or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Canyons Sold - FYI

post #1 of 29
Thread Starter 
Thought this would have been posted by now ...

http://peaks.shareholder.com/EdgarDe...-199&SID=07-00

A poke in the eye with a sharp stick for ASC owners/investors ... hopefully better things to come for PC area skiers/riders.
post #2 of 29
ASC is no more, for a few weeks now.
post #3 of 29
Talisker is a real high end real estate company around here with the big Empire Pass development at Deer Valley. Perhaps some of you guys have more details about them- but it looks like The Canyons has a new owner with deep pockets.
post #4 of 29
These poseurs bought it. http://www.taliskerclub.com/. There goes the neighborhood.:
post #5 of 29
So it wasn't these poseurs then?
http://www.whisky.com/brands/talisker_brand.html
post #6 of 29
TC's GM has officially stepped down now too, looks to be a changing of the guard. Here's the SL Trib article on the pending sale.
post #7 of 29
Anyone care to speculate on the potential changes?
post #8 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin Bell View Post
So it wasn't these poseurs then?
http://www.whisky.com/brands/talisker_brand.html
don't we wish!
post #9 of 29
I love "aspirational marketing". It cracks me up...
post #10 of 29
latest rumour; Talisker has hired Vail (or some entity thereof) to run skiing operations at Canyons.
post #11 of 29
OK,- just another rumour; from the friend I heard it from: " I went on the Web to read more about The Canyons sale. Nothing about Vail & Assoc. taking over ops. However, the guy running Talisker Club in PC is from Vail Resorts. I have a feeling that the real estate agent doesn't have all of her facts straight."

The whole town is wondering what's next. Whatever it is it'll be about real estate. In the last three years, prices have doubled and more depending on if you can hit a ski lift with a rifle from your back door... Oldtown has tripled and any shack that can be called ski-in ski-out with a straight face has gotten a new paint job and a multi million $ price tag. My daughters know a ninety year old lady happily making tea in the miner's shack she's lived in all her life. I wonder if she knows she's a millionaire?

Sure, it's great if you own your home, but between the taxes and the bling bling BS it makes you want to move...


P.S.- To put it in perspective: as little as four years ago, houses in Old town and Prospecter, Silver Summit and some of the outer neighborhoods could be had for 300-400k. Good condos for less. Very nice in town building lots with ski run views ran in the 200's with a few in the Aerie and Chatham around 150 or so. Prices had been relatively flat for ten years due to the surge and building frenzy in the 90's when the Olympics were announced. They went nuts again at the tail end of the real estate bubble in '04 (finally got to PC- but not to SLC, thank god) and now everything is overpriced and not moving. So we'll see what happens. There are about a zillion Talisker- like ghost towns being built on the ranchland outside of town. I say ghost towns because nobody lives there. People inhabit these big houses one week a year and then go back to wherever they made all that money. The locals appreciate the quiet, but we're running into a serious problem housing our firemen and teachers. Thank goodness Park City is well run (IMHO) by the core folks who came here in the 70's and 80's looking to escape the rat race.
post #12 of 29
Mr. Crab,
We think about cashing out and bolting to Ogden Valley, Ogden, SLC, Reno, wherever, all the time now. The thought of being 100% debt free, and then some, is really appealing. I know a lot of locals who think about this. But everyone ends the conversation with pretty much the same sentence, "But where are you gonna go?"

I have to say that I don't really like the direction the town is headed. It is strange to have houses in our neighborhood sit empty 3/4 the time as a second home.
post #13 of 29
If I didn't have kids in school... and the wife would buy into the surf/ski nomad lifestyle... Cashing out and moving to Heber/Kamas/Peoa has become a local mantra. That door is closing fast. We talk about moving north, and my wife can work in New Zealand any time (we think that would be really cool for a year when the kids are older.)
What will be the deciding factor is if we can continue to raise our kids in a semi-normal small mountain town environment as opposed to a place where only $ matters. You get that anywhere though, especially in a resort town, so it comes down to parents teaching (modeling) values. For now we're staying. Besides, the lifts are close by and Alta's just over the hill.
post #14 of 29
GOing back to the OP, in my opinion, having a developer own The Canyons is going to be just another open space disaster. Look at how overbuilt DV is. The Canyons will be next. Developers can not stop drinking from the real estate well, as the money is too easy. Thank god at least PCMR has openly decided to abstain from slopeside developments on the land they control (Treasure Hill & Spiro are owned by others). Just another reason to re-up my pass at PCMR.

TeleProphet
post #15 of 29
Thread Starter 
Well, there is always the possibility that Griswold will win his case and regain control of the property. Seems like a political longshot, but....
post #16 of 29
[quote=Thank god at least PCMR has openly decided to abstain from slopeside developments on the land they control (Treasure Hill & Spiro are owned by others). Just another reason to re-up my pass at PCMR. [/QUOTE]

Well said.

The radio said today that yet another lawsuit was filed against Griswald, so with everyone involved in the Canyons suing little Kenny and each other, including Summit County, it will take some time and an army of judges to sort it all out.
post #17 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by medmarkco View Post
Well, there is always the possibility that Griswold will win his case and regain control of the property. Seems like a political longshot, but....
Except that he is being sued himself over backing out a deal he signed to sell his land. He may be too busy fighting for his own life to deal with his ASC lawsuit. What a clusterf*ck. Once again, won't touch that place with a ten foot pole.
post #18 of 29
That place is a mess.

But, the skiing in the back bowls is still better than any other area in PC, and less crowded.
post #19 of 29
[quote=But, the skiing in the back bowls is still better than any other area in PC, and less crowded.[/QUOTE]

Yes, so they longer they screw around in court the better.
post #20 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Crab View Post
Well said.

The radio said today that yet another lawsuit was filed against Griswald, so with everyone involved in the Canyons suing little Kenny and each other, including Summit County, it will take some time and an army of judges to sort it all out.
Here's the story from today's Park Record
http://www.parkrecord.com/todaysheadlines/ci_6453208

Was Wolf Mountain required to sell resort?
Griswold responds with a lawsuit

Patrick Parkinson, Of the Record staff

A Park City man has sued Wolf Mountain Resorts Managing Partner Kenny Griswold claiming Griswold agreed to sell property he owns at The Canyons for $115 million, according to a spokesman for the plaintiff in the case.
The lawsuit, filed against Griswold and Wolf Mountain Resorts, which leases ski terrain at The Canyons to ASC, comes on the heels of an announcement from American Skiing Co. of a pending sale of The Canyons to Talisker Corp., a development firm based in Toronto.
But the plaintiff in the case, Peninsula Advisors principal Mark Robbins, of Park City, reached his agreement to purchase Griswold's land and take over Wolf Mountain's lease with American Skiing Co. long before the Talisker deal was announced, said
a spokesman for Peninsula Advisors, who insisted that Robbins hasn't worked with Talisker during the negotiations.
"The main purpose of the lawsuit is to enforce the contract and have the court direct that Mr. Griswold is to live by the terms of the lawsuit," Peninsula Advisors spokesman Josh Ewing said. "We're saying, enforce the contract and ensure that that closing does occur."
Meanwhile, attorneys for Wolf Mountain Resorts filed a lawsuit on Tuesday in Los Angeles Superior Court against Robbins and other parties associated with Peninsula Advisors, including a realtor in Park City, according to a prepared statement from Wolf Mountain Resorts.
"The suit alleges claims for breach of contract, fraud and concealment. Particularly, the suit alleges that the defendants made many misrepresentations and fraudulently induced Wolf Mountain to enter into an agreement based on financial misrepresentations," according to the statement from Wolf Mountain.
If Robbins prevails in his lawsuit, he expects to lease the land to Talisker Corp., should the sale of the resort close, Ewing said.
Before ASC can close the sale of The Canyons, however, Griswold must give his consent.
"[Peninsula] would step into Wolf's shoes," Ewing explained.
Peninsula Advisors agreed to purchase about 2,000 acres Griswold owns at The Canyons, the 12-page complaint filed Monday in 3rd District Court states.
The lawsuit seeks $16 million in damages from Griswold.
Griswold owns ski terrain at The Canyons that is leased to American Skiing Company, parent company to The Canyons. Once the largest owner of alpine ski resorts in the country, last week American Skiing, which is in the process of dissolution, announced the pending sale of The Canyons to Talisker.
Ewing claims Griswold signed a contract with Peninsula Advisors agreeing to sell the property and take a 20-percent minority interest in a new firm called The Canyons Real Estate, LLC.
But by failing to sell and convey their land on time, Wolf Mountain officials breached their obligations to Peninsula, Ewing said.
Griswold and Wolf Mountain Resorts had not been served with the lawsuit and did not respond to the complaint on Tuesday.
In the negotiations, Griswold misrepresented to Peninsula Advisors that Wolf Mountain was entitled to 4.3 million square feet of development on the property, "when Griswold knew that the amount of entitled density was substantially less than and not more than 3,700,000 square feet," the lawsuit states.
On Oct. 31, 2006, Wolf Mountain and Peninsula entered a transfer agreement to form the new company to allow Peninsula to acquire the property at the resort, the complaint filed against Wolf Mountain states.
Griswold began leasing land to American Skiing Company when the publicly traded firm formed The Canyons in the late 1990s.
According to Ewing, Griswold's contract with Peninsula includes "2,000 acres of land underneath The Canyons resort and other rights, including Wolf Mountain's interest as the landlord under a ground lease with [American Skiing Company.]"
Officials at Peninsula Advisors told Griswold they were prepared to begin closing the transaction on June 27, the lawsuit states.
But Griswold failed to attend a meeting to close the deal on July 2 when Peninsula was prepared to pay him $115 million, Ewing said.
Wolf Mountain was sued because Griswold failed to file the proper notices to transfer the property and misrepresented his development entitlements, according to the lawsuit. "To date, Wolf has not cured any of the above-described defaults," according to the lawsuit.



Just another day in the life of Wolf Canyons West!
post #21 of 29
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Crab View Post
latest rumour; Talisker has hired Vail (or some entity thereof) to run skiing operations at Canyons.
Well, Vail is involved in the Canyons, but not as the rumor predicted. Vail wants to own it.

Well, the link doesn't work, so there's the full text. Go www.sec.gov and use the EDGAR search function to link through SEC directly.

EX-99.1 2 dex991.htm LETTER TO AMERICAN SKIING COMPANY
EXHIBIT 99.1
July 27, 2007
Mr. Steven Gruber
Chairman of the Board
American Skiing Company
136 Heber Avenue
Suite 303
Park City, UT 84060
Dear Mr. Gruber:
I am writing to express our surprise and disappointment at the decision by the board of American Skiing Company (“ASC”) to enter into a contract for the sale of the stock of American Skiing Company Utah (“ASCU” or the “Company”) to an affiliate of Talisker Corporation (“Talisker”).
As you know, Vail Resorts was pursuing a potential acquisition of ASCU in conjunction with Peninsula Advisors (“Peninsula”) to whom ASC had given a period of exclusivity in relation to any acquisition of ASCU. Following certain actions by Peninsula, Vail Resorts was finalizing a transaction with ASC. Vail and ASC were on the brink of a deal on July 10, 2007 when ASC informed us that it had received a letter from Peninsula inexplicably threatening legal action against ASC if the deal went forward. We explained to you why Peninsula’s claims were baseless and offered to indemnify and protect ASC in the event Peninsula tried to stop our deal. Immediately following those discussions, ASC announced that it had entered into an agreement with Talisker.
We believe that ASC’s board may not be fully aware of Talisker’s activities leading up to this potential transaction. We have now commenced legal action against Peninsula and Talisker to protect our rights which may, in fact, preclude Talisker from proceeding with the ASCU transaction.
In addition, we remain concerned about the ASC board’s lack of engagement with Vail Resorts to ascertain whether a transaction more favorable to ASC could have been reached with our company.
To that end, we are hereby making a superior offer to ASC for the stock of ASCU, with a purchase price of $110 million — a 10% premium to the Talisker transaction. This offer is made on the same terms previously negotiated between Vail Resorts and ASC, except that we agree to increase our deposit to $10 million, to be retained by ASC in the event that any injunction should

prevent the closing of the transaction due to the claims raised by Peninsula in its letter to ASC. We, of course, are not aware of the other terms of your agreements with Talisker, so it is difficult for us to address additional ways to improve our offer, but we remain available at your convenience to discuss all aspects of our offer.
We look forward to working with you to arrive at a mutually beneficial transaction and are confident that, with the benefit of Vail Resorts’ experience developing and operating world class mountain resorts, The Canyons will realize its full potential as a premier Park City and overall Utah ski resort.
Very truly yours,
Robert Katz
Chief Executive Officer
Vail Resorts, Inc.

2

The plot thickens....
post #22 of 29
Ok, I got a little more background. Again, this is in no way official, just stuff gleaned from talking to neighbors and driving around.
United Park City Mines sold it's land to Talisker about four years ago. This includes the Empire Canyon development at Deer Valley, which is huge, and the Bonanza Flats acreage, also huge, that lies behind ( southeast) of the ridgeline that marks the boundaries of Park City and Deer Valley and extends south toward the back of Brighton and east toward Midway on the Wasatch back.

There's another 1500 hundred acres between PCMR and Brighton that PCMR owns that may or may not be part of this, but I believe that's southwest of the Jupiter Peak ridgeline and John Cummings once suggested that this could be future skiing. I think that this is the territory skied on the Wasatch interconnect, directly between Scotts bowl and Brighton. Powdr, you've been back there, right?

Anyone who has driven the Guardsman Pass summer road between Deer Valley and Brighton has driven through Bonanza Flats with it's meadows and aspen forests full of wildlife, surrounded by majestic peaks. You see moose just grazing in the open. An old girl scout camp is back there and a dirt road forks off and goes down to Midway. All this is being developed. The big Catapillers have been up there since last summer making roads, but progress seems slow- approvals are being finalized or perhaps Talisker doesn't want to flood the market. Park City once nearly got this as open space and there are great hiking and biking trails up there. Eventually this will be a city of luxury condos and massive homes at 9000'.

The Empire Canyon development is a rising city with six and eight story apartment buildings, hotels, and big houses on tiny lots right next to each other. There's more copper up there on roofs and gutters than I've ever seen in one place. They're good looking, all massive timbers and ceder shingles. The Pine forest up there is dense and tall. It's pretty, for a city.
So that's Talisker. Whatever they have in mind for the Canyons will be big, luxurious, and exclusive. Now, aren't you glad that some far-sighted dude named Teddy Rooseveldt set aside a few million acres for you a hundred years ago?
post #23 of 29
When I worked at PCMR in the 1980s, there were maps around the offices that showed lifts up 10,420 and skiing behind Scotts Bowl.

Nothing new except the faces.
post #24 of 29
post #25 of 29
Thread Starter 
The Great Carnac sees 10,000 square foot foundations pouring as we speak. The attorneys have to be lovin' this stuff.

Les Otten thinks he got "played" on the ME resorts to bid up the price Boyne ultimately paid. I believe that to some extent. Everything I saw and heard indicated that BJ and Co. would die before Les got his hands on anything. Oakhill must feel like a sap for getting suckered into ASC to begin with.

Maybe there was some under-table deal where Talisker has a backdoor link to Oakhill and was willing to shovel extra $$ to Oakhill down the road, if Oakhill agreed to sell short and keep Vail from establishing a competitive presence in the area.

Money games .. gotta love 'em.
post #26 of 29
OMG!!!!

I am not a bright business man so I ask questions anyway......

Could it be that The Canyons will not operate next year due to court wrangling??
post #27 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sugaree View Post
OMG!!!!

I am not a bright business man so I ask questions anyway......

Could it be that The Canyons will not operate next year due to court wrangling??
Hmmm, almost seems like deja vu to last season with that question, but I have to say empatically no. However the legal wrangling turns out, come this winter, lifts will turn and bombs will be tossed, the big question will be who winds up paying the bills and then getting ticket proceeds - I'm guessing it could be the Oak Hill guys for awhile...
post #28 of 29
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sugaree View Post
OMG!!!!

I am not a bright business man so I ask questions anyway......

Could it be that The Canyons will not operate next year due to court wrangling??
*IF* one was silly enough to take an ASC statement as a sure thing, then yes it appears ASC intends to operate The Canyons until such time as it is liquidated.

From yesterday's 8-K filing by ASC:

http://peaks.shareholder.com/EdgarDe...-216&SID=07-00

"The Company and the holders of the Series C Preferred Stock have had numerous discussions regarding the status of the Series C Preferred Stock. The Company expects that the foregoing matters will have no impact on the Company’s continuing operations or the status of currently pending transactions regarding the Company’s resorts."
post #29 of 29
More entertaining legaleze, coming from the ASC side now:

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/da...86bexv10w1.htm

Interesting info in this is that according to ASC, Vail's last best offer was $95mil w/"limited indemnity".

Guess we'll be waiting until Oct. 1 to see where this mess winds up going...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Resorts, Conditions & Travel