kimhollamby
Administrator
Reged: 16/05/2001
Posts: 3847
Loc: London (at work)
|
|
MBM's Red Alert site will be up and running on 17 April. It will contain an archive of the information published in the magazine, a petition, other useful contacts (some of them gleaned through this forum, for which thanks) and, within the next month or so, a standard form letter.
The first of the magazine features on this subject will also appear on 17 April in the May edition.
|
ParaHandy
regular
Reged: 18/11/2001
Posts: 3651
|
|
I think a standard form letter is brilliant. well done. somebody hereabouts, i think, mentioned that this sort of letter has little or no impact .. well, in my experience, its numbers (= votes) that count.
I am more worried about the unforeseen impact on the UK boat builders not all of whose product is sold to people who can afford such an increase in cost ...
my 2p worth ....
|
Gludy
regular
Reged: 19/08/2001
Posts: 6705
Loc: Brecon, Wales
|
|
"I am more worried about the unforeseen impact on the UK boat builders not all of whose product is sold to people who can afford such an increase in cost ..."
The argument that those who can afford big power boats can afford the increase in price is nonsense.
On my first pontoon there were just two boats with petrol engines. The first a 33 footer went on their maiden trip and was so shocked at the cost that they spent the winter fitting diesel engines. The other converted to gas.
There are many boaters, in fact the majority of power boaters who simply could not afford their boats if the full diesel price hike happened. There are many real enthusiasts who choose to forgo many other things in life so that they can have their boat.
Paul
|
Jools_of_Top_Cat
regular
Reged: 16/12/2002
Posts: 1585
|
|
I think the current ratio of power vs rag will change quite dramatically, I also believe, no really I do, that many hard fast powerboaters will actually be shocked how much they enjoy the change and wish they had done it earlier.
This is not a troll, it is not a dig at power boats, some IMO are very sexy looking, but they are like apples and oranges. Many powerheads look on sailing as slow and boring. I believe if they have to move sports, they will have a headrush of the planning and achievment that comes with sailing.
Yes it might also affect builders building power boats, but surely they can re-tool and turn to sailing boats, there is prolly a lot that they have learnt from power that could be crossed over and make some interesting variations on the benjenbav phenomina that is currently swamping European yacht manufacturing.
J
|
Gludy
regular
Reged: 19/08/2001
Posts: 6705
Loc: Brecon, Wales
|
|
That may well be the case - a change over to sail. But it does away with the domestic market of the UK power boat industry.
I for one chose power boating over sail simply because I wanted to cruise and could not afford the time it takes with sail. That plus the requirements of my better half meant it had to be power boats.
I have a large power boat and devote a lot of resources to it - however I would move it to the Med if the fuel price hikes up to road fuel levels. This would mean a lot less use but hopefully better quality use.
In any event, The chancellor would not gain more revenue from me but a lot less revenue. Losing VAT and many other taxes that I pay in maintaining the boat. I think that overall there is a very good chance that the revenue stream to the government will lessen. The loss of UK jobs, marina berths, manufacturing production etc. He will certainly gather no more tax on the fuel - it is a far more sensitive matter than it first appears to be.
For me a trip to Padstow and back costs about £300 in fuel. I pay just over £1 per gallon. This could change to £1500 in fuel costs - its cheaper to fly out to the Med and enjoy better weather. Its not just the direct cost that matters it’s the cost of competing alternative actions and its these alternatives that would quickly alter the balance. I certainly could not justify £250 per hour fuel costs for using the boat in the UK. Where to keep the boat is a balance between weather, convenience etc. A 500% fuel hike for me would put a stop to my UK boating.
Paul
|
Moose
regular
Reged: 01/11/2001
Posts: 2063
Loc: West Sussex, Boat in Chicheste...
|
|
I am in exactly the same situation as you, although I use a lot less fuel!!
|
Gludy
regular
Reged: 19/08/2001
Posts: 6705
Loc: Brecon, Wales
|
|
Moose - I think most people tend to spend up to their limit on their boats - so no matter what the of boat you have the same problem will apply. Its a fallacy that just because I choose to have a big boats and spend £X on it, I can absorb a 500% fuel price hike.
I know that it would just about destroy the middle boat market of the 25 to 40 footers - instead of a trip costing say £100 it would cost £400 or £500 and most cannot afford that - this is why some i know sepndt 5 months installing their deisel engines into their boats.
It would also destroy the price of most power boats - so many would suffer serious equity losses.
It has been argued that with such a massive increase in tax rate boaters more tax would be bound to be raised - I think not - it would, at a stroke, destroy the UK power boat market, the drop in consumption would be huge - I would have no choice but to export all I spend abroad.
How do the different political parties stand on this issue?
Paul
|
Moose
regular
Reged: 01/11/2001
Posts: 2063
Loc: West Sussex, Boat in Chicheste...
|
|
Oh, yes I agree, we probably spend the same % of total running costs on diesel.
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
