Vail Resorts is buying Peak Resorts. - Page 22

AlpineZone

Page 22 of 113 FirstFirst ... 1220212223243272 ... LastLast
Results 211 to 220 of 1125
  1. #211
    Quote Originally Posted by thetrailboss View Post
    They do. It is called Epic Local. Folks may not like it, but all of the local discounts, special deals, multiple pass options, etc. all disappear to the simplified Epic pass product--Local or Full Epic. That's it. Two choices.

    Additionally, a key part of their strategy is to have VERY LIMITED pass options to make things easy for consumers and easier for marketing and sales. It's exactly like Costco--you only have two or three options for a product instead of like 20. That's because if consumers get confused they are more likely to not purchase.
    They do have local passes. There's a Kirkwood Pass, Wilmot Pass, Afton Alps Pass, Mt. Brighton Pass, Stevens Pass Pass, etc.


  2. #212

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley
    Posts
    3,769
    Quote Originally Posted by Domeskier View Post
    So it appears that you agree that Vail is not actually buying eastern mountains as "feeders hills" to get people to visit its western assets, after all.
    Actually, no. The two are independent.

    Vail operates in a steady revenue model, which works in both destination resort and feeder hills. It still reaps the benefit of scale and predictability.

    Personally, I still believes Vail's real cash cow is ... Vail! But that doesn't mean they will operate the eastern mountain as a loss leader. They don't need to lose money in the east to drive traffic to the west. Not if they can help it. But if push comes to shove, they could as long as they come out ahead. That's the beauty of a large corp. They can cover the loss in a few isolated mountains.

    What I AM saying is Vail is unlikely to expand the eastern destination which may compete with their primary goal of driving skiers to the western destination mountains.

  3. #213
    thetrailboss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    NEK by Birth; Alta/Snowbird by Choice
    Posts
    28,092
    Quote Originally Posted by crystalmountainskier View Post
    They do have local passes. There's a Kirkwood Pass, Wilmot Pass, Afton Alps Pass, Mt. Brighton Pass, Stevens Pass Pass, etc.
    Maybe for some of the smaller places, but for example, I'm looking at Park City and it looks like for that resort it is just the Epic Local and Epic. There is a youth pass.

    https://www.parkcitymountain.com/pla...ss/passes.aspx

    Similar with Stowe:

    https://www.stowe.com/plan-your-trip...ss/passes.aspx
    Live, Ski, or Die!


  4. #214
    Quote Originally Posted by abc View Post
    Actually, no. The two are independent.

    Vail operates in a steady revenue model, which works in both destination resort and feeder hills. It still reaps the benefit of scale and predictability.

    Personally, I still believes Vail's real cash cow is ... Vail! But that doesn't mean they will operate the eastern mountain as a loss leader. They don't need to lose money in the east to drive traffic to the west. Not if they can help it. But if push comes to shove, they could as long as they come out ahead. That's the beauty of a large corp. They can cover the loss in a few isolated mountains.

    What I AM saying is Vail is unlikely to expand the eastern destination which may compete with their primary goal of driving skiers to the western destination mountains.
    Vail now owns three major resorts in the east: Stowe, Okemo and Mount Snow. It's safe to say they're in the business of running major Eastern resorts. Maybe they buy something else, maybe not. I think Smuggs would make obvious sense - perhaps another feeder or northerly resort to take a load off their existing footprint could be in play, too.

    You've made many valid points here, but we should add that this acquisition serves two key proposes for Vail: 1) it's a land grab across many new metro areas and 2) it enhances the value of the Epic pass to skiers from metro NYC, Boston and everywhere in-between. Both factors will enable Vail to sell many more Epic passes. Would they like users to go west and fill their relatively limited and non-core supply of lodging? Of course, but the big driver of profit is getting people to buy the passes and spend money on-mountain wherever that mountain may be.

    Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app
    Ski season is always too short

  5. #215
    Quote Originally Posted by abc View Post
    What I AM saying is Vail is unlikely to expand the eastern destination which may compete with their primary goal of driving skiers to the western destination mountains.
    If Vail's goal were to corner the market on eastern skiers vacationing out west, there are much less expensive and much more efficient ways to do that than buying large destination ski resorts in the east. Vail's clear intent is to enter the eastern ski market, not to move eastern skiers west. The idea that Vail will avoid investing in its eastern ski resorts because it might keep skiers from visiting its western resorts is equally absurd. People go out west because the want to ski western mountains and snow, not because Stowe lacks amenities. Improvements to its eastern assets will increase the money generated by those assets, which is exactly the reason why Vail is purchasing them in the first place - not because it believes it can get a few more Mt. Snow regulars to go to Vail rather than Jackson or Aspen on their annual trips out west.

  6. #216
    Quote Originally Posted by Domeskier View Post
    If Vail's goal were to corner the market on eastern skiers vacationing out west, there are much less expensive and much more efficient ways to do that than buying large destination ski resorts in the east. Vail's clear intent is to enter the eastern ski market, not to move eastern skiers west. The idea that Vail will avoid investing in its eastern ski resorts because it might keep skiers from visiting its western resorts is equally absurd. People go out west because the want to ski western mountains and snow, not because Stowe lacks amenities. Improvements to its eastern assets will increase the money generated by those assets, which is exactly the reason why Vail is purchasing them in the first place - not because it believes it can get a few more Mt. Snow regulars to go to Vail rather than Jackson or Aspen on their annual trips out west.
    Make no mistake, Vail definitely thinks it can (and it certainly will) capture more Mount Snow traffic on their trips out west. Are some people going to want to go to Jackson no matter what? Sure. That doesn't mean Vail won't capture a serious about of traffic from any former (or new) Peak resort skier that frequents Hunter and resorts to the north and east.

    Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app
    Ski season is always too short

  7. #217
    Quote Originally Posted by eastern powder baby View Post
    Make no mistake, Vail definitely thinks it can (and it certainly will) capture more Mount Snow traffic on their trips out west. Are some people going to want to go to Jackson no matter what? Sure. That doesn't mean Vail won't capture a serious about of traffic from any former (or new) Peak resort skier that frequents Hunter and resorts to the north and east.

    Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app
    Sure. But the amount of money spent by eastern skiers going out west pales in comparison to the amount of money spent by eastern skiers skiing in the east. ABC's suggestion that Vail is buying eastern ski resorts to increase its shares of that much smaller pot of money is silly. If there wasn't significant money to be made from eastern skiers skiing eastern ski resorts, Vail would not be buying them. The cost of doing so would simply not be justified by any reasonably expectable increase in Vail's share of the much smaller pot of eastern ski money being spent out west.

  8. #218

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley
    Posts
    3,769
    Quote Originally Posted by Domeskier View Post
    If Vail's goal were to corner the market on eastern skiers vacationing out west, there are much less expensive and much more efficient ways to do that than buying large destination ski resorts in the east.
    Give some examples of “less expensive AND much more efficient” ways please?

    You seems hellbent to believe eastern skiers going to Vail’s western resorts is mutually exclusive to them skiing in the east? Further more, you’re still implying Vail’s eastern purchase price are all losses!
    Last edited by abc; Jul 25, 2019 at 4:02 PM.

  9. #219
    Quote Originally Posted by abc View Post
    Give some examples of “less expensive AND much more efficient” ways please?
    Advertising. Targeted discounts. Partnerships with eastern ski resorts. There is no reason to buy a large eastern ski resort and assume the costs of operating one if your primary purpose is to increase your share of the money being spent by eastern skiers on western ski trips. You do that by getting eastern skiers to come out west as cheaply as possible.

    You buy and operate a large eastern ski resort because you want to make money off people who are skiing in the east, not the west. You view Vail as a regional corporation that wants to increase its regional dominance by investing outside of its region in the hope that it will bring more people into its region. If that is what Vail intends, it has bigger problems than even BG has identified.

    Quote Originally Posted by abc View Post
    You seems hellbent to believe eastern skiers going to Vail’s western resorts is mutually exclusive to them skiing in the east? Further more, you’re still implying Vail’s eastern purchase price are all losses!
    On the contrary. I am saying that you do not purchase major eastern ski resorts because you think that's the best way to get more people to come to your western ski resorts. You buy major eastern ski resorts because you think it's profitable to own and operate major eastern ski resorts. You seem to think that this will only be profitable for Vail if it causes more eastern skiers to visit its western resorts. I think any uptick in visits to Vail's western offerings by eastern skiers was not a major factor in its decision to acquire Peaks. I think its decision to acquire Peaks was motivated primarily from a desire to become a national corporation with significant money making operations in the east. I think your condescending attitude toward eastern skiing is interfering with your ability to think rationally about the reasons Vail would purchase an eastern ski resort. The idea that Vail purchased these major eastern ski resorts as "feeder hills" that it will be happy to operate at a loss because it expects to double or triple or quadruple its profits at its western resorts with these acquisitions is the part I find ludicrous. There is a huge market here for skiers who rarely, if ever, go out west. Vail wants a part of the money they are spending in the east. If a few more of them go out west, all the better. But the success of this acquisition will not be measured by how many more eastern skiers visit Vail or some other western destination.

  10. #220

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley
    Posts
    3,769
    The idea that Vail purchased these major eastern ski resorts as "feeder hills" that it will be happy to operate at a loss because it expects to double or triple or quadruple its profits at its western resorts with these acquisitions is the part I find ludicrous.

    What’s ludicrous is you putting word nobody said into other people’s mouth and starting to argue against it!

    Please quote any post that suggests Vail expect to operate eastern mountains at a loss? I certainly didn’t post anything remotely to that effect. Nor do I recall reading any post suggesting that either.

    I think your condescending attitude toward eastern skiing is interfering with your ability to think rationally about the reasons Vail would purchase an eastern ski resort.

    You’re the one who’s irrational by assigning opinions others didn’t express and then attack them!

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 2:42 AM.