not be economic for us to let the vacancy.

[Fat Boat]

Hi, i was wondering if anyone could shed some light on this statement for me.

 

on the bw moorings site in the vacancy details it quotes

 

"The Reserve Price reflects British Waterways' cost of providing the vacancy. It is the price below which it would not be economic for us to let the vacancy"

 

could anyone enlighted me on what the costs involved in letting the mooring would be for BW that would mean that below a set value is not viable

 

it strikes me that the water is there (in most places) and the towpath (this is on a towpath mooring i have taken the quote from) is there so what exactly are these costs they must have that bids below £1500 is not enough money for them to register the name of a boat at that mooring, take the fees and issue a mooring licence and then renew annually

 

Confused

 

Steve

[Leni]

Hi, i was wondering if anyone could shed some light on this statement for me.

 

on the bw moorings site in the vacancy details it quotes

 

"The Reserve Price reflects British Waterways' cost of providing the vacancy. It is the price below which it would not be economic for us to let the vacancy"

 

could anyone enlighted me on what the costs involved in letting the mooring would be for BW that would mean that below a set value is not viable

 

it strikes me that the water is there (in most places) and the towpath (this is on a towpath mooring i have taken the quote from) is there so what exactly are these costs they must have that bids below £1500 is not enough money for them to register the name of a boat at that mooring, take the fees and issue a mooring licence and then renew annually

 

Confused

 

Steve

 

I admit that's something that puzzles me as well, Steve!

 

I would have thought it was better to have any money from a mooring than to leave it unsold / let and have a succession of CCer's mooring there throughout the year and using the 'facilities' for nothing

[alan_fincher]

Yes, this is a certain bit of nonsense!

 

What I take it to actually mean in many cases is this........

 

1) We have moorers at this site, under old arrangement currently prepared to pay £2000 pa for a mooring of this size. (Just a random amount - choose your own figure for a site and boat size)

 

2) If we put this one up for auction, we will suggest that £2000 figure as the guide price, (hoping it will go higher, of course), but will set a reserve. For most vacancies this tends to be at 75& of guide. So we set a £1,500 reserve, and say we will not take bids less than that, ("not economic for BW to do so").

 

3) Existing moorers will then be put off from bidding at another mooring at the same location, as (after they have forfeited a month's money or more on their current mooring), may not see the likely savings as justifying the bother and disruption.

 

4) But if BW actually set "reserve" at (say) 50%, so were prepared to accept a bid of £1,000, then you would start to find far more existing moorers bidding on and winning an auction at much less than they currently pay, and giving notice on their current one, (which then just becomes another vacancy!)

 

I know this already happens, but not I suspect that often. (Not sure if it is because the message has not spread, or if people are just lethargic!).#

 

So I would say the real reason BW don't want to let at rates way below what people are currently paying may be because they will then find it much harder to keep those higher payers doing so.

 

They would risk suddenly finding they are getting less and less mooring revenue, as people quit for cheaper ones.

 

This really is, in my view, one of the daftest, most ill thought out, ideas from BW, ever.

 

Particularly as, (whatever you get the mooring for for the three year contract), they will apparently revert you to the "standard" rate that all other moorers are paying again at the end of it.

[Fat Boat]

i make you right Alan but i like the way the dress it up to hid it instead of oh i dunno some kind of transparancy or honesty, but we all know that is not the way of BW

 

Does anyone remember when they first started using auctions and there were no reserves. BW were saying that market forces would drive the price and if market forces said the price was more than any existing moorers then the existing moorers prices would rise to market forces rate over a period of 3 years

 

However some friends of mine saw a mooring with a starting price that was less than a winter mooring so put in a bid slightly below their winter mooring fees and won and were paying about 1/3 of the exsisting moorers fees

 

When the other moorers asked BW if their mooring fees would be reduced to the market forces price funnily enough "that was not what they meant by market forces" and then we started seeing reserve prices

 

for me BW were highlighted in their full support of the canals in the golden age of the canals programme, turning down volunters and filling the locks with reinforced concrete, but thats for another thread

 

Steve

[Tesla]

I have just been looking at the BW auction site but cannot see what the definition is of a "Leisure" mooring v. "residential". The difference is obvious in principle, but I would like to understand the actual restrictions? Anyone know where I should look?

 

Cheers.

[howardang]

I have just been looking at the BW auction site but cannot see what the definition is of a "Leisure" mooring v. "residential". The difference is obvious in principle, but I would like to understand the actual restrictions? Anyone know where I should look?

 

Cheers.

A residentiual mooring is one where the local authority has granted planning permission for permanent residency, whereas a leisure mooring is one for use when a licence holder has a permanent address elsewhere and uses the mooring puirely as a secondary, leisure mooring.

 

If you want the strict definition I would suggest that BW are the best people to ask for the correct documentation.

 

Cheers

 

Howard

[CV32]

i make you right Alan but i like the way the dress it up to hid it instead of oh i dunno some kind of transparancy or honesty, but we all know that is not the way of BW

 

Does anyone remember when they first started using auctions and there were no reserves. BW were saying that market forces would drive the price and if market forces said the price was more than any existing moorers then the existing moorers prices would rise to market forces rate over a period of 3 years

 

However some friends of mine saw a mooring with a starting price that was less than a winter mooring so put in a bid slightly below their winter mooring fees and won and were paying about 1/3 of the exsisting moorers fees

 

When the other moorers asked BW if their mooring fees would be reduced to the market forces price funnily enough "that was not what they meant by market forces" and then we started seeing reserve prices

 

for me BW were highlighted in their full support of the canals in the golden age of the canals programme, turning down volunters and filling the locks with reinforced concrete, but thats for another thread

 

Steve

I personally think it should be an open and honest excercise. People should be able to bid and the highest bidder wins. If its less than your fellow neighbours then great, if its more then thats a reflection of the location/desirability or current market value. Some income must be better than none.

[mayalld]

Hi, i was wondering if anyone could shed some light on this statement for me.

 

on the bw moorings site in the vacancy details it quotes

 

"The Reserve Price reflects British Waterways' cost of providing the vacancy. It is the price below which it would not be economic for us to let the vacancy"

 

could anyone enlighted me on what the costs involved in letting the mooring would be for BW that would mean that below a set value is not viable

 

it strikes me that the water is there (in most places) and the towpath (this is on a towpath mooring i have taken the quote from) is there so what exactly are these costs they must have that bids below £1500 is not enough money for them to register the name of a boat at that mooring, take the fees and issue a mooring licence and then renew annually

 

Confused

 

Steve

 

In essence, if they let it below a certain price, it would deflate the market so as to seriously dent their income.

 

Supply and demand.

 

If the going rate is too low, reduce the supply.

[Rebotco]

In essence, if they let it below a certain price, it would deflate the market so as to seriously dent their income.

 

Supply and demand.

 

If the going rate is too low, reduce the supply.

 

 

I think that is correct. But sadly reflects BW's loss of focus on the reason for their existence.

 

Their first duty should be to provide a benefit to their paying customers, not to maximise their income at the expense of

 

their customers.

 

Brian

[cotswoldsman]

I think that is correct. But sadly reflects BW's loss of focus on the reason for their existence.

 

Their first duty should be to provide a benefit to their paying customers, not to maximise their income at the expense of

 

their customers.

 

Brian

 

Seems like sometimes BW just can not win. Surely they should be trying to maximise income to the benefit of their customers. Having said that I do think the auction system is crazy but then I do not have a mooring so at present does not effect me.

[Rebotco]

Seems like sometimes BW just can not win. Surely they should be trying to maximise income to the benefit of their customers. Having said that I do think the auction system is crazy but then I do not have a mooring so at present does not effect me.

 

 

Yes it does seem that way. But if, as you say, they should maximise income in order to benefit customers, it is self-

 

defeating to do so by deliberately putting those benefits further out of reach of the customer.

 

That is why I say they have lost their focus.

 

 

Brian