Guided "climbing" on Everest

I´ve just finished watching Discovery's "Everest-Beyond the Limit" and I must confess I´m deeply impressed...but in a negative way.I´m creating this thread not just to share my opinnion,but much more to read about other people´s opinions.

I´d just like to ask you guys what you think about these commercial expeditions on Everest (and not only). Personally,I didn´t think much about it until I saw this documentary. I was struck by what kind of people attept to "climb" Mount Everest. Except Mogens,the NZ man and the Lebanese I could reckon no real mountaineering skills in anybody else.I am no mountaineer to judge,just a rock climber.
But how can somebody like Tim just get down his rucksack and fall asleep on the way to the North Col? Or the way both he and the French guy refused to return when they were told so,putting the lives of the Sherpas in danger!!It´s indignant how the choice of one man can kill not only him,but the whole team of sherpas. Besides that,the whole team of chinese climbers who could not climb the fixed ladder.
I feel that more than mountaineering,this is mere...tourism...extreme tourism,true,but a kind of tourism that can get the sherpas killed for one man´s ambition and maddness...

And last but not least,shouldn´t it be about the journey somewhere more than "just" the summit? About all you experience while becoming a mountaineer and a climber,instead of paying a fortune so that someone gets you up a mountain? Because,let´s be sincere,without the sherpas,none of these commercial expedition would do nothing.

So,what´s your view in this matter? I´m extremely interested in any reply.

Thanks,
Alex

PS.sorry if this sounds like nonsense,but i really felt I had to ask

It's all pretty messed up...
Check out High Crimes by Michael Kodas.. It's primarily based around the CT Everest expedition a few years back, but goes into a lot of history of expeditions and just how messy things have become from base camp to high camps.

It's quite unfortunate that really all you need is a big checkbook, and you'll be able to find some guide who will take you there... seems like some care more about $ than safety of their clients.

But reading that book certainly deterred me from EVER wanting to do some popular expedition guided peak. I'll stick to my 30 m rock pitches :D

What that place needs is a starbucks and a spa at the summit.

ukclimbing.com/news/item.ph…

crap, I just dropped my jumar

I agree completely. I'm no mountaineer (although one day maybe I can gain this title) however, I think that if you haven't learned the skills to survive on a mountain like Everest you simply don't deserve to be there. It's unethical, as it puts everyone else in danger. I've learned to respect the mountains in my alpine ascents. These people/insititutions are showing no respect and will pay the price sooner or later, as many already have...

Its kind of too bad that K2 is not the taller mountain. Everest would avoid some of the traffic, and after the 4 to 6 ratio of summitters to deaths dissuades further tourism, the mountains would be more respected. From here on the slogan is- K2, tallest mountain on earth.

You guys are just hating. Is this not a service like anything else? The South Col has virtually become via ferrata but thats not to say that you can't take a different line or climb it alpine style. Everyone involved makes a conscious decision to be there and despite being a risky profession, its an important source of income for the Sherpa people.

Well this type of guiding certainly makes summits like Everest less appealing/important to me. Lets face it the expeditions we are talking about here are far less impressive than a team that has experience and the team summits while relying on the team not the guide alone. That said I am happy for the Sherpas who are able to sell a product/service. The morals will be judged regardless of what they decide to do though, leave a man/woman to die to save the team well most of us here understand that view, however the general public might not. Mountaineering as a sport has become largely commercial and it has cheapened the experience for some.

Will Butler wrote:You guys are just hating. Is this not a service like anything else? The South Col has virtually become via ferrata but thats not to say that you can't take a different line or climb it alpine style. Everyone involved makes a conscious decision to be there and despite being a risky profession, its an important source of income for the Sherpa people.

I know it`s an income for the Sherpas,and I´m not "hating" on anyone ; all I´m saying is that such climbers on a mountain present a big threat to others.In the documentary i was talking about,you can clearly see how before having summited,and after having summited, a guide and terry who´re much faster have to wait so that the chinese team makes it up a ladder! And their O2 was getting dangerously low... Everest is only an example,but it also happens in the Alps. On the Hörnligrat on Materhorn,some guides "drag" unfit climbers towards summit. All I say is that this is a risk for the other people on the mountain (in this fall what happened is that the "client" decided to use the shoulder of the climber below him as a step while wearing crampons).

The idea of "climbing" something, but having someone there to do everything else (fix ropes, cook, set up tents, etc.) seems kind of like getting carried up the hill. It seems that the sherpas, and a few other professionals, are really the ones climbing the mountain. Most of the characters they had up there seemed like they would be a risk even on a small hike!

I just finished reading Ed Viesturs "No Shortcuts to the Top" and the perspective I have gathered from reading his book is unless you have been on a 8000 meter peak, you cant judge, but also that using fixed ropes put in place by others is legit but having little experience then paying your way up causes problems, i.e. bottlenecking at Hilary Step (this played into the '96 disaster). But I strongly believe, unless you have been on an 8000 meter peak lets not judge, safety is based on individual perspective, but when someone else's perspective on safety puts others at risk or their lack of experience puts themsleves in danger it is the experienced guides responsibilities to step in without endangering themselves.

IMHO