• 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!

VAIL SUCKS

thetrailboss

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jun 4, 2004
Messages
32,682
Points
113
Location
NEK by Birth
Well Robert, that's a fair question. Perhaps I should have said "core assets" vs "core business."

My thought here and assumption of why the wonderful company Powdr divested from Killington and soon others is that they looked at what the ROI is on say investing a million dollars at Killington vs Copper and concluded that the ROI at Copper is a much better use of their funds. So why not get rid of the properties that don't return value and instead put all of that money into ones that do bring great value?

You know, operate like a true great business does.
Big companies, say Johnson and Johnson as an example, buy companies all the time and realize the ROI simply isn't as strong as their core assets, and sell them off.

Be like J n J, Bob. Take a look at the Wildcats and Sunapees and move on bro. You're better than this
I probably should have posted that question on my own and not through Meme Rob. :ROFLMAO:

I still think it looks very odd for POWDR to be dumping most of its ski areas. It is consistent with what folks have been saying about POWDR being vulnerable.
 

snoseek

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 7, 2006
Messages
6,321
Points
113
Location
NH
Well Robert, that's a fair question. Perhaps I should have said "core assets" vs "core business."

My thought here and assumption of why the wonderful company Powdr divested from Killington and soon others is that they looked at what the ROI is on say investing a million dollars at Killington vs Copper and concluded that the ROI at Copper is a much better use of their funds. So why not get rid of the properties that don't return value and instead put all of that money into ones that do bring great value?

You know, operate like a true great business does.
Big companies, say Johnson and Johnson as an example, buy companies all the time and realize the ROI simply isn't as strong as their core assets, and sell them off.

Be like J n J, Bob. Take a look at the Wildcats and Sunapees and move on bro. You're better than this
The two they really have no business running that immediately come to mind are Wildcat and Kirkwood.

I wish Sunapee was still state run and paired with Cannon on a pass although that ship has sailed
 

trackbiker

Active member
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
360
Points
28
Location
Eastern PA
I think Vail will sell off its first ski area <= 2027.
I agree. Their stock is down 53% from it's peak in 2021. Their pass sales have reached their peak and I believe declined last year if you only count the season passes and not the day passes like they did to make the numbers look better. They are a publicly traded company and there will be pressure to get their margins up and their cost down which likely will involve shedding some of their less profitable resorts. The Wall Street bean counters don't care about skiing. They only care about the numbers.
 

thebigo

Well-known member
Joined
May 15, 2005
Messages
1,913
Points
113
Location
NH seacoast
I wish Sunapee was still state run.
Spent some time a few weeks back looking into sunapee lease. Multiple sources indicate 2028 but I have no idea what happens in 2028. Does vail have option to renew? Does the state have option to put it out to bid?
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20240823_090544_Chrome.jpg
    Screenshot_20240823_090544_Chrome.jpg
    252 KB · Views: 5

Zand

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 30, 2003
Messages
4,249
Points
113
Location
Spencer, MA
I have to imagine Wildcat and Attitash would be the first to go. I can't imagine either one makes Vail that much money and Vail clearly doesn't care much about them. Maybe Crotched and Sunapee would go too. I doubt they will ever sell off the cash cows that are Stowe, Okemo, and Mt Snow unless they really see a need to abandon the east altogether.
 

deadheadskier

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
28,100
Points
113
Location
Southeast NH
If the state doesn't renew, wouldn't Vail have the right to pull all the lifts and really any equipment at all? I assume they now own all of the infrastructure.

Too bad the Mueller's sold out. Okemo and Sunapee were both so much better operations under them. I remember closing a season out at Sunapee one year on April 20th. Vail has never operated past 4/11 there.
 

Smellytele

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Messages
10,054
Points
113
Location
Right where I want to be
If the state doesn't renew, wouldn't Vail have the right to pull all the lifts and really any equipment at all? I assume they now own all of the infrastructure.

Too bad the Mueller's sold out. Okemo and Sunapee were both so much better operations under them. I remember closing a season out at Sunapee one year on April 20th. Vail has never operated past 4/11 there.
I didn’t like Sunapee under the mueller’s either. They were slow opening trails after a snowstorm and seemed to have to groom EVERYTHING before opening it. While they did improve the infrastructure I liked it more under state control. Much more laid back. No “ski ambassadors” telling you to slow down.
 

deadheadskier

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
28,100
Points
113
Location
Southeast NH
I didn’t like Sunapee under the mueller’s either. They were slow opening trails after a snowstorm and seemed to have to groom EVERYTHING before opening it. While they did improve the infrastructure I liked it more under state control. Much more laid back. No “ski ambassadors” telling you to slow down.

I hadn't skied there since the 80s prior to 2009ish. So, no memory of the state run days. Mainly referencing the Mueller's commitment to longer seasons than Vail
 

BenedictGomez

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
12,284
Points
113
Location
Wasatch Back
I agree. Their stock is down 53% from it's peak in 2021. Their pass sales have reached their peak and I believe declined last year if you only count the season passes and not the day passes like they did to make the numbers look better. They are a publicly traded company and there will be pressure to get their margins up and their cost down which likely will involve shedding some of their less profitable resorts. The Wall Street bean counters don't care about skiing. They only care about the numbers.

This is all true, but even more importantly, the debt-bomb cometh. You know it's coming, and there's not much you can do about it.

Wall Street will be like the locusts coming for the ants in, A Bug's Life. I predict "an offering" will be made.

1724475535680.png
Wa
 

AdironRider

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 27, 2005
Messages
3,539
Points
63
Vail was just able to issue 600 mill (to pay off prior debt of 600 mill) for 6.5 percent, a whopping .25 percent increase. If rolling debt over for .25 percent is the offering, they are going to be just fine.

Maintained their dividend as well. Over a billion in cash on hand.

Stock price is basically a vibe check right now. Vail is doing quite well compared to most. Gross revenue is up.

Meanwhile Alpinezone darlings like Gunstock are down over 10 percent in gross revenue.
 

deadheadskier

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
28,100
Points
113
Location
Southeast NH
Meanwhile Alpinezone darlings like Gunstock are down over 10 percent in gross revenue.

Is that right? Last year was tough weather wise at Gunstock, so maybe it's true. Where did you read that?

Overall, I would say the financial picture at Gunstock is quite positive in recent years


"Since Day took over in 2020, Gunstock has increased revenue from $12 million to $20 million, and has invested $18 million in capital improvements “without borrowing a dime,” he said."
 

doublediamond

Active member
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
476
Points
28
My industry source tells me most areas lost money last year. But it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure that out with the crappy weather we had.
 

AdironRider

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 27, 2005
Messages
3,539
Points
63
Is that right? Last year was tough weather wise at Gunstock, so maybe it's true. Where did you read that?

Overall, I would say the financial picture at Gunstock is quite positive in recent years


"Since Day took over in 2020, Gunstock has increased revenue from $12 million to $20 million, and has invested $18 million in capital improvements “without borrowing a dime,” he said."

GAC meeting minutes. The CFO provides overall numbers. To be fair, my memory was off and Gunstock is down 10% EBITDA, not gross revenue. Vail EBITDA was down 3% to Gunstocks 10%, so the point still holds IMO. Gunstock did see a drop in gross revenue, although at a lower level than 10% (more like 4%, which tracks with the overall performance of NH ski areas overall per SKINH, so average performance). Meanwhile Vail managed to show a slight increase.

My overall point though is more to challenge Benny's "the stock price is down they are fucked" idea, as Vail's overall financial picture is outperforming most other ski areas in a general sense, and the outdoor industry as a whole (go look at MTB companies, which are universally getting creamed). They aren't necessarily having the best year ever, but are outperforming most. Gunstock is still in pretty good financial shape overall mind you also, but their trend is objectively worse, but that hasn't prompted a "Gunstock Sucks" thread.
 

AdironRider

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 27, 2005
Messages
3,539
Points
63
The third post in this thread references how Benedict finally has an outlet for his griping about Vail, which has primarily been focused on their financial performance, so I beg to differ. Every complaint lodged here has an underlying implication of "Vail is going to pay for this", yet they continue to grow. Obviously, something is working for the vast majority of customers.

Look, I'm not a big fan of the mega resorts, and I've put my money where my mouth is and have season passes to Dartmouth and Jay Peak, and am a big proponent of Indy, having one of those passes also. But that said, from a managerial perspective, you cannot argue that pushing advance reservations, season pass purchases, and having predictable open and close dates is bad business.
 

deadheadskier

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
28,100
Points
113
Location
Southeast NH
GAC meeting minutes. The CFO provides overall numbers. To be fair, my memory was off and Gunstock is down 10% EBITDA, not gross revenue. Vail EBITDA was down 3% to Gunstocks 10%, so the point still holds IMO. Gunstock did see a drop in gross revenue, although at a lower level than 10% (more like 4%, which tracks with the overall performance of NH ski areas overall per SKINH, so average performance). Meanwhile Vail managed to show a slight increase.

My overall point though is more to challenge Benny's "the stock price is down they are fucked" idea, as Vail's overall financial picture is outperforming most other ski areas in a general sense, and the outdoor industry as a whole (go look at MTB companies, which are universally getting creamed). They aren't necessarily having the best year ever, but are outperforming most. Gunstock is still in pretty good financial shape overall mind you also, but their trend is objectively worse, but that hasn't prompted a "Gunstock Sucks" thread.

A few thoughts

1. One would expect that the wealthiest ski company on earth with a diversified, global portfolio would be a bit more sheltered from regionally bad weather than a mid sized ski area. So I don't really view the comparisons as apples to apples. More like watermelon to raisin.

2. One year does not make a trend. That article I shared highlighted an 80% increase in gross revenue since 2020, plus one year ago Gunstock returning a record reimbursement to the county. Last year was an anomaly due to weather and not part of a larger trend.

3. The Vail sucks thread is largely about operations and not finances. I don't think anyone here particularly cares about their financials other than a few poking fun at the stock drop. Personally, I am critical of and left full time pass status with Vail due to the shortened season and inferior snowmaking performance compared with Peak. I have no complaints with Gunstock regarding snowmaking, the season length has remained unchanged for basically decades, the kids programs are great and they limit capacity to make the weekend experience much more tolerable than most ski areas in New England.

4. Pretty humorous that you call Gunstock the AZ darling. AFAIK , Edd and I are the only Gunstock regulars that also regular post on the forums these days. So, let's be honest, your comments are less about Gunstock and more about your multi decade now obsession with trying to troll me. Still trying after all these years! You certainly are dedicated!
 

ss20

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 13, 2013
Messages
3,956
Points
113
Location
A minute from the Alta exit off the I-15!
I lol'd at comparing Gunstock EBITA to the entire Vail portfolio EBITA. Let's throw in Microsoft, Nividia, PG, and McDonald's in there too so we can get a real accurate comparison of how Vail is doing compared to Gunstock. Don't forget to figure the price of eggs in China in the equation.

No, this post is not supposed to make sense.
 
Top