Brandon Donnelly — Daily insights for city builders. Published since 2013 by Toronto-based real estate developer Brandon Donnelly. — Page 282

Shot on iPhone and a Fujifilm X-T3

Snowboarding in Europe, of course, sounds really fancy. And don't get me wrong, it can be fancy if you want it to be. But the reality is that it's also a cheaper option. And that's because the price of a single day lift ticket at most resorts in America is now many multiples of what it costs in Europe. Think $250 vs. €50.

North America has become the expensive destination.

According to a recent Economist article titled " the economics of skiing in America ," resorts in Europe are often owned by local or national governments. This is not the case in America, and it's why the lift tickets in Europe seem, by comparison, cheap. But this price differential is also the result of an evolving business model.

Historically, owning a ski resort has never been a stable business in the US. And this makes sense. Most resorts make their money on lift ticket sales. However, sales are dependent on snowfall. If you get a lot of snow, then you make a lot of money. If the planet starts warming up and you don't get a lot of snow, then you don't make a lot of money. Vail has since changed this.

What they have done is made it so punitive to buy a single day lift ticket in North America, that even if you're an occasional skier, the only sensible thing to do is buy a subscription-like pass in the spring -- well before the next season starts.

This is what I have started doing and it gives you unlimited skiing for less than the price of a few days. It also gives Vail a source of revenue that isn't so dependent snowfall. Season passes now make up about 61% of their lift-ticket revenue, according to The Economist . At the same time, it is a model that relies on being able to price discriminate against single-day, non-pass users:

In basic economic theory, excessive market power reduces the efficiency of an industry. Firms reduce output so as to be able to charge more. There is, however, an exception: if a monopolistic firm can charge different prices to different customers, it need not reduce output to increase its profit. The skiing industry shows the truth of this. As the industry has consolidated, daily prices have soared, extracting more cash from price-insensitive skiers.

But this isn't the only way to do it. There's also the whole real estate thing. Last year, Reed Hastings, cofounder of Netflix, became the majority owner of Powder Mountain. And here, they're trying out a different business model:

This December, Powder Mountain in Utah announced that it would be moving to a model where only local property-owners are allowed to ski certain chairlifts. The idea is to profit from real-estate sales, by offering private skiing without the crowds. “To stay independent and uncrowded, we needed to change,” says Reed Hastings, the firm’s boss.

Even still, neither of these approaches is making snowboarding and skiing more accessible. Which is why it's not uncommon to come across stickers and t-shirts at local ski shops that say, "Vail -- ruining ski towns since 1966." People are missing the old days when lift tickets were cheap and the lines on powder days weren't so long.

What skiing needs is in fact much of what the economy more generally needs: supply-side reform, and especially the construction of new housing and transport in the most popular spots. Though there are more skiers than ever, there are in fact fewer resorts than there were a few decades ago.

This sounds familiar.

All quotes are from The Economist .

This morning, I was on site at Parkview Mountain House reviewing construction progress and finalizing some finishes with our contractor . And during that time, he said two things to me that I was frankly happy to hear.

The first is that we are his only client -- ever -- where they didn't need to touch the construction contingency line item. (Knock on wood. We are about 2 months out from completion at this point.) And the second is that he loves working with us because we are also his most decisive client.

Now to be fair, both of these things are easier to do when you're not building your own home, or something else for yourself. The process becomes less emotional and more just about business.

Even still, this is generally the aspiration with all construction projects. As an owner, you want to leave your contingency untouched. You want to minimize changes. And you want to make decisions as fast as humanly possible.

In fact, this is a prime example of the mantra that "any decision is better than no decision." And that's because poor decision making is the kiss of death for construction projects. You need to keep things moving.

I also find that decisions tend to seem more daunting in the moment. When you're staring at 37 different shades of white paint and being asked to pick just one, it can be easy to get analysis paralysis. Is a yellow white with a subtle green undertone really the right one?

But more often than not, when the project is done, you're probably not going to remember the other 36 shades of white you didn't select. Or least that's been my experience. So choosing speed over perfection is typically your safest bet.