Let's play "Ski Resort Kingpin"

[ski_resort_observer]

Premise...everyone gets 100 million to acquire the listed ski resorts. You have to buy at least 3 resorts to play. What are the resorts and why do you think they would make you a successful " Ski Resort Kingpin". The prices of each resort in no way represents real world prices. I know I have omitted some of your favs. Wow, methinks I could make better use of my work-breaks...:lol:

Ascutney 3m
Bolton 2m
Sunday River 20m
Sugarloaf 20m
Saddleback 5m
Mountain Creek 18m
Okemo 28m
Sugarbush 18m
Hunter 30m
Stowe 32m
Berkshire East 3m
Wachusett 3m
MRG n/a


Jackson Hole 45m
Big Sky 35m
Grand Targhee 25m
Bridger Bowl 18m
Vail(just Vail) 75m
Park City 45m
Snowbasin 22m
Squaw Valley 65m
Telluride 60m
Alta 20m
Steamboat 60m

Since I'm already tired from typing I will make it easy on myself.

Jackson Hole
Sugarbush
Sadleback
Okemo

JH cause it's...JH. Think for the next few years will be a challenge for them financially. Saddleback and Sugarbush are a great value in looking at future guidance and Okemo is just a well built, well run resort.

 

[ChileMass]

I'll take WaWa for $3m - that's a steal. It's the only halfway decent skiing within an hour of Boston, so it's a winner. I'll take Vail even at the inflated $75m because it's a cash machine. And I'll take SnowBasin for $22m just cuz I could ski there the rest of my life and be happy.

 

[jackstraw]

JH...steeps!
Alta...powdah!!
Targhee...more powdah!!
MRG...EC coolness.

 

[wintersyndrome]

I'll take sugarbush for 18M...such amazing potential with that place

 

[win]

Sorry! You can't have it for that!

 

[thetrailboss]

$18 mill for Sugarbush doesn't even buy the lifts.

 

[ski_resort_observer]

Sorry! You can't have it for that!

:lol: Gee Win, you more than double your money. That's a much better return than the stock market.

I hope Les doesn't post and suggest Sugarbush, Kmart, Mt Snow, the Loaf, Sunday River, Steamboat and the Canyons. He would probably say that even tho some are not on the list but he will borrow the money and buy them anyway....:wink:

 

[SnowRider]

I'll take Ascutney for 3m. If you havn't been there than you don't know why I would pick it. Not only is it steep it has potencial for a great mountain. With the right amount of money and new snowmaking it could be a top "small" mountain.(Mountain under 100 trails) I would also take Steamboat for 60m. Among my town and skiiers we know it seems to be a popular mountain. Also my dad has been there.

SnowRider

 

[loafer89]

I would buy Sugarloaf to save it from ASC management, buy Hunter to pay for the cost of operating Sugarloaf, which is not exactly a money maker, and buy Bolton Valley.


Or I could just buy Sugarloaf and keep the rest of the money to blow a ton of snow on a few trails for some summer skiing

 

[thetrailboss]

K-Mart is not for sale here?

 

[ski_resort_observer]

K-Mart is not for sale here?

I suppose I could add Kmart to the list. What do you think it market value is, realizing they sold all the base area development rights a couple of years ago for mucho millions?

 

[Phildozer]

I'll take Wachusett for $3 million.

In a bad year, they make money. In a good year, things are good.

What do they say about the ski industry? "Want to make a small fortune in the ski resort business? Start with a large one."

 

[Vortex]

Way to much math. SR and the Bush are close to Bost. They would be my 1st two and Wa Wa for the same reason.

 

[Geoff]

The winning strategy:
I'll just keep my money and invest it anywhere but the ski industry or airline industry.

 

[thetrailboss]

The winning strategy:
I'll just keep my money and invest it anywhere but the ski industry or airline industry.

:lol:

 

[EPB]

I think Sugarloaf has the most potential for initial profit. The west mountain area and burnt mountain base area are perfect for building massive amounts of condos and new trails/lifts. With that kind of money, lift upgrades could turn the place into a top shelf resort in all of north america.
Here's an old proposed expansion plan that I found off of k2trav's site:
http://k2trav.com/Pics/archives/burnt2.JPG
http://k2trav.com/Pics/archives/burnt.JPG

(I think that Burnt Mtn has the possibility to house more terrrain than depicted in the maps too)
*Id feel like a dick drawing new people to such a great mountain though.

 

[tree_skier]

To heck with blowing 100 mil. I would spend some time deciding where to live, for example the mad river area, snowbird/alta, Jackson hole, wistler etc. then buy a nice place and just SKI BABY!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Tin Woodsman]

$18 mill for Sugarbush doesn't even buy the lifts.

I'm pretty sure that less than that bought the whole thing a few years ago. Just more proof that you shouldn't let ASC run so much as a lemonade stand.

 

[Geoff]

I'm pretty sure that less than that bought the whole thing a few years ago. Just more proof that you shouldn't let ASC run so much as a lemonade stand.

Nobody knows the real number. I suspect the number was something north of $10 million though most of that wasn't cash. Summit Ventures probably didn't get season pass revenues and assumed a bunch of Sugarbush business debt. ASC used to claim they dumped $28 million into the place for upgraded lifts and snowmaking. Brilliant!



From the 2003 ASC annual report:

Sugarbush Sale
On September 28, 2001, the Company finalized the sale of its Sugarbush resort in Warren, Vermont to
Summit Ventures NE, Inc. This sale generated net proceeds of $5.2 million that were used by the Company to
permanently pay down the revolving and term portions of its prior resort senior credit facility, on a pro-rata basis, in
accordance with the mandatory prepayment requirements of the facility.
The sale of the Sugarbush resort was accounted for in accordance with SFAS No. 121 and APB No. 30,
since the disposal activities were initiated prior to the Company’s adoption of SFAS No. 144. In accordance with
SFAS No. 121, the carrying value of the net assets for Sugarbush that were subject to sale were reclassified as assets
held for sale. The assets held for sale were reduced to their estimated fair value based on the estimated selling price
less costs to sell, resulting in an impairment charge of $15.1 million, which is included in merger, restructuring and
asset impairment charges in the accompanying consolidated statement of operations for Fiscal 2001.