227 replies to this topic

[machskier]

Look for new lifts next year, Vail plans to fully interconnect Canyons and PCMR next season.

[DonaldMReif]

I imagine that it will be via a lift that runs from somewhere near the bottom of King Con to near the top of Iron Mountain with the appropriate trails also included?

I do wonder if the two resorts will keep their individual names.

[TheEpicPancake]

DonaldMReif, on 11 September 2014 - 10:38 AM, said:

I imagine that it will be via a lift that runs from somewhere near the bottom of King Con to near the top of Iron Mountain with the appropriate trails also included?

I do wonder if the two resorts will keep their individual names.

This is one of the first things that crossed my mind. Do they keep the individual names, or literally combine everything into one mega resort? And if they did that, which name would it be? Or a new name completely? I would venture to say they would keep the name PCMR, just since it has more history and is more relevant then Canyons.

[SkiBachelor]

Due to Vail Resorts carrying a heavy debt load of 96% compared to equity, I'm wondering if Vail Resorts will face some financial problems in the near future if interest rates rise? I can't see managing 1.5 billion in debt, that's a lot. Wait, now it's 1.7 billion after this acquisition.

[Tin Woodsman]

DonaldMReif, on 11 September 2014 - 10:38 AM, said:

I imagine that it will be via a lift that runs from somewhere near the bottom of King Con to near the top of Iron Mountain with the appropriate trails also included?

I do wonder if the two resorts will keep their individual names.

In terms of connectivity, the alignment you pointed out seems like a reasonable option from PCMR to Canyons, though it would need to top out on top of the northern extension of Pincecone Ridge rather than Iron Mtn itself. Don't think you'd want to top out on Iron given the difficulty level of terrain from up there. You'd prefer a nice, gentle cruise down near/through Flat Iron and to the base of Dreamcatcher. Another option is to run a lift up from the base of Motherlode to a spot further up on the ridge. My guess is that eventually they will do both, so there's an upper and lower access point accessing some sweet, NE facing terrain.

That said, the bigger question IMO is how to affect access in the other direction from Canyons to PCMR. There are a few issues they need to figure out when assessing options. First, the terrain heading to PCMR is generally pretty advanced, so how to facilitate access for the vast majority of PCMR/Canyons skiers who are intermediates and below? Second, the Canyons lift system is already a balkanized mess. It takes no fewer than three lifts (including the stupid Timberline transfer) just to get to the top of Iron Mtn from the main base of Canyons, and you haven't even skied anything worthwhile at that point. Do they really want to make it a 4 lift ordeal to get to the top of Pinecone Ridge? That's going to be a tough sell.

Seems like there are three general options. First, you could put in short lift from the Flat Iron area up to the top of the ridge, but that just feeds into the problem articulated above. Second, you could put in a lift that starts at the base of Dreamcatcher up to the top of the ridge. That enables easier access for those who are already on the upper mtn, but still leaves you with the same 4 lift ordeal in option 1. A final option might be to string a long detach/gondi from the base of Tombstone right up the gut of White Pine Canyon and all the way up to the ridge. That would enable relatively simple, two-lift access from the current Canyons base while laying the ground work for what I believe is the only long-term solution for Canyons - creating a new base area near the bottom of Tombstone (where the base should have been moved when ASC took over). You'd end up with three major access pts for the combined resort (surely to be called PCMR given the better brand equity of that name) - the old PCMR base in town, the old Canyons base and the new base in the middle. This latter option would also facilitate access to terrain up near Scott Hill/top of Pinecone Ridge) that is surely in the long-term development plan.

Just my $0.02.

[2milehi]

snoloco, on 14 June 2014 - 07:51 AM, said:

Park City has said that they will remove the following lifts. Crescent, Town, King Con, Silverlode, Bonanza, Silver Star, Eaglet, Pioneer, and McConkeys. The Jupiter, Motherlode, and Thaynes lifts will be partially removed as the towers are fixed to the land rather than bolted like on the others. The First Time, 3 Kings, Eagle, and Payday lifts would be shortened and realigned to stay on property. They would have a small ski slope with a terrain park on it as well as a Camp Woodward. This work would take 33 weeks if they worked around the clock and cost almost 4 million. The removable snowmaking equipment would be removed as well as all the groomers and the furniture from the mid mountain lodges.

Nothing like making an empty threat.

[Skiing#1]

http://www.ksl.com/i...sorts-for-1825m

Park City Mountain Resort sold to Vail Resorts for $182.5M

PARK CITY — In a suprise announcement Thursday, Vail Resorts, Inc. reported that it has purchased Park City Mountain Resort, which was previously owned by Powdr Corp., for $182.5 million in cash.

The announcement came two days after Park City Mountain Resort agreed to pay a $17.5 million bond to continue operating on land owned by Talisker Land Holdings for the upcoming ski season. The resort's operation for the season had been in question as it sought to negotiate a lease agreement with its landowner.

Vail's purchase of the resort, however, cancels the bond and resolves all legal questions of the resort's continued operation, according to Rob Katz, CEO of Vail.

"I think the most important piece of today's announcement is it really ends all the litigation, the disruption and ensures that we will not be talking about any potential concerns around the resort operating at any time for the future," Katz said Thursday. "I think it provides comfort and long-term security to the company and to the employees of PCMR."

The acquisition includes the land used for ski terrain and the resort base, parking, lower ski terrain and lifts, as well as water and snowmaking for the entire mountain. Powdr, however, will retain Gorgoza Park, a tubing operation about 10 miles from the resort.

"Selling was the last thing we wanted to do, and while we believe the law around this issue should be changed, a protracted legal battle is not in line with our core value to be good stewards of the resort communities in which we operate," John Cumming, CEO of Powdr, said in a prepared statement.

"A sale was the only way to provide long-term certainty for PCMR employees and the Park City community," Cumming said. "My family and I are extremely grateful to have had the opportunity to play a role in making PCMR what it is today, and we deeply appreciate the dedicated employees and all of the people who have supported us over the years."

Last year, Vail signed a 350-year lease with Talisker to operate Canyons Resort adjacent to Park City Mountain Resort. Katz said Vail hopes to combine the two resorts.

"If we did that, we would actually create a ski resort with 7,000 skiable acres, making it the largest ski resort in the United States," Katz said.

For the coming season, Park City Mountain Resort will operate independently from Canyons Resort, and the two will be operated as they have in years past, Katz said.

More information will be posted throughout the day.

This post has been edited by Skiing#1: 11 September 2014 - 02:16 PM

[Lift Dinosaur]

SkiBachelor, on 11 September 2014 - 11:40 AM, said:

Due to Vail Resorts carrying a heavy debt load of 96% compared to equity, I'm wondering if Vail Resorts will face some financial problems in the near future if interest rates rise? I can't see managing 1.5 billion in debt, that's a lot. Wait, now it's 1.7 billion after this acquisition.

Someone likes their chances- stock went up $8.98/share today- 11.70% increase.
Dino

[liftmech]

Curious if this new infusion of cash is going to shake anything loose at Powdr's remaining resorts.... yes I have a more-than-casual interest in the proceedings I kinda figured the bond was going to force our owners' hand one way or another.

[skidude2]

Very sad about this. I love Canyons and one of the reasons why is because there are never crowds. They literally had half the number of skiers PCMR had last year and there were never lift lines. Now I fear that Canyons will become much more crowded. I suppose good things can't last forever.

[SkiDaBird]

skidude2, on 11 September 2014 - 05:29 PM, said:

Very sad about this. I love Canyons and one of the reasons why is because there are never crowds. They literally had half the number of skiers PCMR had last year and there were never lift lines. Now I fear that Canyons will become much more crowded. I suppose good things can't last forever.

I'l see you on the other side. :) Despite the rumors, LCC really isn't crowded at all and BCC is empty.

[skidude2]

SkiDaBird, on 11 September 2014 - 06:14 PM, said:

I'l see you on the other side. :) Despite the rumors, LCC really isn't crowded at all and BCC is empty.

What?!?! I know that LCC isn't crowded but BCC? Snowbird has long lines and gets tracked out in two minutes it seems. I love the terrain but whenever I go there I wait forever to get on the tram or Gadzoom

This post has been edited by skidude2: 13 September 2014 - 07:25 AM

[floridaskier]

In the Park Record today, it sounds like they won't just be offering a joint pass next year but instead calling the two resorts one under the PCMR brand. A lift up the other side of Iron Mountain is in the works

[Backbowlsbilly]

I think Canyons will get a little more crowded because of this but all in all, it's a great deal for Utah. Both mountains have the lift systems to handle the crowds for the most part and people who have Vail's Epic or Epic Local Passes will be more inclined to go to Park City now that they have access to two mountains there. We went to Canyons this year for Spring Break since I've got the Epic Local Pass and there was NOBODY there, I got on the lift with another person just once. This means the end of an ugly legal battle a new boom in skiers that will most likely be handled well by Vail because it is Vail. There was one day that I skied 8-4 at Canyons and then 4:30-8 at Park City, now they've got an arrangement kind of like Breck has with Keystone and its night skiing. I didn't think Snowbird was all that crowded when I was there either, excluding the Tram and Mineral Basin near closing time but I lapped on Peruvian for a lot of the day and it never had a line.

[Peter]

Besides the lift required to connect the two resorts, I could see a bunch of lift upgrades happening in the next couple years. Dreamcatcher and Dreamscape could go detach since they will now be at the center of the combined resort. Motherlode is long overdue for an upgrade at PCMR.

[floridaskier]

If they want to make the interconnect worth it, good call Peter. Motherlode needs an HSQ badly to take lines off of Silverlode anyway, and if they make that the connection point with the new lift up to Iron Mountain, there will be plenty of traffic there. If King Con is the end of the line there, maybe it's time for an HSS there (plenty of slope capacity there if they groom and blow snow on another run or two besides Sitka and Shamus). Iron Mountain is good as is, but Dreamscape, Dreamcatcher, Peak 5, and Timberline will all be bottlenecks at The Canyons. The Canyons needs another lift to go from the Dreamscape area back in the direction of Tombstone and 9990, otherwise it's the interminable Harmony cattrack from Dreamscape all the way back to the overcrowded Tombstone.

Before any of this, I hope they lay down a whole lot more snowmaking pipe south of Tombstone. It's a very long way between Motherlode/King Con and the interesting parts of The Canyons. I hope they find interesting ways to rework some of the useless terrain between 9990 and Dreamcatcher.

Can't wait to see what they do with everything. I'm sure they have their eyes on dynamiting the entire PCMR base area except the Legacy Lodge and Marriott as well.

[Peter]

It's interesting to hear that Vail plans to stay in Ski Utah and support One Wasatch even though their resorts in Colorado quit Colorado Ski Country USA in 2008.

[liftmech]

The two groups have different foci. CSCUSA is purely a trade organisation while One Wasatch aims to physically connect the big seven, as I understand it. One Wasatch will benefit VA more than a meta-marketing group did in CO.

[DonaldMReif]

floridaskier, on 14 September 2014 - 06:17 AM, said:

If they want to make the interconnect worth it, good call Peter. Motherlode needs an HSQ badly to take lines off of Silverlode anyway, and if they make that the connection point with the new lift up to Iron Mountain, there will be plenty of traffic there. If King Con is the end of the line there, maybe it's time for an HSS there (plenty of slope capacity there if they groom and blow snow on another run or two besides Sitka and Shamus). Iron Mountain is good as is, but Dreamscape, Dreamcatcher, Peak 5, and Timberline will all be bottlenecks at The Canyons. The Canyons needs another lift to go from the Dreamscape area back in the direction of Tombstone and 9990, otherwise it's the interminable Harmony cattrack from Dreamscape all the way back to the overcrowded Tombstone.

Before any of this, I hope they lay down a whole lot more snowmaking pipe south of Tombstone. It's a very long way between Motherlode/King Con and the interesting parts of The Canyons. I hope they find interesting ways to rework some of the useless terrain between 9990 and Dreamcatcher.

Can't wait to see what they do with everything. I'm sure they have their eyes on dynamiting the entire PCMR base area except the Legacy Lodge and Marriott as well.

Yes, Vail Resorts can do a lot to make The Canyons better. They definitely should take out Daybreak, or upgrade and extend it, and make Peak 5 a lift actually usable for making laps. Then they need to create a lift that will allow people to return to Red Pine Lodge without overloading Tombstone (since in the current configuration Tombstone must be used going outbound towards Dreamcatcher or 9990, and must also be used when returning from those areas to Red Pine Lodge, Saddleback and Super Condor.

[TheEpicPancake]

DonaldMReif, on 18 September 2014 - 07:34 AM, said:

Yes, Vail Resorts can do a lot to make The Canyons better. They definitely should take out Daybreak, or upgrade and extend it, and make Peak 5 a lift actually usable for making laps. Then they need to create a lift that will allow people to return to Red Pine Lodge without overloading Tombstone (since in the current configuration Tombstone must be used going outbound towards Dreamcatcher or 9990, and must also be used when returning from those areas to Red Pine Lodge, Saddleback and Super Condor.

I would say Day Break is much lower on the list of priorities at the Canyons, although I agree, I think it should be extended and upgraded. Peak 5 desperately needs to be upgraded, along with Dreamcatcher and Dreamscape. And yes, the fact that the only way to return to Red Pine is via Tombstone is just poor planning from the start. What happens if there's an issue with Tombstone? Everyone skiing south of Tombstone ends up stuck and not able to return to base. So there needs to be another way to get back to Red Pine. Perhaps a lift from the base of Dreamcatcher up to the top of Tombstone? The problem with that whole area is there's houses everywhere; the alignment would be incredibly tricky at the very least, if possible at all.