Season Pass Economics (For the Resorts)

[prsboogie]

The Stratton Spirit pass has been affordable for at least the last two-three years that I've seen. IIRC 799, 849 and now 899. I didn't pay attention to it prior.

 

[yeggous]

Bromley is a sweet spot: they take great care of the mountain and make a good amount of snow considering their size, and they get decent dumps because they seem to always be in the SC-VT snow belt (packing snow while stratton/Magic get rain). There is no better place to be on the coldest days, because their all-day-sunny exposure always keeps it a bit warmer than other spots. They never skimp on grooming every slope that needs it every day (and doing it well), and their lift reliability is strong (when the winds aren't). They have several different back-up chair options when summit lifts are limited by wind, allowing them to essentially operate every day no matter what. It's a shame they haven't linked up with others (besides cranmore and jiminy) because they can only compete as an independent for so long. The pricing is also likely to limit the number of holiday skiers, who, often come from traditionally affluent CT (with some NJ/NYers mixed in), so they can certainly afford it. The mountain is usually at capacity on weekends/holidays, which is why they don't need to compete to make $$$, yet weekdays you have this petite gem to yourself. It's pricey, but if you ask any Bromley regulars, worth every penny. Innkeepers pass is a pretty stellar deal for locals too at $115 to ski every Wednesday. It still would be nice to get more than just one peak for the $$$. I'm only there weekdays, so their midweek pass (includes MLKday and summer lift/+1 summer day pass) is a decent enough deal, all things considering.


the cubbiest skier you've ever met

Bromley is a single mountain pass by choice. They are not an independent mountain. The same owner owns Jiminy and Cranmore. They could easily team up on a pass.


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[skinavy]

I suspect Stowe has a bit of "exclusive image" that they are trying to maintain- price is often used as a discriminator to make a product look more exclusive. Ref real estate prices and overall vibe? Its a cool place and all, but it definitely curates a particular image vibe.

As for E vs W season passes- I've talked with several friends from the East and Colorado about this- we think that, as usual, its driven by what the market will bear. Adam Smith was a smart guy, after all. The affluence of the primary regular skier audience and availability of terrain (supply, and ability of the demand to pay a premium). There are so many "weekend-house" types (read: well-above median incomes) in the NE coming from NY, Boston, even DC who can afford a high season pass, so they will charge it. In the West, the cost of living is lower, population is lower, the local market won't support those prices, so they don't charge the same. Furthermore, there are simply more places with more terrain within a reasonable drive from (Denver, SLC, Sac) than there are from (NYC, Boston, Phil, DC). More supply out West... lower prices for frequent skiers.

The same effect causes the opposite for day tickets- far cheaper in the E than the W:
Because of the lower local population, the Western resorts derive comparatively more revenue from out-of-region vacationers- typically out for 3-5 days of skiing, often from the Eastern cities. They are clearly affluent-ish at least (they can afford to fly and lodge their families out West in the 1st place), so if the market will bear charging them more for a few day tix... and they are there to SKI, for the entire trip. Captive audience.
As for the East, those same huge population centers create loads of day-trippers that don't exist out West. Its one thing to pay $$$ for tix when in a resort vacation mindset (witness Disney tickets), quite another to do it for a just a daytrip. People will drive a few hours and have fun for $95 (or less) tix... not so much for $150. Not-so-captive audience.

Just my (flawed, I am sure) thoughts that have been fermented over a few too many apres PBRs...

 

[cdskier]

Oh, nevermind I thought it was in the 400s now. I wouldn't consider it a lot higher at that price. That is a great deal.

Last year it was up to $459 for the final price after the various early deadline increases. Maybe that's what you're thinking of?

 

[cdskier]

Mad River Glen seems pretty darn expensive for what you are getting in return.

MRG also has 0 income from real estate and lodging like many other resorts do. So that's certainly a factor where the bulk of their income comes purely from skiing. They have a rather captive niche market as well. Even though that price seems expensive for what you get, I really don't think they could lower it otherwise they would go out of business. So the price is probably right where it needs to be for them to remain viable.

 

[drjeff]

I suspect Stowe has a bit of "exclusive image" that they are trying to maintain- price is often used as a discriminator to make a product look more exclusive. Ref real estate prices and overall vibe? Its a cool place and all, but it definitely curates a particular image vibe.

As for E vs W season passes- I've talked with several friends from the East and Colorado about this- we think that, as usual, its driven by what the market will bear. Adam Smith was a smart guy, after all. The affluence of the primary regular skier audience and availability of terrain (supply, and ability of the demand to pay a premium). There are so many "weekend-house" types (read: well-above median incomes) in the NE coming from NY, Boston, even DC who can afford a high season pass, so they will charge it. In the West, the cost of living is lower, population is lower, the local market won't support those prices, so they don't charge the same. Furthermore, there are simply more places with more terrain within a reasonable drive from (Denver, SLC, Sac) than there are from (NYC, Boston, Phil, DC). More supply out West... lower prices for frequent skiers.

The same effect causes the opposite for day tickets- far cheaper in the E than the W:
Because of the lower local population, the Western resorts derive comparatively more revenue from out-of-region vacationers- typically out for 3-5 days of skiing, often from the Eastern cities. They are clearly affluent-ish at least (they can afford to fly and lodge their families out West in the 1st place), so if the market will bear charging them more for a few day tix... and they are there to SKI, for the entire trip. Captive audience.
As for the East, those same huge population centers create loads of day-trippers that don't exist out West. Its one thing to pay $$$ for tix when in a resort vacation mindset (witness Disney tickets), quite another to do it for a just a daytrip. People will drive a few hours and have fun for $95 (or less) tix... not so much for $150. Not-so-captive audience.

Just my (flawed, I am sure) thoughts that have been fermented over a few too many apres PBRs...

East vs West and the customer (from an East Coast perspective)

It's kind of like does a family for their vacation choose to go to Disney (they equivalent of going on a ski trip out West in reality when you look at lodging costs, ticket costs, etc) or stay in the East and go to 6 Flags - most likely a day trip, cheaper ticket costs as a result of being there less days, likely no lodging costs, etc

In both cases its a family (or sometimes an individual) choosing how to spend their disposable income for their entertainment/ relaxation when you look at it from a bigger picture perspective

 

[Smellytele]

Bromley is a sweet spot: they take great care of the mountain and make a good amount of snow considering their size, and they get decent dumps because they seem to always be in the SC-VT snow belt (packing snow while stratton/Magic get rain). There is no better place to be on the coldest days, because their all-day-sunny exposure always keeps it a bit warmer than other spots. They never skimp on grooming every slope that needs it every day (and doing it well), and their lift reliability is strong (when the winds aren't). They have several different back-up chair options when summit lifts are limited by wind, allowing them to essentially operate every day no matter what. It's a shame they haven't linked up with others (besides cranmore and jiminy) because they can only compete as an independent for so long. The pricing is also likely to limit the number of holiday skiers, who, often come from traditionally affluent CT (with some NJ/NYers mixed in), so they can certainly afford it. The mountain is usually at capacity on weekends/holidays, which is why they don't need to compete to make $$$, yet weekdays you have this petite gem to yourself. It's pricey, but if you ask any Bromley regulars, worth every penny. Innkeepers pass is a pretty stellar deal for locals too at $115 to ski every Wednesday. It still would be nice to get more than just one peak for the $$$. I'm only there weekdays, so their midweek pass (includes MLKday and summer lift/+1 summer day pass) is a decent enough deal, all things considering.


the cubbiest skier you've ever met

They must also get nasty thaw freeze shitty ice base as well seeing they face south.

 

[Smellytele]

One interesting thing when renewing my pass today at Wildcat is they said the payments will show up as coming from Mount Snow on my CC statements.

But no tax from VT right?

 

[deadheadskier]

I'm assuming. Didn't ask.

 

[yeggous]

I'm assuming. Didn't ask.

I think this is because Peaks is unifying all their sales systems this year. They want to use the same pass, tickets, gift cards, POS system, etc across all their properties. They made all the changes this year to set them up for this unification. Unfortunately a lot of staff didn't realize it. Thus why it took two managers and a half hour to settle by bar bill at Mt Snow. They looked like dear in the headlights when I tried to pay with my granite pass.

 

[drjeff]

I think this is because Peaks is unifying all their sales systems this year. They want to use the same pass, tickets, gift cards, POS system, etc across all their properties. They made all the changes this year to set them up for this unification. Unfortunately a lot of staff didn't realize it. Thus why it took two managers and a half hour to settle by bar bill at Mt Snow. They looked like dear in the headlights when I tried to pay with my granite pass.

Cuzzins??

 

[yeggous]

Cuzzins??

The Tap Room upstairs. I think half the problem was the waitress who tried it first.

 

[drjeff]

The Tap Room upstairs. I think half the problem was the waitress who tried it first.

Gotcha! Table service up in the Taproom vs at the bar service up there is a different world sometimes! Then again the bartenders up there practically know the 16 digits on my VISA card off the top of their heads, so that might skew my perspective a touch :beer:

 

[yeggous]

Gotcha! Table service up in the Taproom vs at the bar service up there is a different world sometimes! Then again the bartenders up there practically know the 16 digits on my VISA card off the top of their heads, so that might skew my perspective a touch :beer:

Fair enough. The bartenders at the Cat rarely see my credit card. I use the gift cards from the ski expo which I have loaded onto my pass. Saves me 20% off my tab! I really hope those gift cards are not a victim of this unification. That would result in a serious price increase for me.

 

[thetrailboss]

This thread has exploded.

As to Stowe, their primary market is the NYC crowd. They have money. In addition, Stowe has always wanted to distinguish themselves as the best of the east and believe that is worth a premium. Additionally, folks do tend to believe that if something is more expensive it is better. In addition, I've heard that the former AIG had a requirement that Stowe had to break even each year (maybe a local or former local, such as DHS, can confirm). Add it all up and it spells the reasons for the highest rate.

Sugarbush: since Win took over now 15 years ago, they have focused on the local market and the Boston/NYC crowd. Accordingly, they have two pricepoints--the cheaper being the Mount Ellen Passes and the more expensive being the Lincoln Peak products. It has worked pretty well for them, but they have always seen themselves as a close competitor to Stowe. I see that in some ways but not others. I love Sugarbush for many reasons, but Stowe is now WAY ahead in terms of lifts and snowmaking. They edge out SB in lodging and apres. That said, Sugarbush has held their pricepoint at the same place.

Stratton: they have surprisingly run a lot of good deals and have some cheap pass options. I imagine they are getting hurt by Peaks and Vail to some extent with the Epic Pass.

 

[Vortex]

Boyne gold is not the least expensive, but gives you a long season, best Value IMO. Many at the River and loon are property owners and have kids tied up to season programs. Its perfect. Many that have had kids move on go to the silver and miss Holiday periods. Last year with Max add on, Some Bought silvers and moved around and used the Max Pass on Black out Days. I am doing the Gold and Max, I will probably do a trip out West and a Canada trip and Hit WAWA on warm night or powder night.

 

[cdskier]

I love Sugarbush for many reasons, but Stowe is now WAY ahead in terms of lifts and snowmaking.

Not sure I agree (and even if they are ahead, it isn't WAY ahead). While the overall age of Stowe's lifts may be younger, that doesn't necessarily mean they are better. SB did a lot of rebuilding of their lifts the past couple years and they have been quite reliable lately (knock on wood). I'd also take SB's lift system setup any day over Stowe's. I can't stand all the T2B lifts at Stowe on the main mountain. I prefer mountains to be broken up into pods more.

As for snowmaking, while maybe technically Stowe's system is more powerful, it didn't show through looking purely from a numbers perspective. For much of the early season Sugarbush had more trails/miles/acreage open than Stowe. I think it was over on the MRV forum that the numbers comparison was being done. Win was quite proud of his team for them being able to stay ahead of the competition and prove all the people that were criticizing their snowmaking system wrong. I think where Stowe has the advantage is in being able to resurface a larger amount of terrain more quickly.

 

[thetrailboss]

Not sure I agree (and even if they are ahead, it isn't WAY ahead). While the overall age of Stowe's lifts may be younger, that doesn't necessarily mean they are better. SB did a lot of rebuilding of their lifts the past couple years and they have been quite reliable lately (knock on wood). I'd also take SB's lift system setup any day over Stowe's. I can't stand all the T2B lifts at Stowe on the main mountain. I prefer mountains to be broken up into pods more.

As for snowmaking, while maybe technically Stowe's system is more powerful, it didn't show through looking purely from a numbers perspective. For much of the early season Sugarbush had more trails/miles/acreage open than Stowe. I think it was over on the MRV forum that the numbers comparison was being done. Win was quite proud of his team for them being able to stay ahead of the competition and prove all the people that were criticizing their snowmaking system wrong. I think where Stowe has the advantage is in being able to resurface a larger amount of terrain more quickly.

Lifts--reliability is key as well as vertical offered form each one. I think SB has to earn back credibility as to the first one. As to the second, it sounds like your preference is for shorter pods (which I understand) but Stowe has some big skiing off one lift.

As to snowmaking I have heard that since my last season there (2010-2011) that things have improved, but the speed of recovery and amount of terrain that they can cover at once are key in my mind. Sugarbush, like Burke, reduced their capacity, both after erecting rather large hotels near the snowmaking plants. Both also got rid of rental compressors. Sugarbush has come back due to some efficiencies, but it is still slow to cover terrain. I compare it to Sunday River and Stowe.

 

[DoublePlanker]

The VAIL annual report has a lot of information about their season passes, associated revenue, pricing, and strategy. Check it out yourself.

TLDR Here are some highlights:


"Season Pass Products

We offer a variety of season pass products for all of our mountain resorts and urban ski areas that are marketed towards both out-of-state and international (“Destination”) guests and in-state and local (“In-state”) guests. Our season pass products are available for purchase predominately during the period prior to the start of the ski season, offering our guests a better value in exchange for their commitment to ski at our resorts before the season begins. As such, our season pass program drives strong customer loyalty, mitigates exposure to more weather sensitive guests leading to greater revenue stability, and allows us to capture valuable guest data. Additionally, our season pass customers typically ski more days each season than those guests who do not buy season passes, which leads to additional ancillary spending. Season pass products generated approximately 40% of our total lift revenue for the 2014/2015 ski season. In addition, our season pass products attract new guests to our mountain resorts and urban ski areas. Sales of season pass products are a key component of our overall Mountain segment revenue and helps create strong synergies among our mountain resorts. Our season pass products range from providing access to one or a combination of our mountain resorts and urban ski areas to our Epic Pass which provides unrestricted access to all our mountain resorts and urban ski areas.

...

Overview

Our operations are grouped into three integrated and interdependent segments: Mountain, Lodging and Real Estate. Resort isthe combination of the Mountain and Lodging segments. The Mountain, Lodging and Real Estate segments representedapproximately 79%, 18% and 3%, respectively, of our net revenue for Fiscal 2015.

Mountain Segment

During Fiscal 2015 the Mountain segment was comprised of the operations of ten mountain resort properties at the Vail,Breckenridge, Keystone and Beaver Creek mountain resorts in Colorado (“Colorado” resorts); the Park City (acquired inSeptember 2014) and Canyons (transaction entered into in May 2013) mountain resorts in Park City, Utah (“Utah” resorts); theHeavenly, Northstar and Kirkwood mountain resorts in the Lake Tahoe area of California and Nevada (“Tahoe” resorts);Perisher Ski resort (“Perisher” acquired in June 2015) in New South Wales, Australia; and, the ski areas of Afton Alps inMinnesota and Mount Brighton in Michigan (both acquired in December 2012) (“Urban” ski areas); as well as ancillaryservices, primarily including ski school, dining, retail/rental operations, and for Perisher also lodging and transportationoperations. Our mountain resorts located in the U.S. were open for business for the 2014/2015 ski season primarily from midNovemberthrough mid-April, which is the peak operating season for the Mountain segment. Our single largest source ofMountain segment revenue is the sale of lift tickets (including season passes), which represented approximately 49%, 46% and45% of Mountain segment net revenue for Fiscal 2015, Fiscal 2014 and Fiscal 2013, respectively.Lift revenue is driven by volume and pricing. Pricing is impacted by both absolute pricing, as well as the demographic mix ofguests, which impacts the price points at which various products are purchased. The demographic mix of guests to our U.S.mountain resorts is divided into two primary categories: (1) out-of-state and international (“Destination”) guests and (2) instateand local (“In-State”) guests. For the 2014/2015 ski season, Destination guests comprised approximately 59% of ourmountain resort skier visits, while In-State guests comprised approximately 41% of our mountain resort skier visits, whichcompares to approximately 56% and 44%, respectively for the 2013/2014 and 2012/2013 ski seasons.Destination guests generally purchase our higher-priced lift ticket products and utilize more ancillary services such as skischool, dining and retail/rental, as well as lodging at or around our mountain resorts. Destination guest visitation is less likelyto be impacted by changes in the weather, but can be more impacted by adverse economic conditions or the global geopoliticalclimate. In-State guests tend to be more value-oriented and weather sensitive. We offer a variety of season pass products for38all of our mountain resorts and Urban ski areas, marketed towards both Destination and In-State guests. Our season passproduct offerings range from providing access to one or a combination of our mountain resorts and Urban ski areas to our EpicSeason Pass, which allows pass holders unlimited and unrestricted access to all of our mountain resorts and Urban ski areas.Our season pass program provides a compelling value proposition to our guests, which in turn assists us in developing a loyalbase of customers who commit to ski at our mountain resorts and Urban ski areas generally in advance of the ski season andtypically ski more days each season at our mountain resorts and Urban ski areas than those guests who do not buy seasonpasses. As such, our season pass program drives strong customer loyalty; mitigates exposure to more weather sensitive guests;and, generates additional ancillary spending. In addition, our season pass program attracts new guests to our mountain resortsand Urban ski areas. All of our season pass products, including the Epic Pass, are predominately sold prior to the start of the skiseason. Season pass revenue, although primarily collected prior to the ski season, is recognized in the Consolidated Statementof Operations ratably over the ski season. For Fiscal 2015, Fiscal 2014 and Fiscal 2013, approximately 40%, 40% and 38%,respectively, of total lift revenue was derived from season pass revenue.
...

Recent Trends, Risks and Uncertainties

We have identified the following important factors (as well as uncertainties associated with such factors) that could impact our future financial performance:

• The timing and amount of snowfall can have an impact on Mountain and Lodging revenue particularly in regards to skier visits and the duration and frequency of guest visitation. To help mitigate this impact, we sell a variety of season pass products prior to the beginning of the ski season resulting in a more stabilized stream of lift revenue. Additionally, our season pass products provide a compelling value proposition to our guests, which in turn creates a 39 guest commitment predominantly prior to the start of the ski season. In March 2015, we began our pre-season pass sales program for the 2015/2016 ski season. Through September 20, 2015, pre-season pass sales for the upcoming 2015/2016 ski season have increased approximately 16% in units and increased approximately 22% in sales dollars, compared to the prior year period ended September 21, 2014, excluding pass sales at Perisher. We cannot predict if this favorable trend will continue through the fall 2015 pass sales campaign, nor can we predict the overall impact that season pass sales will have on lift revenue for the 2015/2016 ski seas.


...

Through our sales of season passes, we provide our guests with a strong value proposition in return for guests committing to ski at our resorts prior to, or very early into the ski season, which we believe attracts more guests to our resorts.

 

[benski]

Lifts--reliability is key as well as vertical offered form each one. I think SB has to earn back credibility as to the first one. As to the second, it sounds like your preference is for shorter pods (which I understand) but Stowe has some big skiing off one lift.

As to snowmaking I have heard that since my last season there (2010-2011) that things have improved, but the speed of recovery and amount of terrain that they can cover at once are key in my mind. Sugarbush, like Burke, reduced their capacity, both after erecting rather large hotels near the snowmaking plants. Both also got rid of rental compressors. Sugarbush has come back due to some efficiencies, but it is still slow to cover terrain. I compare it to Sunday River and Stowe.

Sugarbush max's out on water regularly so I don't think those rental compressors would do much. From what I understand there main constraint is water now.