The Reason People Are Moving Away From Monohulls

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Sure but did you miss the point?

Some people were arguing that cats should pay extra for width because it forces the marina to provide wide slips for the cats that monos don't need.

Some people dont get it, marinas have wide slips not just because Multis wide beams, ,marinas have a wide variety of size berths to acomódate a wide variety of boats..
Should pay extra? they already pay extra for a wide slip, monohulls cant complaint because the marina is not forced to do anything .
Multis pay extra to in boatyards, its all about space used...If i try to dock a 25 ft wide beam monohull sure im going to pay more..

But conveniently they ignore the fact that deep draft monos force the marina into expensive dredging projects that cats don't need.
If cats should be expected to pay for costs associated with extra width, monos should pay for the costs associated with extra draft.

Mate, any dredging is not reflected in your bill or mine ,no matter if you own a multi or a mono.. Dont be a smartass, i know a couple of marinas where they dredged few fts to acomódate Deep draft boats and the Price its the same.. Tell me whats the diference between a 2 ft centerboard up monohull and a minikeels Lagoon?


Reality in the USA is almost no marinas charge extra for cats because it's bad business. If you have a slip that will fit the cat, you rent it to them at the same rate.

Good for you , they obviously dont have a clue, if i have 25 slips for 25 monohulls and i rent the 25 docks to 15 multis , well go figúrate..

Europe has two issue that pushed them the other way:
- Med mooring is the most common option and means they can cram as many boats as will fit. If the fairway for 30-40' boats is 100' long, they can fit 5 - 20ft beam boats or 10 - 10ft beam boats. This doesn't apply to most US marinas as they have fixed berths. If the slips are 20ft wide, they hold the same number of boats regardless of beam (assuming they fit).

Assuming they fit...

- It seems a significantly larger percentage of marinas are govt owned or overseen. I suspect this creates a disconnect with what makes sense for business. In the US, if you ask someone to pay double for an end tie compared to what a mono of the same length will pay, the boat will go to the next marina over or more likely the marina owner will back down and charge the same rate for both. In Europe, it seems to be much more of an "official" must follow the rules and the rules say cats pay more per foot. If there is no competition, there's not much you can do about (obviously this is a generalization as there are private marinas in Europe and public marinas in the US but in terms of the pattern, it's what we've noticed).

Yes in EU many marinas are GOv owned as well many marinas are privated owned or work like a social club but this dont change the fact that is all about ft,s used, if you have the bad luck to run in a 30 ft wide slip where maybe 2 monohulls can rest in peace with your 20 ft wide multi, well you are using the whole slip...

[malbert73]

I am sure this varies widely. As an example most marinas on Chesapeake have 15-16 foot wide slips for typical 45-50 foot slip. They may not charge more given the minority of cats seen in general on bay can be accommodated on T head. But if those suggesting multis will take over are right, the supply demand curve will shift and the 2 t heads for every 30 normal slips will not be enough.
Basically up until now I suspect the minority of multis means prices can be fixed by foot. If they start to approach same density there's no way the prices stay same as marinas can fit 50% more monos than multis in same basin.


Sent from my iPhone using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[malbert73]

So if I'm a multi owner I would start saying how uncomfortable and dangerous they are so that there aren't too many out there to drive up slip costs 😀


Sent from my iPhone using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[DumnMad]

Originally Posted by malbert73

I am sure this varies widely. As an example most marinas on Chesapeake have 15-16 foot wide slips for typical 45-50 foot slip. They may not charge more given the minority of cats seen in general on bay can be accommodated on T head. But if those suggesting multis will take over are right, the supply demand curve will shift and the 2 t heads for every 30 normal slips will not be enough.
Basically up until now I suspect the minority of multis means prices can be fixed by foot. If they start to approach same density there's no way the prices stay same as marinas can fit 50% more monos than multis in same basin.
Sent from my iPhone using Cruisers Sailing Forum

That seems fair enough.
Another good reason for the inside shallow berth and outside berths to be not too pricey - lightning protection

[waterman46]

Always an interesting subject. Part of the reason "people are moving away from monohulls" could be that there are, as time passes, more and more pre-owned multis on the market so perhaps the prices have declined a little.
And as more and more cruisers go multi, the arguments about safety relative to monos become less compelling.

[44'cruisingcat]

"Mate, any dredging is not reflected in your bill or mine ,no matter if you own a multi or a mono.."

Ridiculous statement. The cost of dredging is reflected in EVERY bill. Even the bills of boats that don't need the dredging.

And that's my point - multihull owners have to pay for their extra beam, fair enough. But why should we pay for the extra depth we don't need?

[boatman61]

Because after much pooh poohing last century designers finally got it that James Wharram knew what he was talking about when it came to designing stable catamarans.. and finally began producing boats that can sail.. without capsizing..

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

"Mate, any dredging is not reflected in your bill or mine ,no matter if you own a multi or a mono.."

Ridiculous statement. The cost of dredging is reflected in EVERY bill. Even the bills of boats that don't need the dredging.

And that's my point - multihull owners have to pay for their extra beam, fair enough. But why should we pay for the extra depth we don't need?

Do you have the last bill last time you be in a marina?
There is something in the bill pointing something like Dear customer, because of recent dredging, we are going to charge you XXXX $$$... hahah Lol.

[DumnMad]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

"Mate, any dredging is not reflected in your bill or mine ,no matter if you own a multi or a mono.."

Ridiculous statement. The cost of dredging is reflected in EVERY bill. Even the bills of boats that don't need the dredging.

And that's my point - multihull owners have to pay for their extra beam, fair enough. But why should we pay for the extra depth we don't need?

Every marina is different.
Some don't need dredging.
Some silt up at a rate proportional to the tidal exchange in which case multi's should pay more.
Some silt up in prortion to depth in which case monos should pay more.
In the end you pay what you have to or go on the hook.

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Do you have the last bill last time you be in a marina?
There is something in the bill pointing something like Dear customer, because of recent dredging, we are going to charge you XXXX $$$... hahah Lol.

Seriously - who do you think pays for the dredging?

You really have to wonder about some people....

[Jim Cate]

And that's my point - multihull owners have to pay for their extra beam, fair enough. But why should we pay for the extra depth we don't need?

Well, until such time as ALL customers that the marina wishes to service are shallow draft, they must have adequate depth for keel boats if they want to maximize their customer base. And so, dredging (if it is in an area that requires it, and not all do by any means) is a base cost of doing business.

On the other hand, if the marina is normally pretty full of boats, having a multihull occupy the space where they could otherwise put two narrower boats reduces their income, and charging more seems appropriate, business-wise.

If the marina is normally NOT fully occupied, they might do well by not charging more for multihulls, and thus encouraging their custom.

In Australia, especially in Queensland where there is an unusually high percentage of multihulls, there is often a waiting list for multi berths. Not surprising that greedy operators charge more! OOps... not PC! Change that to "astute businessmen" rather than "greedy".

Jim

PS Talking to a friend who is a broker in Manly Harbour... he said that he had over a dozen customers who would buy a cat from him IF he could provide a berth for them. He could not...

[buzzstar]

Dear fellow harbor bums: Attempting to how a landlord, including marina operators actually determines costs, let alone prices/rents is something you would need to take up with every one of them on an individual basis. Many if not most times they are also tenants in the form of long term lease holders. The owners are usually governments, and often dictate methods of determining rents for docks or other boat space in the lease to the marina operator. I suspect this tens to be true worldwide. Oh, the old thing I have noticed is that rates always rise, except may not near the end of an operators lease, when they do not plan to renew and definitely plan no capital investments. These marinas and to be on their last legs in the condition of the physical facilities. Oh, did I mention the often necessary off-the-books transactions such as bribes at various levels of officialdom?

[brownoarsman]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

[B]
And that's my point - multihull owners have to pay for their extra beam, fair enough. But why should we pay for the extra depth we don't need?

Because some multi owners chose to buy the new leopard 45 ... I kid, I kid!

[s/v Jedi]

So y'all first buy a cat which is 2-3x the price of a mono and then whine about the marinas charging extra for their beam but not for the draught of a mono?!

[sailjumanji]

Originally Posted by ramminjammin

I have sailed my 40 ft trimaran and my 30 ft Tartan ; coastal and blue water, both amazingly fun to sail. To sum up the trimaran, I will never forget the comment from an old salt ( retired captain of the 143 ft schooner Bluenose) after he was sailing her up along the New Jersey coast , " That was a Rush" . You really can't describe the thrill of traveling 14 kt in a vessel that is 40 ft by 24 ft. The only way I can describe it , it is like sitting on the couch in your house and you are doing 200 mph.

Our personal best, 23 knots. Racing our Corsair 28R, four-person crew (including my wife, who was steering/tiller), downwind under asymmetric spinnaker, probably 28 knots wind, spray flying everywhere, and working hard to avoid all of the boats we were passing. Until the spinnaker blew. Fun meter goes to zero!

We also did long distance races in the Gulf of Mexico. Long stretches downwind at 19 knots. Reaching at same speed. Sometimes we stuffed the leeward bow. Boat would decelerate, stern try to come up, maybe rotate around. But never pitchpoled. You would think from everything written, we would be pitchpole kings! We were on a multihull. Never happened to us, nor any of the Corsair trimarans when we raced Nationals, Key West Race Week, NOOD regattas, etc.

Now my time racing beach cats, well that was a different story altogether.