A 69 Year Denver Tradition Ends
#1
Original Poster
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,030
Likes: 0
A 69 Year Denver Tradition Ends
It was announced today that the 69 year run of the Winter Park Ski Train ended with the sale of the equipment to a private Canadian railroad. Obviously the summer schedule is finished. It was an institution within the Denver skiing community. Too Bad -- it was a nearly a unique experience and, certainly, a throwback to the early days of skiing. See some pictures at photos.denverpost.com
#3
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 10,556
Likes: 0
I'd heard this was being considered. What a dumb move. The Canadians are moving the cars to Canada, non?
My husband volunteers on the ski train. It is such a unique option to offer skiers, and usually it's pretty packed. We've happily used it for years.
A really smart thing to do on Earth Day-- Let's put MORE cars on I-70!
My husband volunteers on the ski train. It is such a unique option to offer skiers, and usually it's pretty packed. We've happily used it for years.
A really smart thing to do on Earth Day-- Let's put MORE cars on I-70!
#4

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,429
Likes: 0
I was very disappointed after hearing the news this morning. I feel fortunate that my children were able to experience the train and the Moffat Tunnel and still have the memories.
If this has been rumored, Hinkenlooper should have been more proactive and worked toward a solution. I read that the redevelopment of Union Station for light rail was one of the factors for the sale. The city should have fought to keep the ski train running. Or did they even care?
If this has been rumored, Hinkenlooper should have been more proactive and worked toward a solution. I read that the redevelopment of Union Station for light rail was one of the factors for the sale. The city should have fought to keep the ski train running. Or did they even care?
#5
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,134
Likes: 0
The Winter Park Ski Train was sold because it was losing money.If the train was "packed" on a regular basis, perhaps they should've raised their prices. Regardless of how environmentally enlightened one is (and, I'm sitting here with my green T-shirt on to celebrate Earth Day), you can not expect someone to operate a money losing business.
#6
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 10,556
Likes: 0
The ski train was not aggressively managed, IMHO. There are lots of things they should have done, raising the prices being just one to consider. But the price was high enough to start, really.
Their season was very short, for one thing. Even shorter than the ski season. They operated weekends mostly. And they didn't run at all in the summer, for all the Winter Park warm weather events.
More importantly, they only offered a same-day round-trip ticket. Many people we knew wanted to take the train up to spend the weekend, but they couldn't. I don't believe management ever asked its market what it wanted. If it had, it could have been very profitable, I think.
It's a brilliant thing to announce on Earth Day, either way.
Their season was very short, for one thing. Even shorter than the ski season. They operated weekends mostly. And they didn't run at all in the summer, for all the Winter Park warm weather events.
More importantly, they only offered a same-day round-trip ticket. Many people we knew wanted to take the train up to spend the weekend, but they couldn't. I don't believe management ever asked its market what it wanted. If it had, it could have been very profitable, I think.
It's a brilliant thing to announce on Earth Day, either way.
#7
Original Poster
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,030
Likes: 0
It is easy to be critical when you don't know anything about the operations. The newspaper also noted the substantial increase in liability insurance and access to the tracks. That is only a single track through that area so traffic has to use both ways. Overall rail traffic in the US is up substantially so usage pressure on that line would be great. And I am guessing that the maintenance on those old cars would have been substantial. I am not sure it could have ever been profitable. The function was too limited.
The equipment is going to a private Canadian railroad company that runs a similar ski train.
The equipment is going to a private Canadian railroad company that runs a similar ski train.
Trending Topics
#8
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 10,556
Likes: 0
Funny that it could be profitable in Canada, but not in Winter Park? huh? Winter Park has built a new village area, with housing, entertainment, a skating pond, shops, etc. It will greatly increase the visitors to that area, both summer and winter.
"you don't know anything about the operations"-- pardon me, but YOU don't know anything about what I know. We have owned a property in Winter Park since the mid-70s, and my husband works on the ski train-- so I know more than the average person, who just read one article. No need to be rude, fmpden.
"you don't know anything about the operations"-- pardon me, but YOU don't know anything about what I know. We have owned a property in Winter Park since the mid-70s, and my husband works on the ski train-- so I know more than the average person, who just read one article. No need to be rude, fmpden.
#9
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 623
Likes: 0
For those who enjoyed using the Ski Train, I'm sorry to see it go. In the 15 years that I've lived in the area I must admit that I never took it. Would have liked to, but at $60 per person (coach) round trip, it would have been cost prohibitive for my family of four ($240) when we could drive up there and back for $15 worth of gasoline. I don't care how GREEN I may want to be.... that cost difference is substantive.
Raising the price wouldn't have helped. Higher prices NEVER bring in MORE customers.
Raising the price wouldn't have helped. Higher prices NEVER bring in MORE customers.
#10
Original Poster
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,030
Likes: 0
PeaceOut, I don't have to know anything about what you know other than your statements. Owning property in Winter Park and riding on the train doesn't make you knowledgeable of railroad operations. And, of course, you know nothing about what I know. Your suggestion for raising prices on a product that is already cost prohibitive for a family other than for a very special occasion doesn't show much marketing knowledge. Tell me something about increasing liability costs, track accessibility, maintenance, per passenger costs, etc., and then, maybe, we could have a discussion about profitability.
Earlier you stated your husband volunteered on the train and now he works for the Ski Train and has inside knowledge. Which is it??
I know nothing about the Canadian operation --- nor do you. So how can you make a judgment about their profitability ??? Wishful thinking?? I don't jump to conclusions. Not being rude -- just asking questions and, maybe, applying a little logic.
Earlier you stated your husband volunteered on the train and now he works for the Ski Train and has inside knowledge. Which is it??
I know nothing about the Canadian operation --- nor do you. So how can you make a judgment about their profitability ??? Wishful thinking?? I don't jump to conclusions. Not being rude -- just asking questions and, maybe, applying a little logic.
#11
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 10,556
Likes: 0
fmpden, you said, "Your suggestion for raising prices on a product that is already cost prohibitive for a family other than for a very special occasion doesn't show much marketing knowledge."
YOUR reading skills are severely lacking. HistoryTraveler recommended raising the prices, not me. I said the price is high already, in an attempt to be tactful to HT. Just re-read the posts, will ya, before you rip into me.
So now you also think I'm lying because I used the words "volunteer" and "work" interchangeably? They are one and the same concept: as in "volunteer work". Get it?
And, yes, I have lots of professional marketing experience, which combines with my "inside" knowledge of the ski train and of Winter Park to give me some understanding of the situation.
You are being rude, as always, when someone else challenges your status as Colorado King of Information on Fodors.
YOUR reading skills are severely lacking. HistoryTraveler recommended raising the prices, not me. I said the price is high already, in an attempt to be tactful to HT. Just re-read the posts, will ya, before you rip into me.
So now you also think I'm lying because I used the words "volunteer" and "work" interchangeably? They are one and the same concept: as in "volunteer work". Get it?
And, yes, I have lots of professional marketing experience, which combines with my "inside" knowledge of the ski train and of Winter Park to give me some understanding of the situation.
You are being rude, as always, when someone else challenges your status as Colorado King of Information on Fodors.
#14

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,429
Likes: 0
Furledleader, I'm sorry you missed the experience. We were lucky to get free children's train tickets included in their 5th grade ski free passports otherwise we also would have made the drive. The train was fun but also a lot of work when riding with children. Loading the equipment at home, finding parking near Union Station, unloading again & hauling the gear to the train and hoping to find our poles once we got to Winter Park. I was always ready for that margarita on the return trip to Denver.
#15
Original Poster
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,030
Likes: 0
It was a great experience. For the same reason everyone should do the Cheyenne ride at least once and in the dome car. The summer weekend runs to Glenwood Springs were terrific. But the trouble with passenger service it is impossible to make it pay.
#16
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 10,556
Likes: 0
Yes, that's my statement, as you know, fmpden. At least you have read it now.
But, if you're clever enough, you can tell my sentence does not recommend raising the price, ". . . raising the prices being just one to consider. But the price was high enough to start, really."
I was being tactful, as I said, to not offend another poster who had suggested a price increase. You would do well to consider some tact and courtesy yourself.
Instead, you're just trying to be obnoxious for whatever reason. No point in continuing.
But, if you're clever enough, you can tell my sentence does not recommend raising the price, ". . . raising the prices being just one to consider. But the price was high enough to start, really."
I was being tactful, as I said, to not offend another poster who had suggested a price increase. You would do well to consider some tact and courtesy yourself.
Instead, you're just trying to be obnoxious for whatever reason. No point in continuing.




