Interesting SAM article on the tradeoffs made in the ski world today about how much real estate to develop around ski areas. I like one of the theories espoused by the author, which perhaps naively goes something like this: achieving a successful balance between building real estate and improving the mountain product comes through the utilization of real estate at ski resorts primarily for rental accommodations to guests, instead of purely aiming for as much high-end real estate development as the immediate market will bear.
http://www.saminfo.com/issues/article.php?tid=3513

Here's a 2006 NY Times article on Wisp and the million dollar homes sprouting all around this ski area in Maryland: http://travel.nytimes.com/2006/01/27/realestate/27wisp.html

Here is a random/typical example of the numerous high end slope-side vacation homes at Okemo, VT (holiday rate $4,600 per night): http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=h...%3D10%26hl%3Den

It was especially nice to see the different approaches different resorts are taking. At least they're not all taking the "build real estate and use skiing as just another amenity" approach. It'd be great to have a few more "lift ticket and cheesburger" ski hills around though.

Sugar Bowl is a gem. I have a hard time picking a single favorite Tahoe resort but SB is right up there. It has terrain for all abilities and a great feel and culture. Some of the chutes in the Palisades area are as challenging as anything anywhere. My son & I were lucky enough to be there an hour after the road opened in Mar. 95 after 11 feet of snow fell over 6 days. We skied lines that had not been skied for decades; they were filled in whereas most of the time they are nothing but rock.