.png.5ff10cca1d0967e44a17e4a2edde2a80.png)
Meantime
-
Posts
4,127 -
Joined
-
Days Won
50
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by Meantime
-
-
1 hour ago, Smoggy said:
Yes it is still open, shuts at 6.00pm on sundays, beer expensive so we just had one.
Did you happen to try the food, or see the menu?
The website still has the message on it from the departing tenants, so has yet to be updated.
-
The previous tenants of The Dukes Head moved on to pastures new as of mid July this year. The head chef was one of the tenants.
Does anyone know if the pub is still open? and if so is it worth a visit?
-
16 minutes ago, Vaughan said:
Well it may be in the "public domain" if you care to take the time to rake it up but I am afraid your post feels, to me, like poking your nose into other peoples' business.
If Richardsons have decided to lay off a few boats for next season that leaves us with a nice piece of armchair speculation as to their long term plans, especially those of us who have known the company and its history for a very long time. We are also interested in the future of the Broads, of course.
Please don't let's turn this forum discussion into a "Chasse aux sorcières".
Firstly let me assure you that it is in no way a witch hunt. It is also not poking your nose into other peoples business, if it is public facing business and the information is in the public domain free of charge. I find it interesting what has been done but was very careful in how I phrased my post, to rightly avoid any negative speculation.
It is public knowledge on this forum that Clive has gone off and done his own thing. I was careful to only post so much of the information, but anyone can do their own research if they want to. It's freely available.
My post should not be construed as a witch hunt, as speculation on the future of the company, or meant to cause them any harm at all.
-
2
-
-
9 minutes ago, DAVIDH said:
It's unfathomable to a mere mortal like me. The market is there. Nobody else is taking it up. Those boats must have paid for themselves many times over the years, so it's just upkeep expenses. Yes, many people who have holidayed on the Broads over the last two years, will likely be overseas next summer (variants allowed of course). But the overall number of boats for hire hasn't risen over that time, so assuming the number of hirers reverts back to 2019 levels, an opportunity to make money is being missed.
I would guess it comes down to the overall figures, would you prefer to hire out 400 boats with an average occupancy over the season of 80%, or 350 boats with an average occupancy of 95%. If you remove a less popular boat from service that perhaps only lets for 10 weeks of the season, you will not necessarily lose 10 weeks of rental as hopefully they get pushed onto other boats, perhaps more expensive boats,, even if it means someone ends up booking a different week to the one they were hoping for.
An old boat may have paid for itself, but that doesn't mean it will be a profitable hire. My toll for a 35ft boat, was around £500 this year. I think the hire boat toll multiplier is something like 2.6. So as a hire boat my boat would cost around £1300 to toll. Now spread that as a cost over a new 35ft boat that rents for 22weeks of the season and then spread that same toll over an old 35ft boat that perhaps rents for 8 or 10 weeks of the season. The toll works on block area of the boat, not age or rental revenue. Some of those weeks will be at the expense of weeks on more expensive boats. Then factor in that the older boats need more maintenance, older more unreliable engines, tired interiors, faulty batteries etc.
Finally I have spent a couple of hours looking through publicly available information and there has been some significant restructuring of the company to facilitate the departure of one of the directors and in such a way as to not overly burden or unduly risk the future of the company, but non the less it will need to service those liabilities and work to reduce them over time, before looking to again burden the company with additional costs as a result of expansion.
I think it is no secret that most new build boats are not built out of profit, but funded with borrowed money that needs to be paid back over time. Wyndham Vacation Rentals have charges on many of the boats recently built to protect their loans made for the construction of those boats.
Any ambitious expansion and renewal plan can only go on for so long before a period of consolidation and strengthening of the balance sheet needs to occur.
It may not always make sense to the outsider, but it is good business practice.
-
1
-
-
It will be interesting to see what happens to the likes of the Ideal 45's. The toll system works on block area which means they will cost as much to toll as the later RC45's, however the later boats probably hire for two or three times the money of the Ideal 45's. Then factor in that they are more than likely to be hired by stag or hen parties and the mess they are likely to be returned in at the end of the week compared to the newer boats.
However if they are sold off, who would realistically want to buy one? Upwards of £700 annual toll, upwards of £3000 annual mooring fee. Lift outs and anti four all charged by the foot. A lot of annual running costs for a boat that is probably way too large for all but the largest families and on the whole they are very tired looking. An Ideal liveaboard maybe, but if you can make do with something smaller, in the region of 35ft, there are some decent savings to be made in terms of annual running costs.
-
3 hours ago, RS2021 said:
If it makes business sense to build and operate new boats why close down your boat building operation?
I guess that's what happens when two business partners, who in this case are also brothers, go their own way and one of them is in charge of the new boat building division. I would imagine a certain amount of financial restructuring has gone on behind the scenes which will leave two smaller businesses.
-
1
-
-
Maybe I'm missing something here, but I cannot actually see any of those boats for sale anywhere?
On the basis that the government are talking about scrapping PCR tests for double vaccinated people returning from Green and Amber list countries, and lets face it the weather in the UK this Summer has been abysmal, is it more likely that Richardsons are trying to condense bookings for next year onto their premium boats and those that generally always book well, and will once they have had a chance to gauge how bookings are going look to add more if there is the demand. Worst case they save the tolls on a few boats and make the remaining boats more profitable, best case someone walks in and wants to buy a boat and Richardsons don't have to shuffle advance bookings around to free the boat up.
-
3
-
-
Back in July my NHS Covid 19 app under Settings - Venue History read like a who's who of pubs on The Northern Broads
I'm surprised the NHS didn't ping me to go for a liver scan 
Only making up for lost time though. 
-
2
-
-
4 minutes ago, YnysMon said:
and another lot jumping up and down on the top of another boat!
Yes, one could be tempted to say that the reporting team waited a while to find those examples but in reality I don't suppose they would have had to wait more than 5 mins in any of the popular spots to film such behaviour.
-
1
-
-
Interesting interview with Greg Munford on ITV Anglia. Ironic though that near the start there is a clip with two people standing on the front of the boat near the toe rail with no life jackets on whilst underway.
-
1
-
-
More details are slowly emerging. Quite a distinctive boat if anyone sees it.
Boat stolen in Barton Turf | Norfolk Constabulary
-
11 minutes ago, Ray said:
The more I read, the luckier I was! At least there were no Facebook camera reporters around... I hope!
Now Ray, about that picture I have! what are we talking?
-
2
-
-
18 minutes ago, annv said:
You do have to allow for full/empty tanks, between full and empty is nearly 2 inches air draft on my boat. John
On a hire boat you don't need to allow for anything. The clearance quoted at the helm will be the worst case scenario in terms of clearance needed to provide a safe passage under the bridge. Yes full tanks or more passengers might provide even greater clearance, but should never be used as a means of risking a passage at anything less than the quoted clearance on the boat.
14 minutes ago, Coryton said:I'm not sure that explains a company giving different values for the same boat though. Unless they measured it more than once (I'm now wondering how they do actually measure the air draft of a boat...)
As above I would always go by the clearance quoted on the boat you are on. Brochures or websites might give figures for a "class" of boat and mistakes can be made in updating such publications.
When I measured the clearance for my boat I simply used a long piece of wood and a spirit level and placed it on the highest part of the boat and then measured down to the water. I did this with the roof and windscreen up, with the roof down but windscreen up and with the roof and windscreen down. I then added three inches to all those measurements and they are the ones I go by.
There are bridges I pass under when I should be near to my safe height and I'm often surprised to see 7 or 8 inches of clearance, not all the bridge height gauges are set with the same degree of margin of error. I've yet to see one that has any margin of error in the wrong direction. However if you treat them all as being totally accurate you should always have a safe passage.
-
3 minutes ago, YnysMon said:
It took me ages to spot where the one upriver from Somerlayton Bridge is. I'm not sure whether it was just obscured, as it's between moorings, but I searched on several occasions before eventually spotting it. Maybe I was just look in the wrong place!
I think you mean the one downriver from the bridge? It was placed at the end of the moorings then a few years back they extended the public moorings, but left the bridge marker in the short gap between the moorings.
-
1 minute ago, Scotty said:
and if it looks low or close just use your eye if possible to the highest part of the boat
All bridges have a height gauge some distance before them. All hire boats should have the clearance needed on a plaque near the helm or in the skippers manual. There should never be a need to eye a bridge up for clearance. Although some hire yards may err on the side of caution when quoting the clearance needed and some of the bridge height gauges might be set to allow a margin of error, never take a chance. Go by the quoted clearance needed and the height gauge and if there is not enough clearance wait even if you think there might just be enough room, because you also might just scrape or just get stuck under the bridge.
-
34 minutes ago, vanessan said:
Funny time of night to discover your boat is missing. 🤨
Not at all unusual for me to leave home at 9pm on a Friday evening, go pick a friend up and then head up to the boat for a weeks holiday. Travel is easy as the traffic is light, arrive at the boat get settled in with the basics and turn in. Next morning finish the unloading, have breakfast, fill the water tank and head straight of for a weeks holiday.
Thankfully every time I've done that my boat has been there!
-
All of that is fine except that to get to St Olaves they must have navigated some of the most tidal stretches of The Broads and be well aware that the tide rises and falls. At the very least they will have already navigated three low bridges and a couple of taller ones.
Not wanting to turn this into a hirer V private debate, but I cannot remember the last time a privateers boat got stuck under a bridge, perhaps the helmsman's head striking the bridge
cue another forum member to provide input , but privateers must have as many lapses of concentration and distractions with family and children on board. Perhaps being the owner of the vessel in question focusses the mind more?
-
1
-
-
I see a boat was stuck under St Olaves bridge yesterday. I think partly it is a generational thing. I grew up in an age where you used paper maps if you wanted to get anywhere. No sat nav, or voice telling you which way to turn. Hence when we first hired a boat the first thing we did was study the map and guide books and they will often have other useful info printed on them such as bridges and warnings. If you look at Google maps, yes you can see which way the rivers meander, and it should be obvious where a road crosses that there has to be a bridge, but not so obvious is how restricting that bridge might be.
Sadly in these days a lot of people cannot even find their way around without some form of technology welded to their hand.
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, annv said:
Either way the boat should have turned other side of bridge as signs inform you too do not at the yacht station where it is narrower. John
Not wishing to get into too much detail, that should be MAIB's job, but depending on tide state not all boats will pass under the bridge, which is why getting the time of low water is so critical for this investigation.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Smoggy said:
I would imagine the maib would work in UT not BST and from the bar, tide tables from different sources often have differences.
Whichever way you look at it, the incident still happened some 4 hours before low water at the yacht station and some five hours before slack water.
-
3 minutes ago, Oddfellow said:
Well, someone's wrong..... If it's the MAIB, it begins to draw questions over their competency to investigate even a sunrise.
Being three hours out is a big error.
The Broadcastor for 2020 has low water predicted at 17:27 with slack water being one hour later.
-
1 minute ago, Vaughan said:
This could be explained by MAIB, being an inherantly sea-going organisation, taking the times at Yarmouth Bar rather than Yarmouth Yacht Station. A common discrepancy in these cases.
I wondered that, but isn't Yarmouth bar one hour earlier!
-
Looking at the interim report on the last page it states the following;
External & internal environment Dry, light breeze, ebbing tide, predicted low water at 1418, high water at 2017
However a look at my copy of the Herbert Woods tide table for 19th August 2020 suggests that low water at the yacht station was predicted to be 17:15. This is also backed up with a check on www.norfolk-broads.org tides.
I have contacted MAIB to let them know as this could be quite relevant to their investigation, given the height of the vessel, the height of the bridges and the need to turn in a strong ebb.
-
4
-
-
1 minute ago, Oddfellow said:
I think that is a very valid point. The BA would probably argue that they have rangers on-hand to assist, but making departure hazardous must be the cause of a lot of "difficulties" amongst totally inexperienced navigators.
I'm not sure, but I'm guessing the mooring is not far off half a mile long. As often witnessed at Reedham, the rangers cannot be on hand at all parts of the mooring to assist, especially when there is a couple of arrivals in different parts of the mooring with perhaps one other departing. Add in the fact that double mooring is also allowed!
Mooring fees should be for a 13 or 26 hour period with people strongly advised to time their arrival at slack low or slack high water, when there is the safest opportunity to turn before the bridge if needed.
Only making up for lost time though. 
Farewell To Some Old Favourites
in Hire Boat Discussion
Posted
I see discussion on this thread, but I don't see judgement, criticism or speculation to the detriment of any company on this thread. Something has obviously touched a raw nerve, but I'm sure it wasn't intentional.