Every skier in the country talks about the short season lack of snow all over the country and about ski trips canceled or never even planned. Yet I have seen very few downgrades of a company which depends on 7 ski areas for it's revenue. The stock went down right after the start of 2012 but then bounced, back why??? Institutions are the major owners of the shares, these are the folks who have the discretionary income to actually go skiing and should really know what is going on in the industry. I must be missing a major element of this story.
You're not missing anything -- the analysts are. They are in Manhattan office buildings looking at charts. They haven't been to all the mountains this year. They believe that the offsets (selling discounted passed for next year etc ..) will make up for some of the lost revenue. They are wrong.
There is no substitute for having seen what's actually happening here (no snow, no ski lessons, no new skis, jackets or boots sold, fewer rentals etc ...) as the analysts are about to discover.
Analysts are frequently wrong by the way. It's often for reasons like this. They make predictions based on trends and financial strategies but not on whats actually happening.
I agree no snow no income no way of making the numbers. I also agree most analyst are unreliable but my problem now is this. How could every wall street professional be wrong. This is not a complicated business like hi tech and biotech. I still think I am missing something.