Killington 5/19/05

[Sugarloafer]

You're conjuring a tradeoff that doesn't exist.

I think you mean a trade-off that you wouldn't make. Trade-offs always exist.

 

[cd]

You're conjuring a tradeoff that doesn't exist.

I think you mean a trade-off that you wouldn't make. Trade-offs always exist.

I'm saying it's apples and oranges. Sure, some people may choose to trade same but you were stating it as a given, not a personal call, by calling it "hypocritical" not to think of it that way. Anyway, the main point was what followed.

 

[cd]

Nah, no need to choose, plenty o' time.....

 

[riverc0il]

awf170, is your 'y' key broken?

What the hell makes you think that's the case ? Lot's of people, myself included, ski from opening weekend to closing weekend. Most of these people buy these passes because they have families and they cover vacation weeks.

first of all, your tone isn't quit appropriate. second of all, i meant that it as a generalization and probably should have clarified better so it didn't seem like a blanket statement. if only 100 cars are in the parking lot (as reported above) and there are a lot of day trippers, where are the season pass holders? not all there. i would think, generally speaking, people buying the full pass are doing so because they want to ski the black out dates specifically. i think most people with the full boat pass are not lining up in may. if you were, cool. but obviously, most are not despite paying the extra money. i wasn't suggesting this is logical, just seems what is happening.

BTW, I'd be interested in hearing your definition of "hardcore. " Is it someone who can quote Scot Schmidt ?? I think if all you hardcore guys were really hardcore you'd be slapping your skins on and skiing instead of being in here whining about it ! Shut up and ski ...its free !

fwiw, i have been breaking out the skins and i know a lot of others on this site that have as well. why don't you follow your own advice on your last sentance :roll:

 

[awf170]

awf170, is your 'y' key broken?

i think the y letter in my brain is broken, on an essay on a test my teacher circled it everytime i did the instead of they and it was like 5 times in one page, its not just typing it is also writing, kinda scary, i think is it like a blank spot in my brain ](*,)

 

[Admin]

i am unfamiliar with the exact laws, but regardless of whether ski area law suits are successful, they are still costly in the legal department. i would guess the insurance would cover the cost of payment if a law suit is successful, but the ski area has to pay legal fees and settlements regardless.

I'm not quite understanding this statement. Liability policies pay for two things: defense and indemnification. Unless specifically excluded by the policy, it provides the legal fees to defend lawsuits, even frivolous ones, and also pays to settle claims the insurer deems worthy or practical to settle in addition to paying any judgments.

The rising costs facing ski areas in this venue are the insurance premiums, not the legal fees or settlements. And two other things to remember:

1. Those costs in most circumstances are fixed, not variable. And even when the costs are variable, I'd be surprised to find a policy where the premium is back-rated and based on the number of operating days. The number of operating days would therefore have no effect on the premium cost to the ski area.

2. Other expenses, like labor and the expense to build that manmade glacier on Superstar, not to mention investment in bad real estate decisions and leveraging the company to the hilt to build that Super-Duper-Galaxy-2005 high-speed detachable super chair, far outweigh any per diem liability insurance premiums.

 

[riverc0il]

i have been misinformed then, please excuse my ignorance regarding legal fees being covered fully by insurance.

 

[Geoff]

2. Other expenses, like labor and the expense to build that manmade glacier on Superstar, not to mention investment in bad real estate decisions and leveraging the company to the hilt to build that Super-Duper-Galaxy-2005 high-speed detachable super chair, far outweigh any per diem liability insurance premiums.

I'd point out that Preston Smith's SKI Ltd, profitable for many years, chainsawed the old Superstar and installed that high speed quad there. The Preston Smith Killington used to be about snowmaking & adding acres and uphill capacity. If you could drag a hose to it, it had snow blown on it. They'd make snow until they sucked the snowmaking ponds dry. You can argue the merits of slash & burn trails like Superstar, Double Dipper, and Outer Limits but you have to create acres of terrain to grow. The first to open/last to close was always part of the marketing budget to promote the largest snowmaking system in the world. People picked Killington because it was a safe bet when the conditions were marginal. That created the core of season pass people that carried the resort for decades and allowed it to grow. Those people bought Preston Smith's bonds that paid season pass rights instead of interest and that funded the expansion rather than ASC 12% junk bonds that are destroying New England skiing. ASC dumped 40 years of marketing down the crapper since they really don't understand the ski business. Now, it's all about cash flow since bean counters run the corporation.


For the record, ASC had to replace the Yan high speed quads at Superstar and Snowshed in 1999. I presume either the Vermont State Tramway division or their insurance company insisted after the Whistler disaster.

 

[Patrick]

Why did some get so much in debt?

Many of them forgot about their core business (providing good skiing...its all about the terrain and the snow, dummy !) and over-leveraged themselves on real estate expansions and buying up other resorts. ASC did both of these at the wrong time in the economic cycle...they're kind of a classic B-school case study on how not to run your business.

That's exactely what I meant. If you read the exact quote, I said "Why did some get so much in debt? Bad decision were made". :?

To quote previous US president Clinton, "It's the economy, stupid!!!". No, not the other famous quote that could be viewed as "R" rated. :lol:

As for the SKI Ltd days, yes there were profitable, HOWEVER SKI Ltd was expanding it's empire (terrain and ski areas) and competing with Les's group at Sunday River. The two of them made serious expenses in a short pêriod of time, then Les's group won and got all the marbles and the debt associated with both empires.

Sunday bought Sugarbush, K bought Sugarloaf and so on, new terrain and lifts here, same there, etc, etc.

 

[Patrick]

The first to open/last to close was always part of the marketing budget to promote the largest snowmaking system in the world. People picked Killington because it was a safe bet when the conditions were marginal.
(...)
ASC dumped 40 years of marketing down the crapper since they really don't understand the ski business. Now, it's all about cash flow since bean counters run the corporation.

For the record, ASC had to replace the Yan high speed quads at Superstar and Snowshed in 1999.

I agree, the PR worked and it's was great. They were able to attract die-hard skiers like myself down from Canada.

As mentioned above, I always believe that SKI Ltd was expanding at a unsustainable rate toward the end. ASC winning the war only made things worst and inheritied two huge debts.

The Whistler disaster was in 1996. I don't recall never noticing the YAN sign on the last pylon on the Superstar lift before. It's not really a sign, but more metal letter above the tower, there is a board behind it so it's doesn't really show much.