Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 12-08-2012, 10:19 AM   #1
Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 741
Where is the Bottom? Split from $ Thread

Any thoughts on when/if the price of cruising type boats in the 35-50 foot category will reach rock bottom? (Initial acquisition and depreciation element in cost of ownership).
__________________
Advertisement

Underway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2012, 01:01 PM   #2
Art
Guru
 
Art's Avatar
 
City: SF Bay Area
Country: USA
Vessel Model: Tollycraft 34' Tri Cabin
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 7,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by skidgear View Post
Any thoughts on when/if the price of cruising type boats in the 35-50 foot category will reach rock bottom? (Initial acquisition and depreciation element in cost of ownership).
I spoke with my physic... She told me that her crystal ball shows a rock-bottom cost of 35-50 foot cruisers gets hit each time the buyer and seller come to agreement and capital changes hands. She also said - smarter the buyer is and needier the seller has become the lower the rock-bottom platform can get at the close of any deal!

PS: I'm married to my physic... so I get the real inside poop on all matters!
__________________

Art is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2012, 01:35 PM   #3
Guru
 
Moonstruck's Avatar
 
City: Hailing Port: Charleston, SC
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Moonstruck
Vessel Model: Sabre 42 Hardtop Express
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 7,848
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art View Post
I spoke with my physic...
Art, please fill us in on exactly what a physic does for you.
__________________
Don on Moonstruck
Sabre 42 Hardtop Express & Blackfin 25 CC
When cruising life is simpler, but on a grander scale (author unknown)
http://moonstruckblog.wordpress.com/
Moonstruck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2012, 01:41 PM   #4
Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 741
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art View Post
I spoke with my physic... She told me that her crystal ball shows a rock-bottom cost of 35-50 foot cruisers gets hit each time the buyer and seller come to agreement and capital changes hands. She also said - smarter the buyer is and needier the seller has become the lower the rock-bottom platform can get at the close of any deal!

PS: I'm married to my physic... so I get the real inside poop on all matters!

..the real inside poop from your physic. OKKKK...
Underway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2012, 03:36 PM   #5
Art
Guru
 
Art's Avatar
 
City: SF Bay Area
Country: USA
Vessel Model: Tollycraft 34' Tri Cabin
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 7,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonstruck View Post
Art, please fill us in on exactly what a physic does for you.
Don - Might be fairly similar to what your psysic might do for you... just sayen, and, that's ALL I'm sayen!!
Art is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2012, 06:41 AM   #6
FF
Guru
 
FF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,515
With housing , we seem to be at a bump, before the next leg ( 30% ?) down.

Weather this will translate into boating mostly depends on demand.

Of more folks want a cottage at a marina it will help,

if lots of folks worry that the printing press will stop and Obamma phones will not work , the desire for offshore boats will go way up.

Mostly this will help sail boats as most "trawlers" are not ocean capable.
FF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2012, 08:12 AM   #7
FF
Guru
 
FF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,515
A Guru opinion, Economists Just Don’t Grasp the
Power of Demographics

By Harry S. Dent Jr., Editor, Survive & Prosper




Dear Fred,

I had a debate recently on Maria Bartiroma’s “Closing Bell” show with Ron Insana. He’s a major contributor to CNBC.
I’ve watched Ron over the years and I like him. He’s a smart and reasonable guy with good analysis, like many economists and economic analysts.
But in that debate he violated the “D” word: demographics…
I was presenting my more bearish views of what lies ahead for the economy and markets and he was countering with his more bullish outlook.
Now I am used to debating people who look at the current trends and project them into the future as if life and our economy grow in a straight line. They don’t. Life and our economy follow very clear cyclical patterns that history and a more realistic view clearly demonstrates.
But that wasn’t the problem I had with him that day.
What really got under my skin was when he said…
Advertisement

“Robert Malthus, the economist in Britain, taught us that demographics do not have a very strong predictive value…”
The only response I could give him?
“Hey Ron! You and this guy don’t know what you’re talking about!”
(You can listen to the debate here if you missed it.)
Demographics absolutely matters.
Ron went on to say that Baby Boomers will spend more as they get older. He’s wrong again. They will NOT spend more as they get older.
We have very clear and irrefutable statistics on this. The typical household’s spending peaks around age 46. From there on, it spends dramatically less, especially after age 53.
Ron also pointed out that Baby Boomers are now staying in the workforce longer… so they’ll keep spending money. I’ll concede on the former point, but definitely not on the latter.
Yes, in this economy Baby Boomers are being forced to work past their retirement age. But they’re not doing this so they can increase their spending. They’re doing it so they can make up for the savings they don’t have any more, thanks to their record low savings rates and bad bet on the wrong assumption that real estate and stocks would go up forever. They will have to save any money they can get their hands on.
Unfortunately, it’s not just Ron that doesn’t grasp the power of demographics…
Economists Just Don’t Get It

The debate with Ron reminded me of my interview with Gene Epstein at Barron’s. While we were talking he said, “Consumers are a constant… it’s only cycles in business and government that drive our economy and its cycles.”
With all due respect: what a moron!
I encountered the same ignorance when I did a talk to a major real estate group about a decade ago. They also had this economist from Wharton talking. She had a minor in demographics.
I thought, “Finally, an economist that will agree with me!”
But no. She proceeded to argue why demographics have nothing to do with macro-economic trends.
That’s when I gave up on economists. Obviously most of them have never had sex or run a business. How else could they not know anything about consumer or business behavior?
Most economists know nothing about demographics because that’s not what they were taught in school. Worse still, some try to quote or talk about demographics, mostly because we have made it more popular, and they are almost always wrong. They don’t understand it. They haven’t studied it. When they open their mouths to talk about it, they violate the “D” word…
And when I’m around to hear that, it means war!
Do yourself a favor. Don’t listen to other economists when they sprout uneducated, un-researched BS about demographics. Here’s what you need to know:
- Before we reach the age of 18-22 when we enter the workforce, we spend very little money. Up to that point, our parents spend money on our behalf, paying for our education, our necessities and our entertainment.
- Between the ages of 18 and 28, we leave the nest to build our careers, get married and rent our first apartment.
- Around 26 to 32 years of age, we start a family, have children and buy our first home. We become highly productive, driving the economy forward… not only with our contribution at work, but also in the checkout line as our spending accelerates more than any time in our life.
- During our late 30s or early forties we upgrade our homes to the biggest home we’ll own, and then spend the next few years furnishing the house. We’re paying for college for the kids, we’re buying more cars and we’re investing in holiday homes. We peak in our consumer spending between age 46 on average and about five years later for more upscale households.
- There after we start to cut back. We spends less not because we live worse, but we don’t have the kids to raise and educate any more. We begin to save for retirement.
- The last stage is retirement itself at age 63 on average, during which we spend even less than in previous years. Retirement is likely to shift to higher ages as more Baby Boomers realize they can’t afford to retire in a bad economy.
Very simply, it looks like this:

I have studied demographics up and down, inside and out, right and left, past and future. If you can find a better expert on demographics, refer them to us.
We know most things that households do, from cradle to grave, in more detail than anyone we know.
More importantly, we have spent over two decades documenting and establishing how demographics and the associated consumer spending trends affects the overall economy and major sectors… everything from when we buy camping equipment to when we buy the most potato chips.
And what our research shows is that we will endure continued slowing over this decade, despite desperate stimulus. There will be a bias towards deflation, not inflation. And there will be no major recovery in the housing market for years to come.
That should change everything about how you invest and conduct business in the years ahead.
FF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2012, 03:18 PM   #8
Art
Guru
 
Art's Avatar
 
City: SF Bay Area
Country: USA
Vessel Model: Tollycraft 34' Tri Cabin
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 7,979
Fred - What Harry Dent’s article intones on your post #7, i.e. Harry S. Dent Jr., Editor, Survive & Prosper all seems pretty much correct, far as I can see. However, if I may add a couple of Big Bubbles that will pop to assist in sending global economics deeply into the toilet:

1. Fiscal bankruptcies for some of the largest economic-pillar nations in the world; U.S. included.
2. Severe climate and ecosystemic alterations that will have no end in sight... caused by whatever the reason may be... anthropogenic, natural events, or any type combinations of the two. Fact is that the globe is about to hit a multi thousand year climate-change sequence which in general will no longer be friendly to human physical-survival as well as being harsh upon many other life forms’ life styles. The last several thousand years have provided a wonderful human-life-accommodative “climate-bubble” for civilization to reach into the 7B + population range. As Newton said... “What goes up must come down”. In my opinion, that includes civilization!

What to do??? - Hunker down! There's a Big Blow A Coming!!

Damn I like boats!
Art is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 05:46 AM   #9
FF
Guru
 
FF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,515
Fact is that the globe is about to hit a multi thousand year climate-change sequence which in general will no longer be friendly to human physical-survival as well as being harsh upon many other life forms’ life styles.

AS USUAL,its been happening for 4.6 Billion years.

THE END IS NEAR , sure ,

but NEAR could be a MERE 5 million years , an eyeblink in gelogic time , not bad for the rest of us.
__________________

FF is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012