Posted by Jeremy Kriewaldt on August 19, 2005 at 01:03:51 from 202.138.212.58 user JeremyKriewaldt.
In Reply to: Re: Swallow anew? posted by Alan Hakim on August 18, 2005 at 23:33:38:
The result of the discussion to date seems to me to be that there are some real issues concerning the economic commonsense of the proposal. However, no one seems now to be adhering to the proposition that, if the proposal makes economic sense, it is something that TARS should not do.
Accordingly, it seems to me that those who wish to propose that TARS take on this project need to come up with both the technical and the financial proposal for the directors to consider (and perhaps to put to the members at a forthcoming general meeting).
My experience is that on many occasions what looked like good ideas are sunk because of practical or financial constraints but that what at first instance may appear to be impractical ends up being entirely feasible once the preparatory work has been fully done.
For example, I was once the Treasurer of a modest suburban golf club. For years members had been complaining about the quality of the fairways. But no one had talked to the greenkeeper about it. He pointed out that the real issue had to do with the kind of mower that they were using. I asked him what kind of mower he wanted. He showed me the mower and told me the cost. Then I was able to work out that in fact when maintenance on the existing mower was taken into account, it was not only going to improve the fairways but also be cheaper to acquire the new mower on a finance lease than it was to keep the existing arrangements! The strange additional consequence was that there was also a reduction in the costs for other supplies such as top dressing and fertiliser and for the labour to apply them to the fairways because the grass was healthier and looked after itself when it was cut properly.
Lest anyone accuse me of being totally dopey (at least based on this), I should point out that I do recognise that there are differences between a boat and a fairway.
However, issues such as where the boat would need to be housed during the northern winter could probably be discussed with the Windermere Steam Boat Museum. If the "Amazon" display could be dealt with appropriately then maybe we could actually have both Swallow and Amazon on display together during winter. Alternatively, TARS presumably already deals with this issue with Cocky.
Then on the question of revenue, there must be sailing schools that hold the same view as other contributors to this discussion, that a heavier clinker built dinghy will be easier to train young sailors in than a modern lightweight dinghy. In which case, TARS could make New Swallow available on suitable financial terms on the basis that TARS can have access on a certain limited notice period for New Swallow to be trailed to TARS activities (This might also deal with the "winter storage" issue).
This just shows that the idea is neither so self-evidently right as to not require proof but nor is it so self-evidently wrong as to not merit the effort by those who wish to propound it to show that it can work.