Epic and Iconic One Wasatch transit plans revealed - Page 6

AlpineZone

Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 104
  1. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by asnowmobiler View Post
    I didn’t Realize it was just a letter but it still lacks facts. That being said, I’m sure the passes had something to do with the larger crowds but I also think the great conditions had more to do with it . IMO ��
    Deer Valley pegged it at 12%; that's pretty significant.

    I wouldn't be surprised if end-of-year it's even more, as I skied there two days last week & saw plenty of IKON folks, including the type that are not beneficial for Deer Valley, like having intentionally loud "look at me" parking lot parties while drinking PBR (of course) & literally carrying on-and-on about how Deer Valley sucks & they're only there because it's "free" skiing, while making fun of "Deer Valley skiers" too.

    President - Bicknell's Thrush Extermination Solutions (BTES), LLC



  2. #52
    My belief is there are 3 specific reasons leading to the increased numbers (listed in order of significance):

    1) Great snow year across America
    2) Great national economy
    3) Great number of people buying EPIC & IKON passes (~925,000 & ~240,000), at roughly 1.2M sales combined.
    President - Bicknell's Thrush Extermination Solutions (BTES), LLC



  3. #53
    thetrailboss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    NEK by Birth; Alta/Snowbird by Choice
    Posts
    27,263
    Quote Originally Posted by cdskier View Post
    Precisely why more than 1 year of data is needed to really know...

    Overall I'm quite interested to see skier visits nationally this year once those numbers are available as well. Based on all the anecdotal talk of how crowded it is everywhere, we should be seeing some good numbers one would think...
    I doubt Alterra will release any “data”, but I agree that we’ve got to see what happens next year.


    Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone
    Live, Ski, or Die!


  4. #54
    Quote Originally Posted by thetrailboss View Post
    I doubt Alterra will release any “data”, but I agree that we’ve got to see what happens next year.
    We don't need "data" from Alterra themselves though.

    Individual partner mountains at least are already releasing data (x% of our visits this year are from Ikon, etc). The tricky part though is that just because say 10% of your visits are from Ikon, that doesn't mean all of those visits wouldn't have existed pre-Ikon. Sure, some are definitely from people that wouldn't have been there without Ikon, but others are from people that used to visit anyway but via different methods (i.e. day tickets or other deals).

    But anyway, even anecdotal "how crowded my mountain seems" data will be useful to compare over multiple years.

    When multiple variables change in 1 year, it is hard to point to 1 single one of those variables as the cause of increased crowding (even though that's exactly what all the anti-Ikon locals are trying to do). I think BG is right in the 3 factors he pointed out as contributing to crowding. When resorts are point blank saying that season passholder visits are up significantly as well, it becomes very hard to blame it purely on Ikon. Ikon absolutely adds to it, but I don't believe quite as much as some people are trying to convince us it is.

    I also find the argument from some locals about Ikon passholders skiing for "free" at their resort pretty ironic. If a local skis enough, their per day revenue to the mountain from the lift ticket could easily be far less than what the mountain is getting per Ikon ticket scan.

  5. #55

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley
    Posts
    3,019
    When resorts are point blank saying that season passholder visits are up significantly as well, it becomes very hard to blame it purely on Ikon.
    Actually, it's pretty easy to do a quick analysis on passholder from 2 years to see the "increase visit" from pass holders.

    The rest of the increase are from point 2) and 3).

  6. #56
    thetrailboss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    NEK by Birth; Alta/Snowbird by Choice
    Posts
    27,263
    Quote Originally Posted by cdskier View Post
    We don't need "data" from Alterra themselves though.

    Individual partner mountains at least are already releasing data (x% of our visits this year are from Ikon, etc). The tricky part though is that just because say 10% of your visits are from Ikon, that doesn't mean all of those visits wouldn't have existed pre-Ikon. Sure, some are definitely from people that wouldn't have been there without Ikon, but others are from people that used to visit anyway but via different methods (i.e. day tickets or other deals).
    We have had some limited information, and in the coming months there will be state ski area associations reporting skier/rider days, but generally resorts don't release financial or skier day totals.

    When multiple variables change in 1 year, it is hard to point to 1 single one of those variables as the cause of increased crowding (even though that's exactly what all the anti-Ikon locals are trying to do). I think BG is right in the 3 factors he pointed out as contributing to crowding. When resorts are point blank saying that season passholder visits are up significantly as well, it becomes very hard to blame it purely on Ikon. Ikon absolutely adds to it, but I don't believe quite as much as some people are trying to convince us it is.
    I agree that those are indeed factors. I think seeing how another year goes will be interesting. I read in the Forbes (I think?) article that was posted here that Alterra asked partner resorts to commit to at least two years. Hence why nobody is all of the sudden backing out.

    I also find the argument from some locals about Ikon passholders skiing for "free" at their resort pretty ironic. If a local skis enough, their per day revenue to the mountain from the lift ticket could easily be far less than what the mountain is getting per Ikon ticket scan.
    That's not correct. At Alta, for example, they get at least $999 for every adult passholder. Nobody has any idea what Alterra is paying them for Ikon days. It is less than $100 a day though, so a ridiculous maximum number would be no more than $700.00 per skier. At last check $999 is more than $700. Granted, I understand what you are saying about the "per day" cost, but a very small number of folks ski more than 20 or so days in a season.

    And, at least from what I have heard from those at the resorts, Ikon folks are not buying more food, drink, goods to offset the lost revenue.

    But the question is if those skiers would have come in the first place. Maybe?

    In full disclosure: my wife just bought a full Ikon pass to replace her Alta pass. She has skied 13 days this season at a group of resorts...that are all covered by Ikon. So it makes complete sense for her. I will be staying at Snowbird (at least).
    Live, Ski, or Die!


  7. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by thetrailboss View Post
    That's not correct. At Alta, for example, they get at least $999 for every adult passholder. Nobody has any idea what Alterra is paying them for Ikon days. It is less than $100 a day though. And, at least from what I have heard from those at the resorts, Ikon folks are not buying more food, drink, goods to offset the lost revenue.
    I'm referring to PER DAY revenue. If I'm a passholder and ski 20 days, per day revenue is $50. Ski 50 days and it is down to $20. That's what I meant by "If a local skis enough". I agree Alterra is definitely giving less than $100 a day. But my argument was that even if Alterra gives $20, that's still the same PER DAY revenue as a passholder that skis a lot of days. So you can't argue that Ikon skiers are skiing for "free" if you're not saying the same about passholders once they hit a certain number of days.

  8. #58
    thetrailboss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    NEK by Birth; Alta/Snowbird by Choice
    Posts
    27,263
    Quote Originally Posted by cdskier View Post
    I'm referring to PER DAY revenue. If I'm a passholder and ski 20 days, per day revenue is $50. Ski 50 days and it is down to $20. That's what I meant by "If a local skis enough". I agree Alterra is definitely giving less than $100 a day. But my argument was that even if Alterra gives $20, that's still the same PER DAY revenue as a passholder that skis a lot of days. So you can't argue that Ikon skiers are skiing for "free" if you're not saying the same about passholders once they hit a certain number of days.
    Right. I acknowledged that. And I have never said that Ikon folks ski for free. My questions have always been, (1) how much revenue the resort gets per Ikon day, and (2) are Ikon skiers and riders buying enough other goods, food, services to make up for the discount in revenue?

    But at the end of the day the resort is getting at the very least, and most likely a lot more, from the passholder who commits to their mountain. I'm factoring in food, lessons, souvenirs, etc.

    And how many passholders do you honestly know that ski 50 days at one mountain? Not too many.
    Live, Ski, or Die!


  9. #59
    thetrailboss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    NEK by Birth; Alta/Snowbird by Choice
    Posts
    27,263
    And none of us know how much Alterra pays each resort for a day for their Ikon passholders. I HIGHLY doubt it is $50 or more. That's in large part because a lot of the Alterra resorts provide reciprocal discounts for the partner resorts (e.g. I just skied at Aspen/Snowmass for half-off using my Alta/Bird season pass.)
    Live, Ski, or Die!


  10. #60
    Food for thought - is the amount paid by Epic/Ikon to a participating resort a FIXED amount per visit, or does it vary based on how much an individual skier has used from their pass? For example, someone pays $700 for a pass. They ski only 7 days. You therefore have $100/day to "distribute". While I doubt they actually pay out the full $100, I do wonder if they increase the payout for the 7 day/year guy vs. someone who skies 30 days. There is only $700 to distribute. Otherwise EPIC/Ikon have to take the risk that their "modeling" of the number of days the average pass holder skis is accurate. If wrong, then EPIC/Ikon could lose money. And I bet its easier to create a payout model passed on pass usage then it is to model the number of days the average pass holder skis. Of course, this would delay payment to the end of the season, to the benefit of EPIC/Ikon. Just wondering.

    Also, I will again state my view that I think the real issue with EPIC/Ikon is Saturday's (and Holiday's). I predict some form of limitation coming on pass usage on Saturdays (and more restrictions on Holiday's).
    2017/18 = 37
    2016/17 = 31
    2015/16 = Depressing
    2014/15 = 28
    2013/14 = 27

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:36 AM.