"Evicted": Marina Won't Renew Contract for Next Year to maximize Profit

[deblen]

Originally Posted by CaptTom

There have been discussions about Safe Harbors buying up lots of marinas, and about their business practices. Was it them? Just curious.

An unfettered grab for profits would eventually reduce all marinas, and all waterfront land, to high-end condos. This is NOT what I call market capitalism.

Capitalism has been around forever. Look at the ruins of any ancient city and you'll see the marketplace. That society established a place, and a set of rules, for trade. Businesses and vendors competed within that set of rules, and the ones which did best were the ones who met the customer's needs most efficiently. There's nothing wrong with that.

The problem comes about when we make the rules. In some places, the local population has seen value in maintaining a "working waterfront" and has made rules to encourage businesses to meet that need. In other (most?) places, the needs of the wealthy who desire beachfront condos are prioritized.

We can't really blame the businesses. Give them a level playing field --a marketplace -- where all have to play by the same rules, and they'll compete there. And they'll give us exactly what we asked for.

At the micro scale, one solution is what my marina did - become a private club. The land is owned jointly by the members and will not be sold to developers anytime in the foreseeable future. The owners (members) value the current use too much to sell out. Without that ownership interest by boat owners, for-profit marinas will eventually all be sold out to developers or Mega-Corp marina chains. Mom-and-Pop marinas are a thing of the past.

Capt. Tom
Your "co-op" ownership of the marina is a great solution.
Dare I suggest that CO-OPs are an example of a touch of "good socialism"used to compete with the uncontrolled,unregulated growth of pure capitalism. Len

[Nokay]

Just a quick clarification: our marina is not owned by a chain and could be called a family operation. It actually has a pretty bad rep in the town, so one could argue that "mom and pop" doesn't always equal good and wholesome.

Ironically, we did change marinas two years ago because our previous one was bought up by Safe Harbor and we were concerned about what that would mean. Bad decision in retrospect.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

The myth I was referring to is the notion that wealth in a capitalist society equates to those who work the hardest, and if you are poor it is your fault because you worked less.

As I said, this circumstance is perfectly in line with how a capitalist society, and business within said society, is expected to operate. Profit maximization is the bottom line, so naturally our OP shouldn't be surprised at what is happening.

Not necessarily "harder" but likely "smarter".

I wonder if the OP offered to pay a premium to keep the slip they might relent?

[rmesfo]

Originally Posted by wingssail

You are victim of a trend: Wealthy will take what they want and the rest of us get what we are given.

In this case waterfront has a higher value to those who wish to develop it for profit than it does for marina owners. It is more profitable as waterfront condos than marinas. Profit rules. The marina owner does what they can to stay profitable. That means getting rid of the low profit clients and keeping the higher profit clients. You lose.

Waterfront is a limited resource which ought to be used for the public good, since the public actually owns it. In some locales certain amount of waterfront has been reserved for a variety of uses: parks, condos, boat yards, marinas, etc. Developers have fought this trend. They are winning.

Unless politicians decide to back fair usage principles for public resources this trend will continue. Don't count on it. Politicians generally have given up ethics and fairness early in their careers. They will back whomever pays them the most. There will be more "victims" (people who don't contribute enough to the profits) who will get kicked out and richer boat owners will get the berths. That is capitalism. We chose it. We get what we sow.

Consider who you vote for.

What wingssail said. Really started back in the mid 90's when greed and power became the holy grail.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Not necessarily "harder" but likely "smarter".

I wonder if the OP offered to pay a premium to keep the slip they might relent?

Yes... in the sense where "smarter" means pursuing activities which generate more profit. I was responding to the myth that wealth equates to how hard one works. Sometimes yes, but sometimes no.

The marina that is evicting our OP is simply pursuing the same "smart" approach. As I said, it's just capitalism working as intended.

[ArmyDaveNY]

I empathize with you. I too like to work on my boats, and it is not about saving the money, although I don't mind that part. I just enjoy learning, doing, and of course, the satisfaction of a job I did myself (hopefully a well done job).

Someone mentioned a club, and that is a great idea. I have been in a marina, on the hook, and in a yacht club. Being in a club has many of the benefits of being in a marina. I found that a launch service is far more convenient than getting to and from in a dinghy, and is almost as good as being in a slip. Also, most clubs have a dock you can tie up to when loading bulky items or a lot of items. My club also allows one to tie up to the dock to work on your boat, with reasonable limitations of course. During the winter, the docks are naturally far more accessible than during the summer, but even then it is not out of the question.

Good luck with your hunt for a new marina.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Yes... in the sense where "smarter" means pursuing activities which generate more profit. I was responding to the myth that wealth equates to how hard one works. Sometimes yes, but sometimes no.

The marina that is evicting our OP is simply pursuing the same "smart" approach. As I said, it's just capitalism working as intended.

The same effect applies to socialism or other economic systems...it's just a question of who gets pulled up or down by those working harder/smarter vs those working lazier/dumber.

I'm always surprised at the number of folks making 6 figure salaries who are deep in debt with no savings vs those making something like $30-40/yr and are debt free with substantial savings. Some people are born with a silver spoon and some simply get dealt a raw deal...but these are very rare exceptions.

Of course, the use of the term "eviction" is a charged term used here to elicit an emotional response and is not representative of what is happening. Eviction implies, you have a legal contract for the place and owner is forcing out during the term of the contract. Typically this is due to violation of the contract terms.

The OP's description is not consistent with eviction. The owner is simply not offering a new contract with the OP.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

The same effect applies to socialism or other economic systems...it's just a question of who gets pulled up or down by those working harder/smarter vs those working lazier/dumber.

Each approach or system has its strengths and weaknesses. I was just responding to this typical myth of capitalism, not making a systemic claim or analysis.

Originally Posted by valhalla360

I'm always surprised at the number of folks making 6 figure salaries who are deep in debt with no savings vs those making something like $30-40/yr and are debt free with substantial savings. Some people are born with a silver spoon and some simply get dealt a raw deal...but these are very rare exceptions.

There are plenty of anecdotes to show all circumstances. It is true however, that if you are rich today it is more likely you come from wealthy parents. This has been well studied in the economic literature.

Originally Posted by valhalla360

The OP's description is not consistent with eviction. The owner is simply not offering a new contract with the OP.

Agreed. The term "eviction" suggests the OP has some legal right to continue to operate under the existing agreement. It might be unfair or unethical to discontinue his contract, but it's not a breach of any legal right.

[S/V Illusion]

Originally Posted by rmesfo

What wingssail said. Really started back in the mid 90's when greed and power became the holy grail.

Sometimes people mislabel profit with “greed and power”. Businesses (which employ people) don’t survive long without profit so we are really discussing how people label profit as though it is a bad thing.

It isn’t.

And any business rightfully sets price and profit goals. Customers have the right to take their business elsewhere. Mumbling resentment over that reality achieves nothing but high blood pressure.

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by S/V Illusion

Sometimes people mislabel profit with “greed and power”. Businesses (which employ people) don’t survive long without profit so we are really discussing how people label profit as though it is a bad thing.

It isn’t.

And any business rightfully sets price and profit goals. Customers have the right to take their business elsewhere. Mumbling resentment over that reality achieves nothing but high blood pressure.

Profit is not bad but allowing wealthy to utilize a pubic resource for profit to the exclusion of less wealthy is wrong. That is not the country I prefer to live in.

It is easy to say, "Customers have the right to take their business elsewhere." but if there isn't any elsewhere because the limited resource, (shorelines) have been taken for development of more profitable businesses the result is that less affluent customers are simply out of luck.

Some locales try to protect low income citizens from that exclusion, which I think is good. Others, dominated by leaders with a Laissez-faire attitude, don't see the need. The wealthy get what they want, claim they got it through hard work and imply that the others should have done the same, and overlook good fortune or circumstances of birth, and are OK with things, as long as it is the poorer folks who get excluded, not themselves. That does seem like greed to me (well, maybe not greed, but surely lack of compassion).

[S/V Illusion]

Originally Posted by wingssail

Profit is not bad but allowing wealthy to utilize a pubic resource for profit to the exclusion of less wealthy is wrong. That is not the country I prefer to live in.

As the saying goes, "I'll be happy to hold the door open for you"

It is easy to say, "Customers have the right to take their business elsewhere." but if there isn't any elsewhere because the limited resource, (shorelines) have been taken for development of more profitable businesses the result is that less affluent customers are simply out of luck.

These philosophical debates are academic. No one is entitled to anything including ownership of shoreline property. It has an intrinsic and quantifiable value - if you cant afford it, who's fault is that? (rhetorical question)

The wealthy get what they want, claim they got it through hard work and....

It's usually not a "claim" but in fact is quite factual, however, that lament is almost always uttered by those who didn't.

[Bycrick]

I once lived in a mom-and-pop marina. It was full of liveaboards, including me. But I can guarantee you that it was a feudal aristocracy. When you drove in, the sign said "Now entering XYZ marina." When you left, the back of the sign said "Now entering the United States." You stayed there completely at the sufferance of the owner. If he suddenly didn’t like you, you were gone at the end of the month. Given the dearth of legal live-aboard slips at the time, that was not a threat to be taken lightly. I can guarantee that he didn’t run the marina as a charity. Nor should he have. No one has a "constitutional right" to a boat slip that they think they can afford.

[redneckrob]

Originally Posted by wingssail

Profit is not bad but allowing wealthy to utilize a pubic resource for profit to the exclusion of less wealthy is wrong. That is not the country I prefer to live in.

It is easy to say, "Customers have the right to take their business elsewhere." but if there isn't any elsewhere because the limited resource, (shorelines) have been taken for development of more profitable businesses the result is that less affluent customers are simply out of luck.

Some locales try to protect low income citizens from that exclusion, which I think is good. Others, dominated by leaders with a Laissez-faire attitude, don't see the need. The wealthy get what they want, claim they got it through hard work and imply that the others should have done the same, and overlook good fortune or circumstances of birth, and are OK with things, as long as it is the poorer folks who get excluded, not themselves. That does seem like greed to me (well, maybe not greed, but surely lack of compassion).

The problem is that in most places there are X slips and 2X or 5X people who want slips. The question is how do you allocate this scarce resource? We all want to be egalitarian, but does that mean we let people who were there first keep their slips for as long as they pay the below market rate? Or do we form a first come first served wait-list? While both may appear fair at first glance, neither seem fair, for example, to me as a military guy who was transferred every 2-3 years for more than 20 years. I'm just out of luck compared to someone who has been fortunate enough to live in one place for a long time? OK, that doesn't work, how about everyone gets a slip for a year and then has to give it to the next person in line? Yeah, that doesn't work either. Do we do a lottery every year, or do one when slips come open but grandfather those who were already there? Well again, that runs into the two problems I already brought up. Do we prevent development of waterfront land for anything but marinas? How would you feel if land you owned, waterfront or not, was suddenly dramatically devalued by restrictions on it's highest and best use? Most of us would call that unfair as well, witness any rezoning proceeding. And the track record on that isn't great either, happy to talk in detail about the unintended consequences of Annapolis' waterfront marine use zoning laws as an example.

To paraphrase Churchill, the current system is the worst way to allocate slips except for all the others. Lots of problems in the world don't actually have good solutions, I think this is one of them.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

There are plenty of anecdotes to show all circumstances. It is true however, that if you are rich today it is more likely you come from wealthy parents. This has been well studied in the economic literature.

While certainly, there is an advantage to starting from wealth....Studies show rich only stay rich for a generation or two typically. Even among the extremely wealthy, it's rare to hold that thru 3-4 generations.

The vast majority of millionaires are first generation millionaires.

[Martkimwat]

Wow, I thought things were bad (and expensive) here in UK especially since the Covid issue started. Very hard to book a Marina space for an overnight stay unless you are prepared to book a month in advance with no redress if you can't make it because of weather etc. That being said, I keep my boat in Portsmouth Harbour on a full tide pile mooring that is owned by the Cruising Club that I am a member of. It costs me £50 pa for family membership and £450pa for my mooring. I can keep my boat on the mooring all year if I want to but I normally lift out in November and then launch in early March and I do this in a small yard about 15Nms away in Chichester Harbour where I rent a workshop and can do all the work I want on my boats with full sanction of the Yard Manager and staff who are exceedingly friendly and we often do each other favours lending/borrowing each others tools and equipment. That time ashore costs me about the same per quarter as I pay for a full year at my Cruising club as well as the same per quarter for the workshop that I rent, I also pay about £2200pa for the long term storage of my 33 footer which I must get round to finishing when I am not working on or upgrading my Parker 27! When I see the figures quoted on here for US Marina fees, I suddenly don't feel so bad.