Vail Resorts is buying Peak Resorts.

[drjeff]

But that would argue FOR offering midweek passes, which neither do.

I almost never ski Saturdays. Too crowded to start with. Plus almost none of my ski companions at the destination ski Saturdays. (they're local so they're more choosy. I do the same at home here, rarely ski Saturdays) I either go x-c skiing with them (if they xc ski). Or in some cases, I was just travelling TO the destination on Saturday.

Had there been a cheaper midweek version of both Epic & Ikon, I probably would get BOTH (instead of "rotating" from 1 year to the next). Same with some of my friends.

Vail Resorts has said that one of their goals is to simplify their pass offerings. Hence why you have the full Epic and the Epic local, and then essentially a few glorified multi-day ticket Epic offerings. True they do still have a very few select local geographic region passes, but their goal is to give the consumer a couple of pass product options, with "benefits" they feel are very attractive for the masses, and not end up with a myriad of pass product options that will likely confuse some consumers as to what is "best" for them. Is this the best way? Not sure..... Does is sell them an large number of Epic pass products? Certainly. And based on the success of their Epic product, and the leadership philosophy for Vail Resorts that Rob Katz has, I doubt that we'll be seeing them start to "micro pass product" their offerings to cater to what is likely a very small percentage of their customers.

Peak resorts did something similar a few seasons ago, where they streamlined their offerings and their pass sales, above and beyond what they'd expect to see just through the additional resort acquisitions and their customer bases they made, went up. Was everyone happy with the streamlining? Nope. Were more people happy and unhappy with the streamlining? The sales volume sure seems to indicate that. Bottom line is that the pass product market is an evolving entity. It seems to be moving in a direction that has more resorts available on one pass, with less "option levels." They seem to be selling more passes. So chances are that some people will see a change in what pass type they have available to them, and not everyone welcomes or embraces change

 

[abc]

Peak resorts did something similar a few seasons ago, where they streamlined their offerings and their pass sales, above and beyond what they'd expect to see just through the additional resort acquisitions and their customer bases they made, went up. Was everyone happy with the streamlining? Nope. Were more people happy and unhappy with the streamlining? The sales volume sure seems to indicate that. Bottom line is that the pass product market is an evolving entity. It seems to be moving in a direction that has more resorts available on one pass, with less "option levels." They seem to be selling more passes. So chances are that some people will see a change in what pass type they have available to them, and not everyone welcomes or embraces change

But one wonders whether the increase pass sale ("above and beyond what they'd expect...") were due to more mountains in the pass, or "streamlined pass options"?

I have no doubt it's working for Peaks and Vail. I'm just not sure it's working as well as it could. $600 is a fair bit of money for many. Don't know how many only buy every other year (like me), how many didn't buy at all (went to MCP, as one of my colleague). A midweek only, or blackout Saturday (as in the Tahoe Value pass) pass at the high $400 may actually get them more passes sale to offset the lower per pass take...

 

[mbedle]

But one wonders whether the increase pass sale ("above and beyond what they'd expect...") were due to more mountains in the pass, or "streamlined pass options"?

I have no doubt it's working for Peaks and Vail. I'm just not sure it's working as well as it could. $600 is a fair bit of money for many. Don't know how many only buy every other year (like me), how many didn't buy at all (went to MCP, as one of my colleague). A midweek only, or blackout Saturday (as in the Tahoe Value pass) pass at the high $400 may actually get them more passes sale to offset the lower per pass take...

So what do you do as far as skiing on years you don't purchase a pass?

 

[cdskier]

So what do you do as far as skiing on years you don't purchase a pass?

One of abc's earlier posts mentioned that she rotates between Epic and Ikon. So I think her comment in this case was specifically saying she doesn't buy Epic every year, not that she doesn't get some sort of pass every year.

 

[deadheadskier]

Actually, I've always wondering about that. Why did Vail even offer the lower priced Epic Local pass? I (not being a "local" of the west) would have opened up my wallet for the full Epic pass!

Every year, I contemplated buying the full of either Ikon or Epic. But so far had mostly gone with the cheap Local version. Had that version not even exist, they would have gotten $300 extra out of me!

I think the key word here is "local".

It's a recognition of who typically will be buying the pass and where they are going to use it. It gives full access to lesser properties, often more locals areas and a taste of the premium resorts.

I bought my Peak pass at an early bird rate of $629. I'll pay the differential this season to upgrade to the local, but not the full Epic. I just don't see myself getting to Stowe more than 5 times. I have no desire to go there on holidays. I might grab a day or two at Sunapee. Less likely Okemo. I won't be taking a Western trip for several years due to having a 4 year old and a 9 month old. So, whatever the pass gets me out west really is of no appreciation.

Now say next year they only offer full Epic. If I'm looking at a grand for that, I might consider a Cannon Pass ($575) and maybe some ski club day tickets to fill out the difference with some variety. I'm sure all of the feeder hill skiers would be even less inclined to go with the full Epic.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[Domeskier]

This thread is jumping the shark.

Literally no one is going to change their ski destination because some other guy they don't know lost his lifetime pass. Even if they do know the guy, they aren't going to change their ski destination.

Outside of pointless debate on ski forums, this decision will have zero effect on Vail's bottom line other than increasing it by getting new passholders. Why? If someone loved a place to ski so much they bought a lifetime pass (which has proven over and over again to be the lifetime of the current ownership of the place), they aren't leaving.

Vail has a reputation among a small but vocal minority as an evil corporate overlord that is killing the ski industry with its near-sighted pursuit of short-term profits. I have no strong opinion on whether that is deserved or not. But a move like this, where the gains to Vail are immaterial, only reinforces that reputation and gives ammunition to its critics.

 

[abc]

It's a recognition of who typically will be buying the pass and where they are going to use it. It gives full access to lesser properties, often more locals areas and a taste of the premium resorts.

But as you pointed out, big chunk of its buyers don't care much about the "premium resorts". They either can't/won't travel or "been there, done that".

The more I hear from people who aren't buying, the more I think a lower priced midweek pass would have gotten Vail quite a bit more pass sale. Granted, some of the current "Local" pass holder might "downgrade". But those are probably the minority.

Anyway, this is just idle speculation for fun. I'm not the sales manager of Vail. They do what they do base on what THEY think is good, not what I think is good.

 

[Newpylong]

I believe Vail has not done their due diligence in regards to pass holder demographics/statistics on the mountains they acquired. They have attempted to implement their existing sales model in the East, with much different demographics and smaller destinations. I believe there is a large portion of former Peak pass holders that have no interest in going out West, let alone visiting other mountains in the East several times. They are not going to see the value add in the Epic - they want a local pass and as such, they will jump ship if there are alternatives.

 

[Dickc]

I believe Vail has not done their due diligence in regards to pass holder demographics/statistics on the mountains they acquired. They have attempted to implement their existing sales model in the East, with much different demographics and smaller destinations. I believe there is a large portion of former Peak pass holders that have no interest in going out West, let alone visiting other mountains in the East several times. They are not going to see the value add in the Epic - they want a local pass and as such, they will jump ship if there are alternatives.

THIS! I will not be going out west. I might SOMETIME go out there, but my wife does not ski, so any trip out there must encompass more than skiing. I do make day trips of three hours in New England without blinking an eyebrow. I looked at the Epic local Vs. the Ikon, and went with Ikon. Ikon offered more New England destinations than the Epic at the time, and I am a bit particular to skiing some of the Boyne Resorts. Next year? That jury is still out and I will look at what I wish to do when spring rolls around. Epic is more enticing now with the increase in New England destinations. Sunapee is less than two hours, but others are 2.5 to 3. From me. I will have to look more closely, and perhaps buy one of Boyne's three packs to cover my Boyne trips. Loon is an easy 2 hour 10 minute drive, and I can ski midweek now that I have retired.

 

[abc]

I believe Vail has not done their due diligence in regards to pass holder demographics/statistics on the mountains they acquired. They have attempted to implement their existing sales model in the East, with much different demographics and smaller destinations. I believe there is a large portion of former Peak pass holders that have no interest in going out West, let alone visiting other mountains in the East several times. They are not going to see the value add in the Epic - they want a local pass and as such, they will jump ship if there are alternatives.

Unless, of course, perhaps Vail don't care about those people jumping ship.

The hallmark of Vail resorts are all mountains with high percentage of intermediate terrain but high end lodging/food. That's obviously a more profitable demographic than hardcore advance skiers with little spending money, or retirees who're wedded to their home mountains but don't even buy a drink, much less lunch!

 

[AdironRider]

I believe Vail has not done their due diligence in regards to pass holder demographics/statistics on the mountains they acquired. They have attempted to implement their existing sales model in the East, with much different demographics and smaller destinations. I believe there is a large portion of former Peak pass holders that have no interest in going out West, let alone visiting other mountains in the East several times. They are not going to see the value add in the Epic - they want a local pass and as such, they will jump ship if there are alternatives.

Now that is funny. Vail is just shooting from the hip? Right......

 

[abc]

Now that is funny. Vail is just shooting from the hip? Right......

Wouldn't be the first time.

 

[mbedle]

Now that is funny. Vail is just shooting from the hip? Right......

I got to agree with you on that one. Vail absolutely knows before they purchased the resorts exactly how many Triple Peaks and Peak Resort pass holders, and to some extent daily pass purchasers, have travel out west to ski their resorts (including which resort they typical ski at on the east cost and which resort they visited out west). A simple cross check of address and name databases would clearly indicate how many east coast pass holders have visit each Vail resort out west.

 

[BenedictGomez]

I got to agree with you on that one. Vail absolutely knows before they purchased the resorts exactly how many Triple Peaks and Peak Resort pass holders, and to some extent daily pass purchasers, have travel out west to ski their resorts (including which resort they typical ski at on the east cost and which resort they visited out west). A simple cross check of address and name databases would clearly indicate how many east coast pass holders have visit each Vail resort out west.

I agree with AdironRider that Vail Resorts certainly did not make this acquisition without its' fair share of due diligence, but that's not to say that it wasnt a mistake, only time will tell. However, I do not believe that Peak Resorts would share its' customer profile databank with Vail as a part of that due diligence.

 

[drjeff]

I agree with AdironRider that Vail Resorts certainly did not make this acquisition without its' fair share of due diligence, but that's not to say that it wasnt a mistake, only time will tell. However, I do not believe that Peak Resorts would share its' customer profile databank with Vail as a part of that due diligence.

I'm guessing that this is also a case where Vail saw a greater upside for their company in some of the Peak resorts than others, and in an "ideal" world in Vail's eyes, the deal wouldn't of included all of the Peak properties.

 

[AdironRider]

I'm guessing that this is also a case where Vail saw a greater upside for their company in some of the Peak resorts than others, and in an "ideal" world in Vail's eyes, the deal wouldn't of included all of the Peak properties.

Outside of Wildcat, I don't really see how all of Peaks properties don't fit exactly into Vail's business plan.

This isn't a miscalculation at all. While some properties certainly are more attractive than others (Mt Snow notably) Peaks was tailor made for a takeover by Vail. Their CEO literally just said so and they now own basically every mountain close to major population centers that get snow in the winter.

 

[drjeff]

Outside of Wildcat, I don't really see how all of Peaks properties don't fit exactly into Vail's business plan.

This isn't a miscalculation at all. While some properties certainly are more attractive than others (Mt Snow notably) Peaks was tailor made for a takeover by Vail. Their CEO literally just said so and they now own basically every mountain close to major population centers that get snow in the winter.

Generally agree. Crotched seems to be a bit outside of other resorts Vail has bought in the past, and one might make the argument that a few of their mid western properties are in redundant geographical areas. Overall, I'm guessing that over a dozen of the properties that Peak had acquired looked like an attractive fit to the Vail folks and their model of expansion/acquisition

 

[mbedle]

I agree with AdironRider that Vail Resorts certainly did not make this acquisition without its' fair share of due diligence, but that's not to say that it wasnt a mistake, only time will tell. However, I do not believe that Peak Resorts would share its' customer profile databank with Vail as a part of that due diligence.

Prior to finalizing the sale this fall, they absolutely shared it. Prior to signing the agreement to buy out Peaks, maybe not. Although Vail might have required it in order to even discuss a potential buyout. It is possible that right now Vail is evaluating that data to determine what type of passes they are going to have on the east coast. If the data they have indicates a strong regional area the skiers typically don't ski anywhere else, they might offer something similar to the Epic Summit Value or Tahoe Local Passes. I think that people need to understand that Vail does not only sell Epic Pass and Epic Local - they actual have 13 different types of passes. Adding a couple of more on the east coast would not be unreasonable.

Edit - they actually have far more than just 13 different passes.

 

[Quietman]

Generally agree. Crotched seems to be a bit outside of other resorts Vail has bought in the past, and one might make the argument that a few of their mid western properties are in redundant geographical areas.

They offer a Keystone only pass for $369, I'm really hoping that they do something for Crotched!

 

[BenedictGomez]

Prior to finalizing the sale this fall, they absolutely shared it. Prior to signing the agreement to buy out Peaks, maybe not.

I thought that's what you were talking about? It is what I was referring to.