REMEMBERING: EpicSki.com 1999-2017

[Gaby]

Because it's easier (read: cheaper) not to migrate.

Sure, I get that from a business perspective but it just seems odd to just toss it in the garbage.

 

[cantunamunch]

Sure, I get that from a business perspective but it just seems odd to just toss it in the garbage.

I think you will find that that 'oddness' is precisely why people are coming away with quite strong feelings above. It speaks of the owners valuing the Epicski culture - let's call it what it was- at effectively zero.

 

[Read Blinn]

Not that I really care since I had no use for Epic after this place started... but I fail to understand why the loss of the platform means the entire thing just gets flushed down the toilet. Why not a migration to a new platform? Clearly there is a ton of content there that should be preserved, and a long standing community that is going to be flummoxed at suddenly having no home. It is a strange decision to just throw up the hands and say "oh well that's it".

Money. Money. And also money.

 

[dbostedo]

@dbostedo We have a lot to swallow with all of this news plus what was already on our docket..Lets talk about it and continue the conversation over the next few months.

Do you mean to tell me I can't get everything I want immediately?

Seriously though, I didn't mean to imply that it needed to be right away. Just throwing it out there since it came up...

 

[Muleski]

Been under the weather for a couple of days, and thus slow to respond to the news.

Like most, it's unfortunate for me to see the content on Epic likely lost to a large part. I suspect that as a community, we can recreate most if not all of it as the need and interest arises. I carry a lot of experience in my head, for example. To the degree that it's ever helpful, I'll jump on the keyboard. I assume we all will.

Since Phil and Tricia made the bold move to launch Pugski, I have been delighted with what has unfolded. This is a tremendous community, made up of a growing number of passionate people who cover a very wide horizon of experience, and geography. We seem to all enjoy this place, and at least in my case I value it and do not take it for granted. I think that's the norm.

We seem to respect each other. Somewhere along the line things changed on Epic. And familar, passionate people with A TON of experience to share just abandoned the place. I did. I think I made the comment that most of us had better things to do than argue on an Internet forum. I had no interest in it.

For those of you just coming on board, I think you'll find this place to be fun, energetic, engaging, and THE BEST SOURCE of accurate and high level information in the world of skiing.

So bring it on, and bring your friends! It will only help the entire community be better!

Sad to see Epic's demise in terms of nostalgia. However, I'll be amazed if the huge majority of folks joining Pugski don't come to see it as a MUCH better community. Many of us who were quite active on Epic simply have not looked back.

Here's to a bright future, and to many new and old friends!

And thanks so much to Phil and Tricia!

 

[blikkem]

I'm confused about their decision to scrap the whole thing. Even from a business standpoint, there is a ton of content that can drive traffic. So many businesses live and die on their content. I see it as a very valuable asset.

 

[crgildart]

I'm confused about their decision to scrap the whole thing. Even from a business standpoint, there is a ton of content that can drive traffic. So many businesses live and die on their content. I see it as a very valuable asset.

It is my understanding that the platform where the data resides and is processed will no longer be supported. Since it was, in fact, an experimental platform that didn't really take off and all the data is now in that obsolete format it would be a massive time and resource endeavor to move all of the content elsewhere. Nobody's stepping up with the funds to do that.

 

[Willy]

It is my understanding that the platform where the data resides and is processed will no longer be supported. Since it was, in fact, an experimental platform that didn't really take off and all the data is now in that obsolete format it would be a massive time and resource endeavor to move all of the content elsewhere. Nobody's stepping up with the funds to do that.

Actually, that's not entirely accurate. A number of other sites moved off the Huddler platform over the past several months. I've been in contact with The Sand Trap to learn what they did and received a pretty good response. What it appears to be, more than anything, is a resistance by MNC to sell the contents and let someone else pay for the migration. I wonder if someone offered them $10,000,000 to purchase the content and migrate it, would they say yes. My guess is they would, which establishes that they have a price. Then you could negotiate it down to something reasonable that makes business sense for the buyer and seller. Right now, no one has MNC's attention and they're letting to die. Why? Who knows but it appears inevitable. C'est la vie.

 

[Bill Talbot]

Well, that will go over well....

This is how it must work...

 

[blikkem]

VC's have given millions of dollars to businesses with less then what's on that forum and a promise. Maybe it's the up front cost and the lack of interest in it's long term value. I don't know, but if I were to start a website and offered an investor this level of content as a starting point, I'd think it would be a pretty compelling product.

 

[crgildart]

VC's have given millions of dollars to businesses with less then what's on that forum and a promise. Maybe it's the up front cost and the lack of interest in it's long term value. I don't know, but if I were to start a website and offered an investor this level of content as a starting point, I'd think it would be a pretty compelling product.

Well, MNC bought it from Nolo what, 3 years ago? Now they are just walking away. If it were profitable they would keep it running and/or sell it for a profit. I don't know of any business that opts to just walk away from a business opportunity with no real downside.

 

[Don in Morrison]

What we don't know is if VR will just sit on the URL (404 Not Found) or repopulate the site with content promoting VR properties, or something else. Could it be they thought an Epic branded site was using up too much bandwidth talking about things unrelated to Epic branded properties?

 

[Philpug]

I feel for the people who will sign onto Epicski.com on Saturday and say WTF? They won't know what to do or where to go and I seriously doubt MNC will have a llink at the bottom saying: "If you are looking for the Epicski Community go to Pugski.com"

 

[Monique]

Well, MNC bought it from Nolo what, 3 years ago? Now they are just walking away. If it were profitable they would keep it running and/or sell it for a profit. I don't know of any business that opts to just walk away from a business opportunity with no real downside.

As long as we're rampantly speculating, "no real downside" is in the eye of the beholder. With a business as large as Vail Resorts, the downside could simply be that it's not profitable enough.

My employer just discontinued a product line. It was profitable, but not profitable enough to be worth the opportunity cost vs. other business opportunities. I think it was a good decision for the company. Of course, it wasn't a great decision from the perspective of the people working in that product area.

If I worked for VR in any position of influence, I would have found the constant stream of little jabs at VR ... off-putting, to say the least. Note, I don't think the jabs had anything to do with the choice to shut it down - but from day one of the purchase, VR could do no right in the eyes of many of the epicski users. No appreciation whatsoever for the fact that VR *did* pay employees to keep the site going - just vitriol when that changed.

What really sucks is that users were given so little time to prepare. I think that is due to ignorance, not malice, on the part of the owners.

 

[Tricia]

Well, MNC bought it from Nolo what, 3 years ago? Now they are just walking away. If it were profitable they would keep it running and/or sell it for a profit. I don't know of any business that opts to just walk away from a business opportunity with no real downside.

The announcement was made in December of 2012 with a takeover date of January 1, 2013

 

[Andy Mink]

The bottom line (for VC) is the even though Epicski had a lot of members, in the big picture it's a fraction of the number of people who come to ski. On any site you'll see say 10,000 members. Of that 10,000, maybe 100 are considered constantly active with maybe 20 of those carrying the load. That's not a bash on those on the site, it's jus the way it is. Most people who ski AREN'T on forums. Most people don't know that VC owns so many resorts, and most wouldn't care anyway. It's unfortunate that community isn't a commodity so therefore has no value on paper.

 

[skibob]

I feel for the people who will sign onto Epicski.com on Saturday and say WTF? They won't know what to do or where to go and I seriously doubt MNC will have a llink at the bottom saying: "If you are looking for the Epicski Community go to Pugski.com"

You've probably already done this. But maybe you didn't because it felt sleazy ~2 years ago when you started this. Make "epicski" and any other relevant words part of the key words header that robots crawl. Your tech guy (@Spooky Marcus ?) will know how to do this.

That way, anybody who goes to a search engine in an attempt to find out what happened, will find pugski.

EDIT: there will be people who know these things better than I do. But I believe doing it this way will result in higher ranking than just counting on, for example, the numerous iterations of "epicski" in this thread.

 

[Steve]

As Monique said I see this as a middle management mistake not made at Vail at all. Mountain News Corp probably got notice of the impending shut down of Huddler and said "hey, this is probably a good time to shut that forum down too." Little did they think about how bad it will look for them to do so.

 

[quant]

I'm confused about their decision to scrap the whole thing. Even from a business standpoint, there is a ton of content that can drive traffic. So many businesses live and die on their content. I see it as a very valuable asset.

It isn't valuable to Vail (MTN). The name EPIC Ski is a liability since it is similar to everything "epic" MTN does, especially the EPIC Pass. Some of the people posting there are also a liability, and this includes some moderators.

Some of mods and members of EPIC Ski hate Vail, right? They think it is the Evil Empire, right? A lot of the regulars at EPIC Ski will never stay in the accommodations MTN is pushing (e.g., Rock Resorts), won't spend $800 per day on private lessons, won't spend money in the restaurants, etc. Worse, they openly state this in the forums. It simply makes no sense for MTN to keep something with the name "EPIC" that doesn't push its brand 100%.

This is no big deal for MTN. I imagine Rob Katz couldn't care less about EPIC Ski or what happens to it. His model is the Las Vegas casino business model on steroids. Bend over backward to get the big spending "Whales" giving them the very best there is to offer and make everyone else an offer they can't refuse (the EPIC Pass). Epic Ski doesn't fit into that model.

 

[Andy Mink]

As Monique said I see this as a middle management mistake not made at Vail at all. Mountain News Corp probably got notice of the impending shut down of Huddler and said "hey, this is probably a good time to shut that forum down too." Little did they think about how bad it will look for them to do so.

Has anyone heard from or seen anything from Vail Corp? If this is a faux pas on MNC, VC can say "pay the bill to move the site" and it will be done.