killington cancelling lifetime passes

[madskier6]

I put it on quotes because I was being sarcastic and making read as though Dave Hirasawa was saying it. I firmly beleive that this was not an attempt for ASC to strip the passholders. This is on the hands of the new owners. You can sure ASC all you want, but a.) you aren't gonna get anything out of them and b.) there laywers can easily defend this. It's in the fine print for any one to understand that IF, and it's a big IF, there is any part to be held liable for honoring the passes, it is not ASC and if SP/Powdr went and signed a contract that in effect said that they were going to allow ASC to cancel life passes effective the day before the sale, well then SP/Powdr would look pretty negligiable.

Hate ASC or not - this is not the intent of ASC and people are going a litte far in their ASC hatred to try and put the blame on them. Hell, I ski at a resort that is still owned by them and I'm nt bitching. Furthermore, for ASC to come out and comment on this without Powdr doing so, is not even rational. If due dilligence is needed, it will come to fruition in court and the new Vermont skiing PR nightmare will ensue.

I agree with this. I didn't pick-up the sarcasm in your post. My bad.

I'm not saying that ASC has any ultimate liability here. Based on what I've heard about the terms of the lifetime passes, they don't have any obligation to ensure that these passholders retain their rights under the new ownership structure. The fact that they negotiated a covenant in the Purchase Agreement obligating SP/Powdr to honor those passes evidences their good faith. They had no obligation to take care of these passholders but they nevertheless attempted to preserve their rights.

My point about writing to ASC was to find out what happened to the Section 8.23 covenant. That may be the only way one will find out what happened.

My point about the liability being ASC's was that as between the Buyer & Seller, the Seller (ASC) is the one that owes these passholders whatever they're entitled to, which isn't much. The fact that ASC sent the letter was an attempt to limit their exposure since as between ASC and SP/Powdr, ASC is the one that is somewhat responsible to the passholders. SP/Powdr is not.

The million dollar question is what the hell happened to Section 8.23 and is SP/Powdr really breaching the contract right at/after the closing?

 

[jerryg]

The million dollar question is what the hell happened to Section 8.23 and is SP/Powdr really breaching the contract right at/after the closing?

They screwed up and it's gonna show up in any forthcoming SR or SL deal! :idea:

 

[thetrailboss]

I certainly understand the situation and empathize...empathize because I am in a similar situation right now. A mountain that I have been very loyal to has made some major changes in pricing that really impact me and they don't seem to understand my POV. It really is tough trying to handle it....

 

[Lostone]

Hard to see where starting the ownership of a new area and immediately generating bad will, with what would be a relative handful of loyal customers, will pay off.

Yes, you are possibly turning non-ticket paying customers into paying customers, but most likely you are turning them into commercials for other areas. :flame:

And having ASC make the announcement is negligible. Nobody is going to think ASC did it without pressure from the new guys. :roll:

 

[Newpylong]

The American Ski Company had an initial filing regarding the sale from February which REQUIRED that any sale would contain a clause honoring all past and present lifelong passes. Most likely this was removed from the final paperwork. So no, this isn't just typical ASC bashing... if you want to blame anyone it's them for doing this on the way out. Why blame SP for getting a better deal?

 

[jerryg]

The American Ski Company had an initial filing regarding the sale from February which REQUIRED that any sale would contain a clause honoring all past and present lifelong passes. Most likely this was removed from the final paperwork. So no, this isn't just typical ASC bashing... if you want to blame anyone it's them for doing this on the way out. Why blame SP for getting a better deal?

Obviously conjecture on your part, but if you are correct it can't just be removed. The filing with the SEC is ASC's current report and not a 14c filing. If the agreement was changed, it should be reflected in the aforementioned filing when that is made public. It would need to be an amendment agreed upon by both parties to be legal upon closing, especially if it means that ASC gained mored than $1,000,000 as result of said amendment. The only adjustments in the current report reflect additional taxes and closing cost made payable to the Seller. Persumably, it was either taken out legally by both parties or perhaps SP made their intentions known that they found a particular loophole in regard to the Shelburne Corp. running the lifts. If ASC would not gain financially for having this removed, it would make no sense to put it in as covenent and then remove it as they will not be burdened by the future cost of these passes. It is possible that SP said they would pay more money if ASC agreed to have it removed. If that is the case, it will have to be reported as part of the definitive closing. Furthermore, it is possible that it wasn't removed and SP didn't think it would be a big deal to do so. Like others have said, maybe they wanted to get the bad news out of the way first.

Or someone could write, call, or email ASC:
David Hirasawa
American Skiing Company
P.O. Box 4552, 136 Heber Avenue
Suite 303
Park City, UT 84060
Telephone: (435) 615-0340. or (435) 615-0396
Email: investinfo@ascresorts.com

 

[Vortex]

Alot of negitive vibes this year with passes. Loon, Burke,ASc Pwdr. Interesteing, but not comfortable.

 

[Terry]

Whether they can do it legally or not I don't know but it is going to cost them in the end from negative comments, and lost customers. I don't know how many have lifetime passes, but if they all are pissed and give lots of negative advertising about Killington it will lose a lot more money in lost ticket sales than it would ever gain by making these people buy passes!

 

[ski_resort_observer]

As predicted the below market pass(A41) was a financial disaster for ASC. Powdr/SP has to turn that around. The lifetime pass thing effects such a small part of their market it doesn't even deserve it's own thread.

 

[thetrailboss]

As predicted the below market pass(A41) was a financial disaster for ASC. Powdr/SP has to turn that around. The lifetime pass thing effects such a small part of their market it doesn't even deserve it's own thread.

Good point about small market. My thoughts are this: sure POWDR/SP Lands may be able to legally do what they want to do. Sure it may be the best thing for the bottom line. And I understand if this is a small group of folks. But what is legal, what is good for the bottom line is not always the "smartest" or "best" thing to do for public relations and marketing. This week we have seen all this bad publicity which has come as a result of this decision. Resorts spend thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of dollars to create an image which is impacted by a decision like this, which may save what, a few dollars? It makes no sense.

Another hypo is this: I can certainly act rude to people all day long. There is "no rule" against that. But it is not in my interest to do so. Therefore, I don't. This is a similar case. Sure they might legally and perhaps ethically be able to do this, but it harms them in other ways and is not good business to piss off loyal customers, who are your core.

As I have hinted, there is a resort/mountain [to remain unnamed at this time] that has almost tripled the amount of money for a season pass for me. I have expressed my concern as a loyal customer and one who has done a lot of PR for them as a gesture of support. It is a mountain where I spend more than just a season pass. They have said that the change in policy is due to other people "abusing" the program. So in essence they are punishing a loyal customer for the harm caused by others. Does this make business sense? No.

In both these instances, the few dollars saved are not worth this debacle.

 

[Vortex]

My take is if you bought a lifetime pass you probably had some real estate involvement. ie a 2nd home or a local. My guess is not many day skiers invested that much money to make day trips.

Those folks I would think will stay(property owners), casue the choices are move and sell or tolerate it with frustration. Terry is Correct in the negitive publicity may be the biggest issue for the resort.

I don't want to comment too much, cause I'm not involved and neither is my money.

When Loons passes were messed with I moved and I am selling my place near Loon.

I diagree with Ski Resort Observer this topic does deserve some consideration. This is all about the new regime and the old customer base.

 

[SkiDork]

I'm trying to compile a list of bondholders. If anyone owns one can you post here.

 

[ctenidae]

I still want to see a copy of the letter and of the pass.

 

[SkiDork]

I still want to see a copy of the letter and of the pass.

yup - I'm going to go to the bank today to get it from the vault

 

[jerryg]

I'm trying to compile a list of bondholders. If anyone owns one can you post here.

SkiDork, you are obviously one of people who has been adversly effected by this and although it does not impact me financially, it does imapct me as a lover of the sport and the industry. That is obviously of little consolation to you, but while you compile your list, perhaps it would be good to get a head start. Contact the dude at ASC and ask his take on this. Maybe he would be helpful, maybe not, but it would not hurt to try.

Just another .25 cents.

Jerry

 

[SkiDork]

SkiDork, you are obviously one of people who has been adversly effected by this and although it does not impact me financially, it does imapct me as a lover of the sport and the industry. That is obviously of little consolation to you, but while you compile your list, perhaps it would be good to get a head start. Contact the dude at ASC and ask his take on this. Maybe he would be helpful, maybe not, but it would not hurt to try.

Just another .25 cents.

Jerry

I just placed a call to Rick at Basin ski shop - I want to get his take on things, he's pretty much in the loop when it comes to stuff like this.

 

[MikeTrainor]

This does not impact me financially either, however it pisses me off. I ski Pico from time to time and I'll tell you I won't anymore. If they want to take this attitude, I will not give them any of my money.

 

[Phildozer]

And like any other investment, the potential to lose it all existed. And lost it they did. Thems the breaks. I still don't blame the new owners.

I agree.

You paid less but were taking a greater risk for a season pass. Sorry to hear you lost but that's what happens. If you want a sure thing, bet against being alive 100 years from now.

 

[SkiDork]

I agree.

You paid less but were taking a greater risk for a season pass. Sorry to hear you lost but that's what happens. If you want a sure thing, bet against being alive 100 years from now.

No argument here. BUT, we certainly have the right not to take it lying down and pursue all avenues to try to resolve it.

 

[jerryg]

I agree.

You paid less but were taking a greater risk for a season pass. Sorry to hear you lost but that's what happens. If you want a sure thing, bet against being alive 100 years from now.

I don't disagree with this in it's entirety, but if the new owners signed an agreement, which gave cause for them to legally honor these passes, then yes, I would raise holy hell - with the understanding that there was indeed risk involved in the initial bond purchase. It never hurts to fight for what you believe to be yours.

I can only say that if I were a new owner, this would not be a move I would make unless I was really strapped for cash and had a legal loophole. Even still, I wouldn't want to come into a new arena in such a manner, but apparently others think it's not bad for them. I think you can surely blame them more than you can admire them. You can do what some have, and blame ASC for the passes being revoked. It's all opinion until the fact are out on paper.