I have followed many threads in which opinions are traded back and forth about the relative merits of different boat designs. These exchanges often include evaluations of cost and performance. Since we are familiar with quantitative factors like D/L and SA/D, I propose a new index: the bang-for-the-buck factor, or B:B. For performance-oriented designs, it is computed by taking the square root of the cost and multiplying it by the PHRF rating (see www.phrfne.org for a list of ratings); then divide this quantity by 1000 to get an easy range of numbers. Of course, you get a "better" score with low values, so you can subtract that score from a constant, say 100, to have the psychologically satisfying idea that bigger is better. According to my casual estimate, a 210 has one of the best B:B scores (which is what Ray Hunt designed her for). Square root of cost is used because costs go up exponentially with size. For smaller boats, especially one-design classes, you can use Portsmouth ratings rather than PHRF scores. This leaves out aesthetic factors, but I believe they are largely in the eye of the beholder.