EEPING TRACK IN RENTAL K
Killington evaluated Easyrent, says Hardy, but the resort prioritized the abil- ity for guests to be able to do one-stop shopping for rentals, tickets, and lessons through the RTP enterprise system. So, the resort uses the RTP rental module, a less complete solution for managing rental department data. (Ed. note: According to Trever Hinckley, rep for Easyrent at Wintersteiger, RTP and Easyrent are in the process of integrating the two programs at the urging of RTP customer Telluride, Colo. This will provide all RTP cus- tomers the option of a robust rental-optimized software module.) “All of our data and rental info is captured in the RTP software that we’re using to sell the ticket and lesson prod- uct,” Hardy says. “But it’s been a bit of a labored process to collect data beyond the guests’ purchasing information.” Killington has experienced some challenges with gathering information such as the skier’s weight, height, and other metrics through the RTP software. After one season of gathering renters’ info in advance, last season techs recorded this data in the shop, Hardy says.
“SO MUCH OF THE LIABILITY COMES BACK TO US AS THE MANUFACTURER, AND THAT’S WHY WE HAVE A REALLY IN-DEPTH INDEMNIFICATION PROGRAM.” — MARSHALL MAYHEW
BINDING TESTING Binding testing is a key part of indemni- fication programs. The shop procedures standards describes how rental operators should test bindings (for skis, not snow- boards) pre-season and then select and test gear in-season to ensure boot-bind- ing systems are functioning as intended. A key requirement is to test 5 percent of a fleet every two weeks during the season, a process that helps detect any fleetwide issues that might trigger a need to test a greater percentage or even all of a fleet. Keeping track of all the data gen- erated, in an easily searchable system, requires diligence. The choice of test equipment can help. There are basically two choices: the manually operated Vermont Release Cal- ibrator and automated machines from Wintersteiger or Montana. The automat- ed machines can record the test results and export them to a database or soft- ware system, but the machines are more costly than the Calibrator—roughly, $20,000 to $30,000 vs. $6,500. That often leads ski areas to the Calibrator, which requires manually recording the results. Powder Mountain’s transition from the Calibrator and manual data recording to digital recording with the
developed by the ASTM F27 Commit- tee on Snow Sports. The suppliers’ tech manuals and procedures are designed to ensure operators are in compliance. Marshall notes that these programs are updated periodically as the ASTM stan- dard evolves, and resorts must adapt and change as well. For example, three years ago, ASTM ruled out the longstanding practice of using “correction factors” to adjust the DIN settings for bindings that functioned properly but whose indicator scales were either too high or low. Liability can be expensive. These pro- grams are especially important this year. “Right now in the insurance market, espe- cially for general liabilities, we’re in a real- ly hard [read: expensive] market, worse than the market was in ’88,” says Tim Bruce of Safehold Special Risk. That’s say- ing something, as anyone who endured the late ’80s insurance market knows. Another reason for diligence: costly lawsuits. “Some of the awards coming out of the court systems are just nucle- ar,” Bruce warns. “And we don’t see that changing.” He cites a catastrophic injury case that set a life care plan of $50 million. Handle with care. As a result, Bruce says, a catastrophic incident involving rental gear will lead an insurer to pull together all relevant records and data immediately—and perhaps pull the gear involved as evidence. He recommends that resorts establish a “cat loss proto- col” that describes how to handle such incidents, including taking the gear out of service and preserving it in “as-is” con- dition. Careful handling is imperative: “If we do have a problem with a claim and you’ve destroyed evidence,” Bruce says, the next question is, “what else have you destroyed?” One step Bruce recommends to pre- serve documentation is for operators to keep two copies of the suppliers’ tech and indemnification documents: one for regular use, and a second clean copy for safekeeping and possible use as evidence in a lawsuit.
LIABILITY AND INDEMNIFICATION
The push for data tracking and documen- tation is driven in part by liability issues, and in particular, the rental shop indem- nification programs that ski-binding companies offer to transfer some liabil- ity concerns from resorts to the suppli- ers. Each indemnification program is unique, but if rental shop operators fol- low the requirements of these programs, the binding manufacturers provide, say, $5 million of coverage for an equip- ment-related lawsuit. In exchange for offering that level of protection, manufacturers’ indemnifica- tion programs require a variety of differ- ent forms of documentation, including liability release and post-accident forms. “So much of the liability comes back to us as a manufacturer, and that’s why we have a really in-depth indemnification program,” says Head Tyrolia marketing manager Marshall Mayhew. Follow the standard. The indemnifi- cation programs are linked to the shop and binding testing procedures standards
A tech at Massanutten runs a binding check with the shop’s automated Safetronic test machine.
Made with FlippingBook Digital Proposal Creator