It's a "fluff piece" in the sense that it does not focus on the financial side of Vail Resorts as a public company like some would think a Bloomberg piece would, nor does it focus on the more "ski-specific" aspects of WB as some hard-core skiers might welcome. But, neither of those types of article would appear in Bloomberg Pursuits - Bloomberg's lifestyle brand dedicated to covering art, travel, leisure, collectibles,...
Having said that, I think it's a good article offering a balanced/fair portrayal of both sides of the story, albeit in a somewhat "light" manner. It's no more of a fluff piece than most articles I've read on this subject across other publications (75% of the articles I read in ski-specific publications are "fluff").
".... a decade ago, he slashed the price of access to less than half the price of a season pass at most rival resorts. At the time, the move was seen as crazy. But the Epic Pass upended the industry, making snow sports more accessible..."
It is surely disheartening if the character/history/pedigree of WB is being taken away. Unfortunately be it Starbucks or Vail, there will likely be mixed feelings in the local community about the new neighbor. Nothing is perfect, nothing is ever going to please everyone. But in this case, it's hard to argue that making skiing more affordable is a bad thing.
As a real life example, Stowe's season pass was $1,600 just two years ago. My family would have likely not bought the pass. Now it's about half, so we bought season passes and have spent thousands on hotels, restaurants, ski tunes, retail, ski lessons... with 80-90% of that going to non-Vail related folks and businesses. Other than the season passes and on-mountain lunches and Vail's cut of lessons fees, most everything else has not been in Vail's "ecosystem". Instead, it has benefited the people in the town/community.