Ikon Pass

I didn't read this thread. Just chiming in...

I got the EpicPass for the past 2 years, at first just because it's lower price than the Whistler-Only Season Pass (which some people buy mainly for better Whistler-specific perks like food discounts, or wrongly thinking they are withholding support from VailCorp, etc.). But this year, the reason I got EpicPass is to roadtrip everywhere for 8-9 months and ski the shit out of everything, with a preference for Whistler. No brainer, EpicPass rules for that.

For next year, I'm getting IKON instead, mainly because that IS the Squaw Season Pass that I need for Squaw next year, but also because an early $199 deposit now gets me unlimited Squaw & Mammoth THIS WINTER from April 8 - July 7 or possibly even longer into July...as I roadtrip back-and-forth between Squaw & Mammoth for the final months. Another no brainer, IKON rules for that.

The Epic & IKON data I see seems to indicate that the crowding is mainly because local passholders are being snow snobs this year, who only show up on powder days to crowd each other out, and are too snobby to stomp flat hardpack into mogul runouts on all the other days. :)

.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vitamin I

The Epic & IKON data I see seems to indicate that the crowding is mainly because local passholders are being snow snobs this year, who only show up on powder days to crowd each other out, and are too snobby to stomp flat hardpack into mogul runouts on all the other days. :)

.

---

If next year is a shitty winter, I foresee the locals thanking their Alterra/VR overlords for the injection of non-local business into their economies. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beece

Personally, I think it's ridiculous that Aspen/JHMR/AltaBird passholders get no benefits from Ikon. They should obviously get at least the free days elsewhere that the Ikoniums are getting - hell, they are paying more for their pass.

My home mountains are unlimited so Ikon is the local pass. If I had the other situation, where I was paying way more, getting no benefits, and having visitors come to my mountain for free, I'd be pissed too.

---

Exactly. Why would I be happy about my home mountains being more crowded when I don't even get a discount at other Ikon hills.

See the post above yours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beece

Personally, I think it's ridiculous that Aspen/JHMR/AltaBird passholders get no benefits from Ikon. They should obviously get at least the free days elsewhere that the Ikoniums are getting - hell, they are paying more for their pass.

My home mountains are unlimited so Ikon is the local pass. If I had the other situation, where I was paying way more, getting no benefits, and having visitors come to my mountain for free, I'd be pissed too.

---

it should be fairly obvious why they don't, I wouldn't say it ridiculous at all. Same with employees of Ikon resorts. Who would pay for them to ski for 'free' in other places and why would they? It would be nice to get discounted tickets in other places for sure though.

But yes if I was a Aspen/JHMR/AltaBird passholder I'd be pissed no matter what.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snowaddict91

Why would I be happy about my home mountains being more crowded even when I do get a discount at other Ikon hills.

---

FIFY

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by muted

it should be fairly obvious why they don't, I wouldn't say it ridiculous at all. Same with employees of Ikon resorts. Who would pay for them to ski for 'free' in other places and why would they? It would be nice to get discounted tickets in other places for sure though.

But yes if I was a Aspen/JHMR/AltaBird passholder I'd be pissed no matter what.

---

There's no reason that someone has to pay, or pay the same rate, for these skiers. It could simply be part of the negotiated rate structure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danno

There's no reason that someone has to pay, or pay the same rate, for these skiers. It could simply be part of the negotiated rate structure.

---

No reason at all? Like not ONE single reason??

Maybe everyone could get some free hot cocoa coupons as Swiftybish once told me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

FIFY

---

Oh really? Show me the discounts I get with my Alta/Bird pass at Ikon resorts. Mountain Collective, yes, but I get nothing from Alterra.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by muted

No reason at all? Like not ONE single reason??

Maybe everyone could get some free hot cocoa coupons as Swiftybish once told me.

---

Uh, miss the point much? My point wasn't that they should just give out free stuff, but that the rates can vary based on the pass particulars. Here's a way you can understand it: there's no reason for them to pay, or pay the same rate, for children Ikon pass holders. And I bet they don't. Because they surely have a negotiated rate for kids versus adults.

It wouldn't be that hard to have a different negotiated rate for skiers holding Altabird/Aspen passes. Or a different negotiated rate (or some other mechanism) for employees. What that fee structure would look like could vary drastically depending on circumstances. But it's all negotiated, there is no reason they could not bake in the ability of someone holding an Aspen pass to ski some number of days at other resorts. It does not have to follow lock-step with the normal fee structure for Ikon pass holders.

So yes, there is no requirement that the fee structure has to look the same for every circumstance. And I bet it doesn't. They made a business decision to treat these pass holders differently, for whatever reason, but changing that doesn't automatically mean that Alterra must pay out at the same level for these pass holders.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snowaddict91

Oh really? Show me the discounts I get with my Alta/Bird pass at Ikon resorts. Mountain Collective, yes, but I get nothing from Alterra.

---

My situation.. home mountain is busier and the benefits I get at other mountains aren't worth it to me for that reason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by singlecross

I was a plug boot stick chaser

---

What’d I ever do to you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

My situation.. home mountain is busier and the benefits I get at other mountains aren't worth it to me for that reason.

---

Ah, thought you were telling me to make lemons into lemonade. Carry on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danno

Uh, miss the point much? My point wasn't that they should just give out free stuff, but that the rates can vary based on the pass particulars. Here's a way you can understand it: there's no reason for them to pay, or pay the same rate, for children Ikon pass holders. And I bet they don't. Because they surely have a negotiated rate for kids versus adults.

It wouldn't be that hard to have a different negotiated rate for skiers holding Altabird/Aspen passes. Or a different negotiated rate (or some other mechanism) for employees. What that fee structure would look like could vary drastically depending on circumstances. But it's all negotiated, there is no reason they could not bake in the ability of someone holding an Aspen pass to ski some number of days at other resorts. It does not have to follow lock-step with the normal fee structure for Ikon pass holders.

So yes, there is no requirement that the fee structure has to look the same for every circumstance. And I bet it doesn't. They made a business decision to treat these pass holders differently, for whatever reason, but changing that doesn't automatically mean that Alterra must pay out at the same level for these pass holders.

---

I'm not the sharpest pencil in the box, but yeah I'm missing your point. Jackson signs up for Ikon to get money. But they lose money in negotiations with Ikon if they negotiate for their pass holders get more access to Ikon owned resorts. Why the hell would they do that?

I think you are saying the COULD negotiate. I'm saying of course they could, but why the hell would they do that? Unless they raised their JXN season passes to compensate for it.

Obviously resorts like altabird and jh join ikon to attract more skiers. Whatever money they get per skier is free money since it costs the resort nothing for that skier to ski. (This assumes they attract skiers who wouldn't otherwise come Which I assume the resorts are now trying to figure out.)

Meanwhile they can charge their local passholders more because those folks are going to ski there regardless. It's business not personal. Like the airlines charging a different fare for each seat depending on when you buy. (I skied an extra day at Points North and the last minute flight was cheaper for first class than for coach.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old goat

Obviously resorts like altabird and jh join ikon to attract more skiers. Whatever money they get per skier is free money since it costs the resort nothing for that skier to ski. (This assumes they attract skiers who wouldn't otherwise come
Which I assume the resorts are now trying to figure out.)Meanwhile they can charge their local passholders more because those folks are going to ski there regardless. It's business not personal. Like the airlines charging a different fare for each seat depending on when you buy. (I skied an extra day at Points North and the last minute flight was cheaper for first class than for coach.)

---

It is not as simple as getting any level of revenue is better than none. Some % of IKON skiers would make a trip to Alta/Bird or JH and would have purchased a ticket at full price. As an Alta pass holder I am not upset about getting extra benefits. We do get two days at SB, Solitude & Deer Valley. Its not what you get with an IKON but its enough for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vitamin I

The Epic & IKON data I see seems to indicate that the crowding is mainly because local passholders are being snow snobs this year, who only show up on powder days to crowd each other out, and are too snobby to stomp flat hardpack into mogul runouts on all the other days. :)

.

---

So much this. But I squaw/alpine stompy hardpack crud so I learned to like it. Besides SVAM, only used my pass at Taos but have good intentions, such good intentions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bigdude2468

It is not as simple as getting any level of revenue is better than none. Some % of IKON skiers would make a trip to Alta/Bird or JH and would have purchased a ticket at full price. As an Alta pass holder I am not upset about getting extra benefits. We do get two days at SB, Solitude & Deer Valley. Its not what you get with an IKON but its enough for me.

---

Sure. Of course they have to make a net revenue calculation. Including marginal sales on beer, burgers, retail sales, etc.

One interesting twist is the contribution to the local economy. I probably spent $1000!on hotels, meals, etc in Jackson but none of that at the resort since I’m a two bars in the pocket and a beer in the pack guy. Ideally the resort would receive a piece of that rev that they effectively generated.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Well, the hotel owners make more money, need to hire more staff, so more folks in the community have more money and are more likely to continue to buy season passes and might just buy food on the hill. It may be hard for a dirt bag local to see, but it pumps a good amount more money into the local economy and they still get something from IKON when you use your days there.

My concern with Epic/Ikon is the increased air travel that a passholder might use to get to all the resorts. Air travel is a huge contributor to climate change. Like that dude who thinks the crappy food at US Resorts is good, he traveled to a bunch of different resorts to get his pass price down to $51.xx (btw, love the exact calculation, minus travel and lodging) and added a bunch more CO2 to the atmosphere and drives the end of winter.

When VR bought KW, I stuck with the KW Only pass as we don’t travel for a bunch of reasons. If I buy an IKON to ski Mammy this spring, then my son and I will be tempted to travel at least once next winter. But doubt we actually will. If we do, probably will be Aspen as they seem like they do not have the shit show that JH and BS endured this season. And Aspen looks rad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phalkor

So much this. But I squaw/alpine stompy hardpack crud so I learned to like it. Besides SVAM, only used my pass at Taos but have good intentions, such good intentions.

---

You should at least get some days at Mammy this spring. Not too far of a drive and once the base of KT is gone, Main Base at Mammy will still be going strong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danno

If next year is a shitty winter, I foresee the locals thanking their Alterra/VR overlords for the injection of non-local business into their economies. ;)

---

How so? If we have crappy snow and no IKON passholders bother to come and ski the rock strewn slopes then it will be the seasons pass holders who allow the (name here) resort to survive the winter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Not bunion

How so? If we have crappy snow and no IKON passholders bother to come and ski the rock strewn slopes then it will be the seasons pass holders who allow the (name here) resort to survive the winter.

---

Because according to Frangers all us mountain folk can only be service industry employees.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Not bunion

How so? If we have crappy snow and no IKON passholders bother to come and ski the rock strewn slopes then it will be the seasons pass holders who allow the (name here) resort to survive the winter.

---

Because people who travel distances to ski do so regardless of snow conditions (or, rather, snow conditions are far from the only factor). If you have to make plane reservations or otherwise block out a lot of time for a long drive, you often do so well ahead of time. Ikon passholders will still represent an influx of cash (to the resort and to the economy) that otherwise would not be there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by concretejungle

Because according to Frangers all us mountain folk can only be service industry employees.

---

No, there will always be people unaffected by the influx of tourist dollars. And they'll be sure to tell everyone that they are, and include derisive references to non-core non-locals too. But many locals at resorts are either affected directly by skier visits because they're in the service industry, or affected indirectly because their business improves when the overall economy improves. The bartender might see direct impact to his wallet, while the GC might see more locals willing to pony up for remodels or the car salesman might see more people shopping for cars. There are some locals completely insulated from the resort economy, and yeah, life sucks for them when the resort is busy and it's great when the resort is empty all winter long. Until the resort goes bankrupt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by muted

I'm not the sharpest pencil in the box, but yeah I'm missing your point. Jackson signs up for Ikon to get money. But they lose money in negotiations with Ikon if they negotiate for their pass holders get more access to Ikon owned resorts. Why the hell would they do that?

I think you are saying the COULD negotiate. I'm saying of course they could, but why the hell would they do that? Unless they raised their JXN season passes to compensate for it.

---

Yes, I am saying they could negotiate. Because sometimes there are long term benefits to treating your customers well, vs trying to squeeze every dollar from them. And yes, it happens, businesses make the decision all the time to give things away that they could otherwise charge for, or make decisions that in the very short term mean less revenue. Because sometimes that is the wise long term business decision, to keep customers, to generate goodwill, etc. So yes, these non-Ikon resorts that are on the Ikon pass could negotiate some benefits for their passholders. And I suspect that will happen for some of them, if people complain enough.

What's going on in the ski industry reflects what's going on in the economy in general--profits and shareholder value being the only consideration of a ski corporation. Prior to Milton Friedman in the 70's corporations were expected to consider the effects of their decisions on the community and the employees. Friedman espoused the doctrine of shareholder value as the only consideration and everyone--corps, dems, republicans, wall street, the courts--bought it. It's time to vote for candidates who will change that--who will enact laws that corporations, in exchange for the benefits of incorporation, have to consider the workers and the community. Democratic socialism if you will. (Mods--I'll delete rather than have this thread go to polyass.)

Agreed Goat