What Can the New Owners do to Fix K This Season

[KingsFourMan]

Only 2 distant holes of the Killington golf course are down by the Wobbly. The vast majority of it is close to the Grand / Trail Creek / Wiffletree and Pinnacle condos which would make a perfect core location in between all of those properties. A 2 stage gondola from the heart of the village to the bottom of Snowshed and then up to the top of Snowshed would be great. Beaver Creek has a gondola up it's beginner slope

I've never played the Killington course because I've never heard anyone say anything good about it. I've played GMN many times and as someone else said, it's a gem.

I completely agree that this would be the best possible location for the village. It's actually brilliant.

that sounds great in theory but beginners need to learn how to ride a chairlift and not get spoiled by a gondola. the snowshed quad is a perfect beginner lift.

It's wide enough to have both.

[newpylong1]

If they decide to install this rumored "transfer" gondola or anything along those lines Snowshed absolutely will retain a traditional chairlift. There is too much rider volume to move entirely towards a signature but lower capacity enclosed lift there.

[Bubba]

That idea does have some merit. However a condo behind Inn of 6 Mtns and Wobbly is going to be worth far less than a condo in the Snowshed parking lot. Plus the sunk costs in permits and design spent already. Who is going to reimburse GG for that very large loss?

Work the cost into the deal. It’s relatively minor if you believe all the hype on estimated total value of the village over the next 20 years.

Ok, let's see. The highest price condo on the access road is probably King's Pine, fairly new, upper 700's recent sale. The Village is expecting to sell for far more, a 3 bedroom will likely ask at least 1.7 million. (Or more, based on Base Camp Bear, 1.9 earlier price to 3M for 4 BR currently) If a brand spanking new Kings Pine would sell for 1M, then that's 700k per condo difference between Wobbly location and Snowshed. Times the number of condos over 20 years. 800? 800 times 700k is $560 million. Just exactly how are you going to "work that into the deal"? Short version: It isn't minor.

Feel free to use your numbers/estimate.

LOL...does King's Pine have a gondola to take people to the mountain? Do they have shops and restaurants to walk to? Do they have a ski home trail? Sorry, that's not even close to a comparison. As for sunk costs, most of the sunk costs belong to SP Land and Powdr and those obviously got worked into the deal between SP and GG.

As unlikely to happen as rogman says this is (and I obviously acknowledge) that doesn't make a land swap and village relocation a bad idea.

[Mister Moose]

That idea does have some merit. However a condo behind Inn of 6 Mtns and Wobbly is going to be worth far less than a condo in the Snowshed parking lot. Plus the sunk costs in permits and design spent already. Who is going to reimburse GG for that very large loss?

Work the cost into the deal. It’s relatively minor if you believe all the hype on estimated total value of the village over the next 20 years.

Ok, let's see. The highest price condo on the access road is probably King's Pine, fairly new, upper 700's recent sale. The Village is expecting to sell for far more, a 3 bedroom will likely ask at least 1.7 million. (Or more, based on Base Camp Bear, 1.9 earlier price to 3M for 4 BR currently) If a brand spanking new Kings Pine would sell for 1M, then that's 700k per condo difference between Wobbly location and Snowshed. Times the number of condos over 20 years. 800? 800 times 700k is $560 million. Just exactly how are you going to "work that into the deal"? Short version: It isn't minor.

Feel free to use your numbers/estimate.

LOL...does King's Pine have a gondola to take people to the mountain? Do they have shops and restaurants to walk to? Do they have a ski home trail? Sorry, that's not even close to a comparison. As for sunk costs, most of the sunk costs belong to SP Land and Powdr and those obviously got worked into the deal between SP and GG.

As unlikely to happen as rogman says this is (and I obviously acknowledge) that doesn't make a land swap and village relocation a bad idea.

You seem to think that with enough lipstick a condo 1/2-3/4 mile further from the skiing and zero chance of a ski home trail will be worth the same as one in the Snowshed parking lot. I disagree.

Consider Glazebrook. Worth less than Kings Pine, right next to restaurants/ski shops and backwoods ski home right now, no waiting.

GG has spent no money so far on the current location? I didn't know that.

[Bubba]

That idea does have some merit. However a condo behind Inn of 6 Mtns and Wobbly is going to be worth far less than a condo in the Snowshed parking lot. Plus the sunk costs in permits and design spent already. Who is going to reimburse GG for that very large loss?

Work the cost into the deal. It’s relatively minor if you believe all the hype on estimated total value of the village over the next 20 years.

Ok, let's see. The highest price condo on the access road is probably King's Pine, fairly new, upper 700's recent sale. The Village is expecting to sell for far more, a 3 bedroom will likely ask at least 1.7 million. (Or more, based on Base Camp Bear, 1.9 earlier price to 3M for 4 BR currently) If a brand spanking new Kings Pine would sell for 1M, then that's 700k per condo difference between Wobbly location and Snowshed. Times the number of condos over 20 years. 800? 800 times 700k is $560 million. Just exactly how are you going to "work that into the deal"? Short version: It isn't minor.

Feel free to use your numbers/estimate.

LOL...does King's Pine have a gondola to take people to the mountain? Do they have shops and restaurants to walk to? Do they have a ski home trail? Sorry, that's not even close to a comparison. As for sunk costs, most of the sunk costs belong to SP Land and Powdr and those obviously got worked into the deal between SP and GG.

As unlikely to happen as rogman says this is (and I obviously acknowledge) that doesn't make a land swap and village relocation a bad idea.

You seem to think that with enough lipstick a condo a mile further from the skiing and zero chance of a ski home trail will be worth the same as one in the Snowshed parking lot. I disagree.

Consider Glazebrook. Worth less than Kings Pine, right next to restaurants/ski shops and backwoods ski home right now, no waiting.

GG has spent no money so far on the current location? I didn't know that.

Ignoring the obvious? Ignoring specific language of the post? Nah....

Neither Glazebrook nor King's Pine will ever be part of a pedestrian village with multiple shops and restaurants. Neither will ever have a lift and/or gondola to take them to Snowshed or beyond. Neither has a realistic possibility of having a ski home trail or trails. Put a village on the golf course and you could have all of that.

Again, as for sunk costs, the word I used was "most". You can look up the meaning on your own time.

Now, just to add to your confusion, the additional land provided by the golf course could provide space for more condos as well as additional facilities such as a water park and allow for the current stuff at Snowshed to be relocated and expanded.

Again, all of this is more than highly unlikely to happen and future Killington skiers will have to deal with remote parking and the other downsides of a village at Snowshed and Ramshead but the unlikeliness does not take away from the utility of making the land swap successful for the resort, the town and Great Gulf.

[Mister Moose]

<snip>
Again, all of this is more than highly unlikely to happen and future Killington skiers will have to deal with remote parking and the other downsides of a village at Snowshed and Ramshead but the unlikeliness does not take away from the utility of making the land swap successful for the resort, the town and Great Gulf.

If this was true, they would do it. Which leaves it isn't true.

Gondola or not, lipstick or not, a condo 3/4 of a mile away with an extra lift to ride (That likely won't run weekdays) is not going to be as valuable as the equivalent condo walking village shops et al adjacent to the resort. And just exactly how are you going to deal with the elevation changes and East Mtn Rd crossing for your ski home trail?

The better use of the land? Home run.

[Skid Mark]

I would guess we will hear about near and long term capital improvements about a month before the World Cup. This, along with village updates from Great Gulf, will generate a lot of interest for prospective buyers.

[RustyK]

Some of the things killington is doing while biking with Hollywood today.
Bottom of the Poma new house going up. Guessing for the club.
Lots of new snowmaking everywhere. Kinda impressed.

[rogman]

So the recent heavy investment in fixed guns should primarily reduce labor requirements, and they’ll perhaps require a tad less air. The conclusion being that the major snow making limitations of the last few years have been manpower. But that’s also based on incomplete information as to what else is being done (if anything). However, it is the new owner’s answer to the question posed by this thread. Obviously a good sign that they want to hit the ground running.

[newpylong1]

It will be a lot more than a tad. The Impulses use 1/4 the air of a K gun. 1/3 of a Rat or SR7. Bulletpoint #3 below is now front and center to be addressed in future years.

3 main issues:

• Terrain served by only portable gear (labor intensive and snowmaking windows are lost shifting gear around): partially solved by new portable Low-E gear on sleds meaning a snowmobile, SxS or cat can easily move 10 of them at once with just 1-2 people. Ultimately solved by fixed installation.

• Higher air consumption due to air hog fixed and portable gear. Ultimately solved by Low-E fixed and portable gear.

• Water Capacity. Now that they are going more all in on Low-E, they are going to be water starved quicker. Not sure what the long term plan is, but it will require a drastic increase in water pumping and distribution changes.

Other less but tangible issue is equipment commonality. When your workforce has a massive change year over year it's important to have commonality. The more they can standardize the better.

[jimmywilson69]

it will be interesting to see if they really commit to using the new commitment. It often seems they default to the air hogs when they really want to lay it down.

as Newpy said having consistency across the system does make it more labor efficient. The next issues is moving more water and keeping it from blowing out all over the place...

[Mister Moose]

It will be a lot more than a tad. The Impulses use 1/4 the air of a K gun. 1/3 of a Rat or SR7. Bulletpoint #3 below is now front and center to be addressed in future years.

3 main issues:

• Terrain served by only portable gear (labor intensive and snowmaking windows are lost shifting gear around): partially solved by new portable Low-E gear on sleds meaning a snowmobile, SxS or cat can easily move 10 of them at once with just 1-2 people. Ultimately solved by fixed installation.

• Higher air consumption due to air hog fixed and portable gear. Ultimately solved by Low-E fixed and portable gear.

• Water Capacity. Now that they are going more all in on Low-E, they are going to be water starved quicker. Not sure what the long term plan is, but it will require a drastic increase in water pumping and distribution changes.

Other less but tangible issue is equipment commonality. When your workforce has a massive change year over year it's important to have commonality. The more they can standardize the better.

It's easy to say replace all the guns and take advantage of current technology. Since that equipment is expensive, you will want to recover the expense over many seasons. This is true for all the snowmaking guns that were previously the next best thing, such as the Snow Logics. You just can't replace all the hardware every few years. So you replace a percentage. Snowmaking is still an evolving technology, so you know large scale replacement is going to be an ongoing expense. You would want to expect to have a fraction of your hardware replaced each year or so, not the whole system. And then you have the 'all your eggs in one basket' risk of too much commonality. You also benefit from the different characteristics of a diverse fleet, rather than be a one trick pony. Yes, that is at the price of more training due to the lack of uniformity of operation of the gun. It's a trade off.

Killington has been deferring upgrades under the shadow of The Village for decades. In this case, it's likely no pumping upgrade will happen at Snowshed until the plan is finalized, approved, funded and hard dates set, not the someday dates we've been seeing. (What wouldn't require waiting for the Village? The Ottaquachee pumps and lines. And where does the lead investor have a ski house?)

I'd say there's a good chance your grandchildren will see a K3000 spewing at an early season high wet bulb 'first to open' snowmaking push. Nothing has replaced that yet. It's the B52 of snow guns.

Here's a question- Are there worthwhile improvements to the K3000 crude tripod? As is, they are light and can stack. They can be loaded into a cargo bed. What about a custom trailer that has racks for them? Different legs/stand that resist backwards thrust better?

[snoloco]

The Snowshed pumphouse has to be moved for The Village. So that's probably when it gets upgraded. They're not going to update the old one only to rip it out a couple years later. I don't think the resort ever said they were deferring other upgrades because of The Village. It was more likely because the resort was for sale that those things were deferred.

[Mister Moose]

The Snowshed pumphouse has to be moved for The Village. So that's probably when it gets upgraded. They're not going to update the old one only to rip it out a couple years later. I don't think the resort ever said they were deferring other upgrades because of The Village. It was more likely because the resort was for sale that those things were deferred.

<cough> Snowshed quad. Ramshead 6pack. Snowshed lodge. Ramshead lodge. Access road. The list is long.

[newpylong1]

It will be a lot more than a tad. The Impulses use 1/4 the air of a K gun. 1/3 of a Rat or SR7. Bulletpoint #3 below is now front and center to be addressed in future years.

3 main issues:

• Terrain served by only portable gear (labor intensive and snowmaking windows are lost shifting gear around): partially solved by new portable Low-E gear on sleds meaning a snowmobile, SxS or cat can easily move 10 of them at once with just 1-2 people. Ultimately solved by fixed installation.

• Higher air consumption due to air hog fixed and portable gear. Ultimately solved by Low-E fixed and portable gear.

• Water Capacity. Now that they are going more all in on Low-E, they are going to be water starved quicker. Not sure what the long term plan is, but it will require a drastic increase in water pumping and distribution changes.

Other less but tangible issue is equipment commonality. When your workforce has a massive change year over year it's important to have commonality. The more they can standardize the better.

It's easy to say replace all the guns and take advantage of current technology. Since that equipment is expensive, you will want to recover the expense over many seasons. This is true for all the snowmaking guns that were previously the next best thing, such as the Snow Logics. You just can't replace all the hardware every few years. So you replace a percentage. Snowmaking is still an evolving technology, so you know large scale replacement is going to be an ongoing expense. You would want to expect to have a fraction of your hardware replaced each year or so, not the whole system. And then you have the 'all your eggs in one basket' risk of too much commonality. You also benefit from the different characteristics of a diverse fleet, rather than be a one trick pony. Yes, that is at the price of more training due to the lack of uniformity of operation of the gun. It's a trade off.

Killington has been deferring upgrades under the shadow of The Village for decades. In this case, it's likely no pumping upgrade will happen at Snowshed until the plan is finalized, approved, funded and hard dates set, not the someday dates we've been seeing. (What wouldn't require waiting for the Village? The Ottaquachee pumps and lines. And where does the lead investor have a ski house?)

I'd say there's a good chance your grandchildren will see a K3000 spewing at an early season high wet bulb 'first to open' snowmaking push. Nothing has replaced that yet. It's the B52 of snow guns.

Here's a question- Are there worthwhile improvements to the K3000 crude tripod? As is, they are light and can stack. They can be loaded into a cargo bed. What about a custom trailer that has racks for them? Different legs/stand that resist backwards thrust better?

Good points but the counterargument is the Impulse was top of the line 10 years ago, and is still top of the line and go to for most air/water replacements 10 years later. The heads and nozzles are all interchangeable. The valves and extrusions, and cranks are all interchangeable. If HKD comes out with something game changing in another 5-10 years then in all likelihood you just lower your tower and swap out the heads. They build a lot of backwards compatibility into their products because they realize a wholesale replacement top to bottom is not a good ROI.

Let's say Killington has 400 guns to replace. The current price of an Impulse 20 foot tower is $4500. That's $1.8M to swap them all out at once. That's not counting any volume discount you know they got. Do the math on how much diesel they are going to be saving. Labor is also not cheap, it's a big line item in the P&L. That is honestly a really good ROI even if they make another wholesale replacement in another 10 years.

The all eggs in one basket does not have to be the case. They likely will retain their fleet of K guns and rats. Those can and likely should be used when the wet bulb is over 24 and you need to lay it down. Most other resorts have traded those in with Efficiency Vermont, but Killington does not and likely won't do so. So for 95% of snowmaking conditions they can use the HKDs and reap the benefits.

They have reduced the volume of water withdrawn from the Ottaquachee intake ever since Woodward went online but there is nothing to say they cannot increase this as long as the flow levels are maintained. The better option is likely to increase the capacity at Bear where they have more room and more access to water (Woodward's pipeline dumps here). That system also can serve far more acreage than the Route 4 pumps can. This can happen regardless of what happens in the basin. I do wonder if the electrical supply continues to be an issue on the east side preventing an investment into that pumphouse.