Maybe not quite as rosy at Princess

[BartW]

Just a guess, but maybe part of a marketing battle with gyros, as a gyro adds displacement? Alternatively, maybe to highlight that the hydraulics aren't wasting energy lifting heavy fins, and can be more responsive. Either way, i'm pretty sure it came from the marketing department, not the technical one

agree,
but it might be that the technical department worked on the "zero weight " fins for the reason you gave, and pointed this out to the marketing Guy's,
I don't remember for sure, but believe that CMC fins have positive boyancy (lighter than water)

 

[admillington]

Just a guess, but maybe part of a marketing battle with gyros, as a gyro adds displacement? Alternatively, maybe to highlight that the hydraulics aren't wasting energy lifting heavy fins, and can be more responsive. Either way, i'm pretty sure it came from the marketing department, not the technical one

The fins might be "zero" weight but what about all the hydraulics, pumps etc -

 

[benjenbav]

I was curious to check the fins size, so I just looked for the model on Sleipner website (http://side-power.com/kategori/1963/sps-actuators/), and couldn't help noticing the statement "Fins have zero weight in water". Can anyone think of a logical reason for specifying that?
With apologies for the o/t....

I think just what was quaintly called "puff" and is now more coarsely categorised as marketing BS.

Like the classic: "any time, any place, anywhere"

I can still almost sing the rest...

But, prosaically, it's quite difficult to see what "anywhere" adds, other than a rhyme for, "there's a wonderful world we can share"

 

[MapisM]

Just a guess, but maybe part of a marketing battle with gyros, as a gyro adds displacement? Alternatively, maybe to highlight that the hydraulics aren't wasting energy lifting heavy fins, and can be more responsive. Either way, i'm pretty sure it came from the marketing department, not the technical one

Hang on a second, also neutral fins (and even positive ones, if any) DO affect the boat displacement. If their buoyancy is neutral, it just means that their specific weight is the same as water - not that they have "zero weight"... :ambivalence:
The consequence is that fins alone don't change the w/line (though obviously the rest of the equipment does), but they still increase the boat displacement for good, anyway.
Hence my doubt about an (imho) completely meaningless statement.
And also re. the energy, it's safe to guess that the fins weight is neither here nor there, in comparison to the energy required to push them against the water.
Then again, I guess you are spot on with your last statement - as well as benjenbav with his comment...

 

[ari]

About 1,800 shop-floor staff voted overwhelmingly not to accept the zero per cent pay increase offered by the luxury boat company’s bosses.

I've never quite understood this 'rejecting pay offer' by employees (be they boat builders or tube train drivers). Here's the job - you do this, and you get paid that for it. If you accept, come and do the job and take the money. If you don't accept, don't take the job (or leave the job, if you are already doing it) and take one that does meet your pay/work criteria.

And if you can't find one that does, you find one that gets as close to it as you can.

It's called market forces isn't it? If a company pays 'x' for job 'y' and people are prepared to work for it then that's the rate. If they can't find people to do it then they either need to increase 'x' or make 'y' more attractive at the lower figure somehow.

 

[Whitelighter]

All true, unless of course your work force have a particular skill set you can't easily replace.

I'm sure there are hundreds if people who'd like to work for princess and have a go and building a superyachts - but how many have the ability and the training already.

That's why its a negotiation - a pay freeze is in real terms a pay cut. What would happen to princess if all their skilled workforce did as you suggest? They'd pretty soon have no business at all. Of course the employees would gave no job, so no one wins.

 

[ari]

But that's for Princess to make a judgement call on isn't it? If they freeze the rate and people start leaving in droves then they have a problem. But if they judge that actually, what they pay is fair and reasonable and that having looked at the job market it is unlikely that people will be able to find better paid jobs elsewhere then they surely have the right to say 'that's the rate, the choice is yours' don't they?

I'm very uncomfortable with this idea that the workforce can attempt to blackmail a pay increase out of their employee. (As I say, this isn't aimed particularly at Princess, I feel the same about the tube strikes, albeit that is for a slightly different reason).

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

I'm very uncomfortable with this idea that the workforce can attempt to blackmail a pay increase out of their employee. (As I say, this isn't aimed particularly at Princess, I feel the same about the tube strikes, albeit that is for a slightly different reason).

In principle I agree with that but at a time when pay increases are starting to rise, it could be very short sighted for companies to have a take it or leave it attitude to pay. Princess is not like a supermarket business in which minimum wage shelf stackers can be replaced easily without affecting the business. Princess relies on a trained and dedicated workforce to build products, the quality of which directly affect the bottom line. If the Princess workforce becomes demotivated by a pay freeze, that could affect productivity and quality, both of which could cost the company a lot more money in the long run than giving a modest pay rise now. I'm sure the Princess management has thought long and hard about these factors but IMHO it is a risky game to play particularly when the company does declare reasonable profits according to its published accounts. It also sends the wrong message to potential customers too

 

[jfm]

Hang on a second, also neutral fins (and even positive ones, if any) DO affect the boat displacement. If their buoyancy is neutral, it just means that their specific weight is the same as water - not that they have "zero weight"... :ambivalence:
The consequence is that fins alone don't change the w/line (though obviously the rest of the equipment does), but they still increase the boat displacement for good, anyway.
Hence my doubt about an (imho) completely meaningless statement.
And also re. the energy, it's safe to guess that the fins weight is neither here nor there, in comparison to the energy required to push them against the water.
Then again, I guess you are spot on with your last statement - as well as benjenbav with his comment...

Sorry for the continued o/t - you are correct on the physics MapisM but I think all they are trying to say is that the displacement/buoyancy of the fins broadly offsets the weight of the fins+actuators, resulting in no waterline change. They came up with a short hand way of saying that, which is engineeringly not accurate but the one small thing you can say in its favour is that it was at least brief (!). It was but a small footnote on the brochure page so they weren't making a big sales feature out of it, so no big deal imho. But for sure you are correct that the things aren't weightless!
If weight were relevant, Sleipner's fins are the lightest of the major players, area-for-area, because they are one shot infusion moulded around the shaft. Bravo to them on the engineering front for achieving that. The others make them in 2 halves and stick them together around the shaft, which generally adds weight. But the amount of kilos in any fin is so small compared with the boat generally that fin weight is surely irrelevant when designing/making/speccing a system

 

[gjgm]

It also sends the wrong message to potential customers too

Who are going to end up paying for the wage increases...

 

[henryf]

I'm not sure any one element, be it pay, currency or material cost directly influences the sale price by it's particular amount.

Factored into the equation are profit and costs which can be altered at the discretion of the company. Marketing cost might fall into this category.

Princess are most definitely not selling their boats at cost. How they choose to manipulate the end of year accounts to paint a financial picture is their choice and people far cleverer than I might be able to dissect what information is made public to better understand actual profitability but all businesses, even mine, have the ability to alter their public financial image to suit.

If Princess suddenly said they made £150 million we'd all be asking for £500k off a boat before we even sat down for a coffee and a chocolate biscuit.

As an employer I have to balance employee retention with what the business can stand, what the employment market dictates and what I think is fair. In lean times that means I have to take a bit of a hit for the troops. Hopefully in better times the pendulum swings more in my favour.

Just as Princess won't want to lose key employees those employees must realise their skills are potentially quite niche market. If they didn't work for Princess who would they work for? Don't punish Princess for building a successful product and a strong brand.


Henry

 

[ari]

In principle I agree with that but at a time when pay increases are starting to rise, it could be very short sighted for companies to have a take it or leave it attitude to pay. Princess is not like a supermarket business in which minimum wage shelf stackers can be replaced easily without affecting the business. Princess relies on a trained and dedicated workforce to build products, the quality of which directly affect the bottom line. If the Princess workforce becomes demotivated by a pay freeze, that could affect productivity and quality, both of which could cost the company a lot more money in the long run than giving a modest pay rise now. I'm sure the Princess management has thought long and hard about these factors but IMHO it is a risky game to play particularly when the company does declare reasonable profits according to its published accounts. It also sends the wrong message to potential customers too

Agree with all of that (bar the last sentence), but surely that is all still Princess's call? It should be up to them whether they want to risk demotivated staff, loss of skill base etc, not the workforce to say 'we're having a rise whether you like it or not, and if we don't get it we're downing tools'.

As to a message to potential customers, if you round up 200 Princess owners and ask them what the workforce pay structure and wage rise (or otherwise) was the year they bought their new boat, how many do you think would be able to tell you (or even care)?

 

[PowerYachtBlog]

Just as Princess won't want to lose key employees those employees must realise their skills are potentially quite niche market. If they didn't work for Princess who would they work for? Don't punish Princess for building a successful product and a strong brand.

Nice PR but do not wave this flag to high as nowadays it really might fall on you faster then you think.
The key people in the business (in this case fiberglass boat building or affiliates) who can make a difference to a boat builder are always offered a higher wage and a better position in the next company.

E.g. A resin fiberglass professional working for Princess payed 50k? (I assume it might be an average wage) it is in reality chicken feed. By repairs alone as a freelance in the Med you will do double to that on average.

 

[MapisM]

It was but a small footnote on the brochure page so they weren't making a big sales feature out of it, so no big deal imho.

Yup, agreed.
In fact, I didn't ask because I thought it was a big deal, but just out of genuine curiosity about whether the statement was meaningful for some reason that I was missing.

That said, do you really think that the fins are light enough to compensate also the actuators?
I'm sure you'll agree that the weight of the whole setup (hoses, oil, PTO pump, electric motor+pump, VFD, compensation tank - and I might be forgetting something...) could never be compensated by the fins displacement, even if they were inflated with helium
But I would have thought that the actuators alone (and obviously the fins shafts) are substantial enough bits of steel to weigh more than the fins volume in water, no matter how light the fins themselves can be...

Oh, and welcome back after the summer "radio silence". Looking forward to a thread with your cruising pics/clips!

 

[MapisM]

As to a message to potential customers, if you round up 200 Princess owners and ask them what the workforce pay structure and wage rise (or otherwise) was the year they bought their new boat, how many do you think would be able to tell you (or even care)?

I neither want nor can speak for Deleted User, but what I guess he meant is that some client might think twice before spending millions for a toy built in a factory where there are strikes and/or other troubles - something that nowadays you can't hope to hide to public knowledge.
And while I'm not saying that this should be the main management concern in this case, I think it's a valid point.

 

[jfm]

Yup, agreed.
In fact, I didn't ask because I thought it was a big deal, but just out of genuine curiosity about whether the statement was meaningful for some reason that I was missing.

That said, do you really think that the fins are light enough to compensate also the actuators?
I'm sure you'll agree that the weight of the whole setup (hoses, oil, PTO pump, electric motor+pump, VFD, compensation tank - and I might be forgetting something...) could never be compensated by the fins displacement, even if they were inflated with helium
But I would have thought that the actuators alone (and obviously the fins shafts) are substantial enough bits of steel to weigh more than the fins volume in water, no matter how light the fins themselves can be...

Oh, and welcome back after the summer "radio silence". Looking forward to a thread with your cruising pics/clips!

Yep the sleipner statement is questionable if you dig into the maths. Very roughly, 1msq fins perhaps displace 150kg water, perhaps 100kg. That would make some contribution agianst the fin+actuator weight but would not offset the other hardware you mention. You could argue that some of the hydraulic kit would be needed anyway for thrusters and winches, but it all gets a bit questionable and I don't think the system in total results in an unchanged static waterline! I don't think there is any meaningfulness that you are missing!

Thanks for the welcome back! I will try to post cruising pics and drone vid asap. My brother finished his refit of m/y Silver Dee and the new John Deeres (very nice things I must say) took him from Scotland to Cala D'Or Mallorca without missing a beat. Pity he didn't have time to keep the refit thread going. I met him in Mallorca and we had 2 weeks cruising with friends/family then he did the final leg of his journey by taking Silver Dee to Antibes where she is now parked a few berths along from me. Anyway, let's park that discussion so as not to hijack this, and I'll make another post asap, perhaps tonight.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

I neither want nor can speak for Deleted User, but what I guess he meant is that some client might think twice before spending millions for a toy built in a factory where there are strikes and/or other troubles - something that nowadays you can't hope to hide to public knowledge.
And while I'm not saying that this should be the main management concern in this case, I think it's a valid point.

Actually I was thinking more along the lines of potential customers seeing that a company cannot afford to give their staff a pay rise and wondering whether the company is going to be in financial trouble soon although I'm sure this isn't the case with Princess. Also I'd be wondering how much pride and effort those staff would put into building my boat. Lastly, maybe I would be the only one but a little bit of me might be feeling that the hospitality being lavished on me as a potential customer would be better spent giving those people in Plymouth a payrise. Crikey I seem to be going over all socialist in my old age

 

[henryf]

Nice PR but do not wave this flag to high as nowadays it really might fall on you faster then you think.
The key people in the business (in this case fiberglass boat building or affiliates) who can make a difference to a boat builder are always offered a higher wage and a better position in the next company.

E.g. A resin fiberglass professional working for Princess payed 50k? (I assume it might be an average wage) it is in reality chicken feed. By repairs alone as a freelance in the Med you will do double to that on average.

Except that the boat building industry unlike, say building, programming, engineering, medicine, sales, accounting, law etc is tiny. I can't think of anyone crying out for staff at the moment.

As for your repair man he would first have to move his family lock stock & barrel out to the Med. Set up and run a company, deal with French (probably) employment law, find the work, do all the paperwork and other hidden stuff, etc, etc. Taken to the extreme he might as well just set up his own boat building business.

Not everyone wants to run a business and many people who function really well under the umbrella of a big company struggle like hell on their own.

I don't work for Princess so can't tell you whether they are wonderful or a nightmare to work for. What I do know is they have a very strong brand and product line up within their niche. That being the case it would be easy for employees to think everyone is in that position. They aren't. Not by a country mile.

Henry

 

[TheOrs]

Regarding the 'Blackmail' question; I don't think it is as confrontational as you may think.

I imagine the union rep's will have had several meetings with management where cards will have laid on the table (& some kept close to the chest). Management will have said "We can offer, this, this & this but we need that & that". The union rep's will say how about "???" instead & we will also do "XYZ" for you.

When they reach an agreement the union rep's will take it to the workforce and ask them to vote "Yes" or "No". So, probably in this case the union rep's agreed to 0%. There were probably also other aspects to the offer (bigger rise next year?) that haven't been reported. The workforce voted not to accept.

The union rep's will now have to go back & re-negotiate. If it drags on too long the management can just decide to impose the offer. The workforce then have the option to strike. Extremely unlikely that they would though as, like many have pointed out, it doesn't make much sense.

 

[admillington]

Regarding the 'Blackmail' question; I don't think it is as confrontational as you may think.

I imagine the union rep's will have had several meetings with management where cards will have laid on the table (& some kept close to the chest). Management will have said "We can offer, this, this & this but we need that & that". The union rep's will say how about "???" instead & we will also do "XYZ" for you.

When they reach an agreement the union rep's will take it to the workforce and ask them to vote "Yes" or "No". So, probably in this case the union rep's agreed to 0%. There were probably also other aspects to the offer (bigger rise next year?) that haven't been reported. The workforce voted not to accept.

The union rep's will now have to go back & re-negotiate. If it drags on too long the management can just decide to impose the offer. The workforce then have the option to strike. Extremely unlikely that they would though as, like many have pointed out, it doesn't make much sense.

It is is hard to understand how Princess have performed as their accounts for 2014 are overdue at Companies House. Maybe the union rep was faced with pay rise or lost of more jobs. I am sure it will all become clear in the next months.