yurp resorts don't have owners

[davidof]

Thanks for this M. davidof!
very interesting stuff indeed...

Just two points :

Denis Creissels is hard to see through, but what he does say is that he wouldn't sell the lift whatever the price. Plus he's building an hotel on the actual parking lot, so I think he falls in the "I make money with land that wouldn't be worth it without a lift" category.

Artouste will be back on the resort map this year, I don't know the details of the deal (heard that Altiservice had made an offer to the commune) but you'll find them on skipass.

Thanks Mr Super Beaver,

Great news about Artouste, the negotiations with Altiservice have been long and difficult. If these resorts are left more than a season or two they have trouble coming back. Artouste might be the kind of example that Verbier was thinking of where a range of interests have worked to breath life into the resort although I doubt the American's would be comfortable with the amount of state aid some French resorts receive. Anyway it is a great resort by all accounts and I will have to get over to ski in 2006 if Altiservice can work its magic.

[verbier61]

thanks, david, very detailed and interesting. I've learnt a lot

[TeleAl]

Some good discussion there.
Brings me back to my point on page 1:
What is better for me?

Buying a lift ticket vs. selling real estate makes the difference.

See my point?

[verbier61]

Some good discussion there.
Brings me back to my point on page 1:
What is better for me?

Buying a lift ticket vs. selling real estate makes the difference.

See my point?

mmmmhhh...
an established community with long-lasting traditions is probably more easy-to-predict and to deal with than a corporation with central officies a 1000 miles away.

But US still have a lot of things that are possibly better and cheaper than yurp. Music, for instance.

[AntiSoCalSkier]

that was exactly what I was trying to say, but I used waaaaaay too many words.

also, and here I'm talking out of my ass...a substantial part of North American business strategy has been the concept of chains - chain restaurants, movie theaters, fast-food, video rental, car dealerships, etc...so it's not really surprising that we also have chain ski companies like Boyne and the American Ski Company, etc.

Does the chain concept really work with ski resorts?

I can't really imagine a Bay Area Heavenly skier deciding to visit Breckenridge just because it's owned by VR. I don't think the general public understands the corporate structure of the big resorts. The only thing they know is that there are some resorts where you can buy interchangable lift tickets. (For example Mrs. ASCS didn't realize that Beaver Creek and Breckenridge were owned by the same company, even though she has taken advantage of their interchangeable lift tickets. She simply assumed that Vail had some sort of deal worked out with Breck.)

[Lostinthetrees]

(For example Mrs. ASCS didn't realize that Beaver Creek and Breckenridge were owned by the same company, even though she has taken advantage of their interchangeable lift tickets. She simply assumed that Vail had some sort of deal worked out with Breck.)

True. The "brand equity" is the name of the resort. Vail, Aspen, Deer Valley, Steamboat. Not American Ski Company (or, any other corp.)

My point is that they should be changing their name to fit their image. American Resort and Condominium Development Corp.

One of my favorite US areas is Alpine Meadows. Just a parking lot, small base area and plenty of great terrain.

One of my least favorite is Beaver Creek. Shit, not a damn beaver in site. Only Trophy Homes lining the Creek. And, that heavily developed base area that smacks of a suburban shopping mall. I truly feel like I am pressing my nose against the glass skiing there. Outside, looking in.

Kirkwood is a mistake in progress. I would have banished all the housing/condo from the base area and lake. They should be located 3 -5 miles down the road and have a shuttle service. Keep the space (base area and surrounding valley) was wild as possible and banish the suburban gated community creep elsewhere. imho

[Tippster]

Lookit the big brain on Davidof! Kudos to you, sir!

I think the chain model is basically a hedging of bets for a company. If Heavenly has an off year they're covered, however it's more likely they'll have a better snow year than say Keystone. Also, according to numbers I read in Vail Associate's newsletter a while ago (yes, I'm a Peaks Pass member) Heavenly HAS seen an increase of skiers, especially from the EC, since VA bought them and promoted the hell out of them.

[Lostinthetrees]

Does the chain concept really work with ski resorts?

Yes, the consolidation of all back room operations of numerous ski areas/resorts. Folding all HR & Payroll, Purchasing, Accounting, Insurance, IT, Advertising, etc. into single entities instead of duplicating the departments at each ski area/resort lowers overall costs.

Like it does for Home Depot, Walmart, Supermarkets, Banking, Manufacturing, Energy, Hospitals, etc.

But, bigger does not necessarily lead to increased return for shareholders and overall profitability. Bigger doesn't always benefit consumers.

Key questions for me are:

Who benefits? Local community residents, or yuppies w/ 2nd homes, or real estate development corporations and their shareholders?

And, what model could be developed to insure the locals and skiers/boarders profit?

[supercastor]

And, what model could be developed to insure the locals and skiers/boarders profit?

Do I read about a maggot-run ski resort in the subtext? Sweet