On the news tonight, a government scientist has predicted that the temperature is going to rise by 3C in the future. I have since found out that approximately for every 100m rise in altitude the temperature drops by 1C. Bear in mind this is a government scientist , he will be from the cautious/ optimistic end of science, so it is not unreasonable for the snow line to move up the mountain by 500m.
Would it be fair to assume that a ski property at 1500m will have the same snow conditions a resort at 1000m currently enjoys?
I have been looking to buy a property in a ski resort , but the only ones I can afford are at 1000m. (I want minimum 3 Bedroom 3 Bath) I seriously thought about reducing property size to get further up the mountain, however, after News report, I don't see the point, if say in 10/15 years time the snow at 1500m is as reliable as the current 1000m resorts.
I would buy at 1500m if I could get the property for 1000m prices. Can someone please tell me why people are paying such high prices for these places. What they need to be doing is looking down the hill 500metres to see what they should be buying and selling at.
Rule Number 1: Don't believe everything you see on television Rule Number 2: Luckily, we all die sometime. If we didn't one would have a real reason to worry about global warming. Rule number 3: This has to do with Listeria,Salmonella, CJD, H1N5,SARS and now global warming. If someone says it's going to happen, go down to the shops and buy huge amounts of what they recommend you don't eat.....
It all comes down to location & the lower down the mountain you are the shorter the season, and the more hassel it is to get to the snow! This maybe wont be a problem if you're going to use it yourself only, but if you're looking to let it, your customers will want ski in ski out for the whole season & you're unlikely to get this at 1000m or if you do, the season will be shorter, so your chance to earn from it reduces. I'd go as high up the mountain as possible, or make sure where you buy links to the higher resorts via a good high speed lift system Good luck!
Location is the key: If it is not ski in /ski out the potential for real capital appreciation is slim.
The height is important, however a Swiss Real Estate agent told me that 1800m is potentially too high for a summer rental market, as from time to time it snows in July. I find this a little odd why he should won't to put me off from going as high as possible, after all the summer rental is peanuts when compared to the winter rental. Do you think he might be having trouble shifting the properties at lower altitude?
Height is one factor, but others are lifts, local services, and roads. The relationship (in terms of value) can be quite complex. I've seen some nice ski-in/out chalets, but you don't want somewhere inaccessible if snow is heavy (I've seen desperate visitors panicking because they simply can't get out of their drives, even with chains). And a lot of people are put-off by seeing "Just a short 50M walk to the chalet." - at 11pm after a 2 hour drive, fitting chains just to get the last 2km, carting your luggage across 50M of deep snow is no way to start your holiday.
Our apartment has underground heated parking which is a big plus point with many clients.
Having centralised heating and hot water is also a big plus - you never run out of hot water, even if the everyone in the party decides to have a bath in quick succession.
Lift opening is a big limiter to rental, even in the summer. Most summer walkers and cyclists don't want to start the day with a 1,000M climb, however fit they are. If the lifts are running, then you release 2-3 hours to add to your excursion. In our village, summer lifts only run July-August and this basically sets the limit of the summer season.
It's true that height is important for snow, but then most lift systems are such that you simply don't ski the lower slopes until you go home. I'd probably agree that 1300M+ is a good height to look for as a base. So as you say, your agency rep may well be having problems with properties lower down.
Conversely, if you're prepared to get into a car to get to the base, then you can actually trade on this price differential. If you want to avoid using a car (or a long bus connection) then don't look much more than 250M from the base station: in winter, clomping along in your boots carrying your skis and poles, even this distance can be tedious. Many buyers visit in the summer, when a pleasant 400M walk in trainers belies the problems you'll have clomping the same journey in boots, or taking the car.
Closeness to services is also a factor. We can walk to the supermarket, hire shops and restaurants from our apartment. Many of the chalet residents have to use a car (parked in the open). Personally, I'd rather be in a smaller property cloose to lifts and services than a bigger place that's isolated.
In retrospect, I'd say you could work out a 'scoring' system of oyour own so that you could evaluate each place on the basis of lifts, services, accessability, snow, etc.
The reason it is proving difficult to find any suitable property for a reasonable price is because I am very particular in what I want. You are quite right about walking in Ski Boots, up a hill. Its just no fun. I am after slope side property with access in summer and winter for 2 cars(park outside) at a min altitude of 1500m with links to a big ski area. And also property must "Wash its Face" with a 30-35% deposit (repayment, interest and running costs).
Also: Will a North facing resort get sufficient sun for Gin And Tonics after a hard day on the slopes?
JJB: North-facing locations have the advantage that snow melts less in the winter, which is good for preserving early snowfalls and if the weather turns warm during the season. Downside is that the light gets `flat' after 3pm if it's dull/cloudy. Drinks on the balcony are more of a March-Easter thing and we don't `do' late in the season - getting fussy, I suppose. North-facing balconies in the summer give you a good view of sunsets and afternoon sun if you have a balcony to the rear. But I can understand the attraction of south-facing if the resort is in the right position. Ovronnaz and Veysonnaz come to mind, in that case (assuming Crans and Verbier are too pricey for you).
