Another recession 'victim'

[charles_reed]

You don\'t know what you don\'t know

Having never owned a Westerly, but having known many people that have and having worked on the boats, I would confirm that they combined nearly all the bad QC habits of British industry.
It's mainly in the parts and places you can't see, nuts glassed in to avoid short-term complaints about leaks, lack of sealant and backing plates, electrics wired in a shoddy manner, rudderstocks badly glassed to mention but a few.
What makes it even more frustrating was that they fitted some of the best hardware and the designs certainly weren't poor by even international standards.
Unfortunately many of their weaknesses are reflected in other British boatbuilders.
My gripe about my current (British) boat is in the wiring - using normal car type connections, untinned wire, unsupported lengths of wire.
All the elctrics problems I'm having come back to the original wiring, that which I've put in (or replaced) is OK.

In comparison look at an American built boat.

Even your Benjanbavs are what they appear to be, built down to a price, but soundly - they seem to survive well enough with the mishandling they get from flotilla sailors.

 

[billmacfarlane]

Re: Just for the record

Yes you're right Peter , there are still some in the business who are thriving , Moody being one of them. In this thread we've been analysing what makes a company fail but perhaps we're all looking in the wrong direction. Maybe we should be looking at the successful companies and analysing why they succeed because they are definitely doing something right.

 

[Grehan]

Re: Just for the record

Yup, but please don't let us get drawn into examining Morgan cars. They're a totally misleading model - an exception that doesn't even relate to a rule, except that through sheer longevity they've an expensive product that a very very (discerning?) few people will buy and buy and buy whatever handicaps Morgan put in their way. There are boats like that.

From a proper sensible business point of view, Sir John Harvey-Jones was right in everything he said about them all those years ago. Yes, I know they've survived (and even brought out a new swanky model this year), maybe even prospered (?), and I know about Rover and MG, etc etc

There is no long term substitute to (a) finding out what people want - price, quality level, features, how they'll use it, etc (b) formulating, designing and producing a product, differentiated from its competitors, that suits one or more of those identified particular needs or that appeals to a particular niche audience and (c) selling and promoting it so as to make a profit to be reinvested. That's what Marketing is all about. Truly. I do realise it could be argued that's what Morgan did/does, but if that's so then it's through luck not judgement. Give me my Mazda MX5 any day.

Part of the disdain that yachties feel towards motor boats, and the reason for Sunseeker's success (if that is so), may indeed be that they properly appeal to a market that buys more and more of them. [Not me, I hasten to add.] They're taking over for Pete's sake!

Sailing yacht builders have got to know their target purchasers 'in depth' and produce high quality (design, performance, ease of use, manufacture, reliability, durability) products accordingly. Doing so almost certainly means throwing out 'traditional' practices - that amazing combination of arrogance (towards the stupid 'punter' customer), shoddy workmanship (nil investment in skill or machine or process) and amateurism (hope for the best, then liquidate).

People jeer at "Benbavjen"s etc. but they're beating the pants off British boatbuilding. Are they? Anyone remember the British vs Japanese motorcycle industry situation 25 years ago? (a once proud native industry that's taken all that time to sort itself out, and nearly has).

Incidentally, our's is a (British made) Southerly, and we're very pleased with her . . .
[got two Japanese cars, though!]

 

[Guest]

Re: Just for the record

It's a bit depressing when people choose yachts in terms of "(a) finding out what people want - price, quality level, features, how they'll use it, etc (b) high quality (design, performance, ease of use, manufacture, reliability, durability) etc." and boatbuilders build boats that are a "product, differentiated from its competitors, that suits one or more of those identified particular needs or that appeals to a particular niche audience".

It's also a shame if people are "throwing out 'traditional' practices - that amazing combination of arrogance..., shoddy workmanship... and amateurism..."

What you say no doubt makes perfect business sense. It also (seems to) make sense to people wandering starry eyed around boat shows, drawing up lists of "features", and seeing how many of them they can get for their money. But are the products any better than those produced using traditional techniques? Is a modern production cruiser a better product than an equivalent produced, say, in the 20's or 30's (ignoring some of the dogs which were no doubt produced then as now!)?

The answer to that question is not obvious. But many experienced sailors choose a sailing boat built along more traditional lines, and are willing to pay more for it, than a production boat that pound for pound gives more "features", or is a "product differentiated from its competitors", or is properly "sold and promoted so as to make a profit to be reinvested".

It is us, the sailors, who are the losers in the end.

 

[Guest]

p.s.

Here are some alternative criteria for designing, building and choosing a yacht. I think that it is telling that few of them appeared in your description of how builders should target their production. Obviously, different people will emphasise different aspects - eg. if they intend to use the yacht only for day sailing in sheltered waters, or for entertaining guests, accommodation will be important:-

1. How well it sails - efficiency in various wind conditions, seakindliness (eg. motion in a seaway), speed (in a whole range of wind conditions), ease of handling;

2. is it a pleasure to sail?

3. is it well designed in terms of eg. does everything come to hand, how does the interior work when angled to 30 degrees and shaken?

4. is it well built?

5. Is it aesthetically pleasing?

6. Is it a "safe design" in terms of eg. strength, stability, size of cockpit, where water drains to etc.

7. Is the accommodation adequate?

8. Is it well equipped?

There is no doubt much that I have missed out. After going down this list, one should then look for the boat that satisfies the criteria. After that, find out what the price is, look for other boats that satisfy the criteria and find out what their prices are. Ignore any boats that do not satisfy the criteria, and don't even bother asking what their prices are, even if they will be half the price.

Of course, the builder who builds this kind of boat will not attract the kind of buyers who are interested in brochures, and will go bust, and that is sad.

 

[david_e]

Re: Just for the record

It will be interesting to see how things go for the two new kids on the block. Namely Legend, who have already been mentioned, and Caledonia Yachts who have the Westerly moulds. I wonder what strategy the latter will be adopting?

 

[Mirelle]

Re: a PS on this topic...

Here is a funny thing. I don't know any old style wooden boat yard that has gone bust. Their owners and staff don't drive the newest cars, and they can go a long time on repair work between new boats, but they seem to hang on rather well....

 

[billmacfarlane]

Re: Just for the record

Legend seem to going from strength to strength. I'd guess that Caledonia yachts will build one of the old Westerly designs on request , with an appropriate price tag for that sort of boat.

 

[robp]

Re: a PS on this topic...

No, the time they would be in danger is, if their product became in high demand and they are faced with fulfilling it efficiently. Or give way to other yards that do.

 

[mpprh]

Re: Another recession \'victim\'

Hi

I know nothing about Trident, other than being an admirer of the boats they produce (d).

I do know about business, and Sweden, and HR, having lived 20 kms from their factory for some years.

I would add -

1) Sweden has much higher employment costs than UK
2) The generous social benefits in Sweden also result in lower "available working days per year" reducing output per man
3) The Swedish climate increases production (and delivery) costs.
4) Sweden must export because the highly taxed population of 8.5 m cannot support their extensive leisure boat industry
5) The HR factory is high tech ....................... high investments have been made
6) HR and other swedish boat builders are good marketeers. compare websites
http://www.hallberg-rassy.se/
http://www.maloyachts.se/frameset.htm
http://www.najad.se
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/tridentmarine/homepage.htm


The Swedish competition market premium products extremely well. They appear to meet buyers needs despite the premium price. Investment in technology enables them to build the required products at budget cost, and, at the required time.

Of course they will suffer as the recession deepens. Some may fail.

Neither Sweden or GB are in the Euro, but what will help Sweden is the currency -

In 1996 1 GBP would buy 10 Swedish crowns, today it is around 15.2 Swedish crowns.

In fact, with the exception of the rate to the USD, the UK pound is still close to being at its highest since the 1980 ' s.


So , to summarise, I know that the Swedish boatbuilders are doing most things right. They have to because of the harsh business and economic economic climate in Sweden pre 1997. The currency benefits now help them . They have built up reserves during the boom times.

Equally British industry has not been able to fully benefit from the last five years of good times because of adverse currency rates, and I believe they have generated inadequate reserves to see them through adverse conditions.

It is unfair to say foreigners must have some advantage over domestic producers.

I believe the problem in this case is lack of investment, and government exchange policy.

MPPRH

 

[claymore]

The final word?

Well you certainly stimulated an interesting debate there. I'm writing this for 3 reasons, the first one is to post another reply so that the originator of the most intellectually stimulating post might be rewarded with this months star prize. The second is to apologise if the tone of my earlier postings was a bit shirty and the third is to reflect that my MBA would have benefited from the obvious range of knowledge, experience and opinion posted here.
regards
JS

 

[Bergman]

Re: The post final word?

It would have been an interesting exercise for your MBA to develop a business plan for a company building a leisure product that sold for a very high price, with very high material costs, several months of labour intensive production time, no firm forecast of demand, ill defined market, little capital available and no opportunity to diversify.

It is not a scenario to make the bank manager open the drinks cupboard.

I do feel real sympathy for the people caught up in the machinery of this sort of thing. I suspect in many cases the management/directors have more enthusiasm than expertise and have been seduced by a dream rather than studying the realities.

I don't think it is right to blame the staff, nor, in most cases is reducing pay the answer. The good ones that you need will go, the bad ones you want rid of, will stay, making things worse. At the end of the day, the responsibility is with the directors, both legally and morally.

The workers cannot fire a lousy director!

 

[claymore]

Re: The post final word?

I agree with all you say. There is a traditional builder situated near me - David Moss, who is a real craftsman. Time served and running apprentices, he had some scope for income by doing a bit of winter storage. The Yacht Club next door, Blackpool and Fleetwood, have stuffed him by getting a travelhoist and offering a service to its members which is undercutting David. Membership has naturally risen because there has been a large influx of Fleetwood Marina bertholders seeking to cut their running costs. The yacht club (on which I did my dissertation!) is now cash rich and has reversed its balance sheet fortunes - declining youth membership, reduced bar takings etc, although it is still has the feel of death on Club nights. Right now the land is covered in boats ashore for the winter and the boatyard has but a few faithful customers in there. Should the day come when David Moss has decided that he is no longer able to continue perhaps people will understand that they could have helped. It all seems a bit short sighted really but then we live in the microwave world of instant satisfaction, lets have it now and sod the future.

 

[Grehan]

Re: p.s.

simonc

These could well be exactly what should be designed into a yacht product . . . and what you say in your PS does not run counter to any of my point(s). Your list is a mixture of proper practical factors that a buyer may need to see represented in a yacht. Amongst others.

Sorry to use terms like 'product' and 'marketing' but they should be at the heart of a successful yacht (precisely in your own terms) and a successful company making those yachts. Unsuccessful companies that go bust or don't have enough profits to reinvest in high quality, customer care etc etc are no use to anyone, however quaint and British they might be.

Please don't confuse - in a tabloid kind of way - 'marketing' with second-hand car salesmanship (selling crap to numbskulls).

There is - or should be- of course, a place for small builders and craftsmen providing a highly tailored personal approach. If they're willing to work for love and not much money then that's fine by me. If they want a fairer reward then the products of their labour will be costly - but worth it in the eyes of some, you (presumably) and (possibly) me included. Not everyone has such deep pockets.

But that's not the basis for 'an industry' (again, sorry about that commercial word).

TVR, Aston Martin, maybe even Morgan make and sell a bespoke product. . . . "built along more traditional lines, and (their customers) are willing to pay more for it" Even these must be different from each other (their competitors) and be ". . . sold and promoted so as to make a profit to be reinvested".

But I'm afraid to say that it's the Ford Mondeo and Focus, Honda Civic, Vauxhall Astra, Skoda Fabia, etc. that show the way that an industry and its products must engineer - re-engineer - themselves. First class products (don't be snobbish - what do you drive?) for ordinary people. "Ordinary people" - what a patronising term for you and me!

I just don't understand "It is us, the sailors, who are the losers in the end". Are you driving a Jowett Javelin? (and enjoying spending every spare minute fixing it . . ) What's wrong with brochures? We're not all so amazingly well qualified about boats and sailing that we can dispense with more information. Most of us can see through superficial gloss and hype. Trust us.

To imply that only 'real' sailors should be trusted to buy the 'real' boats made by (altruistic semi-commercial?) craftsman boatbuilders fifty or more years ago is precisely what may be wrong. When men were men, boats were boats and women knew their place . . .

Sailing itself is a serious affair with real, potentially life-threatening, hazards. But it is a leisure pursuit and not everyone wants to spend every spare minute (and they may not have many) holystoning and recaulking the decks. They want a safe, reliable (and all the things you list) and 'value for money' and . . enjoyable . . thing (product) to do it in. En famile more than likely.

Those that provide such a thing will prosper and continue - yacht or motorboat builders, home or foreign grown. Being serious, professional and commercial about such an enterprise is a good thing, not to be sneered at.

Actually, it's a necessary thing.

 

[Guest]

Re: p.s.

Grehan, old chap (excuse the familiarity)

I don't doubt that what you say in terms of building an industry is correct. What I doubt is that that is a good thing for you and me.

On marketing: you say that I shouldn't confuse marketing with selling crap to numbskulls. But the whole business of marketing is neutral as to whether the product is good or bad, the point is to make us want to buy it. It was well satirised in "How to Get Ahead in Advertising". From the consumer's point of view, it adds no value to the product and serves only to confuse the inexperienced or the gullible as to the real merits of alternative products. The history of consumer goods is littered with superior products that have fallen victim to inferior products that were better marketed.

However, my point is that when buying a boat one should approach the purchase in a completely different way: the way I summarised in my earlier post. But we are trained to think in a different way: "what do I get for my money?", plus the subtle psychological pressure of not only marketing but also peer pressure ("when I bring guests, will they be impressed with the size and luxury of my yacht"). We're all vulnerable to such pressure - I know I am.

You ask what kind of car I have. I don't have a car, and never have had. I have a bicycle instead. having a boat is a more important priority! More importantly I feel myself tremendously privileged not having a television, which I know has given me and my family a tremendous advantage in life! Perhaps therefore I'm a little less used to the influence of marketing than most, so I notice it more keenly.

To summarise: it is extraordinary that the creation of this massive boatbuilding industry which you are discussing, so many billions of dollars/pounds invested has not improved the "product" (ie. boats) visibly. I believe (but I recognise that it is a massive generalisation and many would disagree) that it has resulted in us sailing "products" that are inferior to what was there before this massive modern industry was created.

And for us, that is a BAD THING. For shareholders in mass production boatbuilders it may be a good thing (or may not, depending on when they bought and sold).

Finally, your comment: "To imply that only 'real' sailors should be trusted to buy the 'real' boats... is precisely what may be wrong. When men were men, boats were boats and women knew their place."

Of course I didn't imply anything of the sort. Everyone should be trusted to buy their own boat. But it would help all of us, and themselves, if in doing so they were given better guidance/access to better information. Boat shows and brochures are the very worst sources of information for this kind of decision, and there is subtle pressure to approach the purchase in the wrong way.

As for women, I wouldn't say or think anything so prehistoric.

 

[Guest]

An aside

I was very interested in a part completed Warrior for long term cruising.
I found the owner of Trident to be dismissive and unhelpful. After a phone call, factory visit and boat show chat he refused a demo sail with out a full deposit. Needless to say my money went else where.
I am sad to here they have gone out of business but not surprised.

Maybe this is not a due to the British climate, just someones business methods....