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

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by redneckrob

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.

Well I certainly don't know the best solution but it starts with recognition that the shorelines are a limited resource and should be shared by all to the extent possible, not just those wealthy enough to buy out the remainder.

If we recognize that then we must come to the conclusion that simple market actions don't meet the need tor a fairer allocation. Maybe we don't agree that there is a need for a fairer allocation of that resource. Certainly most of the wealthy would think no such need exists; the market works fine.

I don't think it does and while I don't know the solution I think we ought to find one. I do know some cities have rent control. Much hated and widely circumvented, but it's an approach. Some west coast harbors have similar approaches to marina rents.

Unfair to the property owner who can't maximize his income? Yes. Unfair to the frequently moving boaty who can never hope to get a berth because there is little turn over? Yes. Unfair to the yacht salesperson who can't promise a berth for the millionaire who would otherwise buy a new boat? Yes.

I agree with all those issues, but as a middle class boat owner rapidly drifting towards lower class as I age, I just don't want to concede that I need to sell (or junk) my boat and move into a box somewhere because the millionaire next door wants another slip for his fleet of boats or the developer down the road wants to demolish the marina and build waterfront condos so he can add four more zeros to his bottom line net worth.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

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.

Link to these studies. I've not seen them. There is vast evidence which links parental wealth to the wealth of their offspring.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by wingssail

Well I certainly don't know the best solution but it starts with recognition that the shorelines are a limited resource and should be shared by all to the extent possible, not just those wealthy enough to buy out the remainder.

Up here, there's recognition that certain resources (eg greenspaces and waterfront) are a public good, and that access should be reasonably available to all. This need is met by creating enough parks, city-run marinas, etc and by trying to ensure that any redevelopment of private waterfront contains provisions for meeting all the public demands for waterfront amenities, not just those of the most wealthy. This often results in walkways, playgrounds, and other facilities being incorporated into the new development.

... as a middle class boat owner rapidly drifting towards lower class as I age, I just don't want to concede that I need to sell (or junk) my boat and move into a box somewhere because the millionaire next door wants another slip for his fleet of boats or the developer down the road wants to demolish the marina and build waterfront condos so he can add four more zeros to his bottom line net worth.

Two words for you: "yacht club". They're not all snotty unaffordable elitist institutions. At least up here, there's clubs at all levels and amenities. We belong to a "self help" club where facilities aren't plush but prices are reasonable - and often cheaper than marinas. And the icing on the cake - reciprocal privileges at other clubs .

Relating to this thread - once you're in the club, and you keep paying your annual fees, you won't be "evicted". Further, you're part of a community. Our club has many long-term members, many who are now seniors, who have the club community to lean on.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Link to these studies. I've not seen them. There is vast evidence which links parental wealth to the wealth of their offspring.

"Millionaire" is almost a meaningless term now. We have a small house in Toronto... so on paper we're millionaires. And at present, the genuinely wealthy have more mechanisms than before for retaining that wealth within the family.

Perhaps more important than the wealth itself is being "in". Privilege. Where you forge (or buy) the connections that get you advance knowledge, the inside track, the tricks of retaining and growing wealth. And the use of this position to give your kids a leg up, into the right schools, and opportunities with the best companies.
[/derail]

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by LLCoolDave

Valhallas opinions seem to be in line with the book "The Millionaire Next Door: The Surprising Secrets of America's Wealthy" it's a good book and I read it in the early 2000s but a lot has changed since 1996.

I'm not familiar with the work, but it's not surprising given the rise in real estate values. Is that the source of the claim that the majority of millionaires are first-generation? Makes sense...

The fact remains, wealth begets wealth. It's a long-established fact of economics. And I await the evidence to show that the rich only stay rich for a few generations. I do not believe this is true, but as always, I will be persuaded by actual data.

There is a deep literature on the relationship of parental wealth to the wealth of offspring. It's not controversial. Here's just one of probably hundreds of supporting studies:

https://web.stanford.edu/~pmitnik/Ec...itedStates.pdf

Economic mobility has fossilized in the USA, and to a lesser extent in many other developed countries. This just means the birth lottery is the most important determinant of wealth and success.

[Iaangus]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Sounds like capitalism operating as designed.

Yeah, let a socialist government figure it out right, LOL

[gonesail]

umbrellas cost more in the rain.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Iaangus

Yeah, let a socialist government figure it out right, LOL

I don't understand. What has socialism got to do with it ?

Originally Posted by gonesail

umbrellas cost more in the rain.

You get it.

[thinwater]

There are markets where most of us can't (or should not) afford sailing as a hobby. It's just not worth it. I'd do something else (cycling, climbing, kayaking... many options).


I'm not saying that's right or wrong, only that it is. In my market a slip is $150 and there are vacancies. If it was $900/month I'd be doing other things for now, or I'd decide I didn't want to live there anymore.

[Tetepare]

In my observation, when boaters or renters are asked to move along there’s a reason and it’s not capitalism.

Those who complain constantly or are bad neighbors are tops on the list. I have a new boat neighbor and I’m going to do whatever to ensure he’s gone next summer. Since someone is going to ask, he untied and dropped my windward stern line so he could (for some unknown reason) rig a dividing line between our boats- which is redundant to the one I had already rigged to keep him from hitting us! I don’t have a problem with adjusting others’ lines, but you don’t leave the most important line dangling. He’s a nice guy. He’s a moron. Time to move on.

[Larry Florida]

Marinas are total scum. They will bleed you dry like a whore without a care about you. Yessir!!

[S/V Illusion]

Originally Posted by wingssail

Well I certainly don't know the best solution but it starts with recognition that the shorelines are a limited resource and should be shared by all to the extent possible, not just those wealthy enough to buy out the remainder.

.

Why do you think everything should be shared? Lts of old jokes pointing to how frivolous that concept is, e.g., two college roommates - one studies hard and gets all As and a great job, is successful and becomes affluent; the other does neither. Do you think that's unfair somehow?


You are seeking a solution to a problem which, if it exists at all, is largely self-inflicted.

[S/V Illusion]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

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.

You may be conflating wealth with successful. Actually, the (few) studies with which I am familiar show successful people (parents) nurture the traits which breed success in their children. The money is a consequence, not a causal agent.



If you have evidence to the contrary, I'd like to see it.

[ixnax]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

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.



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.



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.

All of that and we get just one side of the story. Of course from his story, except that he did all of his own work he was faultless. Maybe he truly was a jewel day in and day out, we don't know. But as someone who has needed to be paid monthly by tenants I can attest that forgetfulness is not uncommon and nothing sucks worse than asking for the money. Nor is taking advantage of things and not always following every rule. Then there is also complaining about crap that no one else is complaining about that you need to deal with anyway. So when I hear these stories I always wonder.......

[Pelagic]

I consult on the building of new marinas for large yachts, so attend the world Marina conferences.

What you have been told is a global trend.

Simply put, waterfront property and Marina overheads are far too expensive these days to be profitable on their own.

Dry Store and Upland rentals with added service and profit centers is what's keeping them sustainable these days.

If you can live off grid, then those marinas are not needed anymore and you can choose what maintenance services to use.