2026.09.24 | GP | Consumer | Vail Resorts Activist Case

Primary:

MTN

Associated:

Alterra Mountain Company

Intrawest U.S. Holdings Inc.

Pacific Group Resorts, Inc.

Aspen Skiing Company, LLC

Viewpoint:

Competitor

Moderator: Katherine Spurlock (KS)

| Sep 23, 2026 | 34 Min Read

Christian Knapp (CK), Former Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer - Aspen Skiing Company

SU MMARY

Overview

The discussion centers around Vail Resorts and the potential impact of activist investor Oasis Management's increased stake in the company. The expert, with extensive experience in the ski industry, provides insights into the strategic and operational challenges Vail faces. Oasis Management has nominated new directors, suggesting that fresh perspectives could enhance Vail's strategy and long-term value. The conversation explores whether these board changes could drive growth and improve returns for Vail Resorts.

Key Insights

The expert believes that while board changes could bring new perspectives, Vail Resorts is a large entity and changes will not occur overnight. The company has strategic initiatives in place, but execution remains a challenge. There is a focus on improving customer experience through dynamic pricing, better food and beverage offerings, and infrastructure investments. However, community engagement and addressing local challenges are critical for success. The expert notes that Vail's pass model has proven resilient, even during challenging seasons, but there is pressure from competitors like Ikon and Indy Pass.

Competitive Landscape

Company/Product

Positive Aspects

Negative Aspects

Vail Resorts

Ikon Pass

Strong pass model, strategic initiatives in place, large market share

Execution challenges, community pushback, competition from Ikon and others

Broad partner network, momentum among destination skiers

Competes directly with Vail's offerings

Indy Pass

Affordable alternative, growing demand

Smaller scale, limited access compared to major competitors

Quantitative Insights

Financial Metric

Current Performance

Expert's View

Net Income

$128 to $162 million (revised guidance)

Achievable with strategic initiatives

Resort-reported EBITDA

$735 to $755 million

Reflects realistic expectations given current challenges

Pass Sales

Declined 10%

Expected to improve but not fully recover in the short term

Conclusion

The expert suggests that while Vail Resorts faces significant challenges, particularly in execution and community relations, the company's strategic initiatives and pass model provide a strong foundation. The influence of activist investors and potential board changes could bring valuable perspectives, but patience is required for substantial change. The competitive landscape remains dynamic, with Vail needing to innovate and adapt to maintain its market position.

KS: Hello, everyone. My name is Katherine Spurlock, and I'm a moderator with Guidepoint. I want to welcome everyone to our call today, Vail Resorts: Can Activist Pressure Drive Growth and Unlock Value with Christian Knapp? If you have any questions for our advisor throughout the call, please email ask@guidepoint.com and I'll work your questions into our discussion. Your questions will be anonymous. Christian, I just want to make sure you will not speak about any material non-public information, security prices, your investment holdings, or provide any investment recommendations during the teleconference. Do you confirm?

CK: Confirmed.

KS: All right. Thank you and thank you for being with us today. To start, can you please give us a little background on yourself, your experience in the ski industry, and then we can begin our call. Thank you.

CK: Thank you, Katherine. Appreciate you hosting this panel. My background, I've been a career ski industry marketing executive, currently working for Pacific Group Resorts based in Park City, Utah. We're a multi-resort holding company with properties in British Columbia, the Mid-Atlantic, Colorado, and Vermont. And so it's a good broad perspective on the resort markets in those areas as well as my past experience of 9 years as the chief marketing officer and vice president at Aspen Skiing Company where I was heavily involved in both the Aspen Skiing Company brand and its position in the marketplace as well as the development of the Ikon Pass and Mountain Collective Pass. And then prior to that, I spent 13 years working in various marketing positions with Vail Resorts located in Colorado at Keystone, Breckenridge, Vail, and Beaver Creek Resorts through that time.

KS: All right. Well, that's helpful. Let's get started. Recently, Oasis Management increased its stake in Vail Resorts from

1. 2% to 7.4%, according to SEC filings. And earlier in September, Oasis nominated 4 directors and argued that fresh

operating experience could sharpen Vail's strategy and enhance long-term value. Vail says its priorities remain unchanged and can drive sustainable growth. Given these dynamics, what are your thoughts? Can board changes improve Vail's growth and returns? Thank you.

CK: Thank you, Katherine. As you and I were talking before the call started, Oasis actually took their position up 2 days ago. They acquired additional shares. I believe now there are approximately $373 million invested at 2.6 million shares in Vail Resorts. So as you said, a 7.4% stake, which is pretty substantial. And obviously, they're coming at this

with an activist proxy type point of view and have, as widely reported, requested some changes to the board makeup to improve oversight and they believe that operating discipline and urgency of execution could be improved at Vail. So it's a strong move on their part. They don't believe have much presence in the ski industry or other asset holdings in the ski world. So it is a bit of a mystery as to why they're focused on this particular company at this particular time, but nonetheless they are now a major shareholder and they are advancing their board nominees Bob Chapek, Ashton Hudson, Bryce Roberts and Picabo Street. So they've laid out a plan. They see some issues with Vail and how they're managing the properties and are going to try to impart some change through these board changes.

KS: Thank you. And given your experience in the industry, what strategic or operating gaps could new directors address that the current board has not? What comes to mind?

CK: It's a tough one, right? I don't believe that they are going, even if they are to get to 4 new board members put in place in the not too distant future, Vail Resorts is a huge company and it is not going to change overnight. I think there are problems with execution. I don't think it's for a lack of strategic initiative. I think what Rob Katz has outlined since his return to the chief operating officer seat is smart. I think that they're focusing on flexible, more dynamic lift ticket pricing. They're talking about improving their food and beverage operations and offerings across the portfolio. They're focused on their rental products, private lesson concierge, better digital engagement, and continuing to invest substantially in their lift infrastructure, snowmaking investment, and all the operations that are essentially table stakes at this point in our industry, right, to preserve your ability to make snow with the climate changing is more and more important every year. And obviously, if you have large scale operations such as Vail does, you need to have modern lift equipment that can move people at a rapid rate and continue to upgrade lifts from 2-, 6-, and 8-packs and gondolas and they're making those investments. That's clear. They are reinvesting in the properties. I live in Park City, Utah. I'm a pass holder here, Epic pass holder, and ski and ride Park City Mountain quite a lot, and there is a lot of pushback here. There's a lot of angst in the community. Some of that stems from the patrol strike 2 seasons ago. Some of that stems from the crowding and also you have some activist kind of locals such as Matthew Prince who's the principal at Cloudflare, lives here in town, has made overtures to purchase Park City Mountain from Vail and cites that they haven't made the upgrades fast enough. I think you could argue, though, living here and seeing what they're doing, they've spent considerable resources at the Canyons side of the property, upgrading gondolas, giant new 1,800-slot parking structure going in, coming online this season, another new access gondola. But where they haven't improved is on the Park City side, and there's been obstacles with the community there to get those lifts upgraded and I think that's a bigger challenge in our industry. There's some key governance questions around how these communities operate, how you get stuff through. And that maybe is a point that Vail and its managers at some of these resorts could improve on, because you have to have good community expertise to move those initiatives forward, or you're going to be held accountable as the council and some of these folks here in Park City are doing.

KS: Thank you. You mentioned Vail had some problems with execution, like the patrols strike, crowding, not making upgrades fast enough due in part to regulatory obstacles, I believe. How long might it take to get those issues resolved? What can the company do to resolve those issues and or how might an activist do it better?

CK: It is a big challenge. You know, these community, the ski resorts are embedded in these communities. They're symbiotic, and so there's varying levels of angst in some of the communities they operate in, right? I do not believe that the issues are systemic across their entire portfolio. They have many successful resort operations. You don't hear nearly as much challenges and impediments to changing out lifts, improving the customer experience, egress. At Vail, I think they've made investments at some of their other big properties in Colorado. I think where you feel and where you see some of these challenges and where the community is really pushing back are places like Park City. Whistler Blackcomb, I believe, has had a lot more community vocal angst as to how they're operating the resort there. But I'd say by and large, their operations are strong. Vail is a good operator. And the other one I do hear, you know, there's some East Coast properties that they operate, particularly in New Hampshire, and some other kind of second-tier

destinations that they may have not invested as much in, and they have shrunk the ski seasons on either end, and the community, the pass holders are used to a certain season length at that particular resort, and they've not been able to deliver that at some of their properties. So it's not across the entire portfolio, I don't believe. And I do think there's these flare-ups, these pain points, and you get these folks that think that they know how to run a resort. Somebody like Matthew Prince here in Park City is certainly a great tech leader and has been incredibly successful with his companies. But to assume that he could step in, purchase the resort, and run it better is not necessarily path forward that I believe would... it could work and there are ways that it could happen successfully, but it also presents challenges and I've... we've seen various management ownership stakes in different companies across the industry, some with more success than others.

KS: Thank you. In June of this year, Vail said its spring pass units declined 10% and sales dollars fell 5%, although Vail said its revised marketing approach produced early gains. Oasis argues that better pricing, marketing, and guest experience could increase hospitality asset utilization. Given this, how quickly could pricing, marketing, and guest experience improvements lift pass sales and utilization? Thank you.

CK: I think there's a lot to unpack on that question. The ski industry is coming off an undeniably bad winter, particularly in the West. That has a meaningful impact. There is a hangover in this industry. I see it at our properties. I've seen it throughout my career. When you have a really challenging season and folks, pass holders, loyal guests, don't get enough value out of their pass product or their vacation, they tend to change behavior a bit. Not the vast majority of folks will renew their passes. Obviously, the projected passes are down heading into the season. I believe they will see some improvement in the year-over-year sales when they report their next earnings. But it won't be up by any stretch. It'll still be down, but I do believe it will improve. I think consumers and skiers have short memories. But coming off of last season, people felt burned. They didn't use their passes as much as they typically would. They didn't have as good of experience. If they did spend time at the resorts out west, there wasn't as much terrain open, so there was more crowding issues because of that, and the customer experience was compromised. That was not the case in the East Coast in a lot of areas, but particularly the eastern seaboard where the conditions were much better and actually good by many standards for those particular areas. So it's not universal. There were areas of strength, but the pass model has proven effective for Vail. They are arguably the best at it. They have nailed advanced commitment better than anyone else in this industry and a lot of folks are following them in how they're moving sales to spring to have resiliency in the case of a down year and you saw that manifest in last year's results that were modestly down. And I think in a previous world, a decade ago plus, if you had a season like you did out west, it would have been much more cataclysmically bad for the properties, and because of the pass model, because of the advanced commitment and the loyalty that the industry has built up over time, we were able to weather the storm, so to speak, and be ready for another season. And I think the Super El Nino prediction this winter helps in certain pockets in the West. It's just a prediction, but people do feel like there's a structural change happening in the weather. We're feeling it out west right now with more monsoons, more precipitation, and a significant change in the weather heading into the fall, so hopefully that turns into a more productive winter. But that's kind of broad stroke. I think it was a tough, very challenging year, but this industry is resilient and it could rebound very quickly.

KS: Thank you. Given that, let's talk about that some more. Vail lowered its fiscal year 26 outlook to $128 to $162 million of net income and $735 to $755 of resort-reported EBITDA after historically weak conditions continued through March and April. Given this, how realistic is the revised guidance and where is the greatest remaining risk and or opportunity? Thank you.

CK: I think the guidance is an achievable level for Vail, based on the trajectory of the pass sales that they have discussed so far and some of the other initiatives that they are putting in place. And I didn't mention it in the last comment, the marketing. They are doing more marketing specific to each property, and I think it's going to take time to rebuild those brands. I think that was certainly one of the things that Rob Katz has noted in his return was that some

of the marketing needed to be back focused on the resort brands themselves and they are executing that at some of their key destination resorts, particularly in Colorado, here in Utah, and further west. And so I think they are making the moves to improve their economics this coming season. They have announced pricing heading into the season, which obviously got some headlines as people realize that they have pushed their peak rate up again, but that's a cost of doing business these days. And quite frankly, very few people pay those peak rates. The most notable rate being $392 walk-up 1-day lift ticket that was announced that will be at Beaver Creek. That is an astronomic number for a lot of folks to hear in the industry. Very few people pay that. But Vail has basically sent a signal that there are many ways to purchase the season pass in advance, even right now today, buy Epic Day tickets in advance, and commit upfront to get a significant discount off of that. So moving folks into those advanced commitment products, like we said, addressing some of the pricing concerns and with dynamic pricing and making improvements to the overall customer experience, I think will have a meaningful impact. But I don't... is it going to have a massive uptick on revenue this coming season? I don't believe that's the case. I think that it is going to take more than 1 season to right this ship, so to speak. But their guidance is still in line with what's achievable this year if we have a return to an average to above- average snow year. I believe that strongly.

KS: Thank you. Oasis argues that Vail's 42 resort portfolio is undervalued and that its hospitality assets could be more fully utilized. Separately, as you mentioned earlier in the call, Matthew Prince has advocated an asset-light model and offered to invest $500 million in the Park City Mountain Resort. Given this, could asset sales or an asset-light model unlock value? What do you think of this point of view? Thank you.

CK: I don't believe that an asset-light approach is the right path forward for Vail Resorts. There are certainly resorts in the portfolio on the edges that may not be as accretive to the overall portfolio. But the strength of Epic and their loyalty and their advanced commitment program is their pass network, right? Those 42 resorts plus their partner resorts are critical to maintaining that network, that ecosystem. And you could argue that they've probably lost a bit of share to Ikon over the last several years. And I think that's why you've seen a slowdown in their market penetration on their season passes. You also have products like Indy Pass and Mountain Collective, which are much smaller but more affordable alternatives that benefit customers as well that are looking for variety and going to less large-scale, more independent resorts. So they are competing effectively in these two large ecosystems. But if they start selling off assets and going to an asset-light approach, they potentially lose their strategic position. Because I mean, granted, if you sold the asset, if you sold Park City to Matthew Prince, you could immediately take the $500 million or what he's pledged to purchase the property and pay down debt or repurchase shares or do whatever you want with those dollars to improve their balance sheet. But you could also set up a long-term deal to accept Epic Pass at Park City. However, those deals wouldn't be in perpetuity. It would have a timeline and you would potentially lose control of that incredibly important strategic asset. Park City is their only property Vail owns and operates in the state of Utah. Utah is one of the key ski markets out west. So I don't believe that they are going to be motivated. I believe that what Rob has been saying that they are not interested in selling Park City is probably accurate. I don't think it's a strategic advantage for them to move the asset. However, as I said, I think there are properties on the edges in some of their markets that are being undermanaged and may not be that beneficial to the ecosystem, but I think they have to maintain certain properties and certain markets to keep those skiers and snowboarders engaged in their home cities with those passes or else they could potentially lose more share to the other products.

KS: Thank you. That's helpful. Vail said industry visitation in the Rockies declined approximately 24% after historically adverse weather versus the previous non-pandemic low of 8% in 2012. Given this, are weaker skier visits and pass sales weather-driven or structural? You touched on it earlier in the call, but let's talk about it some more. Thank you.

CK: Weather was undeniably the largest immediate factor for the results of last season. You cannot overcome the decline almost 15% down, skier visitation down in the Rockies. Ski school, dining, retail fell less than that. So they were able to capture more yield per skier than they were on the actual skier days, which is a positive. But it's just weather,

we are a weather-driven business. But as I said before, the pass model proved its value. The fact that third quarter visitation only fell 15% while lift revenue declined 5% is because of that advanced revenue insulation that they have provided to their property and others in the industry have followed suit. The more concerning signal, I think, is the future commitment, as we're talking about with pass units down approximately 10% on their last report. That's concerning to them, and I think a poor operating season like we had does affect subsequent purchase behavior and we're seeing that happen right now. And so I think if people aren't willing to commit as much to those advanced products and passes then their options are less, with as I mentioned, with those high price of lift tickets at the window, the walk-up rates, or even online. It just takes away people's ability to be spontaneous and do last-minute trips when the pricing is so exorbitant and counterproductive to just showing up or deciding to do a last-minute vacation decision if you haven't pre-committed to a pass or a ticket pass. So that's a tension right now. And Vail has said they're going to address that with some dynamic pricing. They addressed it a bit with their 30-day window for a heavier discount on advanced purchase online if you buy more than 30 days out. They're addressing it a bit with their ski with a friend coupons that they've improved and added more value to that are attached to the Epic Pass. It's a huge ecosystem. There's a lot of season pass holders that have those 8 to 10, 50% off lift tickets that are out there and can be transferred to a friend or family member. So they're addressing, they're doing the right moves to try to bolster this upcoming season. It is incredibly hard to rebound immediately until there is a more consistent snowpack this coming winter in the key markets in the West. There's going to be some challenges to get those customers to come.

KS: Thank you. So is it your sense that... Normal snowfall will be enough to restore visitation or must Vail also address affordability, customer acquisition, and the guest experience?

CK: I think they, as I said, I think they are making the right moves to address some of these things. I personally don't think that continuing to raise the price of those window rates, those peak rates, is helping their cause. I think no matter how few people pay those peak rates, they're what gets the headline. And it's a signal that this is an exclusive, expensive sport for folks. So that's a challenge, you know, but I do believe, you know, I think it's highly unlikely in this industry, when you look at the scale and breadth of North America, right? There's, you know, that we're going to have consistent, universal great snow and conditions across all of North America; that is just not a reality in any season, you know, with very few exceptions in history.

KS: Thank you.

CK: But because Vail has such a large market share of skier visits in Colorado, here in Utah, in California, in British Columbia, and the Northwest, if those areas do have a rebound to an average or above average snowpack and conditions, you will see people come back. You will see pass visitation go back up, right? You've still got almost the same number of... 10% down year over year in terms of advanced commitments. So you still got a huge number of people that own the pass. Last year, those people just skied less. And if there is a return to normal, then you'll see those people increase their days used on their passes, and that will have flow through to those other lines of business, could be rentals, could be lessons, could be food and beverage purchases. And you have to have people on the mountains to get those per-cap spends across your resorts. So I do think that you can't guarantee that snow. And the Super El Nino year is not necessarily going to be universal in how each property, each region receives snow. Thank you.

KS: As discussed, pass units declined 10%, sales dollars fell 5%, and days sold decreased 8%. However, the company said renewing pass holders and higher value unlimited products outperformed with no evidence of customers trading down. Given this, what do current trends imply for renewals and pricing power? How much might dynamic prices or other levers that you discussed earlier in the call impact sales dollars and pass sales? Thanks.

CK: Those levers, without a broad scale reduction in their lift ticket pricing, people still have to look at those advanced commitment products, whether that's an Epic Day product or one of their pass products. One of the things that they

did do, Vail did announce this year, was a significant 20% discount for ages 13 to 30, which I believe was directionally sensible because it addresses basically the life cycle issue. Instead of broadly lowering price. There was another move where they could have made the decision to just take all of their lead rate lift tickets down by that same 20% number, but that would have had a significant impact on their margin, a significant impact on their overall revenue. So they've decided to focus in on that younger age demographic that is more challenged with affordability right now in our country. And so this 20% discount off of those pass products is meaningful. And so I think they avoided the blanket discounting, which obviously risks training existing customers to wait and maybe not do an advanced commitment. And then they focused on a demographic that is susceptible to pricing challenge and address that. So I'm certainly not privy to their penetration and how they were able to move those units for the younger folks, but I do believe that that 13 to 30 demo that they're targeting gets more new people into the sport, keeps people in the sport, that ultimately become huge lifetime value customers for Vail Resorts in the broader industry. So I think they've made some smart decisions. Yet to see on the dynamic pricing. I think they piloted it a little bit at some of their properties last winter where they're flexing pricing at the windows based on conditions, day of week, time of year, particular resorts. And so I think with AI modeling and everything else that's available now, they can move quicker in terms of how they price and structure those tickets to avoid blanket discounting and keep their overall lift ticket revenues intact.

KS: Thank you. Vail said third-party data indicates its Spring Pass sales outperformed the broader industry, although management acknowledged that peer data is incomplete. It also said its US lift ticket visitation declined less than the rest of the industry. Given this, and you touched on earlier on the call, is Epic losing share to Ikon, Mountain Collective, Indy Pass, or Independence? And what can it take to regain share and how long might it take?

CK: You know, I do believe Epic is losing share a little bit. I think a portion of their decline in units over the last several years is a market shift to some of the other products. I think what happened this past season is some of it is certainly related to the poor season and people trading down or opting not to renew at the same level as they did in the past. I think the public information that's out there is somewhat insufficient to definitively conclude that Epic is losing material share to one competitor. Ikon certainly has momentum among some destination-oriented skiers, high- frequency skiers. I think they've got a pretty interesting mix of owned and partner resorts. They have a much broader list of partner resorts than Vail does across lots of different markets and globally. And so I think by doing more of a partner-heavy approach, Ikon has been able to move fast and add very strategic partners that are iconic resorts across the world, right, and out west as well. So they've put together a great network. And I think... Indy Pass is certainly up. They have talked publicly about that they continue to see incredible demand for their product, albeit it's a much smaller, more affordable alternative and only gives customers 2 days of access at each of the properties that it represents, but they're now north of almost 300 properties available across the globe. And granted, they are not necessarily the A-list properties that Vail and Alterra have in their portfolios and on their products, but the price point is much more attainable in an economic climate like we're experiencing now that does benefit customers looking for variety, customers seeking more independent resort character alternatives to the 2 large ecosystems. So I think there are... it's still small in the scheme of things, but I think there is more pressure from the competition, which is going to force Vail to look at partners and to continue to innovate around their products to compete with these others.

KS: Thank you. Let's talk about that some more. Vail said its Epic Friend tickets at a 50% discount increased benefit ticket visitation 10%, while 30% off advanced tickets drove a 65% increase in tickets sold more than 20 days out without material cannibalization. Given this, can they broaden its customer base without weakening pass economics or relying on discounts? You just mentioned that, but let's talk about it some more. Thank you.

CK: Yeah, no, I think that's a good signal that those moves made an impact. And I think it's partially why you see them continuing to push pricing up on their peak rate in resort lift tickets. Because all of those discount products that you just mentioned, those 50% off friends and family vouchers and some of these other products are all built on using that

lead rate ticket. So if the lead rate at Park City on a day in February is $350, $360 and I have a 50% off lift ticket, you can do the math. It's still a very high-yielding ticket product for Vail because of those price points. And so I think that they're successfully pushing out more discounts, using the friend networks and the family networks through those tickets to get more people, younger people, and price-sensitive guests to consider getting access to one of those tickets and trying a day on the slopes. However, it is still a pretty expensive proposition. But ultimately, Vail needs to preserve the value of the Epic Pass for the committed skiers. That is a challenge and a tension that they're going to have to address and figure out how to successfully get some of these price-sensitive guests into their fold without... again, without diminishing the value of their Epic products and their advanced commitment products. And so that's through the Epic Day Pass, beginner bundles, the friend tickets, some of these regional passes that they've structured and targeting those advanced purchases for anyone willing to commit more than 30 days out.

KS: Thank you. Oasis identified food and beverage host community partnerships and year-round programming as opportunities to deepen customer engagement. Vail's $234 million to $239 million total capital plans includes technology investment across gear, ski school and dining. Given this, could food and beverage, community engagement and year-round programs drive customer acquisition, retention, and frequency? And at what cost? Thank you. What's the opportunity here?

CK: I think better food is necessary because it really has a value perception issue. It damages the entire resort experience. Very few, if anybody, chooses a resort based on the food and beverage offerings on that mountain. However, it is a very important part of the customer experience and you are likely, especially destination guests, to go and eat on the mountain and experience one of the cafeterias or one of their sit-down restaurants, depending on what they have on offer at each of their properties. So I think improving the food and beverage to support satisfaction, increased spend and retention can help keep customers in the fold. I think dependable quality, I think reasonable value—I'm stressing reasonable because I don't think anyone expects it to be super affordable and cheap. Eating on the mountain is a privilege. It's akin to going to a stadium where there's a captive audience. And so nobody expects the pricing to be that of a more general spot. But you should feel quality, though. And if you're paying $20, $25 for a hamburger and your lunch is $30 to $40 per person, it should be of a quality that makes you comfortable and proud of that purchase. And quite frankly, I think they've lost their way in some of that. I think that they could refocus on the quality, make sure the value is there. They've got to have those high quality volume staples, but they've also got to improve some of the experiences. And I think one of the big trends over the last several years is more and more people going to the Alps, especially from the East Coast where it's easier to access. And I think a lot of why people choose the Alps is because the lift tickets are much more affordable, and now you can use your Epic Pass or Ikon Pass there and you get this very different experience. You get these small mom-and-pop owned European restaurants all around the mountains and that experience in those restaurants is really special and different. And I think people really enjoy that experience when they do spend time in the Alps, and I think we could curate that more here in North America. I think we've focused on large-scale cafeterias, moving people through as fast as you can. But people are looking for nourishment on the mountain. They're looking for unique experiences. And so I think Vail is going to deploy more resources against some of these initiatives. Hopefully they can capture more folks in their restaurants on the mountains and ultimately create better satisfaction which is going to lead towards more loyalty long-term.

KS: Thank you. Oasis says Vail should deepen its connections with guests and host communities through stronger partnerships and expanded year-round programming. What are your thoughts? Is there an opportunity here and does Vail's centralized operating model make it harder to respond to local guests, employees, and host communities?

CK: I think to answer that right off the bat, I do believe, you know, that they are refocusing on their management at the various properties to engage locally. And I think they've brought on more people to help with those negotiations because it is a very complex relationship with the community. You know, you have to think about there's housing where you have to house your staff. So you've got employee housing that is often in the city or in the county that the

resort's located in. You have transportation, you have to work with the community on moving skiers and snowboarders from various hubs around to the mountains as well as your employee base. There's permitting issues, there's local events, there's advocacy, there's the employee experience, and then there's ultimately the guest experience, right, and how that translates across these different. So I believe, you know, community engagement must be embedded in local operating decisions and not treated only as a corporate effort or corporate philanthropy. I think Vail does a great job with its Epic Promise and pushing money into the right places into these communities, but it does come from a corporate perspective, you know, and that's one way that they have tried to engage with the communities. But being embedded locally is super important and I think that's something that they need to refocus on, in my opinion. But because these are complex and you see it rear up, as I said earlier in the call, you know, when the Park City Patrol went on strike, that had a major impact. The customer experience delivery had an impact on the local community; it was a visible dissatisfaction with the management that reared up during a peak time that impacted the overall perception. And you know, if you don't watch those things closely and you aren't ahead of it and negotiating and making sure that you're delivering, you can have an adverse impact. So I think that that community engagement is critical.

KS: Thank you. Given your position in marketing, I have a question related to Meta's new Muse agent. Meta's new Muse agent can develop personalized plans and book travel, while AI search tools increasingly allow travelers to build itineraries and compare options within the search interface. Given this, could AI search and travel agents such as Muse weaken Vail's direct customer relationships, increase customer acquisition costs, or make it easier to acquire guests and convert them into pass holders? Any thoughts there? Thanks.

CK: Well, one of the things about the ski industry is that, you know, in most cases, the resorts in Vail, in this case, control the product distribution, right? So you have, for the most part, unless you're doing a prepackaged wholesale package through a tour operator, you are going to buy the lift ticket component either on your own or online or in advance. And Vail and most ski resorts are typically the only sellers of lessons. They're obviously the only sellers of food and beverage on the mountain, and they have the largest majority share of the rental fleet as well in their respective markets. So skiing is somewhat insulated from third-party distribution. You know, there is a need to transact through the resort destination you're traveling to in order to access the products and services on the mountain that you plan to use. So I don't believe AI and some of these AI agents can disrupt that component of it. And so I don't think there'll be margin. I don't think we'll be losing margins in the industry because of that. However, I think that people will plan their travel differently. They will use these AI tools. I believe Muse is now the number 1 app in the App Store in its first few weeks on the market. You know, what I've heard so far is that it's very effective in helping people do things, act as an assistant, and be able to do transactions and help plan travel; that is only going to accelerate and improve over time. I think resorts will use these tools, customers will use these tools, but ultimately, they're going to have to purchase the access products and through that resort operator. There's a little more choice with hotel and air and all those other components, but we are still a physical industry that you actually have to get out into the world to; you can't use AI to go skiing.

KS: Thank you. And what are your thoughts on Vail's management, Katz, and their ability to execute in the current environment? Thank you.

CK: I think Rob understands the advanced commitment model better than anyone in this industry, right? He was the one that kind of spearheaded Epic Pass, which set off the advanced commitment. He has helped the resiliency, you know, and so I think him coming back to the fold, I think some of his comments in the last 8 to 10 months since he's been on board, he's correctly identified that the guest experience needs improvement. He's focused on customer acquisition again. As we talked about before, the resort-specific brand marketing efforts that I'm seeing from the destination properties, I think, is the right move there. He's also stated that he's going to focus on modernization of their digital marketing efforts, using influencers, using more modern tactics to reach the next generation of customers.

So I think it's in process. It's a turnaround. It's not going to happen overnight. I think you're seeing some results, as we talked about with the 50% off Epic Friends tickets, the 30-day out advanced commitment products, some of these other initiatives. The guest experience stuff that they recently announced is going to take longer. So I think ultimately the measure of Rob and the executive team is going to be on can they retain pass holders? Can they generate new customers? Can they make meaningful improvements to the guest satisfaction, capture more revenue, and then return to the shareholders? I think that's still to be determined, but I do believe Rob is capable and he's got a management team that's capable of continuing to move this strategy forward.

KS: So given this, how do you expect the dispute or the issue between Vail and Oasis and the broader activist pressure to play out? Any thoughts there?

CK: Yeah, I think Oasis will probably get at least 2 seats given their stake in the company. I think that they are pushing to make some changes and to bring some different perspectives onto the board. I think that's probably a good thing. Can those board members make immediate difference in how the company operates? It's a big company. It's not technology. Things don't happen as quickly as they do in some other industries. So I think there's going to have to be a level of patience. But clearly, the board slate that they're proposing could change some of the perspectives, right? They've got... I think Bob Chapek obviously comes from a deep Disney background. I think he certainly brings chops to experience, customer experience, pricing, hospitality. Disney scale is different, however, and definitely not as directly comparable to mountain resorts. The Picabo Street nomination is interesting. She's obviously an ex-athlete. She's a ski person. But ultimately, each of these directors, if they are appointed, are going to have to be judged on how well they can govern and what their contributions to the board are going to be. I think having a broad slate of board members that can provide more and more push on Katz and everybody else could be good for the company.

KS: All right. Well, thank you. We are out of time. This has been most informative. And as a reminder to our audience, there will be a replay and a transcript following this call. Thanks so much and have a wonderful day. Thank you for watching.

DISCLAIMER: The statements or opinions expressed today are those of the Advisor and not Guidepoint, who disclaims all liability for the content provided. The Advisor may not disclose material nonpublic or confidential information or any information that would cause the Advisor to breach any duty or obligations. Guidepoint is not a registered investment advisor and the information provided is not intended to constitute investment advice.