Who should pay for the Broads ?

[ExMemberBobdog]

I Am just pulling your leg,

I have never heard of the set up but it seems like it would be a lot easier to take one block payment than mess about with lots of small payments..

Exactly ... and that's an example of the 'tax efficiency' I mentioned earlier.  Far cheaper for the BA to have a big lump sum from the BCU than have to correspond with, and collect money from, hundreds of individuals.  Effectively the BCU is doing their tax collecting work for them.

[C.Ricko]

Exactly ... and that's an example of the 'tax efficiency' I mentioned earlier.  Far cheaper for the BA to have a big lump sum from the BCU than have to correspond with, and collect money from, hundreds of individuals.  Effectively the BCU is doing their tax collecting work for them.

great, so if I pay for 320 boats all in one go,do I get it cheaper than a individual private boat owner??     

[Guest]

great, so if I pay for 320 boats all in one go,do I get it cheaper than a individual private boat owner??     

 

Sounds like an excellent idea Clive, I think something like a 2% discount would be well deserved in that case. 

 

(My grumpy old git humour in return !)  

[C.Ricko]

anything would be better than the current deal,

I will take your 2%  

[Guest]

Joking aside Clive, (and apart from any multiplier disagreements), it would certainly seem fair and reasonable for the BA to give some sort of large bulk user discount on toll payments.

 

Their administration time and costs must be significantly less when invoicing one company for over a hundred craft all in one main transaction, with one cheque, rather than corresponding with a hundred private owners and then handling their individual payments. Even just the postage saved must presumably be worthwhile.

[LondonRascal]

Clive, because I booked Mystic Horizon over the phone (to use the loyalty discount) I’ve not got the total bill with me here – so I am working this out using memory of what the boat cost per week at the 2013 tariff when I booked it therefore the figures below may nto be exact.  

 

I believe it would have been charged at £305.00 per week for the cheapest band of which the period I was away was this would be hire charge only.  This has now I see reduced for 2014 season.

 

So I had the boat for 14 nights, of which you get a discount for a multiweek booking (I think that is 15%) so 14 nights @ £610.00 – 15% for the multiweek discount = £518.50.  Take off this amount my discount accrued of £332.00 and so the boat cost me (without fuel and damage waiver) £186.50 for two weeks or £13.32 a night.  I could have used a £50.00 voucher given for bad weather in March 2013 but have saved this to go towards next seasons first hire., had I used it of course I would have been even more ‘quids in’.

 

You would have paid around £75.00 to the Broads Authority for the two weeks  I was on Mystic Horizon in Tolls, - the VAT element in the hire charge and you certainly would not have got much profit out of me this time

[ExMemberBobdog]

As long as the variable costs are covered, any contribution to the fixed costs is worth having ... the alternative to your rental may have been the boat sitting idle and earning nothing.

[LondonRascal]

I got my figures in my previous post wrong now am home and checked the paperwork.

 

The cost was not £186.50 for a fortnight it actually was £232.82 (£46.32 more).

[C.Ricko]

As long as the variable costs are covered, any contribution to the fixed costs is worth having ... the alternative to your rental may have been the boat sitting idle and earning nothing.

We cant afford to do this every week, bear in mind some boats did not do 20 weeks, also take the VAT off, yes there may be a contribution but not one which covers the electric and rates.

please don't let this sound as if I don't appreciate the hires because we do, its all swings and roundabouts and it keeps the staff in regular employment either seasonal or permanent, and the happy faces on our customers makes it all worth while.

[ExMemberBobdog]

No, I realise that, I'm not suggesting you can do it all the time, in the long run you need to cover all your costs and make a reasonable profit/living.  I've just got my 'economics teacher' hat on which says that if the alternative to Robin's £232.82 was to have the boat moored up for the week (fortnight) earning nothing, then the money is worth having as long as it covers any specific costs of the hire and makes any contribution to the costs that you mention - which would have to be paid if the boat is 'out' or not.

[C.Ricko]

agreed but all this has to be done without cheapening your brand to a point where you don't have the money to improve year on year and you have to cease to operate in the current form....

[ExMemberBobdog]

Yup, "cheapening the brand" would be one of the (potential) specific costs of this hire, which is why you might not make those prices available to everybody, but instead tie them up with "loyalty bonuses" and make them available only to regular customers.  You'd make a good case study for an 'A' level Economics and/or Business Studies class

[andyg]

Should hope so he runs a rather large company all Kidding aside Clive, I'm surprised you work on an average budget of a 20 week season.. You obviously have boats that perform better then this ie your new models, but after all the cost and overheads are striped out there can't be a lot left, for future investment in fleet buildings etc. I'm also surprised that ba dosnt give / offer a discount to the larger operater as an insentive to keep your fleets viable. As I'm sure we are all aware if the likes of yourself woods and the big boys in wroxham went the broads would in my opinion die as a mass holiday destination. Seem to me as an odd set up with no insentives for the yards to invest from the authority that promotes the broads.. Don't get it !!

[Boaters]

Senator .I certainly did not suggest this out of jealously ,I don't know where that came from ? But as a discussion alternative thrown into the mix.I have owned different size and power of boats including sail,in my years of boating,so have no axe to grind .I was reminded in that post about the narrow boat. Paying half of the toll than of a conventional 60 footer which would obviously need more length on the moorings so why should that not be the same toll ? maybe a case of " never mind the width. ,Feel the length " just a comment ,with no confrontational motive,honest !

[senator]

Boaters, there is a reasonable argument for length being the defining factor given that this affects mooring availability. The engine HP has absolutely no impact whatsoever on the available space unless it is being used. When large, especially large modern, engines are used within limits set by the speed limits of the Broads the noise and pollution is far less than so called traditional Broads 1.5 BMC type engines being run flat out.

 

If there is an argument for tolls on HP it is that more should pay less. the only reason for the alternative is "I can't afford it so they should pay more". It is not the same argument that can be applied to small engine cars as big engine cars driven in lower gears are capable of greater emmisions. even then it is dubious given a small engine car driven flat out will use more fuel than a large engine car driven at the same speed. This was duly demonstrated by Clarkson and co when they ran a Toyota Prius and a BMW M5 around a track. the BMW just had to follow the Prius which was being driven as hard as it could.

 

Guess which one used the most fuel?

[C.Ricko]

20 weeks was above average for most yards this year (inc us) 2 years ago we averaged 4 more weeks than this year with 15 less boats, we took the boats out solely so that we did not have to tax them in what was looking to be a bad year, we had the option of bringing them back into the fleet if the season improved which it did not.

[littlesprite]

20 weeks was above average for most yards this year (inc us) 2 years ago we averaged 4 more weeks than this year with 15 less boats, we took the boats out solely so that we did not have to tax them in what was looking to be a bad year, we had the option of bringing them back into the fleet if the season improved which it did not.

 

 

This is why I thought you could base a figure on a 20 week average but only pay for the actual hire periods, the BA would lose if a boat only hired for 18 weeks but would gain if it hired for 22 weeks.

Someone did compare this to business rates but I'm sure boat yards pay this as well, better to compare it with a transport company that could pay road tax for only 6 months if it didn't work during the winter..

 

Another possible suggestion  for hire craft would be lowering the multiplier as the boat ages, I'm sure the bookings, price and profit are all higher on brand new boats, so as the boat ages and hire prices drop so would the multiplier.

[LondonRascal]

You’ve got some yards that went down the ‘book late save 30%’ route.  Then one reduced this to 25% reduction within 7 days of a booking being made.

 

Now purely on seeing how many boats were tied up in these boatyards when I have been about, these late deal savings may not have worked as well as planed further it encourages your regular customers to wait later and save so overall you may well loose more than gain.

 

What may be an idea to encourage people to book ‘on a whim’ is when bookings are not looking as good perhaps in a particular class and have a ‘bargain’ page on the website – it has nothing to do with booking within a week and saving a percentage off the usual price, but based purely upon a selection of boats that may be ‘under performing’ in hires and these can then be hired at a reduced cost – take it or leave it type thing.

 

The deal could be removed at any time, and indeed might only last for a couple of days in the first place but in so doing you have not devalued a business, neither have you encouraged people to wait and book a week before they are planning on going knowing should they do so they will get up to 30% off because this would be almost random, based upon bookings not how long one waits before making one.

 

Of course the Broads Authority can (and should) be doing more to help the businesses – not just boat hire, but where planning matters are concerned encouraging new or helping support current ventures. It does seem a little bit like they don’t want to get too complicated with tolls because it may cost them more.  So to have a database of boats based upon age as an example, and have tolls reduced by the age of a boat and newer boats (which hire for more money) be tolled on a higher band would likely not work out since the Broads Authority would not want to go to the extra trouble to maintain such a database and do all the back office work.

 

There are lots of different ideas out there – you’ve got Herbert Woods who are not part of Hoseasons but doing there own thing, yet Ferry Marina went all inclusive and made a big splash about leaving Hoseasons.  Of course however you price and run a business be it all inclusive or not, part of a booking agency or not – you need to make a modicum of profit on each boat and each hire how much you make (or try to) along with all the other overheads is where the crunch comes. 

 

It is not always about price though; I am more loyal to Richardson’s because of choice and service and in particular have found Horizon Craft very nice but that is just my personal opinion, but be it a big or small boatyard I think the times are fast approaching where the tolls levied on operators are looked closely at because these may very well start being the difference to stay in business or not make it worthwhile.

[C.Ricko]

I think more incentive needs to be made to invest in new boats. the older boats don't owe much and they cover their values much more quickly, the future of the industry needs to be thought about, not keeping things the way they were as although we all like seeing the classic boats it is not what the customers always expect.

 

however it is split or apportioned the BA will need the income at at least the level at which they decide to spend it, unfortunately where there was a surplus of over a million the suggestion of easing the toll for a period resulted in a rush to spend it on another white elephant.

[SPEEDTRIPLE]

Having just sat and read all this topic, i`ve just a great idea.  Why not just leave things the way they are, as although it is`nt perfect, it`s a damn sight more realistic than charging a tol for a boats age, power, or emissions (just look at how extrememely unfair that is with cars?). It` all very well saying that hire fleet operators should pay the multiplier, but then there`s no stopping private owners using their boats every week of the year. It is`nt perfect, but then no system of taxation ever will be, but it`s worked reasonably well for many years, so leave things as they are.

 

 

Regards to all ....................... Neil.

[Hockham Admiral]

That's probably exactly how the BA see it, Neil.

[C.Ricko]

to be honest, I think that is how  we see it, just need the multiplier to be eased a bit and the over inflation increases stopped.

[Maxwellian]

For that to happen Clive there has to be a drive to reduce expenditure by The BA. They only have three ways to move. 1) increase income via tolls 2) reduce costs 3) borrow. My real concern is that they fail to recognise that increased tolls will drive toll payers away and there reduce income.

[Oddfellow]

Changing the system would be very costly. Nothing happens in organisations like the BA without masses being spent on studies to tell them whether it might work or not and by the time all that money was wasted.......

 

The multiplier is the biggest problem facing us. This simply adds insult to injury when the baseline increases are high as we get clobbered twice.

 

We've seen a 30% increase in the tolls on Song of Freedom between 2008 and 2013 seasons. This is a 30ft x 10ft cruiser that cost around £851 this year in tolls.

[Oddfellow]

Max,

 

You're right to a degree. But as the Broads are the cheapest navigation for tolls, it's probably not a big problem to the BA.

 

The big, big problem is the huge amount of money wasted; Sprit of Breydon (broken again due to inexperience I am led to believe); Thorpe offices and the inability to let/sell Ludham Field Base which was supposed to help pay for it; apparent lack of inventory of equipment which the BA has lying all around Broadland in rented sheds on farm land and so, so much more.

 

The inefficiency is staggering.