Lessons learned from another ski season…

Another ski season is now over, so it’s time to conduct the annual debriefing and find out what I learned as a skier and more importantly as a human being through the turns I’ve made. 

This season stood out for its lack of snow and its subsequent shortness all over the Western US. That’s mostly why skiing looked to be more of a chore than a thrilling experience, but still, I forced myself to go and discover new ways to have fun in a universe of scarcity and keep on learning new things and skills by “pushing the envelope” in the direction of doing “difficult things”. 

When advanced skiers were skiing like beginners as the conditions got extremely tough, I did my very best to stay graceful and nimble on my pair of boards and make something out of nothing, or if you prefer “turning lemons into lemonade”. I learned a few new tricks like using the edge of a run creatively to work my way down an overcrowded spot by passing folks in places they wouldn’t go, using speed defensively and also cutting my way into slush, ice or other heavy types of snow. 

In more than one way I discovered adaptation this season. First, to my advancing age, skiing perhaps less in terms of hours and vertical, but much more efficiently in the ways I expanded my energy into my skiing, in restraining my temerity and also avoiding potentially bad situations which resulted in almost no fall except for one single one in a terrible mogul, without any negative outcome. I learned to do more with less and return home satisfied. 

On the subject of satisfaction, I loved my new Nordica rear-entry boots, although they weren’t perfect but still made a huge difference in getting in and out of them. A few things should be done to them to tweak them into greater perfection, but that will be for another time. There was also the comfort provided by the new covered parking garage at the Canyons Village that made struggling into mud a thing of the past. 

At 78, I learned more about advancing in age and accepting change, particularly when some younger and stronger skiers happened to pass me and leave me in the dust. I was still happy with myself and saw one door closing as another one opened up. Overall and in spite of some weaker muscles I did all the difficult skiing I used to do in previous years and I was pleased with my 72nd winter season. I also was grateful to have done what so many my age, and even younger, can no longer do. 

I’m aiming at doing much, much better next year, snow and weather helping!

Tip of the iceberg in ski racing earnings?

Last week, the official prize earning for World Cup skiers circulated around the specialty media citing figures about what the top best female and males are making, like up to 741 254 Euros for Marco Odermatt, and 615 167 Euros for Mikaela Shiffrin) in winning World Cup races.

This doesn’t include the Olympic prize money that is left to the discretion of each National Olympic Committee ($37,500 for gold in the US vs. 87,500 euros in France). These figures don’t take into account sponsorship contracts, brand deals and social media as well as other special events or involvement (films, books, ski days, etc.) 

In fact, very few skiers make serious money, only a few (Lindsey Vonn, Mikaela Shiffrin, Marco Odermatt) make several millions per year. For instance, this 2025-2026 season, Shiffrin should make between $6 to $8 million and so is Odermatt, but this is almost entirely from endorsements, not prize money. Shiffrin's high sponsorship income is driven by her record-setting career, including 110 World Cup wins and maintaining a high profile in both American and European markets. 

This said she has expenses other athletes don’t have, like special private coaching, mental specialists, etc. In Europe and particularly in Italy and France, many World Cup skiers are often part of the military or state police or even custom agents, which provides them with a relatively low but steady salary and support for training and competition. 

The typical annual income for a pro skier ranges from $30,000 to $125,000 before taxes, and one has to reach the 1% to earn much more. Let’s say that for about 150 men and as many women ranked in the overall Alpine Ski World Cup, the Paretto rules apply, with 20 % of them earning 80% of the total pot of money available.

Professional skiers earn dramatically less than athletes in most other individual sports. Even top World Cup racers or elite freeskiers typically make only a fraction of what golfers, tennis players, or combat‑sport athletes earn. The money in skiing is limited because prize purses are small, the audience is niche, and most income depends on sponsorships rather than winnings.

Upgrading Park City Mountain?

After a failed attempt a few years ago to upgrade its 6-pack SilverLode lift into an 8 passenger chair, and replacing the Eagle/Eaglet fixed grip lifts by a 6-pack detachable, Park City Mountain (PCM) is returning to the Park City council for an authorization, emphasizing that these improvement won’t increase vehicular traffic in town. 

It’s true that with the terrible snow season we just had, Park City needs all the help it can get to make up for its low altitude in view of continuing climate warming. Given the extremely poor snow season we just experienced and the resort’s relatively low elevation, which makes it more vulnerable to ongoing climate warming (the woolly Mammoth in the room) —Park City needs every operational advantage it can get. Hopefully, the City will at approve the Eagle upgrade. 

The most urgent need is to increase morning uphill capacity so skiers can access the mountain quickly, without long lines. Failing to address this continues to hurt the Park City brand, especially if we put in the mix the number of outdated lifts still in operation. A faster, higher‑capacity Eagle lift connecting the base to the top of King Con would significantly address the morning bottleneck. 

However, the proposed upgrade of Silverlode to an 8‑pack won’t be enough to resolve the crowding at the base of that lift. Unlike its predecessors, PCM has developed a habit of frequently slowing or stropping its chairlifts, which significantly reduces their nominal capacity. Adding two more seats per chair may lead to even more stoppages, offsetting much of the theoretical 33% capacity increase. This won’t make the difference needed to resolve the current long lines and massive overcrowding at the base of Silverlode.

Instead, I return to a proposal I’ve advocated since this discussion began: Lower the base terminal of Motherlode down the Thaynes drainage to roughly 7,500 feet. This would allow a ski cut-off to be created from the top of Broadway, wrapping around and below Miner’s Camp, descending directly into the new Motherlode loading area. 

The cherry on the cake would be to extend the top terminal by moving it to the edge of Puma Ridge, near the timberline below Jupiter Peak, at up to 9,500 feet. This would open a much easier access to the entire Jupiter area, including Puma Bowl, Pioneer and McConkey lifts, and any terrain currently served by Motherlode. 

Many skiers coming from the upgraded Eagle lift would have the option to ski into Broadway and then turn left toward the new Motherlode cut-off, reducing pressure on both Silverlode and King Con. Removing Motherlode’s top station from the congested Summit area would also reduce crowding there. A redesigned Motherlode would offer roughly 2,000 vertical feet of skiing and distribute skiers more effectively across the entire Park City side of the resort. 

Even those skiing the bowl from the top of the Quicksilver Gondola could directly access Motherlode without having to reach King Con. This could reduce or eliminate the need for the aging Thaynes double chair. In addition, the current Motherlode 4‑pack could be relocated to Jupiter, with its base lowered near the Thaynes mine shaft, improving access and spreading skiers into currently underutilized terrain. 

Overall, this approach would improve circulation, reduce congestion, and make far better use of existing terrain than simply upgrading Silverlode to an 8‑pack.

The end of a forgettable ski season

Last Friday was for me the end of the most forgettable ski season in my entire life. The good snow never really came and for the first time ever, I had to literally force myself to go out and hit the slopes. My skis got regularly ruined so I had to work many times to fix them, and except for two or three good times, skiing was just terrible.

The times I skied (58) and the quantity of ski I logged 662,611 vertical feet (201 294 vertical meters) was similar to what I did 25 years ago when I was still working and a quarter of what I achieved 3 years ago (admittedly, I’m older, but still) ...

This is not to say that I didn’t try hard. I did my very best to ski the best I could in conditions that were the worst ever, but over me and inside my head, I couldn’t remove the specter that this season was a sample of the shape of things to come in a changing world of warming climate. 

That is, as I like to say, “The woolly Mammoth in the room” that no one wants to even acknowledge and hear about, shrugging one bad season off and forcing themselves to believe that next year will be much better. Oh, how much do I wish these folks were right!

Don’t worry, be happy! (Part Four)

Since I was born and grew up in France, I’d be remiss not to include my native country into that analysis. In France, this kind of review is based on a combination of statistical data from INSEE and satisfaction surveys. For 2025–2026, a clear distinction is observed between departments offering a "healthy" living environment and those offering the highest levels of overall satisfaction. 

If we look at the “Top Regions” (Those standing at the top of the "Happiness Podium"), recent rankings often place coastal and mountain regions at the forefront, driven by a balance between the natural environment and access to services. These regions include Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur that emerges as the leader for perceived happiness in 2025. It benefits from high satisfaction rates regarding transportation and—naturally—sunshine. 

Then there are Pays de la Loire and Brittany, these two regions dominating the overall satisfaction indicators. They are highly appreciated for their balance of air quality, and the vibrancy of cities like Angers—regularly voted the most pleasant city in France, just before Annecy, in Haute-Savoie. 

The Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes follows as it’s the benchmark region for health and active living. It combines state-of-the-art medical infrastructure (in Lyon and Grenoble) with unparalleled access to outdoor recreational activities. Below, the analysis of “Happiness” by region in France is broken down by one’s priorities, namely health, safety, or vibrancy. There is also a satisfaction criteria survey in 2026 based on studies by OpinionWay/Ipsos in 2026.

Those are priorities French folks use to define a "happy" area. These include Quality of Life (82%) with factors like pollution, green spaces, and climate. Safety & Security (73%), an important measure rising in importance when selecting a place of residence. Health (56%) based on easy and rapid access to medical doctors and hospital facilities. 

In conclusion, we’ll mention France’s Parisian Paradox, the Île-de-France region—and Seine-Saint-Denis in particular, that often records the lowest satisfaction levels, despite having higher average incomes. Housing costs, commuting times, and a lack of proximity to nature weigh heavily on the perceived happiness index of residents in the capital region. 

Conversely, rural departments such as Cantal (15) or Lozère (48)—though less well-equipped in terms of transport infrastructure, post high satisfaction scores, thanks to a strong sense of security and the quality of social relationships. Knowing what I learned about France, I think I’ll stay put in Park City!

Don’t worry, be happy! (Part Three)

Like we’ve seen it for the entire world, we’ll try today to apply that same "macro" lens to the "micro" level of our 50 United States. In fact, organizations like Gallup and the Sustainable Development Solutions Network do this yearly. When we break down the US using those same six pillars—Wealth, Support, Health, Freedom, Generosity, and Trust—the "United" States starts to look like a collection of very different countries. 

Here is how that extrapolation would look across the US. First, there’s the "Healthy Life Expectancy" divide in which the Mountain West (Utah, Colorado) and New England (Vermont, Massachusetts) would consistently take the top spots. This comes from the "Active" Effect: High-altitude states with strong outdoor cultures (like those with major ski industries) show significantly higher healthy life expectancy. 

These regions benefit from a "virtuous cycle" where climate and environment encourages physical activity, which in turn boosts mental well-being. In contrast, the "Stroke Belt" (so-called because of its higher stroke mortality rates) in the Southeast often scores lower on this pillar, not just due to healthcare access, but because of systemic dietary and lifestyle factors. 

Then there’s the social support region where "Community wins over Anonymity", where the Midwest and the Intermountain West (Nevada, Utah, and Idaho) often outshine the coastal powerhouses. States with high civic engagement and religious or community-based networks (think Utah, Minnesota, or Nebraska) score remarkably high on "having someone to count on." 

On the other side, high-GDP states like New York or California often suffer from "social fragmentation." People move there for work, leaving their support networks behind, which lowers their overall "Happiness Score" despite higher salaries. Another regional trait is driven by freedom to make life choices. In the American context, this pillar is often a battle between Economic Freedom and Personal Freedom. 

We’re currently seeing a massive internal migration driven by this pillar. Some move to states like Texas or Florida for "Economic Freedom" (lower taxes, fewer regulations), while others move to states like Oregon or Washington for "Personal/Social Freedom" (environmental policies, social liberties). This is where the rankings become most "arbitrary." 

If the "Happiness Index" weights "Low Taxes" heavily, Texas wins. If it weighs "Public Services" heavily, Vermont wins. Now, there are the outliers. If we follow the World Population Review's metric for generosity (charitable giving and volunteering), the "Hit Parade" looks very different from the "Wealth" list. Wealthiest states (Connecticut, Maryland) are not always the most generous. Utah consistently ranks #1 in the US for both volunteering and charitable giving as a percentage of income.

This metric is highly meaningful because it measures "Social Cohesion." A state where people give their time and money to neighbors is generally more resilient to economic shocks. Finally, there is the perception of Corruption (Are we trusting our institutions?) This is perhaps the most "meaningless" pillar at the state level because it is so heavily influenced by the news cycle. 

States with long-standing political "machines" (like Illinois or New Jersey) often score low on trust. On the opposite side, there’s the "Small State" advantage in smaller, more homogeneous states (like New Hampshire or Wyoming), they tend to have higher trust scores because the government feels "closer" to the people. When I review this, I realize that Utah isn’t so bad! 

Tomorrow, we’ll explore France, just like we just did for the US...

Don’t worry, be happy! (Part Two)

After introducing the concept of happiness as presented by the World Population Review, here is the report. A pragmatic person could see it as a good indicator if looking for a better spot in which to spend the rest of their life. 

If we want the best, we need to look at Northern European countries that dominate the top of this 2025 happiness rankings, reflecting strong social support systems and high standards of living. Finland is ranked as the happiest country in the world in 2024, with Denmark and Iceland following closely behind.

The least happy country in the world for 2024 was Afghanistan, whose 143rd and last place ranking can be attributed in part to a low life expectancy rate, low gross domestic product rates per capita, and perhaps most importantly, the recent Taliban takeover of Afghanistan. Rounding out the bottom five are Lebanon, Lesotho, Sierra Leone, and Democratic Republic of Congo. 

If you live in another country, like me in the US, we can see how happy our countrymen are and how much room is left for progress! Happiness rankings are determined by analyzing comprehensive Gallup polling data from close to 150 countries in six particular categories: gross domestic product per capita, social support, healthy life expectancy, freedom to make one’s own life choices, generosity of the general population, and perceptions of internal and external corruption levels. 

I don’t recommend going to Afghanistan, but Finland is okay. How’s your Finnish and have you packed up your suitcases yet?