will you still go???

will you still purchess a trail pass?

  • Total voters
    245
B

Banks93

New member
Firecatguy said:
how about twice to the UP and 4 times out west!!!!what the better value?

I like to point this out...this poll means nothing if the people who live in mich vote as i believe you only register your sled??do you still pay the same price as out-state??
Click to expand...

Yes, that is a good point.

I would say that this is similar to the WI DNR deer hunting fiasco. I have been hunting for 25+ years and this year I don't think I am going to buy a tag. I know lots of out of state people are not buying tags and coming to WI like they did in the 70's, 80's and 90'. There are even a lot of WI hunters who are now going out of state to hunt. Anything the WI DNR has it's hands in is a bad thing IMHO. Maybe the MI DNR is taking notes.
 
T

Team Elkhorn

Guest
We make it to the UP about every other year. But every year before the season I order 3 UP stickers just in case we do. (I hate those ugly paper stickers, so I order the better quality ones). Next season I'm not getting stickers unless we actually do ride in the UP. Maybe we'll plan trips into the UP every other year?
 
B

bart

New member
polarisrider1 said:
Looks good on paper. One thing your not factoring in is that 10 less sleds not ripping up our trails, 25 sleds paying more to care for less trail wear = better trails. In my view the $45 is way ahead.
Click to expand...

Yeah and the 5 less couples getin hotel rooms and food and gas, less tax revenue so its a loss.......
 
L

latebraker

New member
xsledder said:
Right now 10 no, 25 yes,

35 * $35 = $1,225
25 * $45 = $1,125
Click to expand...

intersting way to look at it. I wonder if the people that answered no have ever purchased a Michigan trail pass. I also wonder if snow is unrideable in wisconsin would they really not go to Michigan.
 
F

fatdaddy

Member
Éveryone keeps saying $10 is no big deal and its really not, but like I said before its when you start adding these things up. what would you do if gas went up $10.00 and this site charges $10.00 and everytime you flush the toilet $10.00. I think you get the idea. alot of us live outside the riding area and it costs us alot more to get there, how would the UP do if we stopped comming up there. How would the hotels and bars do, gas stations and everyone else up there that relies on our money. I think it would have some affect?
 
E

elf

Well-known member
Just some food for thought:
This year we ran into some guys from Thunder Bay riding in MN. Over a few beers we got talking about why they are riding in MN and not near Thunder bay and the reason was no trails around there. They said back when Ontario came out with their higher cost trail permits the intent was to make the sport self funding. What actually happened, in their opinion, is that less and less passes were getting sold so the price kept going up and of course even less passes were sold. So now there is no money to groom a trail system around the Thunder Bay area, so even less passes are sold, and they come down to MN, 30 minute drive, and pay $16 or $18 (not sure) and can ride all year. So, in their opinion, higher trail pass fees killed snowmobiling in their area. If that is the case, I'd hate to see that happen in the Midwest.
 
E

elf

Well-known member
willey said:
The riding in the U.P. is worth an extra ten dollars from me! I do understand how it would affect a family with 4 or more sleds. You gotta pay to play I guess.

I will be for sure hitting the northwoods of Minnesota next season. I buy a sticker to ride with my Dad in the Brainerd area so I might as well try some Boondocking in the Arrowhead area. Elf you ever need a riding buddy let me know!
Click to expand...

Willey, we are going this weekend again. Come on up! I actually used to live near you, we lived in Amery for 8 yrs.
 
Admin

Admin

Administrator
Staff member
latebraker said:
intersting way to look at it. I wonder if the people that answered no have ever purchased a Michigan trail pass. I also wonder if snow is unrideable in wisconsin would they really not go to Michigan.
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same exact thing. I know you are keeping your analysis simple xsledder, but it is also favoring a point you seem to be trying to make.

I see two major flaws with this type of analysis.

1) Out of the no's, how many would actually come if it were the only place to ride? There have been several that have already said this would be the case, so they are not absolute no's, rather conditional no's. Seems to me the yes's are absolute yes's.

2) How many of the no's would always be a no, no matter what. Meaning is it really lost revenue as you are trying to make it out to be, or was that revenue already not there in the first place.

I do love this poll idea though. Interesting results so far, about what I expected, nearly a 6:1 ratio of yes to no.

-John
 
R

ridindirty800

Active member
Administrator said:
I was thinking the same exact thing. I know you are keeping your analysis simple xsledder, but it is also favoring a point you seem to be trying to make.

I see two major flaws with this type of analysis.

1) Out of the no's, how many would actually come if it were the only place to ride? There have been several that have already said this would be the case, so they are not absolute no's, rather conditional no's. Seems to me the yes's are absolute yes's.

2) How many of the no's would always be a no, no matter what. Meaning is it really lost revenue as you are trying to make it out to be, or was that revenue already not there in the first place.

I do love this poll idea though. Interesting results so far, about what I expected, nearly a 6:1 ratio of yes to no.

-John
Click to expand...



When there are guys who live in Michigan voting yes it throws the whole thing off! If you could just poll people from out of state it may be different! I do not think it would change very much though.
 
B

Banks93

New member
Administrator said:
I was thinking the same exact thing. I know you are keeping your analysis simple xsledder, but it is also favoring a point you seem to be trying to make.

I see two major flaws with this type of analysis.

1) Out of the no's, how many would actually come if it were the only place to ride? There have been several that have already said this would be the case, so they are not absolute no's, rather conditional no's. Seems to me the yes's are absolute yes's.

2) How many of the no's would always be a no, no matter what. Meaning is it really lost revenue as you are trying to make it out to be, or was that revenue already not there in the first place.

I do love this poll idea though. Interesting results so far, about what I expected, nearly a 6:1 ratio of yes to no.

-John
Click to expand...

Yes, but you can spin those same to flaws to the Yes answer also.

1) People in MI don't count and there revenue is already counted.
2) MI will never ever be the only choice.

I think xsledder proved his point that it is enough people that are thinking his same way that it would hurt the UP. People in MI might not see it that way as they look at it as people invading there territory but it also helps bring revenue. Why do you think WI doesn't have a toll booth by IL - WI border. They make alot more money on the FIBS with taxing there boats, cottages, and other toys.
 
P

polarisrider1

New member
Firecatguy said:
less people will= less places that are open!!!less hotels,loss of jobs it cant be a plus!!!
Click to expand...

Pat, I am not happy about an increase either, But being a realist, I have accepted the increase knowing that to maintain and improve the trails at the current rate of fuel, insurance and equipment needed to do the job, a cost increase needs to be. Nobody likes it, but it is a for real issue that needs to be addressed. If the public din't demand such nice trails then we could probably do away with most of the cost of the permits. I don't see that happening. A comparision would be the current price of sleds. I was totally happy with a Polaris edge chassis with a carbed engine for $5000. Then came the manufacturers making sleds they say we want and need prices have doubled for sleds quite quickly. Who needs ABS, Power steering, Turbos, 4 strokes for all that matters, plush M10 suspensions (trails not smooth enough?) exotic shocks, Fuel Injection, elec. reverse, elec. start, heated grips, heated seats, and on and on. now we pay over $10,000 for a sled. I could see the trail system go the same way. Canada has gone way over board with their trails and cost. so DNR and MSA need to find out what the market wants and is willing to bear. When they ask, Don't blantantly say, "smoother trails, more trails, better bridges" and not to expect to pay for it. I think the cry'ers will get over it and life will go on.
 
R

rp7x

Well-known member
i'm feelin lucky

flame on , i'll just ride off trail with no sticker , or maybe i,ll borrow yours
 
R

rozzy43

Member
I was one of the few that voted no. but being where i'm located, MI is a short drive-yes! but we always went to Northern WI mainly for the "more trail options"....but if no snow is in any of these areas, it just means that it's the same amount of drive time for me to get to PA for no cost of a trail permit to ride.
 
xsledder

xsledder

Active member
Currently at 18 no, 66 yes.

84 * $35 = $2,940
66 * $45 = $2,970

Now your in positive territory. Just using the numbers. No new math here. I'm actually surprised by the number of nos, I thought they would be half.

Not an actuary so can't use nothing more than the poll numbers. You can put all the what-if's you want in to it but the nos are probably higher then most people expected.
 
Last edited:
7

700classic

New member
First, I voted yes. Second, it is a MI. trail pass and all I'm hearing about is the UP. There are many miles of trails in the Lower too. Rode quite a few good miles on PR1's turf this year, even rode in the thumb on that trail system. It's your 45 dollars use it as you see fit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top