Originally Posted by Captain Bill
I never quite understood the pay by the foot concept
. If a slip will fit a 40 foot boat and you have a 40 foot boat things are great, but the same slip containing a 35 foot boat still has has the same finger piers, takes the same dock space, etc. Why does the 35 foot boat pay less money
than the 40 foot boat? In NC where I kept my boat several marinas
charged based on the slip size. Depending on the marina there were 30, 40, 50, and 60 ft slips available and each had a flat rate. In one case all the slips would accommodate the same length boats, but some were cat slips. They charged the same rate for all of the monohull
slips and a different rate for the cat slips which occupied 2 monohull
spaces but had only 1 power pedestal
so it wasn't quite twice the monohull space rent. This always seemed to make more sense to me than a by the foot rate.
In the end as long as the market is consistent, it works itself out but...
If you only have a few 60' slips available and they are sitting empty, do you want to scare off a customer with a 30' boat because you are going to charge him as if it's a 60' boat?
Or maybe you have 30 & 40 foot slips and a local competitor has 35 foot slips for the same per foot price
. Do you want to scare off 31-35' boats because they effectively pay more?
Or you can charge a 33' boat 10% more even though you squeeze them into a 30' slip.
A marina trying to buck the larger market will find itself typically in a tough position explaining itself to customers.
As to the original post, a 4% increase isn't huge by any stretch of the imagination and 5c per kwh was likely selling you electric
at a loss, so increasing it seems very reasonable.