$500M Project in the Northeast Kingdom

[SkiToKill]

http://www.wcax.com/story/19646867/500m ... st-kingdom

I hope Killington's new president is half as good as Bill Stenger is.

[manhattanskier]

http://www.wcax.com/story/19646867/500m ... st-kingdom

I hope Killington's new president is half as good as Bill Stenger is.

I really hope they do not grow too fast and turn into another American Skiing Company!

[da Pimp]

For us skiers/riders- none of this "proposed" activity will do anything to make me drive the extra long distance from the major metropolitan customer sources to go to Jay or NEK areas in general. If the NEK was close enough to commit to making more trips (day or weekend) we would have been doing so already. It is the number of miles and hours in the vehicle that preclude me from regular NEK fun. Unless the snow is really good, I and my friends do not consider Jay. We stay within our 3 or 4 hour commute to Killington and enjoy the natural advantage of the Green Mountain snow belt, snowmaking, many trail options including woods, and the access road activities that are missing elsewhere. It used to be a larger & better advantage, but still an advantage exists. Sure Jay & Burke have more & better natural snowfall but it is not automatic to go there and get 25% or 50% better conditions than Killington. It has to be right. I think most agree that if Jay sat only 30-35 miles past Killington we would all be there. But it ain't reality.

I also agree with the article comments about where the better paying job talent will come from. Not the NEK local talent pool. A lot will be imported either temporarily or by relocating long term.

Overall the investment and emphasis on developing Jay, Burke, NEK business is a good thing for all interested parties but it wil take time and be a slow turning wheel, certain to be derailed at times and subject to future changes in direction by investors.

[SnoBrdr]

http://www.wcax.com/story/19646867/500m ... st-kingdom

I hope Killington's new president is half as good as Bill Stenger is.

Yes it's real nice but as stated how many of those jobs, other than low paying ones will go to the locals.

This is yet another EB-5 visa grab. Nothing like buying your way to a green card.

[Highway Star]

Numerous Killington regulars took weekend trips up to Jay last year, they are definitely drawing people.

Too bad we're not getting that sort of investment.

[Bubba]

Jay has been growing skier visits for the past 5 or so years. They know their market and how to work with it.

[skiadikt]

Jay has been growing skier visits for the past 5 or so years. They know their market and how to work with it.

as opposed to powdr/nyberg who's modus has been to squeeze as much as they can out of their 675k or so skier days instead of trying to grow it. there's certainly nothing wrong with maxing profits but you can only squeeze so much before you antagonize your base and get contraction.

[jaybird]

Jay's terrain and amenities surpass Killington, and many others.
If the biggest problem is too many Canadians, well, we can take that.
We're happy that Hunta' is still operational !

[Geoff]

Jay has been growing skier visits for the past 5 or so years. They know their market and how to work with it.

I wonder what that indoor water park and ice arena have done for their midweek business? Killington doesn't have a weekend problem. They have a midweek and April problem.

[da Pimp]

Excellent observation. Look at Vail's income per visit - recently released at over $55 per visit (takes into account season pass costing, daily rate buyers, etc.)

Remember when POWDR came into town and stated that they wanted the MARGIN up, and could do that with less. Well, they quickly reached some type of saturation factor that you pointed out, and contraction set in.

Back when I had a bond with ASC, I remember seeing their discolsure statements and reading that the aaverage skier visit would yield them somewhere in the $50's per person per visit. That is the number that POWDR wants to raise, because it means that you can realize more profit without operational investment to drive it. Sure, you need to invest in the business infrastructure and key enablers such as lifts, snowmaking capability, structures (especially those that create revenue like bars & food) but if you can reduce your need for employees, snowmaking, utilities then whatever visits you get is divided by a smaller number of costs. Voila yuor margin goes up.

Optimally the number of guests expected in a certain time period determines the snowmaking commitment. When Killington sees low reservation numbers for lodging that they book on a given approaching weekend, it tells them to cut back on operating costs because they will not be needed as much. That directly translates into go/no go snowmaking decisions for resurfacing or expanding their offering. Then you get the weather factor on top of that to complicate things.

I believe that this also drove their poor decision to cut back 1/2 hour of operations this winter. Eliminating 1/16 of your overhead costs every weekend & holiday means that much less electricity and lifty costs. Same visits / less costs. Already they open only "key lifts" on time, most opened at 9am weekends. What they fail to realize or refuse to admit is that this decision will costs them in ill will, public perception of moving backwards, less value for the customer. Ask any customer when the best trail surfaces and condition are - the last half hour or the first? How many customers are on the hill close to 4pm unless it snowed? Why not close earlier so that patrollers can get their work done before it gets dark. When the daylight gets longer, remain open 8am - 4pm and keep that competitive advantage over other areas.

[Stormchaser]

Excellent observation. Look at Vail's income per visit - recently released at over $55 per visit (takes into account season pass costing, daily rate buyers, etc.)

Remember when POWDR came into town and stated that they wanted the MARGIN up, and could do that with less. Well, they quickly reached some type of saturation factor that you pointed out, and contraction set in.

Back when I had a bond with ASC, I remember seeing their discolsure statements and reading that the aaverage skier visit would yield them somewhere in the $50's per person per visit. That is the number that POWDR wants to raise, because it means that you can realize more profit without operational investment to drive it. Sure, you need to invest in the business infrastructure and key enablers such as lifts, snowmaking capability, structures (especially those that create revenue like bars & food) but if you can reduce your need for employees, snowmaking, utilities then whatever visits you get is divided by a smaller number of costs. Voila yuor margin goes up.

Optimally the number of guests expected in a certain time period determines the snowmaking commitment. When Killington sees low reservation numbers for lodging that they book on a given approaching weekend, it tells them to cut back on operating costs because they will not be needed as much. That directly translates into go/no go snowmaking decisions for resurfacing or expanding their offering. Then you get the weather factor on top of that to complicate things.

I believe that this also drove their poor decision to cut back 1/2 hour of operations this winter. Eliminating 1/16 of your overhead costs every weekend & holiday means that much less electricity and lifty costs. Same visits / less costs. Already they open only "key lifts" on time, most opened at 9am weekends. What they fail to realize or refuse to admit is that this decision will costs them in ill will, public perception of moving backwards, less value for the customer. Ask any customer when the best trail surfaces and condition are - the last half hour or the first? How many customers are on the hill close to 4pm unless it snowed? Why not close earlier so that patrollers can get their work done before it gets dark. When the daylight gets longer, remain open 8am - 4pm and keep that competitive advantage over other areas.

Please, stop being logical...

[Geoff]

Excellent observation. Look at Vail's income per visit - recently released at over $55 per visit (takes into account season pass costing, daily rate buyers, etc.)

Remember when POWDR came into town and stated that they wanted the MARGIN up, and could do that with less. Well, they quickly reached some type of saturation factor that you pointed out, and contraction set in.

Back when I had a bond with ASC, I remember seeing their discolsure statements and reading that the aaverage skier visit would yield them somewhere in the $50's per person per visit. That is the number that POWDR wants to raise, because it means that you can realize more profit without operational investment to drive it. Sure, you need to invest in the business infrastructure and key enablers such as lifts, snowmaking capability, structures (especially those that create revenue like bars & food) but if you can reduce your need for employees, snowmaking, utilities then whatever visits you get is divided by a smaller number of costs. Voila yuor margin goes up.

The Vail empire has a near-monopoly on I-70 Colorado skiing. They can do whatever they want with pricing to tune their model. Killington obviously can't. To the east, you have the Boyne empire with a season pass that works at 3 ski resorts. They've drained away much of Killington's traditional metro-Boston market and would pull away even more if Killington adopted a premium pricing model without delivering a premium product. Killington can screw with the Tri-State market because there are so few alternatives but they can only pull so much revenue out of that market.

[Mister Moose]

...their poor decision to cut back 1/2 hour of operations this winter. .... What they fail to realize or refuse to admit is that this decision will costs them in ill will, public perception of moving backwards, less value for the customer.

Size does matter these days -- particularly in the freezer aisle, where Ben & Jerry's is mounting a pint-sized assault on rival Haagen-Dazs. The popular Dreyer's brand has decreased the size of its "pints" from 16 ounces to 14 ounces, and rival Ben & Jerry's is trying to use that to its advantage.

http://adage.com/article/news/ben-jerry ... ng/135126/

When I look in my grocer's freezer these days, I see 2 to 3 times the shelf space given to Ben & Jerry's compared to Haagen-Daz. Not too hard to see who's losing market share there either.

[Highway Star]

Excellent observation. Look at Vail's income per visit - recently released at over $55 per visit (takes into account season pass costing, daily rate buyers, etc.)

Remember when POWDR came into town and stated that they wanted the MARGIN up, and could do that with less. Well, they quickly reached some type of saturation factor that you pointed out, and contraction set in.

Back when I had a bond with ASC, I remember seeing their discolsure statements and reading that the aaverage skier visit would yield them somewhere in the $50's per person per visit. That is the number that POWDR wants to raise, because it means that you can realize more profit without operational investment to drive it. Sure, you need to invest in the business infrastructure and key enablers such as lifts, snowmaking capability, structures (especially those that create revenue like bars & food) but if you can reduce your need for employees, snowmaking, utilities then whatever visits you get is divided by a smaller number of costs. Voila yuor margin goes up.

You're a bit out of date on your yield per visit numbers. In the last few years of ASC, they were doing about $73 overall per visit, and about $28 ticket yield per visit IIRC. POWDR did massively raise the ticket yield figure by raising pass prices and cutting availble deals. I get the feeling that the discount K55 (etc) tickets they sale are priced right around their ticket yield or slightly above it. So figure about $45 ticket yield today. They certainly lost visits, so it's tough to say if revenue is down overall. And it's hard to tell if overall yield has increased by the same amount.

Vail has excellent price controls and limited deals. Aside from the early season pass pricing. If you're a visitor you're going to pay about $75 per day for a ticket and then probably throw done some cash for food, parking, etc at minimum. Adds up quick. Their overal yield per visit is probably north of $100 at this point.

[jimmywilson69]

Vail is over $100 a day (no discount) and good luck trying to find a place to park in vail for less than $20/day.