List of Current Seasteading Projects


(Theodore M. Amenta) #124

Octavian: – I prefer the cruise ship over the barge for this first step. I find a lower price for a better interior. T


#125

Yes, a cruise ship will accommodate more people. But, it will cost MUCH more than that barge.

Another option is to forget about a boat for the first step and use the $8-9 Mil. (the price you will pay for the barge) to “set foot” on, let say, Elbow Cay (the westernmost cay in Cay Sal, running southwest to northeast along the Straits of Florida). https://youtu.be/2h4d76PdpVo

By “setting foot” I mean working a deal with the Bahamians and developing a land base/small marina/construction site where you can start building the seasteading modules depicted in your design. Such move, (building “on site”) will result in hefty saving on your overall construction and deployment costs.

Most of the time, LESS IS MORE :wink:


(Bob LLewellyn) #126

[quote=“Octavian, post:125, topic:2107”]
Yes, a cruise ship will accommodate more people. But, it will cost MUCH more than that barge.[/quote]
You can find cheap cruse-liners, that’s not the problem, but on a barge, you only need a deckhand to keep watch while a boat will have to have a full compliment because a boat has to be under power to handle rough weather.
Plus there will be additional costs to purchase a fuel barge, without which, you would not have any boaters. Boaters are the seasteaders. Eventually it will be boaters that buy the ocean homes which will bring about phase two.

But a ship would have a stage and gambling tables. give additional rooms for rent, more restaurant space, in short, it’s a great idea as an addition to the barge.

Now that was my reasoning about our options, however, no reasonable person would neglect the reasoning of others especially someone of experience so I will remain objective. We need the gas station, what options are there?
Bob


#127

Well, if money is there, I guess anything is possible Bob.

BUT, as I said before, first thing that should be done is getting permission from the Bahamian Government to operate there. Cay Sal seems to be politically “complicated and sensitive”. Cuba is 30 miles away and Trump messed things up recently. There seems to be some drugs and Cuban migrants being run through there. There seems to be certain illegal fishing there. Coast Guard regularly patrols the area (with a Bahamian Navy representative on board).

You guys are planning a big operation there. First, a 380’ LOA barge, followed by a cruise ship, followed by what seems to be a sizable floating seastead. That’s a lot to drop into any nation EEZ!

If anybody thinks that one day will show up in Cay Sal with all those toys in tow, drop the hook and happily seastead thereafter, they’re wrong. There might be a certain probability that the Bahamians might not let you operate at this size.

Unless, of course, this has been already taken care of at both ends.


(Wilfried Ellmer) #128

@Octavian | @ForexBob | @thebastidge | can not use an old barge / ship / maintainence cost is the issue /


It is not only the building cost per square foot.


We currently have a spread of USD 30 on the lower end and USD 500 on the high end - that is a “considerable spread”.


We also have to put numbers on the “maintenance cost per square foot per year” and understand that something like a ship is a fast rotting item where the steel plating of only 12mm and can be completly rott trough in only a few months (when paint cover fails the location is tropical and the item stay stationary what is pretty much the worst case scenario…) so it requires a “go to drydock | sandblasting | new paint” at a cost similar to the building cost every few months. Imagine Fishermens paradise to be towed to the next drydock it can fit - and the the cost of this operation … (only ask for the drydock rent and the required days of rent - to get the picture)


So it is not the case as some seem to assume that buying an old ship you get cheap real estate happy to use for ever after…


Concrete structures on the other hand have a maintnance free service life of at least 200 years what makes the maintenance (and drydock) cost per square foot per year a completly different universe. ( another factor 100 of difference)


That needs to be “taken into account” when doing cost and feasibility calculations.


Workhypothesis: You can not run a marine steel built real estate infrastructure, on condo and shop rents. That is factor 100 out of feasiblility on any place i know of. Ships are built to run cargo and make tons of money every minute every day during their short service life . That is different to real estate. When they are gone due to fatique and rott (15 years mayor fatige cracks) they become a “cost intense liability, expensive to get rid of” - not a “desireable real estate asset” for seasteaders.


Since Isambard Brunel introduced modern marine steel building for ships (Great Eastern 1858) NON of the marine empires used it for building stationary harbor infrastructure and floating wharfs on large scale for a good reason. There is a technology bottleneck it is the short lifespan and the high maintenance cost that makes it impossible to use it for floating real estate on important scale. Or does anybody here believe nobody had the “idea” to use a ship for living purpose in naval history. Actually Jules Verne wrote Floating City after a voyage on Great Eastern in 1871 …


Core Info : when it comes to marine steel structures the most important cost factor is not the building cost - it is the maintenance cost.


Ask yourself the smart questions :


• Are those who propose floating real estate on base of steel ships up with a new idea that nobody had before - or did they not make the basic cost calculations yet ?

• Will a steel hull get you through phase 1 investor talk with effect A or effect B with an informed investor who made his homework ?

• Is an old ship a new point on the evolutionary line of seasteading ?

• If seasteading was a “dream impossible to reach” with the steel technology of the 19th century - what exactly is the technology we have today at hand (and Jules Vernes´s contemporanies didn´t) that makes the DIFFERENCE …

• Who are the people on the cutting edge of this new technology ?

• What is the potential and what are the limits of this new disruptive technology that can drive seasteading ?

• Who can be trusted to pull it off in a pilot project ?

• Who has done something that nobody has done before ?

• Who has hands on experience in this ?

• Why have the floating settlements of the TANKA people never developed into “Seasteads” in 1200 years ?
What needs to be done different ?

• Is “floating out something” enough ?

• Why is sandbank building for real estate (at USD 80 per square foot) a billion dollar business attracting investors already - and seasteading is NOT ?


… everybody is endorsed to form his own opinion on that and there is not really a need to discuss in controversal fight groups until one side “wins an argument”… just make a point and go on - leave the evaluation of the point to the auditorium.



#129

WRONG

They require both very careful construction, AND routine maintenance to be durable. Neglect either one, and you are looking for a disaster.


(Matias Volco) #130

A ship’s second life as outdoor sculpture - focal point
Notice reflecting pool (the ship is not floating)


(Wilfried Ellmer) #131

The key to success (and investment worthyness) is to build something that combines the virtues of a ship ( light honeycomb shell building round bubble structure, wave impact resistant, global mobility to reach global markets, directional bow design … ) with the virtues of land buildings (last for generations, low maintenance cost, built of economic cement based materials, comfortable permanent living, connect into urban infrastructure…) … do it efficient and at a cost of building and maintenance that can compete with what is here already on the real estate market… doing something below that is pointless and not worth to invest as it does not represent a step forward to the floating future of mankind, and therefore has no POTENTIAL to be big business in a near future.

The Google search term for this technology is :


cement based light honeycomb shell structures for ocean colonization



(Theodore M. Amenta) #132

8 July was busy “chat.” I suspect we agree more than we disagree. Let me start with the cost of a platform. I believe the spread is $30 / SF to $50 / SF in my research. The $500 number I think might derive from the TSI / DeltaSync work a few years ago. This may be explained by including the infrastructure (water, sanitation, energy, communication) cost. I account for these individually. I can bracket the upper end cost of the hull / platform as $100 / SF but since a significant portion can be occupied with infrastructure and back of the house BOH needs $50 / SF can be attributed to “core and shell” in a building. So the buoyant - displacement of the hull function can be to the order of $50 / SF. Without detail provided here a 3.5 to 4.5 level occupied structure produces sufficient “residual” value to make the platform feasible.

Steel versus concrete hull - platform. I agree on all points, Concrete is long term; steel is less so. Initial cost is only part of the equation – maintenance and life span lean to concrete. I agree and account for the maintenance in the pro-forma. Cruise ship is speed to action. The ship provides an instant field office, on-site occupancy for trade people and first seasteaders. It is sold after 3 to 5-years.

Ships versus Barge — there are two criteria; initial cost and “ambience.” I will defer to the investor who in this area tends to defer to me as more experienced in hotel - resort - mixed-use development.

EIS & EEZ — Governments tend to focus in the EIS on economic impacts; construction employment, permanent employment and taxes. Imagine the difference of pre-building the platform-buildings in a US port or buildings on platforms constructed in situ. ---- Taxes might include property, income, corporate and royalties.

Happy to see all the chat — Ted


(Theodore M. Amenta) #133

Octavian, et al.: —I agree with the $9.0 million purchase price of the US based barge is a correct number for the area purchased. The current asking price I found was $15 million. I thus illustrated the circular floating marina surrounding tho barge adding solar and wind generators. I also did the operating budget and pro-forma revenue for Marinea at Cay Saland in Polynesia with TSI. I think I shared most of this with them. It works in principal.

As an alternative — Please search 1965 Classic Cruise Ship for sale online —$1.5 million, located in Spain. I have also tested this in Polynesia and Cay Sal. This can also work. I am not arguing for either. I am doing the basic pre-development effort to be applied to either or both projects. I have done multiple hours of due diligence testing the program on both the barge and a cruise ship ---- after gathering information on many inducing new construction in China at the $100 / SF.

These are all variations physically and financial feasible. However I have found no market feasible location in Polynesia. That is a location where the appeal to visit and live generates sufficient revenue to supper the economics of the project. I am still searching for such a location in Polynesia. I thin I may have found one.

Cartagena is all three: physical, financial and market feasible. It has the advantage of close access to local labor — thus no need for on-site staff housing and high-speed ferry support without need for seaplane. The cruise ship (or barge) first phase “field office” sold in the future while the on-platform “prototype” is fully balanced and feasible — BUT!

There is a topic I have not shared. It is the Ben Franklin “For want of a nail, the shoe was lost, for want … the Kingdom was lost.” Ted


(Theodore M. Amenta) #134

Ellmer: Work-hypothesis: - I agree 100%; not steel - the hull / platform is concrete. Barge (practical - cost benefit) or Cruise Ship (nostalgia ambiance) is only a short term field office ---- not a Phase 1. The prototype is built (50% +/-) on location (employment for government benefit). The field office is then sold. If it has charm it might have a longer life span or be replaced ---- like a Disney ride. It is not long term real estate. The prototype is the real estate. The barge/cruise ship is expedient cost and advance “marketing” inducement for the sea stead. Ted


#135

I totally agree.

I totally agree, again.

“At the end of the day”, you will be spending all the profit from whatever operation aboard for maintenance, @ the best scenario. At the worst, you will be losing money from the operation.


#136

I do understand the need for a “field office”, I called it the “initial critical mass”. I do also understand the need for compromise to achieve the first step (buying a steel boat).

BUT, a 380’ LOA, $9.0 million “field office”? Is there a NEED for that?,… I highly doubt it.

Personally I would settle down to a MAX of $ half a million and around 100’-150’ LOA. Few examples:

http://www.yachtworld.com/boats/1974/Alumaship-Inc.-Pilothouse-2195772/Morgan-City/LA/United-States#.WWEdyYTytdg

http://www.yachtworld.com/boats/1977/Kelly-Houseboat-2956238/Morgan-City/LA/United-States#.WWEiU4Tytdg

That’s VERY wishful thinking my friend. More likely will be sold for pennies to the dollar for scrap metal. Keep in mind that the “Fisherman’s Paradise” has been on the market for at least 4 years now. Sitting there in the water (read RUSTING there in the water). I’ll bet you anything that it needs a haul out, some re-plating “here and there”, systems overhauled, painting, etc. Another $$$$$ expense.[quote=“tamenta, post:132, topic:2107”]
Imagine the difference of pre-building the platform-buildings in a US port or buildings on platforms constructed in situ. ---- Taxes might include property, income, corporate and royalties.
[/quote]

A bit unclear here. You meant better to build in US, or on site? If meant built in US, think twice. They will rape you down here,…


(Theodore M. Amenta) #137

I bet up close we could be great friends — but we are remote. Please self reflect for a moment. I am 75. You might be less. I have managed the investment of possibly $1.0 billion in real estate development. A $1.0 million cost for the field office is a very little consideration — I may well be wrong and you may be right. I do not get my money back. I full get it. The cost is absorbed by the development as a promotional - marketing cost. — Step back for a moment. Like it or not you have insight witnessing how this kind of a development gets done. Relax, self appraise and see what happens. Ted


(stephen russell) #138

I say for location: Gulf of Mexico is closer than Polynesia by far & then the Bahamas, last Cartagena.
Other locales id add would be:
Hawaii, Mexico, Brazil, Caribbean, Med Sea, Red Sea, Australia ( base for So Pacific IE Fr Polynesia.),Bering Sea,
Coral Sea, near Phillppines, Java, SE Asia area ( use Vietnam, So China base for Sestead assembly)


(stephen russell) #139

Does Concept include Undersea Observation Nodes or airlocks & Mini Sub bays,
Hydroponics, & surface Traffic Tower for Aircraft & shipping & Radar & Comm arrays to shore.
Otherwise Neat project. & good reuse of cruise ship.


(Theodore M. Amenta) #140

S. Russeli – You are largely correct. Gulf of Mexico is closer than Bahamas — better — but there is a bit more to the exercise. :slight_smile: Ted


(Bob LLewellyn) #141

We do this because we love our projects and the hope of expanding to the sea. It will be a heavy burden for our children and grandchildren if we fail to colonize the sea. There are 3 or 4 claimed projects represented on this board. If you like one, get behind it and try to help. If you can’t find one that you like, start your own. The ocean is big and there is enough room for more projects. But please stop beating up on the ones who dared to try.

All four of us need all the goodwill and help that we can get. This isn’t a race against each other, it’s a race against time. The earth will produce 50% more people (3.5 billion) by sometime in the 2050s. If we don’t start now, people will die from poverty. That’s happening already and without a major change in our living arrangement, it will escalate.

So when you’re ready to criticize someone else’s idea, stop and ask yourself, why you are here on this planet, is it to hurt others or to help its children.

The mentioned projects have chosen their place to establish their first colony, they won’t change after they started because it would hurt their momentum. We can tweak around the edges, but any major change would kill the project.

These proposed projects are the first of their kind. No one really knows much about what we will find so we go slowly, step by step. Peoples lives will be in our hands if we succeed. It won’t do anyone any good to save lives from over-population only to lose them to risky behavior. A steel barge is a stepping stone to a more permanent town center. One that uses volcanic ash to make the cement (Roman Cement).

One of the first structures that we will build for the Marinea Project is a large floating dry dock. This will be the beginning of phase 2.

Ted is comparing various aspects of each area without criticizing any one project. Let’s try to do likewise, it will make for a more pleasant and informative trip.


(Theodore M. Amenta) #142

Bob LL ---- Bob hit on something I did not understand myself until this moment. Bob offered I am trying to compare and contribute without criticizing ---- He is 100% correct. I want to help. I thought I was best able to contribute as a generic authority (sic authority? — give me this grace for the moment.) — I do not dispute the decisions barge versus cruse ship — That is not the issue. We are a wide audience trying to contribute to a single objective. Bob is wise and correct — We can not fully agree and debate. We are seeking the same goal. Ted


(Theodore M. Amenta) #143

Shilina: I am sorry it has taken me so long to reply to you. Forgive me. Polynesia is of course a wonderful place to create a new sea stead – shallow or deep. I am not qualified to answer this specific question. I have identified two “remote” locations for a sea stead and share these with TSI – at the time we were discussing their interest was inside the Tahiti reef. I did not agree for multiple reasons, but of course this is their choice.I believe a remote location is better for the Polynesia people and actually better for the socio-economic-political benefits of the Seastead community. Ted