Park City/Talisker-Vail Lawsuit

[jimmywilson69]

This, apparently, fell through the cracks.

That is exactly how it appears and that is absolutely unbelieveable. I also believe you used the term "hostile takeover" a few posts ago. If I was taliskier and now Vail this is exactly what I would've done. I honestly think that is why they brought Vail on board to operate the Canyons. They basically want someone with experience in managing/operating a mega resort. Throw in Ski-Link and the face of SLC/Park City skiing could be changing before everyone's eyes.

 

[First Tracks]

That is exactly how it appears and that is absolutely unbelieveable. I also believe you used the term "hostile takeover" a few posts ago. If I was taliskier and now Vail this is exactly what I would've done. I honestly think that is why they brought Vail on board to operate the Canyons. They basically want someone with experience in managing/operating a mega resort. Throw in Ski-Link and the face of SLC/Park City skiing could be changing before everyone's eyes.

Whoa there, Nelly! Rein in that horse.

"Hostile takeover," yes, in the sense in that VR is trying to get PCMR while Powdr ain't sellin'. I agree that phrase is absolutely accurate. The fact of the matter is that VR got involved because they want PCMR, not because they want Canyons.

However, you must understand that:

1. There's a huge tract of privately owned land separating Canyons from PCMR -- a deep valley between Iron Mountain and Pinecone Ridge. And as far as I know that landowner isn't interested in selling, although we all know that everyone has a price.

2. SkiLink is essentially dead, or at least on life support. Congressional support has withdrawn for the land exchange needed, Salt Lake County is vehemently opposed, and VR has said publicly that they're not interested in pursuing it at this time.

"The face of SLC/Park City skiing could be changing before everyone's eyes" is either hyperbole or overstatement.

 

[thetrailboss]

Didn't know about the tract of land in between Canyons and PCMR. That's interesting.

And as for SkiLink, I didn't know that the Utah Delegation withdrew the proposal. I know that it was a PR and all around blunder for Talisker to do what they did and avoid local input. FWIW Alta has (long term) ambitions to connect with Brighton/Solitude, so I'm sure that some "SkiLink II" will eventually appear.

 

[First Tracks]

And as for SkiLink, I didn't know that the Utah Delegation withdrew the proposal.

"Withdrew" is perhaps the wrong word. Maybe "dropped" is more accurate.

FWIW Alta has (long term) ambitions to connect with Brighton/Solitude, so I'm sure that some "SkiLink II" will eventually appear.

If Alta's planned/proposed Flagstaff lift ever goes in, they'd be linked bi-directionally even though the ostensible reasoning behind Flagstaff involves avalanche mitigation in an era when Korean War-era 110mm shells are hard to come by and the DHS is none too keen about launching live ammo over populated places.

Right now Solitude and Alta can be skied in that direction. Hop off Solitude's Summit lift, hang a left, go through your first gate on the right and you're on the Highway to Heaven traverse that leads to Twin Lakes Pass, at the head of Grizzly Gulch. From there it's all downhill to Alta. The proposed Flagstaff lift would put you high enough across Davenport Hill to drop into Solitude in the other direction. It's a bit of a schlep but doable. A more efficient connection would be directly up Grizzly Gulch, and Alta Ski Lifts owns that land I believe.

You can also head up Supreme and ski into Catherine's Area, drop down to Lake Catherine and just keep going into Brighton via the Dog Lake Chutes. At least once or so each season we'll do the whole four-resort loop thing: Start at Snowbird, ski into Alta, head to Brighton via the route described above and return via Solitude and the Highway to Heaven.

 

[steamboat1]

http://www.parkrecord.com/park_city...rp-executive-important-figure-lawsuit-departs

 

[thetrailboss]

The plot thickens....Vail offers to buy PCMR base area. In other news, I've got to use my three free days at PCMR soon!

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/57730593-78/vail-park-resort-katz.html.csp

 

[drjeff]

The plot thickens....Vail offers to buy PCMR base area. In other news, I've got to use my three free days at PCMR soon!

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/57730593-78/vail-park-resort-katz.html.csp

Seems like its only a matter of time, one way or another that PCMR is available to those that have an Epic Pass. Also seems like Katz at Vail Resorts is both outplaying and calling the bluff of Cummings at Powdr.

I'm quite sure that they'll be a few Killington folks that would hope that if Cummings sells, that Killington be included in the sale

 

[thetrailboss]

Seems like its only a matter of time, one way or another that PCMR is available to those that have an Epic Pass. Also seems like Katz at Vail Resorts is both outplaying and calling the bluff of Cummings at Powdr.

I'm quite sure that they'll be a few Killington folks that would hope that if Cummings sells, that Killington be included in the sale

Based on what I've seen, this has really made POWDR look like amateur hour.

 

[Hawkshot99]

I dont really see what leg PCMR has to stand on in this case at all. They missed the date in which they needed to renew their lease. If Taliskier/Vail wanted to ignore that they could just let them renew late, but dates are there for a reason. They missed it, and are now trespassing on someone's property.

 

[mbedle]

Katz is right in saying that the lost of the base area(s) would not impede the use of the upper portions of Park City. If they own the land between the two resort, lifts could be installed up to Pinecone Ridge (albeit, a lot of switchbacking to get intermediates and beginners done on the park city side). One thing I think is overlooked on Katz part is how important the city is to the PCMR's success. Having direct access to Park City downtown area from the ski resort brings in a lot of vacation people. And if it does come to that, I would bet that a lot more people are going to jump into this fight.

 

[Highway Star]

Based on what I've seen, this has really made POWDR look like amateur hour.

What an incisive analysis!!!!

 

[thetrailboss]

What an incisive analysis!!!!

Not as good as yours, Kevin.

 

[drjeff]

I dont really see what leg PCMR has to stand on in this case at all. They missed the date in which they needed to renew their lease. If Taliskier/Vail wanted to ignore that they could just let them renew late, but dates are there for a reason. They missed it, and are now trespassing on someone's property.

Yup, and I thought that it was quite interesting reading through some of the comments in that link, when one of the folks commenting mentioned that after they missed the lease renewal date and PCMR was complaining about Talisker/Vail wanting to up the renewal rate to something resembling fair market value, that the commenter thought it seemed appropriate as the 150k that PCMR had been paying annually for the lease was less than multiple businesses on Main St. in Park City pay for in their annual leases

 

[jimmywilson69]

THis has to be rewarding for the Kzone folks and Killington hard core, long term passholders that made such a stink about Powder when they came. It's clear they are clueless on how to run a business. Seriously how do you forget to renew the cheaper than cheap lease for the land that your ski resort is located on...

Vail has 4 Aces, Powder has 2-2s, a jack and an 8.

Once Vail starts operating PCMR, they will get behind the Ski Utah, One Wasatch thing and then BOOM! It's excitying to think about what the future could hold out there!

If this drags on through the summer, could Vail/Talisker file an injuction to have Powder cease operations at PCMR next winter? That would seemingly force Powder's hand in selling.

 

[thetrailboss]

Yup, and I thought that it was quite interesting reading through some of the comments in that link, when one of the folks commenting mentioned that after they missed the lease renewal date and PCMR was complaining about Talisker/Vail wanting to up the renewal rate to something resembling fair market value, that the commenter thought it seemed appropriate as the 150k that PCMR had been paying annually for the lease was less than multiple businesses on Main St. in Park City pay for in their annual leases

The amount of the lease is an interesting subplot. Talisker says that it planned on increasing the lease amount to something more reasonable. PCMR does not feel that there should be an increase in their lease for obvious reasons.

PCMR maintains then, and now, that they "implied" that they would be renewing their lease with Talisker because they let Talisker know that they were planning on replacing a lift and doing some other work to the resort. PCMR maintains that this was constructive notice that they intended to renew the lease. PCMR did not renew the lease on or before the deadline in writing; they submitted a letter of intent several days after the deadline that Talisker alleged was postdated.

And technically Vail is now handling the lawsuit since Talisker decided to assign its interest to them last year.

I find it interesting that many locals hate Talisker, in part, because it is not "local". Powdr is not local either....they seem to forget that.

 

[RENO]

THis has to be rewarding for the Kzone folks and Killington hard core, long term passholders that made such a stink about Powder when they came. It's clear they are clueless on how to run a business. Seriously how do you forget to renew the cheaper than cheap lease for the land that your ski resort is located on...

Vail has 4 Aces, Powder has 2-2s, a jack and an 8.

Once Vail starts operating PCMR, they will get behind the Ski Utah, One Wasatch thing and then BOOM! It's excitying to think about what the future could hold out there!

If this drags on through the summer, could Vail/Talisker file an injuction to have Powder cease operations at PCMR next winter? That would seemingly force Powder's hand in selling.

Doing this to the town and not having any skiing for the winter because of it would all but kill any chance of support for Vail. They would get shredded and then you're bringing in possible state/fed charges...

Also, if PCMR gets thrown off the land, what happens to the lifts? Aren't they owned by POWDR? If PCMR gets thrown off and Vail runs a lift to the mountain and PCMR doesn't want to sell them the lifts after getting evicted and just prevents them from using them, then what? They just can't take the lifts. Doesn't POWDR still get time to remove them or sell them? I just don't get how this whole mess is gonna play out!

 

[Highway Star]

Not as good as yours, Highway Star.

That's Highway Star to you buddy! Reported post to moderators!

 

[RustyGroomer]

That's Highway Star to you buddy! Reported post to moderators!

OMG. You got reported Trailboss. Hate to be you when the hammer comes slamming down.

 

[thetrailboss]

Doing this to the town and not having any skiing for the winter because of it would all but kill any chance of support for Vail. They would get shredded and then you're bringing in possible state/fed charges...

How does this bring in "possible state/fed charges?" Most of PCMR is owned by Talisker. They are merely a landlord that wants their property back since the tenant did not renew the lease as per the terms...or at least that is Talisker's POV. No doubt it would hurt downtown PC if it is not resolved.

Also, if PCMR gets thrown off the land, what happens to the lifts? Aren't they owned by POWDR? If PCMR gets thrown off and Vail runs a lift to the mountain and PCMR doesn't want to sell them the lifts after getting evicted and just prevents them from using them, then what? They just can't take the lifts. Doesn't POWDR still get time to remove them or sell them? I just don't get how this whole mess is gonna play out!

That is another issue. The lease and Utah law would spell out what would happen to Powdr's fixtures on the land.

 

[First Tracks]

Also, if PCMR gets thrown off the land, what happens to the lifts? Aren't they owned by POWDR? If PCMR gets thrown off and Vail runs a lift to the mountain and PCMR doesn't want to sell them the lifts after getting evicted and just prevents them from using them, then what? They just can't take the lifts. Doesn't POWDR still get time to remove them or sell them? I just don't get how this whole mess is gonna play out!

That's been discussed before. Per the terms of the lease agreement all improvements upon the land (including lifts, snowmaking, restaurants, etc.) revert to landlord ownership upon expiration of the lease. So should Talisker/Vail win the pending litigation, they belong to Talisker.

Here's our piece on the latest development:
http://www.firsttracksonline.com/2014/03/26/vail-resorts-offers-to-buy-park-city-mountain/

(It's so good to be back publishing again! Even if we're still being besieged by hackers...)