158 replies to this topic

[SkiBachelor]

Tamrack's management teams is going about this the wrong way.

It should focus on finding someone willing to lease its golf course as it could still be a source of revenue that would pay the caretaker's salary, that's if it plans on having one.

I've seen mother nature claim a brand new golf course in less than 2 years after it was built, making it almost as expensive to build the course in the first place.

[Peter]

SkiBachelor, on Mar 3 2009, 01:34 PM, said:

Tamrack's management teams is going about this the wrong way.

It should focus on finding someone willing to lease its golf course as it could still be a source of revenue that would pay the caretaker's salary, that's if it plans on having one.

I've seen mother nature claim a brand new golf course in less than 2 years after it was built, making it almost as expensive to build the course in the first place.

They claim to be keeping 16 employees to maintain the property, including the golf course fairways and greens. Otherwise you're right, they would deteriorate very quickly. Perhaps some of those 16 employees will be in lift maintenance? The big question is how long they can continue to keep those employees on board with no source of revenue.

[iceberg210]

Sad to hear of another business death to add to the numerous ones we seem to be hearing about far too often these days. It seemed to me that they were trying to build a whole new "Sun Valley" type thing and yet couldn't establish it in time to prevent the downturn from taking it down with it. I wonder however what will happen with Tamarack down the line. There's just far too much invested there for it to be abandoned like other smaller resorts, I'd be much more inclined to think that someone will pick it up and start it up again albeit with a more conservative expansion plan I would hope.

The overall effects on the Idaho economy is much more than just the 100 or so layoffs from Tamarack itself. I know folks in Boise whose businesses had contracts for various aspects of the building of Tamarack and obviously those are probably over now and those that were completely if they haven't already been paid for the contractors I'm sure are being told to not expect any sort of payment at least for some time. Only time will tell but I think the next six months should be interesting as I can't imagine a buyer would not be found by then. However in a credit crunch market it's hard to know.

[aug]

Skier, on Mar 3 2009, 01:33 PM, said:

They claim to be keeping 16 employees to maintain the property, including the golf course fairways and greens. Otherwise you're right, they would deteriorate very quickly. Perhaps some of those 16 employees will be in lift maintenance? The big question is how long they can continue to keep those employees on board with no source of revenue.

So far that I have heard only one.

[SkiBachelor]

As a marketing concentration, I could tell from the get go that Tamarack would most likely not make it. It tried to target the wealthy people who loved the outdoors, but this demographic is very small and while they did buy real-estate there quite quickly, there wasn't enough people to keep utilizing the area to keep it afloat, especially with the size of Tamarack.

As it has been previously stated, Tamarack was also located in the middle of no where so it never drew large crowds of people.

[Peter]

While we're on the subject of Tamarack, does anyone know why they switched from Leitner-Poma to Doppelmayr CTEC after the first year? Was it purely based on price or were they unhappy with the L-P detachables? I always thought it was kind of strange that they installed 2 different brands of detachables in 2 consecutive years. I would have thought a new resort would want to have only one set of parts.

[Kicking Horse]

Could be that Dopp was cheaper?

[SkiBachelor]

Tamarack purchased the two L-Ps two years before the D-Cs and it's bid was lower.

[Peter]

SkiBachelor, on Mar 3 2009, 07:51 PM, said:

Tamarack purchased the two L-Ps two years before the D-Cs and it's bid was lower.

I was looking at an article from 2004 and Tom Clink from Poma was quoted as saying how excited Leitner-Poma was to be entering the Idaho market at Tamarack. I wonder if L-P bid low just so they could have the marketing value of being in Idaho. In 2005 that was no longer a factor. I suspect this is what happened in the New York Tram bidding that just took place, in which Poma bid almost exactly half of Doppelmayr. All of Tamarack's lifts were installed in '04 and '05.

[LuvPow]

Skier, on Mar 3 2009, 07:11 PM, said:

I was looking at an article from 2004 and Tom Clink from Poma was quoted as saying how excited Leitner-Poma was to be entering the Idaho market at Tamarack. I wonder if L-P bid low just so they could have the marketing value of being in Idaho. In 2005 that was no longer a factor. I suspect this is what happened in the New York Tram bidding that just took place, in which Poma bid almost exactly half of Doppelmayr. All of Tamarack's lifts were installed in '04 and '05.

I don't think LP bid low for Tamarck, I think the next year they were just to busy to take on any more jobs.

[SkiBachelor]

Skier, on Mar 3 2009, 07:11 PM, said:

I was looking at an article from 2004 and Tom Clink from Poma was quoted as saying how excited Leitner-Poma was to be entering the Idaho market at Tamarack. I wonder if L-P bid low just so they could have the marketing value of being in Idaho. In 2005 that was no longer a factor. I suspect this is what happened in the New York Tram bidding that just took place, in which Poma bid almost exactly half of Doppelmayr. All of Tamarack's lifts were installed in '04 and '05.

Tamarack was a year late installing the L-P lifts.

[Peter]

SkiBachelor, on Mar 3 2009, 07:28 PM, said:

Tamarack was a year late installing the L-P lifts.

Okay I see what you are saying, the bids were 2 years apart. The contract with L-P for the Tamarack Express and the Summit Express was announced on April 30, 2003. They were not installed until Summer 2004, at which point Discovery was ordered from Doppelmayr CTEC. Those three lifts opened on December 15, 2004. Then in 2005 Wildwood Express and Whitewater (renamed Buttercup) were built by Doppelmayr CTEC.

Another random Tamarack thing, Wildwood Express did get the goofy looking vinyl graphics that the original lifts had, apparently after the Skilifts.org pictures were taken.
[attachment=16834:39151938...d0821a_o.jpg]
I wonder if Whitewater/Buttercup got them too?

[Peter]

Well interestingly the complete website is back up: http://www.tamarackidaho.com/

[Peter]

Tamarack Asks for Emergency Re-opening of Resort
“This is a matter of the utmost gravity. We do not make this request lightly."

By Jill Kuraitis, 3-05-09

With a full courtroom behind him, the attorney for the owners of Tamarack Resort in Valley County, Idaho asked district court judge Patrick Owen Thursday to authorize an emergency re-opening of the lodge and ski operations. “The process has been anything but transparent,” said lawyer Steve Millemann of McCall, outrage in his voice.

The attorney for Doug Wilson, the court-appointed receiver for Tamarack, said they had no choice but to shut down operations Wednesday evening at 5:00, stopping the ski lifts and snow cats and closing the entire resort to the public. But Millemann claimed they were not asked for input of any kind about the decision.

Millemann said, “This is a matter of the utmost gravity. We do not make this request lightly. Nothing can damage the collateral more than for the resort to lie fallow.”

Wilson’s lawyer Douglas Pahl responded that with $1.5 million left in the fund to oversee the reorganization or shutdown of Tamarack, to use it to generate small income from lift tickets would produce short-term liabilities that would add to Tamarack’s problems. “We don’t have the money to operate the resort in a responsible way,” he said, claiming reopening would be financially remiss. “If no other funding becomes available, there would be a hard shutdown that would damage the property even more.”

Attorneys for the group of lenders which includes Credit Suisse pointed out that they had provided the most recent loan extension for the purpose of closing Tamarack, not to keep it operating. The most pressing bills, they said, were for ski lift and golf course lease payments, in arrears since January.

After the hearing, Millemann told NewWest.Net he is “hoping for a meaningful discussion about funding alternatives” after the judge announces his decision about today’s hearing on March 10.

“We are….well involved in some discussions about new funding,” he said. “This closure didn’t help much.”

[Peter]

From today's Seattle PI:

In the meantime, what will become of Tamarack's ski lifts? Last June, Bank of America threatened to remove two - the Buttercup and Wildwood lifts - after the resort fell behind on $70,000 monthly lease payments. It's now missed those payments since January, according to Milleman. At least for now, Waters says, snow still on the ground should keep the spurned bankers' repo men at bay, if it comes to that.

[liftmech]

Repo men? Do they think you can just come up and load the thing onto a truck?

In all seriousness, though, those lifts might be a good buy for someone else if they are indeed removed. When areas are reinstalling 20- to 30-year-old lifts after refurbishing, think of finding a 'lightly used' one.

[SkiBachelor]

The Idaho Mountain Express has just reported that Tamarack has been purchased by a Saudi prince and will be giving the resort a new name in Arabic that translates to "The Mountain That Came to Mohammed."

http://www.mtexpress...p?ID=2005125262

However, I'm having a hard time believing this is true after this setence was made: "Refugees from Middle Eastern wars staffed its facilities, and aside from their refusal to drink alcohol, their AK-47s and their beards, they looked and acted just like the rest of the region's help," although no mention of it being satire is listed.

[iceberg210]

I would have to assume it's satire as well for a variety of reasons.

Mainly that I just don't see the bankruptcy to sale would go that fast. Right now Tamarack is tied up in bankruptcy court and that alone would hold up most any sale because you have a bunch of creditors all trying to get their money back.

In fact it will be interesting what does happen with the ownership of Tamarack, I think I remember there being a resort in Wyoming was it that the bank that owned it (via debt) after foreclosing just started running it themselves. I kind of doubt that Tamarack would be in that position in the near future but then again the credit markets are so tied up that it may be hard for investors to get the backing capitol to pick up Tamarack. If no buyer is found I could see the creditors maybe hiring some management team to run the resort in the meantime till a buyer was found. The problem is that even if you're only breaking even with a ski resort you are much better off to be doing that even if there is no money being made due to the fact that without maintenance and use the lifts, runs, buildings, etc will fall into disrepair and then you end up with a situation where your asset isn't worth as much as it was due to the disuse.

Will be interesting to watch if nothing else, though I hope the resort the best and hope it gets back up and running soon, it's never good to have ski resorts closing.

[Peter]

Tamarack's new loan not enough for ski lifts, golf course

06:42 PM MDT on Monday, March 23, 2009

KTVB

New loan comes with high interest rate

BOISE -- A new loan is approved for Tamarack, but the resort says it's not nearly enough -- in fact, Tamarack says it’s in jeopardy of losing the ski lifts and golf course.

This new $1.7 million loan will take Tamarack though April.

But even within that time frame there are problems.

Closing Tamarack certainly did not end its problems nor its financial obligations.

Even a new loan will barely scrape the surface of the mounting bills needing to be paid.

The judge just approved additional funding by investors, but it comes at a much higher price.

Last fall, lenders gave Tamarack a $10 million loan to kick off the ski season -- the interest rate on that loan was 6.5 percent.

According to court documents, this new loan carries an interest rate of 17 percent and it's retroactively applied to that original $10 million loan.

Tamarack didn't want this budget approved because it doesn't provide enough money for the resort to pay two of its most significant leases -- the monthly payments for its ski lifts and golf course.

Each month Tamarack owes Bank of America more than $78,000 for the lift lease. Court papers indicate the last time it was paid was in January.

Tamarack told the judge the bank could foreclose on the chair lifts if payments aren't made.

Meanwhile, there are also concerns about the Osprey Meadows golf course -- even though it's not scheduled to open this spring, the resort is supposed to be making payments of more than $63,000 each month, and that too is in default.

This most recent loan was requested by Doug Wilson -- the court appointed manager of Tamarack.

He told NewsChannel 7 the $1.7 million would be used for payroll, winterization payments and for nearly $500,000 worth of insurance.

We asked Wilson what happens come May 1st when this latest loan runs out and he admits, he does not know.

He calls this entire situation "unfortunate" and "sad."

There is another status hearing to discuss what's next and that's scheduled for April 16th.

Meanwhile, Tamarack is trying to acquire new funding, but Wilson says that's very challenging in this economic climate.

[iceberg210]

A bit off the beaten path of the topic but nevertheless I found interesting...

That lift payment seems to me like Tamarack is getting a great deal. I mean it says over 78 grand a month, so let's assume it's 80 grand a month, that's only $960,000 a year for lifts. If this is for all lifts that's actually seems to me to be a fairly decent deal.

They've got three high speed lifts, two fixed grip, a Poma and a magic carpet. So what would that cost total? Upwards of ten million I'm sure! So really they are only having to pay less then ten percent with no interest which seems to me to be very affordable.

And I know that means nothing in terms of the overall financial condition and what not just found it interesting.

Beyond that it will be interesting to see if Bank of America does repo the lifts. I mean it's possible but it seems that they would cost quite a bit to remove and unless BOA had a customer in mind it might not pencil, plus I'd think that any prospective buyer of Tamarack would really want to prevent the lifts from going away as it would cause a huge hit to the value of the land and such that constitutes Tamarack. Guess it will all depend on whether a buyer comes first for the resort, or a buyer comes first for the lifts.