Gunstock's business model has been a solid one for years

To The Daily Sun,

I was very surprised to read the letter from Doug Lambert on comparing Gunstock to Loon for early opening and his negative innuendoes on Gunstock’s management. As someone who is involved with politics, business and skiing, he should know exactly why Gunstock could not open on Thanksgiving weekend regardless of what the weather has been. Let me remind him . . . 

Each business operates on a business model. The business model for Gunstock is very different than that of Loon as Gunstock has always been a government-owned area compared to Loon being a privately owned area. As the ski industry is a seasonal business each of these business uses a financial tool called debt along with early seasonal tickets sales in order to procure cash reserves over the summer or off-season. This cash reserve is used to upgrade/repair equipment, expansion, improvements and most importantly to pay employees during the opening month of the season, until substantial ticket sales kick in. Now, if either area is denied the debt it will have a difficult time opening earlier than expected, before high volume ticket sales are realized. . . say on Thanksgiving weekend. The form of debt for Loon is banks and corporations willing to lend the funds, usually with some interest tacked on. Because Gunstock is a government business its form of debt is bonds and “Revenue Anticipation Notes.”

From the initial development of Gunstock through the Works Progress Administration, Gunstock has used the same successful business model. Every year except, I believe two, Gunstock has made money for the county. Now comes along some politicians who, without researching and understanding the model and facts, think that Gunstock is a losing deal for the county. They have been trying to change the business model and doing it by getting elected to the county commission and then tearing apart the business model. This year was the first year that the county commission denied the revenue anticipation note. That means no upgrades/repairs, improvements, utilities (electric) and especially early hiring of employees to make and groom snow for early season. Basically the operation has been purposely shut down by a group of politicians who have no understanding or respect for the business model.

Up to this year Gunstock has been a very successful business compared to Loon and Mt. Sunapee (which these politicians are using as an example of what the county should do with Gunstock). Both Loon and Sunapee resorts have been sold to larger ski conglomerates when their business models failed. As Gunstock is in a lower snow belt than either of these mountains and there is no possibility of developing the mountainside real estate it would be a hard sell to find a large conglomerate who would lease it.

Other factors for Mr. Lambert to consider for early opening is that Loon is substantially further north and at a higher elevation. They have had several feet of snow and colder snow making conditions while Gunstock has enjoyed (a lot of) rain and warmer temperatures.

Dave Nix

Belmont