I've been thinking about the word "debundling."
@snoloco did you see this used somewhere in relation to skiing? When I google it, google keeps redirecting me to "unbundling" implying that debundling isn't a real word. In any case I think we all know what we are talking about.
In theory this should be a good thing for the consumer. As the emu car insurance guy says "only pay for what you need." If you don't need parking or space for you boot bag, you save right?
While sometimes I think that Skiology is over the top, in this case, I think his use of the term "bait and switch" is somewhat accurate. The Epic model has capitalized on the fact that people aren't really focused on the broader implications of a huge cut in price for lift tickets, they just see the immediate savings.
The way I see it the only possible outcomes are:
1 - Cost truly drops and ski areas make less money
2 - Cost for lift tickets drops but skier volume goes way up, so ski areas make the same money, but the majority of skier visit days (weekends/holidays) are more crowded
3 - Cost for lift tickets drop and ski areas make it up by charging for other things that used to be included (debundling).
4 - A combination of 2 and 3.
IMO all of the options reduce the value of the experience. That last one 4 seems to be what is going on now. By dropping ticket prices and then coming with the add-ons a year later, epic kind of sucked you in before they added the extra fees. Basically if you want to pay less you have to deal with the fact that it's going to be more crowded, or the mountains are going to make less money.
It's easy to calculate your ticket cost per ski day. Be very cool if there was an app that calculated your cost per ski minute. Powder aside, I'd be curious to see how my recent $40 lift ticket at McCauley would stand up against your average holiday at Mount Snow.