Client case studyCasago Heber CityHeber Valley & Wasatch Back, UT
UtahStreamlineClient since 2024
Summer 2026 · May to August

The market discounted. This portfolio raised rate.

Demand softened across the Heber Valley this summer. The bedroom-matched market gave up 3.3 points of occupancy and leaned on a modest 6.2% rate increase to cover it, finishing with rent per available night down 3.9%. Casago Heber City lost the same share of demand and pushed rate 2.6 times harder, so the rent reaching owners went up instead of down.

“The results they produced were amazing.”

Jeff Harris · Owner, Casago Park City, Deer Valley & Heber City
+5.3%
Owner rent · same-store
market RentPAR -3.9%
+16.2%
Rent ADR · market +6.2%
31.8%
Adjusted occupancy · market 31.0%
9 pts
of separation from the market on owner rent
The season

Everyone lost the same demand. Not everyone priced for it.

This was a softer summer across the Wasatch Back, and the portfolio was not exempt from it: nights sold fell 9.3%, almost exactly the 9.6% of occupancy the surrounding market gave up. What separated the two was the response. The market moved rate 6.2%. This portfolio moved it 16.2%, and that is the entire difference between rent falling and rent growing.

Owner rent · Heber City
+5.3%
Owner rent · market
-3.9%
Rent ADR · Heber City
+16.2%
Rent ADR · market
+6.2%
Demand captured · Heber City
-9.3%
Demand captured · market
-9.6%
The demand loss was shared and the outcome was not. Rent reaching owners grew 5.3% while the comp set's rent per available night fell 3.9%, a 9 point swing produced almost entirely by rate. Adjusted occupancy still finished at 31.8% against a market at 31.0%, so the rate was not bought with empty nights.

A matched group of 21 homes within the Casago Heber City portfolio that booked in both periods, May 1 to August 31, 2026 against the same window in 2025. The portfolio is larger than the matched group. Portfolio figures are night-allocated from booked reservations, cancellations excluded and stays of 28 nights or more removed from both years. Market is Key Data comp sets matched to each home's own bedroom count, unit-weighted to the cohort's bedroom mix. Growth rates are compared rather than absolute levels, because bedroom count does not capture size, location or condition. Adjusted occupancy is per available night, net of owner stays and maintenance holds.

What it took

Holding rate when the market would not.

Rate

Priced through the softness

+16.2%

The reflex in a slow season is to discount into it. Rent ADR moved 16.2% against a comp set that managed 6.2%, which is where every dollar of the outperformance came from.

Occupancy

Did not buy nights

31.8% vs 31.0%

Higher rate is only real if the calendar holds. Adjusted occupancy finished above the bedroom-matched market, so the rate increase was priced into genuine demand rather than traded against it.

Approach

Managed home by home

Every home, every date

Pricing decisions are made per property and per date rather than by portfolio-wide rule, which is what lets individual homes hold rate while the market around them discounts.

Method

How these numbers were produced.

A matched group

21 homes within the wider Casago Heber City portfolio that booked in both summers. Homes that joined or left the program between the two periods are excluded.

One source, both years

Both summers come from the same booked-reservation data, night-allocated to the calendar, with cancellations and stays of 28 nights or more removed from each year alike.

Growth, not levels

The portfolio is compared to its market on rate of change rather than absolute dollars, because bedroom matching does not control for size, location or condition.

What is your season actually worth?

Pacer is a preferred revenue management partner to the Casago franchise network. We will benchmark your portfolio against bedroom-matched market performance and show you what is recoverable, before you make any commitment.

Request a portfolio audit