Do smalll boats owners subsidise BIG boat owners?
John Edginton
I stayed overnight so I had to cough up my fees to cover pontoons, showers
and so on, no problem?
YES there is... Why for the last 3 years have I usually had to pay a minimum
fee for a 7.5 or 8 Mtr boat when my own vessel is only 6 Mtr LOA? My vessel
requires a lighter weight of engineering to retain it, it's displacement and
foot print are smaller, I am no larger than average... so why must I
continue to be ripped off?
The though occurs to me that all vessels should be charged an additional
25-30%, you can just imagine it... When I look around marinas it seems that
the largest percentage of boats are larger not smaller, surely a few pence
all round would remove the need for one owner (small boat, little money) to
subsidise another (big boat, big money).... The ultimate insult is that if
I could afford to run an 8 Mtr or larger boat I would, and these robbing
B*&^%$ŁS are keeping that day further away...
Am I alone in this plight? Do you think all owners should pay their fair
dues? Are the marina companies taking the Mickey?
J.Edginton
S/Y 'Halo Jones', Hillyard 2.5 Tonner
John Church
operators and don't be shy about naming and shaming. UK cost of living is
probably less rather than more than our continental friends, so the only
possible reason for high UK marina charges are that we're being ripped off.
Since MDL got enough of the market to control the price everyone joined in.
There's no such thing as a fair deal, you just have to take your pain and
put up with it while the fat cats down at MDL think up even newer and
cleverer ways to remove valuable cash from a marine industry that needs all
the help it can get.
Marinas are harbours around which the marine industry tries to function, but
when so much of the available cash is mopped up before the punter gets
ashore it's no wonder we are a market in decline.
JC
John Edginton wrote in message <7u32oq$1kio$1...@grind.server.pavilion.net>...
Rainer Thonnes
%steve%@firthcom.demon.co.uk (Steve Firth) writes:
>John Edginton <jedg...@pavilion.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Am I alone in this plight? Do you think all owners should pay their fair
>> dues? Are the marina companies taking the Mickey?
>
>occupies a berth that could be used by a 7.5/8m boat. Hence you either
>have to pay the whack or they lose out on the income that could have
>been made by berthing a (slightly) larger boat.
So the marina builds a hundred berths for 50-footers, in an area where
there aren't enough rich bastards to own 100 50-footers. There may be
the odd one or two, and the remaining berths are used by 30-footers.
Hardly justifies charging 30-footers 50-foot rates when there are no
50-footers desperately seeking places, does it?
Geoff Blake
: I have just returned from a round trip to a well known south coast marina.
: I stayed overnight so I had to cough up my fees to cover pontoons, showers
: and so on, no problem?
: YES there is... Why for the last 3 years have I usually had to pay a minimum
: fee for a 7.5 or 8 Mtr boat when my own vessel is only 6 Mtr LOA? My vessel
: requires a lighter weight of engineering to retain it, it's displacement and
: foot print are smaller, I am no larger than average... so why must I
: continue to be ripped off?
: The though occurs to me that all vessels should be charged an additional
: 25-30%, you can just imagine it... When I look around marinas it seems that
: the largest percentage of boats are larger not smaller, surely a few pence
: all round would remove the need for one owner (small boat, little money) to
: subsidise another (big boat, big money).... The ultimate insult is that if
: I could afford to run an 8 Mtr or larger boat I would, and these robbing
: B*&^%$ŁS are keeping that day further away...
: Am I alone in this plight? Do you think all owners should pay their fair
: dues? Are the marina companies taking the Mickey?
: J.Edginton
First let me say that I don't agree with this view, I too have a 6m boat,
just that as a small business man I can understand where it comes from.
A marina berth can accomdate up to a certain size, and it makes good sense
that the charge should be related to the size of berth, not craft. The
package holiday business (for example) have been doing this for years in
"under occupancy" charges. This of course disadvantages those using berths
larger than their craft, be they a 6m craft in an 8m berth or a 10m owner on
a 12m berth.
Geoff
--
Geoff Blake geoff (at) palaemon . demon . co . uk linux 2.0.36
Chelmsford g8gnz @ g8gnz . ampr . org sparc - i586
Please, only use the .ampr.org address if you know what you are doing
Intel create faster processors - Microsoft create slower processes
jim barr
Firth <%steve%@firthcom.demon.co.uk> writes
>John Edginton <jedg...@pavilion.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Am I alone in this plight? Do you think all owners should pay their fair
>> dues? Are the marina companies taking the Mickey?
>
>occupies a berth that could be used by a 7.5/8m boat. Hence you either
>have to pay the whack or they lose out on the income that could have
>been made by berthing a (slightly) larger boat.
>
As a bit of an outsider, (I do not use marina berths at present), I wish
to make an observation.
1. For the economic success of the marina the spread and variety of
berths should reflect the anticipated clientele.
2. This is a sellers market to a mainly *Hobby* clientele! ( I
reckon that the majority of boats in marinas are for pleasure) If it
costs TOO much, you don't do it.
3. Having said that, I agree with the original post in that marinas
could charge like many hotels; I have stayed at many hotels and paid
for a single room but had to use a double, some hotels do not have
single rooms, they simply have a single tariff.
I can see a clear potential similarity between marinas and hotels, in
this context.
I'll shut up now.
jim
Jim Barr http://www.wandana.demon.co.uk
Best is the enemy of good enough
Barrs Law of Recursive Futility
"If you are smart enough to use one of these.....
....you can probably manage without one"
Clint Smith
the foot/metre. That is because the cost of mooring is linear (per foot) but
the cost of boat/maintenance is a little less than cubic comparing like types
(ie. it is expontentially, more expensive to get and run a larger boat) This is
the same argument as cars subsidising lorries who cause far more than
proportional damage to the roads.
However, it's not up to us to whinge about the marina's cos they are horrible
anyway but it IS encumbant on us the WHINGE LIKE HELL when we get charged for
using our own anchors (Dartmouth etc.) without the benefit of any facilities
other than the land God put there to give us shelter. In view of this perhaps
we should put 'The Creator God' as the payee next time we write a cheque for
charges for anchoring in a sheltered estuary?
Geoff Blake
: In article <1dzny4g.q1v...@civet.firthcom.demon.co.uk>,
: %steve%@firthcom.demon.co.uk (Steve Firth) writes:
: >John Edginton <jedg...@pavilion.co.uk> wrote:
: >
: >> Am I alone in this plight? Do you think all owners should pay their fair
: >> dues? Are the marina companies taking the Mickey?
: >
: >I can't see that the marina owners are taking the mickey - your boat
: >occupies a berth that could be used by a 7.5/8m boat. Hence you either
: >have to pay the whack or they lose out on the income that could have
: >been made by berthing a (slightly) larger boat.
: So the marina builds a hundred berths for 50-footers, in an area where
: there aren't enough rich bastards to own 100 50-footers. There may be
: the odd one or two, and the remaining berths are used by 30-footers.
: Hardly justifies charging 30-footers 50-foot rates when there are no
: 50-footers desperately seeking places, does it?
No Ranier, if you look at the charges, you will find that they can earn more
using 30ft berths than 50 ft berths, Generally there about twice the number
of 30ft berths in the same area as 50 ft berths.
Bear in mind that most 50 ft'ers have considerably more beam, thus wider
berths, than most 30 ft'ers (multi's excluded). Also the larger boats
require more access (he says remembering warping a rather beamy 47 ft'er
into an extremely tight marina, 30 ft - no problem).
John Edginton
Steve Firth
>
> SNIP
>
>In my experience this is the case that prevails. If I turn up in my 7.49
>metre boat at most marinas along the south coast, I get charged for 7.5
>metres, even if they have to give me a berth for a 36 metre boat.
>However I don't see anything wrong with having a lower limit to the
>charge - the original question is from someone who (presumably) is
>feeling iffy about paying exactly how much over the top? About GBP 1.25
>more than he expected. I'm sure that this is a huge subsidy towards the
>running costs of a 160ft yacht, no, really, I am.
>
>Steve Firth . There has been an alarming increase in the
> u...@firthcom.demon.co.uk . number of things you know nothing about.
>Message and .sig (c) 1999 .
>$500 to reproduce either. .
Steve,
It strikes me you may have missed the point!
It's not so much the amount (though it has worth) as the percentage...
If I pay for 8Mtr boat I am paying 25-33% over the odds...
Would you want to pay for 13.5Mtr vessel when mooring a 10Mtr vessel?
I do 'cause I must and I wish to keep sailing, but... you know the rest...
J.Edginton
S/Y 'Halo Jones', Hillyard 2.5 Tonner
BTW. Could you let me know where I can get a south coast marina berth for
under 75 pence per meter/night as visitor, I will most definatily add it to
my list of 'got to be checked/too good to be true' out mainas. The real
world means that at between £1.50 and £2.50 per Mtr/Night those 2 Mtr I pay
for but do not own can add up to new kit every year...
John Edginton
John Church wrote in message <7u45te$o9a$2...@lure.pipex.net>...
>I think your first mistake is in aiming at the boats, aim at the marina
>operators and don't be shy about naming and shaming. UK cost of living is
>probably less rather than more than our continental friends, so the only
>possible reason for high UK marina charges are that we're being ripped off.
>
I agree that it is not the large boat owners that are out to get the small
boat owner. Though this continued pricing strategy means that we will
continue to subsidise them as long as it remains in force.
>
>Since MDL got enough of the market to control the price everyone joined in.
>There's no such thing as a fair deal, you just have to take your pain and
>put up with it while the fat cats down at MDL think up even newer and
>cleverer ways to remove valuable cash from a marine industry that needs all
>the help it can get.
>
You can also add TARMAC to you list of evil marina developers, they too are
guilty or robbing the poor to assist the rich...
Having said that, both MDL and TARMAC offer acceptable meterage rates
(rounded to nearest .5 Mtr) for annual berths on all vessels.
>Marinas are harbours around which the marine industry tries to function,
but
>when so much of the available cash is mopped up before the punter gets
>ashore it's no wonder we are a market in decline.
>
>JC
Exactly... I or A.N.Other could invest in broader refits, newer inventory
or a larger boat (7 Mtr) with our change... Thus moving our money around a
larger group...
Ian Wright
<jedg...@pavilion.co.uk> wrote:
>Am I alone in this plight? Do you think all owners should pay their fair
>dues? Are the marina companies taking the Mickey?
I sympathise, At Queen Anne Battery (Plymouth) this summer
they charged me £27 to raft outside two of Chay Blyths 60 footers, and
Patience is 25ft 4ins,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Ian.
Alastair Law
<jedg...@pavilion.co.uk> wrote:
>
>YES there is... Why for the last 3 years have I usually had to pay a minimum
>fee for a 7.5 or 8 Mtr boat when my own vessel is only 6 Mtr LOA? My vessel
>requires a lighter weight of engineering to retain it, it's displacement and
>foot print are smaller, I am no larger than average... so why must I
>continue to be ripped off?
>
<snip>
I agree that you are being ripped off, but I don't think the marina
operator is the guilty party, I think this a self inflicted wound. Why
do you want to stay in a marina anyway? Do you always stay in the most
expensive hotel when you go on a land-based holiday? In the past 10
years of boating in my current (small) boat I have paid marina fees
possibly 5 times, at all other times I lie to my own anchor. If you
don't like the fees, don't use the facilities (no one is forcing you)
The above remarks should be ignored when visiting Salcombe where the
pontoon berths are excellent, and the corner where I anchor is still
nice and quiet :)
--
Alastair
Rainer Thonnes
ge...@nospam.demon.co.uk (Geoff Blake) writes:
>Rainer Thonnes (r...@dcs.ed.ac.uk) wrote:
>: So the marina builds a hundred berths for 50-footers, in an area where
>: there aren't enough rich bastards to own 100 50-footers. There may be
>: the odd one or two, and the remaining berths are used by 30-footers.
>
>: Hardly justifies charging 30-footers 50-foot rates when there are no
>: 50-footers desperately seeking places, does it?
>
>No Ranier, if you look at the charges, you will find that they can earn more
>using 30ft berths than 50 ft berths, Generally there about twice the number
>of 30ft berths in the same area as 50 ft berths.
Agreed, in fact the ratio is probably more like 2.5. Suppose you have 2.5
times as many boats charged at the same cost per linear foot, then you earn
50% more from 30ft boats than you would from the number of 50ft boats you
could fit in the same area. But that's income, not profit, you need to
deduct costs.
Not all your costs are area related. 20 big pontoon berths will only
cost a little more to construct and maintain than 20 small ones, certainly
they'll cost a lot less than 50 small ones. The cost of admin, i.e.
dealing with customers, will be linear with number of boats, so if you opt
for small berths instead of big ones, your income will be 50% up but some
of your costs will be 150% up. Depending on how strong the linear element
in your overall costs is, it *can* be more profitable to go for bigger
berths, provided you can fill them.
The problem arises when there is overprovision, and they can't find enough
big boats to fill the big berths. If all their small berths are full, they
can stuff more small boats into the spare big berths, but unless they can
charge them big berth rates, their profits will be less, and so it is
understandable that marinas should *want* to charge by berth size rather
than boat size. But of course it was their own damn fault for overproviding
in the first place and they should be grateful they can at least put *some*
boats there even if not big ones.
Still, the point I was trying to make was that they can't justify charging
small boats big boat rates on the grounds that they're taking a space
which might be filled by a bigger boat, when there are no big boats
actually after that space. It would be different if there were waiting
lists on which both big and small boats are competing for one big berth.
John Edginton
Alastair Law wrote in message <38062998...@news.demon.co.uk>...
>
><snip>
>
>I agree that you are being ripped off, but I don't think the marina
>operator is the guilty party, I think this a self inflicted wound. Why
>do you want to stay in a marina anyway? Do you always stay in the most
>expensive hotel when you go on a land-based holiday? In the past 10
>years of boating in my current (small) boat I have paid marina fees
>possibly 5 times, at all other times I lie to my own anchor. If you
>don't like the fees, don't use the facilities (no one is forcing you)
>
>The above remarks should be ignored when visiting Salcombe where the
>pontoon berths are excellent, and the corner where I anchor is still
>nice and quiet :)
>--
>Alastair
Alistair,
You are quite correct to state that I don't have to stop in marinas, though
the truth of the matter is that living in the south-south-east of our fair
country my options for a sheltered anchorage are limited, prevailing
conditions being south westerlies.
When I go on holiday I have a choice of accomodation with a range of prices
to suit my needs and wallet, I have yet to see this applied to marinas or
many south-south-east and Solent anchorages.
An 18 foot vessel, and Hillyard at that will not permit great distances to
be covered unless there is a lot of time at hand, so my jaunts usually have
to fit into a weekend. This rather limits my cruising range.
Add to the fact that after a few days of living aboard I admit I enjoy the
luxury of standing upright to wash and sitting on a loo to...
When I beat the 40 miles (think south westerly 4-5, course to make 280, 5
Mtr waterline, long keel) to the Solent I do indeed use anchorages as well
as marinas, though the same robbery of minimum fees applies there, you can
also pay for dropping an anchor if you are not too lucky...
Rainer Thonnes
>: times as many boats charged at the same cost per linear foot, then you earn
>: 50% more from 30ft boats than you would from the number of 50ft boats you
>: could fit in the same area. But that's income, not profit, you need to
>: deduct costs.
>
>: Not all your costs are area related. 20 big pontoon berths will only
>: cost a little more to construct and maintain than 20 small ones, certainly
>: they'll cost a lot less than 50 small ones.
>
I don't think it's important here to make the distinction between capital
costs and recurrent costs, since they both affect overall profitability
in the same way.
>: The cost of admin, i.e.
>: dealing with customers, will be linear with number of boats, so if you opt
>: for small berths instead of big ones, your income will be 50% up but some
>: of your costs will be 150% up.
>
>No, this is Marginal Costing, administering twice the number of boats will
>mean that the same number of staff will have to work harder(?) :-)
That's true up to a point, but only if with fewer boats they're twiddling
their thumbs.
>Admin = Fixed costs. For example, you need one lock keeper/security
>guard/telephonist/manager/etc for one or ten boats. Folks that you will need
>more of, like boat fixers etc. are charged seperately.
Hmm. If you're small enough, you don't need one each of each of these kinds
of people, but just one factotum, who carries the office around on a belt
(mobile phone). Once this person gets overworked, you need a second
person, perhaps office based, in addition to the roving one, and so on.
The fact that the number of staff needed is a step function of the size of
your marina doesn't mean it's not in effect proportional.
>: Depending on how strong the linear element
>
>Linear element = Variable costs...
If you like, but in some sense all costs are variable. The total cost of
operating a marina will have a fixed part, a part which is proportional
to the number of potential customers, a part which is proportional to the
sum of the lengths of all the berths, and a part which is proportional to
the total area. Here I meant linear as distinct from area-related.
A snag is that your *income* is proportional to the sum of lengths of berths
*actually* let, while your costs are related to the size of your marina
(and are "fixed" in the sense of being independent of number of *actual*
customers). So your *profit* depends both on actual and potential numbers
of customers, berth sizes, etc. To predict your profit well, you need a
good estimate not only of the size profile of potential customers, but
also of the likely number of berths of each size which will be vacant.
>: in your overall costs is, it *can* be more profitable to go for bigger
>: berths, provided you can fill them.
>
>Yes, but what I was saying is that it is more profitable to fill 125 off
>30ft berths with 30ft yachts rather than 50 off berths with 40 30ft'ers and
>10 50ft'ers.
Agreed, only what I was trying to say is that making twice the income
doesn't necessarily mean you'll make twice the profit.
Geoff Blake
[large snip]
: >Yes, but what I was saying is that it is more profitable to fill 125 off
: >30ft berths with 30ft yachts rather than 50 off berths with 40 30ft'ers and
: >10 50ft'ers.
: Agreed, only what I was trying to say is that making twice the income
: doesn't necessarily mean you'll make twice the profit.
No, and it all comes down to this, if you double the income - unless you are
a very bad manager - you will probably make three times the profit - or
more.