Page 16 of 23 FirstFirst ... 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ... LastLast
Results 376 to 400 of 555
  1. #376
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    878
    well, shit ... stories like this aren't helping bookings that's for sure ... http://www.cnbc.com/id/101951406#

  2. #377
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    below the Broads Fork Twins
    Posts
    5,772
    Quote Originally Posted by getoutside View Post
    well, shit ... stories like this aren't helping bookings that's for sure ... http://www.cnbc.com/id/101951406#

    Source: Jessica Golden
    An arial view of Park City, Utah.


    And all this time I thought that was the Lone Peak/Alpine ridge of LCC/AF

  3. #378
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    6,041
    Quote Originally Posted by getoutside View Post
    well, shit ... stories like this aren't helping bookings that's for sure ... http://www.cnbc.com/id/101951406#
    Probably the single worst article I've read about this whole deal.

  4. #379
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Park City
    Posts
    1,857
    Quote Originally Posted by bigdude2468 View Post
    I see PCMR is making the same argument that I have which is how do you value the land if you can't gain access or water rights. I may only be 30 miles away but I have not skied PC in maybe five years and have not paid any attention to the boundaries. So locals in the know, how does or can Vail gain access to the disputed property if PCMR keeps them out of the base facilities, lower mountain and snow making??
    they could build access points around the pcmr property and they can drop in the ridge from Thaynes canyon. All of which would require new lifts, new parking new base amenities, etc. Probably one year build time if done on an expedited schedule and not considering the logistics of getting a big structure and parking lots put in in a town where putting up a shed can take two years to get approval. If they think they can put up a new parking structure and the nieghbors are going to be cool with it because of the community good, they don't understand the NIMBY attitude here. I like this outcome. Now they need to get this settled through mediation by Friday, which is the better long term fix.

  5. #380
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    the Low Sierra
    Posts
    17,818

  6. #381
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    50 miles E of Paradise
    Posts
    15,566
    From that, PC thinks FMV rent is between $226K and $1 million per year. Talisker thinks its between $11.4 and $14.8 million. No surprise, since PCMR claims their EBITDA is ~$27 million per yr and Talisker seems to think its $42-55 million. But as the judge points out below, Talisker is using lawyer-math for posturing

    Quote Originally Posted by Da Judge
    Talisker countered that the land in question is worth $11.4 million based on what Vail is now paying for it. According to Talisker attorney Howard Shapiro, Vail’s annual payment of $25 million to Talisker includes $13.6 million for Canyons Resort and $11.4 million for the 2,852 acres of ski terrain at PCMR.

    But the judge didn’t buy that reasoning.

    "That fails the eyeball test," he said. "They paid $25 million for the whole shootin’ match. ... The $11.4 million looks like a litigation-manufactured number."
    Good eye Judge. $11.4 per year ascribes 45% of the whole deal to the UPCM leases. NFW, especially when Vail values the property at $58 mill - that's a 5X multiplier.

    Seems to me the options on the table are:
    1. Powdr pays really high rent going forward - my WAG is Vail wants around $4million/year. That would reduce PC's annual EBITDA from $27 to ~$23 million.

    2. Powdr sez fuck you to Vail, removes lifts and develops a winter camp. If the camp can make >$22 mill per year, its a push between that and paying Vail $4 million in rent

    3. Powdr buys the leased property for $60+ million, i.e. a slight premium to what Vail sez is FMV. That means rewinding Vail's lease and settling out with the Talisker creditors, but it should be doable inside a BK chapter. The key will be to figure out who (Vail, Talisker creditors) get how much of the buyout proceeds.

    4. Powdr leases the base facilities, lifts, etc to Vail. Vail won't go for that - Talisker's math to justify the Hudge rent for the upper mountain in turn justifies a Hudger rent for the stuff Powdr owns/controls there.

    5. Powdr sells PCMR assets to Vail. Again, Talisker's math supporting the upper mountain rent bites Vail in the ass.

    6. Powdr is acquired by MTN

    So, I'm thinking #3 and #6 are the most likely conclusions

  7. #382
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Sandy, Utah
    Posts
    14,410
    not that this would ever happen, but could Vail realistically bag PCMR season and maybe do "cat skiing" on the PCMR terrain from Canyons? I havent looked at maps, etc. Just wondering is maybe they could do that to use the terrain, give the canyons guests something special until they can get their own base/lift/etc? I know...crazy idea...bash it if you want.

    I just can't imagine they can come up with some compromise? Their bond #'s are soooooo far apart its laughable even the HIGH end of PCMR's "offer" is way off still, and im sure they're looking for the LOWER end of their range obviously. Could PCMR even come close to making a million in profit on a Woodward style deal THIS season if Vail/Talisker says FU?

  8. #383
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Sandy by the front
    Posts
    2,345
    Quote Originally Posted by Skidog View Post
    not that this would ever happen, but could Vail realistically bag PCMR season and maybe do "cat skiing" on the PCMR terrain from Canyons? I havent looked at maps, etc. Just wondering is maybe they could do that to use the terrain, give the canyons guests something special until they can get their own base/lift/etc? I know...crazy idea...bash it if you want.

    I just can't imagine they can come up with some compromise? Their bond #'s are soooooo far apart its laughable even the HIGH end of PCMR's "offer" is way off still, and im sure they're looking for the LOWER end of their range obviously. Could PCMR even come close to making a million in profit on a Woodward style deal THIS season if Vail/Talisker says FU?

    Cat Skiing at PCMR, you are kidding? Here again without water not a whole lot of terrain available until later in the season.

    One number did stand out. If in fact the PCMR EBITDA is $27 million as claimed then the $25 million per year that Vail is paying to lease The Canyons is major suckage. I remember seeing somewhere in this thread several months ago what the daily skier visits are at both resorts and PCMR was significantly more, maybe twice as many as The Canyons.

  9. #384
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    6,041
    Quote Originally Posted by bigdude2468 View Post
    Cat Skiing at PCMR, you are kidding? Here again without water not a whole lot of terrain available until later in the season.

    One number did stand out. If in fact the PCMR EBITDA is $27 million as claimed then the $25 million per year that Vail is paying to lease The Canyons is major suckage. I remember seeing somewhere in this thread several months ago what the daily skier visits are at both resorts and PCMR was significantly more, maybe twice as many as The Canyons.
    PCMR is straight up lying or intentionally miscalculating it's EBITDA, or not including inflated "management fees" and "rent" for certain small tracts of land.

    Cumming has at least two ways of pulling (tens of?) millions of dollars out of the business each year. One is management fees. This is directly addressed in Vail's bond hearing arguement document as being way over industry norms, and is part of PCMR's EBITDA according to Vail, but not according to PC. PCMR basicly pays POWDR a fee for managing them, this goes to paying John Cumming (probably pretty massive) salary and the rest of corprate management, or some other way of paying out involving a tax dodge. The other is that Cumming owns 200+ acres of land at the base of PCMR, through park properties inc, which is leased to PCMR at an inflated rate, allowing him to pull millions out every year.

    So, if there is a difference in the EBITDA that Vail reports vs. PCMR, it is because Vail is a savvy operator and is not fooled by these tricks that are keeping the EBITDA artificially low.....and they have brought them to the judge's attention.

  10. #385
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Park City
    Posts
    1,857
    Quote Originally Posted by bigdude2468 View Post
    Cat Skiing at PCMR, you are kidding? Here again without water not a whole lot of terrain available until later in the season.

    One number did stand out. If in fact the PCMR EBITDA is $27 million as claimed then the $25 million per year that Vail is paying to lease The Canyons is major suckage. I remember seeing somewhere in this thread several months ago what the daily skier visits are at both resorts and PCMR was significantly more, maybe twice as many as The Canyons.
    That is also the crux of this dispute. Vail paid for two ski areas at the onset, and now has to win to not have the canyons deal be a drain for the next 50 years on their stock price. Wolf mountain bites another ski company. The only viable way they make their rent work is to take PCMR for free, and the Cummings don't need to do that.

    Finally, I don't know a lot about ski area management, but I don't see the PCMR terrain they own driving $20 mil. The only people who would stay would be dedicated racers content to sit on Peekaboo all day working on angulation and park rats. It takes them from being a legitimate resort to being a novelty area teaching kids to ski gates and do spin tricks.

  11. #386
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Sandy, Utah
    Posts
    14,410
    Quote Originally Posted by Damian Sanders View Post
    PCMR is straight up lying or intentionally miscalculating it's EBITDA, or not including inflated "management fees" and "rent" for certain small tracts of land.

    Cumming has at least two ways of pulling (tens of?) millions of dollars out of the business each year. One is management fees. This is directly addressed in Vail's bond hearing arguement document as being way over industry norms, and is part of PCMR's EBITDA according to Vail, but not according to PC. PCMR basicly pays POWDR a fee for managing them, this goes to paying John Cumming (probably pretty massive) salary and the rest of corprate management, or some other way of paying out involving a tax dodge. The other is that Cumming owns 200+ acres of land at the base of PCMR, through park properties inc, which is leased to PCMR at an inflated rate, allowing him to pull millions out every year.

    So, if there is a difference in the EBITDA that Vail reports vs. PCMR, it is because Vail is a savvy operator and is not fooled by these tricks that are keeping the EBITDA artificially low.....and they have brought them to the judge's attention.
    Thanks for this write up...couldnt figure out how PCMR was coming up with such drastically different #'s.

    I worked for 7 years for a forensic accounting firm (i was a sys admin), this is the kind of shit they uncover during their business valuations. How to find the money thats being diverted.

    I can't see any way PCMR comes out of this...

  12. #387
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    6,041
    Quote Originally Posted by Canada1 View Post
    That is also the crux of this dispute. Vail paid for two ski areas at the onset, and now has to win to not have the canyons deal be a drain for the next 50 years on their stock price. Wolf mountain bites another ski company. The only viable way they make their rent work is to take PCMR for free, and the Cummings don't need to do that.

    Finally, I don't know a lot about ski area management, but I don't see the PCMR terrain they own driving $20 mil. The only people who would stay would be dedicated racers content to sit on Peekaboo all day working on angulation and park rats. It takes them from being a legitimate resort to being a novelty area teaching kids to ski gates and do spin tricks.
    Vail wants a 7,300 acre, 2 million skier visits mega resort, 45 minutes away from a major airport. They think they can turn a profit on that, no matter the cost, and I'm pretty sure they are right.

  13. #388
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    50 miles E of Paradise
    Posts
    15,566
    Quote Originally Posted by Damian Sanders View Post
    PCMR is straight up lying or intentionally miscalculating it's EBITDA, or not including inflated "management fees" and "rent" for certain small tracts of land.

    Cumming has at least two ways of pulling (tens of?) millions of dollars out of the business each year. One is management fees. This is directly addressed in Vail's bond hearing arguement document as being way over industry norms, and is part of PCMR's EBITDA according to Vail, but not according to PC. PCMR basicly pays POWDR a fee for managing them, this goes to paying John Cumming (probably pretty massive) salary and the rest of corprate management, or some other way of paying out involving a tax dodge. The other is that Cumming owns 200+ acres of land at the base of PCMR, through park properties inc, which is leased to PCMR at an inflated rate, allowing him to pull millions out every year.

    So, if there is a difference in the EBITDA that Vail reports vs. PCMR, it is because Vail is a savvy operator and is not fooled by these tricks that are keeping the EBITDA artificially low.....and they have brought them to the judge's attention.
    $27 mill per year may be low, but not tens of millions low. First off, it's a really bad idea to lie to a judge who has very likely seen your financials. Second, there's a limit on deductability of management fees and other controlled group transactions. The charges have to be "reasonable and customary" or the IRS won't allow.

    Third, MTNs last annual report shows $32/skier day of EBITDA. Vail is considered a savvy operator no? So, IF PCMR pulls the same profit per skier day (highly unlikely if they are understating their profits with excessive fees) $27 million/$32= approx 850k skier days last year. Numbers I've seen bandied about here range from 800k to 1 million visits.

  14. #389
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Park City
    Posts
    1,857
    Quote Originally Posted by Damian Sanders View Post
    Vail wants a 7,300 acre, 2 million skier visits mega resort, 45 minutes away from a major airport. They think they can turn a profit on that, no matter the cost, and I'm pretty sure they are right.
    Have you skied the canyons?

  15. #390
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    6,041
    Quote Originally Posted by Canada1 View Post
    Have you skied the canyons?
    I didn't say it would be awesome. Breck and Vail get over 1.5M visits each, and are mostly flat.

  16. #391
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Park City
    Posts
    1,857
    Quote Originally Posted by Damian Sanders View Post
    I didn't say it would be awesome. Breck and Vail get over 1.5M visits each, and are mostly flat.
    Breck and Vail have good snow making, flat wide runs and the ability for their runs to follow the fall line. The canyons has none of these things. The only upside I see for them at the canyons is if they buy out a bunch of mansions to put the slopes and chairs to a configuration that makes sense. Of course the base does have room for development. The place has some huge obstacles to overcome. PCMR fits their model perfectly. Logistically, the place makes sense, but the last four developers that owned the place have created some bug hurdles.

  17. #392
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    In Your Wife
    Posts
    8,291
    Quote Originally Posted by Canada1 View Post
    Have you skied the canyons?
    The Canyons, despite having a perfectly mediocre lift layout, has a lot of fun terrain and great backcountry access, it has gotten the short of the stick snowfall wise for 3 years running though. In a big year with good coverage down to 7500-8000 feet on the PC side, it's a fun mountain. I enjoy it more than PCMR.

  18. #393
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Your Mom's House
    Posts
    8,299
    Quote Originally Posted by Canada1 View Post
    Breck and Vail have good snow making, flat wide runs and the ability for their runs to follow the fall line. The canyons has none of these things. The only upside I see for them at the canyons is if they buy out a bunch of mansions to put the slopes and chairs to a configuration that makes sense. Of course the base does have room for development. The place has some huge obstacles to overcome. PCMR fits their model perfectly. Logistically, the place makes sense, but the last four developers that owned the place have created some bug hurdles.
    I know nothing about Canyons and little about the PCMR debate, but I can say that the actual skiing is mostly irrelevant to Vail and Breck's business.

  19. #394
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    below the Broads Fork Twins
    Posts
    5,772
    It'll be Whistler Blackcomb without the mountain and the village. Prescient move by Vail.

  20. #395
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Park City
    Posts
    1,857
    Guessing they are making announcements to employees first thing this morning and then a press release by noon? I have not heard a word.

  21. #396
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    6,041
    I reviewed this situation with a friend of mine who works in commercial real estate. If there is a very high bond set, say over $100m, PCMR/Cumming could possibly borrow part of the money based on the projected profits of PCMR over the next couple years. They could them make up the rest from cash on hand. They wouldn't need the property as collateral, if I undestood correctly. But who knows.

  22. #397
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    6,041
    Quote Originally Posted by Canada1 View Post
    Guessing they are making announcements to employees first thing this morning and then a press release by noon? I have not heard a word.


    Wow, huh.............????
    Last edited by Damian Sanders; 09-02-2014 at 08:49 AM.

  23. #398
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah
    Posts
    188
    The latest Fox 13 article...

    http://fox13now.com/2014/09/02/media...eviction-case/

    Edit: That link's been updated and it sounds like they've asked for the bond hearing to be pushed until Friday.
    Last edited by PointOfRelease; 09-02-2014 at 04:57 PM.

  24. #399
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    below the Broads Fork Twins
    Posts
    5,772
    Gonna be another week of guessing.

    Park City bond ruling pushed to Friday
    Ski industry » Judge grants parties’ request to postpone Wednesday’s scheduled decision.
    http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/58...judge.html.csp

  25. #400
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Park City
    Posts
    1,857
    At this point I am out of ideas. Maybe seeking board approval from Vail for something, but I don't understand why else the extensions keep happening?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •