F Vail

[x10003q]

Seems like nobody's business how you spend your own money. Maybe it's all in fun?



The same amount, or more? Could be either, to some extent it's a choice.

I don't see how investing $XM in a piece of equipment to run the business wouldn't impact the cost of the sport. The biggest differences between now and 1935 are snowmaking, advanced lifts and, for the individual, gear. Maybe insurance too.

The gear is really a choice. You can probably ski on the same pair of skis/boots forever if you want to. But to some extent, if you want to ride lifts, you are going to have to bear the costs of those lifts and snowmaking. You can say that lifts and snowmaking have no impact on the cost of skiing, but to me that's just not credible.

Years ago, I'd heard something about the American auto industry and competitors, that sounded legit, but I never knew if it was true or not. Maybe @Campgottagopee knows. The theory was that one reason American cars were bigger than foreign cars, beyond gas tax, was that the American companies had huge pension liabilities that Japanese companies didn't have. The idea was that with $5000 in pension built into each vehicle that Toyota didn't have to include, the US companies were forced to sell a bigger product that they could bury that extra cost in. If GM built the same Corolla for $5000 more, it would never sell.

IF true, it would be an example of high fixed cost pushing the "manufacturer" to target a luxury market.

Capital improvements exist for many businesses. They are done to improve the business - increase sales, marketing, cost reductions, competition, replacing old/worn out equipment, etc. On some level it is built into ticket pricing, but you can only charge a certain amount - what the market will bear. If your snowmaking pumps break, you cannot raise pricing on the spot to accommodate your new cost for the pumps. The other side of the coin is that snowmaking has become cheaper to operate over the last 20 years, but ticket prices have not gone down.

If you need to replace a main double chair and you are choosing between a FGQ or a HSQ, there are many variables based on your market and the max you can charge, your ability to pay back the note and your forecasting of better sales with a HSQ.

Skiing is not a viable business in the East without snowmaking and modern chairlifts. For larger areas, there are very few exceptions to this rule (MRG, Smuggs). Even little Plattekill replaced the T-bar with a double chair. I bet that improvement paid off 10x over and Platty still has a reasonable day ticket price.

 

[Brownski]

Not sure that is in their top 10 goals.

No but it’s a good idea. Do you think Vail knows how hated they are? Or do they rationalize it? Dismiss it as everyone hates the big guy, jealousy etc?

 

[raisingarizona]

No but it’s a good idea. Do you think Vail knows how hated they are? Or do they rationalize it? Dismiss it as everyone hates the big guy, jealousy etc?

For every person that hates Vail there’s a thousand people buying the epic pass.

I’ve always felt that if you aren’t pissing someone off you probably aren’t doing your job correctly

 

[Harvey]

My theory: Rob Katz works for the shareholders and is highly incentivized (paid) to make them happy. Selling more Epic passes apparently is what drives the share price up.

Generally if our boss tells us we can make more money by doing X, we'll do it, or at least consider it.

I'm sure Vail has an idea that hardcore skiers aren't fans. But they don't seem to be targeting us, or maybe me.

Curious about how many here:

• Have a epic pass
• Think it's a great product vs tolerate it because it's the only way to ski their home mountain or whatever
• Think the impact of epic is good for skiing, whatever that means to you

Time for a poll? Help me think of what the choices would be.

 

[Andy_ROC]

For every person that hates Vail there’s a thousand people buying the epic pass.

I’ve always felt that if you aren’t pissing someone off you probably aren’t doing your job correctly

Buying an Epic pass and liking VR are two different things. But when they gobble up and monopolize the mountains you call home or want to go to then you really have a limited choice.

 

[Andy_ROC]

My theory: Rob Katz works for the shareholders and is highly incentivized (paid) to make them happy. Selling more Epic passes apparently is what drives the share price up.

Generally if our boss tells us we can make more money by doing X, we'll do it, or at least consider it.

I'm sure Vail has an idea that hardcore skiers aren't fans. But they don't seem to be targeting us, or maybe me.

Curious about how many here:

• Have a epic pass
• Think it's a great product vs tolerate it because it's the only way to ski their home mountain or whatever
• Think the impact of epic is good for skiing, whatever that means to you

Time for a poll? Help me think of what the choices would be.

• I don't have an epic but did buy a multiday epic when I went to ski 4 days at Breck and Vail.
• If Vail bought Bristol and HV, I guess I'd be forced to strongly consider buying an epic. But it would be tough for me to swallow.
• I think the epic is a plus/minus but more minus than good for skiing overall. Yes it's great that you can ski a lot of places with the same pass. But to me the horrible outweighs the good. When you buy an epic then all you want to do is ski epic mountains to maximize your pass value and hence miss out on other great places. Most importantly you hurt the independent mountains. Eventually the giants will force the others out of business and/or buy them at fire sale prices. It only feeds the monopoly being created.

 

[MC2]

Time for a poll? Help me think of what the choices would be.

Do you:
1. Have an epic pass & think Vail is a net positive for the resorts they control
2. Have an epic pass & think Vail is a net negative for the resorts they control
3. Do not have an epic pass & think Vail is a net positive for resorts they control
4. Do not have an epic pass and think Vail is a net negative for the resorts they control.

Unfortunately, it’s probably a mix of both and the mix is different at different resorts. People probably like efficiencies (in hiring, payroll, insurance, etc.), but dislike the rules (instructors can’t ski backwards, etc.). Like the capital improvements, dislike the elimination of “soul”.

Also, it probably depends on the place before Vail took over. Lots of people hated the ownership of Seven Springs, for example, so their opinion on Vail is “can’t be worse than it is!”

 

[tirolski]

Time for a poll? Help me think of what the choices would be.

Do you agree with the phrase "F Vail”?

a) What’s F stand for?
b) Yup
c) Ya shouldn’t use that type of language but Vail sucks.
d) Nope. Love it. Haven't ya seen my latest pics & selfies? It was Epic.

To be fair since this is currently in the F Vail thread YMMV for unbiased results.

 

[Andy_ROC]

Do you:
1. Have an epic pass & think Vail is a net positive for the resorts they control
2. Have an epic pass & think Vail is a net negative for the resorts they control
3. Do not have an epic pass & think Vail is a net positive for resorts they control
4. Do not have an epic pass and think Vail is a net negative for the resorts they control.

Unfortunately, it’s probably a mix of both and the mix is different at different resorts. People probably like efficiencies (in hiring, payroll, insurance, etc.), but dislike the rules (instructors can’t ski backwards, etc.). Like the capital improvements, dislike the elimination of “soul”.

Also, it probably depends on the place before Vail took over. Lots of people hated the ownership of Seven Springs, for example, so their opinion on Vail is “can’t be worse than it is!”

Would love to hear from employees.

About 5 years ago I talked to a friends son who worked at Park City before and after Vail took over. He worked on the mountain coaching (I think) and also in the ski shops selling skis and clothing etc. He said that before Vail took over he made a lot more money because was paid a really nice commission on the goods sold in the shop. I gathered it was common for some really rich family to come in and he'd sell them $10K of gear and clothing and would get like a 10% commission. Once Vail took over the commission went away and they paid a bit above min wage.

 

[raisingarizona]

Do you agree with the phrase "F Vail”?

a) What’s F stand for?
b) Yup
c) Ya shouldn’t use that type of language but Vail sucks.
d) Nope. Love it. Haven't ya seen my latest pics & selfies? It was Epic.

To be fair since this is currently in the F Vail thread YMMV for unbiased results.

Hey, I’m from New York and Jersey and I curse like a sailor…..fuhgettabouttit