Haystack / Hermitage news

[EPB]

If Hermitage or Stratton weren't so close it might make sense. But the type of person that would join Haystack or the Stratton club are basically the same type of person. Haystack might be more ritzy but it's still not much of a difference to justify owning 2 places that are so similar only 30 minutes apart

I wouldn't expect anyone at Stratton to own two places (totally forgot about how nice that place must be because I've never been). I could see Stratton skiers interested in having the option to buy tickets to Hermitage on holiday weekends, though. It's tough to know what type of deal could get struck, but I could see a rich Stratton skier liking the option to buy a Hermitage ticket at, say, $150/per during MLK weekend or during other crazy busy days to avoid the crowds. Figuring out how to ration tickets or justify to club members why they should be on board with periodic small-to-medium-sized influxes of Stratton clientele could get dicey, though.

 

[sull1102]

If Hermitage or Stratton weren't so close it might make sense. But the type of person that would join Haystack or the Stratton club are basically the same type of person. Haystack might be more ritzy but it's still not much of a difference to justify owning 2 places that are so similar only 30 minutes apart

But, the Stratton Club members might love getting away to a place with minimal crowds on the busiest of weekends and holiday breaks. Even if its just one of the two days. It really will come down to just how much it would cost and what exactly are you getting for your money. From what I can gather it would be the ski area, the paid for already lifts, the clubhouse, the Inn, and a couple other foreclosed upon inns around the valley. KSL probably has zero interest in running the Inns save for the Hermitage with the direct lift.

 

[VTKilarney]

I thought that non-locals couldn’t buy tickets.

 

[sull1102]

As far as we know right now that is the case, but you could ski there is you were staying at a Hermitage property and club members could bring guests. Does that mean somehow some way if essentially Stratton(in the form of KSL) buys the Club they can bring in Stratton club members and Ikon passholders. If they can, and they get the mountain cheap with its brand new snowmaking and lifts etc, the place needs nothing to operate, and run it as a satelite of Stratton, but exclusive.

Should note, place is still covered top to bottom with a ton of snow. If I was a member I'd be real unhappy seeing my private mountain not running just the one lift needed to reach 80% of terrain. Of course they are once again shutdown by the state for not paying taxes, again.

 

[EPB]

I thought that non-locals couldn’t buy tickets.

It's tough to know what the agreements will look like after going through this whole process, but I don't see why this couldn't be revisited. Do we even know if this is a policy or a more formalized contract with some local municipality? Even if it's a contract, it could be revisited in a bankruptcy scenario.

Chances are, something is going to have to change regarding the club's exclusivity policies unless the only reason why the club failed was because of mismanagement. In that case, club members might see it most prudent to bail the club out... Stratton's wealthy base (likely including this club with which I am not familiar) would be a great group to offer high priced tickets to avoid crowds if the club is not viable in its current form. I could see a scenario where a quota of high priced tickets could be made available to Stratton pass holders on holidays or powder days. It seems like the lodging could be dicier given that the club hasn't even constructed homes they were supposed to deliver to new members, but I will plead ignorance to the lodging issues at The Hermitage.

 

[icecoast1]

It's tough to know what the agreements will look like after going through this whole process, but I don't see why this couldn't be revisited. Do we even know if this is a policy or a more formalized contract with some local municipality? Even if it's a contract, it could be revisited in a bankruptcy scenario.

Chances are, something is going to have to change regarding the club's exclusivity policies unless the only reason why the club failed was because of mismanagement. In that case, club members might see it most prudent to bail the club out... Stratton's wealthy base (likely including this club with which I am not familiar) would be a great group to offer high priced tickets to avoid crowds if the club is not viable in its current form. I could see a scenario where a quota of high priced tickets could be made available to Stratton pass holders on holidays or powder days. It seems like the lodging could be dicier given that the club hasn't even constructed homes they were supposed to deliver to new members, but I will plead ignorance to the lodging issues at The Hermitage.

It was part of the contract of sale when the owner before Barnes bought it from ASC who also owned mount snow that it could never open as a public ski area except to locals. Seeing as the water rights to mirror lake transfered over, I would imagine that would as well in any sale.

 

[sull1102]

It was part of the contract of sale when the owner before Barnes bought it from ASC who also owned mount snow that it could never open as a public ski area except to locals. Seeing as the water rights to mirror lake transfered over, I would imagine that would as well in any sale.

Great point about the water rights transferring. IF the restriction is not in the deed there's a chance it had the same time limit on it as the water. Should it be in the deed, the local and state officials are worried about losing a tax generator so they will be willing to help.

 

[EPB]

It was part of the contract of sale when the owner before Barnes bought it from ASC who also owned mount snow that it could never open as a public ski area except to locals. Seeing as the water rights to mirror lake transfered over, I would imagine that would as well in any sale.

Thanks and understood. I agree with sull1102 in that the it's probably in the local area's best interest to have a viable Hermitage Club, but we'll have to see how the powers that be feel about it... I also wonder if it would be possible to argue that offering a small quota of tickets to pass holders of sister resorts would still be within the terms of the agreement (i.e. the resort is still effectively private because only a small number of tickets can be sold to a small subset of the "public" and that traffic would be kept strictly in check). It all depends on how the agreement was written, I suppose.

Going into bankruptcy could potentially allow the Club to put forth a reorganization plan that allows for it to sell some tickets to the public (and argue to a bankruptcy judge why a hard line "no public skiing" policy is unnecessarily burdensome to the debtor). Of course, I would have to imagine that moving to a true "public" resort model like Mt. Snow or Stratton would face some serious opposition from the Club members, too.

 

[Zermatt]

Thanks and understood. I agree with sull1102 in that the it's probably in the local area's best interest to have a viable Hermitage Club, but we'll have to see how the powers that be feel about it... I also wonder if it would be possible to argue that offering a small quota of tickets to pass holders of sister resorts would still be within the terms of the agreement (i.e. the resort is still effectively private because only a small number of tickets can be sold to a small subset of the "public" and that traffic would be kept strictly in check). It all depends on how the agreement was written, I suppose.

Going into bankruptcy could potentially allow the Club to put forth a reorganization plan that allows for it to sell some tickets to the public (and argue to a bankruptcy judge why a hard line "no public skiing" policy is unnecessarily burdensome to the debtor). Of course, I would have to imagine that moving to a true "public" resort model like Mt. Snow or Stratton would face some serious opposition from the Club members, too.

Going into bankruptcy wont change the deal about no public tickets. That is part of the deed and has nothing to do with creditors.

Now, I agree that is what is needed, but bankruptcy will not change it.

 

[icecoast1]

It will be interesting to see what happens. Barnes could have sold it months ago to the members and probably still can but he'd rather see it fail than flourish in somebody else's hands. Eventually he will have no choice, it's unfortunate for everyone involved that his ego is preventing him from doing what's in everyone's best interest.

 

[sull1102]

Eventually is coming in roughly 8 weeks with the tax sale of the ski area and the inns. I would think between now and then something has to happen with the bankruptcy proceedings started by the bank about a month ago.

 

[EPB]

Going into bankruptcy wont change the deal about no public tickets. That is part of the deed and has nothing to do with creditors.

Now, I agree that is what is needed, but bankruptcy will not change it.

I may have gotten myself mixed up. I figured there could be a way to argue that the only way the club is viable as a going concern is through relief from this restriction. Perhaps not the more I think about it. I haven't seen a case quite line this before. In full disclosure, I am not a bankruptcy lawyer.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[mister moose]

Eventually is coming in roughly 8 weeks with the tax sale of the ski area and the inns. I would think between now and then something has to happen with the bankruptcy proceedings started by the bank about a month ago.

Plus a year. Tax sales can be redeemed, and the old owner has a year to redeem. The high bidder doesn't get title until that year is over.

 

[sull1102]

Oh of course, I just figure there's borderline no chance at all Barnes suddenly pays the millions of past due taxes, unless members bail it all out.

Sent from my LG-H820 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[trackbiker]

I don't think anyone mentioned that typically the bank holding the mortgage buys the property at a tax sale to protect and maximize their investment. In any case, the property would still have the mortgage lien if another buyer was successful at the tax sale.

 

[sull1102]

I don't think anyone mentioned that typically the bank holding the mortgage buys the property at a tax sale to protect and maximize their investment. In any case, the property would still have the mortgage lien if another buyer was successful at the tax sale.

Berkshire Bank has already paid some taxes as well so they probably think they can sell somewhat quickly if they do buy. Realistically club could skip next winter, come back for 19/20 with a new owner.

 

[VTKilarney]

In any case, the property would still have the mortgage lien if another buyer was successful at the tax sale.

Incorrect.

 

[trackbiker]

Incorrect.

At a tax sale the tax lien would go away but the mortgage on the property would stay unless the bank released it or it was somehow satisfied.

 

[VTKilarney]

At a tax sale the tax lien would go away but the mortgage on the property would stay unless the bank released it or it was somehow satisfied.

Once again, incorrect.

 

[sull1102]

Once again, incorrect.

Mind sharing how it would work? You seem to know a little more than the rest of us about this stuff.

Sent from my LG-H820 using AlpineZone mobile app