Real Estate Paradigm Shift | oceanic business alliance | oceanic real estate | floating real estate |


(Wilfried Ellmer) #48

Fonseca Honduras | Pitcairn | Venice | Tahiti | how remote can seasteading be ? | what is the ideal dose of remoteness ? |


(Wilfried Ellmer) #49

Hypothesis:

Seasteading has two development branches powered by very different needs and proponents (seastead tastes).

• The poor who are displaced in need of space and can not afford conventional real estate | Tanka | Uros | as historical examples |

• The new global elite looking for a “interference free space” type New VENICE.

In the past this has been discussed as “High Road” and “Low Road” seasteading… and lead to a lot of controversy on the threads.

Mostly because the “low roaders” attracted by the term “homesteading” wanted to see their vision implemented as the “only rightful seasteading version” -


It would be better for all if we could step out of the “versus ideas” and start to percieve seasteading as a “meta idea of many colors and tastes” …


Theory: There can not be such a thing like a “unified project for all seasteaders”… the needs are too different…


Typical Low Roader Projects:


floating out on improvised rafts…

floating on vegetation rafts (sumerian version)


Typical High Roader Projects:

bubble cluster shells

New Venice | the global elite floating out… | New Atlantis |


context:


The big five business fields of ocean colonization: | oceanic transport | oceanic energy | oceanic real estate | deep sea mining | oceanic aquaculture |

The four fundamental quests of ocean colonization : | The quest for interference freedom | The quest for mobility | The quest for oceanic resources | The quest for space on the planet |

Meta Topics:



Axes of ocean colonization: | Main Axes | Plate Seastead | Floating Real Estate | Catamaran concept | Captain Nemo Concept | Floating Breakwater Concept | Submerged Living Space Bubble Concept |
Concepts: / Lens shell pictures overview / / Ramform floating home pictures / / c-shell floating home pictures / / Floating concrete building methods / / shell cluster pictures / / investor proposal list /

(.) #50

You can go and do whatever you want, just not with my money.


(.) #51

ellmerWilfried Ellmer35m2
Hypothesis:

Seasteading has two development branches powered by very different needs and proponents.

• The poor who are displaced in need of space and can not afford conventional real estate | Tanka | Uros | as historical examples |

• The new global elite looking for a “interference free space” type New VENICE.

In the past this has been discussed as “High Road” and “Low Road” seasteading… and lead to a lot of controversy on the threads.

Mostly because the “low roaders” attracted by the term “homesteading” wanted to see their vision implemented as the “only rightful seasteading version” -

It would be better for all if we could step out of the “versus ideas” and start to percieve seasteading as a “meta idea of many colors and tastes” …

Theory: There can not be such a thing like a “unified project for all seasteaders”… the needs are too different…



I wonder if this statement is going to be withdrawn by the author.


#52

@Elmo spams the comment threads …

“… over and over and over and over …”


(Wilfried Ellmer) #53

Hypothesis: There is no second life for old ships and barges as “cheap oceanic real estate” | ref


If you find out what is a “realistic lifespan” for those things and how their “life cycle in oceanic business” goes you will find out why… (ref) - and put that idea to rest.



(Larry G) #54

Wrong. Most ships in the last 30 years are retired due to changes in business processes (container shipping), not exhaustion of their inherent value or structural integrity.


(Wilfried Ellmer) #55

if you think so - go for it - you have my blessing - but don`t count me in on your investor syndicate…:+1:

If you have google you might have found out in the meanwhile that i actually do ship repair and survey in the cartagena marine cluster … so if you where smart you would consider what i say seriously…instead of insisting…anyway - your call.


Why i am not going to argue with any “random internet connected person” on a 7,5 billion planet… everybody is endorsed to his opinion…


(Larry G) #56

Like many different industries, even experts can be wrong when they look at things with a committed viewpoint of paradigm, immersed in a given context. Cargo shipping businesses don’t find a cost-effective use for older ships. Conceded. I am fairly aware of the problems due to my years of seasteading research and participation on top of a graduate school case study/courses on international container shipping and logistics during my first attempt at grad school while working full time.

Consider: there’s a huge market in used autos (fleet vehicles) from rental car fleets and corporate fleets. These vehicles sell for a significant portion of their new price, better than the average used car price for similar models and years. Rental fleet managers don’t make these decisions in a vacuum, there is good and solid evidence that it is more cost-effective to replace them early than to maintain them in the fleet service.

That doesn’t mean they have no value, quite the contrary, the best value to the fleet manager comes from operating/renting NEW vehicles with customer attraction, low maintenance costs (still under warranty from the dealer/manufacturer for almost every conceivable mechanical issue), they probably don’t even have to change the tires on most of these vehicles before they sell them. But lots and lots of individual families are driving lease returns and former fleet vehicles that they purchased for a reasonable price with lots of life left in them.

The robust market in used ships, with thousands of commercial vessels for sale world-wide, puts the lie to the idea that these ships have zero effective value. Otherwise, they would simply automatically scrap them rather than listing for re-sale. The residual resale price is a fraction of the original cost, it’s true. The cost of maintenance goes up with age, it’s true. It eventually becomes more difficult to certify them with a shipping bureau, true. Most of these things are issues primarily related to using them for cargo and passenger transport across long distances. Changing the use from trans-oceanic routes to regional loitering/itinerant “tramp steaming”, de-coupling your travel plans from delivery schedules, de-coupling your business model from cargo management, changing your profit margin expectation to include permanent residence for crew and families makes a big difference in the value proposition.

It’s common for people to talk about ferro-cement yachts as having less value. It’s true people don’t pay as much for a used ferro yacht as they do for a used traditionally-built yacht in similar condition. That doesn’t mean that the people who own that ferro yacht receive less value from using it.

So once again, I’ll make an attempt at educating “the auditorium” on an economic point: cost is a numeric measure, price is a signalling mechanism, and value is entirely individual to circumstance.


Mobil Bio-fuels processing
(Wilfried Ellmer) #57

I see you are not willing to put that idea to rest … so go for it and let me know how it went… :+1:

I can be helpful to connect you with a lot of ship owners who would “love to give their old ships to an enthusiastic seasteader to get rid of the liability issue” - not only for a surprisingly low price - for FREE… because otherwise they would have to pay the scrapyard to recieve them…


When you do it, have a look at the “real goodies” that come with your floating paradise - like the cost of asbestos removal from the engine room, and the cost of slurry removal from the tanks, and drydock cost for plate removal and replacement in the bottom section…you already sound like a “fleet manager” to me… thanks for educating the auditorium…


I personally would accept your expertise on topics like vermicomposting, biogas |ref | homelessness | ref | and team up forum bulleying groups of low riders and underdogs to beat up TSI on its own forum | ref | ref | (you have shown skill in that) …

  • but i prefer to listen to other voices when it comes to ship management… others may listen to you - who knows? - good luck on that.

[Ocean colonization is the biggest business opportunity of the century](https://discuss.seasteading.org/t/the-biggest-business-opportunity-of-this-century-ocean-colonization-oceanic-business-alliance-frontier-investment-solve-bottleneck-oceanic-business-alliance/1606)

#58

Voices in your head don’t count as investors…


#59

@Elmo is full of ignorant bullshit, as usual.

FREE ships that nobody can get rid of?

Yeah … total bullshit.


(Wilfried Ellmer) #60

@BobDohse | @JL_Frusha | @thebastidge |

Great team ! - i wish you all the best !

What is the name of your project ?

Do we have IMTA and vermicomposting on board ?



The big five business fields of ocean colonization: | oceanic transport | oceanic energy | oceanic real estate | deep sea mining | oceanic aquaculture |

The four fundamental quests of ocean colonization : | The quest for interference freedom | The quest for mobility | The quest for oceanic resources | The quest for space on the planet |

Meta Topics:



Axes of ocean colonization: | Main Axes | Plate Seastead | Floating Real Estate | Catamaran concept | Captain Nemo Concept | Floating Breakwater Concept | Submerged Living Space Bubble Concept |
Concepts: / Lens shell pictures overview / / Ramform floating home pictures / / c-shell floating home pictures / / Floating concrete building methods / / shell cluster pictures / / investor proposal list /

#61

#62

The crazy voices inside your head, maybe.

FREE boats that nobody can get rid of.

Yeah … sure. :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes::stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes::stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:


#63

Sunken Concrete Submarines Recovery Company

… marketed to any fool who buys from you, @Elmo. :wink:


#64

I call mine Gulfsteading, as opposed to the Wil Ellmer approach suggesting dumpster-diving, floating the materials and attempting to build in the water, while attempting to hold it together.

Of course, there’s the proven failure of ferrocement submarines, like the one that sank in Lake Attersee, and the scrapped hunk in whichever port in South America, with trash piling up against it.


(Larry G) #65

Highlighting a point from Bob Dohse’ link:

A crisis in merchant shipping has left a glut of cargo ships on the market, with low demand depressing prices and making an aging vessel particularly affordable

(emphasis added) and adding a few more references:

Costly Bet on Big Cargo Ships Comes Up Short

ships are more than a third larger than the largest ships of a decade ago, and the largest eclipse their surroundings at ports.

The glut of massive ships is adding to the overcapacity on the world’s busiest trade lanes, particularly the benchmark Asia-to-Europe route, pushing the cost of shipping a container from Shanghai to Rotterdam down to a record low

Container-ship operators say they lose money in the long run on the Asia-to-Europe trade lanes if freight rates stay below $1,300 per container. Analysts estimate capacity in the route at around 30% above annual demand, which is expected to grow between 3% and 5% this year.

“The bitter truth is that with so much extra tonnage in the water the [rate increases] are meaningless,” said a senior executive of a major Asian carrier who asked not to be named. “A number of operators in Asia-Europe are already offering rates at around $300 per box and the price war will continue. The choice to invest so heavily in ULCSs is increasingly being questioned.”

Zombie Fleet:

Shipping has undergone a period of massive growth, fuelled by cheap debt and steady demand. The world fleet doubled in size between 2010 and 2013. At the same time, China doubled its shipyard capacity and took huge orders for new ships as it sought to control the commodities trade. "All of a sudden you’ve hit a market that’s gone flat. That is a radical change.

“If you’ve got more ships than there are cargos, then freight rates are going to be weak - it’s that simple.”

The impact on ship owners’ profits has been drastic. The average charter rate for the largest Capesize vessel – so-called because they are too large for the Panama canal and have to round Cape Horn - has fallen to around $2,700 per day. By contrast, they had traded within the range of $15,000 to $25,000 during the past two years, and briefly touched $250,000 during the mania of 2008, according to Mr Penn. Many trips are now loss-making as the cost of running a Capesize vessel, which at up to 340m is equivalent of almost four football fields in length, can run to $7,500 dollars a day. In a normal market the rational decision would be to remove loss-making ships from the fleet, but this is anything but a normal market. The world shipping fleet is drowning in debt.

Mr Kidwell describes how ship owners who have financed their fleets with 60pc debt and 40pc equity have seen that equity become worthless.

Meanwhile, the banks that provided the debt won’t pull the plug as they would be forced to recognise the losses. Instead, they accept that they won’t have debt service, and are forced to wait and see if the ship owner can survive until the market recovers. At some point in the future they might be able to sell the vessel at a better price.

Mr Kidwell said that a five-year old Capesize vessel was sold for $19m in recent weeks, 40pc below the normal listing price for a vessel that age of around $33m, and less than half the $48m cost of a new ship. The scrap value of ships has also plummeted as China pumps new steel onto world markets.

The collapse in prices for secondhand vessels will blow a hole in the balance sheet of any bank or individual that is sitting on those loans.

Cargo ship glut makes profitability a challenge

Until the late 1990s, the largest container ships could carry about 5,000 steel shipping containers, each about 20 feet long. Today, such ships are little more than chum.

The Triple-E’s can carry more than 18,000 containers, piled 20 high, with 10 above deck and 10 below. But they can sail only between Europe and Asia, as their nearly 194-foot wide hull is too large to fit into U.S. ports or to slip through the Panama Canal.

Few carriers besides Maersk are profitable, too many new ships are being built, and demand for space on container ships is slowing as economies in Europe and Asia face headwinds. Shipyards, conditioned to build ever-larger vessels, are cutting prices to keep their order books filled.

“There are two types of companies that will survive this,” Sanders of Boston C?onsulting said. “Either you have the very large companies like Maersk” that “take advantage of scale and make money, or particular shipping lines that operate a niche where they dominate, like a feeder line out in Southeast Asia.

The largest cargo ship to ever land in the US is just too big for the business

shipping analysts say there just isn’t enough cargo for these outlandishly large sizes—growth in global trade can’t keep up with the potential number of containers that can traverse the world. In other words, there is a shipping glut.

Equally problematic for the Benjamin Franklin is that US ports are simply not prepared to offload a ship of its size efficiently, lacking the cranes, deep-water channels and infrastructure to get its cargo out of the port. The ship could not work at its full capacity without significant investments by US ports.

Too Many Boats, Too Little Cargo-The Monumental Glut In Global Shipping

When business slows and owners of ships and offshore oil rigs need a place to store their unneeded vessels, Saravanan Krishna suddenly becomes one of the industry’s most popular executives. Krishna is the operation director of International Shipcare, a Malaysian company that mothballs ships and rigs, and these days he’s busy taking calls from beleaguered operators with excess capacity. There are 102 vessels laid up at the company’s berths off the Malaysian island of Labuan, more than double the number a year ago. More are on the way. “There’s a huge demand,” he says. “People are calling us not to lay up one ship but 15 or 20.”

Globally, orders for new vessels dropped 40 percent in 2015, to $69 billion, according to London-based consulting firm Clarksons Research. The demolition rate for unwanted vessels jumped 15 percent.

I’ll note by clear logical deduction that the aging rate of vessels physical decline didn’t magically jump 15% in one year. even if maintenance was neglected, and even if a bolus of previous manufacture hit a ROI milestone, it’s unlikely that the rate of demolition would jump that much at the same time new orders slumped that much. Clearly, ships are being disposed of at increased rates because the work isn’t available for them, not purely due to deterioration or end of lifecycle. It may be in the interest of shipbuilders to claim that it is not cost-effective to operate older ships. That doesn’t mean it is necessarily true. If ships that are not completely deteriorated are being disposed of early, then value still exists in them for other purposes. Is there enough value to be of use to seasteaders? That depends on the individual seasteaders’ desires and capabilities, not on an absolute condition of the vessel itself.

Can “smarter” ocean cargo vessels reverse capacity glut?

The ocean container carrier industry has been plagued by overcapacity of late […] “As carriers continue to over-invest in new ships, they are largely to blame for the chronically low profitability of their industry,” says Philip Damas, director of the London-based consultancy Drewry Supply Chain Advisor.

The clear inference is that ship obsolescence and disposal is being driven in some significant part by changes in business practices and availability of cargo, port capacity, and trade routes, not simply the age/condition of the vessel.

But then I don’t know anything about the used ship market or the shipping industry, apparently.

“You know,” he said, musing on an entirely different topic; “it’s amazing how being kind, non-argumentative, supportive, collaborative, and open-minded can ALSO help one avoid looking completely effing stupid.”


#66

:open_mouth::smirk::stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes::stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes::stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes: … etc., etc.


(Larry G) #67

Try leasing or purchasing a commercial property on land. Comes with many of the same problems. Where I live, a commercial landlord is responsible for two things- walls and roofs have to be intact. That’s it. The building can have no power, no water, no HVAC. If there is asbestos on site requiring removal or mitigation- the tenant is responsible. If there is an underground fuel tank leaking, the tenant has to fix it. If the stormwater run-off is contaminated, the tenant has to fix it.