mountain products, but with land sale, hotel stays, merchandise bought, other consumables. Think of the shear manpower cost needed to operate each day regardless of snow conditions or the number of people that show up. Now add in that during the summer their business drops off and they still have to maintain everything plus pay the poeple that makes it possible to have a winter season. In the summer they run in the red so the only time to make money to "stay" open is in the winter. 

You aren't "entitled" to ride the lifts or exchange tickets. You "buy" the right to use "their" equipment. If you have a problem with buying a full ticket then "man" or "woman" up and learn how to hike for your runs. Or better yet create your own resort so that we can ride there cheaper using your logic.

P.S. sometimes the high price tickets are because of the demand of people would cause crappy and unsafe snow conditions. Using Vail as the model here when you can put over 10,000+ people on to the side of the mountain it costs a lot more to maintain. The way to keep your product up to the standard you want to provide and/or stay in business is too raise your prices. Raise it to far and you loose money, lower it to far and your product suffers and you go in the "red" P.S. I don't begrudge Vail for the price of their ticket, They have earned the right to charge that amount and we the consumers aren't making the choice in high enough numbers to change their minds about it. Everytime I have ridden there I am awestruck at the size and enormity of that mountain.


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

ev13wt said:


> If I do not "own" the hours, basically the resorts are ripping us of from the start.


You don't own those hours and they aren't ripping you off if you're willing to buy a ticket from them.

If people think you're getting 'ripped off' from the resort, don't go! Guess what? If enough people stop going due to the price of a ticket, their practices will change.


----------



## Music Moves (Jan 23, 2009)

Biggs said:


> But it doesn't. One more time: you do NOT own the hours on your lift ticket. If they could eliminate the lift ticket, you would see that you 'own' NOTHING at the mountain. A lift ticket is a physical representation of a rental agreement. You agree to buy a ticket, they agree to let you use their mountain facilities. That's all it is. With no lift tickets (replace it with face scans/eye scans/finger print scans/whatever as I said above), what would you all say about 'YOUR' hours?
> 
> If you go to a club and get a hand stamp, when you leave do you grab another guy in line and say to the bouncer 'Hey! I paid my cover charge but I'm leaving. But hey! The club is still open so just give this guy a stamp cause he'll just replace me in the club' that's essentially what you're saying here.
> 
> You're all clinging way too tightly to the belief that because you have this physical thing (a ticket) that you own those hours. You don't.


I'd like to point out before I continue, I understand the WAY IT IS and that you are correct as far as legal technicalities are concerned. I'm discussing how it should be. I sincerely hope you can comprehend that.

Part of a discussion, btw, is to provide a defense, so in saying I am defensive, you are correct, but if an implication of emotion is there, put your arrogance to rest.

I've acted like I'm doing the resort a favor? Lol, I definitely don't think that... 

"...steal from them." Regarding how they account for unforeseeable expenses, here's a financial projection for ya:

"Well, we have to account for our unforeseeable expenses, so let's price the half day tickets at 90% of the full day price." That may be "legal" if they set it that way and you can back that if you want, but it's garbage and I disagree with it. As with any situation like this, it's understood that they will set it at a higher price proportionately, but maybe 65-70% tops is my recommendation. Otherwise, it's "stealing" from the consumer imo.

*I also mentioned my approach being akin to taxes. I can afford to pay, so I always do (and never sell my pass) and I don't mind helping the resort "cushion" the "unforeseeable" expenses for the broke rider who can't afford to pay full price because I think everyone should be able to ride. 
*
Regarding your club analogy and as I've said before, I know how it is now. I'm talking about how it should be. If you think that the resort's financial projections should include charging way too much, that's your PRIVILEGE. But to the kid who is just trying to progress and can only ride 2-3 hours a day due to school and work... the kid who can't drop hundreds of dollars at a time for a season pass... those financial projections didn't include him or her... and he or she should say "bollucks" to them. 

And for the record, I do support the hill, which is why I always pay. I also support the rider, which is why I say do what you have to do in order to ride.

No saint, just doing my part.


----------



## HoboMaster (May 16, 2010)

Tarzanman said:


> Hmm. I haven't read the entire thread, but I think that the moral question is an interesting one.
> 
> This is my opinion:
> 
> ...


Based on conditions, Mountain will actually lower lift ticket prices for that occasion if they are unable to run full capacity or close to it. It offers an incentive for the rider to still buy a ticket, and since the lift isn't operating anyways operating costs are lowered. At least that's what my mountain does when the weather is shitty and they have to stop lifts because of adverse conditions.


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

Music Moves said:


> I'd like to point out before I continue, I understand the WAY IT IS. I'm discussing how it should be. I sincerely hope you can comprehend that.
> 
> Part of a discussion, btw, is to provide a defense, so in saying I am defensive, you are correct, but if an implication of emotion is there, put your arrogance to rest.
> 
> ...


In regards to 'you' in much of this thread, 'you' may not refer to YOU specifically, it may be you as in the general public. Such was the case when I made note of 'you' feeling like you're doing the resort a favor. That was directed to the thread in general, as I know you never said that.

With that said, no one is debating with you regarding how you feel it should be -- the problem comes when people complain about these ticket prices, then bum a ticket. You could potentially be doing your part to increase those ticket prices in the years to come. The resort will always look to raise prices before they look to cut amenities. It's potentially a vicious cycle -- 'I don't want to pay that much so I'm going to bum a ticket! --> 'Wow, prices went up this year! I'm not going to pay those high prices so I'm going to bum a ticket!' rinse, repeat.

If enough people band together and demand hourly pricing and refuse to pay exorbitant prices, you'll see changes. I know a few local hills where I used to live operated entirely on 'hourly' based passes. Buy anything from 1 hour to 8 hours. If you only buy 3 hours and decide the conditions are too good and you want to stay longer, buy another hour or two -- the prices are consistent hour by hour. It's a wonderful operation.

For what it's worth, I agree with you -- I don't enjoy paying 75% of a full day ticket price for a half day ticket. Do I wish it was lower? Of course. Is it fair? Certainly -- there are enough people willing to pay for it. Until that changes, you're stuck with those prices.


----------



## Music Moves (Jan 23, 2009)

^^^Yeah, I was on the hill last Wednesday and every lift shut down for an hour and a half... part of the money was not even offered to be refunded.

Of course, I have a season pass, but for those that don't...

*Sorry, that was supposed to point to Hobomaster's post.*


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

HoboMaster said:


> Based on conditions, Mountain will actually lower lift ticket prices for that occasion if they are unable to run full capacity or close to it. It offers an incentive for the rider to still buy a ticket, and since the lift isn't operating anyways operating costs are lowered. At least that's what my mountain does when the weather is shitty and they have to stop lifts because of adverse conditions.


This is the practice I've seen as well. Much the same with early season openings -- they're going to run the lifts so they offer drastically discounted prices to get people out on the 3 trails open or whatever the conditions might be.


----------



## Music Moves (Jan 23, 2009)

Biggs said:


> In regards to 'you' in much of this thread, 'you' may not refer to YOU specifically, it may be you as in the general public. Such was the case when I made note of 'you' feeling like you're doing the resort a favor. That was directed to the thread in general, as I know you never said that.
> 
> With that said, no one is debating with you regarding how you feel it should be -- the problem comes when people complain about these ticket prices, then bum a ticket. You could potentially be doing your part to increase those ticket prices in the years to come. The resort will always look to raise prices before they look to cut amenities. It's potentially a vicious cycle -- 'I don't want to pay that much so I'm going to bum a ticket! --> 'Wow, prices went up this year! I'm not going to pay those high prices so I'm going to bum a ticket!' rinse, repeat.
> 
> ...


I agree that this shouldn't be abused by those who can afford to pay, but if it is necessity for others, then so be it...


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

Music Moves said:


> ^^^Yeah, I was on the hill last Wednesday and every lift shut down for an hour and a half... part of the money was not even offered to be refunded.
> 
> Of course, I have a season pass, but for those that don't...
> 
> *Sorry, that was supposed to point to Hobomaster's post.*



That's not good business practice. I could understand if SOME of the lifts were shut down to not offer anything, but if ALL are down, that's bad customer service.


----------



## Music Moves (Jan 23, 2009)

Biggs said:


> That's not good business practice. I could understand if SOME of the lifts were shut down to not offer anything, but if ALL are down, that's bad customer service.


Yeah, it was power situation and all of them were down. I understand that it MAY NOT have been their fault, but it is still an inconvenience to the consumer and should be addressed... especially considering there were maybe only 30-40 people on the hill during the time it happened. Of course half of those were probably people that worked there and at least 3 (myself and friends) were season pass holders, but even a free hot dog is at least a gesture...


----------



## Towkin (Oct 14, 2010)

Blue Mountain, PA just rapes you. 10 trails open? $60 (this year it was ½ off for 3 days with 3 “trails” open and some connectors). Come on a weekend and the lift line is so long you stand in line for 30-45 minutes and only get 7-10 runs in? That’s $65. I’ve been going there for years and the service and pricing continues to get worse. Actually considering a new local mountain…

I always pay for my ticket, but if I see someone in the lot I just give them mine if there is time left. If Blue Mt made an effort to accommodate poor conditions or special pricing I would reconsider, but they don’t. Other mountains offer ticket packages, specials, etc. Blue just takes your money.


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

I think it's funny that everytime we penetrate your economic justifications you revert to the legal defense...which doesnt mean shit to me. Fuck if laws were set in stone you'd be running ski resorts with black slaves...by the sounds of it you guys would be down for shit like that...it doesn't matter who you fuck, as long as it increases the bottom line.

Under the current circumstances you're taking advantage of consumers who dont have a choice. I went to check out Aspens website to see how much day rates were and they don't have that option...you have to buy 2days or more. If all resorts followed suit, we wouldn't have a choice but to buy 2 day tickets.. which would price more people out of the market. Just like you already price the people who only looking to ride for 2-3 hours out of the market....and on top of that resorts are assholes for not letting me meet that demand with MY time, which I want to sell.


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

Remember that you could always go backcountry and not have to pay for any chairlift.


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

ev13wt said:


> You could compare the ticket giving away to running a red light i the middle of the night in a small town and no traffic at all.


I don't do that either.


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

Extremo said:


> Under the current circumstances you're taking advantage of consumers who dont have a choice.


You _do_ have a choice. You do not _have_ to go snowboarding. It is not mandatory. It is an expensive form of recreation and you knew that going into the sport. If you are severely hurting for money, you could buy some snowshoes and hike up. Or, you could skip going snowboarding until your financial situation is better.


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

Extremo said:


> I think it's funny that everytime we penetrate your economic justifications you revert to the legal defense...which doesnt mean shit to me. Fuck if laws were set in stone you'd be running ski resorts with black slaves...by the sounds of it you guys would be down for shit like that...it doesn't matter who you fuck, as long as it increases the bottom line.
> 
> Under the current circumstances you're taking advantage of consumers who dont have a choice. I went to check out Aspens website to see how much day rates were and they don't have that option...you have to buy 2days or more. If all resorts followed suit, we wouldn't have a choice but to buy 2 day tickets.. which would price more people out of the market. Just like you already price the people who only looking to ride for 2-3 hours out of the market....and on top of that resorts are assholes for not letting me meet that demand with MY time, which I want to sell.


What 'economic justifications' have you penetrated (that's what she said?)? You haven't said anything that has a grain of truth to it. You can 'fight the power' all you want, but those hours are still not technically yours, whether you sell them to someone bumming or not. Like I said, just because you have this physical item in a lift ticket, doesn't mean it's a good that you can choose what to do with it. CAN you do what you want with it? Of course. Do you have the right? No. It really isn't any simpler than that. You're obviously okay with selling them, so why keep arguing (especially when you're going to throw in such wonderful points as us being okay with black slaves running resorts) about a point that we've agreed with you on -- you CAN sell them. You just don't have the legal right to do so. On top of that, you might end up financially hurting the hill.

And as for your choice, you ALWAYS have a choice. No one is forcing you to drive to a hill, suit up, pay for a ticket, and go ride. You could just as easily drive to some other hill where the price isn't so detrimental to you. You could go to the local golf course and slide down their hill. You could hike the back country for free. Or you could not go altogether. If you cant pay to play, don't play.

And calling a resort an 'asshole' because they wont let you cut into their potential profits? Yes, how stupid of them.


----------



## Music Moves (Jan 23, 2009)

Biggs said:


> What 'economic justifications' have you penetrated (that's what she said?)? You haven't said anything that has a grain of truth to it. You can 'fight the power' all you want, but those hours are still not technically yours, whether you sell them to someone bumming or not. Like I said, just because you have this physical item in a lift ticket, doesn't mean it's a good that you can choose what to do with it. CAN you do what you want with it? Of course. Do you have the right? No. It really isn't any simpler than that. You're obviously okay with selling them, so why keep arguing (especially when you're going to throw in such wonderful points as us being okay with black slaves running resorts) about a point that we've agreed with you on -- you CAN sell them. You just don't have the legal right to do so. On top of that, you might end up financially hurting the hill.
> 
> And as for your choice, you ALWAYS have a choice. No one is forcing you to drive to a hill, suit up, pay for a ticket, and go ride. You could just as easily drive to some other hill where the price isn't so detrimental to you. You could go to the local golf course and slide down their hill. You could hike the back country for free. Or you could not go altogether. If you cant pay to play, don't play.
> 
> And calling a resort an 'asshole' because they wont let you cut into their potential profits? Yes, how stupid of them.



Haha, with that last sentence, my finance professors would have loved you. 

I just can't be so nonchalant about the statement "If you cant pay to play, don't play." There are too many people that love it and have difficulty being able to pay for it. Maybe I'm coming off like some bleeding heart, but I LOVE riding and I'd hate to not be able to afford it. I already hate not being able to do it as much as I want, but at least I can afford it when I get to go.

I mean I probably rode about 50 days last season, but it seemed to be nowhere nearly enough.

*And there is a "choice" of not going but as real riders, do any of you TRULY see this as a choice?*


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

Music Moves said:


> Haha, with that last sentence, my finance professors would have loved you.
> 
> I just can't be so nonchalant about the statement "If you cant pay to play, don't play." There are too many people that love it and have difficulty being able to pay for it. Maybe I'm coming off like some bleeding heart, but I LOVE riding and I'd hate to not be able to afford it. I already hate not being able to do it as much as I want, but at least I can afford it when I get to go.
> 
> ...


Oh I can fully understand a desire so strong that you absolutely feel that you need to do it, but you do have other options. There is always another hill, another resort, another day of the week where prices/specials may be more forgiving, some back country, or even building a mini park in your/a buddy's back yard. Extremo referring to having no other choice was what I was pointing out -- if he doesnt want a 2 day pass, dont get it. Go to a different resort that has single day passes. Go to a local hill which is sure to have a single day pass. Or simply wait until you have the funds/vacation time to take the 2 day trip.

If I honestly couldn't afford a lift ticket, I would be looking for a way to change my own situation, not fleece a company. The hobby is expensive by nature, but you can make it work. Take a look at some of what Killclimbz does -- the guy has posted some AMAZING photographs on here from his adventures and not one of them (that I can recall) was taken where he paid for a lift ticket.

Edit: and for what it's worth -- consider your 50 days lucky! I moved to North Carolina for work so I don't imagine I'll be getting 50 days in this year...or even 5  But I do know where you're coming from -- I lived in Maine and when you've got the itch, it feels like no amount of days/amount of lift tickets will satiate it.


----------



## notter123 (Nov 11, 2010)

okay the original question was do we sell our tickets if we dont use them?
yes everyone makes valid points, we all know its not right, we all know the resorts rip us off and the people who do sell their tickets know all this and are eprfectly fine doing that! really I think we are beating a dead horse now.....


----------



## gjsnowboarder (Sep 1, 2009)

Music Moves said:


> *And there is a "choice" of not going but as real riders, do any of you TRULY see this as a choice?*


Is a potential choice, yes. But as someone who has chosen boarding as an activity I never ever want to give -up I have made alternate choices that don't put me on "questionable" grounds. I have chosen to work in the industry so that I can meet the cost of riding in resort. Not only that part of my work is part-time at a resort while I work a full time job the rest of the week. In the last ten years I haven't taken a day off from a job unless it was to take a sick day or plan time-off to go riding. That is how I get my fix by working for it. I understand because the mountain I learnt at that a resort can go under and close. I have made the choice not to assist in a resorts demise. 

I have friends who have been left with out a close resort that have resorted to hiking or carpooling to meet their carpooling needs. There are "other" choices then picking up a ticket from someone else that was sold to "just" that person in good faith.


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

notter123 said:


> really I think we are beating a dead horse now.....


I disagree -- I've enjoyed the friendly discussion and I hope others have as well.


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

Biggs said:


> What 'economic justifications' have you penetrated (that's what she said?)? You haven't said anything that has a grain of truth to it. You can 'fight the power' all you want, but those hours are still not technically yours, whether you sell them to someone bumming or not. Like I said, just because you have this physical item in a lift ticket, doesn't mean it's a good that you can choose what to do with it. CAN you do what you want with it? Of course. Do you have the right? No. It really isn't any simpler than that. You're obviously okay with selling them, so why keep arguing (especially when you're going to throw in such wonderful points as us being okay with black slaves running resorts) about a point that we've agreed with you on -- you CAN sell them. You just don't have the legal right to do so. On top of that, you might end up financially hurting the hill.
> 
> And as for your choice, you ALWAYS have a choice. No one is forcing you to drive to a hill, suit up, pay for a ticket, and go ride. You could just as easily drive to some other hill where the price isn't so detrimental to you. You could go to the local golf course and slide down their hill. You could hike the back country for free. Or you could not go altogether. If you cant pay to play, don't play.
> 
> And calling a resort an 'asshole' because they wont let you cut into their potential profits? Yes, how stupid of them.


What don't you get? It's not a matter of legally selling them. It's a matter of them having value and being able to freely sell something that has value...meeting a market demand...as I said in the beginning some people need to take a fewe economics coarses...because you either haven't and don't know this shit or you just won't accept it because it hurts your bottom line. If you're in finance you obviously know about securities, derivitaves, cdo's, treasuries, bonds, how is this ticket any different. If something has value you'll find a market for it...a market will be created. And if we're going to all play by the same rules of capitalism then I should have every right to sell my remaining time on the ticket. It's simple.

And when were talking about choice I mean choice of riding...If I had the means of starting a resort and allowing tickets to be sold on the open market...with all other things being equal people would probably choose my resort over those that place restrictions on selling tickets that still have value.

So we've determined it is ok to sell your tickets for the remaining time...regadless how many resorts cry about it. And as long as you're not dupicating passes you're not hurting the resort financially. Glad we cleared this up.


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

Extremo said:


> What don't you get? It's not a matter of legally selling them. It's a matter of them having value and being able to freely sell something that has value...meeting a market demand...as I said in the beginning some people need to take a fewe economics coarses...because you either haven't and don't know this shit or you just won't accept it because it hurts your bottom line. If you're in finance you obviously know about securities, derivitaves, cdo's, treasuries, bonds, how is this ticket any different. If something has value you'll find a market for it...a market will be created. And if we're going to all play by the same rules of capitalism then I should have every right to sell my remaining time on the ticket. It's simple.


...Which is exactly what I said to you earlier regarding your opportunity to be a capitalist. You've found someone who finds value in your ticket, and have made sales. Like I said a few posts ago, you insist on arguing something that we've all agreed with you on -- no one cares if you sell it. No one is saying you cant. You've already done so and no one seems to care.

The ONLY thing people are arguing about, is the reasoning behind people's beliefs that they have the RIGHT, and the LEGAL okay to do so. No one is arguing that you CANT PHYSICALLY SELL IT. You've done it. You've proven that to be true. So have all the other people on here who have sold tickets or bummed one themselves. We didn't care that you were doing it then, we don't care that you're doing it now, and we'll continue to not care that you sell them/bum them in the future. What we do seem to care about is the silly justifications as to WHY you do it.

If you want to say 'I illegally sell tickets in the parking lot because I feel that I'm getting fucked in the ass by the resort so I intend to fuck them back!' GREAT! At least it would be an honest justification as to why you're doing it. But people please don't spout rubbish about having legal ownership over something you don't, and don't claim to be saving the little guy while causing no harm to the hill.


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

notter123 said:


> okay the original question was do we sell our tickets if we dont use them?
> yes everyone makes valid points, we all know its not right, we all know the resorts rip us off and the people who do sell their tickets know all this and are eprfectly fine doing that! really I think we are beating a dead horse now.....


It's not right and it's not legal are different paradigms. Under laws of economics, especially in the uber capitalist environment we're in now, everybody should be able to hustle for all they can get. If there's value in a half eaten cheeseburger go ahead and find a market for that shit...don't just throw it away...even if Burger King doesn't want you too.


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

Extremo said:


> Under laws of economics, especially in the uber capitalist environment we're in now, everybody should be able to hustle for all they can get. If there's value in a half eaten cheeseburger go ahead and find a market for that shit...don't just throw it away...even if Burger King doesn't want you too.


I couldn't agree more -- if you're okay with the circumstances and potential consequences, then get that money. All I've been saying is don't justify yourself as 'in the clear' for doing so  Regardless of the capitalist society we live in, the resort and the courts would rule against you every time.


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

notter123 said:


> okay the original question was do we sell our tickets if we dont use them?
> yes everyone makes valid points, we all know its not right, we all know the resorts rip us off and the people who do sell their tickets know all this and are eprfectly fine doing that! really I think we are beating a dead horse now.....


No way homey...we need to cover all sides here. Too much info is always better than not enough. The more we discuss it the more we influence the dialogue.


----------



## JoeR (Oct 30, 2010)

Extremo said:


> It's not right and it's not legal are different paradigms. Under laws of economics, especially in the uber capitalist environment we're in now, everybody should be able to hustle for all they can get. If there's value in a half eaten cheeseburger go ahead and find a market for that shit...don't just throw it away...even if Burger King doesn't want you too.


You are generally correct that in societies like ours, black markets will develop to trade virtually anything that has value to someone. I acknowledged that point a long time ago in this thread. However, you also must recognize that your brand of no-holds-barred capitalism contains inherent contradictions. I don't mean that in a Marxist sense; rather, the principles you are declaring are self-defeating when pursued by everyone simultaneously. One person's "hustling" will conflict with someone else's because there are no universally accepted rules. For example, you want complete freedom to sell exactly what you want to whomever you want. Well, the resorts want that freedom as well, but your sales of used lift tickets tend to undermine their sales of limited, _personal_ rights to use the resort. They want to sell only exactly what they want to sell -- same as you -- but you won't let them. The upshot of your approach is that if everyone can sell or buy whatever they want, with no limits, eventually no one will be able sell or buy whatever they want. No economic transactions will be stable and predictable because all of them will be subject to disruption by everyone's "hustling for all they can get."


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

Music Moves said:


> And there is a "choice" of not going but as real riders, do any of you TRULY see this as a choice?


Yes. If I can't afford to do something, I don't do it until I can (or I just use a credit card since you don't have to pay them back – just kidding, I haven't carried a balance on any credit card for over a decade).

Trying to "creatively finance" purchases or hobbies just leads to nothing good, I tell you.


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

Extremo said:


> No way homey...we need to cover all sides here. Too much info is always better than not enough. The more we discuss it the more we influence the dialogue.


I agree. Or, we could go back to discussing binding colors and sexy goggles...


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

JoeR said:


> You are generally correct that in societies like ours, black markets will develop to trade virtually anything that has value to someone. I acknowledged that point a long time ago in this thread. However, you also must recognize that your brand of no-holds-barred capitalism contains inherent contradictions. I don't mean that in a Marxist sense; rather, the principles you are declaring are self-defeating when pursued by everyone simultaneously. One person's "hustling" will conflict with someone else's because there are no universally accepted rules. For example, you want complete freedom to sell exactly what you want to whomever you want. Well, the resorts want that freedom as well, but your sales of used lift tickets tend to undermine their sales of limited, _personal_ rights to use the resort. They want to sell only exactly what they want to sell -- same as you -- but you won't let them. The upshot of your approach is that if everyone can sell or buy whatever they want, with no limits, eventually no one will be able sell or buy whatever they want. No economic transactions will be stable and predictable because all of them will be subject to disruption by everyone's "hustling for all they can get."


All capitalism is, really, is one big hustle, capitalism by definition is maximizing profit at someone elses expense...Resorts are hustling us by offering full price lift tickets even though I'm in the market for a 5 hour one. So if we're going to play this game, we're both going to protect our bottom line. They look out for they're best interests, not mine. So I need to do the same, and under economic theory I should do the same. 

The only regulations that should be on a free trade should be for the consumers protection, because we're in a position to be abused (exactly what resorts are doing by only offering full price tickets to people who ride part time). I won't be undermining shit if I sell my ticket...The only undermining going on is the resort undermining my ability to maximize the value of my ticker by not allowing me to sell my it. And what are you talking about no transations will be stable. What country do you live in? We have one of the most free markets in the world and prices have been pretty stable as far as I can tell. Fuck, economic libertarians took over monetary policy decades ago. I'm just playing by free market rules...just like everyone else. 

You're acting like I'm my own entity printing tickets and selling them for the same mountian taking away ticket sales from the resort. I'm simply selling a ticket for it's remaining value...the resort still get's the 100% of the ticket value, whether it changes hands once or five times. As long as 5 people don't ride simultaneously on the same ticket, it's fair. 

Look at it like this...I buy a Celtics ticket...Lebron just put up 40 and the Celts are down by 26 with a minute left in the 3rd. So I say fuck this shit I'm out...on the way out I offer some guy my ticket for $10...he goes in, occupies my seat, and get's to watch Lebron put up 55. Do the Celtics lose any money for my seat? They don't give a fuck, as long as someone shows up with a ticket. It's the same damn thing.


----------



## Triple8Sol (Nov 24, 2008)

Extremo said:


> I'm simply selling a ticket for it's remaining value...the resort still get's the 100% of the ticket value, whether it changes hands once or five times. As long as 5 people don't ride simultaneously on the same ticket, it's fair.


That's actually a great point.


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

Triple8Sol said:


> That's actually a great point.


I disagree. The resort would also disagree. Fair is always in the eye of the beholder, but in this case, let's assume both parties:

Let's say Extremo buys a 100 dollar full day ticket. He leaves at noon. A half day ticket is 75 bucks.

Under Extremo's 'as long as the resort gets their whole day ticket worth, whether it changes hands once or between five people, it's fair' theory:

Extremo - 100 bucks to the resort
Guy 1 - Zero (but pays 20 bucks to Extremo)
Guy 2 - Zero (but pays 15 bucks to Guy 1)
Guy 3 - Zero (but pays 10 bucks to Guy 2)
Guy 4 - Zero (but pays 5 bucks to Guy 3)
Guy 5 - Zero (and pays nothing to Guy 4)

The resort ends up making 100 bucks, when 6 ticket sales were potential (I say potentially because many of you assume that if people cant bum a ticket, they go home...I still don't know that I buy that)

If Extremo didn't sell his ticket (the theory that these resorts are built on and bank on...literally.):

Extremo - 100 bucks to resort
Guy 1 - 75 bucks to resort
Guy 2 - 75 bucks to resort
Guy 3 - 75 bucks to resort
Guy 4 - 75 bucks to resort
Guy 5 - 75 bucks to resort

The resort ends up making 475 bucks.

As I said, fair is in the eye of the beholder, but most people would find your version of 'fair' to be incorrect -- the resort's costs are based against those projected (6 tickets) sales. Their costs never dipped due to 6 people playing on one ticket sale (regardless of it being one at a time) but their income certainly did.


----------



## ev13wt (Nov 22, 2010)

tl dr

But just so something worth a lift ticket gets posted here...


----------



## Tarzanman (Dec 20, 2008)

is that Hannah Teeter?


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

Tarzanman said:


> is that Hannah Teeter?


Gretchen Bleiler


----------



## JoeR (Oct 30, 2010)

Extremo said:


> And what are you talking about no transations will be stable. What country do you live in? We have one of the most free markets in the world and prices have been pretty stable as far as I can tell. Fuck, economic libertarians took over monetary policy decades ago. I'm just playing by free market rules...just like everyone else.


You're missing the point. I said no transactions would be stable and predictable *IF *everyone adhered to the principles that you advocate: no limits, no self-restraint, no binding agreements -- at all times, do only what's in your best interest, regardless of any pre-existing obligations. But the fact is that most people, most of the time, don't behave that way. Black marketeering is kept under control because most buyers and sellers usually live by a consistent set of rules.

There's a big difference between a free market and the anarchy of the perpetual hustle. Honoring contracts doesn't make you unfree -- it's actually essential for prosperity.


----------



## loren646 (Dec 9, 2009)




----------



## Snowfox (Dec 26, 2009)

Extremo said:


> All capitalism is, really, is one big hustle, capitalism by definition is maximizing profit at someone elses expense...Resorts are hustling us by offering full price lift tickets even though I'm in the market for a 5 hour one. So if we're going to play this game, we're both going to protect our bottom line. They look out for they're best interests, not mine. So I need to do the same, and under economic theory I should do the same.
> 
> The only regulations that should be on a free trade should be for the consumers protection, because we're in a position to be abused (exactly what resorts are doing by only offering full price tickets to people who ride part time). I won't be undermining shit if I sell my ticket...The only undermining going on is the resort undermining my ability to maximize the value of my ticker by not allowing me to sell my it. And what are you talking about no transations will be stable. What country do you live in? We have one of the most free markets in the world and prices have been pretty stable as far as I can tell. Fuck, economic libertarians took over monetary policy decades ago. I'm just playing by free market rules...just like everyone else.
> 
> ...


Regarding lift tickets with timers, it's possible they could do that with a scanner at each lift, but it would be hard to forcibly kick someone off the mountain once their time is up. You would have the majority of people buying a ticket for x amount of hours and using it for the whole day. It's just not feasible for them to offer a huge variety of different lift tickets at the beginning of the day. A resort won't be very "family friendly" if they're using security (another expense by the way!) to manhandle people off the mountain. 

On your Celtics example, not so much. They can't sell that ticket again so they don't care (although I still have a feeling security isn't the happiest about it). Basketball games aren't sold on a continuing basis throughout the game. The resort, on the other hand, does care about that lift ticket as they could have sold the other person a different lift ticket as the day is going on. 

The main argument seems to be what exactly is a lift ticket: license, service, or a good in and of itself (credit to others for bringing those up). You seem to believe it's a good in and of itself while others are arguing it's a license or service. From what I can tell legally, the police force will view it more as a license or a service that's non-transferable. Does that make you a bad person? I personally don't care as I don't run a resort at the moment.


----------



## Magnum626 (Dec 31, 2009)

Wow you guys have all this energy to keep discussing this? :laugh:

I just wanna go ride with those chicks in bikinis, or at least meet them in the hot tub.


----------



## Triple8Sol (Nov 24, 2008)

Biggs said:


> I disagree. The resort would also disagree.


You missed the point of that particular statement. It wasn't a discussion about loss of future earning capacity, just that there was no loss of income on the original lift ticket's value.


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

Snowfox said:


> Regarding lift tickets with timers, it's possible they could do that with a scanner at each lift, but it would be hard to forcibly kick someone off the mountain once their time is up. You would have the majority of people buying a ticket for x amount of hours and using it for the whole day. It's just not feasible for them to offer a huge variety of different lift tickets at the beginning of the day. A resort won't be very "family friendly" if they're using security (another expense by the way!) to manhandle people off the mountain.
> 
> On your Celtics example, not so much. They can't sell that ticket again so they don't care (although I still have a feeling security isn't the happiest about it). Basketball games aren't sold on a continuing basis throughout the game. The resort, on the other hand, does care about that lift ticket as they could have sold the other person a different lift ticket as the day is going on.
> 
> The main argument seems to be what exactly is a lift ticket: license, service, or a good in and of itself (credit to others for bringing those up). You seem to believe it's a good in and of itself while others are arguing it's a license or service. From what I can tell legally, the police force will view it more as a license or a service that's non-transferable. Does that make you a bad person? I personally don't care as I don't run a resort at the moment.


If half the seats in the arena are empty you can buy a ticket to get in anytime throughout the game. So you're saying its fair to force someone to buy a ticket at full price halfway through the 3rd quarter? Esp when I'm selling my ticket, still good for my unoccupied seat, at a discount.

Same thing with a lift ticket. The only people pissing and moaning about this is the pro buisness side, which essentially says the busness has the right to set the rules and they're non negotionable. I'm going the other way, the consumer sets the rules...it's been a sellers market for way to long. What consumers fail to realize is that they're the other half of the trade and have just as much power...Let's start using it. Remember the market sets the trend...riders are the market.


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

Magnum626 said:


> Wow you guys have all this energy to keep discussing this? :laugh:
> 
> I just wanna go ride with those chicks in bikinis, or at least meet them in the hot tub.


I want to ride SOOOOO bad...But my resort closed from Sunday til tomorrow because of the rain...so they're making snow today. It sucks even more because I took vacation to ride this week and haven't been out since Sat. Think i'll get a refund on my season's pass? HA...so I'm stuck home arguing buisness ethics.

But on the bright side I'll have my drop-in and boxes set up with build pics coming on the way.


----------



## Music Moves (Jan 23, 2009)

JoeR said:


> You're missing the point. I said no transactions would be stable and predictable *IF* everyone adhered to the principles that you advocate: no limits, no self-restraint, no binding agreements -- at all times, do only what's in your best interest, regardless of any pre-existing obligations. But the fact is that most people, most of the time, don't behave that way. Black marketeering is kept under control because most buyers and sellers usually live by a consistent set of rules.
> 
> There's a big difference between a free market and the anarchy of the perpetual hustle. Honoring contracts doesn't make you unfree -- *it's actually essential for prosperity.*


Technically, and especially when concerning financial projections, no transactions are predictable, though some have more potential to be predictable. This is why some passes, i.e. half day passes, rip off the consumer. Whether you admit it or not, this is a "hustle" disguised as "good business" through "legalities" used to cushion unpredictable circumstances. And again, "legal" doesn't make it right just as "illegal" doesn't make it wrong. 

And if the below pic is illegal, handcuff me now... as long as they are doing the frisking...



loren646 said:


>


----------



## Music Moves (Jan 23, 2009)

Extremo said:


> But on the bright side I'll have my drop-in and boxes set up with build pics coming on the way.


:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:


----------



## Magnum626 (Dec 31, 2009)

Extremo said:


> But on the bright side I'll have my drop-in and boxes set up with build pics coming on the way.


Cool I'll keep my eye out.



Music Moves said:


> And if the below pic is illegal, handcuff me now... as long as they are doing the frisking...


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

Extremo said:


> What consumers fail to realize is that they're the other half of the trade and have just as much power...Let's start using it. Remember the market sets the trend...riders are the market.


If riders and skiers stopped showing up altogether, then that would really get the resorts' attention. As things are now, resorts provide something that people want, and enough people are willing and able to pay for it, so they have no reason to adjust prices.


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

Triple8Sol said:


> You missed the point of that particular statement. It wasn't a discussion about loss of future earning capacity, just that there was no loss of income on the original lift ticket's value.


I get what you're saying, but I still have to ask -- so what?

The resort isn't looking to fill the time in its entirety. Instead, they merely want to sell as many tickets as possible. Selling off your tickets prevents them from selling the most tickets.


----------



## JoeR (Oct 30, 2010)

Music Moves said:


> Technically, and especially when concerning financial projections, no transactions are predictable, though some have more potential to be predictable. This is why some passes, i.e. half day passes, rip off the consumer.


No. Something's merely being overpriced in the opinion of the buyer does not make it a rip-off. A rip-off is not getting what you paid for, or finding undisclosed or disguised restrictions that weren't bargained for. If you don't like expensive lift tickets, don't buy them. No one is forcing you.

One day I was at a tiny, county-run ski area with only one lift. That lift broke down, leaving only the bunny hill in operation. They offered full refunds to everyone. Had they not, _that_ would have been a rip-off. On another occasion, a resort told me at the ticket window that the most important lift -- the one that serviced the terrain I wanted to ride -- was down indefinitely. No price reduction, just information. I said, "Thank you very much," and drove away to a different resort. Had I purchased a ticket, would it have been a rip-off? No. If I had been willing to pay full price for reduced service, it would have been my choice, and my problem. Maybe the resort was _unwise_ not to offer a reduced-price ticket -- maybe I would have stayed if it had -- but nevertheless I was dealt with honestly.


----------



## Music Moves (Jan 23, 2009)

JoeR said:


> *No.* Something's merely being overpriced in the opinion of the buyer does not make it a rip-off. A rip-off is not getting what you paid for, or finding undisclosed or disguised restrictions that weren't bargained for. If you don't like expensive lift tickets, don't buy them. No one is forcing you.
> 
> One day I was at a tiny, county-run ski area with only one lift. That lift broke down, leaving only the bunny hill in operation. They offered full refunds to everyone. Had they not, _that_ would have been a rip-off. On another occasion, a resort told me at the ticket window that the most important lift -- the one that serviced the terrain I wanted to ride -- was down indefinitely. No price reduction, just information. I said, "Thank you very much," and drove away to a different resort. Had I purchased a ticket, would it have been a rip-off? No. If I had been willing to pay full price for reduced service, it would have been my choice, and my problem. Maybe the resort was _unwise_ not to offer a reduced-price ticket -- maybe I would have stayed if it had -- but nevertheless I was dealt with honestly.


Lol.


Snowbird, UT rates
2010/11 WINTER DAY TICKET PRICING
All Day Tram & Chairs – $74
All Day Chairs Only – $66
*1/2-Day Tram & Chairs – $64
*1/2-Day Chairs Only – $56

Yes.

Need I do the math?

$74 = full 
$66 = half day

$66/$74 = 89.189% mark-up

50% of the riding for 89% of the price of a full day = rip off

Regarding this:



> If you don't like expensive lift tickets, don't buy them. No one is forcing you.


AS I said, I pay and don't sell, so I'm not really complaining here. I'm just showing the obvious and with factual evidence. So in response to your quote, if you don't think this is a rip off, I can no longer have any type of conjecture with you. It's blatant.


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

Music Moves said:


> Lol.
> 
> 
> Snowbird, UT rates
> ...


What Joe is getting at is the fact that the resort is offering all of the same 'stuff' that you get with a full-day ticket so there is no actual 'rip-off'. While you may find that price unreasonable, there are still tons of people who happily (or unhappily, it really doesn't matter) pay that price. You may PERSONALLY find it to be an unfair price, but until the resort/hill offers LESS than what you paid for (which they haven't -- you get all the same amenities of a full-day ticket), you aren't being ripped off in the sense that you didn't get what you paid for.


----------



## Music Moves (Jan 23, 2009)

Biggs said:


> What Joe is getting at is the fact that the resort is offering all of the same 'stuff' that you get with a full-day ticket so there is no actual 'rip-off'. While you may find that price unreasonable, there are still tons of people who happily (or unhappily, it really doesn't matter) pay that price. You may PERSONALLY find it to be an unfair price, but until the resort/hill offers LESS than what you paid for (which they haven't -- you get all the same amenities of a full-day ticket), you aren't being ripped off in the sense that you didn't get what you paid for.


Where's the other 39% of riding time?

I sent you a PM btw.


----------



## JoeR (Oct 30, 2010)

Music Moves said:


> So in response to your quote, if you don't think this is a rip off, I can no longer have any type of conjecture with you. It's blatant.


I don't know what you mean by not having conjecture with me, but I think you're wasting your time with calculations intended to prove that you think half-day lift tickets are too expensive. I already know that you think they're too expensive, and they seem pretty expensive to me, too. So, if they're too expensive, _don't buy them_. No one is reaching into your wallet (or any other hapless snowboarder's) to take your money against your will. Who is ripping you off when you take out your credit card and hand it over?

All this talk of "rip-offs," when applied to things that are simply overpriced, is just an emotional way of justifying the "screw the resorts" position. "Rip-off" implies dishonesty! cheating! thievery! Therefore, it must be OK to act similarly in retaliation. "Overpriced" and "too expensive" sound bland and innocuous by comparison.


----------



## Biggs (Nov 16, 2008)

Music Moves said:


> Where's the other 39% of riding time?
> 
> I sent you a PM btw.


You'd have to get there earlier 

I totally understand what you're saying, but the problem with determining what a 'rip-off' is based on what you personally find objectionable is you end up getting situations where no one is happy. Unless a service is poorer than what you paid for (which a half day ticket versus a full day ticket isn't), you cant really justify it as a 'rip-off'. Now if the price was truly unjustifiable (lets say it's 100 bucks for a 8-10 under the lights pass), it would phase itself out and become reasonable because no one would pay it. As long as people are paying it, the price will remain that way -- there's a demand for it, they're going to profit from that demand.

For example, you want 39% less to pay due to having 39% less riding time. Well what if I don't want to pay even that because the snow conditions could be not as good as they were this morning? Or I want to pay less because the sun went away and the weather isn't as nice as it was earlier? Or I came in 30 minutes after you did so I want 39%+30 minutes taken off? 

There comes a point where the resort HAS to make these decisions for you -- they give you options: want the best deal on a per riding day basis? Buy a season pass. Want the best deal of the day? Check out our daily specials and pick the day that has the best discount (ladies day, carload Tuesday, whatever it may be) -- get a full day lift ticket as opposed to a half day ticket. Going today and want the best deal in terms of hours vs expense? Buy a full day ticket. Cant make it more than noon to close? Buy a half day ticket. 

But like I said -- I completely understand where you're coming from -- I think all resorts should switch to a per hour basis for customer convenience, but because of the profit potential and the demand with how they do it now, I don't fault them for it.


----------



## sleev-les (Feb 26, 2010)

....and on the topic... I have a season pass to the local spots, but have never given a lift ticket away. On one hand its a nice gesture, but on the other, I had to pay so you have to pay. If you can't afford it, you shouldn't be there.


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

Music Moves said:


> Lol.
> 
> 
> Snowbird, UT rates
> ...


"Rip-off" implies stealing or cheating, but if you know the cost of something before paying, then choose to pay anyway, I don't think you can consider yourself wronged. You knew the price, you grabbed your wallet, and you paid them what they asked for. Everyone knew what they were getting beforehand. Now if you paid the asked price and then _afterward_ found out that half of the lifts weren't operating, or that half of the runs were closed, then that would be a rip-off.

There's most definitely a markup with a half day pass. I don't think it's any secret that they do that in order to encourage people to bump up to the full day pass at a slightly higher price. I think that's pretty basic business strategy. You can buy a medium drink for $.99 or a large drink for $1.09. Same concept.


----------



## gjsnowboarder (Sep 1, 2009)

JoeR said:


> I don't know what you mean by not having conjecture with me, but I think you're wasting your time with calculations intended to prove that you think half-day lift tickets are too expensive. I already know that you think they're too expensive, and they seem pretty expensive to me, too. So, if they're too expensive, _don't buy them_. No one is reaching into your wallet (or any other hapless snowboarder's) to take your money against your will. Who is ripping you off when you take out your credit card and hand it over?
> 
> All this talk of "rip-offs," when applied to things that are simply overpriced, is just an emotional way of justifying the "screw the resorts" position. "Rip-off" implies dishonesty! cheating! thievery! Therefore, it must be OK to act similarly in retaliation. "Overpriced" and "too expensive" sound bland and innocuous by comparison.


+1....this is the jump to conclusions that when people do it i dislike. I don't believe that the majority of resorts have the intention to "rip-off" us consumers. To many of them enjoy riding themselves. I think that that the law of supply and demand coupled with quality of product drives them more and that does leave certain people out in the cold unfortunately.


----------



## gjsnowboarder (Sep 1, 2009)

Adult,19-59Youth,13-18Senior,60-69Preteen,7-1270+6 & Under
*full day Daily*$56$46$46$26$26$16
*NEW!*
9am-12pm $30
12pm-4pm $40
2pm-4pm $20 
EZ Rider only ticket: $20

This is some pricing from the resort I work at. Due to the demographics and locale to bigger resorts we have worked out better deals to adjust for the supply and demand. Because we aren't really a "destination" resort we are at the mercy of the local population and walk a very thin line for breaking even. It also means that we are priced out of certain upgrades like high speed lifts and snow making because of that.


----------



## Music Moves (Jan 23, 2009)

Lol, *NO.*

Ten


----------



## Music Moves (Jan 23, 2009)

gjsnowboarder said:


> Adult,19-59Youth,13-18Senior,60-69Preteen,7-1270+6 & Under
> *full day Daily*$56$46$46$26$26$16
> *NEW!*
> 9am-12pm $30
> ...


:thumbsup: except for the barely breaking even part and this is a situation where a small spot may not be able to do the fair pricing, but it is commendable. Hate to see small spots go under...


----------



## JoeR (Oct 30, 2010)

gjsnowboarder said:


> Adult,19-59Youth,13-18Senior,60-69Preteen,7-1270+6 & Under
> *full day Daily*$56$46$46$26$26$16
> *NEW!*
> 9am-12pm $30
> ...


That's a pretty nice slate of options. It shows that customer service improves if good customer service is necessary to attract customers. When people willingly pay up regardless of the quality of service, it tends to decline.



> Because we aren't really a "destination" resort we are at the mercy of the local population and walk a very thin line for breaking even. It also means that we are priced out of certain upgrades like high speed lifts and snow making because of that.


All of us (including me) like to bitch about high prices, but it's generally true that the expensive places provide the best conditions on the slopes, whereas bargain hills have to hold the line on capital improvements and the latest tech.


----------



## Music Moves (Jan 23, 2009)

Gives an entirely new connotation to lift .


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

Music Moves said:


> Gives an entirely new connotation to lift .


I like the "alternative stance" of the rider on the left. No, that's not all I noticed.


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

gjsnowboarder said:


> 9am-12pm $30
> 12pm-4pm $40
> 2pm-4pm $20
> EZ Rider only ticket: $20


Why is the morning ticket less expensive than the afternoon ticket? Morning is when you find the best conditions.


----------



## gjsnowboarder (Sep 1, 2009)

Toecutter said:


> Why is the morning ticket less expensive than the afternoon ticket? Morning is when you find the best conditions.


Best conditions but less time on hill.


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

gjsnowboarder said:


> Best conditions but less time on hill.


Makes sense (I guess). What's the EZ Rider option?


----------



## Music Moves (Jan 23, 2009)

Toecutter said:


> I like the "alternative stance" of the rider on the left. No, that's not all I noticed.


I think she has her legs crossed... otherwise, chilly pinocha...


----------



## gjsnowboarder (Sep 1, 2009)

Toecutter said:


> Makes sense (I guess). What's the EZ Rider option?


 Bunny hill lift.


----------



## loren646 (Dec 9, 2009)

gjsnowboarder said:


> Bunny hill lift.


i never understood why they made the bunny hill so difficult with that rope and that thing I have to put behind my back.


----------



## ev13wt (Nov 22, 2010)

loren646 said:


> i never understood why they made the bunny hill so difficult with that rope and that thing I have to put behind my back.


Maybe it so hard because you should put it between your legs instead of behind your back.




Great pics keep them coming!


----------



## gjsnowboarder (Sep 1, 2009)

loren646 said:


> i never understood why they made the bunny hill so difficult with that rope and that thing I have to put behind my back.


 
not all resorts use a a rope tow or surface lift for the bunny hill. The one at my hill is a lowriding two seater. Typically it is easier and less expensive to but in a surface lift on a short run. Just look at it as an opportunity to improve your balance.


----------



## ajh257 (Oct 19, 2010)

bro are you kidding?!?! if your done early and theres time on your pass, i wouldnt leave until i sell it at the door.
damn man


----------



## shoe757 (Dec 6, 2010)

I'm not against selling it and I'm not for it. But if resorts are noticing that people are buying tickets off other people who are leaving and still have time left on their lift ticket, why don't they do something where you can turn in your pass with still an hour or more left on it. Say it's $55 for an all day pay for 9 AM till 9:30 PM. If you go until 5 and decide you want to leave, instead of selling the ticket to someone. The resort could buy it back for like $5 or $10 and sell it for $10 or $15 to someone who doesn't really have the money to spend on a twilight ticket that might cost $32 and they got there late. I know when I was younger, I barely had enough money to pay for a lift ticket. If there would have been an option to buy a ticket that only had maybe 3 hours left on it for $10 cheaper. I would have taken that all day.


My 2 pennies,
Will


----------



## labowsky (Sep 28, 2010)

shoe757 said:


> I'm not against selling it and I'm not for it. But if resorts are noticing that people are buying tickets off other people who are leaving and still have time left on their lift ticket, why don't they do something where you can turn in your pass with still an hour or more left on it. Say it's $55 for an all day pay for 9 AM till 9:30 PM. If you go until 5 and decide you want to leave, instead of selling the ticket to someone. The resort could buy it back for like $5 or $10 and sell it for $10 or $15 to someone who doesn't really have the money to spend on a twilight ticket that might cost $32 and they got there late. I know when I was younger, I barely had enough money to pay for a lift ticket. If there would have been an option to buy a ticket that only had maybe 3 hours left on it for $10 cheaper. I would have taken that all day.
> 
> 
> My 2 pennies,
> Will


our world is about maximizing profits, this wouldn't be as efficient, more money with the current system.


----------



## shoe757 (Dec 6, 2010)

True. But if they are so worried about it happening, instead of paying an extra security guard or two $9 an hour. They could just use my option. But then again it is more of a utopian idea.


----------



## HouseMuzik (Dec 22, 2008)

I gave my lift ticket to somebody tonight. I didn't charge for it though. At the same time after i did it driving away i don't know if i felt comfortable doing it.

After all you're really screwing the resort itself


----------



## MistahTaki (Apr 24, 2010)

HouseMuzik said:


> I gave my lift ticket to somebody tonight. I didn't charge for it though. At the same time after i did it driving away i don't know if i felt comfortable doing it.
> 
> After all you're really screwing the resort itself


karma is going to catch you soon. good luck, there's no hope.


----------



## ev13wt (Nov 22, 2010)

MistahTaki said:


> karma is going to catch you soon. good luck, there's no hope.


Probably with a free something.


----------



## MistahTaki (Apr 24, 2010)

anybody that sells or gives away lift tickets should be crucified.


----------



## HouseMuzik (Dec 22, 2008)

lol i'm going to hell or wherever you go with bad karma


----------



## Music Moves (Jan 23, 2009)

HouseMuzik said:


> I gave my lift ticket to somebody tonight. I didn't charge for it though. At the same time after i did it driving away i don't know if i felt comfortable doing it.
> 
> After all you're really screwing the resort itself





MistahTaki said:


> karma is going to catch you soon. good luck, there's no hope.





ev13wt said:


> Probably with a free something.





MistahTaki said:


> anybody that sells or gives away lift tickets should be crucified.





HouseMuzik said:


> lol i'm going to hell or wherever you go with bad karma


This sequence made me .

And it's interesting to think of how karma views circumstances... are you kind for giving someone the pass or are you not because you POSSIBLY kept someone from buying one from the resort?


----------



## gjsnowboarder (Sep 1, 2009)

shoe757 said:


> True. But if they are so worried about it happening, instead of paying an extra security guard or two $9 an hour. They could just use my option. But then again it is more of a utopian idea.


Actually when resorts high security guards the intent is not to grab ticket clippers. Its to help prevent theft of their customers which is rampant around the holidays.


----------



## gjsnowboarder (Sep 1, 2009)

I do want to mention that with the change in ticket offerings at my resort they have also made changes back to the wire wicket ticket to help prevent theft. Not only that the will be keeping their eye open for ticket clippers. This shows that the consumer can effect changes in pricings and offerings, but also shows what the expectation of the resort is when they sell one ticket to one customer.


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

Bachy is tightening up their pass sharing security with photo monitoring. Last season I think they posted some figure like 70 fraud attempts caught and hauled off to the Sheriff's station. That'd ruin my day.

http://www.bendbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20101216/NEWS01/12160358


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

gjsnowboarder said:


> Actually when resorts high security guards the intent is not to grab ticket clippers. *Its to help prevent theft of their customers* which is rampant around the holidays.


People get stolen??? I don't want to go wherever that is!







Yes, I know what you meant.


----------



## Music Moves (Jan 23, 2009)

Toecutter said:


> hauled off to the Sheriff's station. That'd ruin my day.


+1 squared


----------



## mijinkal (Jan 9, 2009)

Toecutter said:


> Bachy is tightening up their pass sharing security with photo monitoring. Last season I think they posted some figure like 70 fraud attempts caught and hauled off to the Sheriff's station. That'd ruin my day.
> 
> http://www.bendbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20101216/NEWS01/12160358


You have to be a paid subscriber to see your link.


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

mijinkal said:


> You have to be a paid subscriber to see your link.


Sorry about that.

Seeing fraud on screen at Bachelor
Mt. Bachelor sends pictures of riders to a screen at Pine Marten lift

By Jordan Novet / The Bulletin
Published: December 16. 2010 4:00AM PST

To further cut down on fraudulent skiing and snowboarding, Mt. Bachelor has installed a television screen showing pictures of pass holders as they attempt to board the Pine Marten Express chairlift.

Bachelor appears to be one of the first few ski areas in the United States to adopt the technology.

The screen, insulated in a case, also tells lift-access employees at Pine Marten — currently the only lift that has a screen — if the skier or snowboarder appearing before one of the five operational turnstiles at the lift has a season pass or a day pass.

“It’s been a great deterrent, because people know their (pass) picture’s coming up here,” said Christian Sansing, the staffer checking Pine Marten’s riders early Tuesday afternoon.

The screen technology was not familiar to Troy Hawks, spokesman for the National Ski Areas Association in Colorado. “I can’t say I know of other (resorts) using a screen,” he said.

The technology

Radio-frequency identification (RFID) scanners embedded in panels to the left of the turnstiles — which were first used in the 2005-06 season — scan the rider’s pass to see if it is valid.

If so, an LED will give off a green light for Sansing or one of his colleagues to spot. The device also will sound a beep for Sansing to hear, in case he’s looking elsewhere. But the light and sound from the scanners only alert Sansing to a ticket’s validity. They cannot tell him if one skier is using another’s pass, for example. But the screen with pictures can tell him as much, and he can check to see if the pass holder’s picture matches up with his view of the person coming through the turnstile.

The approximately 30-inch-wide screen mounted above the gate with turnstiles helps Sansing notice obvious mismatches, such as a young girl’s picture showing up when a grown man wants to ride the lift. The screen has five sections stacked vertically and shows pictures and pass information as skiers and snowboarders get scanned.

Last season, Mt. Bachelor started using hand-held scanners that show pictures, to spot rider fraud. This summer, said mountain spokesman Andy Goggins, Mt. Bachelor incorporated the screen into the Pine Marten lift system in place of the hand-held scanners.

“It’s more efficient, getting on the lifts,” Goggins said. “It’s ... better (from a) guest-service standpoint, and it also ... prohibits the potential for people to scam (Mt. Bachelor), so overall to enhance the guest experience. Anything we do up on the mountain is with the guest in mind, so that was the main focus with that, as well as to deter scamming. But at the same time, it was to make a more efficient lift access.”

Feedback

Several skiers and snowboarders in the mountain’s West Village parking lot on Tuesday said they had no qualms with the television screen showing pictures of them.

“I don’t mind,” said Corey Beelke, 27, of Redmond. Beelke said he has a season pass and had not noticed the screen during a previous visit to the mountain.

Nick Secrest, 62, of Salem, also a season-pass holder, said the screen was a great idea.

“People that I’ve seen go through it seem to enjoy it,” he said. “I haven’t seen anybody that’s been negative about it at all. Especially adults with kids. They really enjoy it.”

As for season-pass holder Joe Cullen, 20, of Klamath Falls, he had no problem with the screen, either.

“I didn’t see my picture, so I wasn’t complaining,” he said. And he looked, he said.

Larry Williams, CEO of Axess North America, based in Park City, Utah, and tied to Axess AG of Salzburg, Austria, said Mt. Bachelor was one of the first ski areas in the United States to try using RFID scanners to prevent fraud, with hand-held scanners or a screen. Still, only about 20 ski areas in the United States use hand-held or screen scanners, Williams said. The technology is much more popular in Europe, he said.

Williams said ski areas can choose to show information such as gender and height with Axess’ equipment, although Bachelor only displays pass information and rider pictures at this point.

A company in East Setauket, N.Y., Mountain Pass Systems LLC, has applied for a patent for software that uses biometric scanning to prevent fraud, said CEO Hal Charych.

Charych said RFID technology is not perfect. “It all depends on the person that’s looking at the monitor and the people going through,” he said. Disguises such as facial hair and different clothing can fool a person checking the screen, while an automated biometric scanner can check for the outline of the rider’s body, Charych said.

The law

Deschutes County Sheriff’s Office Lt. Deron McMaster said no one from the office has been called up to the mountain on pass fraud cases so far this season. But, as it occurred at least a dozen times last season, according to Bulletin archives, McMaster expects it to happen sooner or later in the next few months.

“You know, people don’t really change that much,” he said.

Neither Goggins nor Sansing had heard about any pass violations as of Tuesday, they said.


----------



## HouseMuzik (Dec 22, 2008)

biometric scanning? That is fucking ridiculous. It would take YEARS for that kind of system to pay for itself.


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

Fuck that...I say we co-op a mountain and run these fools outta town. And you can resell your tickets on the open market when you leave early.


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

Extremo said:


> Fuck that...I say we co-op a mountain and run these fools outta town. And you can resell your tickets on the open market when you leave early.


Yes! Rally the troops! 




There's nothing funnier than watching a bunch of angry potheads try to accomplish something.


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

Well I don't smoke pot but it'd be better than a bunch of assholes ripping us off..


----------



## ev13wt (Nov 22, 2010)

Extremo said:


> Well I don't smoke pot but it'd be better than a bunch of assholes ripping us off..


Hell yea!

Save a hill, sell your lift ticket.


----------



## tripper (Feb 23, 2008)

Toecutter said:


> Yes! Rally the troops!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's prob the dumbest thing I have ever heard on this forum. What does smoking weed have to do, with being successful?


----------



## tripper (Feb 23, 2008)

HouseMuzik said:


> I gave my lift ticket to somebody tonight. I didn't charge for it though. At the same time after i did it driving away i don't know if i felt comfortable doing it.
> 
> After all you're really screwing the resort itself


lol dude seriously. Who gives a fuck?


----------



## Toecutter (Oct 11, 2009)

tripper said:


> That's prob the dumbest thing I have ever heard on this forum. What does smoking weed have to do, with being successful?


Ya pothead!


----------



## tripper (Feb 23, 2008)

Toecutter said:


> Ya pothead!


Nah, nowadays I don't really smoke. I find it funny though how people hate on weed for absolutely no reason. Or think that smoking weed somehow makes you a failure.


----------



## MistahTaki (Apr 24, 2010)

tripper said:


> Nah, nowadays I don't really smoke. I find it funny though how people hate on weed for absolutely no reason. Or think that smoking weed somehow makes you a failure.


you hippy !


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

ev13wt said:


> Hell yea!
> 
> Save your money, sell your lift ticket.


I fixed it for you


----------

