The Ski Pass Is a Weather Hedge, Not a Climate Shield

By Elle Trump and Lehan Edirisinghe · October 31, 2026 · AngryPages

Editorial illustration for The Business of Ski Resorts

Wendover Productions' January 2020 episode explains how ski resorts use multi-resort season passes to reduce their dependence on unpredictable snowfall. Customers pay before winter begins, companies secure revenue in advance, and networks such as Epic and Ikon offer access to dozens of destinations.

The episode describes this arrangement as risk-sharing: “the consumer is sharing the risk with the company.”

That description is incomplete. The skier and the resort do not carry the same risk, at the same time, or under the same contractual conditions. The customer can lose the value of a season pass when snowfall disappoints, while the company collects money in advance and retains the opportunity to earn additional revenue from that customer.

The more important question is whether this arrangement actually protects ski companies against climate change, or merely postpones some of the financial consequences.

The contract puts ordinary snowfall risk on the customer

The current Epic Pass refund policy makes the distinction unusually clear. Vail Resorts explicitly excludes refunds when weather or wind prevents customers from using their passes, including situations involving insufficient snow.

Its coverage does provide refunds for qualifying personal circumstances, such as certain injuries and job losses, and narrowly defined resort closures. Ordinary snowfall shortages and weather-related limitations on available terrain do not qualify.

The Ikon Pass has similar limitations. Its standard purchase terms make products non-refundable and allow resorts to restrict access because of weather, operational problems and capacity constraints. The terms also make no guarantee of a minimum number of operating days. Ikon offers a separate Risk-Free Refundable option for eligible products, but that protection is not included automatically with every standard pass. (Epic Coverage; Ikon Purchase Terms; Ikon FAQ).

This is not equal risk-sharing. A customer receives discounted access and flexibility across multiple mountains, but accepts the possibility of paying for a season that delivers considerably less skiing than expected.

The resort, meanwhile, receives payment before winter arrives.

There is an important accounting distinction: Vail collects pass payments in advance but recognizes pass revenue throughout the ski season according to the number of skiable days. Advance cash is not automatically the same as immediate recognized profit. Nevertheless, it gives the operator substantial financial visibility before the season begins.

The 2020 video did not examine this contractual division of risk. The current terms demonstrate why it matters.

The season pass has become a customer-retention machine

There is another important part of the business model missing from the episode's explanation.

Vail's 2019 annual report, published before the video, already described season passes as a way to reduce exposure to weather-sensitive customers, improve revenue stability, build loyalty and generate additional spending. Pass products accounted for approximately 47% of its lift revenue in fiscal 2019.

By fiscal 2026, they accounted for approximately 70% of lift revenue and 73% of total visitation. Vail's portfolio expanded substantially during this period, so these figures are not a same-resort comparison, but they demonstrate how central prepaid access has become to its business. (Vail 2019 Form 10-K; Vail 2026 Form 10-K).

Vail also explains that passholders typically ski more days than customers without passes, generating additional spending on food, accommodation, lessons and equipment rentals.

Its Epic Mountain Rewards program offers passholders 20% discounts on several of these purchases.

The pass therefore does considerably more than stabilize lift-ticket revenue. It secures customer loyalty, provides valuable customer data, encourages repeat visits and creates opportunities for additional spending.

The company is not simply selling a cheaper way up the mountain. It is securing a customer relationship before the customer knows what winter will deliver.

That distinction matters because the company's financial protection comes from several sources, not just the weather risk transferred to passholders.

The hedge works, but the financial damage remains

The 2025/2026 winter provides a useful real-world test.

The Western Water Assessment's 2026 snow-drought assessment identified the worst winter on record for snow accumulation in its Intermountain West assessment period. April 1 snow-water equivalent reached just 22% of average in Colorado, 19% in Utah and 50% in Wyoming. The Upper Colorado River Basin reached 23% of average.

The U.S. Forest Service also documented record warmth, rain-on-snow events and unusually early snowpack melting across western mountain regions. (Western Water Assessment; USDA Forest Service).

Vail's own financial results show both the strength and the limitations of its pass strategy.

For fiscal 2026:

Total skier visitation fell 13.4%.
Total lift revenue declined 3.5%.
Pass revenue increased 3.9%.
Resort net revenue declined $131.9 million, or 4.5%.
Resort Reported EBITDA fell $98.5 million, or 11.7%.

The increase in pass revenue helped cushion the decline in visitation. Without that prepaid revenue, the company's exposure to weather-sensitive customers would have been greater.

But the company still suffered a substantial financial setback.

This is precisely where the distinction matters. Season passes reduce the immediate financial impact of poor snowfall. They do not eliminate operating costs, protect ancillary businesses completely, or guarantee profitability.

Vail itself acknowledges that its mountain operations have a significant fixed-cost structure and that profit margins can fluctuate substantially with revenue. (Vail fiscal 2026 results; Vail 2026 Form 10-K).

Geographic diversification cannot guarantee better snow

Wendover presents geographic diversification as another important protection. If snowfall is poor in the Rockies, customers can visit British Columbia or another destination where conditions are better. Australian resorts also extend Vail's operating presence into the Southern Hemisphere.

The strategy makes economic sense, but it is not a guarantee.

During fiscal 2026, Vail reported that snowfall in its Australian region was approximately 57% below the ten-year average during the relevant quarter. The conditions pressured visitation and revenue, although growth in Australian pass sales provided some mitigation.

At the same time, Vail described snowfall and snowpack in the Rockies as being at or near historic lows.

Geographic diversification helped provide alternatives, but multiple geographically separated parts of the portfolio experienced difficult conditions during the same financial year. (Vail fiscal 2026 results).

This does not prove that geographically diversified portfolios cannot reduce weather risk. It demonstrates that geographical spread cannot guarantee an offsetting good season elsewhere.

There is also a more fundamental distinction: diversifying across mountains can protect against local snowfall variability, but it cannot eliminate the long-term effects of warming temperatures on the availability of reliable skiing conditions.

A company can acquire another mountain. It cannot acquire a different climate for the entire planet.

The next financial problem arrives when customers decide whether to renew

The most revealing consequence of a poor winter may not appear in the season when snowfall fails. It may appear when customers decide whether to purchase another pass.

Vail's September 28, 2026 financial announcement provides evidence of this delayed exposure.

For the upcoming 2026/2027 North American season, pass sales through September 18 were:

Units sold: down approximately 12%.
Estimated access days sold: down approximately 10%.
Sales dollars: down approximately 6%.

Vail attributed continuing weakness in demand partly to the effects of the previous season's historically challenging conditions. It also said some customers might simply be delaying their purchases rather than abandoning the product entirely.

This is an early-season sales snapshot, not a final measurement of annual demand. Nevertheless, it demonstrates an important limitation of the prepaid-pass strategy: a company can retain the money from one poor season while still facing weaker demand for the next one. (Vail fiscal 2026 results).

A customer who receives disappointing value today may decide not to purchase tomorrow.

The company has transferred much of the immediate weather-related utilization risk to the buyer, but it cannot contractually guarantee that the buyer will return.

That is the second half of the risk equation the episode does not adequately develop.

The missing measurement

There is one further problem with the original argument: it never quantifies how much financial risk is actually transferred.

Vail reports the proportion of lift revenue generated by passes and the proportion of visitation associated with pass products. Its public filings also describe the benefits of loyalty and additional spending.

However, the filings reviewed do not provide a complete measurement of unused pass days or the aggregate value customers forfeit when poor conditions reduce their skiing.

Without those figures, it is impossible to calculate precisely how much weather-related loss is absorbed by passholders rather than the resort.

The distinction between reduced revenue variability and actual risk transfer deserves more than a passing explanation.

The original video was sponsored by CuriosityStream and promoted the CuriosityStream/Nebula bundle. I found no evidence connecting that sponsor to Vail Resorts, Alterra or either pass product, so there is no factual basis for alleging that the sponsorship influenced the editorial argument.

Verdict

Wendover correctly identifies season passes as an effective way to stabilize ski-resort revenue. Vail's financial disclosures confirm that the strategy works.

But a revenue hedge is not a climate solution, and the description of consumers and companies sharing risk conceals an important imbalance.

Under standard pass contracts, customers absorb ordinary snowfall-related losses. Resorts collect advance payments, build customer loyalty, capture spending on additional services and retain exposure to future renewals and operating costs.

The 2026 financial results demonstrate both sides: pass revenue cushioned a disastrous winter, but the company's earnings still suffered, and early sales for the following season weakened.

The ski pass does not remove the climate risk. It moves the first bill to the skier and buys the resort time.

That is a valuable business strategy. It is not climate protection. Confusing the two makes the industry's financial adaptation look considerably more secure than it really is.

References

The Business of Ski Resorts — Wendover Productions, January 29, 2020. Original video. Establishes the original argument about season passes, consolidation and weather-related revenue risk; its archived description also records its sponsorship and research references.
Vail Resorts, Fiscal 2019 Form 10-K — September 26, 2019. Company filing. Establishes that passes already generated 47% of lift revenue and that Vail explicitly described them as a means of reducing exposure to weather-sensitive customers.
Vail Resorts, Fiscal 2026 Form 10-K — September 28, 2026. SEC filing. Documents the 70% pass share of lift revenue, 73% visitation share, advance cash collection, revenue recognition and ancillary-spending strategy.
Vail Resorts, Fiscal 2026 Fourth Quarter and Full Year Results — September 28, 2026. Company announcement. Provides the financial evidence of weather-related losses, pass-revenue resilience and declining advance pass sales.
Epic Coverage Refund Policy — 2026/2027. Official policy. Establishes that ordinary weather and insufficient snow do not qualify for refunds.
Ikon Pass Purchase Terms and Conditions and FAQ — 2026/2027. Purchase terms | Official FAQ. Establishes non-refundable standard purchases, weather-related access restrictions and the availability of separate refundable products.
2025–2026 Extreme Snow Drought in the Intermountain West — Western Water Assessment, 2026. Research assessment. Provides independently assessed snowpack measurements and historical context for the severe 2026 winter.
A Warm Winter in the West: Understanding the 2026 Snow Drought — USDA Forest Service, April 3, 2026. Research article. Explains the temperature, rainfall and early-melt conditions behind the western snow drought.