A PYMNTS Company

New York AG Wins Antitrust Battle Against Intermountain Management Over Ski Market Competition

By  |  March 10, 2025
Judge with gavel image.

Intermountain Management, the company behind Labrador and Song Mountains, has suffered a significant legal defeat in an antitrust case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James. The case centered around Intermountain’s acquisition and subsequent closure of Toggenburg Mountain, a move that state officials argued was designed to eliminate competition and create a monopoly in the Syracuse-area ski market.

    Get the Full Story

    Complete the form to unlock this article and enjoy unlimited free access to all PYMNTS content — no additional logins required.

    yesSubscribe to our daily newsletter, PYMNTS Today.

    By completing this form, you agree to receive marketing communications from PYMNTS and to the sharing of your information with our sponsor, if applicable, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions.

    According to a statement from the Attorney General’s office, the court’s decision represents a victory for both consumers and local competitors. The ruling effectively curtails Intermountain’s attempts to dominate the market, ensuring that skiers in the region continue to have multiple options for winter recreation.

    Per the Attorney General’s press release, the company deliberately paid a premium to purchase Toggenburg Mountain, only to shut it down shortly after. The state argued that this was done with the explicit intention of reducing competition, allowing Intermountain to raise prices and limit choices for skiers. The legal team prosecuting the case, led by Deputy Bureau Chief Amy McFarlane and Bureau Chief Elinor Hoffmann, provided substantial evidence that Intermountain’s actions violated state antitrust laws.

    Judge Robert E. Antonacci II ruled in favor of the Attorney General’s office, affirming that Intermountain’s tactics were indeed anticompetitive. Additionally, the court examined allegations of a “no-poach” provision, which purportedly prevented the former owners of Toggenburg from hiring employees previously working for Intermountain. Per the Attorney General’s office, such agreements further restricted fair competition and employment opportunities within the industry.

    The lawsuit, originally filed in October 2022, argued that Intermountain’s maneuvering was not just a business decision but an illegal scheme to suppress competition. With the court ruling now in place, the decision serves as a warning to other corporations considering similar tactics.

    “Intermountain paid a premium price to destroy competition because its owners knew they could raise prices and profit more with a monopoly. Now Intermountain’s anticompetitive scheme is put on ice,” Attorney General James stated following the ruling.

    Source: Hoodline