[Form 4] VAIL RESORTS INC Insider Trading Activity
Rhea-AI Filing Summary
Nadia Rawlinson, a director of Vail Resorts Inc. (MTN), reported a non-derivative and derivative securities transaction related to restricted share units. The filing shows a transaction dated 09/27/2025 recording the acquisition of 1,281 common shares (code M) at a $0 price and a subsequent beneficial ownership total of 5,642 shares. Table II shows 1,281 Restricted Share Units (RSUs) with $0 price and 0 derivative securities owned after the transaction. The explanatory note states the RSUs were granted on 09/27/2024 and vest in one installment on 09/27/2025, creating a date inconsistency between the table and the explanation that is explicitly noted in the filing.
Positive
- Director received 1,281 RSUs, increasing reported beneficial ownership to 5,642 shares
- RSUs vest in one installment (09/27/2025), aligning the director's interests with future company performance
Negative
- None.
Insights
TL;DR: Routine director RSU grant; modest ownership increase, limited immediate market impact.
The filing documents a grant of 1,281 RSUs to Director Nadia Rawlinson and records an increase in beneficial ownership to 5,642 shares. The transaction is typical director compensation and is recorded at $0, consistent with equity awards rather than open-market purchases. The grant vests in a single installment, which aligns director incentives with future performance through delayed equity vesting. The filing includes a date inconsistency between table and explanation that warrants attention for record accuracy but does not change the quantum of the award.
TL;DR: Standard governance practice—time‑vested RSUs for a director; no red flags but note the reporting date discrepancy.
The disclosure shows compensation delivered as RSUs vesting one year after grant, a common approach to align board members with shareholder interests. The award size (1,281 RSUs) is presented clearly; ownership post-transaction is 5,642 shares beneficially owned. The document is properly signed by an attorney-in-fact, but the mismatch between the transaction date in the tables and the explanatory clause should be clarified to ensure accurate Section 16 reporting.