Peak Resorts - Preliminary Year end Results & Hunter Mountain Expansion

NELSBEERNELSBEER advanced
edited June 22 in NELSAP Forum Posts: 222
This evening Peak posted the following, looks like they are ready to grow in the right places...:
The editing stuff is all together just scroll below it for the meat of the article...

Peak Resorts Announces Two New Expansion Projects and Provides Preliminary Fiscal Year 2017 Results

Company Release - 6/21/2017 6:32 PM ET
  • Intends to apply for permits to add additional skiing terrain to Hunter Mountain and a zip tour to Hidden Valley
  • Expects to report record revenue of $120-$125 million for the year driven by growth in visitors, season pass sales and the acquisition of Hunter Mountain
  • Expects to report record EBITDA of approximately $26-$27 million despite poor seasonal weather conditions

WILDWOOD, Mo., June 21, 2017 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Peak Resorts Inc. (NASDAQ:SKIS), a leading owner and operator of high-quality individually branded ski resorts in the U.S. today announced that it intends to apply for permits for two organic revenue growth opportunities, and has reported preliminary financial results for the 2017 fiscal year.

Organic Growth Expansion Projects

Hunter Mountain Expansion
Peak intends to apply for construction permits at the company’s Hunter Mountain resort in Hunter, New York, to increase the resort’s skiable acreage by approximately 25-30%. The new area will feature a parking area and a detachable high speed chair lift.  The additional acreage will be built on the north facing slope of Hunter Mountain, between the Main Face and the West Side, and will be predominantly intermediate terrain.  The company’s goal is to complete the project in time for the 2018-2019 ski season. The expansion is expected to cost approximately $9 million and has the potential to generate $1.5 million to $2 million in incremental EBITDA per year.

Hidden Valley Zip Tour
Peak also intends to apply for a permit to construct a zip tour at its Hidden Valley resort in Wildwood, Missouri. This investment is aligned with the company’s goal of leveraging underutilized capacity in the spring, summer and fall to generate additional sales and diversify its revenue base. The company’s goal is to begin construction this fall and complete the project for use beginning in the fall of 2018. The project is expected to cost approximately $2.5 million and has the potential to generate $0.5 million to $1 million in incremental EBITDA per year.

EB-5 Capital Projects
The company is pleased to report that its EB-5-funded West Lake water project and Carinthia base ski lodge project at Mt. Snow are running within budget and on schedule for their completions prior to the 2017-18 and 2018-19 ski seasons, respectively. 

Preliminary Fiscal 2017 Results
Based on preliminary unaudited financial results, Peak expects to report record revenue and EBITDA for the year ended April 30, 2017. Revenue is expected to be approximately $120 million to $125 million, which, at the midpoint of this range, reflects an increase of 28% over fiscal 2016 revenue. EBITDA is expected to be approximately $26 to $27 million, which, at the midpoint, reflects an increase of 63% over fiscal 2016 EBITDA.

The company anticipates having over $30 million in operating cash on the balance sheet at year-end, and remains in full compliance with all debt covenants.  In addition, the company was able to pay off $10 million in debt during the third quarter of fiscal 2017.

Comments

  • mapnutmapnut expert
    edited June 22 Posts: 778
    "The additional acreage will be built on the north facing slope of Hunter Mountain, between the Main Face and the West Side, and will be predominantly intermediate terrain. "  Hard to picture where this could be. My guess is below the intersection of Way Out and Belt Parkway, more on the northwest face. Maybe 1000 vertical feet. Hunter needs more intermediate terrain, although this area does not look flat at all on the topo.
  • flbskiflbski intermediate
    Posts: 79
    The area they seem to be talking about at Hunter doesn't seem to be intermediate terrain unless you do more blasting than the Slutsky's ever did.
  • lotsoskiinglotsoskiing expert
    Posts: 665
    Can they go no further south of Hunter West (the old z-line)? I agree- the area between west and main area will take a lot of rock work. Definite need for intermediate terrain and to get crowds off main area.
  • NJSkiNJSki advanced
    Posts: 269

    Long overdue for Hunter to address the need for more intermediate terrain. I agree that it will not be as easy as just cutting trails. Looks like there will be a lot of excavation and blasting.

    That is one of the things I really dislike about Hunter. It is not a mountain that was made for skiing. They have had to sculpture it to make a ski are fit, and by doing this, they have created one of the least appealing (visually) ski areas. It just does not look like it belongs there.  

  • ski_itski_it expert
    edited September 2 Posts: 1,648
    ISNE-I Skied New England | NESAP-the New England Ski Area Project | SOSA-Saving Our Ski Areas - Location SW of Boston MA
  • lotsoskiinglotsoskiing expert
    Posts: 665
    Will be nice and much needed.

    What is the story behind the "Z line" or whatever the cut is that is beyond Hunter West?

  • newmannewman advanced
    Posts: 187
    The cut runs into state land
  • lotsoskiinglotsoskiing expert
    Posts: 665
    Was it an overly ambitious move by Hunter or cut for some other reason?
  • obienickobienick expert
    Posts: 852
    Bad survey IIRC.
  • flbskiflbski intermediate
    Posts: 79
    I skied the z cut with the ski school in the late 70's.  I heard they felt it was too steep to commercially develop.

  • z1000307470z1000307470 intermediate
    Posts: 84
    flbski said:

    I skied the z cut with the ski school in the late 70's.  I heard they felt it was too steep to commercially develop.


    My hearsay story is they cut the line in anticipation of a land swap. The land swap would have been10,000 acres elsewhere in the Park for a couple of hundred acres around the cut that would have allowed Hunter to connect with the other side of the cut where they owned more land. The Slutzkys had pissed off NYS quite a bit over the years and this was one more example and the land swap never happened. This was told to me by a long time Hunter patroller in the late 1980s. I was told similar stories about the land swap from other people. I do not know the accuracy of the story.
  • spk27alumnispk27alumni intermediate
    Posts: 38

    A 'bad survey' story went around regarding how Trail 44 (Westway) ended up so wide. Never heard a mention of a bad survey having anything to do with what we called Y Lift line. 

    I had a chance to ski it back in the late '90s, in the Spring, after a good natural snow year. The brush had been cleared in recent summers, so it was getting pretty good poaching traffic, and had great conditions. I don't recall it being any steeper than Clair's or 44.

    I had heard about the State being miffed about that cut, when it was done back in the early Seventies. I never knew there had been a failed land swap involved. As for land beyond that cut, on a chairlift ride around '76 or '77, Izzy told me that they owned land on Rusk Mountain. That is the mountain on the other side of Taylor Hollow, on the opposite side of the current Westside base area. He expressed the hope that someday lifts would go up it.  

  • z1000307470z1000307470 intermediate
    Posts: 84

    A 'bad survey' story went around regarding how Trail 44 (Westway) ended up so wide. Never heard a mention of a bad survey having anything to do with what we called Y Lift line. 

    I had a chance to ski it back in the late '90s, in the Spring, after a good natural snow year. The brush had been cleared in recent summers, so it was getting pretty good poaching traffic, and had great conditions. I don't recall it being any steeper than Clair's or 44.

    I had heard about the State being miffed about that cut, when it was done back in the early Seventies. I never knew there had been a failed land swap involved. As for land beyond that cut, on a chairlift ride around '76 or '77, Izzy told me that they owned land on Rusk Mountain. That is the mountain on the other side of Taylor Hollow, on the opposite side of the current Westside base area. He expressed the hope that someday lifts would go up it.  

    That was the land, which they owned, that they were trying to reach with the cut. I am not sure if they own the land where the cut was made. I think they needed the acreage to connect with Rusk. That was what they were going to get for the 10k acres. The terrain in Taylor Hollow is steep.

    I also skied the cut a few times and I agree, it is no steeper than Clair's or 44.
  • ciscokidciscokid expert
    edited September 8 Posts: 1,358

    A 'bad survey' story went around regarding how Trail 44 (Westway) ended up so wide. Never heard a mention of a bad survey having anything to do with what we called Y Lift line. 

    I had a chance to ski it back in the late '90s, in the Spring, after a good natural snow year. The brush had been cleared in recent summers, so it was getting pretty good poaching traffic, and had great conditions. I don't recall it being any steeper than Clair's or 44.

    I had heard about the State being miffed about that cut, when it was done back in the early Seventies. I never knew there had been a failed land swap involved. As for land beyond that cut, on a chairlift ride around '76 or '77, Izzy told me that they owned land on Rusk Mountain. That is the mountain on the other side of Taylor Hollow, on the opposite side of the current Westside base area. He
    expressed the hope that someday lifts would go up it.  


    Ask Dr Lane (Bearpen, PSB)about some bad surveying

    Used to love Huntah, my very very first high speed quad ride '88
  • ADKskierADKskier advanced
    Posts: 225
    I would like to see the proposed expansion. I know that they will be moving forward with it in the next few years. 25-30% is is a good bit of development of a resort with only 58 trails and 250 acres. 

    ~Rich~
    ~Rich~
  • ciscokidciscokid expert
    Posts: 1,358
    Between state owned Bell and Huntah

    expansions it could keep the hoardes down, yea right. Wish I could get to Platty
  • ADKskierADKskier advanced
    Posts: 225
    I would prefer to see hunter develop upwards rather than sideways. Hunter mountain the summit gets a good bit of snow for the Southern Tier. 
    ~Rich~
Sign In or Register to comment.