Auction for Agenda 21 Oxford mooring

[patty-ann]

Reading guidelines sounds ideal if u have solar panels and want to live in that way. Maybe Tis right for tree huggers.. I didn't read any nastiness in Juniors post merely a way of describing ecology minded individuals.

[Richard Fairhurst]

St Ed's is closer to Summertown where there are banks and late opening shops. Wolvercote is near to Kidlington where there are banks and much larger late opening shops

 

...and, later this month, Oxford Parkway station; and in a few years' time, the Northern Gateway development.

 

Prices in previously unfashionable areas of northern Oxford (as opposed to "North Oxford") have been heading skywards for a couple of years now. Though access from this bit of the canal to Oxford Parkway will be a bit circuitous, I suppose.

[ditchcrawler]

So at the end of the day what is the difference between these agenda 21 moorings and any other liner mooring that allows you to live aboard. In fact they sound as if they should be a lot more expensive than standard leisure moorings as they are not residential.

[Southern Star]

I didn't read any nastiness in Juniors post merely a way of describing ecology minded individuals.

Nor me, but there are a few folk on CWDF who permanently feel the need to burn out the clutch on the Outrage Bus.

[Mike Todd]

 

I disagree about the "market price" being 6.5k or anything like that. When you bid on an auction like this, you do so in the knowledge that you might pay a premium for three years but after that the price should drop down to the guide price (plus adjustments). If you are plannign to live on that mooring for a decade or more, then actually it might be worth paying that fat premium for the first three years just to secure the mooring at the more reasonable rate for the remaining seen or so.

 

The "market value" argument worries me because it's actually how CRT see it, and use it as justification for raising the guide prices in a given area. 6.5k most definitely is not the "free market rate" for the mooring -- it's a hit that someone is prepared to take in the belief that the cost of the mooring will fall after three years. It's a very subtle, but very important distinction.

But all of that is part of the 'package' for which people bid ie the deal on offer on the web site. It says nothing about the market value of a different package eg a mooring either somewhere else or under different conditions. There is no getting away from the fact that on the day the price paid was the market price for the item being auctioned. (Save for the possibility of fraudulent activity whereby some was duped into paying more as the result of false bids) Even so, it ended up being 'worth' that much to the bidder in that he/she was prepared to pay that much for it. That's what open market means. You may well want a regulated market but that is a very different matter.

[TheBiscuits]

Nor me, but there are a few folk on CWDF who permanently feel the need to burn out the clutch on the Outrage Bus.

I think the Americans call it the short bus

[magnetman]

 

I disagree about the "market price" being 6.5k or anything like that. When you bid on an auction like this, you do so in the knowledge that you might pay a premium for three years but after that the price should drop down to the guide price (plus adjustments). If you are plannign to live on that mooring for a decade or more, then actually it might be worth paying that fat premium for the first three years just to secure the mooring at the more reasonable rate for the remaining seen or so.

 

The "market value" argument worries me because it's actually how CRT see it, and use it as justification for raising the guide prices in a given area. 6.5k most definitely is not the "free market rate" for the mooring -- it's a hit that someone is prepared to take in the belief that the cost of the mooring will fall after three years. It's a very subtle, but very important distinction.

This is a fair point to make. However I can give an example of how CRT -do- use the auction value to increase the 'local rate'

 

I know someone on a central London mooring who bid £12k per year for 3 years while the "local rate" was £6k for the mooring. Two other boats on the mooring (which has 3 boats on it - CRT residential mooring) have since acquired slots for £12k and £10k respectively.

 

All of a sudden the "local rate" is £9k. So anyone thinking they would pay the £12k for three years then drop to the original £6k local rate has taken a gamble which has not paid off.

 

One noticeable thing about that particular situation is that one boat which had been there on the original "local rate" has left and all boats are on auction-acquired slots so I guess this means CRT were free to raise the local rate whereas making someone who was paying £6k suddenly pay £9k may not be entirely legal. I do 't know.

 

I rather think that the value acquired at auction -is- a market value at that point and that the long term situation is just a gamble. Maybe not that many people realise this ?

 

And it may not apply to all areas.

[old-lock-heron]

This is a fair point to make. However I can give an example of how CRT -do- use the auction value to increase the 'local rate'

 

That was what I said in my second paragraph -- the perception that the auction rate is the free market rate worries me because CRT take that view and use it to increase local mooring rates. The auction rate is emphatically nothing to do with the free market value and I would very much like for people (and CRT in partiular) to understand why it isn't.

[Alan de Enfield]

I would very much like for people (and CRT in partiular) to understand why it isn't.

 

I don't understand why its not a market rate.

 

Several bidders 'bid it up' to the maximum they are prepared to pay, the winning bidder pays £1 (or whatever the bid amount is) more than the 2nd bidder.

The 2nd bidder is the market rate as more than one person was prepared to pay that - the winning bidder has paid one bid over market rate.

 

Where is the problem ?

 

Why should C&RT or anyone not accept that is the market rate ?

[Southern Star]

 

I don't understand why its not a market rate.

 

Several bidders 'bid it up' to the maximum they are prepared to pay, the winning bidder pays £1 (or whatever the bid amount is) more than the 2nd bidder.

The 2nd bidder is the market rate as more than one person was prepared to pay that - the winning bidder has paid one bid over market rate.

 

Where is the problem ?

 

Why should C&RT or anyone not accept that is the market rate ?

I agree. By definition an auction determines the market rate.

[magnetman]

 

 

it is the market rate for what is being offered. A 3 year mooring contract. Nothing more than that. The fact that the mooring occupier will be offered the mooring at the 'local rate' afterwards is (or should be) a completely different consideration when bidding.

 

Easy to get caught out on that

 

CRT have to maximise their income - good luck to them !!