Re: “Pushing the Boundaries” article in the Nov/Dec print edition of Elevation Outdoors.

Regarding terrain expansion, here’s my take on the solution to overcrowding issues at Breckenridge and other Summit County ski areas: very simple – double (or triple) the season pass price. Ridiculously low pass prices is not some kind of inalienable human right – and these prices are really not such a great thing if you consider the negative impacts.

Overcrowding on powder days – think that’s not coming from Denver? The increase in bodies on powder days is not from people flying in on vacation. How about Copper last year offering a $99 season pass for days when it snowed over 4″ – the best days – ridiculous! The same can be said for any of Vail Resorts’ season pass plans – while they might seem like a great deal, they are just too low and cause significant problems. It seems so obvious to me that neither parent company is in any meaningful way concerned with the direct results of their extremely low pass pricing: horrendous I-70 traffic and area overcrowding – which creates this supposed “need” for continued expansion. Even if season pass prices were doubled, they would still be less than those at any very mediocre Eastern resort – this is easily verified.

By doubling (or more) season’s pass prices, you’ll kill 2 birds with one stone (sorry for the analogy, PETA): fewer skiers (thus no near-term “need” for terrain expansion) and a lot less traffic on I-70!. And the Colorado resorts will still be able to make a reasonable return on their actual ski area operations through increased profit margins. But let’s not overlook the obvious – Vail Resort’s overall profitability is not just about running an actual ski operation – running lifts and serving meals profitably – the real money is in property development! Get half of Denver out on the hills cheaply and you will get enough people with wealth to help support increasing condo prices over time. Whoopee!

I’m no genius, and I can’t be the only one thinking along these lines. Does anyone have friends in Colorado who pay up for single-day lift tickets, even those with good incomes? Think those people holding out boxes of tissues at the mid-mountain lodges at Vail are doing so for your average mountain town local? Nope, it’s for the “special people” with money who like to be “serviced”, and who might buy a condo if they are treated just so (a rugged lot).

In summary, the problem with the mega resorts out here is that they play this low-priced volume game, with correspondingly low profit margins as it relates to running ski area operations, because property development is the real coveted driver of overall profit. And no one takes them on about this. Just throw more bodies out there and keep expanding. Vail Resorts is a public company – and for public companies, it’s all about the stock price, and therefore shareholders’ interests are paramount. You’re kidding yourself if you think otherwise – just ask your average Harvard Business School graduate. And the #1 rule for increasing stock price is maintaining or increasing investor expectations for future growth in revenue and earnings. Vail Resorts is smart, no doubt, and a a big Colorado employer, but why aren’t the impacts of their business model not questioned (horrendous traffic, the “need” for ski area expansion)?

While no one really likes the idea of paying 2 or 3 times as much for a pass, it would have a real impact on ski areas crowding, traffic (and smog), and I think quite possibly tragic traffic accidents.

As Colin Quinn used to say on SNL: that’s my story and I’m sticking to it.

Jim O’Brien
Denver, CO