Pursuit Attractions' Earnings Call: Jasper Lodging Timing and M&A's Role in 2030 Targets Don't Align

Date of Call: Aug 5, 2026

Financials Results

• Revenue: $133.5M, up 14% YOY
• Operating Margin: EBITDA margin down ~90 bps YOY due to weather impacting high-margin attractions

Guidance:

• Full-year 2026 adjusted EBITDA growth expected to be 14% at the midpoint, with a range of $128M to $138M.
• Increased guidance incorporates $5M-$6M from incremental Flyover contribution prior to sale, $1M-$2M from Eagle Wing Tours acquisition, partially offset by ~$2M from unfavorable exchange rate assumptions.
• Underlying business performance outlook remains unchanged.

Business Commentary:

Revenue Growth and Strategic Transactions:

• Pursuit reported record revenue of $133.5 million for the second quarter of 2026, up 14% year-over-year.
• The growth was driven by strong performance at Tabacón, which was acquired in July 2025, as well as continued growth across existing geographies.

Enhanced Financial Outlook:

• Pursuit increased its full-year adjusted EBITDA guidance to reflect incremental contributions from recent strategic transactions, expecting 14% year-over-year growth at the midpoint, with a range of $128 to $138 million.
• This adjustment incorporates contributions from the sale of Flyover and the acquisition of Eagle Wing Tours, partially offset by unfavorable changes in exchange rate assumptions.

Organic Growth and Investment Pipeline:

• Pursuit has a pipeline of more than $300 million of organic growth investment opportunities from 2026 through 2030, expected to contribute more than $40 million of incremental adjusted EBITDA by 2030.
• The investments focus on elevating experiences and expanding capacity, with projects like the Golden SkyBridge attraction and new lodging developments.

Attraction and Hospitality Performance:

• Ticket revenue for attractions reached $55 million, reflecting a 3% year-over-year increase, while room revenue totaled $33 million, up 27% year-over-year.
• The attraction performance was bolstered by strategic programming initiatives, while the hospitality performance was driven by strong demand and improved RevPAR.

Strategic Acquisitions and M&A Pipeline:

• Pursuit completed the acquisition of Eagle Wing Tours for roughly 6.5 times adjusted EBITDA, enhancing its portfolio in Victoria, British Columbia.
• The company continues to pursue strategic acquisitions that align with its criteria of being iconic, having perennial demand, and offering high return on investment.

Sentiment Analysis:

Overall Tone: Positive

• Management cites 'exceptional guest experiences and record second quarter results,' 'strong momentum,' and 'positive demand indicators.' They increased full-year guidance, highlighted 'strong performance' from new acquisitions, and expressed excitement about the 'next chapter' of growth, stating 'we're pretty excited about where we are, but even more excited about where we're going.'

Q&A:

• Question from Jeff Stanchel (Stifel): Can you add color on the margin performance in the quarter, both year on year and relative to expectations?
  Response: Margin degradation was due to weather challenges disproportionately impacting high-margin attractions, while the lower-margin lodging business performed well.

• Question from Jeff Stanchel (Stifel): Can you expand on the booking pace trends, particularly the sequential change in Canada and acceleration in the U.S.?
  Response: Positive year-over-year growth and strong ADR/occupancy are positive indicators; month-to-month fluctuations are normal due to channel dynamics and go-to-market strategy adjustments.

• Question from Tyler Batori (Oppenheimer): Can you talk more about what you're seeing from the travel trade business and its mix?
  Response: Travel trade remains strong despite some FIFA-related shift; the company balances demand across tour/travel partners, consumer direct, and OTAs.

• Question from Tyler Batori (Oppenheimer): Is there any extra conservatism in the Q3 or organic growth assumptions in the guidance?
  Response: Core business is tracking to original expectations; weather impacted Q2, but strong booking pacing and performance from new acquisitions support confidence.

• Question from Tyler Batori (Oppenheimer): How much upside came through for Tabacon versus the original $10M EBITDA target, and can you talk about the new villa project?
  Response: Tabacon exceeded first-year EBITDA target, achieving >20% growth and lowering the effective multiple to nearly 9x; the new premium villa project is in development, with details on cost and contribution to be disclosed later.

• Question from Tyler Batori (Oppenheimer): Is there any contingency on cost or timing for the CapEx projects, and what is the confidence in completion?
  Response: Projects are far along with good cost estimates; timing is the main variable, but overall Vision 2030 and 2026-2027 multi-year project cadence remain unchanged.

• Question from Eric De Laurier (Craig-Hallam Capital Group): Is there any timing or cadence to project completion dates for 2027?
  Response: Too early for specifics, but 2026 starts many multi-year projects; larger inflection points from growth capital projects will be in the back end toward 2030.

• Question from Eric De Laurier (Craig-Hallam Capital Group): Are there any major lodging openings expected to bring more visitation to the Jasper market?
  Response: Early days; the remainder of the Forest Park Woodland Hotel will open with public spaces to follow, offering upside potential, but timing is uncertain.

• Question from Eric De Laurier (Craig-Hallam Capital Group): How full is the M&A pipeline post the Flyover and Eagle Wing Tours acquisitions?
  Response: Pipeline is bountiful with many opportunities, but the company is selective, focusing on iconic, high-margin assets in destinations with perennial demand.

Contradiction Point 1

Timeline and Impact of New Lodging in Jasper

Contradiction on whether new lodging benefits are already materializing or still uncertain.

Tyler Batori (Oppenheimer) - Tyler Batori (Oppenheimer)

2026Q2: We are excited about the upside from new/renovated lodging (e.g., completed phases of Forest Park Woodland, upcoming Lobstic and Pyramid Lake Lodge projects), but timing of visitation impact is still to be determined. - David Barry(CEO)

Can you discuss the conservatism in Q3 organic growth assumptions, the upside at Tabacón versus the $10M EBITDA target and the new premium villa project, and the contingency in the CapEx pipeline for Banff and Jasper along with confidence in completion? - Eric de Laurier (Craig-Hallum Capital Group)

2026Q2: The Forest Park Woodland Hotel will be fully open soon, with public spaces to follow. Any upside from new openings is positive but the timing is still uncertain. - David Barry(CEO)

Contradiction Point 2

Growth Trajectory of the Tabacón Project

Contradiction on the scale of Tabacón's EBITDA growth reported in the same fiscal year.

Tyler Batory (Oppenheimer) - Tyler Batory (Oppenheimer)

2026Q2: In the first 12 months of ownership, Tabacón's EBITDA grew over 20% (implying a purchase multiple now near 9x) due to strong team execution on yield and volume. - Bo Heitz(CFO)

What is the EBITDA upside for Tabacón versus the original $10M target, and could you provide details on the new premium villa project? - Tyler Batori (Oppenheimer)

2026Q2: Tabacón has delivered over 20% EBITDA growth in its first year, lowering the effective multiple to nearly 9x. - Bo Heitz(CFO)

Contradiction Point 3

Fuel Price Impact on Visitation

Contradiction on whether elevated fuel prices historically affect visitation.

Jeff Stanchel (Stifel) - Jeff Stanchel (Stifel)

2026Q2: Smoke from distant wildfires has had temporary, spotty effects on guest behavior... However, it is not holding back full-year performance as conditions clear. - Bo Heitz(CFO) & David Barry(CEO)

Can you provide insights into the margin performance decline (~90 bps YoY), the sequential booking pace trends in Canada and the U.S. in May, and any impacts from forest fires/smoke on bookings or attraction visits? - Eric Des Lauriers (Craig-Hallum)

2026Q1: Elevated fuel prices historically have had a marginal effect, if any, on the business. - David Barry(CEO)

Contradiction Point 4

Capital Expenditure (CapEx) Project Confidence

Contradiction on level of certainty regarding timing and completion of major projects.

Tyler Batori (Oppenheimer) - Tyler Batori (Oppenheimer)

2026Q2: Many projects are far along in planning with locked-in costs and construction contingencies. Timing remains the bigger variable... The team is confident in the Vision 2030 long-term plan and keeps the investment range unchanged. - Bo Heitz(CFO) & David Barry(CEO)

"1) Can you talk about the mix and performance of the travel trade business versus other channels? 2) Is there any extra conservatism in the Q3 organic growth assumptions within the updated guidance? 3) How much upside has come through at Tabacón versus the original $10M EBITDA target? Can you discuss the new premium villa project? 4) Regarding the capital expenditure (CapEx) pipeline (e.g., Banff, Jasper), is there any contingency built in for cost or timing, and how confident are you in completion?" - Jeff Stantial (Stifel)

2026Q1: No significant expected impacts from fuel costs on... capital projects, which are multi-year and not overly specific to fuel. The company will monitor but does not anticipate major changes to the growth CapEx plan. - Bo Hites(CFO)

Contradiction Point 5

Role of M&A in 2030 Growth Targets

Contradiction on whether M&A is a 'key component' or a 'directionally' minor contributor to 2030 targets.

Eric de Laurier (Craig-Hallum Capital Group) - Eric de Laurier (Craig-Hallum Capital Group)

2026Q2: The M&A pipeline is bountiful. The team is selective... acquisitions have historically contributed significantly. - David Barry(CEO)

Okay, so the user wants me to rewrite the input into a concise earnings-call question. Let me start by understanding the input. The original question is: "Can you comment on the state of the M&A pipeline post the Flyover and Eagle Wing Tours acquisitions?" First, I need to make sure it's a clear question suitable for an earnings call. Earnings call questions are usually specific and to the point. The input is already a question, so that's good. The key elements here are "M&A pipeline," "post acquisitions," and the specific names "Flyover" and "Eagle Wing Tours." I should check if the question is too vague. The user mentions Flyover and Eagle Wing Tours as specific acquisitions, so including those names adds necessary context. The phrase "state of the M&A pipeline" is a bit broad, but in the context of earnings calls, it's acceptable as it's asking about the current status or any updates after those acquisitions.The instruction says to output exactly one line, only the final question text, ending with a question mark if a rewrite is possible. Since the original is a valid question, maybe it's already concise enough. However, maybe "state of the M&A pipeline" can be phrased more directly. Perhaps "How has the M&A pipeline evolved following the Flyover and Eagle Wing Tours acquisitions?" But the user wants it concise. Let me see. The original is already concise. "Comment on the state" is standard in earnings calls. Wait, maybe "state" can be replaced with "status" for clarity. But the original uses "state," which is acceptable. Also, "post the Flyover and Eagle Wing Tours acquisitions" is clear. I don't see any issues here. The user's instruction says if the input is a clear question, output it as-is. The input is a valid, specific question. So according to the rules, if the input is already a clear question, do I need to modify it? The rules say "If the input is NOT a question, is too vague, or lacks enough information to form a clear earnings-call question, output the input EXACTLY as-is, with no modification." Wait, no. The rule says if it's not a question, too vague, or lacks info, output as-is. Otherwise, if it can be rewritten, output the rewritten version. But the input is already a valid question. So maybe the user expects it to be rewritten into a more concise form. Let me check the original again. The original is "Can you comment on the state of the M&A pipeline post the Flyover and Eagle Wing Tours acquisitions?" Maybe "post" can be replaced with "following" for a more formal tone, but "post" is acceptable. The question is already concise. Maybe there's no need to change it. However, the user wants it rewritten into one concise question. Since the original is already a single concise question, perhaps the answer is to leave it as-is. But the user might expect some rephrasing. Let me check the rules again. The user says "If the input is NOT a question, is too vague, or lacks enough information to form a clear earnings-call question, output the input EXACTLY as-is, with no modification." The input is a valid question, so the user expects a rewrite. But how to make it more concise? Maybe remove "Can you" to make it more direct. For example: "How has the M&A pipeline evolved following the Flyover and Eagle Wing Tours acquisitions?" That's more direct. But the original uses "comment on the state," which is a bit more open-ended. However, in earnings calls, direct questions are preferred. So maybe the better version is "What is the current status of the M&A pipeline following the Flyover and Eagle Wing Tours acquisitions?" But the user wants exactly one line. Alternatively, "How has the M&A pipeline been impacted by the Flyover and Eagle Wing Tours acquisitions?" But the original question is already acceptable. Maybe the user wants to keep the original structure but make it more concise. The original is already concise. So perhaps the answer is to output the original as-is. Wait, the rules say if a rewrite is possible, end with a question mark. The original ends with a question mark. But the user might want to ensure it's formatted correctly. Let me check the input again. The input is a question, so according to the rules, if it's a clear question, do we output it as-is or rewrite? The instructions say "Rewrite the input into ONE concise earnings-call question." So regardless of whether it's already a question, we need to rewrite it. But the user also says if it's not a question, too vague, etc., output as-is. So since the input is a valid question, we need to rewrite it into a more concise version. Let me try that. The original is "Can you comment on the state of the M&A pipeline post - Jeffrey Stantial (Analyst)

20260226-2025 Q4: Directionally, the majority of growth is expected to come from organic sources, with acquisitions remaining a key component. - David Barry(CEO) & Michael Heitz(CFO)