Killington - Other ski areas in a death spiral besides Killington?

[drjeff]

Profitable?

It's not fair to compare this year to a peak year, with it being as warm as it has been and visits being down accordingly. Beyond that, they're charging more than twice as much as ASC was for a season pass, and have a much better cost structure. As much as the demise of BMMC pisses me off as much as anyone, and a few of their other questionable decisions, saying it's a death spiral is just dumb. I'd bet even on a down year like this they're more profitable than under ASC.

I think that the question that also needs to be asked to give context to this year and whatever it's numbers are is "Did ANY ski area in the Northeast have an 'up' year over last year?"

If whatever's K's numbers turn out to be has them down far less than the New England ski area average, then was it really that bad of a year?? Especially considering what mother nature brought?

 

[thetrailboss]

The GM at okemo he was quoted in the last post in that thread

Right, when we you read the whole thread and see his response you realize that the original post was pure speculation.

 

[deadheadskier]

I think that the question that also needs to be asked to give context to this year and whatever it's numbers are is "Did ANY ski area in the Northeast have an 'up' year over last year?"

Only place I've read is having a good season is Jay Peak, but apparently that is due to the water park. Then again, that was something posted on an internet forum, so it could be total BS.

 

[Highway Star]

Profitable?

It's not fair to compare this year to a peak year, with it being as warm as it has been and visits being down accordingly. Beyond that, they're charging more than twice as much as ASC was for a season pass, and have a much better cost structure. As much as the demise of BMMC pisses me off as much as anyone, and a few of their other questionable decisions, saying it's a death spiral is just dumb. I'd bet even on a down year like this they're more profitable than under ASC.

I'm not comparing this year to one of the last years under ASC with the all41 passes. I'm comparing it to their peak in the 90's. Killington has been in a slow decline (aka death spiral) for 15 years.

 

[RENO]

PLEASE ALLOW ME TO REPEAT MYSELF, AGAIN.

The town of Killington village econ report states a peak of 1.4 million (killington & pico), and uses a 750k figure for calculations going forward:

http://www.killingtonzone.com/assets/TownEconomicImpactStudy.pdf

Other news sources have referenced figures of around 700k. This year will like be an all time low for them in skier visits, under 700k.

Could you please repeat yourself again? I didn't get it the first 500 times you posted the same useless information...

 

[oakapple]

I'm not comparing this year to one of the last years under ASC with the all41 passes. I'm comparing it to their peak in the 90's. Killington has been in a slow decline (aka death spiral) for 15 years.

"Slow decline" and "death spiral" are not synonymous.

I do agree that skier visits have probably declined, and there is no question at all that Killington has been shrinking both the mountain and the skier experience.

But it could be that this is actually a more profitable strategy; we don't have access to the information that would enable us to make that judgment.

 

[AdironRider]

PLEASE ALLOW ME TO REPEAT MYSELF, AGAIN.

The town of Killington village econ report states a peak of 1.4 million (killington & pico), and uses a 750k figure for calculations going forward:

http://www.killingtonzone.com/assets/TownEconomicImpactStudy.pdf

Other news sources have referenced figures of around 700k. This year will like be an all time low for them in skier visits, under 700k.

All of these numbers are assumptions at best, as outlined in the report. Thats not proof, thats cherry picking speculation that helps your argument, let along the fact that 750k is not more than 50% decline, but whatevs, doesnt matter to your 5 year old whining arguments.

Death Spiral? You seriously are losing credibility with each post you make.

 

[drjeff]

"Slow decline" and "death spiral" are not synonymous.

I do agree that skier visits have probably declined, and there is no question at all that Killington has been shrinking both the mountain and the skier experience.

But it could be that this is actually a more profitable strategy; we don't have access to the information that would enable us to make that judgment.

Next question then for this thread. Does anyone other than HS really want K to go back to the zoo that it was in it's over a million skier visit days vs. how it skis/rides now with some more "elbow room" on the slopes?? And realistically given what a lift ticket costs today vs. where is was 15 years ago given the current costs and what the competition is offering, could K get back to over a million visits a year??

To fend off the "Old K advantage" line of response that i'm sure HS will chime in with. Is it even fathomable to think that K could once again build the type of advantage that it had in so many areas of the ski industry? Since with what it did to build that initial advantage, it basically forced so many different areas to dramatically "improve their game" to compete, to the point where now the overall level that most major ski areas operate at in terms of what they offer, lifts, snow surfaces, off hill ammenities is so much greater than it used to be. Is there really that much extra "room" now for K to be able to once again set the bar so much higher than anyone else??

I almost look at it like golf and the Tiger Woods effect. He was untouchable. Things happened. He's still pretty damn good, but in the mean time the competition got a bit tired of him always kicking their a$$es and as a result the competition worked very hard to improve to the point where they became much better than they used to be in an effort to compete

 

[jimmywilson69]

I'll add another twist, if you can call it that.

When K was owned by 1 man, it was a lot easier to take risks or say lose money one year for "marketing" sakes?

A Corporate structure of any kind completely will not allow that kind of thinking. Of course the Powder guys in Utah are looking to maximize their proffit that is what they are programmed to do.

 

[Highway Star]

"Slow decline" and "death spiral" are not synonymous.

I do agree that skier visits have probably declined, and there is no question at all that Killington has been shrinking both the mountain and the skier experience.

But it could be that this is actually a more profitable strategy; we don't have access to the information that would enable us to make that judgment.

How about a "slow motion tail spin"? Lol.

 

[AdironRider]

I'll add another twist, if you can call it that.

When K was owned by 1 man, it was a lot easier to take risks or say lose money one year for "marketing" sakes?

A Corporate structure of any kind completely will not allow that kind of thinking. Of course the Powder guys in Utah are looking to maximize their proffit that is what they are programmed to do.

Not to mention that (adjusted for inflation) Pres Smith was charging closer to 2k a pass in todays dollars and utilities were lets say just a tad cheaper those days (even when adjusted for inflation as well).

 

[Highway Star]

All of these numbers are assumptions at best, as outlined in the report. Thats not proof, thats cherry picking speculation that helps your argument, let along the fact that 750k is not more than 50% decline, but whatevs, doesnt matter to your 5 year old whining arguments.

Death Spiral? You seriously are losing credibility with each post you make.

Coming from someone with zero stake in this, I'll take that as a compliment.

 

[AdironRider]

And Ill take that as 'foot in mouth' syndrome from you.

 

[Highway Star]

Nahhh definitely not in a death spiral....

From each (open) mountain's website, as of this morning:

Stowe..... 69
Jay Peak.. 44
Stratton .. 41
Sugarbush 37 (17 trails were farmed)
Okemo.... 37
Smugglers 31
Mt Snow.. 28
Killington.. 23 of 151
Burke..... 12 of 40
Bolton Vly 10

[Reno]In spite of not being on being on a ski resort payroll, I still can count. [/Reno]

You can go further and analyze acres open, base depths (real vs advertised) solar aspect, latitude, natural vs manmade, inflated vs real trail counts, or some other metric of your choosing, but these trail counts are notable. Killington is ranking 8 out of 10 on trail count, and only Burke, who still is claiming 30% of their only 40 trails open, and Bolton Valley saves them from being last.

How is this possible if Killington blew the same amount of snow as usual, and the Dew Tour was not a factor?

I sure hope Superstar lasts, because we're looking pretty 8th place at the moment.

 

[RENO]

Maybe this is the incentive now for you to finally move to Stowe like you've been saying for several years? :idea:

 

[skiadikt]

Next question then for this thread. Does anyone other than HS really want K to go back to the zoo that it was in it's over a million skier visit days vs. how it skis/rides now with some more "elbow room" on the slopes?? And realistically given what a lift ticket costs today vs. where is was 15 years ago given the current costs and what the competition is offering, could K get back to over a million visits a year??

To fend off the "Old K advantage" line of response that i'm sure HS will chime in with. Is it even fathomable to think that K could once again build the type of advantage that it had in so many areas of the ski industry? Since with what it did to build that initial advantage, it basically forced so many different areas to dramatically "improve their game" to compete, to the point where now the overall level that most major ski areas operate at in terms of what they offer, lifts, snow surfaces, off hill ammenities is so much greater than it used to be. Is there really that much extra "room" now for K to be able to once again set the bar so much higher than anyone else??

I almost look at it like golf and the Tiger Woods effect. He was untouchable. Things happened. He's still pretty damn good, but in the mean time the competition got a bit tired of him always kicking their a$$es and as a result the competition worked very hard to improve to the point where they became much better than they used to be in an effort to compete

nice post.

as a k regular, certainly wouldn't want to go back to the days of a million+ skier days. i do remember the 45 min wait on the k chair on weekends. at bear, we skied space walk from wildfire or ol to ride the fiddle chair as often as possible to avoid the waits for the bear chair. having said that, k was built to handle a million skiers and currently has the most lift over capacity in the east and could easily handle an additional 100-200k skiers.

back in the 80's/early 90's k was the "only" game. you didn't have the instant access to the kind of info you now have, but you knew k opened in october & closed sometimes in june. where were you gonna go for reliable snow mid-season. everything was a superlative - longest season, most snowmaking, most lifts, longest lift, steepest bump trail, longest trail etc. a marketer's dream. i remember early 80's thinking of okemo as a place that didn't have a lot of snowmaking & mostly pomas and sunday river was a place they shipped les otten off to, to take it off their hands. but then both areas started building infra-structure and catching up to the mighty beast and many of those advantages dissipated. plus they and areas like mt snow & stratton provided a superior intermediate ski experience so they all took chunks of the k pie.

will k regain it's competitive advantage? doubtful. unfortunately instead of trying to grow the business, current management is trying to max profits by cutting back on some of the very services (lifts, hrs of operation etc) that are needed to grow the business. instead they're continuing to push forward with some pie-in-the-sky village.

 

[oakapple]

Next question then for this thread. Does anyone other than HS really want K to go back to the zoo that it was in it's over a million skier visit days vs. how it skis/rides now with some more "elbow room" on the slopes?? And realistically given what a lift ticket costs today vs. where is was 15 years ago given the current costs and what the competition is offering, could K get back to over a million visits a year??

It probably could not.

The one thing the Killington skeptics are right about: they've shrunk the product. They've shrunk the operating hours, shrunk the season length, reduced snowmaking, taken terrain off the map, and removed lifts without replacing them. None of the competition (that I can think of), has done that.

So it's not merely a question of the competition upping their game. There's a legitimate argument that Killington has gotten worse. It's still pretty good, but it's not all it can be.

I'll add another twist, if you can call it that.

When K was owned by 1 man, it was a lot easier to take risks or say lose money one year for "marketing" sakes?

A Corporate structure of any kind completely will not allow that kind of thinking. Of course the Powder guys in Utah are looking to maximize their proffit that is what they are programmed to do.

You were doing extremely well, up to the last sentence. Maximizing profit is what businesses do. It is not a disease or a character flaw. But there many ways of going about this. Not every ski area owned by a corporation is following Killington's strategy.

 

[steamboat1]

Only place I've read is having a good season is Jay Peak, but apparently that is due to the water park. Then again, that was something posted on an internet forum, so it could be total BS.

Jay Peak & Stowe have the advantage of catering to more Canadians than most other New England resorts. The Canadian economy is not in the crapper like the U.S. economy is therefore those areas feel less of an impact. I posted in another thread that last Thurs. night (a weekday) both the Spruce Peak Lodge & Jay Hotel were fully booked. I highly doubt any other area with on mountain lodging could claim that in the east.

 

[jimmywilson69]

You were doing extremely well, up to the last sentence. Maximizing profit is what businesses do. It is not a disease or a character flaw. But there many ways of going about this. Not every ski area owned by a corporation is following Killington's strategy.

I guess what I was trying to say with that last sentence is that Powdr's method of maximising proffits might not be the best suited to the "skier" or "property owner" in Killington.

Is it the correct way? well that is subjective depending on your angle.

 

[oakapple]

I guess what I was trying to say with that last sentence is that Powdr's method of maximising proffits might not be the best suited to the "skier" or "property owner" in Killington.

Is it the correct way?

Yes. Phrased that way, I would agree with you.