Indy Pass gets bought!

Chuckstah

Abrams was on Indy, and dropped off. Another big one in Canada, can't remember the name. I'd think if Jay drops off they will upgrade Burke to a full partner as a replacement, but who knows the financials.... could be over saturated with redemptions around these parts.

riverc0il

Magic is already out of Indy reservations for Saturday. I get the business reasons behind that decision.

But, that said, what's the point of having an Indy pass when the place you want to use it is out of reservations? That really slants the calculus towards a real season pass.

I was leaning towards using a Mad Card at MRG, any ways. But I was curious enough about Magic to take a look.

Chuckstah

Early word, supposed to be confirmed tomorrow, 23-24 pass will be $279 for renewal basic plus a $10 fee for delivery of the new card. Also, no 3 percent service fee for next year. And Jay is confirmed. This sounds good if and when confirmed.

NewEnglandSkier13

Chuckstah;c-59836 wroteEarly word, supposed to be confirmed tomorrow, 23-24 pass will be $279 for renewal basic plus a $10 fee for delivery of the new card. Also, no 3 percent service fee for next year. And Jay is confirmed. This sounds good if and when confirmed.

So the whole concept of it being an "indy" pass doesn't really mean anything anymore if Jay is included. Shows that they care more about money than what the actual vision behind it was supposed to be.

Chuckstah

NewEnglandSkier13;c-59838 wrote
Chuckstah;c-59836 wroteEarly word, supposed to be confirmed tomorrow, 23-24 pass will be $279 for renewal basic plus a $10 fee for delivery of the new card. Also, no 3 percent service fee for next year. And Jay is confirmed. This sounds good if and when confirmed.
So the whole concept of it being an "indy" pass doesn't really mean anything anymore if Jay is included. Shows that they care more about money than what the actual vision behind it was supposed to be.

Somewhat true, but it works for me. Black, NH, Jay, and Cannon skied great the past 3 days. It's a great deal to ski around different areas and support them, truly Independent or not. My Jay receipt was for $55. Not sure if that's an average or not, but I'm sure places like Black (either one), or Big Rock and the like are very happy with that payout or similar.

ski_itJR

NewEnglandSkier13;c-59838 wrote
Chuckstah;c-59836 wroteSo the whole concept of it being an "indy" pass doesn't really mean anything anymore if Jay is included. Shows that they care more about money than what the actual vision behind it was supposed to be.
So does that mean BE and Catamount don't deserve to be on it? I think the main idea is that the resort that doesn't contribute to the Ikon or Epic. Jay certainly nails the vibe for an indy resort despite being larger and now part of a conglomerate.

Peter

Jay is staying on next season.

NewEnglandSkier13

It's really irritating to see them continuing to market themselves based on a concept which they no longer represent.

Chuckstah

Epic and Ikon are for profit. Not all places on their passes are epic or iconic. Indy is a for profit brand. Not all areas on their pass are truly independent. It doesn't matter in the least. Buy it or don't.

NewEnglandSkier13

Chuckstah;c-59851 wroteEpic and Ikon are for profit. Not all places on their passes are epic or iconic. Indy is a for profit brand. Not all areas on their pass are truly independent. It doesn't matter in the least. Buy it or don't.

Yes, but "epic" and "iconic" are much more loosely defined than "independent," in terms of ski areas. It just gives the impression that you're supporting all independent ski areas by buying and using it, when you actually aren't.

JimK

I was at Sundance, UT last Wednesday 1 March 2023 with some friends. One of the guys asked a manager if they'd consider going on the Indy Pass. Nope. They want to be truly independent. At least for now ;)

Place was super snowy! First time ever and had a great powder day.

NewEnglandSkier13

JimK;c-59853 wroteI was at Sundance, UT last Wednesday 1 March 2with some friends. One of the guys asked a manager if they'd consider going on the Indy Pass. Nope. They want to be truly independent. At least for now ;)

Good for them! It looks like a fun ski area, on my list to try if I ever make it out to Utah.

hiemsman

NewEnglandSkier13;c-59849 wroteIt's really irritating to see them continuing to market themselves based on a concept which they no longer represent.

I get what you're saying because of the whole "In pursuit of Soul" PR push they did with TGR.

At the same time, it's not like they're kicking independent resorts off the pass. The prices are still rather competitive vs. the Ikon/Epic/Mountain Collective passes. Seems like it's still consumer and resort friendly - if it wasn't they wouldn't be expanded to 120 resorts and groups like "Powder Alliance" and the "Freedom Pass" would be taking up the slack.

If they kicked Jay off over the "indy" technicality it would be more of a disservice to the consumers AND the resorts that benefit from a major anchor resort that draws people to the pass in the first place. And aside from people that hang out on tiny forums like this, I don't think many consumers care so long as they're getting the value out of the pass.

NewEnglandSkier13

hiemsman;c-59855 wrote
NewEnglandSkier13;c-59849 wroteIt's really irritating to see them continuing to market themselves based on a concept which they no longer represent.
I get what you're saying because of the whole "In pursuit of Soul" PR push they did with TGR.

At the same time, it's not like they're kicking independent resorts off the pass. The prices are still rather competitive vs. the Ikon/Epic/Mountain Collective passes. Seems like it's still consumer and resort friendly - if it wasn't they wouldn't be expanded to 120 resorts and groups like "Powder Alliance" and the "Freedom Pass" would be taking up the slack.

If they kicked Jay off over the "indy" technicality it would be more of a disservice to the consumers AND the resorts that benefit from a major anchor resort that draws people to the pass in the first place. And aside from people that hang out on tiny forums like this, I don't think many consumers care so long as they're getting the value out of the pass.

The Indy Pass seems to be very selective about which ski areas they allow on the pass. If I remember correctly, they had no interest in allowing Whaleback to be a partner. It's seems like they're generally only interested in resorts that are relatively large for their area, with a few exceptions.

For what it's worth, the Freedom Pass was around well before the Indy Pass, and I think it's a much better concept, but will never be as big as Indy by design.

riverc0il

NewEnglandSkier13;c-59849 wroteIt's really irritating to see them to market themselves based on a concept which they no longer represent.

You are speaking as if Indy has been changing over the years. I really don't understand that thinking. Indy has always had a few big mountain headliners that they needed to draw people into buying a pass. They have certainly added more and more top tier areas over the years, but having non-Epic, non-Ikon headliners was always part of the value proposition.

And that only serves to help the smaller mom and pops. People wouldn't buy the Indy if it was just places like Black (ME), Black (NH), Pats, Saskadena, Berkshire East, etc. More people get exposed to those areas after being initially attracted to a few of the bigger names.

A true "mom and pop only" multi-mountain pass would never work, it just wouldn't be feasible without the headliners. Brands often have names that are meant to appeal to the spirit of the product rather than a literal definition. The Indy Pass is no different.

NewEnglandSkier13

riverc0il;c-59858 wrote
NewEnglandSkier13;c-59849 wroteIt's really irritating to see them to market themselves based on a concept which they no longer represent.
You are speaking as if Indy has been changing over the years. I really don't understand that thinking. Indy has always had a few big mountain headliners that they needed to draw people into buying a pass. They have certainly added more and more top tier areas over the years, but having non-Epic, non-Ikon headliners was always part of the value proposition.

And that only serves to help the smaller mom and pops. People wouldn't buy the Indy if it was just places like Black (ME), Black (NH), Pats, Saskadena, Berkshire East, etc. More people get exposed to those areas after being initially attracted to a few of the bigger names.

A true "mom and pop only" multi-mountain pass would never work, it just wouldn't be feasible without the headliners. Brands often have names that are meant to appeal to the spirit of the product rather than a literal definition. The Indy Pass is no different.

Read this quote from one of the emails to passholders: "Entabeni is privileged to keep Indy Pass 100% independent, and we remain steadfastly committed to the original mission - supporting independent resorts and providing incredible value for skiers and riders."

At least the first part of that is blatantly false. Even if they keep the name, they shouldn't go on claiming that only independent ski resorts are on the pass.

trackbiker

NewEnglandSkier13;c-59856 wrote The Indy Pass seems to be very selective about which ski areas they allow on the pass. If I remember correctly, they had no interest in allowing Whaleback to be a partner. It's seems like they're generally only interested in resorts that are relatively large for their area, with a few exceptions.
If I remember correctly; It was more about not having two areas too close together.
I would lover for Elk Mountain to join but they are close to Montage. So I don't see that happening. I also don't see that happening with the current owner. Their pass is relatively expensive compared to other nearby areas and they still do well.

trackbiker

If I remember correctly; It was more about not having two areas too close together.
I would lover for Elk Mountain to join but they are close to Montage. So I don't see that happening. I also don't see that happening with the current owner. Their pass is relatively expensive compared to other nearby areas and they still do well.

ceo

NewEnglandSkier13;c-59859 wrote Read this quote from one of the emails to passholders: "Entabeni is privileged to keep Indy Pass 100% independent, and we remain steadfastly committed to the original mission - supporting independent resorts and providing incredible value for skiers and riders."

At least the first part of that is blatantly false. Even if they keep the name, they shouldn't go on claiming that only independent ski resorts are on the pass.

They don't actually claim that. "100% independent" means the Indy Pass itself is independent, not that 100% of its member resorts are. And having Jay as a flagship resort that draws lots of people to get the pass is absolutely in keeping with a mission of "supporting independent resorts and providing incredible value for skiers and riders".

And what defines "independent?" If you mean local private ownership, better kick Cannon and Saddleback off. If you mean ownership of only that resort, then kick off Berkshire East and Catamount.

ceo

Actually, "not owned by a large operator that issues its own multi-resort pass" is a fine definition for these purposes.

« Previous Page Next Page »