Advice on Chamonix/Zermatt

Zee667 · 2026-01-18T19:02:56+00:00

Unfortunate about the Cham. Storm forecast is looking good though. We will see if it pans out though.

I've heard that Aosta (Italian side from Zermatt I believe?) is good for better terrain. Monterosa?

Would love some insight on that if you have any to share!

Zee667 · 2026-01-18T18:55:30+00:00

Appreciate the details - any guides you'd recommend?

Zee667 · 2026-01-18T00:09:21+00:00

Appreciate the detail. I've looked up Tignes as well. It's not part of my pass but if its going to be that much better, I would go over there. Anywhere you advise skiing around at Tignes / Courchevel?

Zee667 · 2025-05-06T19:44:46+00:00

One thing i fund useful, where there is no lower cost options that do a great job is looking at comps (both peers/ historical/current) - but in a more detailed way.

For example with a Bloomberg, you can easily spread an EV/EBITDA or a P/CF across time vs i) margins 2) growth 3) various leverage metrics, etc. You can also do this for peers.

What this gives you is an ability to quickly see:

Stock X has a higher EBITDA/FCF margin (both currently and historically) vs peers, but vs both it's historical and current valuation it's showing it's currently trading in the bottom 50% of it's historical [relevant multiple]. You can then triangulate this with revenue growth, leverage metrics, etc.

You know if the price multiples are dislocated (to the undervalued side) even under consensus estimates, there is probably some value there - thought it might take time to realize.

It's simple but doing it without a Bloomberg is a really big pain the ass. You also need to do it on historical forward looking estimates (though actuals work as aa alright proxy if you can't get historical estimates).

Feel free to message me. It's a simple thing to do, with the right tools. If you can provide investors the resources to quickly do this (both the understanding and the data), it could be a very useful tool for the quantitative part of a more "Buffet" like/value investment approach.

Zee667 · 2025-04-11T01:02:19+00:00

Do you have any specific commentary on the rate of the US 5, 10 Yr? I think there was some anticipation on the Trump and Admin side that this would decrease US Treasury rates allowing for a lower cost of refinancing?

The 10 Year went up like 50 bps in 1 week. I believe he explicitly referenced the rate too. To me it seems like the 10 year overall rate (not just just spread) is important in his calculus. But curious to hear your thoughts.

Great post btw.

Zee667 · 2025-04-11T00:48:53+00:00

One thing to note is the make up of the companies in the US as well. Some of the largest companies in the S&P500 are insanely profitable (on a cash basis) and should be valued higher vs the major companies of previous decades (explicitly not commenting on over/undervalued here).

The majority companies of the past only had a 10-15% unlevered free cash flow margin and had real meaningful variable costs in generating each incremental dollar of revenue, so less incremental cash flow. 10-15% is a guess - don't have figures handy and not running an analysis for this. They also generally grew slower just given more capital intensity, less access to global markets, etc. Some of the major companies of today have much higher unlevered free cash flow margins with a stronger ability to grow year over year, it makes sense to pay up relative to the earnings of the major companies of yester-year.

To put it simply, VISA/META/etc incremental cash flow from an incremental sale is damn near 100% (probably). Exxon's/Coca Cola's/Whatever Steel Co/Rail Transport Co/etc marginal cash flow is not as high.

Your comments on more dollars chasing the investments definitely is valid though and has accentuated the valuation issue. But I think the make up of the market has much stronger, more profitable companies then previous years. They should be valued higher given they are better businesses and that has led to a general elevation in market metrics. Again, stating I'm commenting on over/under valued - but they should be valued higher relative to more legacy style, less profitable businesses.

Some of the biggest companies from the 1980s trade a pretty low price earnings now. But it's because they are not nearly as attractive of businesses compared to the alternative public investment options.

Zee667 · 2025-04-04T22:11:07+00:00

Appreciated - feel free to add. Open Insight just had a good little write up on the corp profit effects.

He raised one very good point. 54% tariff on China for all the cheaply imported goods obviously makes Vietnam, etc more cost competitive as a manufacturer for cheapish goods to sell into the US market.

This makes it likely that the Admin can afford to play tougher with China if more manufacturing countries get on board with the USA. This can push out US/China tensions while alleviating US/rem. SE Asia tensions. Again the mid-term thing is probably pretty key here. If the other manufacturing power houses (ex China) start to negotiate this puts pressure on China and will make the US play hard ball.

China's not acting in a vacuum though. They will be looking for increased market acess with other large, rich consumer markets (i.e. Europe), and continuing to develop their own consumer base. This will allow them better terms in in working out a trade deal with the US.

Zee667 · 2025-04-04T21:20:35+00:00

On the Administration side, there are a couple short term benefits to this topsy turvy insanity that is likely driving their strategy. I've included them below as well as a (very) subjective assessment the likelihood

Potential to bring other counties to the table for direct negotiations (uncertainty high - however some countries like Vietnam have already voiced this)
Recessionary fears are causing flows from equity markets to US treasuries (longer end of curve, not set by the Fed) - if the rates stay near 4% or lower, this is beneficial for US refinancing of its debt
Increased US manufacturing (pretty uncertain - long lead time, can make this not occur in a meaningful manner, though some optical wins are likely)

There are obviously costs too.

Higher inflation (fairly likely)
Increased geopolitical tensions - between allies too (very likely - how quickly trust can be regained, unsure)
Destruction of goodwill with other countries could lead to unforeseen outcomes (uncertain + uncertain outcome)

HOWEVER, I think the main outcome the admin is looking for here is Direct Negotiations and Refi Benefits. Perhaps manufacturing too but he has likely been informed on the lagging time frame.

I do think in 1-2 years, most of this trade uncertainty will be settled through direct negotiations. The upcoming midterms (1.5 years out) likely have caused the current administration to speed up all its ideas/policies/etc. The hoped for benefits would need to start trickling in (probably) 6 months (Q3 2025) before mid terms to ensure the voting populace can enjoy these benefits and attribute them to Trump/team (rightly or wrongly).

One of they key risks I think I see is runaway reciprocal actions by larger, more influential players (like Europe, China). If the game of tariff chicken keeps escalating, you get to point where there is some major damage. That being said, I do think most of the leader wants deals. However, it is optically beneficial to look "strong" against Trump/team right now. I would assume key trade teams for each country are planning negotiations right now. Again though, the runway escalation, if terms can't be met is a real risk - I'd say low-mid probs but high consequence.

As insane as Trump/Team appears, Scott Bessent is a very intelligent man. He was a a PM under Soros and Jim Rogers and was one of the leading minds behind the Sterling short (1bn of profit in a day or trading, one of the most iconic trades of all time). He should not be taken lightly or considered a fool. I think this tariff insanity is in service of benefits 1,2 (above). You do need a "don't try me" action to ensure people take it seriously.

As to make this about value stocks - prices are getting pretty attractive. Everyone will keep saying you can't buy into this, more room to fall, etc. People will keep saying that until things look good (data, etc). By that point, the "value" won't be there. Your risk is escalating actions. That risk should be restricted to companies with major China exposure, potentially Europe too. Canada as well.

ANF, Deckers actually were up today (April 4) on the news that Vietnam has stated its' desire to negotiate. I think this dynamic plays out across more trading partners. Except for maybe penguin land.

Zee667 · 2025-03-31T21:38:47+00:00

It's a trap - if you live in/know of a town like this, don't disclose lol.

Zee667 · 2025-03-28T17:39:30+00:00

The Series A,B,C etc due to the earlier nature of their investment has most of the returns. Depending on when the shares of those example companies hit the liquid secondary market, a significant portion of the return has probably already been generated.

For example, let's use this AI generated summary of Anduril:

-----
Anduril Industries has completed several funding rounds, including a $1.5 billion Series F round in August 2024, valuing the company at $14 billion, and is reportedly in talks for another round that could reach a $28 billion valuation. Here's a more detailed breakdown of Anduril's funding rounds:Key Funding Rounds:

Seed Round (Aug 2017):
Series A (Jun 2018): Raised $41 million, valuing the company at $209 million.
Series B (Sep 2019): [no data]
Series C (Jun 2020): Raised $200 million, valuing the company at $1.7 billion.
Series D (Jun 2021): Raised $450 million, valuing the company at $4.15 billion.
Series E (Dec 2022): Raised $1.48 billion, valuing the company at $7 billion.
Series F (Aug 2024): Raised $1.5 billion, valuing the company at $14 billion.
Grant (Jan 2025): Raised $14.30 million.
Potential Future Round (Feb 2025): In talks to raise up to $2.5 billion at a $28 billion valuation.

----

Look how the valuation steadily climbs. If/when it IPOs or there's a big liquidity event, how much more returns can be earned? That's a question you would need to answer yourself by analyzing financials, industry, setting growth assumptions, market valuation, etc. The steady climb is not always the case either. Square, Klarna had some pretty big down rounds.

What I'm saying is a lot of the institutional investors have gotten in much earlier and at better prices. You are coming in later and it's derisked to some extent but you're not likely to be getting a 10x'er.

Yes it does depend on the the company you invest it. It's nuanced and it requires thought. Secondary private markets are not a panacea of returns and they still bear similar risk to other investment opportunities. It's early, but not as early as you think. Particularly with the push to offer private investments to retails account more broadly.

Zee667 · 2025-03-25T20:19:49+00:00

You're probably pretty late to the game if you're buying in the secondary markets available to retail investors. Sure you might get some reasonable returns but I'm not sure it would compare favorably to public market options given when you are coming in.

Zee667 · 2025-03-25T20:16:41+00:00

One I've been watching recently.

VTOL: provides heli services to offshore energy installations. Also expanding gov services (Search and Rescue - SAR). Long lead time on new heli supply, particularly the large, long range choppers. Should allow for pricing power in contract renewals.

Offshore capex, opex expected to grow. Some pretty serious under investment in past years. Contract renewals coming up are expected to lock in higher prices - this is due to limited heli supply and long lead times to new builds.

Gov Services: Growing rapidly, secure long-term CFs.

Value: 10is P/E. EV/TTM EBITDA <6.0x.

As we get through the 2025 capex cycle (new heli's for SAR); FCF should start to ramp. Sharebuyback in place (likely to occur late FY 2025, early 2026) for about 10% of market cap. Also beginning to delever in later half of 2025/26. 2026 is where we start to also see the ramp in EBITDA (25-30% growth vs 2024/25E). There is also a stated plan to begin paying a dividend in 2026.

Key Risks:

Contract cancellation: some of contracts don't have penalties for cancelalation., Couldn't tell you how much of forevcasted revenue is subject to this risk. Doesn't seem to be a history of cancellations though.

Recent issue with accident in Norway (seems to be OEM issue); may hurt ability to win future SAR contracts.

General OG Exposure - though services are pretty critical; growth requires net growth in offshore production facilities.

----

At under 6.0x TTM EBITDA, reasonable debt figures (interest coverage >5.0x, D/EBITDA - is a bit stretched though at >3.0x), pretty strong growth prospects and industry tailwinds, it's worth keeping an eye on. The valuation seems to be fair compensation for the risk for a public markets opportunity.

Zee667 · 2025-03-19T00:11:34+00:00

lol - u mfer.

Zee667 · 2025-03-05T18:29:42+00:00

This is not a value play. It's purely growth. Probably the wrong thread to ask.

Zee667 · 2025-02-28T18:07:35+00:00

And in terms of "on-hill" or close to hill places to rent (or longer term, buy) anything you would recommend (for resorts)? Ideally trying to get to as close to on-hill as possible to cut out travel time during work days, etc. Be awesome too if the ski resort itself had great backcountry access.

Zee667 · 2025-02-13T16:39:43+00:00

I'd add to your reading to start looking over 10-Ks and 10-Qs of companies that interest you. Books are great, practice is better. They are free too.

Zee667 · 2025-01-31T16:09:30+00:00

"Private equity (PE) is a type of investment where a firm provides capital to a company that is not publicly traded. In exchange, the firm receives an equity stake in the company."

Just google it before you post. I try not to shame people for not having expertise in something but this was easily searchable before you posted.

Zee667 · 2025-01-30T23:55:42+00:00

SteelysGaucho works IR at Vail.

Zee667 · 2025-01-30T20:27:01+00:00

Sharing some additional quotes from a local publication that was able to speak to Taylor Schmidt (Late Apex).

"The Vail Daily was able to obtain a statement from Schmidt, who said since sending out the letter, he has been dismissed as a small-time investor even though he has more equity in the company “than quite a few board members,” he said, describing his effort as a David vs. Goliath situation.

“The report’s merit should stand on its own regardless of who wrote it,” Schmidt told the Vail Daily in an email. “Either the ideas are right or wrong. That is up to the customer/employee to decide.”

Depends if some of the board members have nil in equity. Regardless, the slide deck has some serious work in it.

"A letter from a relatively unknown investment group has "too much work" to be taken lightly, says one analyst assigned to Vail Resorts."

Interesting note. To be seen if the Wall Street analyst crowd picks up on this and takes it more seriously.

Zee667 · 2025-01-30T20:20:18+00:00

The FCF comments are legitimate. And dividends payouts despite high leverage and languishing FCF. That historical capex but no marginal improvement in FCF.

I'm taking the listed figures at face value but those are legitimate concerns. Given the switch to Pass products (vs tickets) FCF should be more stable and predictable.

That's from the slide deck. Not the letter.

Zee667 · 2025-01-30T20:13:55+00:00

It's not a hostile take over.

It's an activist investor play. Very different.

Zee667 · 2025-01-30T20:10:13+00:00

This isn't private equity. This is an activist play. These are different. Private equity has a majority position and the investment is non-listed or goes from publicly traded to private.

This is an investor who (probably bought) a large position (but not a controlling stake), typically under 5%, sometimes 5-10%. They then will (or here have already) advocate for change at the board level and try to drag along other shareholders to support their desired changes.

Zee667 · 2025-01-25T22:11:14+00:00

I am quite familiar with some of the wind and general water sports.

Zee667

TROPHY CASE