I think we need to have a look at Cairngorm's press release, in its original form ...

[www.cairngormmountain.org]

... whoops, it's not there!

There's a suggestion, above, that CML should be putting out 'positive spin'. On the other hand, everyone seems to favour honest truthful journalism.

I sense a conflict there!

By all accounts, those who work out on the hill made a substantial effort to make the most of what snow they had to work with....and getting up and running again after having 'closed down the winter operations' during March was an effort worthy of applause.
It must be incredibly frustrating to put in a lot of effort but then find that not everyone is pulling in the same direction. The CEO can fix that...if he so desires.

Kind regards

Olderalan

Not really David, there's nothing in what I suggested that is dishonest - May was a significant bonus after the expectations of season end in March. But that's a much better spin than the "recorded lowest number of skiers in over a decade" line that has been put out. why even bother to say that ? If I was cynical, I might think that there's a deliberate strategic policy of running down the snowsports operation, and this is setting the scene for it.

Quote:
Snowsport figures slide to lowest for a decade

Days of actual lift operation for snowsports is a pretty obscure stat that is very rarely heard about, compared to the skier day figure. The skier day figure didn't provide the negativity required so another stat was found.

I wouldn't be surprised if someone from accounts who's been watching season ticket interest recover in the past 2 months, hasn't walked over and given whoever wrote the press release a good slap!

Surely it's the first statistic any operator (or potential operator) would look at. I think it's very relevant that this figure has been given.

We've been very lucky that dreamers/optimists have ignored it and built lifts where they have proven to be marginally viable or not viable at all ...

... compared to the wise heads who built the early lifts, in the initial chapter of Scottish ski development, based on proven snow-holding corries that would offer around 150 operational days in a typical winter.

[edit: 120-150 days might be more realistic]



Edited 1 times. Last edit at 18.01hrs Thu 7 Jun 12 by David Goldsmith.

Days of operation is not a stat that is normally reported in the public domain, figures given to the press in review of a season are normally start and end of the season and skier days.

Your contention above is a complete twisting of history, obviously if the first lifts were built on the most snow sure parts of the mountains, subsequent developments have had to go elsewhere on the mountain - that's just stating the bloody obvious.

It was looking at stats of actual lift operations rather than potential operations and not understanding the difference that lead to the busted flush that was the core lifts policy that was so successful CML ended up in public ownership to stave of liquidation.

If your stating 120 to 150 days of operation are needed to justify a ski lift, then there is hardly a viable ski resort in the world is there?



Edited 2 times. Last edit at 18.15hrs Thu 7 Jun 12 by alan.

Ironically - if they had managed to complete Phase 1 of the Ciste plan the poor ski numbers could of possibly been offset by an increase MTB numbers, especially with the good weather.

I'm sorry but I don't see what was negative in that statement. Its honest.

While I enjoyed the wee cameo in late April/May as much as anyone there is no getting away from the fact that this has been a poor winter.

Hurricane after hurricane early on, a very mild February and then a non-existent March. Top to bottom skiing on maybe 3 days, top bowls and maybe boulder dodging in the cas when they were open.

And they finish the statement on a positive note.

"Our pisting team did some great work in keeping the slopes open, providing a course to enable us to run the inaugural Red Bull 50/50 and in getting the Gorm Freestyle area jumps and rails into shape, attracting lots of interest and enhancing our reputation"

Who could disagree that they did excellent work snow farming etc to keep open at all during half term, and then getting as much back running as they did in late April. Both of these helped them get almost up towards their budgeted figure.

All in all its a great job, under trying circumstances, for the management at the Gorm this year, in my opinion.

The Strathy's take on the Cairngorm news/statistics:

[www.strathspey-herald.co.uk]

And a shorter report from the BBC:

[www.bbc.co.uk]

I actually skied an additional day more this year than I did last year

I don't think anybody is saying it's dishonest, but it lacks PR nounce. The media picks-up and highlights the initial statements in a press release, and creates headlines from that. It's the headlines that the reader notices; very few readers ever get to the positive stuff at the end. So instead of a headline something like "Late season snow boosts numbers, helped by operators excellent work", we get variations on doom and gloom, which just reinforces the Joe Public view that there's no snow in Scotland, and becomes a self fulfilling prophecy of ultimate disaster.

So...was that 1 day rather than 0 days or 2 days rather than 1 day?? lol

Regards

Olderalan

We still don't know how the press release was worded. The most recent press release archived on the CML website is dated 13 May 2011.

For us to have a sensible discussion about it, we need to see exactly what was said, in what order.

Since CML is essentially a public company, which results from very large investments of public funds, it's only right that its PR department should put out clear factual information that doesn't try to steer journalists towards dumbed-down (economical with the truth) comment. It's also right that the company posts an end-of-season report, each year, so that a consistent comparative picture can be built of its performance. As far as I can see it makes perfect sense for the company to relate its skier days to its operational days. Otherwise the data is unrelated to this vital meteorological perspective.

It's interesting, by the way, that last year's report was posted a full month earlier ...

[www.cairngormmountain.org]

... so if there had been a series of mega May storms in 2011, similar to 2012, that report would have seemed somewhat premature!

CML is just like any other business, whether publically owned or not. It has a duty to its shareholders (ie you and me) to ensure that its activities are presented in a positive light in order to encourage customers, not put them off. To believe otherwise, or expect the media to present the message entirely objectively is commercially naive at least.

I have to say despite the poor winter (although not as bad as 2007 or 2003) i had a much better season than last year. The late snow made superb skiing conditions and the off piste was awesome. In 2011 the snow condtions after feb were rock hard a lot of the time, at least that what i remeber while touring.
Having read the bbc report i do think they've focussed on the negative. How many ski resorts open for 169 days?...anyway the late season numbers at cairngrom were very encouraging and it shows that the information is getting out there form other sources than the BBC or SCGB.