Print

Print


My two minute/ two cent synposis:

1.  The local guys who started this suit are, frankly, 100% SOL.  This suit 
would never have been launched in a 'loser-pays' tort system.  One of the 
oldest, most well-established contract principles in the common law system 
is called "privity of contract"  That means that a contract between two 
parties cannot bind a third party who was never a party to the contract. 
POWDR is not an original party and is off the hook.  The LEGAL solution 
would have been the freeholders caliming against ASC for not holding up 
their end of the contract when they sold the resort (ie: selling the resort 
subject to preserving the lifetime passes).  A result, ASC arguably received 
a higher price from POWDR than they would have if the money-losing freehold 
passes were amortized into the sale price by being transferred on an intact 
basis.  That higher price is simply the annuitized cost of the free passes.

2.  POWDR can, and should, nip the free passes in the bud. NOW.  It's a huge 
revenue loss even when spread over a short time, especially since the vast 
majority of those skiers likely spend not a wit on peripherals, and simply 
add to the crowds.

3.  What the list forgets sometimes is that "local color" detracts, not 
enhances from the typical tourist experience.  Bums are usually not all that 
fun when they mix with typical families, even if the "bum" in question may 
have the word "ski" as a prefix.  Realistically, for every friendly, 
colourful bum, there are ten times the number of silent/condescending loners 
skiing out there at the resort.  I've met plenty of those.

4. The tedious "Yeah, but they talk up the resort" is a complete 
non-starter.  If you meet a ski bum taking up the resort, chances are you're 
already there.  For most folks, the guy taking up the resort is the 
co-worker guy at the watercooler talking up his once-a-year ski trip where 
the crowds were thin, the grooming was good, and the bum quotient was low.

4.  Ski resorts are, after all, a business.  That means you give the 
customers YOU CARE MORE ABOUT what they want.  Those are the MOST profitable 
customers.  Those customers want clean lodging, good grooming, good service, 
and reasonable crowds.  The freeholders actually detract from alll fot those 
('cept the lodging). They sure don't add to it.

5.  Additonally, speaking of giving the customers what they want, I 
personally might WANT to shop at Wallmart for free.  That doesn't mean I CAN 
shop at Walmart for free, even if I stamp my feet a lot at the door.  I may 
not like the fact that Walmart charges me money, but its not always my 
choice whether or not to shop there.  Walmart can simply refuse my business 
if they want to refuse it.  Should I sue Walmart if I can't shop there for 
free?  For full price?  Is it discrimination if I want to pay full price and 
Walmart won't let me shop there? In case you're wondering, tyhe answert to 
all of those questions is a resounding, unequivocal NO. I'll still buy my 
shoes there if they are cheaper.

6.  Stevens Pass has to weigh the loss of Jerm's "revenue"  (the season pass 
he never bought, and maybe never had anyway) versus one typical family of 
four who skied there for, say, a single four-day wekend, buying lessons and 
rental at full freight, and who liked the resort because it was "really 
uncrowded."  Not much of a loss there.  My discussions with upper management 
there a few years back led me to believe they are managing that place very 
well.   True, Harbour Resorts didn't have  freakin' clue how to manage 
Schweitzer and Mission Ridge, but they have Stevens down pat.

7.  If you're a ski bum and you've just lost your pass, ski somewhere 
cheaper or hike it.  If you're an non-resident owner of a $750,000.00 condo 
and have skied for free for twenty years, well hey, I'm not sure I feel like 
going to the wall for you on this one.

8. Lastly, remember that your jury is going to be mostly locals who likely 
have a vested interest in the resort moreso than in your free pass.  Like, 
say, having extended family members who depend on resort profitability for 
winter employment.

two cents only,
Leigh 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
SkiVt-L is brought to you by the University of Vermont.

To unsubscribe, visit http://list.uvm.edu/archives/skivt-l.html