Airline Service Steps It Up
Nov 24, 2009 | 2304 views | 39 39 comments | 18 18 recommendations | email to a friend | print
With Six Carriers and Nine Destinations, Telluride/Montrose Airline Bookings Are Up

TELLURIDE/MONTROSE – Airline service into Telluride and Montrose airports l steps it up this ski season.

The Telluride/Montrose Regional Air Organization has announced that “total number of air seats to Telluride/Montrose maintains pace with last year’s record number,” with six different carriers flying to nine nonstop destinations: Denver, Phoenix, Salt Lake City, Dallas Ft. Worth, Houston, Atlanta, Chicago, Newark, and Los Angeles.

Already, bookings are up – “currently pacing 12 percent up over last year at the same time,” the organization reported, in a press release.

New this winter from United Airlines is a second Saturday flight from Chicago during peak winter travel periods and both first and coach service from Los Angeles on Saturdays, with United adding Sunday service out of Los Angeles for Telluride travelers. “The enhancement of our exceptional air service will truly benefit our guests, as many connecting domestic and international visitors will have easier access into the Telluride and Montrose Airports,” said Scott Stewart of TMRAO. “While many leisure destinations are seeing a sizeable decrease in available seats year over year, Telluride is expanding markets and maintaining service levels.”

The increase in air service lends an air of optimism to ski-area projections: “The addition of new flights increase Telluride’s accessibility each year, offering our skiers and riders an ease in travel schedules,” said Telluride Ski Resort CEO Dave Riley. “With new terrain and amenities this year, coupled with the same great service, we are proud to offer greater access to all our committed guests and potential new visitors.”

The six carriers providing services this year include American Airlines, Continental, Delta, Great Lakes, United and USAirways. International travelers will find same-day connections when flying from European cities such as London, Dublin, Paris or Frankfurt; to South America’s Sao Paulo, Buenos Aires and Santiago; and many Mexico cities. Australian and Canadian travelers will benefit from easier connections through L.A., New York, and Denver, as well as throughout the United States.

The overall booking trend, Stewart reports, is “fuller planes than in previous years, earlier,” with connecting flights to Montrose/Telluride “also showing greater bookings, earlier in the fall booking season.”

With that pattern in mind, Stewart suggests customers seeking out bargain fares buy early, travel mid-week and off-peak, and avoid holidays.
Comments
(39)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
FaceOnMars (nli)
|
December 03, 2009
Collectively, Telluride doesn't have to lift a finger to be a special, unique, and mindblowing place to visit. It is hardly necessary to up the prices and lock the gates & jack up the prices.

Let's get real here, if you can't appreciate what nature has on display in it's own "store front window" here, you've got bigger problems.

Any sensible business person (who might be spending marketing dollars to "promote" Telluride), ought to realize this dedicate funding to open up the gates to the greater populace.

There has been untold millions spent in Vail, but they could LITERALLY SPEND 100 TRILLION (YES LITERALLY), and it would NEVER become Telluride.

Price points & the economic law of supply and demand are the key operating principles. You can try and steer this into "saywhatconomics" if you'd like, but I wouldn't invest in such as system (unless I had an inside track).

By the way, I'm sitting in Santa Cruz right now .... took a $260 rt flight from Durango -> San Fran. Could not use United milage from TEX. Cost was like $750 if purchased outright. Montrose was like $475.
anonymous
|
December 02, 2009
We are not McDs or Walmart. We can not be reproduced anywhere in the world.

Go to the front range for french fries and a fake apple pie.
thcpa
|
December 02, 2009
most profitable burger business in the world -McD's and they employ millions.

largest business enterprise in the world-walmart-again, millions.

one of the highest priced ski resorts in the country-Telluride-and people are literally on financial life support...

I think we need to compete on price...and ..value.

Say What?
|
December 02, 2009
Agreed, tourist business. But that doesn't mean cost cutting will get people here. I'm not supporting empty mansions and $13 hot dogs. I'm trying to make a case for robust tourism as opposed to real estate dependency. And this whole thing started with the observation that Telluride can't compete on PRICE. We have to compete in other ways: quality of experience. That is not necessarily "high end" but it isn't cheap or discounted, either.
tourist business
|
December 02, 2009
Not every destination tourist wants to spend her holiday staring at empty mansions eating a $13 hotdogs, Say What.
Say What?
|
December 02, 2009
I wonder if Face or THCPA have ever worked in tourism or in any business for that matter. The notion that you can lower prices and people will flock to Telluride is just so unrealistic. A fantasy. It's a tactic that can work to a degree (as part of a bigger strategy) for a resort near a metro area. But not for a remote destination resort. Do you guys really think the good citizens of GJ and Montrose and Farmington are going to patronize Telluride in sufficient numbers to make the slightest bit of difference if we just lower prices? It will never happen. And those from further away have many, many cheaper options close to home. It's not a question of peddling real estate. And it's not a question of what class of person we would prefer to see on the slopes. It's a question of who we can realistically expect to draw. Every remote destination mountain resort has the same challenge.

face it
|
December 01, 2009
Those who call for targeting the uber-wealthy are simply hoping to wring out the last of the trophy-home real estate commissions. Rather than a recipe for a successful community, it's a tombstone epitaph for "Sunset Man." Only by targeting the middle will Telluride become a vibrant community again.
THCPA
|
December 01, 2009
The big fat middle is where we want to target our pricing..not the ski technicians who live on the truck and not the marvelous bailed out elite..who live for the show...

We have this beautiful place all dressed up and no one to show it to...

The big fat middle will get the economies of scale to support the local economy.
FaceOnMars (nli)
|
December 01, 2009
THCPA is correct about lowering prices across the board & real estate being one of the controlling factors.

Say What: this is not rocket science, but rather basic economic principles. Lower lift ticket prices will invariably generate a larger customer base ... I simply don't see how this could possibly be considered "shrinkage". Maybe you're simply projecting your agenda/perspective in so far as being concerned about the shrinkage of the more "elite" market? I wouldn't be surprised if most local business would support a 30% increase in overall visitor numbers from the middle class (their money is still green) vs. continuing on the downward or flat (at best) trend we've witnessed over the past two years.

Don't kid yourself about the significance of what might be a $69 lift ticket vs. a $94 ticket (sure there are deals, but other resorts offer deals too). People do A LOT of research on the internet and most people/families who haven't been super insulated to the economic downturn will add up ALL the costs in a trip. I know I do. I'll look to see if a hotel will be charging $10/day for internet or $35/day for parking. It all adds up.

By the way, while I wasn't here in the 60's or 70's, I'm fairly certain it wasn't the miners who envisioned (let alone pushed for) a ski area. I believe there was a fair amount of conflict at the time over the change.

THCPA
|
December 01, 2009
No question about it. We need to lower prices. From everything from food to taxes to ski prices (although a ski pass at $1200 for Tride is a great buy)...most importantly, real estate assets need to fall (and the fall is imminent) and hot bed prices need to fall (won't be linear but will occur in packaged sales with ski products). Then, we will have a chance at a sustainable economy.

I know many hurting people here in town and we need to get over this adjustment period quickly.

We do need to be more accessible to the family budget but it cant be done until real estate values fall, starvation hits the town budgets and they will actually assist a developer to invest in the market (versus hinder them)and tax policies do not subsidize one group over another.

Lower prices are coming and this is good news for our community. Yes, speculators will be hurt, 2nd homeowners will face high tax structures for services and a declining asset value on their home but it is inevitable.

Japan in the 90's serves as an economic model.

Say What?
|
December 01, 2009
I am not defending high prices. I am questioning the assertion that high prices is at the root of our problem and that lower prices would do much of anything to address it. Our problem is to have enough cash flowing through our economy to support the community. Until the bust, the cash came from real estate development and sales. Now that it's gone, what will replace it? Nobody has ever suggested a replacement economy other than visitation, which we've never really had much of, and certainly not enough to support the community. So the question is how do we get more tourism. To suggest that lower prices will do it is simplistic. Lower prices could be part of a larger strategy. But what Face envisions is SHRINKAGE. In effect, a smaller community to support. While less consumption is a worthy goal, a shrinking economy and a shrinking community is not because it exacts a very high toll in human terms. A generation ago, miners envisioned a ski area and tourism as a replacement for mining, so that they and their descendants could continue to live here. How will we and our children afford to stay here if we don't have a functional economy? This is a big question and the fixation on lift ticket prices is short sighted and self-serving.
FaceOnMars (nli)
|
December 01, 2009
The PR routine is entertaining, but is getting to be very circular. As I've been saying all along, eliminate capital expenditures & reduce the operating costs of the ski area ... and you don't need to see a 50% increase in ticket sales if you cut the lift ticket prices in half (to use simplistic numbers).

It's interesting to see one or two individuals adamantly defend a $94 ticket price.

brilliant,,
|
November 30, 2009
I have a question for Face On Mars: If Telski cut its prices in half (as it appears you would do if you ran Telski), do you think they would more than double their skier visits this year (from over 400,000 to over 800,000)? My math says that would be necessary to pay for the discount. Do you honestly believe that would work FOM? My guess is their skier visits might grow to 500,000 and they would loose a pile of money.
Say What?
|
November 30, 2009
What's difficult about this, Face, is that it won't happen. It can't happen. Lowering lift ticket prices wouldn't pay. Even if you reduced them to zero, as Crested Butte has done for years early season. There aren't enough bargain hunting skiers within 500 miles to take advantage of it. It's a fantasy. There's no free lunch. Your belief in low prices stimulating enough demand to pay for itself strikes me as incredibly naive.
anonymous
|
November 30, 2009
Please read "say what's" comment below.

It is very true and everyone who voted for the latest TOT council members should realize that this is what you voted for. Many of you, I fear, do not know the vision they have.

As far as FOM's 10-year dooms day predictions go...I wouldn't bet against Telluride.
FaceOnMars (nli)
|
November 30, 2009
Say What: I suppose it has ultimately turned into an interesting dance ... where neither side gets their way altogether.

Getting back to reality, if you cut the lift ticket prices here enough & we'll get more visitors. I'm not sure what's so difficult to understand about this? I'm willing to bet there's a good chance we'd have a relatively high number of return visitors and good word of mouth advertisement as compared to other destinations.

This is not a retrograde vision, rather a pragmatic course to take ... if not one which the free market will eventually navigate it the forces say so.
Saw What?
|
November 30, 2009
I think Face, wittingly or not, has spoken the vision of a good portion of our population: Telluride should emulate Wolf Creek. This would be a very small Telluride. Most existing businesses would be gone, taking the jobs they provide with them. The population would fall drastically. This retrograde vision drives a lot of our local politics, and like most apocalyptic thinkers, those who pursue this agenda always see themselves as among the few survivors. Others, doubtlessly all greedheads, will be driven out, saving Utopia for the visionaries. And what's sad about it, is that they may just get their way, too.
I'll Just Move
|
November 30, 2009
Telski has the right to "improve" itself into bankruptcy if it wants. Anyone that opens a business in this town is knowingly hitching their horse to that wagon so when their horse goes lame because of too much weight in the wagon they shouldn't complain. Problem with people these days is everybody finds it easier to go along rather than really think for themselves and face down problems when they are still small. Save this comment and look at it in ten years.
anonymous
|
November 30, 2009
Really glad Face isn't running anything except kung fu dvds. Dude, move to Wolf Creek.
another theory to be
|
November 30, 2009
tested...as a pre-requisite for destroying Bear Creek for their profit TSG should have an open financial book examination so we can see and understand why Riley and his henchman see the need to destroy that which we all so enjoy...

Period.

photos

more photos