Mooring Shortages.

[deletedaccount]

Well the one I was looking at had no faciliteis other than mooring rings and that costs 1.5k to run, apparently.

[furnessvale]

Are BW actively withholding some to keep the price up ? Even so might this not be an "own goal", as two moorings let for (say) £1,800 each would net them more income than one let at (say) £2,500 ?

 

Another example that worries me is moorings that BW have failed to let under the tender system, as no bid over the (unpublished) reserve price was received. As often these moorings then fail to come up quickly for re-tendering, it would seem to me that BW in many cases would lose less revenue by letting them go under the reserve, than by significantly delaying re-advertising.

 

Nothing new in that sort of policy. For years the warehouse at Whaley Bridge has been empty despite several approaches from canal related companies to lease the building.

 

BW want to convert it into a NIGHTCLUB (in Whaley Bridge I ask you) and would rather forego rent than compromise their position despite having been told by the local authority in no uncertain terms that they are not getting a NIGHTCLUB!

 

George ex nb Alton retired

[churchward]

Focusing on the topic title, are there mooring shortages? We certainly appear to have some unoccupied on-line moorings here at Cropredy but we also have some people who need moorings but cannot afford the prices that others may be prepared to 'bid' in the tendering scheme.

 

Perhaps the real issue is that moorings are becoming too expensive.

I suppose it depends on the area any one wants to moor. The situation around Napton (with lots of Marinas in a small area) seems to be that all/most Marinas have vacancies but they are not cheap. However, I have found perhaps because of these vacancies it is possible to negotiate down the asking price for a mooring in some of the Marinas in the area.

[alan_fincher]

In fairness, it does look like one of the GU Cowley moorings that failed to reach reserve back on Sept 22 under the "tender" system, may have just reappeared on the replacement "auction" system. Or at least one at the same place, and same length has - hard to be sure!

 

Last time guide was £1,158 and highest bid (which failed) was £916.

 

The new system publishes the reserve, which is apparently £1,042, so the mooring could actually let at about £126 more PA than the previous failed bid. It will be interesting to see if it does, but by the time it's done and dusted it will have remained empty for two or three months more, I guess, so the gain to BW may not be great. Of course if nobody bids at least reserve this time, BW would clearly have been quids in by etting it out at £916 at the first attempt.

 

(Incidentally this is only a 36 foot mooring - I'm not sure that's a particularly "in demand" length, is it ?).

[NB Alnwick]

Slightly but I think the new auction system that BW have started to use is much better, more transparant and, therefore, fairer than the 'sealed bid' system that they trialled . . .

[Chris Pink]

much better, more transparant and, therefore, fairer

 

How can it be fair to allocate a very scarce resource on a publicly owned system by a system that rewards only those with the most money?

 

A system whose only logical result is push up prices with a ratchet effect.

 

Fair? you're having a giraffe.

Edited October 8, 2009 by Chris Pink

[Naughty Cal]

How can it be fair to allocate a very scarce resource on a publicly owned system by a system that rewards only those with the most money?

 

A system whose only logical result is push up prices with a ratchet effect.

 

Fair? you're having a giraffe.

 

I personally do believe it is fair. People can set their own budget and watch the "auction" unfold. Not all of the moorings for tender are expensive.

[Chris Pink]

I personally do believe it is fair. People can set their own budget and watch the "auction" unfold. Not all of the moorings for tender are expensive.

 

I'm not saying an auction is not a good way of selling things and arriving at their value in the market place.

 

But this isn't the market place and the mooring will go to the person who can afford the most, no matter what the cost.

[NB Alnwick]

How can it be fair to allocate a very scarce resource on a publicly owned system by a system that rewards only those with the most money?

 

A system whose only logical result is push up prices with a ratchet effect.

 

Fair? you're having a giraffe.

 

But it does at least show you how many bidders there are, what the highest bid is, and it provides the oportunity to make a bid armed with that knowledge. Not a lot different to eBay really.

 

My point was that the auction system is fairer than the sealed bid system - its a matter of degree really but I doubt if you could argue that the sealed bid system was any fairer.

 

And the system does not necessarily reward those with the most money - it rewards those prepared to spend the most money to secure a mooring - there is a difference!

 

I would be interested to know how a fairer system might operate if, as we are told by BW, demand is greater than the number of moorings available?

 

While on the subject of fairness, I heard a story recently of a lady who spent her life savings on a piece of farmland with an offside mooring (a residential boat had been moored there before she bought it) only to find subsequently that the mooring had not been authorised by BW (they are now taking action to close the moorings) and that the land is classified as being for agricultural use only - that is what I call unfair practice . . .

[Naughty Cal]

But this isn't the market place and the mooring will go to the person who can afford the most, no matter what the cost.

 

Which they would have under the sealed bid process anyway

[alan_fincher]

I personally do believe it is fair. People can set their own budget and watch the "auction" unfold. Not all of the moorings for tender are expensive.

Trust me, around here they are.

 

I need my boat close enough to home that I can both work on it, (hell, it needs it!), and use it enough to justify the cost.

 

If I move it miles from home, savings in moorings would likely be wiped out in extra travelling.

 

FWIW, here is one that closed within the last few minutes....

 

Full Tender History

 

Cooks Wharf, reference 0692

Tender ended 08/10/2009 at 1pm

 

The record of all tenders received for this vacancy is shown below:

 

Date Time Amount

05 Oct 2009 16:37:34 £2,335

07 Oct 2009 17:52:54 £2,262

Guide price £1,853

13 Sep 2009 21:32:11 £1,800

05 Oct 2009 19:32:06 £1,300

05 Oct 2009 20:18:25 £1,300

 

It's only a 50 foot mooring, making it useless to many, and it's on (short length) pontoons, pointing across the cut, not bank-side.

 

OK only two people bid over guide in the end, but the winning £2,335 bid is a full 26% over the £1,853 guide price.

 

As Chris says, it doesn't matter what bidding system is used, the one with the most money to spend will always win, (obviously ).

 

I should, I guess, admit that even with a 26% hike over what other moorers at the site pay, £2,335 actually compares rather favourably with local marina pricing, (which would be perhaps £300 more now, but no doubt going up in January).

 

I would almost certainly have been prepared to try to outbid the winner here, had it been under the open auction system, but so, I rather expect, might the winning bidder here have done so to. I think, (actually, know!), it would have gone for more, not less, under the new system.

 

Looking on the bright side, (for the winning bidder!), at least the £2,262 second placed bid made going as high as they did worthwhile to get a result. Had that second bid not been made, then they could have had it at "reserve", (presumably less than £1700 ?), and hence at least a whacking £700 cheaper. Total bloody lottery, unfortunately, however you do it.

Edited October 8, 2009 by alan_fincher

[Naughty Cal]

Even at the prices above its only £155 per metre. Thats not (for some areas) over the top.

[alan_fincher]

Even at the prices above its only £155 per metre. Thats not (for some areas) over the top.

Yes, I've already kind of agreed with you, but it can't be called inexpensive, can it ?

 

I'm sure people at the site already paying less than £124 per metre, will find youre words comforting.

 

No way of course are BW ever going to use the fact that someone will pay over £30 a metre more as "evidence" to increase the going rate to other users. Are they ?

 

If I were one of the forum members mooring at the really rather much nicer BW Cow Roast off side linear moorings for "just" £110 a metre at the moment, I think I would be worried that someone will fork out £155 for pontoon moorings just up the cut. Goodness knows what a vacancy there might make under auction.

[luctor et emergo]

I have been reading the various threads regarding mooring, costs, and licences with great interest.

 

One thing that this system of 'auctioning off' moorings will achive, is that it will price a lot people out off the market, and stop them from getting a boat altogether. Regardless of the canals (presumed) being full, if you lose a certain amount of 'new boaters' coming into the system, you will end up with less boaters, who will spend less money. Second hand values will drop, because those with enough money will buy new boats, but there will not be enough buyers for their old craft.

 

With the economy nowhere near out of the doldrums (and perhaps only being on a short term respite..! ) I would think that leisure boating will take a knock. Foreign holidays and flying already have. It would be interesting to see data relating to the hire boat industry, and perhaps the amount of fuel sold to boats (as that would give a fair indication of how much people actually took their boats out). Has there been an increase of boats for sale (indicating more people getting out of boating)? How many people on Permanent or Residential Mooring waiting lists are actually still looking to take up a space, if it became available?

 

I think that it would be a good idea if BW would make living on the canal ('legaly') easier, to encourage more people onto the canal. It would increase their revenue, and would help the various businesses like marinas and chandlers too.

 

If it would be un-neccessary to 'bridge hop' it would probably be much less of a problem. It should be possible than, to effectivly enforce the rules, rather than to 'turn a blind eye', which encourages the current practice of 'bridge hopping'.

 

I, for example, would rather pay 'rent' to live on my own boat, than pay the equivalent rent to a land lord to live in a one bed flat or such.

 

And yes, it is patently obvious that BW are keeping the price of moorings up, by only auctioning them off one at a time.... supply and demand.

[Naughty Cal]

I have been reading the various threads regarding mooring, costs, and licences with great interest.

 

One thing that this system of 'auctioning off' moorings will achive, is that it will price a lot people out off the market, and stop them from getting a boat altogether. Regardless of the canals (presumed) being full, if you lose a certain amount of 'new boaters' coming into the system, you will end up with less boaters, who will spend less money. Second hand values will drop, because those with enough money will buy new boats, but there will not be enough buyers for their old craft.

 

New boaters neednt be in 50-60ft brand new narrowboats though. There are plenty of small cruiser moorings for auction at very reasonable prices.

[luctor et emergo]

New boaters neednt be in 50-60ft brand new narrowboats though. There are plenty of small cruiser moorings for auction at very reasonable prices.

 

 

fair enough, but most of those are probably 'leisure boats', not liveaboards. Boating for leisure is very expensive, and a luxery. If people need to give up on things, because of cost, it will probably be boating. Liveaboards will not have that issue, and would be a much more 'reliable' income source.

[Naughty Cal]

fair enough, but most of those are probably 'leisure boats', not liveaboards. Boating for leisure is very expensive, and a luxery. If people need to give up on things, because of cost, it will probably be boating. Liveaboards will not have that issue, and would be a much more 'reliable' income source.

 

So we just get rid of the leisure boaters because they are an unreliable source of income and charge the residential boaters more to make up the difference. I somehow cant see that working.

[luctor et emergo]

So we just get rid of the leisure boaters because they are an unreliable source of income and charge the residential boaters more to make up the difference. I somehow cant see that working.

 

 

Let me re-read my post... no, I don't think I said that we should get rid of leisure boaters. What I did say, was that it may make sense for BW to make living on the canal easier, to make better use of that specific revenue stream.

 

As I understand it, BW is struggling to maintain the canal with its current revenue. Maintanance is already under funded, and from what I understand large parts of the K&A are not properly maintained at all.

[Naughty Cal]

Let me re-read my post... no, I don't think I said that we should get rid of leisure boaters. What I did say, was that it may make sense for BW to make living on the canal easier, to make better use of that specific revenue stream.

 

As I understand it, BW is struggling to maintain the canal with its current revenue. Maintanance is already under funded, and from what I understand large parts of the K&A are not properly maintained at all.

 

How much easier should they make it. You need insurance and a licience.

[luctor et emergo]

How much easier should they make it. You need insurance and a licience.

 

 

and so we go round and round....

 

[Naughty Cal]

and so we go round and round....

 

 

Instead of going round and round, maybe you could outline yur proposas of how BW could make it easier for liveaboard boaters whilst not raising costs.

[luctor et emergo]

Instead of going round and round, maybe you could outline yur proposas of how BW could make it easier for liveaboard boaters whilst not raising costs.

 

 

If I have to explain, you wouldn't understand...

 

 

[Chris Pink]

OK only two people bid over guide in the end, but the winning £2,335 bid is a full 26% over the £1,853 guide price.

 

and the guide price for the next auction will be £2,335 - the guide price is whatever the other moorings in the area go for.

[soldthehouse]

and the guide price for the next auction will be £2,335 - the guide price is whatever the other moorings in the area go for.

Which is pity really because one affluent and determined person dictates the playing field for subsequent boaters

[Naughty Cal]

and the guide price for the next auction will be £2,335 - the guide price is whatever the other moorings in the area go for.

 

Is it not an average of what moorings are rented for in the area?