They're smoking some kind weed down there in Ludlow

[Dr. NO]

Sunrise being trail side requires the Southridge chair to be running and access to the rest of the mountain via Bear. That normally occurs by Christmas and ends by mid April at the latest. Almost ALL of P-Okemo-N is accessable from the condos and homes, and most of the area is running from the week before Christmas into April. Big difference between slopeside at Sunrise vs. the condos half way up the mountain at P-Okemo-N.

Still no excuse for such outlandish prices, but what the market will bare !

of course you meant the Sunrise lift

Of course, the lift du joir that services the Sunrise Condos and overpriced homes. used to be Northeast Passage?

[KingsFourMan]

Sunrise being trail side requires the Southridge chair to be running and access to the rest of the mountain via Bear. That normally occurs by Christmas and ends by mid April at the latest. Almost ALL of P-Okemo-N is accessable from the condos and homes, and most of the area is running from the week before Christmas into April. Big difference between slopeside at Sunrise vs. the condos half way up the mountain at P-Okemo-N.

Still no excuse for such outlandish prices, but what the market will bare !

Somewhat true, but even then you could compare Topridge condos which do not require the Sunrise lift, just a Bear Mtn lift, against Solitide Village condos which are about 5-10 yrs old. Both are as central to there respective resorts but the price differences are 30% or more.

Take this brand new Topridge 3 bedroom condo at K for $695,000:

http://www.skicountryrealestate.com/vie ... mls=184117

And this NOT New Solitude Village 3 bedroom condo at Okemo for $995,000:

http://www.okemorealestate.com/view/det ... SV%20O-302

The Okemo unit is 30% more for a unit that is no more slopeside than the unit at K, is at least 5-8 yrs older vs a brand new unit at K, and is on Okemo Mtn which SUCKS compared to the terrain at K which is my entire point.

Prices should be MORE at K than they are at Okemo, not the other way around, but they are not primarily because Okemo is run like a swiss watch and K is run by a bunch of broke-dicks trying to keep their asses above water without much success.

[KingsFourMan]

Under ASC, Killington has developed a reputation as a shabby resort with rude employees, which is entirely true, and real estate prices have suffered as a result not to mention local businesses.

i'll take a double over 6 yrs anytime. that ain't exactly sufferin....

all real estate in the NE has done well over the last 5-6 years, some places better than others. Okemo has done better than K. It shouldn't be that way, K should do better than Okemo because it is a far superior mountain.

[whiteout]

Under ASC, Killington has developed a reputation as a shabby resort with rude employees, which is entirely true, and real estate prices have suffered as a result not to mention local businesses.

i'll take a double over 6 yrs anytime. that ain't exactly sufferin....

all real estate in the NE has done well over the last 5-6 years, some places better than others. Okemo has done better than K. It shouldn't be that way, K should do better than Okemo because it is a far superior mountain.

agreed. that's why i'm buying and holding.

[KingsFourMan]

Under ASC, Killington has developed a reputation as a shabby resort with rude employees, which is entirely true, and real estate prices have suffered as a result not to mention local businesses.

i'll take a double over 6 yrs anytime. that ain't exactly sufferin....

all real estate in the NE has done well over the last 5-6 years, some places better than others. Okemo has done better than K. It shouldn't be that way, K should do better than Okemo because it is a far superior mountain.

agreed. that's why i'm buying and holding.

where are you buying? I'm always interested in peoples Vt real estate stories. I'm not saying K real estate is a bad investment, i'm just saying that it would have done (and will do) even better if not for ASC and that Okemo is proof of this point.

but like i said in an earler post, i think real estate in K may get a nice bump to Okemo levels when K is finally out of the hands of ASC.

[whiteout]

Under ASC, Killington has developed a reputation as a shabby resort with rude employees, which is entirely true, and real estate prices have suffered as a result not to mention local businesses.

i'll take a double over 6 yrs anytime. that ain't exactly sufferin....

all real estate in the NE has done well over the last 5-6 years, some places better than others. Okemo has done better than K. It shouldn't be that way, K should do better than Okemo because it is a far superior mountain.

agreed. that's why i'm buying and holding.

where are you buying? I'm always interested in peoples Vt real estate stories. I'm not saying K real estate is a bad investment, i'm just saying that it would have done (and will do) even better if not for ASC and that Okemo is proof of this point.

but like i said in an earler post, i think real estate in K may get a nice bump to Okemo levels when K is finally out of the hands of ASC.

my bad, should have said "bought" and holding. sunrise for 6 yrs.

the sunrise condo assoc is actually being proactive by expanding and improving the fallsbrook common area to keep pace with the future development on the other side of K. this improvement should help maintain, if not increase prop. values down the road.

my condo value has also increased because of the new (higher priced) units that now surround the older units.

[KingsFourMan]

Under ASC, Killington has developed a reputation as a shabby resort with rude employees, which is entirely true, and real estate prices have suffered as a result not to mention local businesses.

i'll take a double over 6 yrs anytime. that ain't exactly sufferin....

all real estate in the NE has done well over the last 5-6 years, some places better than others. Okemo has done better than K. It shouldn't be that way, K should do better than Okemo because it is a far superior mountain.

agreed. that's why i'm buying and holding.

where are you buying? I'm always interested in peoples Vt real estate stories. I'm not saying K real estate is a bad investment, i'm just saying that it would have done (and will do) even better if not for ASC and that Okemo is proof of this point.

but like i said in an earler post, i think real estate in K may get a nice bump to Okemo levels when K is finally out of the hands of ASC.

my bad, should have said "bought" and holding. sunrise for 6 yrs.

the sunrise condo assoc is actually being proactive by expanding and improving the fallsbrook common area to keep pace with the future development on the other side of K. this improvement should help maintain, if not increase prop. values down the road.

my condo value has also increased because of the new (higher priced) units that now surround the older units.

6 years ago was just about perfect timing. even if prices drop by 35% like they did in the late 80's you are still 65% ahead of the game.

Sunrise condo's are great.

[laseranimal]

this thread is further proof why Downhill Slide by Hal Clifford should be required reading for every skier/snowboarder.

[whiteout]

this thread is further proof why Downhill Slide by Hal Clifford should be required reading for every skier/snowboarder.

enlighten us with a brief summary, please.

[laseranimal]

Its a fabulous read even if you're not a treehugging hippy flower child.

I was expecting a treehugging rant against corperate America, what I read was a passionate skier who was truly concerned with the direction that skiing is taking and over 240 pages made a well reasearched and well thought out arguement that his conclusions are correct and if they are correct what it will mean for the ski industry as a whole and for future generations of skiers.

Not that I agreed with everything in his book Clifford sometimes sounds a bit like chicken little, but it was a worthwhile and thought provoking book.

As for content its basicly boils down to the following

Ski corperations are not interested in selling skiing, skiing is not profitable. They're using skiing to sell real estate which is far more profitable and since they're only interested in showing profit over the short term they are less concerned with the long term impact. Ski area expantions like Jackson Gore are less about adding terrain then adding lucrative housing and other money making properties.

Massive real estate development that is the engine that drives Ski corps like ASC and Intrawest is not only enviornmentally unfriendly but its not sustainable growth(ie some day you run out of land to develop, then what) Plus if every home in the area is $10 million plus where do you house the workers for your resort who can't afford those kind of prices?

Less a problem here in the east, where the land a mountain operates on is more likely to be privately owned, out west many ski areas sit on federal lands and the US Forest service is responsible for protecting these areas, but with congressional cutbacks in its budget has become more and more dependant on funding from the Corperations that lease the areas for ski resorts. Kinda a conflict of interest when your trying to regulate the industry that for all practical purposes is paying your paycheck.


Like I said you may or may not like the book but its definately on the must read list
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de ... s&n=507846[/url]

[tyrolean_skier]

Its a fabulous read even if you're not a treehugging hippy flower child.

I was expecting a treehugging rant against corperate America, what I read was a passionate skier who was truly concerned with the direction that skiing is taking and over 240 pages made a well reasearched and well thought out arguement that his conclusions are correct and if they are correct what it will mean for the ski industry as a whole and for future generations of skiers.

Not that I agreed with everything in his book Clifford sometimes sounds a bit like chicken little, but it was a worthwhile and thought provoking book.

As for content its basicly boils down to the following

Ski corperations are not interested in selling skiing, skiing is not profitable. They're using skiing to sell real estate which is far more profitable and since they're only interested in showing profit over the short term they are less concerned with the long term impact. Ski area expantions like Jackson Gore are less about adding terrain then adding lucrative housing and other money making properties.

Massive real estate development that is the engine that drives Ski corps like ASC and Intrawest is not only enviornmentally unfriendly but its not sustainable growth(ie some day you run out of land to develop, then what) Plus if every home in the area is $10 million plus where do you house the workers for your resort who can't afford those kind of prices?

Less a problem here in the east, where the land a mountain operates on is more likely to be privately owned, out west many ski areas sit on federal lands and the US Forest service is responsible for protecting these areas, but with congressional cutbacks in its budget has become more and more dependant on funding from the Corperations that lease the areas for ski resorts. Kinda a conflict of interest when your trying to regulate the industry that for all practical purposes is paying your paycheck.


Like I said you may or may not like the book but its definately on the must read list
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de ... s&n=507846[/url]

Thank you laseranimal for the synopsis.

[whiteout]

Its a fabulous read even if you're not a treehugging hippy flower child.

I was expecting a treehugging rant against corperate America, what I read was a passionate skier who was truly concerned with the direction that skiing is taking and over 240 pages made a well reasearched and well thought out arguement that his conclusions are correct and if they are correct what it will mean for the ski industry as a whole and for future generations of skiers.

Not that I agreed with everything in his book Clifford sometimes sounds a bit like chicken little, but it was a worthwhile and thought provoking book.

As for content its basicly boils down to the following

Ski corperations are not interested in selling skiing, skiing is not profitable. They're using skiing to sell real estate which is far more profitable and since they're only interested in showing profit over the short term they are less concerned with the long term impact. Ski area expantions like Jackson Gore are less about adding terrain then adding lucrative housing and other money making properties.

Massive real estate development that is the engine that drives Ski corps like ASC and Intrawest is not only enviornmentally unfriendly but its not sustainable growth(ie some day you run out of land to develop, then what) Plus if every home in the area is $10 million plus where do you house the workers for your resort who can't afford those kind of prices?

Less a problem here in the east, where the land a mountain operates on is more likely to be privately owned, out west many ski areas sit on federal lands and the US Forest service is responsible for protecting these areas, but with congressional cutbacks in its budget has become more and more dependant on funding from the Corperations that lease the areas for ski resorts. Kinda a conflict of interest when your trying to regulate the industry that for all practical purposes is paying your paycheck.


Like I said you may or may not like the book but its definately on the must read list
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de ... s&n=507846[/url]

my next read. thanks!

[Snowjob]

What a post! I had no idea that there were so many high priced houses.

If that's what's available 45 minutes away then I can't imagine it will be too long before we see the same thing a Killington. I know that Bear has some development, but it looks like Okemo has just outpaced Killington.

The taxes on those places must be unreal. I hear a $5,000.00 tax bill for an average home is not unusual, never mind a high end home.

Real estate prices at Okemo have been significantly higher than at K for quite a few years. It has a lot to do with the fact that Okemo is run like a swiss watch and K is run on a shoestring budget.

Under ASC, Killington has developed a reputation as a shabby resort with rude employees, which is entirely true, and real estate prices have suffered as a result not to mention local businesses.

For a simple comparison of Okemo quality vs. Killington quality, take a walk through K's Grand Summit Hotel and then Okemo's Jackson Gore Inn. The difference is striking. It's like that with everything at Okemo, from the golf course to the snow quality, Okemo outshines K in every respect.

K's terrain is far superior than Okemo's and K should be enjoying that level of success but ASC has (and continues to) run the place into the ground while losing between $160 million and $200 million dollars a year which is the only thing they have done consistently for the last 5 years.

K4Man - seems like you know a lot about VT R.E. I'm so disappointed that P Okemo Mon is so much better run than K. How can you argue that it isn't when the market votes with it's pocketbook. Okemo is way higher than K. Their prices are incredible. Where do all the tax dollars go?

[Snowjob]

Its a fabulous read even if you're not a treehugging hippy flower child.

I was expecting a treehugging rant against corperate America, what I read was a passionate skier who was truly concerned with the direction that skiing is taking and over 240 pages made a well reasearched and well thought out arguement that his conclusions are correct and if they are correct what it will mean for the ski industry as a whole and for future generations of skiers.

Not that I agreed with everything in his book Clifford sometimes sounds a bit like chicken little, but it was a worthwhile and thought provoking book.

As for content its basicly boils down to the following

Ski corperations are not interested in selling skiing, skiing is not profitable. They're using skiing to sell real estate which is far more profitable and since they're only interested in showing profit over the short term they are less concerned with the long term impact. Ski area expantions like Jackson Gore are less about adding terrain then adding lucrative housing and other money making properties.

Massive real estate development that is the engine that drives Ski corps like ASC and Intrawest is not only enviornmentally unfriendly but its not sustainable growth(ie some day you run out of land to develop, then what) Plus if every home in the area is $10 million plus where do you house the workers for your resort who can't afford those kind of prices?

Less a problem here in the east, where the land a mountain operates on is more likely to be privately owned, out west many ski areas sit on federal lands and the US Forest service is responsible for protecting these areas, but with congressional cutbacks in its budget has become more and more dependant on funding from the Corperations that lease the areas for ski resorts. Kinda a conflict of interest when your trying to regulate the industry that for all practical purposes is paying your paycheck.


Like I said you may or may not like the book but its definately on the must read list
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de ... s&n=507846[/url]

I don't know what to say. It's true, and we all seem to want a slope-side condo (well, maybe I should speak for myself) Where does it end?

[KingsFourMan]

K4Man - seems like you know a lot about VT R.E. I'm so disappointed that P Okemo Mon is so much better run than K. How can you argue that it isn't when the market votes with it's pocketbook. Okemo is way higher than K. Their prices are incredible. Where do all the tax dollars go?

not sure what you mean, please elaborate.