Epic pass trying to be more affordable
8 users
2k+ views
Here is an article discussing the discount for skiers under the age of 30. As a senior skier, I'm not happy. But I guess they figure that I'm already "hooked", but they've got to do something to get younger crowd hooked.
https://www.summitdaily.com/news/vail-resorts-epic-pass-prices-high-discount/?fbclid=IwdGRjcAQUhrJjbGNrBBSFHmV4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHvqS_UpDJCgqIEV0_UYYuYsTrZ36sVJ1TIwVEoHuRz8nrbWRuWeR9cGjjMIu_aem_rzaFA0v8UfudvYw5YZjcUw
They've adopted a model with reasonable season pass prices and ridiculous daily lift ticket prices that manages their risk better in regards to repeat visitors. However, that model has no room for new people that don't ski regularly. Ummm, bowling for $20 or skiing for $500 (with rental)? This is why their visitors are dropping. As people age out, there isn't an avenue for new people coming in. If a newbie does give it a shot, they will drop $100 at an indy or even $35 for a night instead of $350 at Vail. Their model was successful for them at first, because it reorganized an existing population of skiers, but it's going to continually be a problem in the future.
I saw a similar type thing happen with volleyball tournaments where the prices increased as the population aged and could afford it, but then no new people wanted to come out and get beat for those prices, and the tournament system in my area collapsed. You maximize your profits optimizing for the existing population, but then give up future growth by pricing out new people. Most people that aren't sure if they want to commit to the sport, but want to give it a try, don't buy a season pass for $1,000, and they don't drop $500 just to try something new that will probably kind of suck for that first day.
itdoesntmatter wrote:
Here is an article discussing the discount for skiers under the age of 30. As a senior skier, I'm not happy. But I guess they figure that I'm already "hooked", but they've got to do something to get younger crowd hooked.
https://www.summitdaily.com/news/vail-resorts-epic-pass-prices-high-discount/?fbclid=IwdGRjcAQUhrJjbGNrBBSFHmV4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHvqS_UpDJCgqIEV0_UYYuYsTrZ36sVJ1TIwVEoHuRz8nrbWRuWeR9cGjjMIu_aem_rzaFA0v8UfudvYw5YZjcUw
For the Epic Northeast region, which means OH, PA, Hunter in NY, VT, and NH, it's hard to say that an Epic Northeast pass options are expensive. A NE Value pass includes 10 days at Stowe, and has holiday black out dates. The NE Midweek pass includes 5 days (M-F, non-peak) at Stowe, and unlimited M-F at the other Epic resorts in the "northeast."
$497: Epic Northeast Value $662 Adult, $497 Sr (65-79)
Hunter, VT non-peak, Stowe 10 days, NH, PA, OH, Mt Brighton in MI
$376: Epic Northeast Midweek Sr (65-79) - $497 Adult
Mon-Fri, including Peak
Hunter, VT non-peak, Stowe 5 days M-F, NH, PA, OH, Mt Brighton in MI
Note that there are 1-location Epic options in the midwest. Used to be an Epic Ohio pass, which seems to have disappeared for 2026-27.
The daily lift tickets in the northeast region do not seem out of line with the regional competition. Fair to say that national headlines related to Vail lift ticket prices rarely mention resorts in the midwest, NY, or New England.
For context, the Mountain Collective pass is $669 for adults for 2026-27. Full Epic for an adult is $1089 for 2026-27. Ikon will probably be around $1400.
then yew gotta git there and stay somewheres...feedndrink...tix are the least $$$ yer gonna drop if yew are on tour...lifelong self-sponsored semi-pro...yew!
I remember paying $90 for a Vail lift ticket back in 2002. That means lift ticket prices have far outpaced inflation. You can fly across the country for the same price you pay to ride the lift. You might say there's a lot more expenses than the lift, because you got grooming, ski patrol, and other such things, but airlines have way more infrastructure and personnel than that, but can still give much lower relative prices for what you get. Is it price gouging and someone's pocketing a crazy amount of money? The only way I can figure how that wouldn't be the case is that everyone skis on the same day. Basically, you have to pay extreme prices, because most of the time the resorts are relatively empty. On those few days where everyone goes at the same time, high prices are a way to keep it not too crowded and pay for operations on empty days. The problem is that raising the prices only makes it worse, because no one wants to pay $350 for a crappy day of skiing. By the time someone is willing to pay those prices, it's got to be a fabulous day, and everyone is up there on that day making it even more crowded requiring even higher prices.
The pass is one way to try to deal with this. You pay without knowing what kind of days you'll get. The income for the resort in that model is similar no matter how many bluebird powder days they get. Therefore, it manages their risk. Like I said before though, that model keeps out new people. Instead, the solution has to focus more on crappy days of skiing. They need to use empty days to allow people to get into the sport for much less money. A beginner doesn't care about powder. It only makes it worse for them. This is basically dynamic pricing, but they need to do something more extreme than what they've been doing. It's easy to jack up prices for holidays and weekends, but somehow they need to jack up prices for powder days as well, though it would take some creativity to figure out how to do that. Maybe one method would be to have prices increase substantially as tickets sell. If you want to be sure to ski, you have to buy well ahead of time, and you'll get a great price. They do that a little bit, but not enough to make it worth buying ahead of time and risk going to the resort that didn't get snow. That's basically what airlines do. As the plane gets full the prices go way up.
A lot of resorts are already doing dynamic pricing. Wintergreen uses it for lift tickets purchased off its website -- much cheaper if you buy in advance, and bumps up in price every 10 or 15 tickets sold until it gets to full price, or sold out (they started capping).
Stephen wrote:
I remember paying $90 for a Vail lift ticket back in 2002. That means lift ticket prices have far outpaced inflation. You can fly across the country for the same price you pay to ride the lift. You might say there's a lot more expenses than the lift, because you got grooming, ski patrol, and other such things, but airlines have way more infrastructure and personnel than that, but can still give much lower relative prices for what you get. Is it price gouging and someone's pocketing a crazy amount of money? The only way I can figure how that wouldn't be the case is that everyone skis on the same day. Basically, you have to pay extreme prices, because most of the time the resorts are relatively empty. On those few days where everyone goes at the same time, high prices are a way to keep it not too crowded and pay for operations on empty days. The problem is that raising the prices only makes it worse, because no one wants to pay $350 for a crappy day of skiing. By the time someone is willing to pay those prices, it's got to be a fabulous day, and everyone is up there on that day making it even more crowded requiring even higher prices.
The pass is one way to try to deal with this. You pay without knowing what kind of days you'll get. The income for the resort in that model is similar no matter how many bluebird powder days they get. Therefore, it manages their risk. Like I said before though, that model keeps out new people. Instead, the solution has to focus more on crappy days of skiing. They need to use empty days to allow people to get into the sport for much less money. A beginner doesn't care about powder. It only makes it worse for them. This is basically dynamic pricing, but they need to do something more extreme than what they've been doing. It's easy to jack up prices for holidays and weekends, but somehow they need to jack up prices for powder days as well, though it would take some creativity to figure out how to do that. Maybe one method would be to have prices increase substantially as tickets sell. If you want to be sure to ski, you have to buy well ahead of time, and you'll get a great price. They do that a little bit, but not enough to make it worth buying ahead of time and risk going to the resort that didn't get snow. That's basically what airlines do. As the plane gets full the prices go way up.
Vail is a bar/pub conglomerate attached to ski hills.
I know people that spend more on food and drink than it cost them to ski. That's where the money is at. Sure they will take your money for a pass too.
itdoesntmatter wrote:
Here is an article discussing the discount for skiers under the age of 30. As a senior skier, I'm not happy. But I guess they figure that I'm already "hooked", but they've got to do something to get younger crowd hooked.
https://www.summitdaily.com/news/vail-resorts-epic-pass-prices-high-discount/?fbclid=IwdGRjcAQUhrJjbGNrBBSFHmV4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHvqS_UpDJCgqIEV0_UYYuYsTrZ36sVJ1TIwVEoHuRz8nrbWRuWeR9cGjjMIu_aem_rzaFA0v8UfudvYw5YZjcUw
Indy Pass is doing this already with the Learn-to-Turn program. It's an insanely good deal for three days of lift tickets, rentals, and lessons. I know people love those Epic mountains, but there are much better deals to be had for skiing.
wgo wrote:
Dynamic pricing is still not very friendly to never-evers. I wonder if there is a way to offer discounted deals to get people invested with the hope that those folks convert to season pass purchasers. I am sure Vail and the big companies have data that indicates at what point people are likely to buy a season pass. Suppose their data shows that the likelihood of buying a season pass increases dramatically after 4 visits. Could Vail do something to make it easier for potential new skiers to reach the 4 visit threshold?
That's awesome. I just looked that up and the 3 days of lessons would make this pass worthwhile by itself.
Indy Pass is doing this already with the Learn-to-Turn program. It's an insanely good deal for three days of lift tickets, rentals, and lessons. I know people love those Epic mountains, but there are much better deals to be had for skiing.
wgo wrote:
Dynamic pricing is still not very friendly to never-evers. I wonder if there is a way to offer discounted deals to get people invested with the hope that those folks convert to season pass purchasers. I am sure Vail and the big companies have data that indicates at what point people are likely to buy a season pass. Suppose their data shows that the likelihood of buying a season pass increases dramatically after 4 visits. Could Vail do something to make it easier for potential new skiers to reach the 4 visit threshold?
natehurst wrote:
Indy Pass is doing this already with the Learn-to-Turn program. It's an insanely good deal for three days of lift tickets, rentals, and lessons. I know people love those Epic mountains, but there are much better deals to be had for skiing.
Worth noting that unlike the general Indy Passes, Learn-to-Turn is available at any time. Not all Indy locations are part of that program but enough to make a difference once more people find out about it. Indy pass holders in 2025-26 got two discount codes to give away that reduced the price even more.
Epic pass sales decreasing:
I guess the pass model isn't that great after all. Kind of like insurance where you don't have to pay up front for an accident, but then the insurance company will make you pay down the line by raising rates. You pay one way or another. Now the customer is making Epic pay for that bad winter by not renewing the pass the next winter. If this is true, then the pass model is only insurance for that one year. If the snow is bad, the resorts still get their money, but that means the customer didn't get their money's worth. So, the customer decides not to take that risk again. With such high lift ticket prices, I can only assume these people are leaving the sport for that year. If this ends up being financially difficult for the company, I would have to argue that reasonable lift ticket prices are the answer.
As with any large entity, the general logic with Vail / Epic is that all the overhead associated with dealing with per-visit lift tickets needs to be eliminated. Anything you can sell that works electronically and is pre-paid is preferred over anything else. I don't generally have a problem with technology and the acceleration we are all experiencing. It is the resultant experience and service you observe when you visit most of these resorts. Not to mention the lack of investment going on with many of them. None of that is at the level it should be. As for the easing on the epic pass prices -- that's great when you've been overpriced and simultaneously not invested and providing the best service you can. But, overall, it should achieve the desired effect: obviate the bad press they've been getting.
Bottom line: Vail's introductory presentation at the returning employees event last year -2025 started with the gist of "We've made mistakes." / "We get it." I'm not sure simply acknowledging it matters; maybe if you improve and invest afterward? Season pass prices go up and down, it's expected (even in the 90s a single pass to a single resort in the mid-A could cost 450-500). The deal today can look great to many, but it's the experience, service, and investment that you (don't) get that ends up mattering, at least to me.
The data they've accumulated shows that, for example, for a typical skier in a given region buying a NE Value Pass basically puts the load on only a handful of ski areas, basically. Yes, eager skiers will travel to New England to take advantage of the rest of the terrain, (Not sure how many New Englanders will travel south to 7S... heh, but perhaps!) and that all costs money in travel and lodging completely apart from the pass investment. Mostly they are banking on that not happening. You are advertised a pass that costs, perhaps a little too much, with the seller knowing that you won't load up other regions. So this is what we are all dealing with. It's no wonder service and investment are kept to bare minimums at many of the places. (Admittedly, not all - if you happen to be a top-producing destination resort, of course - foolish to not invest.)
Fair to say that New England and the mid-Atlantic are very different when it comes to the level of competition and emphasis on snowmaking compared to the Rockies and Tahoe. What a GM in different regions has to focus on has different priorities. In recent years Northeast Epic has had to compete with the growing Indy pass, and now the Snow Pass. Those are targeted at people who are likely to get on the slopes less than 10 days during a season, with prices in the $300-400 range. Meaning they aren't aspiring to take a 1-week ski vacation out west, at least not in the near future.
The Triple Play pass started up in 2025-26. It is good for 3 days overall for lift access. Must go to at least two ski hills. At $200, that's quite a deal for someone who lives in NYC, NJ, Philadelphia.
The situation has changed since VR bought Peak Resorts in 2019 and moved into the midwest and mid-Atlantic in a big way. Peak bought the Snowtime trio in 2018. VR bought the Pittsburgh trio in 2021. From what I've observed in the southeast (TN, NC, VA), major capital improvement projects such as replacing a lift or a serious overhaul of aging snowmaking infrastructure seem to take 5-10 years starting from the creation of a viable plan to get necessary permits, with a timeline to actual completion that's hard to predict until the last stages.
Actually, I don't really have a lot of complaints about snowmaking / quality of made snow around these parts. Historically, areas around here continually rely on maker snow, and the corresponding snowmaking infrastructures reveal that. HV usually has great made snow.
And Seven Springs just got a new Blitzen lift, within a few years of new ownership. Not all bad.
I'm mostly talking about attention to detail and service at these areas. I realize that after you acquire a good amount of properties prioritization must be done. But there should be a base-level of customer service and "vibe" for lack of a better word - (rental availability / demo availability / special on-mtn events, etc.). I also realize you have to have price models that suit variable skiing habits to entice as many people as possible to buy-in. But you need to make good on the all-around experience for customers. If you can't, you're being a foolish speculator who has purchased too much.
I would guess that "attention to detail and service" depends a great deal on staffing. I assume there has been some shift under VR compared to a decade ago. For the former Snowtime trio, shifting from Peak and then VR probably didn't help.
My experience of how staffing impacts vibe is between Massanutten and Wintergreen.
Massanutten Resort is less than 30 minutes from Harrisonburg, a city that has a large state university. The town of Elkton is less than 15 minutes away. There are plenty of long time lifties, including several who don't ski/board at all. Winter staff can work other jobs on resort during the other three seasons. I know of ski patrollers who become bike patrollers or mountain bike instructors. In addition, Mnut became 100% employee owned via an ESOP several years ago. So not only local ownership, every employee on salary has an ownership stake.
Wintergreen is more isolated than Mnut. It's a 45-60 minute drive from a bigger town or city. There is a larger percentage of customer-facing jobs done during the ski season by J-1 folks than at Massanutten.
Wintergreen staff get the job done. But for a day skier, the place doesn't feel as "friendly" as Mnut. Midweek during midweek, most of the lifties are not that likely to smile and say "hello" when people are loading.
I get it. Well that sounds like an ideal situation at Massanutten.
No, the staffing at the resorts in the Laurels amounts to many of the same faces, even under VR. A fraction bailed under VR ownership, but still, today HV has a really good ski and ride school. So does 7S. Pay them a little more. And beyond that, pay the folks who do F&B and general customer service a little more, too. They work just as diligently as patrollers or instructors (former instructor here...)
