Peak Resorts: The New ASC?

[deadheadskier]

Give the marketing department the "tools" of a new high speed lift and a 25% expansion via new terrain headlines to work with and they'll easily be able to spin that into increased visits and revenue.

The Northeast ski community rarely these days gets a sizable terrain expansion and a truly new lift (not just an upgrade of an existing lift), so the curiosity factor will be high, and the marketing folks at Peak and Hunter will enjoy promoting it

This all sounds great. However, even though I am not very likely to ski Hunter, I still think they should have came out swinging with a bit more information on this announcement.

A new High Speed Quad - how much vertical will it service?
25% expansion in terrain acreage - I suppose I could do the math, but making a statement such as, "10 new trails totaling 70 acres" would carry more weight

I'm sure if they have this plan, they at least have to have some drawings. Let's see em'!

Overall, this type of terrain sounds exactly like what Hunter could use. One complaint I have heard from Hunter skiers about Peaks since they took over the mountain is they now groom the place to death, which the prior owners weren't so guilty of. Hopefully by adding new intermediate terrain, they can leave more of their expert terrain untouched.

 

[abc]

The biggest negative of Hunter is crowds, on lifts and trails. That's what deter many from going there.

Adding terrain and a new lift will definitely help increase visitation. Good marketing notwithstanding.

 

[drjeff]

This all sounds great. However, even though I am not very likely to ski Hunter, I still think they should have came out swinging with a bit more information on this announcement.

A new High Speed Quad - how much vertical will it service?
25% expansion in terrain acreage - I suppose I could do the math, but making a statement such as, "10 new trails totaling 70 acres" would carry more weight

I'm sure if they have this plan, they at least have to have some drawings. Let's see em'!

Overall, this type of terrain sounds exactly like what Hunter could use. One complaint I have heard from Hunter skiers about Peaks since they took over the mountain is they now groom the place to death, which the prior owners weren't so guilty of. Hopefully by adding new intermediate terrain, they can leave more of their expert terrain untouched.

Given that it's expected to come online in the '18-'19 season, I'm guessing the major blitz, with much greater details, will start late Feb/March when the '18-'19 Peak Pass products roll out

Also, you have to remember as always, that the majority of people that a ski area markets to, don't have anywhere near as much interest in the details of what's going on, and have their interest captured with things like "coming next season, a new lift and NEW terrain!" Us AZ'ers just aren't the typical ski area customers!! ;-)

 

[cdskier]

A new High Speed Quad - how much vertical will it service?
25% expansion in terrain acreage - I suppose I could do the math, but making a statement such as, "10 new trails totaling 70 acres" would carry more weight

To me a 25% expansion "sounds" more impressive than "10 new trails totaling 70 acres". Many people have no concept of what an acre on a mountain for skiing really is. Of course we could split the difference and Peaks could have used all of these descriptors in their announcement! "A 25% expansion of terrain featuring 10 new trails on 70 additional acres!"

I do agree a diagram or proposed trail map would be nice though.

 

[deadheadskier]

Exactly what I'm saying. Use both metrics. If you really want to ramp up the hype machine include trail mileage as well.

"New for 2018, A High Speed Quad serving 1100 vertical of terrain that will include 10 new trails adding 70 acres and 3+ miles of new skiable terrain. This expansion will increase our skiable terrain by over 25%, making it the largest new development in Hunter's history!"

Not too difficult to throw a bunch of hyperbole into a press release like that one.

Sent from my XT1565 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[Funky_Catskills]

Local consensus is this is going to happen and has been in the works since before the purchase.
Will be on the face where Wayout and Huega are.. We ski those lines on a good year... It's nice in there

 

[deadheadskier]

The real question is whether or not Blue Boy gets a trail named after him. He's kind of a Hunter legend now.

 

[Funky_Catskills]

The real question is whether or not Blue Boy gets a trail named after him. He's kind of a Hunter legend now.

I gotta tell you - most of us could give a sh*t about that guy..

 

[Jully]

I suspect cdskier's thought about Southern VT might be a source for new skier visits. Maybe they will pull from Mount Snow specifically with more intermediate terrain closer to NYC.

Stratton too, but that is a slightly different client base IMO

 

[Jully]

Also, no one mentioned that Peaks pulled in $130 million in revenue this year and has basically that on hand for off season expenditures. Pretty good news!

 

[Funky_Catskills]

I suspect cdskier's thought about Southern VT might be a source for new skier visits. Maybe they will pull from Mount Snow specifically with more intermediate terrain closer to NYC.

Stratton too, but that is a slightly different client base IMO

Biggest legitimate gripe about Hunter is the lack of intermediate terrain..

 

[Smellytele]

The biggest negative of Hunter is crowds, on lifts and trails. That's what deter many from going there.

Adding terrain and a new lift will definitely help increase visitation. Good marketing notwithstanding.

As Yogi Berra said "No one goes there nowadays, it’s too crowded."

 

[cdskier]

I suspect cdskier's thought about Southern VT might be a source for new skier visits. Maybe they will pull from Mount Snow specifically with more intermediate terrain closer to NYC.

Stratton too, but that is a slightly different client base IMO

Pulling from Mt Snow wouldn't result in any earnings increase for Peaks though :razz:

 

[BenedictGomez]

There lack of intermediate terrain is defiantly holding them back. Windham has many customers for them to take and leaves much to be desired in terms of variety and snowmaking quality.

The thing about Windham though, is I find some of their trails faux-marked. Some of their intermediates are more like beginners, and some of their black diamonds are more like intermediates.

To me a 25% expansion "sounds" more impressive than "10 new trails totaling 70 acres".

I haven't skied Hunter in years, but admittedly if they really did a 25% terrain increase, I would definitely check it out. And the 2 main reasons I haven't been to Hunter in years are the precise reasons many in this thread have already cited, weekend crowding, and lack of intermediate terrain.

 

[Newpylong]

Also, no one mentioned that Peaks pulled in $130 million in revenue this year and has basically that on hand for off season expenditures. Pretty good news!

Except it doesn't work like that. Just because the season stops, it doesn't mean the bills do as well. Also, revenue is not profit and only a portion of profit is typically earmarked for capital expenditures.

 

[cdskier]

Except it doesn't work like that. Just because the season stops, it doesn't mean the bills do as well. Also, revenue is not profit and only a portion of profit is typically earmarked for capital expenditures.

Yes, but bills after the season are part of the next fiscal year (Peaks fiscal year end is the end of April). So that revenue value is their revenue for their year, but as you pointed out, revenue is a pretty pointless value by itself. Their EBITDA for the fiscal year is projected to be $26-27M, which is a bit better indicator of how well they did but is still not a real "net income" number which will be substantially lower than that. They are projecting they will have $30M cash on hand though which sounds decent.

 

[Jully]

Except it doesn't work like that. Just because the season stops, it doesn't mean the bills do as well. Also, revenue is not profit and only a portion of profit is typically earmarked for capital expenditures.

I echo what cdskier says, also I'm aware it doesn't work like that they now have $130 million to spend however they please. It's just nice to see them have a profitable year.

 

[catskillman]

I gotta tell you - most of us could give a sh*t about that guy..

They will when he uses them like a gate in a race!! Saw him on the last day rolling a joint and playing with fire.

He was attempting to send up one of those lanterns from the deck, with hundreds of folks around.

If course it was blue, and he was un successful.

 

[catskillman]

It is impossible to find a seat in the base lodge now! and forget about getting food due to the number of people.

But I am there to ski, not eat. The 6 pack lines are insane now on most weekends. I have left rather than stand in a 1/2 hour lift line. I am there early so the parking is not an issue for me, but the lot is overloaded on weekends with people parking along the road...

I am glad I do not have property on Rusk Hollow Road. There goes your quite mountain home.........

 

[Jully]

It is impossible to find a seat in the base lodge now! and forget about getting food due to the number of people.

But I am there to ski, not eat. The 6 pack lines are insane now on most weekends. I have left rather than stand in a 1/2 hour lift line. I am there early so the parking is not an issue for me, but the lot is overloaded on weekends with people parking along the road...

I am glad I do not have property on Rusk Hollow Road. There goes your quite mountain home.........

Sounds like while the terrain expansion will potentially make the lift lines better on average throughout the resort and trail crowding a lot better, there are other elements of Hunter that also need a capacity upgrade that this expansion will only put further strain on. Is there any chance for a new base area anywhere?