WrightwoodCalif.com Forum
Public Forums => Outdoors => Topic started by: Moose on Dec 06, 04, 08:39:44 AM
-
-
What day did you go?
-
This last Saturday
Saturday, December 4. East.
-
I went snow boarding for the first time at Mt. High today and had a blast! The conditions were great and so was the instructor. By the end of the day I was really performing well and look forward to next weekend. I remember last week when I went skiing early in the morning and the lift chair was covered in ice and snow and it was not very pleasant. I did not pay to much attention to it though because I always come home wet.
-
-
Perhaps this Forum will bring attention to their deficits and they will be amended over there... ??? Er, OR NOT. :-\
-
I too, was waiting with my son Saturday at "Ghetto Mountain". I agree with Moose, the staff could have done a much better job preparing the lifts, and telling us, the paying customers, what was going on.
I had the pleasure of skiing Snow Summit yesterday. What a difference from Mt. High! The facility looks and feels like a resort, not a surplus store. The staff was pleasant, hard working, and ubiquitous. Yes, they even brushed off the chairs before we sat down.
All this from a resort which gets less customers/year, and therefore less revenue than Mt. High.
It is obvious that Mt. High is pulling money from their customers, and not giving back in terms of putting a better resort together.
What a shame for Wrightwood, and the rest of LA, who spend our money there.
-
-
I think they have those little "rate your expirience" slips, over at the customer service section... or whatever they call it ...
Fill a couple out and hand them in, I think you would have better luck that way.
-
-
Let's not forget who "owns" Mountain High.
Right on their literature, in the corner of the map, it states:
"Operated under special use permit in the Angeles National Forest"
WE OWN MT. HIGH!!
Just like the concesion for Table Mountain Campground, the forest service has contracted with Mt. High's parent corporation to operate a Ski/Board Resort IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST. We, the public, have a right to point out what kind of activities and behaviour are in our interest.
I think we need to start copying the LA County Board of Supervisors and the Forest Service with our safety and customer service related complaints. It is pretty obvious that Mt. High management is not listening.
-
Let's not forget who "owns" Mountain High.
Right on their literature, in the corner of the map, it states:
"Operated under special use permit in the Angeles National Forest"
WE OWN MT. HIGH!!
Mountain High is a Corporation that leases property under a special use permit and is not owned by the Forest Service. The corporation must follow provisions within the special use permit but the Forest Service does not dictate how Mountain High does business.
-
Wrigthwood,
I agree in principle, no more than the Forest Service dictates how American Land and Leisure runs their campgrounds. But both companies are sitting on public land, and their business is subsidized by the taxpayer, obstensibley for the good of the citizens.
-
I bet if you contact Steve you will get results. As far as Ghetto Mountain I think you are very wrong. Besides if that is what you think of it why are you not going to another restort? If you want to give Steve a try call 249-5808 Ext. 7805.
-
I bet if you contact Steve you will get results. As far as Ghetto Mountain I think you are very wrong. Besides if that is what you think of it why are you not going to another restort? If you want to give Steve a try call 249-5808 Ext. 7805.
The problem with Mt. High is way above Steve. It is in the way the resort is marketed, the clientele they attempt to attract, and the results of having that demographic as customers.
My wife worked at High for several years. A few years back, they took the family oriented resort out of their mission statement. They are clearly catering to the 16-30 singles crowd. Therefore you have the disrespect, trash, profanity, etc. At the same time, this crowd is not as concerned with customer service and proffesionalism, so its not emphasized with the staff as much as other resorts. Clearly this is a management decision that Mt. High made, it comes from the top.
Yes, I have tried other resorts, and they are much more professional, clean, safe, etc. They are just alot farther to drive than Mt. High. I just wish we could get the type of resort which would benefit the community most. Wrightwood could really benefit from a change.
-
Wrigthwood,
I agree in principle, no more than the Forest Service dictates how American Land and Leisure runs their campgrounds. But both companies are sitting on public land, and their business is subsidized by the taxpayer, obstensibley for the good of the citizens.
What subsidies? There is a prospectus, companies bid on the prospectus, and they run the concession. They pay a percentage of their gate reciepts back to the government. For "Granger-Thye" permits (where the government owns the improvements like Table Mountain) the concessionaire can do "fee offset" work where they can (agreed upon ahead of time in writing) to do improvements above and beyond routine maintenance back into the facility and this is deducted from what they owe the government. The Forest Service prefers the money be invested back into the facility as opposed to going back to the general treasury.
For straight commercial operations, there is NO "subsidy" of the operation. They bring in a project proposal. If the proposal is accepted, then they fill out an application. The project proponent is responsible for all costs of environmental analysis (user pay philosophy) and start up costs. It is a major investment for a company to do this. The fees are determined on a nationwide formula. I fail to see anywhere in the process that there is a "subsidy." Can you explain?
-
Wrigthwood,
I agree in principle, no more than the Forest Service dictates how American Land and Leisure runs their campgrounds. But both companies are sitting on public land, and their business is subsidized by the taxpayer, obstensibley for the good of the citizens.
What subsidies? There is a prospectus, companies bid on the prospectus, and they run the concession. They pay a percentage of their gate reciepts back to the government. For "Granger-Thye" permits (where the government owns the improvements like Table Mountain) the concessionaire can do "fee offset" work where they can (agreed upon ahead of time in writing) to do improvements above and beyond routine maintenance back into the facility and this is deducted from what they owe the government. The Forest Service prefers the money be invested back into the facility as opposed to going back to the general treasury.
For straight commercial operations, there is NO "subsidy" of the operation. They bring in a project proposal. If the proposal is accepted, then they fill out an application. The project proponent is responsible for all costs of environmental analysis (user pay philosophy) and start up costs. It is a major investment for a company to do this. The fees are determined on a nationwide formula. I fail to see anywhere in the process that there is a "subsidy." Can you explain?
What are they paying to lease the land? Is it even close to the cost of actually purchasing the land? Since the public owns the land which they are leasing, for the specific purpose of operating the resort in the public interest, don't we get a say in how our interests are being served?
-
-
Does anyone have any info regarding the forestry new meters being read and the usuage. ( i.e) camp ground usage and MH?
-
April 24th is MT High "FREE DAY"
Somehow..I am not liking this idea.
-
I received a Mt.High email telling of a music jam session and contest on the 23 that is supposed to be in the morning. My complaint is that it starts at 9 through 10am for the "practice" and at 11am the contest is supposed to begin. Mike and I were thinking about going anyway but man thats way too early... and after reading the thing about traffic problems and what not... I don't know... on one hand it sounds like we'd have a lot of fun playing there (except for early in the morning)... ::) but on the other hand I think locals probably wouldn't like it...well, because, for the reasons I read below... still I think we'd smoke a lot of those bands. This sucks. The good news is that Santana is playing on Saturday at the Hard Rock in Vegas and I'd rather go enjoy a weekend there...and play for tips with Mike and my son Kevin on Fremont...and then we'll watch Santana in the evening. My wife thinks I should do the Mt.High thing in the morning and leave to Vegas after we smoke the other bands right afterward. Its a conundrm. And ego thing too.
-
I say go smoke the other bands since you is talking smack! ;D
The traffic into WW will be minimal this Saturday. Take my word on that. The only time we see bumper to bumper is after we get a huge dump and during peak winter days...
You can leave WW by 2 be in LV by 6, play for tips for a couple hours and go see Carlos by 8.
-
Agreed on the traffic, it will be O.K. I remember walking my dog up a trail close to Mt. High, the trail that reaches the school camp. There was a very loud band playing in the Mt. High East parking lot and we got a free concert. My dog didn't think much of it though. ;)
-
What subsidies?
How about free water?
Both times I went to mh this season I noticed snow on the chairs and the lifties just standing there doing nothing.
As far as how the the resort is marketed, I think John McColly has done an incredible job of bringing in the dollars. It's his job to market the place and he's prooved he's good at it.
As far as management goes, Karl K. is no Rusty Gregory (CEO Mammoth Mountain). Karl runs and hides, Rusty makes himselve accessable to anyone and everyone that would like to speak with him.
The problem is at the very top, worms have more backbone then Karl K. :P
-
Yesterday was closing day at Mountain High. Spring conditions, with lots of mud patches and rocks. A bit challenging to ski, but fun.
To make it more challenging, there were 500 plastic eggs with prizes to distract everyone. Still fun.
Starting at 8:30, on top of Conquest, Karl put 2 ski patrollers to work, removing all the protective foam from the lift poles and snow guns. By the time I left at 10 AM, they had stripped Conquest and were working Head Wall.
Shouldn't they remove the safety equipment the DAY AFTER they close? Isn't the cost of removing the equipment on Monday simply 2 persons * $10/hour *8 hours, or only $160? How would it be to run into a bare metal pole and be told, "sorry, we don't have safety gear on the last day?"
Karl was no doubt skiing at Snow Summit and complaining about all the boarders ;-)
-
He must have laid the risk managment guy off the day before.
:P
-
are you really surprised??
-
It was free and weren't there waivers to sign? Everyone has a budget and deadlines to meet.... :)