SummitPost.org

I'm certain you folks recall the demise of Alpinist when they were selling their lucrative demographics.

http://www.statlistics.com/datacards/cndc182.htm

Average income, $91,000.

battledome wrote:I think it depends. Some people start out middle class... and then they become climbers and drop a socio-economic rung or two.

Haha! That's totally me. I lost all ambition to climb the corporate ladder when I found such a great way to spend my free time. And the "work hard retire early" path seemed to contain a lot of potholes...

Among the guys I climb with there is a huge diversity of incomes and it has no correlation with their ability. Mike is a pediatiric intensive care doc ond easily walks up 5.12 trad climbs (and should be climbing trad in the mid .13's but hasn't really tried yet). Matt is not quite as strong but is bold and recently led his first 5.13 trad route and lays up fiberglass for a company making windmills. Josh is a fireman and has about the same ability as I do, Kyle is a school teacher and has led plenty of 5.13R trad routes. I'm a PhD chemist. Huge diversity.... and that is what is cool about climbing.

If any of you wealthier climbers here wanna donate any winter or alpine gear to a poorer person hit me up.

To be honest, while I can someone dirtbagging as a sport or even trad climber, alpine climbing is much more gear-intensive (a good -20 deg bag = rack + rope), and difficult alpine-style climbs totally trashes gear.

I'm already dumping my income straight into gear, and I'm not sure I'd be able to do any alpine if I were to end up flipping burgers.

Just my guess that high disposable income is more of a factor (a requiste) for activities like high altitude mountaineering. I imagine Himalayan outings cost a pretty penny, not only in terms of out-of-pocket for travel and gear, but also the equivalent in time; unless you're in the renown/elite class where you have sponsors.

kheegster wrote:To be honest, while I can someone dirtbagging as a sport or even trad climber, alpine climbing is much more gear-intensive (a good -20 deg bag = rack + rope), and difficult alpine-style climbs totally trashes gear.

I'm already dumping my income straight into gear, and I'm not sure I'd be able to do any alpine if I were to end up flipping burgers.

True, you just have to be smart about that...I see way too many of you buying expensive gear that the industry produces for one purpose....to sell to the wealthier "big mountain" trekkers because they want the absolute best and can afford it....most of it really is not going to make you any better of a climber or your expedition go any smoother....i.e. ArcTeryx clothing, expensive plastics and/or the latest tools (if you are only climbing WI 4 anyway?)...if you want to climb hard, I expect you to rip your clothes and outerwear to threads, no matter who makes it. Be smart about paying reasonable prices for it. So many folks are geared up way beyond their level or what they need. Just an observation. The more you spend, the better for me, but there at better things in life to spend your hard earned money on.

Eric Beck, part of the Camp 4 crew in the 60s and who had mastered the art of dirtbagging, once famously wrote that: "At either end of the social spectrum lies a leisure class." I'd say that pretty much sum up alot of climbers.

Most climbers I know are either living hand to mouth for climbing or have a fairly comfortable or disposible income they can spend for that purpose. The folks I climbed with long ago, for example, typically fall into two camps: they frittered around professionally but devoted the bulk of their energy to climbing or they applied the drive that propelled them as climbers to their professional lives and they're now ph.ds or lawyers, doctors, etc.

Sadly, I for one have always been stuck in the 'have money-no time' or 'have time no-money quandry.' Nowadays, it's the money-no time, so I'm keeping up my end of the wealth/climbers issues.

Mountain Impulse wrote:Just my guess that high disposable income is more of a factor (a requiste) for activities like high altitude mountaineering. I imagine Himalayan outings cost a pretty penny, not only in terms of out-of-pocket for travel and gear, but also the equivalent in time; unless you're in the renown/elite class where you have sponsors.

The individuals going to the big three (Everest, Cho Oyo and Ama Dablam which accounts for the vast majority of those climbing in the Himalyas; probably ~85%) tend to be wealthier, but many happen to just spend A LOT of their hard earned cash on something that is important to them.

Also some of the most interesting mountains aren't that expensive. Kasum Kangaru which has an AMAZING north face and awesome ridge routes has a peak fee of $750 plus a garbage deposit which you can easily get back (plus a LO). Thee route can be done as cheaply as a trip to Alaska (almost)

The funny thing is that I find that my climbing helps my professional life (I don't care about advancement so I'm not afraid of telling people what they don't want to hear so people tend to respect my professional opinion more) and not climbing day in and day out and not placing my ego in terms of climbing, improves my climbing.

Probably because most climbers/hikers realize that there's more to life than working...

Dow Williams wrote:

kheegster wrote:To be honest, while I can someone dirtbagging as a sport or even trad climber, alpine climbing is much more gear-intensive (a good -20 deg bag = rack + rope), and difficult alpine-style climbs totally trashes gear.

I'm already dumping my income straight into gear, and I'm not sure I'd be able to do any alpine if I were to end up flipping burgers.

True, you just have to be smart about that...I see way too many of you buying expensive gear that the industry produces for one purpose....to sell to the wealthier "big mountain" trekkers because they want the absolute best and can afford it....most of it really is not going to make you any better of a climber or your expedition go any smoother....i.e. ArcTeryx clothing, expensive plastics and/or the latest tools (if you are only climbing WI 4 anyway?)...if you want to climb hard, I expect you to rip your clothes and outerwear to threads, no matter who makes it. Be smart about paying reasonable prices for it. So many folks are geared up way beyond their level or what they need. Just an observation. The more you spend, the better for me, but there at better things in life to spend your hard earned money on.

I tend to buy expensive gear but don't view it as wasteful at all. What price do you put on getting a restful night sleep, or keeping your digits warm in freezing weather to prevent losing your fingers and toes? There is not just comfort to consider but also safety. I could go through each piece of gear I own and strongly justify the expense. I guess it's all a matter of perspective. Perhaps the biggest luxury is to pay more for lighter weight gear. However. even that I would argue helps me to go farther faster and is thus worth the extra $.

I have noticed that the increase in popularity of rock climbing and danger sports parallels advances in orthopedic medicine.

150 years ago if you busted an ankle you would be screwed up for life. Now you are back on the boulders in a couple months.

mvs wrote:

battledome wrote:I think it depends. Some people start out middle class... and then they become climbers and drop a socio-economic rung or two.

Haha! That's totally me. I lost all ambition to climb the corporate ladder when I found such a great way to spend my free time. And the "work hard retire early" path seemed to contain a lot of potholes...

+1

kheegster wrote:To be honest, while I can someone dirtbagging as a sport or even trad climber, alpine climbing is much more gear-intensive (a good -20 deg bag = rack + rope), and difficult alpine-style climbs totally trashes gear.

I'm already dumping my income straight into gear, and I'm not sure I'd be able to do any alpine if I were to end up flipping burgers.

You don't know a lot of serious alpinists, I assume. Most of the badass alpine climbers I know (those who aren't sponsored ambassadors or the like) are total dirtbags. They live out of their cars or at the valley SAR site; they guide clients up sloggineering peaks so they can get a free ticket to South America or Alaska; they work crap jobs and live like monks for a few months so they can venture out into the greater rangers for the rest of the year. Also, they're getting pro deals on gear, expedition left-overs, etc. Ultimately, commitment is what it comes down to. They're willing to forgo a lot that most people take for granted to get out there. Not for everyone, to be sure.

In my opinion, climbing & mountaineering is where the lower and upper income brackets get together. The reasons are all covered by the above posts.

The income-challenged, young climbers can adopt the dirt-bag lifestyle and exist to climb. Its easier to do this at an early stage in life before they commit to families and careers. The can dedicate all of their time to being the best at their sport. They have to scrimp, save and forage to get needed gear.

The older professional, career types who enjoy climbing and mountaineering have committed a large part of their steady income to support their families and maintain a comfortable standard of living. They have a lot of nice gear but not as much time available for adventure as they would like.

Climbers and mountaineers are a still a small minority of society. Most of my middle-class friends, aquaintences and colleages spend most of their time and money on motorcycles, quads, buggies, jet-skis, boats, toy-haulers and motor-homes.