Park City Mountain Lift Upgrades Blocked

fatbob

Not responding
Skier
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
4,497
Vail seems to enjoy Fire, EMS, S&R, Grocery stores.......ugh idk Medical Services standing upon their heads to keep their low paid workforce alive in a global pandemic via testing/ treatment/ hospitalization, not to mention touron management.

Perhaps the "locals" should have left the Range Rover that a touron drove 1/2 way down a ski slope @ Okemo? Nope they got out of bed at 11pm to dig out a SUV from a fn trail.
re Range Rover thing I'm not sure of the relevance - tourists can be dumb not exactly shock news. And if the local community really wanted to leverage itself against Vail why not say "your land your problem" once basic issues of human life had been addressed.

I'm not sure what the other point is. Vail should respect the community by handing back perks? I'm not sure big corporations think like that where there is revenue to be foregone or significant costs incurred to deliver those perks. Not saying that's good but it is reality in some parts of the capitalist world. Some swag for local charity raffle, a shout out for some fundraising - yup easy for them. Building a parking structure just for locals - hmm
 

HardDaysNight

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Posts
1,085
Location
Park City, UT
OK so it's dead easy for PC locals - buy their pass at DV. Feels easier than trying to strongarm Vail into magical creation of extra parking just for them. Or take the bus of course. Added bonus of DV they will get to ski a less shittingly busy hill an put a very tiny dent in the Evil Empire although against that they'll have DV types to deal with including not being able to ride their snowboards.
Don’t know that it’s really worth the discussion but I don’t get this “if you don’t like it move on” view. I don’t bloody well want to ski at DV. I’m perfectly prepared to do whatever I can to strong arm Vail into doing a better job running the mountain. There are many things beyond parking that go into this. BTW, don’t know when you were last at DV but it’s become extremely crowded too, not to the delight of season pass holders who pay $2,600/year for the privilege!
 

fatbob

Not responding
Skier
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
4,497
I'm pretty sure there will still be a community in Park City. People aren't going to be handing back the keys on their multi $m properties soon just to spite VR. Of course it's a community where the residents may have to pay more for those essential service workers if the fun stuff that kept them around is no longer fun.

On a more philosphical level you might well be right - arguably PC has already got to that point if locals are pitted against tourists against SLCers by scarce resources like parking space and sq m on the hill.

@HardDaysNight - I'm specifically suggesting DV in response to the contention that DV still has parking available at 10am midweek for locals that need drop in parking to choose a ski hill. I'm not actually against your strong arm strategy - you can but try. I just think it is a significant uphill battle and one that should have been fought earlier like e.g. when parking lots were being sold off or real estate development permits being granted. Any chance of passing a local ordinance that all transit (including ski lifts) has to be paid on day of use i.e. no passes? That would be hardball.
 
Last edited:

Wasatchman

over the hill
Skier
Joined
Nov 9, 2017
Posts
1,593
Location
Wasatch and NZ
As a percentage the growth rate of Utah has been steadily 20%-30% each decade since the 50s. The % change is still the same today as 70 years ago but instead of 100,000 new residents on top of 600k population it's 500k on top of 3,000,0000.
Utah was nowhere near the fastest growing state in the 70, 80s, or early 90s. It was the fastest growing state the last 15 years. I don't think your analogy holds because typically as things get bigger the law of large numbers kicks in and the growth rate slows. Not to mention we are increasingly in a dire water situation as the growth rolls on. The perception of Utah in the 70s and 80s was some backwards place full of hicks and religious nuts and not desirable. That's not the case today by any stretch.
 

Philpug

Notorious P.U.G.
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
34,685
Location
Reno, eNVy
^no Vail should respect the community b/c soon there may not be one.
What up to this point do you think Vail cares other that just the minimum they need to to appease them?
 

Brian Finch

PT, CSCS, FRCms, FRSC, Ready State L2 Coach
Industry Insider
Joined
Nov 17, 2015
Posts
2,229
Location
Vermont

Brian Finch

PT, CSCS, FRCms, FRSC, Ready State L2 Coach
Industry Insider
Joined
Nov 17, 2015
Posts
2,229
Location
Vermont
From the article above -



“ If you are Rob Katz, this is all looking pretty good. Vail Resorts’ stock price rises from $170 in early 2017, around the time of the announcement of the Stowe purchase, to over $300 in September 2021, and then even higher.

To do the right thing, you and your wife Elana Amsterdam have started a foundation to give back to local causes in mountain towns, causes centered around education, health, racial justice and substance abuse. Over five years, you donate $180 million to the foundation. You champion and promote women in your workplace, you instill DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion) training at all levels, you vow in 2017 that Vail Resorts will reach net zero for its carbon emissions by 2030.

And then, with all cylinders firing and the stock soaring, you step down and hand the reigns over to the marketing genius, Kirsten Lynch, who helped the company succeed—despite the Covid pandemic.

But before you do, you donate 100 percent of your stock appreciation rights (SARS) to charitable causes via your foundation, earmarking $4.9 million for mental health care and racial justice. Vermont’s most recent share —$250,000 – gets channeled through the Vermont Community Foundation.

Look at it one way and you could say Rob Katz was a business whiz who singlehandedly both disrupted and saved skiing, while he gave back to the communities where he did business.

So why, all of a sudden, does everyone hate Vail Resorts?”
 

Jwrags

Aka pwdrhnd
Skier
Joined
Nov 17, 2015
Posts
1,381
Location
Portlandia
At some point both Vail as well as Park City and the county planning commission all deserve blame for the circumstances. Vail has attracted a lot of people with their Epic Pass but my impression is the majority of the problem is not from vacationers but from the regional skier (Salt Lake residents). When we were there in February we arrived on a Saturday. We tried to navigate through town mid afternoon and it was a traffic mess. Completely crazy traffic which was exacerbated by poor traffic flow and lane design, which is a city/county issue. First ski day was Sunday, Super Bowl Sunday. It was not especially crowded at all. If it was purely a tourist issue then the mountain would have been crowded like Saturday. Instead, the local/SLC skiers stayed home because of the game. The mountain remained uncrowded the rest of the week. Of course, the snow also sucked but that is not Vail's fault.

It was very obvious that Vail was not managing the mountain well, with closed lifts, especially on the Canyons side. Why were they closed? No staffing because they didn't/couldn't hire enough staff. Why? Because they do not pay enough nor provide enough benefits(housing) to attract more workers.

Vail's management of the mountain is poor but it also seems that local land use decisions contribute to many issues. They approve the increase in housing and condos, most of which either sit empty or are short term rentals for vacationers. Their traffic management plan seems terrible. They could put remote parking in down by Kimball and force people to take the bus. They could limit short term rentals.

Just my thoughts after visiting this past winter.
 

fatbob

Not responding
Skier
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
4,497
It's not all of a sudden is it? There's been simmering resentment for years and any skier with a brain knew that the Epic pass was a double edged sword and , if they could, to best position themselves for benefit while mitigating downsides. Which usual meant things like getting up the hill early for parking and have non traditional use patterns on the mountain.

What has happened this year is that Vail failed to deliver normal operating capacity in a very conspicuous way so things that were on the verge of failing totally and obviously collapsed.

Maybe the cost of living crisis will bite more next year. People will think twice about gassing up the SUV in the city to go ski on a marginal weekend. Maybe there will be a backlash against ramped up accomodation costs from tourists. But that in itself won't be a sign that Vail has fixed things obviously.
 

fatbob

Not responding
Skier
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
4,497
At some point both Vail as well as Park City and the county planning commission all deserve blame for the circumstances. Vail has attracted a lot of people with their Epic Pass but my impression is the majority of the problem is not from vacationers but from the regional skier (Salt Lake residents).
That would be my assumption. The size of the tourist "problem" must be directly related to available beds so if planning has allowed excessive development and AirBnB etc not tightly controlled then those aren't Vail factors (beyond their own owned accomodation).

I sorta struggle with the idea that Epic is a major draw for SLCers as Ikon offers so much more in the area but then I remember I am a keen skier who likes to hit different mountains and perhaps the archetype is a SLC family skier who likes familiarity and for whom Park City is the brand name for family groomer skiing. Plus when buying for a family or for people who won't get out every weekend price is definitely a factor. Again not all on Vail, the same factors that made living in Park City attractive to locals (like proximity to city jobs and amenities) works in reverse.
 
Last edited:
Thread Starter
TS
Tricia

Tricia

The Velvet Hammer
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
22,362
Location
Tahoe
The beginning of the end for PC was when any resemblance of local ownership of PCMR evaporated. It wasn’t that long ago and the change accelerated after Vail acquired Canyons and PCMR. I lived in Park City when there were three distinct ski resorts and the overall living and skiing experience was better.


I’m not hearing any full-time PC residents asking for special treatment. And, comparatively there aren’t that many full-time PC residents and most are not wealthy and just working stiffs like many of us. Sure their 1800 sq. Ft. house is now worth $1M+ but doesn’t do you any good when you aren’t wanting to leave and can’t afford to size up.

Everytime I read threads like this about the process when VR took over PCMR I have to chuckle a little because the "paperwork glitch" that opened PCMR up for VR to swoop in resembles a situation that happened when they cancelled my contract to manage EpicSki.com.

When I was the site manager, I paid for the URL EpicSki.com every year (as did nolo before me) and then got reimbursed by VR. Prior to ending my contract to manage the site, they asked me to unlock the domain and let their guy take it in house, which I did.
Almost a year after they cancelled our contracts and Pugski.com was humming along I got an email from them saying... "Ooopsie, our guy didn't do his job and it appears that you still own the URL. Can you, pretty please, unlock it again so we can move it to our in house domain managers?"

I could have been nasty about it and kept the domain for myself, but that doesn't reflect my spirit.
 

tromano

Goin' the way they're pointed...
Skier
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Posts
1,769
Location
Layton, UT
Not far off the mark.
And still the case today. Look at shows like Under the Banner of Heaven, The Book of Mormon, etc ... Not sure if destination skiers are just protected from exposure to UT culture. And maybe not aware of how it's mocked by outsiders...

 

ski otter 2

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Nov 20, 2015
Posts
1,992
Location
Front Range, Colorado
To me, there is so much that is problematic in where we are headed, including at the ski areas. Individuals pretty much have to do the best they can in more and more limited/limiting ways everywhere - one step at a time, in the general decline. Over-population pressures of one sort or another - and massive denial of same - are everywhere, both worldwide and here in the states, with folks moving from spoiled and scarce air, land and water situations, pollution, drought, decrepit and unhealthy infrastructure, the lack of any real transportation solutions in the U.S. in our lifetimes (though maybe not in Europe), etc.

It was so different here when I was growing up (fifties and early sixties). So many more people now, and harder to get by, for most.

Cut down forests, spoil the air, use up streams and rivers, and overall rainfall decreases in those places. Imbalance. Pretty simple, basically, but not to most people in our culture. The basics are beyond us as a culture worldwide - a culture divorced from Mother Nature.

Covid seemingly aggravated many situations including this one with the ski areas , but it also caused some healthier behavior - for instance, young people getting out into the outdoors at much higher rates than previously, probably good for their quality of life, whatever the overall effects down the road.

I think there are fewer options for adjustments, for most people - financially and in terms of places still unspoiled/less crowded.

Vail ("Cub Foods Ski") Resorts, with its business model of squeezing its workers wherever it can, had things catch up with it a bit this year, in some places. Maybe they will improve as they are suggesting, dunno. They - and our culture - have a long ways to go.
 
Last edited:

Sponsor

Top