Courchevel: The Economics of the Snow Line

Courchevel is the most architecturally ambitious alpine market in Europe. The resort — specifically Courchevel 1850 — has positioned itself as the alpine equivalent of Monaco: a small, supply-constrained, ultra-prime enclave where the price per square metre exceeds any other ski market in the world. The positioning is deliberate, the planning is controlled, and the result is a market that trades on exclusivity rather than utility.

The market divides by altitude. Courchevel 1850 — the highest of the resort's villages — is the prime segment, with prices that can exceed €30,000 per square metre for the best chalets. The lower villages (1550, 1650, 1300) are secondary markets with different buyer profiles and different value trajectories. The underwriting discipline is to understand that these are not the same market at different price points. They are different markets that share a lift system. The buyer who underwrites 1850 and buys in 1550 because it is 'cheaper' has misunderstood the asset.

The key underwriting variable in Courchevel is the snow line. As alpine temperatures rise, the reliability of snow at lower altitudes is declining, and the value of high-altitude properties is, if anything, increasing as a result. Courchevel 1850 sits at an altitude that has historically been snow-reliable, and climate models suggest it will remain so longer than lower-altitude competitors. The underwriting must model the snow reliability trajectory, because the value of the asset is a bet on the future of winter. A chalet at 1850 is not just a ski property. It is a climate-resilience hedge.

The French tax environment is significant. France imposes a wealth tax (IFI) on real estate assets above €1.3 million for residents, and non-residents are subject to French capital gains tax on property sales (19% plus surcharges for high-value gains, with a taper for holds over 22 years). The IFI does not apply to non-residents, but the capital gains regime does. The underwriting must model the after-tax return, not the headline, because the French capital gains taper is substantial for long holds but punitive for short ones.

The risk in Courchevel is seasonality. The market is a winter market with a summer season that is growing but still secondary. The yield on a Courchevel chalet is low — often below 2% gross — and the void period (the weeks when the property is not rented and not used by the owner) can be substantial. The underwriting must model the carrying cost — service charges, management, maintenance, and the opportunity cost of capital — against the rental income, and the result is usually that the buyer is paying for the use, not the yield. This is correct for a trophy asset, but it must be underwritten honestly.

The longevity of a Courchevel asset is driven by the altitude, the planning control (which limits new supply), and the brand of the resort (which has been carefully managed). The greatest risk is climate — not because 1850 will lose its snow, but because the broader alpine market's perception of snow reliability may shift, and the premium for high-altitude properties may widen or narrow accordingly. The buyer who underwrites Courchevel is underwriting the snow line, and the snow line is the asset.