VAIL SUCKS

[Ski2LiveLive2Ski]

You don't get unlimited at Stowe on Epic Local. I believe it was a max of 10 days that were holiday blacked out.

I don't feel that $1200 for a family of three should provide unlimited access to a place like Stowe. Prior to Vail purchasing the mountain, the price was around $1800 for early buy on a single adult pass.

It's unlimited at Stowe, but being blacked out on holidays - combined with its distance from NJ - have meant we have used Stowe far less than we have used Okemo Snow or Hunter. So far I have done 3 days at Stowe and kids 2 days each. Would have done one more each but it poured all day Xmas when we were in a hotel there with reservations to ski (black out started 26th). Will get 2 more Stowe days in early April, if their conditions warrant driving all that way.

Glad Katz feels his customers deserve to ski nice places more than our moderator does. Care to guess which POV I think sucks?

 

[Ski2LiveLive2Ski]

Hasn't actually been that busy any of my days at Stowe other than the Gondola. Just choose your lifts wisely and ski. Never waited more than 5 min for any other lift including Dec 24 and Presidents Day (black out was only Sat and Sun)

 

[ThatGuy]

Glad Katz feels his customers deserve to ski nice places more than our moderator does. Care to guess which POV I think sucks?

Katz doesn’t care where you ski, he cares about how much money can be raked in. Also “nice” is subjective when it goes hand in hand with long lines and bad customer service. More power to you for utilizing your Epic pass to the fullest, but some people have other ideas of what makes a ski place “nice”.

 

[Ski2LiveLive2Ski]

Katz doesn’t care where you ski he cares about how much money can be raked in. Also “nice” is subjective when it goes hand in hand with long lines and bad customer service. More power to you for utilizing you Epic pass to the fullest but some people have other ideas of what makes a ski place “nice”.

Our moderator on the other hand seems to be upset that we ski Stowe without paying $5400 for our season passes like we would have had to do a few years ago, cause it means he can't ski there without waiting in 5 minute lift lines.

 

[dblskifanatic]

This is interesting! When I lived in NH we bought cannon passes for my wife son and I. The year before we moved to Colorado, our passes cost us $1243 and I had a NH Vet deal. The following year we move to Colorado and our Epic Local (Colorado) Passes cost $1317. For $1243 we ski one mountain, for $1317 we got Breck, Keystone, A Basin, Vail, Beaver Creek and could make trips to Tahoe or Utah as well. The year we were skiing Cannon half of our days were at Cannon (aboout 25) and we deal hunted to go to other places which cost us extra. When we had the Epic Pass we did not need to look elsewhere because we had almost 15,000 acres to ski.

To me the $1317 feels like way way more value! Not that is available here via Ikon or Epic and that IMO is great!

 

[Ski2LiveLive2Ski]

Of course ultimately Vail can set whatever policies they want and I will continue to choose each year the option that provides the best deal for my family.

But my experience with 58 days of skiing in on Epic Local Pass over last two years is that it will not be length of lines that sways me away from Epic, as on only 2 of those 58 days (an early season day at Jack Frost this year and a day at Snow last year with lots of lifts down due to icing) have lines significantly impaired our experience. Other than that the worst they have done have is get me ski a less busy part of the mountain.

 

[deadheadskier]

It's unlimited at Stowe, but being blacked out on holidays - combined with its distance from NJ - have meant we have used Stowe far less than we have used Okemo Snow or Hunter. So far I have done 3 days at Stowe and kids 2 days each. Would have done one more each but it poured all day Xmas when we were in a hotel there with reservations to ski (black out started 26th). Will get 2 more Stowe days in early April, if their conditions warrant driving all that way.

Glad Katz feels his customers deserve to ski nice places more than our moderator does. Care to guess which POV I think sucks?

Get a grip dude. Some things in life should cost more money.

Do you expect Audi to sell you an SQ7 for the price of a Toyota Highlander?

Morton's to sell you a Prime Ribeye for the cost of Texas Roadhouse steak tips?

If Epic and Ikons MO is to pack their resorts to the gills, I'll take my business elsewhere. Its ok.
People have different perspectives on value. To me, that's not necessarily how cheap something is.

 

[snoseek]

I'm more concerned about day to day operations than crowding. At my areas of choice they needed improvement.

Crowding is low on the list for me, I ski midweek...and yeah the pass at 509 dollars unlimited was too good to pass up. I like saving money but if they need to charge more to pay their staff and run their resorts proper then yeah dont put out a half ass product.

So yeah imo they need to acquire and retain more and better staff on the actual ground at resorts like wildcat and that's gonna cost money.

 

[Ski2LiveLive2Ski]

Get a grip dude. Some things in life should cost more money.

Do you expect Audi to sell you an SQ7 for the price of a Toyota Highlander?

Morton's to sell you a Prime Ribeye for the cost of Texas Roadhouse steak tips?

If Epic and Ikons MO is to pack their resorts to the gills, I'll take my business elsewhere. Its ok.
People have different perspectives on value. To me, that's not necessarily how cheap something is.

I don't expect anyone to sell me anything for any price other than that which will hit the sweet spot of a price point that attracts the number of customers that maximizes their profitability. I expect Vail does that pretty well, but if they calculate this year that by doubling their prices they will only lose 20% of their customers and will be more profitable - then by all means they should do that. And as a public corporation, if they do anything other than maximize profits as much as they can while complying with the law, then they should be sued by their shareholders.

You seem to be arguing for them to reduce their profitability so as to enable you to ski places that exclude those of us who have more limited recreational budgets per person than you have.

Of course either of us are free to take our business elsewhere. But if they are losing your business not based on overcharging but because you feel their business model - as they makes them too popular, I can't imagine fear of losing the business of a few people who want to spend more for a less popular product is going to shape their behavior - as in that scenario their issue is not having insufficient customers to maximize profitability.

 

[dblskifanatic]

I'm more concerned about day to day operations than crowding. At my areas of choice they needed improvement.

Crowding is low on the list for me, I ski midweek...and yeah the pass at 509 dollars unlimited was too good to pass up. I like saving money but if they need to charge more to pay their staff and run their resorts proper then yeah dont put out a half ass product.

So yeah imo they need to acquire and retain more and better staff on the actual ground at resorts like wildcat and that's gonna cost money.

That got me thinking - Vail runs places like Breck and Keystone almost flawlessly and there are a shit load of employees - sometimes too many. They we have Wildcat and much much smaller place and revenue wise it goes probably unnoticed. Seems like getting Wildcat improved would be a piece of cake. Leads me to wonder what the long term objectives are with the Peak Resorts. Like it is hard to think that Crotched in a Vail owned ski area.

 

[thebigo]

Today was day #72 on my epic northeast pass, I paid $475. That is stupid value. The closest comp for the epic NH mountains is the WMSP at around $1k, if my memory is any good. If they were run in the same manner, I would take the epic mountains over the wmsp mountains everyday. If the wmsp can stay in business around $1k than unlimited nh epic should be in the same range. I would like to see weekend and holiday access start at the epic local price point, unlimited full epic only.

But if customers are paying a premium price, they deserve a premium product. Wildcat should have the longest season east of killington, attitash needs an hsdq, sunapee needs their expansion. Crotched is good enough for what it is.

 

[thebigo]

That got me thinking - Vail runs places like Breck and Keystone almost flawlessly and there are a shit load of employees - sometimes too many. They we have Wildcat and much much smaller place and revenue wise it goes probably unnoticed. Seems like getting Wildcat improved would be a piece of cake. Leads me to wonder what the long term objectives are with the Peak Resorts. Like it is hard to think that Crotched in a Vail owned ski area.

If I woke tomorrow and found out that crotched had been acquired by boyne, I would buy a boyne pass. Same with several other operators. 1,000,000 people live in southeast NH, many more in northeast mass; crotch is a good local option that rounds out the pass.

 

[deadheadskier]

I don't expect anyone to sell me anything for any price other than that which will hit the sweet spot of a price point that attracts the number of customers that maximizes their profitability. I expect Vail does that pretty well, but if they calculate this year that by doubling their prices they will only lose 20% of their customers and will be more profitable - then by all means they should do that. And as a public corporation, if they do anything other than maximize profits as much as they can while complying with the law, then they should be sued by their shareholders.

You seem to be arguing for them to reduce their profitability so as to enable you to ski places that exclude those of us who have more limited recreational budgets per person than you have.

Of course either of us are free to take our business elsewhere. But if they are losing your business not based on overcharging but because you feel their business model makes them too popular, I can't imagine fear of losing the business of a few people who want to spend more for a less popular product is going to shape their behavior.

Where have I ever said for them to reduce profitability?

I specifically said, fewer people at higher margins.

Sorry that's problematic for you and you'd rather see Rob Katz become Oprah and give everyone a free pass along with the free car.

 

[KustyTheKlown]

tastes like rob katz' balls in here.

 

[Jersey Skier]

I'm more concerned about day to day operations than crowding. At my areas of choice they needed improvement.

Crowding is low on the list for me, I ski midweek...and yeah the pass at 509 dollars unlimited was too good to pass up. I like saving money but if they need to charge more to pay their staff and run their resorts proper then yeah dont put out a half ass product.

So yeah imo they need to acquire and retain more and better staff on the actual ground at resorts like wildcat and that's gonna cost money.

I only ski Hunter on Wednesdays. For the past 2o years I never had a lift line more than a few minutes. This year was like flash backs to the 70's with 15-20 minute waits to get on the 6 pack. I thought the $479 pass would make that tolerable, but I just couldn't do it. Only used it 3 days.

 

[cdskier]

I'd like to see pass prices lowered significantly by those places that charge more (or almost as much) for 1 mountain passes as Epic/Ikon charge for multi-mountain passes.

I care about prices of options available to me, not resorts profit margins. I am a fan of entities like Vail / Alterra / ORDA that offer a good deal to customers like me. Pass prices at places like Elk, Plattekill, Windham could benefit from competitive pressure.

I guess I am OK with some resorts still catering to rich elitists who want to pay more to avoid skiing with the rest of us if there are enough of you to make that a viable business model.

Hopefully most of my fav places won't go that way.

I certainly don't believe Vail sucks for offering a product that appeals to lots of people at a price point they can afford.

Here's the problem. The Mega-pass resorts can afford to offer low pass prices because of the sheer volume of passes they sell. They've set artificially low prices to capture market-share and "hook" people on their product. Ikon and Epic sells hundreds of thousands of passes. Meanwhile how many passes do you think a place like Plattekill sells? Maybe 5-10K (this might even be a high estimate)? Last year they were charging around $750 I think for a pass. If we assume for a minute they sold 5K passes, and if they lowered prices $100, they'd need to sell an additional 770 passes just to break even with what they made off the higher prices (that's a 15% increase in sales). I really don't know you're going to see substantial increases in pass sales at a place like Platty just by lowering the price. These ski areas need to sell passes as a price that allows them to stay in business.

I get the impression Elk is busier than Platty, so I'd assume they sell more passes. But still, they're not selling anywhere near what Ikon or Epic are. They again would need to see substantial increases in pass sales to offset the loss in revenue from lowering prices. And you want "significant" lowering of their prices. I don't see that happening if they want to stay in business.

Windham? Yes they are over-priced, but they've been that way for a long time. And they still are packed. What's the point of them lowering prices if they're selling more than enough passes to hit their capacity targets and if that many people are still willing to pay those prices?

And ORDA's Ski-3 pass doesn't belong in this conversation at all. It is a great value, but the ORDA resorts are subsidized by the taxpayers of NY. Not a valid comparison at all to the majority of the ski resorts out there that don't get that type of funding.

Personally I'd also be in favor of the mega-passes increasing their prices a bit (I'm an Ikon pass-holder and also far from rich). I think ideally they should require you to pick a "home" resort (or perhaps in some areas a group of resorts could be lumped together and count as 1 for the purpose of a "home" resort). You get unlimited access to your home resort(s) and then a limited number of days at all the other resorts on your pass. I think that would make a lot more sense than allowing unlimited access to dozens of resorts for a stupid-low price.

 

[Rowsdower]

JFBB shutting down the 28th. BB closing the 21st (this Sunday). That is very early considering Big Boulder used to go until mid-April.

 

[Edd]

I don't expect anyone to sell me anything for any price other than that which will hit the sweet spot of a price point that attracts the number of customers that maximizes their profitability. I expect Vail does that pretty well, but if they calculate this year that by doubling their prices they will only lose 20% of their customers and will be more profitable - then by all means they should do that. And as a public corporation, if they do anything other than maximize profits as much as they can while complying with the law, then they should be sued by their shareholders.

You seem to be arguing for them to reduce their profitability so as to enable you to ski places that exclude those of us who have more limited recreational budgets per person than you have.

Of course either of us are free to take our business elsewhere. But if they are losing your business not based on overcharging but because you feel their business model - as they makes them too popular, I can't imagine fear of losing the business of a few people who want to spend more for a less popular product is going to shape their behavior - as in that scenario their issue is not having insufficient customers to maximize profitability.

I see his point as the quality of the ski experience (at Stowe for example) is being diminished by Vail’s overall strategy. You’re on a forum for ski nerds who care about skiing, not coupon cutters. The skiing is the thing, and if higher prices preserve a quality of experience, than it’s worth it to a ski nerd, even a non-rich one.

 

[thebigo]

I only ski Hunter on Wednesdays. For the past 2o years I never had a lift line more than a few minutes. This year was like flash backs to the 70's with 15-20 minute waits to get on the 6 pack. I thought the $479 pass would make that tolerable, but I just couldn't do it. Only used it 3 days.

If those chairs were going up full, you think the wait would have changed?

My problem is the amount of time I spend skiing alone while kids are in program. Doubt I would have wanted more than five minutes all year if there a proper singles line and full chairs.

 

[deadheadskier]

Personally I'd also be in favor of the mega-passes increasing their prices a bit (I'm an Ikon pass-holder and also far from rich). I think ideally they should require you to pick a "home" resort (or perhaps in some areas a group of resorts could be lumped together and count as 1 for the purpose of a "home" resort). You get unlimited access to your home resort(s) and then a limited number of days at all the other resorts on your pass. I think that would make a lot more sense than allowing unlimited access to dozens of resorts for a stupid-low price.

I'd be onboard with that. If Vail said, pick two mountains for unlimited access and then we will give you three days a piece everywhere else, that would be a better balance.