I should have been clearer...I think they've paid $0.
And FWIW I ran into the jolly Mr. John Cumming at Snowbird with his GF/wife out for a stroll. Made me sick.....
-
Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!
You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!
Park City/Talisker-Vail Lawsuit
- Thread starter thetrailboss
- Start date
I should have been clearer...I think they've paid $0.
And FWIW I ran into the jolly Mr. John Cumming at Snowbird with his GF/wife out for a stroll. Made me sick.....
marcski
Active member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2005
- Messages
- 4,576
- Points
- 36
From the SAM article you posted a link:
"But Talisker/VR would seek a high price for their acquiescence: they would ask the court to require PCMR to post a bond equal to the rent for the past three seasons as well as for the coming season. That’s an amount that could easily run to several million dollars."
So, then the Judge will have to come up with a figure himself as far as fair market value what they should have been paying after the lease expired in order to come up with the bond amount. What is even more interesting is the fact that PCMR is going to owe a substantial amount of money for the past 3 seasons since this started. In fact, given the depreciation of the lifts they claim they are entitled to take with them if forced to leave, I'm not sure the lifts will even cover the costs of the lease, especially given the costs involved with removing the lifts.
Moreover, perhaps this is the reason why Vail is paying Talisker such an extraordinary amount of money to lease the Canyons. They realized that the Judge was eventually going to need similar "comps" in order to come up with a fair market value for the lease that PCMR let expire as of 2011. (I think the lease expired in 2011).
Right, the FMV for rent that they should have paid.
marcski
Active member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2005
- Messages
- 4,576
- Points
- 36
Well, they can only go back to 2011, the date the lease expired.
Right. I think that they've paid zero since the lease expired and owe FMV for that time period. I find it interesting that Vail wants a bond for that period AND the next two seasons.
Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone
drjeff
Well-known member
100% into phase 3 now, which is probably also a bit of a sign of phase 4 starting now!
The big question is will phase 5 begin in this calender year or not?? The judges looming next deadline in about 2 weeks might have a big outcome on how slowly or quickly the Cumming family moves on to the inevitable buy-out by Vail....
Looks like they are still negotiating....they did not meet the deadline to have it resolved, but they have asked the Judge to give them more time to work a deal. That's good.
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/58300579-78/pcmr-resort-talisker-deadline.html.csp
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/58300579-78/pcmr-resort-talisker-deadline.html.csp
Another article from the NYT:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/20/us/20ski.html?ref=business&_r=0
The author apparently does not realize that there is Deer Valley and Canyons in town......
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/20/us/20ski.html?ref=business&_r=0
The author apparently does not realize that there is Deer Valley and Canyons in town......
skiNEwhere
Active member
I want to know what happened to the person responsible for the dropping the ball on the lease. Is it safe to say they were fired?
steamboat1
New member
He left POWDR about a year earlier & is laughing his ass off.
Hawkshot99
Active member
That person had already left the company. Not sure if by fireing or quiting, but they never put someone else in charge of it. The paperwork stayed sitting in their desk.
skiNEwhere
Active member
So I guess they won't be asking POWDR for a reference with their new job lol
If I know anything about how corporate America works, the person who should have assumed responsibility for the paperwork is busy shifting the blame to someone else (almost certainly an underling).
mbedle
Well-known member
keepparkcityopen.com just went live. Seems like a strong stance to not giving up the lower mountain.
That is yet another "fake" website that POWDR made to try to gather support. Look who the person on the front page is....
I am :-? because it is yet another disingenuous PR campaign that POWDR has hatched to try to make up for their mistake. I think it's misleading.
Ha! would be funny if it was some corporate cost cutting move. hey lets save a couple of bucks on payroll....oooooops.
mbedle
Well-known member
I'm not sure what you mean by "fake" other than you believe they what they state on the site is not true. As far as a disingenuous PR campaign, if I was the owner of POWDR, I'd be doing everything in my power to keep the resort in my name. Any other business owner would do the same thing. Everybody is taking the stance that they don't care who owns/runs it, just get it open so they can ski, which I can understand. However, POWDR has a right to do everything they can to fix what they screwed up.
"Fake" in the sense that it is misleading because I take it as an attempt to give people the sense that this is a community group or some locals who are organizing to save PCMR. They also created a "Friends of PCMR" site. Both are controlled by POWDR and are PR vehicles as opposed to a group of locals banding together.
Can they do it? Sure. Absolutely. I understand that. Is it misleading? I think so. These are both self-serving sites that are masked to make it appear to be something else.
mbedle
Well-known member
I don't take that read, but respect that you do. I actually take this single page website as an attempt by PCMR to get public support. And yes, both sites are PR vehicles, but there is nothing wrong with using PR to garner support. I also get that if you hate POWDR or PCMR, than you are going to take a stance that they should just fold up and move on, living with their mistake. If you truly don't care who runs the resort, just care that it opens, I can also see taking the stance that POWDR should sell out and move on. But if you look at it strictly from a business point of view, with out prejudice, POWDR is doing just what they should be doing. Misleading or not, its all fair in the business world.
Similar threads
