PDA

View Full Version : Why aren't the greatest still produced



Stevedore
08-01-2008, 02:43 PM
Imagine you could own DORADE fresh out of the box. Or you could order yourself a brand spanking new NY 40. Are these things possible? Are the licences just not granted to build? I just can't understand why there aren't more of these wonders.

TimH
08-01-2008, 02:52 PM
they would be pretty expensive to build these days.

Lew Barrett
08-01-2008, 03:05 PM
Replacement cost on Rita: $750,000 for insurance purposes. Not bad actually. We all doubt we could get the job half done for that cost. The surveyor (RGM) would have pegged it higher, but it became ludicrous, so we settled on $750,000. Large wooden construction yachts are just not practical anymore as a routine affair. That's why saving the survivors has appeal.

David Conard
08-01-2008, 03:09 PM
Bill Cannell in Camden, ME says he will build you a new NY 30. Check his website http://www.cannellclassicboats.com/

bamamick
08-01-2008, 03:13 PM
Brooklin Boat Yard, Covey Island, G&B, and others still build such things with semi-regularity, but obviously cost is an issue and things are not improving on that score. With this economy I am seriously afraid that we are going to lose some yards and many skilled craftsmen. Anyway, as far as just building a new 'Dorade' or a replica of some boat like her, then I believe that you would have to go through S&S and they very well not work with you to build an exact copy of such a historic boat. If it's a classic metre boat you're after there are some rather complicated class rules to take into account. It'd just depend on several factors.

Mike (mmd) and others are imminently more qualified to speak on this than am I, but it's a multi-layered question with different answers depending upon exactly what you meant with your question.

Mickey Lake

Tom Hunter
08-01-2008, 03:30 PM
Every now and then one of them is produced.

Dorade was a one off to begin with. Most of the really great yachts are one offs.



Most people with the money for a Dorade want thier own custom boat. It's the nature of the purchase, if you are going to spend that much money and time why not have something designed and built just for you?

Gary E
08-01-2008, 04:09 PM
Just my opinion but it all boils down to money.... and taxes...

The people that used to make real money used to be the buyers of those and other luxury items... Those people made millions each year...maybe 20 mil or 100 mil a year, and that was before the govment could keep track of every freeekin dime they made...Now where did that money go. Before taxes were imposed it went where ever the rich wanted to spend it...And after the income tax was imposed, they have less to spend...as taxes were increased, and as it became harder to hide income from uncle sam, the rich spent less on frivality... and that means less spent on toy boats.

Do you remember Dennis Kozlowski ? He is a prime example.
If your interested read about him here..
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&pwst=1&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=Dennis+Kozlowski&spell=1

Now, fast forward to the imposition of the luxury tax imposed by the US Govment in 1990.. What it did was add a huge chunk of money to be paid, for absolutly no value, to the US Govment for simply buying a high priced boat.. What did that do?.. killed boat building...



One of the more controversial provisions passed by Congress in its attempt to reduce the burgeoning federal deficit was the luxury excise tax. The tax, introduced as part of RRA 90, levies a 10% surcharge on certain high-priced items to the extent that they exceed certain statutory limits. Effective January 1, 1991, the tax applies to the "first retail sale" of luxury goods with a sales price above the following thresholds: automobiles $500,000; boats $100,000; aircraft $25,000; and jewelry and furst exceeding $10,000. the tax was originally projected to provide revenues of $9 billion over the next five years. It has become obvious that the original projections are, at best, unrealistic. In addition, on a larger scale, the imposition of the excise tax has been reported in the press as aggravating the plight of the luxury industries already hard hit by current economic conditions. Legislators levied the tax on only five industries, allegedly to make the tax easier administer. It was decided, for example, that electronics should be dropped as a category since there are too many different types of dealers and equipment. Needless to say, the industries affected have been quite vocal in their criticism. The producers singled out are concerned that consumers who misunderstand the "threshold" concept may be resistant to purchase so called "luxury items." This would occur, for example, if consumers were to believe that $3,000 in additional tax would be owed on the purchase of a $30,000 automobile, when in fact none would actually be due. For the consumer, the tax is particularly worrisome because, once the statute is in place, it is simple to lower the threshold amounts or increase the rate. Opponents claim that the provision will affect not only the consumers, but also the industries, and in time will translate into lost jobs.


How to fix it?... Eliminate taxes and the very wealthy will make even more, then they will find a way to spend it... and usually that means employing others to make the new toys they want...

Lew
Do you know who your boat was built for? and what that man did for a living? How about the cost of it when new? I'm guessing but it was most likely paid for with cash, just like the Cadillac's were in those days, with pocket change...

Or, do as our congress critters are doing...
ahh never mind...

Lew Barrett
08-01-2008, 05:03 PM
Lew
Do you know who your boat was built for? and what that man did for a living? How about the cost of it when new? I'm guessing but it was most likely paid for with cash, just like the Cadillac's were in those days, with pocket change...
.

She was built for Dr. John Hay of Port Angeles, Wa, and she is indeed a one-off. I have no idea what Dr. Hay was a Doctor of, but Hey, he couldn't have been doing too badly. She cost about $11,500 in 1938.

I did a little calculation, using 6% as the annual return for a conservatively managed portfolio. That put the cost/value today at $743,000, not far off from our 750K finger in the air, but I still doubt she could be built for that with teak at $22 bf and labor pushing $60/hr. Changing the rates by one percent up or down has a huge impact. A 7% annual return makes the value of money (11,500) $1,400,000 today, whereas calculating at a 5% annual return puts her in at about $375,000. Any way you look at it, the doctor was doing just fine. And yes, he probably paid cash. Boat loans were not part of the deal in 1938, just as it looks like they will be less available in 2008!

elf
08-01-2008, 05:56 PM
Built for no value? Hmm. Education, roads, sewage treatment, power grid, trash collection and disposal, war in Iraq - no value?

Some people just don't get it.

TR
08-01-2008, 06:09 PM
An updated and slightly enlarged version of Stormy Weather is currently under construction.

http://www.sparkmanstephens.com/yachtdesign/sailyachts/2721/

Dorade has not been repeated because she's not that great a boat.....famous yes, but not particularly good otherwise. IMO Stormy is a far better boat, and worth doing again.

The general type have been built a great deal in recent years. See http://www.hoekdesign.com/ and http://www.gdnp.nl/index.php These are "Spirit of Tradition" boats, with updated underbodies and increased displacement to deal with modern systems and big tanks. Almost all the replicas have higher freeboard, shorter overhangs, and fin keels. This is because owner's spending several million $ think they should get at least two heads and private staterooms. Thus style suffers in the face of practicality.

Lew Barrett
08-01-2008, 06:11 PM
For better or worse, owning a boat is the dream of many, and for better or worse, most will never build one themselves. I do remember the luxury goods surtax, and the effect it had on the boating industry here. It wasn't just the mega yacht builder that were affected. In fact, mega yacht buyers will still be commissioning 100 GPH boats in this climate, as they are unswayed by the economics that weight the middle classes. While Gary will be the first to remember that he and I don't agree on many items of a political nature, taxing some schnooks 20K dream at 10% might be the straw that convinces him that a small boat really isn't a prudent buy. And, it may not be in fact. It may be that boats should only be for the very wealthy. But luxury and sin taxes are almost always borne not by the rich, but by the common man. The rich may bitch, but they can pay. I don't remember anybody in the marine trades around here being very sanguine about the surtax on boats a few years ago.

Lew Barrett
08-01-2008, 06:16 PM
Thus style suffers in the face of practicality.

Not amongst my clan! We'll take style over substance any day, and are prepared to prove it with ownership of the most impractical boat in the fleet! (That long skinny look has one enormously endearing benefit these days: fuel economy!)

I have said before, here, and been pilloried for it, that the modern builds lack the grace of the old boats. Ah well!

pcford
08-01-2008, 08:11 PM
Imagine you could own DORADE fresh out of the box. Or you could order yourself a brand spanking new NY 40. Are these things possible? Are the licences just not granted to build? I just can't understand why there aren't more of these wonders.

Too few very rich individuals with taste.

Gary E
08-01-2008, 08:13 PM
Some people just don't get it.

Tax receivers and welfare queens wont ever have to pay taxes....

More from that article, mybe you'l get a clue about PRODUCTIVITY and how jobs are created...




In the boating industry, this has already become obvious. According to a recent The Wall Street Journal editorial, the Labor Department estimates that in Florida, the nation's leading boat building state, builders laid off 5,000 out of 18,000 laborers by the end of 1990 and these layoffs are not isolated. Retailers, manufacturers, and services aligned to the boating industry are simultaneously affected. To provide even the slightest justification for these job losses, the government should at least be realizing substantial revenue gains. Nevertheless, according to the same editorial, the Joint Committee of Taxation has released collection estimates of which only $3 million were attributable to boats in 1991. Where is the justification?
Enacted in Haste
Ostensibly, a surcharge on luxury items is an equitable means by which to shift the burden of deficit reduction to those who can best afford it. It is hard to argue that an individual who can afford a $40,000 car cannot afford an additional $1,000 contribution to Uncle Sam. This perceived equity is exactly what the legislators were striving for when the legislation was introduced. Unlike most tax legislation which is the subject of extensive comment and review, accountants, attorneys and the public had little input into the 1990 act, which was drafted and presented almost exclusively behind closed doors. Now, in light of both the regulations released in late December 1990 and the revised revenue projections, which place the projected revenue of five years at only $1.5 billion, the tax is not quite as appealing as it may have seemed. In order to reach an agreement within a reasonable time frame, it appears that legislators were hasty in their analysis of the ramifications of the new luxury tax. Aside from the fact that the tax probably unjustly places its burden on only five industries, many argue that it will be an administrative and compliance nightmare that may actually use more resources than it can provide. Moreover, the newly issued regulations appear to leave open many technical issues, the ambiguities of which may produce extremely inequitable results.
Administrative Nightmare
From a practical standpoint, ambiguities as to who is liable for the tax make administration quite a problem. Under the regulations, the general rule is that the luxury tax is to be paid by the individual who makes the first retail sale. In the case of subsequent additions to taxable vehicles and to the other so-called luxury goods, the additional tax is imposed on the owner-operator or lessee who installs the part or accessory or who carries it for subsequent installation. The owner of the trade or business that installs the addition must collect the tax and is secondarily liable for failure to do so. Furthermore, in the case of a qualified lease, if the lease is canceled or otherwise terminated, the balance of the tax that would have been required if the lease continued is imposed. For these purposes the lessor is treated as the seller. For purposes of the tax, prior use of demonstration models is treated as a sale. According to a representative of the National Automobile Dealers Association, this places an unfair burden on dealers who have to pay the tax until they are finally able to sell the car. In addition, taxing such vehicles at the time of first retail sale would actually be of benefit to the government because these models typically sell at higher prices than other cars and higher than the "lowest retail price" called for under the regulations. This is just one example of how simplification and clarification would be of benefit to all parties. Examples may be found in each of the industries. The luxury tax regulations present a host of specifications and exceptions that are both internally inconsistent, as well as inconsistent with other code provisions.
Specific Industries
While the proposed rules provide a business use exemption for all vehicles, they employ a different standard for business use for passenger vehicles than they do for boats and aircraft. To be exempt from the luxury tax, automobiles must be utilized by the purchaser exclusively in the active conduct of the trade or business of transporting property or persons for compensation or hire, unless other use is de minimis. For boats, the exemption is a bit more liberal. In particular, the tax does not apply to boats used exclusively for commercial fishing, transportation for compensation or hire, or for use in any other trade or business, unless the boat is used predominantly for an activity generally considered entertainment, amusement or recreation. There is an exception for entertainment boats for hire, i.e., cruise ships, sightseeing boats, etc.
Aircraft enjoy the most liberal business use exemption. The tax will not apply for the first two years ending after the date the plane is placed in service if at least 80% of its hours of flight time is for use in a trade or business. This means that if an aircraft is regularly flown between New York and Florida for pleasure, and to and from Europe for business, the aircraft could conceivably meet the test for exemption.
Subjectivity Abounds
Unlike the test for airplanes, the test for automobiles and boats is extremely subjective and, therefore, far more difficult to meet. The regulations present an example of an individual who owns a luxury taxi cab for use in his business of providing taxi services to the public. In addition, he often uses the cab to pick up family members and to go shopping. These other uses are not considered de minimis non-business uses, and the taxi will not qualify for exemption. Therefore, a limousine driver is basically prohibited from using his automobile during the "off" hours even if it is only for local transportation. As a consequence of this discrepancy, on July 4 when ABC Company decides to use its exempt aircraft to fly its employees to the sunny beaches of Florida, Fred, their limo driver, is faced with the dilemma of asking his mother-in-law for a ride to the airport to preserve his business use exemption.
On top of providing different standards for business use exemption for the different classes of vehicles, within the same vehicle class the standards imposed are different from those for other code provisions. For deduction purposes, the IRC permits a limited depreciation expense for luxury automobiles. Unlike the luxury excise tax, which applies only to what is generally perceived to be expensive cars, the luxury automobile limitations apply to limit the depreciation deduction if the taxpayer's cost basis in the auto, used 100% for business, exceeds $12,800. The luxury auto rules allow for personal use of the automobile, but require an allocation between non-business and business use. The allocation is used to further limit the amount of depreciation allowed. In the case of a $50,000 automobile used 80% for business and 20% for personal use the taxpayer would be liable for a luxury excise tax on the full amount. The payment of $2,000 in additional tax should bring the car's depreciable basis to $52,000. However, although the code allows depreciation on the automobile, its depreciable basis would be capped at $10,240 (80% x $12,800). Therefore, the taxpayer would derive no benefit from the payment of the tax, and would be afforded no excise tax relief for his portion of business use. The result of the discrepancy between the code sections appears to impose a double burden on the taxpayer.
Examples of the Inequities
The inequities created by discrepancies between the luxury tax and other code sections is also apparent with respect to boats. Preferential treatment is afforded homeowners under the IRC, presumably to encourage home ownership long considered an integral part of the "American Dream." The regulations also recognize that one man's home may be another man's boat or castle, and accordingly, for purpose of the mortgage interest deduction, the IRC provides a liberal definition of a "qualified residence." Under the regulations, the determination of a residence should be based upon all facts and circumstances, including the good faith of the taxpayer.
Boats are specifically included in the definition, provided that they contain a sleeping space, toilet, and cooking facilities. Unlike the income tax, the luxury tax provides no special provision for house boats. As such, any boat over $100,000 is subject to tax as a luxury item even if it is purchased as a residence. This appears unjust because it is highly unlikely that a $100,000 house would be considered a luxury. Wouldn't it be more equitable to tax a second vacation home? If a boat qualifies as a home for purposes of a liberal exemption, why should one be forced to choose a different type of home to avoid the excise tax?
Opponents of the tax in the boating and marine industry claim legislators failed to recognize the significant cost of electronic equipment in relation to the cost of boats. Although electronics were dropped as a category subject to the excise tax, in the case of boats, electronic equipment may actually cause the cost of the boat to exceed the threshold and be subject to the additional tax. Although it is difficult to take exception to the inclusion of recreational boats as luxury items, there is no apparent justification for subjecting equipment to the tax. A radar device is far less a luxury than a necessity to a boat pilot. But, from an economic standpoint, he would be better off investing in a hi-tech stereo system and a big screen color television.



There's More
See next post

Cant copy it... read it here
http://www.nysscpa.org/cpajournal/old/11583345.htm

Stevedore
08-01-2008, 08:41 PM
Too few very rich individuals with taste.

As near as I can tell this seems to be the main reason.

I use DORADE purely as an example. That guy up in Camden looked interesting.

Great insight from everyone.

Concordia...41
08-01-2008, 09:12 PM
Precisely. Money does not equate to taste. To give the uber-rich some credit (slack) though, they're running in circles where a couple million gets you something like this:

http://newimages.yachtworld.com/1/7/4/1/9/1741901_1.jpg?1161068400000

Few step out of the mold.

Mrleft8
08-01-2008, 09:41 PM
Hell..... You'd have to PAY me a couple million to take one of those.

The Bigfella
08-01-2008, 09:45 PM
There's a story in the local rag today about one of our rich young inheritees buying one of these:

http://yachts.monacoeye.com/files/mangusta156salvaje1.jpg

World's largest open boat at 165' and a steal at $50 mil.

I think his late father's converted icebreaker had a bit more style

http://www.superyachttimes.com/images/3/992/main_568x418.jpg

pcford
08-01-2008, 10:34 PM
Precisely. Money does not equate to taste. To give the uber-rich some credit (slack) though, they're running in circles where a couple million gets you something like this:

http://newimages.yachtworld.com/1/7/4/1/9/1741901_1.jpg?1161068400000

Few step out of the mold.

I call those tennis shoe boats...they look like them.

TimH
08-01-2008, 10:38 PM
Stormy Weather with a fin keel.

http://www.sparkmanstephens.com/yachtdesign/sailyachts/2721/Brooklin_56_SP_large.jpg

pila
08-01-2008, 11:17 PM
Even though my old wood boat needs TLC frequently, can't bring myself to switch to a tupperware tub.

andrewe
08-02-2008, 03:28 AM
Racing rules might have a bit to do with it. Lots of people are spending serious money on new boats (Americas Cup?) But they have to have a chance in real life. What we see as classics were built to the rules of the time. And before you say modern boats are throwaway after a few seasons, many of the 19th and 20th cent. boats were too.
Andrew

Hwyl
08-02-2008, 03:41 AM
Actually boats are constantly being recreated. I'd say the best example is the Schooner Atlantic. Ranger is pretty amazing too.

Lew Barrett
08-02-2008, 12:34 PM
I've been very impressed with what these people are doing. Modern boats, traditional designs, great quality.

http://www.legendaryyachts.com/

Bob Cleek
08-02-2008, 01:02 PM
I'm going to disagree a bit here, having made the acquaintance of a very few of those guys who had "bespoke" large wooden boats built "back in the days."

I don't think it's the cost, really. That's purely relative. A well designed and built boat was always expensive. I don't think good boatbuilding wood was ever less expensive or more "plentiful" in the old days than it is now. Sure, there may have been more of it closer to the yards than now, but advances in mechanical harvesting and milling, not to mention transportation, have pretty much kept it all in balance. When we talk about how "cheap" materials were seventy-five years ago, we have to remember that a fancy dinner for two back then maybe ran you $2.50. Just the other day, I heard some steakhouse advertising a "deal" on a steak dinner for two as "only" $89!

It isn't the luxury tax, either. There are lots of ways around that one. I'd think you'd avoid the tax legitimately by simply "sub-contracting" the work yourself, such that you weren't "buying" the whole finished boat for a sum that triggered the tax, but rather simply buying the materials incrementally and paying labor to assemble it. The tax seems applicable mainly to finished production boats built on "spec."

Frankly, I think it is a matter of taste and class. Today's rich people want it all now. Plunk down the credit card, turn the key, and off they go. Few with that kind of money have the patience and sophistication to involve themselves in the often years-long process of selecting, designing, and building a masterpiece. They'd rather buy a piece of expensive junk that just "looks" expensive so their friends (who aren't really) will be impressed with what they were able to buy. Proof of this can be seen in the popular yachting magazines of the times. Years and years ago, the magazines featured new boats with commentary on their construction and performace. Details of rigging and hull lines were fully explored and discussed with a fair level of technicality. Today, you'd think all the big boats sold were bought by women! The magazines today picture and discuss nothing but the fancy interior decorators' work with only a nod to engine power and the like. They aren't interested in what really makes a boat tick. That said, the big boats that make up mosf of that market have become nothing more than powered barges providing a venue for chi chi interior decorators.

John B
08-02-2008, 01:22 PM
Of course there is the factor of performance.( sailing)
The epitome of speed , Atlantic, Westward,The J class boats, the turn of the century cup racers etc etc all hit the wall at about 14 to 16 knots sustained.You get that out of your average 28 ft sport boat these days, hell Positive touch , the Jim Young Rocket 31 was doing it in the 80's in club racing.
Speed boat the 100 ft beast just built here last year was doing that on the wind and 26 or 28 knots ( I forget) on her first or second sail. They're talking a 40 knot potential with that boat, some say higher.

Steve Paskey
08-02-2008, 01:55 PM
Frankly, I think it is a matter of taste and class. Today's rich people want it all now. Plunk down the credit card, turn the key, and off they go. Few with that kind of money have the patience and sophistication to involve themselves in the often years-long process of selecting, designing, and building a masterpiece. They'd rather buy a piece of expensive junk that just "looks" expensive so their friends (who aren't really) will be impressed with what they were able to buy.

I think you're absolutely right, Bob. It isn't the money; it's the tastes and preferences of the people who have enough money to buy a big new boat. The big boat market is very customer-driven, and the stuff that's out there is what the customers want. Most want a floating luxury palace. And the few who are genuinely interested in performance and the technical side want something that's high tech and cutting edge, rather than an old classic.

Hwyl
08-02-2008, 03:19 PM
Imagine you could own DORADE fresh out of the box. Or you could order yourself a brand spanking new NY 40. Are these things possible? Are the licences just not granted to build? I just can't understand why there aren't more of these wonders.

This thread is annoying the heck out of me.
Why do most posters assume the thread starter is correct in his hypothesis.

Dorade was considered a breakthrough boat when she was built, outside ballast was not a mainstream idea at the time. She was probably the "Speedboat" of her time.

Bob Cleek says it's lack of taste, yet his avowed favorite boat "Dyarchy" (herself considered revolutionary, when boats such as Jolie Brise, were the norm) has been reproduced more than a dozen times and I'd bet there's one being built as I type.

There are scores of Herreshoff boats being sailed. Fifes are being restored by the fistful. Most of these restorations include very little of the old boat. The J boat owners association are running out of boats to reproduce (to qualify as a J boat they have to have existed in plan form when the class was originally being raced).

A visit to any big marina would afford you the sight of hundreds of large yachts, some of which have to be acceptable to "Stevedore". The spirit of tradition class in the Mediterranean is thriving.

The "Golden Age" of yachting is, at least for big boats, right now. The people who say different are ignoring the facts

Art Read
08-02-2008, 03:31 PM
To be fair, there HAS been a quite a resurgance in "classic" inspired, simple but admittedly very expensive and oversized, glorified daysailors lately. The "Ailerion" series, Morris Yachts, even the much maligned Hinkley "Picnic Boat"... And custom builders ARE building some true, new, classics. Not all are wooden but many are. True classics are by definition, rare. They no more filled marinas or anchorage fields in the "glory years" then they do now. We just remember and revere the best of the best more than we do the forgotten "average" boat of the era.

Quality is an elusive and slippery target. It dissapears like fog on a river when practical cosiderations overwhelm dreams. The "perfect" boat or something you can use this summer to actually have a picnic with your kids?

While I admire those who keep the craft and the history of fine yachting alive by maintaining or building "classic" boats, I more understand and identify with those who just keep the dream going with a modest, little, leaky wooden skiff and a big grin on their face.

Peter Malcolm Jardine
08-02-2008, 05:58 PM
I have no doubts with a big enough cheque book you could get anything you want built. I notice that the vintage yacht movement is all about having something that no one else has, with a pedigree to boot. I have no problems with that, because stewardship of beautiful things has always been the pervue of the wealthy. I'm glad old wooden boats have benefitted on the way by...

Larry P.
08-02-2008, 07:03 PM
I don't know, even though they are glass I think our boats are pretty nice:

http://www.chmarineyachts.com/images/image04.jpg

Robbie 2
08-02-2008, 08:00 PM
For better or worse, owning a boat is the dream of many, and for better or worse, most will never build one themselves. I do remember the luxury goods surtax, and the effect it had on the boating industry here. It wasn't just the mega yacht builder that were affected. In fact, mega yacht buyers will still be commissioning 100 GPH boats in this climate, as they are unswayed by the economics that weight the middle classes. While Gary will be the first to remember that he and I don't agree on many items of a political nature, taxing some schnooks 20K dream at 10% might be the straw that convinces him that a small boat really isn't a prudent buy. And, it may not be in fact. It may be that boats should only be for the very wealthy. But luxury and sin taxes are almost always borne not by the rich, but by the common man. The rich may bitch, but they can pay. I don't remember anybody in the marine trades around here being very sanguine about the surtax on boats a few years ago.

Yes... the 20% Boat tax imposed in 1978 by Prime Minister Rob Muldoon virtually killed overnight the boatbuilding industry here in NZ.
The very high end superboats seem to be built now, but a lot of the small yards etc went under very quickly and most others cannot compete with imported tupperware mass produced products.

Lew Barrett
08-03-2008, 12:46 AM
The old boats, those that can be, are all subjects for restoration, but for the sake of conversation, I'll be the devil's advocate here. First off, I don't agree entirely with Bob Cleek. Wood of the quality that went into our boats is not easily found. Mine's all Burma teak and old growth fir except for the bottom which I had to replace with AYC. I can't buy Burma teak at any price. Maybe somebody can, but I can't. Yellow cedar, yeah, and decent fir maybe so, but some of the stuff that went into my boat is just not for sale here anymore. Good thing I haven't needed it.

In one respect there was nothing wildly different about the construction of any of the great boats (absent their individual design considerations and the degree of detail and effort that went into them). Building such boats was THE business, and it's the way it was done. Nothing has changed in respect to the race for the biggest newest, fastest. That's been ongoing since the Joneses moved next door. Always a newer, bigger, better boat, and in the days before WWII, of wood, generally, and by a good architect and builder, generally, at least if she lives today.

So what's changed? Plenty. If we consider the new wooden builds of what we might call "classic" provinance and line them up against the
factory builds, we'll quickly get a sense of the scale of the business and who is being served. Sure enough Gareth, there are among those who can afford it an increasing interest in and desire for what I will loosely call "important" boats, and even of interesting wooden boats. But the days I'm thinking of, the days when at least on these shores, LUDDCO, Blanchard, Geary, Stevens, Monk, Marco and all the hundreds of others who were busy with continuous drawing, building and launching of fine wooden craft for the carriage trade are over. What is left is a handful of craftspeople and yards doing something that has become today rather remarkable indeed.

In one respect I agree with you completely, and as one who is heavily invested in classics, it pays me to do so. There hasn't been more interest in fine wooden craft as art since the pre war era than there is today. But in another sense, this interest remains at a very unique and somewhat elevated...or separate ....place in the market.
Absent a complete economic meltdown, there are better prospects for classics today than there have been in 30 years. But this remains a very small and unique niche in a much larger and very different world than the ones these boats were originally born into.

I don't have any access to the sporting world of yachts in the Med, so I can't speak to that. But really, in the great scheme of things, how many people do? What we have here is unique, and unlikely ever to return in a form that the average, reasonably successful guy can participate in. In 1935, all of them were nice new wooden boats. Today? Just the survivors and the output of a very few yards aimed at the very few rich who have a taste for such things. Don't misunderstand me. That these things are becoming objects of desire and greater fascination is all to the good for me. I own one. Perhaps in the future, I will simply wish mine had sails.

bamamick
08-03-2008, 07:42 AM
I am surprised that no one mentioned the SEVEN J-class boats being built or pondered upon right now.

As long as there are millions and millions of us working hard for someone else, those someone else's will have the means to have boats built. 'Yachts and Yachting' will always have some big boat to discuss at length so don't woory about that. As I said earleir, it's the small yards and folks like me that I worry about for the future.

Mickey Lake

Hwyl
08-03-2008, 09:36 AM
. The J boat owners association are running out of boats to reproduce (to qualify as a J boat they have to have existed in plan form when the class was originally being raced).




I am surprised that no one mentioned the SEVEN J-class boats being built or pondered upon right now.


As usual we're on the same page

Lew Barrett
08-03-2008, 11:29 AM
As usual we're on the same page

I suspect what you are saying is that you can get anything you want at Alice's restaurant. If what you are saying is that building a fifty foot blue water racer has always been a big deal, I agree. It doesn't change the fact that there are fewer places to do that today.

rbgarr
08-03-2008, 12:53 PM
Maybe fewer places but every one of them would love to do it!

Hwyl
08-03-2008, 01:35 PM
Maybe fewer places but every one of them would love to do it!

I think there are waiting lists in the good yards. American yards should start getting orders soon given the third world status of the currency.