• 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

Highway Star

Active member
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
2,921
Points
36
Well, just needed to point out that they are almost as unpopular out there as they are around here.

Your thoughtful moderation "keeps the bar high".
 

Highway Star

Active member
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
2,921
Points
36
Bump. People need to be aware that POWDR owns Killington, Mt. Bachelor, and Park City Mountain Resort. All of which are evidently poorly run. They seem to be a scourge on the ski industry,
 

AdironRider

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 27, 2005
Messages
3,502
Points
63
While I can see on the surface how this is easy POWDR bashing, but out here more people have beef with Talisker right now that POWDR, court of public opinion will be interesting on this one.

Id flip the coin, and argue that Talisker is playing its power position right now hard. They own the land, probably signed a lease on the property decades ago before they are what they are now, and today are trying to take it back and ride all of Park City's efforts to improve the given terrain.

Im not super familiar with the exact plots in question, but it doesnt seem like the best practice on Taliskers end to completely strongarm everyone. They are trying to force a land swap through Congress, now it seems they wont play ball with PCMR. Kind of heavy handed business tactics to by throwing around, and pretty much a huge gamble from a marketing perspective. Most people think the connect to Solitude is pretty bad already.

That being said, PCMR could be little bitches about the whole thing and trying to swing another sweetheart deal. Im sure the lease terms from back in the day are a little more palatable than what current market value is now.

Ultimately, this isnt that big a deal really to me from a business perspective. Its just two big dogs duking it out. Both sides are pretty reliant upon one another, and their are some pretty big ramifications involved, in this day and age this is how this shit gets worked out, unfortunately.
 

deadheadskier

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
27,958
Points
113
Location
Southeast NH
Side question as the topic involves an eventual interconnect

What's the terrain like between the two resorts? Connecting them I believe would make for the largest ski area in the US. Vail has ridden that marketing pony for years and is I believe the most popular ski area in the country. To be able to unseat Vail as the largest ski area in the USA as well as being less than an hour from an International airport would be a HUGE deal IMO. If I were a local business owner, I know I'd want to see that happen.
 

AdironRider

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 27, 2005
Messages
3,502
Points
63
I agree with you. However, the terrain isnt really ultimately all that amazing, its more so a connect ala Sugarbush's express or even moreso like Europe.

I didnt really have a problem with it. The court of public opinion (and Trailboss could probably enlighten on this, I just get the telemarker bc dudes bitching in my ear on the Glory bootpack for my news) seems to be against it as some massive invasion to "pristine" backcountry with no less than 70 lifts within a 10 mile radius. The way they are going about things is also pretty shady, with a foreign owned company trying to force feed a land swap through Washington without any local insight. I thought it was a pretty neat idea and liked the whole "euro" aspect of it.

This issue is pretty interesting as it can really shine through on Talisker's true colors IMO. Park City has a whole lot more to lose so they'd probably end up going to court no matter what, what in today's litigious society.
 

marcski

Active member
Joined
Jan 10, 2005
Messages
4,576
Points
36
Location
Westchester County, NY and a Mountain near you!
Park City Mountain Resort's PR site on the suit: http://www.supportpcmr.com/

'


You and I both know....that this entire website is complete total bullshit and a marketing campaign. If they are so sure of their position, post the lease! They either took advantage of a lease extension provision or they didn't. Or perhaps it was a 40 year lease? Either way, they are clearly playing games and posturing.
 
Last edited:

Highway Star

Active member
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
2,921
Points
36
Fair enough, but some of the newspaper comments are quite insightful......

http://www.parkrecord.com/ci_20141104/pcmr-fighting-survival-resort-sues-talisker

bubba1111
Hmmm. Seems a little fishy. Looks more like an article written by Patrick Parkinson. One sided and small town newspaper drama. I'm sure Talisker is going to shut down PCMR. Give me a break!! Poor little defenseless PCMR... (defender of local jobs, saviour of the environment, champion of the poor and meek, humble steward of Park City skiing and mentor of the terrain park Grom ) is bullied by Big Bad Rich Talisker (destroyer of the watershed, raiser of season pass prices, deranged heater of orange lift seats, killer of soft cute bunnies). C'mon. Really?
Here is what I think is going on. PCMR and Talisker's negotiations have been going on now for years it seems on the renogiation of the lease which ended in 2011. I understand that PCMR pays $150,000 a year for the lease of a majority of the slopes at the resort. Not a bad deal. I'm guessing Talisker thinks it can get a lot more per year than that going forward and both parties disagree on price. The creation of the website ( supportpcmr.com ) tells me that PCMR does not have the upper hand in this discussion and seems like a desperate move on their part (Talisker to SHUT DOWN Park City Mountain Resort and eradicate 1,200 local jobs !!!) Give me a frickin break.
Will be fun to watch this unfold. We just need a Kenny Griswold quote at this point. "This is my worst fear realized"...... hahahhhahahahha
On a positive note maybe they will work things out agreeably and establish an interconnect between the two resorts which makes the most sense. The 3 Park City resorts need to be competing with Colorado and not it's neighbors in PC. The 3 resorts connected in a partnership with all three connected by lifts with one interconnect pass is what they need to compete going forward and not bickering among themselves.
Bubba

MQBitsko
"Corporate citizens"? Let' me tell you something about the wonderful "corporate citizens" who sold that land to Talisker in the first place. It was just a scam to avoid dealing with mine closure requirements and environmental remediation, which was going to cost them a fortune. Instead, they played on the innocence of a Canadian company who is in the business of operating ski resorts, not American mine companies, and stuck Talisker with THEIR mess.
Oh, by the way.....the taxpayers of Park City are stuck with enormous cleanup bills themselves, now and in the future, because of those "corporate citizens" you miss so much. They have managed to wash their hands of the whole mess and leave YOU to deal with it. Enjoy.
Be glad you have Talisker up there on the hill. They're far more ethical, believe me. I've been watching this happen for years. I'm glad to see the chickens come home to roost, actually. I'm going to buy a Talisker tee shirt. Meanwhile, enjoy paying those taxes so that the former United Park City Mines can avoid cleaning up their own mess.

MQBitsko Collapse
For many years United Park City Mines played a shell game with environmental regulators. They kept their "Mining" and their "real estate" and their "ski resort" businesses separate so that they could alternately claim to be a "mine company" or "land developer" or "resort operator" as it was convenient in order to avoid dealing with mining era clean up requirements and licensing issues, or to hide their development business behind their status as a "mining company", etc. The whole thing was a huge scam.
Now it has come back to bite them in the backside. When they sold the land itself to Talisker, a company that everybody knows is in the business of owning and operating ski resorts rather than just playing landlord to ski resorts, they thought they could foist the mining cleanup issues on Talisker and keep the resort for themselves. Talisker found themselves maneuvered into ownership of a big mess, while the guy who originally MADE the mess slithered away laughing.
WRONG! Payback time, boys. I'm with Talisker on this one. They got sold a bill of goods by United Park City Mines, and they haven't been happy about it at all. Revenge is a dish best served cold, and the time has come.
The resort will fold because it no longer has access to its own ski runs and lifts. Nobody will buy it because they'd have to get Talisker to lease the land to them, which won't happen. Talisker will be the sole bidder to grab up the bones of the dead resort.
Rank and file resort employees will be fine. Their paychecks will just have "Talisker" written on them. But the guys who ran the shell game are about to find themselves unemployed. (You know who you are!)
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive....."

butter1111
Really people????? Are we all going to jump on the Talisker hate train?????? Anybody out there remember when Powder corp bought out the Badamis" Now that was %#$@#. Oh yea and they raised season passes every year since. Do any of you really believe that Talisker would move on such a huge public relations nightmare? I agree with Bubba1111, seems a little fishy to me. I think maybe someone at PCMR was asleep at the wheel. Either way, shouldnt we all wait till the facts come out instead of jumping at the chance to get on the hate train. One more thing, if Talisker wants more money for land that it owns.....their right. Any of you out there willing to sell/rent your rental property or land for less than its worth????? If so let me know. Im an old school local with no money......Wait till the truth comes out, wait to jump in line with the down to corporate america. Wake up SHEEPEOPLE, if it isnt Talisker, it would have been Vail. With Kenny Griswold in the cracks.

MQBitsko
Talisker never had any intention of renewing the lease. $150K per year? That is a remnant of the days when the Mine Company leased the mountain to its own resort. Talisker, if they WERE to renew the lease, would want what it's actually worth. It wouldn't be $150K, I guarantee it. At least ten times that figure, MAYBE.
How could anybody not have seen this coming years ago, when Talisker bought the property? They're running a business, not a skiing-based charity.


:-o:-o:-o:-o:-o
 

Highway Star

Active member
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
2,921
Points
36
More gems:

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/faith/53686577-78/resort-park-lawsuit-mountain.html.csp

  • ratskrad
    You all understand that Talisker is not our friend, as they are in business to develop land and sell it. They pretty much have ruined Canyons as a resort except for the very rich. They doubled season pass prices this year and sold 2000 fewer season passes and guess what they meaning upper management are happy because it eliminated the riff raff from the resort meaning us the locals. By the first of the year Canyons resort was down 35,000 skier days and again they were happy. Nothing like a big loss to show a major tax write off. Canyons (Talisker) is off 10's of millions of dollars in projected revenue this year as a result of being very narrow minded in who they want to ski at their resort. I understand this was not a good year skier number wise but you can not go from $599 to $1149 for a seasons pass in a year and expect to generate any revenue as those 2000 season passes they did not sell meant those people did not by goods and food at the resort.
    This is not a company that needs to own another resort in our town as guess what they will price us the locals right out of the game. I see them as wanting to own both Canyons and PCMR creating the largest resort in North America but at what cost.
    It is funny though that Canyons resort does not own the land on which its resort sits but it does own the land on which one of the other resorts in town does sit.
    This has nothing to do with the LDS church and mormons. Rant mode off.

    (Edited by author 20 hours ago)



  • itsnowjoke
    Powdr Corporation is not your friend, either. Both companies are in business to make money. The Canyons was horribly mis-managed under American Skiing Corporation. Talisker came in, dumped 10's of millions into the skiing side of the resort, and can now charge prices on-par with what Park City and Deer Valley charge. I'm sorry that you don't like that and it's inconvenient for you. Maybe Park City should lower their prices if they are your friend and Canyons isn't? Skier days this year means nothing: It was a crappy winter. And in case you didn't know, season pass holders generally buy way less food and beverage than tourists, so no one is really doing the resort a "favor" by buying a season pass. Lastly, Powdr should have bought the land that it sits on, instead of letting someone else do it. Talk about a greedy corporation: The parent corporation of Park City mountain resort bought Killington, Copper Mountain, Mount Bachelor and Boreal. They evidently didn't cross their t's and dot their i's when it came time for lease renewal. Then they lash out at the landlord, with a slick, corporate ad campaign that incites fear through job loss and resort closure. That's a crappy way to run your business, Park City Mountain Resort. Lastly, I'm far from rich. Talisker hasn't ruined Canyons for me, it runs way better than it did under past ownership. I agree that season pass prices in general are steep. Tahoe and Colorado Season Passes are around 500 bucks for multiple areas, it would be great to see that here, too. The law of supply and demand prevails, however, so we've got to live with that.


 

snoseek

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 7, 2006
Messages
6,289
Points
113
Location
NH
Not that I really care what happens on the Wasatch back but I'm actually rooting for powder on this one only because I do not support Taliskier and their way of doing business.

I guess the Wasatch really is the new Jerusulam...
 

thetrailboss

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jun 4, 2004
Messages
32,438
Points
113
Location
NEK by Birth
Adiron: the locals HATE Talisker and Canyons. Not sure how much of it is that it is "The Canyons," or how much of it is "Talisker," but the locals I talk with and the folks I ski with don't take them seriously. Last summer they were practically giving away passes to locals and in the early fall had a very lame ad campaign that they ran on billboards en route to Big and Little Cottonwood Canyons.

To be clear: the whole SkiLink project is NOT related to this. SkiLink is the proposal to run a Slide Brook Express-esque lift from the top of Canyons to the base of Solitude. The ramming it through DC act got people upset (rightfully so) and the BC folks would be upset anyways. What is laughable though is that this so-called BC is so heavily skied that you would not know that it was BC. The whole Wasatch is accessible and skied a lot. As for me, the jury is out. I would not use it and there are too many people at the Canyons as it is. The biggest reflection of the fact that this won't come anytime soon is the fact that Deer Valley, PCMR, and Canyons are side-by-side on essentially the same ridge and won't connect with each other. Instead there are fights like this (and DV pushing up the price to keep the unwanted out).

I did see an article in the SL Tribune that the congressional delegation supports eventually linking up all the resorts (Alta/Snowbird -> Brighton/Solitude -> PC Resorts). They are that close, but that is a long ways off.

And I agree about the PCMR "PR" site, which is pure exageration. I don't really know what they aim to accomplish since this is a civil lawsuit between two private parties. There is no place for public opinion per se. As to the real deal, I don't really know how much is hyperbole. I have no idea what portion of PCMR is at stake, but from reading the articles you'd think that it was the whole damn resort. I doubt that.
 

thetrailboss

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jun 4, 2004
Messages
32,438
Points
113
Location
NEK by Birth
So here is an update on this story. Last week, the SL Tribune ran an article that shed more light as to what is going on here and what is at stake.

As many know, most of the land surrounding Park City was mined in the past, and a good portion of the land, or the claims, are still owned by mining companies or their successors. Land that Deer Valley and PCMR sit are some of this former mining land. In 1969 or so, Deer Valley's predecessor, Powder Park, found that their lease was terminated and they went out of business for 12 years when Deer Valley took over the lease.

PCMR sits on land owned by an entity named the United Park City Mines. Only the base lodges and water rights are wholly owned by PCMR. PCMR has a 40 year lease with United Park City, that is set to expire this year. The leased land composes a majority of PCMR, and PCMR pays United Park City $150,000 per year.

In 2003 Talisker entered the picture by purchasing United Park City Mines, and becoming PCMR's landlord.

As many know, Talisker purchased the Canyons in 2007/2008. Ironically, most of the Canyons are on leased land with the former resort operator, Wolf Mountain, being the landlord. Talisker/Canyons pays $3 million annually to lease the land that the Canyons sits on.

According to the PCMR/United Park City lease, PCMR gave "unequivocal notice" to United Park City that they intended to renew the lease for another 40 years, or until 2051. PCMR claims that United Park City (Talisker) is refusing to renew the lease. PCMR has sued stating that United Park City (Talisker) is negotiating in bad faith.

So if the rumor that Talisker wishes to take over PCMR via a hostile takeover is true, then it was a plot that was devised back in 2003 or so.

I wonder if Deer Valley is worried about its landlord not renewing....but then again, I don't know how much land is leased there.

The SL Trib story: http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/53718069-78/pcmr-park-resort-ski.html.csp
 

Highway Star

Active member
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
2,921
Points
36
So if the rumor that Talisker wishes to take over PCMR via a hostile takeover is true, then it was a plot that was devised back in 2003 or so.

In all seriousness, that's how I read it. POWDR is run by chumps who completely lack vision. This is just the first phase in a multi-decade plan.

It doesn't take much to see that taking all these UT resorts and connecting them (just like in europe) creates the premier north american ski destination. I'll bet talisker has been planning this for a while, and it's pretty brilliant. In 2003, it was clear that ASC would eventually go out of business and the Canyons would become available, so buy the neighbors land ahead of time and........oops!

How many lifts and skiable acres is this:

Canyons
PCMR
Dear Valley
Brighton
Alta
Solitude
Snowbird
 

Geoff

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2004
Messages
5,100
Points
48
Location
South Dartmouth, Ma
In all seriousness, that's how I read it. POWDR is run by chumps who completely lack vision.

I'd spin it a little bit differently....

Billionaire Ian Cumming bought a string of ski areas so his son the mountain climber could "do something with his life". I imagine he also hired and installed a bean counter to make sure his scion son didn't simply squander the whole thing. When daddy hands you a string of ski areas and you know that you have a billion of family money to fall back on, there isn't a whole lot of incentive to do the best you can possibly do in your business. I'm sure "the little people" do all the day-to-day. This guy is a dilettante and won't starve to death if his ski areas don't do well.

Vision? Why would somebody like that need vision?
 
Top