• Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!

    You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!

New majority owner of Peak Resorts

deadheadskier

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
25,627
Points
38
Location
Southeast NH
Wonder how many sales of Oxycodone it will take to fund a new lift at Attitash.

I'd also suggest that public knowledge of this will result in the alienation of a not so insignificant amount of people. I certainly don't like that my money is going to the Sackler family. Those people are pure evil.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app
 

JimG.

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 29, 2004
Messages
10,997
Points
48
Location
Hopewell Jct., NY
Wonder how many sales of Oxycodone it will take to fund a new lift at Attitash.

I'd also suggest that public knowledge of this will result in the alienation of a not so insignificant amount of people. I certainly don't like that my money is going to the Sackler family. Those people are pure evil.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

I was just going to say this.

I minimized my visits to Peaks resorts this winter to get the most out of my season passes to K and Belleayre/Gore/Whiteface. I only skied Peaks to socialize with old friends.

But knowing the Sacklers own those places means the cord is cut for me I won't spend a dime at those places. Those are some horrible and evil people.
 

deadheadskier

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
25,627
Points
38
Location
Southeast NH
My feelings are that though I have a moral conflict spending money that will benefit the Sacklers, any boycott by me would harm the employees of Wildcat more than that evil family.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app
 

JimG.

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 29, 2004
Messages
10,997
Points
48
Location
Hopewell Jct., NY
My feelings are that though I have a moral conflict spending money that will benefit the Sacklers, any boycott by me would harm the employees of Wildcat more than that evil family.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

You also have the benefit of calling Wildcat your home which is far and away without any doubt the best ski area Peaks operates. I would be hard pressed to boycott them under those circumstances.

But living 5.5 hours from Wildcat it's much easier for me I won't miss out on anything.
 

Smellytele

Active member
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Messages
7,556
Points
38
Location
Right where I want to be
fbgm has been stating this for years on here. So now they own a few more percentage points no real difference


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone
 

cdskier

Active member
Joined
Mar 26, 2015
Messages
3,767
Points
38
Location
NJ
fbgm has been stating this for years on here. So now they own a few more percentage points no real difference

I tend to agree. Boycotting a resort over who purchased their public stocks seems a bit extreme. You're causing far more damage to the local communities and people that work at these resorts than you are to people that may not even realize they have a controlling interest in the company (let's be honest...they probably have some finance hedge fund manager making these decisions and have no idea what they own as long as they see profits).
 

thetrailboss

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jun 4, 2004
Messages
28,162
Points
48
Location
NEK by Birth; Alta/Snowbird by Choice
I was going to say that this flew under the radar. I for one would be concerned about the stability of their ownership. They currently are in the crosshairs of multiple upon multiple lawsuits for alleged egregious behavior. That doesn’t sound like the definition of financial stability to me.


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone
 

dlague

Active member
Joined
Nov 7, 2012
Messages
8,789
Points
36
Location
CS, Colorado
You have no idea of how many things you buy / use that are not socially aligned with your own convictions. For example they have owned shares as far back as 2015 but now it is not acceptable. That is because you know. It is easier when you do not know.

What about ski areas that claim that they are envirinmentally sustainable but require fossil fuels to people there.

Just sayin!

Sent from my SM-G930V using AlpineZone mobile app
 

icecoast1

Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2018
Messages
431
Points
18
fbgm has been stating this for years on here. So now they own a few more percentage points no real difference


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


except they owned a small share of the company before, they now own the majority controlling share, a little different
 

cdskier

Active member
Joined
Mar 26, 2015
Messages
3,767
Points
38
Location
NJ
except they owned a small share of the company before, they now own the majority controlling share, a little different

They owned 40% previously. Not exactly what I consider a "small" share. It may not have been a majority controlling share, but it was still substantial.
 

Pez

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2016
Messages
267
Points
16
Location
WMASS
I will still continue to hit up Snow and buy lunch somewhere and buy beer to take home from somewhere. Better to keep the local economy flowing. Peak is going to probably crash and burn at some point in the next five years anyway.


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone
 

JimG.

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 29, 2004
Messages
10,997
Points
48
Location
Hopewell Jct., NY
I was going to say that this flew under the radar. I for one would be concerned about the stability of their ownership. They currently are in the crosshairs of multiple upon multiple lawsuits for alleged egregious behavior. That doesn’t sound like the definition of financial stability to me.


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone

This exactly.

Inflicting death for profit does not sell well.
 

prsboogie

Active member
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
1,753
Points
36
Location
Swansea
I wonder at what point PEOPLE will start taking responsibility for their own actions instead of blaming others for their downfalls. Back in the late 70s early 80s there was a big push in medicine for pain control, after many years criticism from the public that their pain was poorly controlled after surgeries. To the point that there was a push to include pain in all vital sign rounds, "pain is the fifth vital" was the mantra in nursing and medical schools.

The big bad rich people created a medicine that is effective in treating pain. Pain which most should never have complained about in the first place but as a society we are soft, so the Sackler's seized the opportunity.

Was the drug abused, yes. Was it misrepresented, probably. Is it their fault people started taking their pills three-four times more frequently and double and triple the prescribed doses, absolutely not. Nowhere on the drug information sheets does it say it is acceptable to chew them (because it gets you high instead of slow release as intended), nowhere does it say crush an snort as an acceptable route of administration (because it gets you high instead of treating pain as intended).

We as a society need to stop passing the buck and take responsibility for our own actions. I couldn't care who owns what as long as they keep the lights on. I have way more important shit to worry about - mainly keeping my kids safe and healthy and teaching them to stay away from all the bad shit that goes on in this world.


Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using AlpineZone mobile app
 
Top