KGRKJGETMRETU895U-589TY5MIGM5JGB5SDFESFREWTGR54TY
Server : Apache/2.4.62
System : FreeBSD fbsdweb2.web.rcn.net 14.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 14.1-RELEASE releng/14.1-n267679-10e31f0946d8 GENERIC amd64
User : www ( 80)
PHP Version : 8.3.8
Disable Function : NONE
Directory :  /domains/daveculp/speedsl/

Upload File :
current_dir [ Writeable ] document_root [ Writeable ]

 

Current File : /domains/daveculp/speedsl/cost_30k.html
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>

<HEAD>
	<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html;CHARSET=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Description" CONTENT="Sumarizes current status of commercial sail. Investigates free flying kites as primary motive power for ships. Specific pros and cons of crewed, lighter-than-air KiteTugs are investigated. Costs and paybacks are investigated.">
<META NAME="KeyWords" CONTENT="sail, hapa, kite, sailboat, commercial sail, airship, transport sail, helium, sail assist, kitetug">

	<META NAME="GENERATOR" Content="Symantec Visual Page Mac 1.1.1">
	<TITLE>Operation Costs 30ksf</TITLE>
</HEAD>

<BODY TEXT="#000000" BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" LINK="#0000FF" VLINK="#551A8B" ALINK="#0000FF">

<P><FONT SIZE="4"><I><B>On KiteTugs<SUP>&copy;&nbsp;&nbsp;</SUP></B></I></FONT><I>copyright
1996, </I><A HREF="mailto:[email protected]"><I>Dave Culp Speedsailing</I></A></P>
<P><A HREF="cashflow.html">Previous Chapter |</A><A HREF="cost_15k.html">Next Chapter
| </A><A HREF="KiteTugs.html">Table of Contents</A></P>
<H2><A HREF="KiteTugs.html"></A></H2>
<H2><IMG SRC="kitetug5a.gif" WIDTH="320" HEIGHT="233" ALIGN="RIGHT" BORDER="0"></H2>

<H2><BR>
<BR>
Possible Fixed Costs of Operation for a 30,000 sq. ft. KiteTug<SUP>&copy;</SUP>:<BR clear = "right">
<BR clear = "left">
</H2>
<P>
<TABLE BORDER="0" CELLPADDING="0" CELLSPACING="5" WIDTH="90%">
	<TR VALIGN="TOP">
		<TD>Maintenance, helium and repairs (this is 50% more than expected maintenance costs
			of other modern sail assist rigs, on a per sq. ft. basis)<A HREF="refer.html"><FONT
			SIZE="2"><SUP>1</SUP></FONT></A></TD>
		<TD WIDTH="20%" ALIGN="RIGHT" VALIGN="TOP">
			<P ALIGN="RIGHT">$100,000
		</TD>
	</TR>
	<TR VALIGN="TOP">
		<TD>Fuel for auxiliary power, maneuvering, and free flying. Average of 200 gals/day x
			250 days @ sea. (This would be zero if solar powered.):</TD>
		<TD WIDTH="20%" ALIGN="RIGHT" VALIGN="TOP">
			<P ALIGN="RIGHT">$50,000
		</TD>
	</TR>
	<TR>
		<TD>Crew salaries (three crew at $50k, 35k and 35k):</TD>
		<TD WIDTH="20%" ALIGN="RIGHT" VALIGN="TOP">
			<P ALIGN="RIGHT">$120,000
		</TD>
	</TR>
	<TR>
		<TD>Total annual operating costs:</TD>
		<TD WIDTH="20%" ALIGN="RIGHT" VALIGN="TOP">
			<P ALIGN="RIGHT">$270,000
		</TD>
	</TR>
</TABLE>
</P>

<P>We'll look at profitably two ways; gross profit model, with the KiteTug leased,
and simple payback model, with the KiteTug purchased for all cash.</P>
<H4>Gross Profit Approach</H4>
<P>We assume that the KiteTug is 100% leased, on a seven year schedule.</P>
<P>
<TABLE BORDER="0" CELLPADDING="0" CELLSPACING="5" WIDTH="90%">
	<TR VALIGN="TOP">
		<TD>We assume the interest to be 9%/year, with a salvage value of 30% after 7 years.
			This will result in annual lease payments of:</TD>
		<TD WIDTH="20%" ALIGN="RIGHT" VALIGN="TOP">
			<P ALIGN="RIGHT">$487,000
		</TD>
	</TR>
	<TR VALIGN="TOP">
		<TD>Grand total cost of operation:</TD>
		<TD WIDTH="20%" ALIGN="RIGHT" VALIGN="TOP">
			<P ALIGN="RIGHT">$757,000
		</TD>
	</TR>
	<TR>
		<TD>Annual income stream:</TD>
		<TD WIDTH="20%" ALIGN="RIGHT" VALIGN="TOP">
			<P ALIGN="RIGHT">$1,092,500
		</TD>
	</TR>
	<TR>
		<TD>For a gross annual profit of:</TD>
		<TD WIDTH="20%" ALIGN="RIGHT" VALIGN="TOP">
			<P ALIGN="RIGHT">$335,500
		</TD>
	</TR>
</TABLE>

<H4>Simple Payback Approach</H4>
<P>
<TABLE BORDER="0" CELLPADDING="0" CELLSPACING="5" WIDTH="90%">
	<TR VALIGN="TOP">
		<TD>Gross operating costs:</TD>
		<TD WIDTH="20%" ALIGN="RIGHT" VALIGN="TOP">
			<P ALIGN="RIGHT">$270,000
		</TD>
	</TR>
	<TR VALIGN="TOP">
		<TD>Gross income stream:</TD>
		<TD WIDTH="20%" ALIGN="RIGHT" VALIGN="TOP">
			<P ALIGN="RIGHT">$1,092,500
		</TD>
	</TR>
	<TR>
		<TD>Gross profit:</TD>
		<TD WIDTH="20%" ALIGN="RIGHT" VALIGN="TOP">
			<P ALIGN="RIGHT">$822,500
		</TD>
	</TR>
</TABLE>
</P>
<P>Industry expectations for capital payback are on the order of three years<A HREF="refer.html"><FONT
SIZE="2"><SUP>1</SUP></FONT></A>. $3.0 million, divided by $822,500 gives a payback
of 3.65 years</P>
<H3><U>Options for Increasing Profitability</U></H3>
<H3><B>Option 1:</B> The prototype is built in Asia,</H3>
<P>and then production KiteTugs are built there as well. This presumes a capital
cost for the prototype of $2.0 million, and $1.6 million for production Tugs.</P>
<P>
<TABLE BORDER="0" CELLPADDING="0" CELLSPACING="5" WIDTH="90%">
	<TR VALIGN="TOP">
		<TD>This brings the gross annual profit on the prototype, under the gross profit approach
			to:</TD>
		<TD WIDTH="20%" ALIGN="RIGHT" VALIGN="TOP">
			<P ALIGN="RIGHT">$497,500
		</TD>
	</TR>
	<TR VALIGN="TOP">
		<TD>And the gross annual profit for the production model to:</TD>
		<TD WIDTH="20%" ALIGN="RIGHT" VALIGN="TOP">
			<P ALIGN="RIGHT">$563,500
		</TD>
	</TR>
</TABLE>
</P>
<P>Under the simple payback model, paybacks are:</P>
<P>Asian prototype: 2.43 years <BR>
Asian production model: 1.95 years</P>
<P>These figures are well within acceptable ranges, indeed they are far better than
virtually any sailing retrofit system envisioned to date<A HREF="refer.html"><FONT
SIZE="2"><SUP>1</SUP></FONT></A>. Even presuming wide variations in actual revenue
streams, an average payback period under 2 years is perfectly acceptable to investors.</P>
<H3><B>Option 2)</B> Factor in income from salvage towing.</H3>
<P>Under current standards of practice, deep-sea tugboats charge from $100-500/mile
run, both out to a disabled ship, and back to harbor<A HREF="refer.html#12"><FONT
SIZE="2"><SUP>26</SUP></FONT></A>. Thus, a 30,000 ton vessel, stranded 500 miles
offshore, might pay $400,000 for a tow to harbor. Such a trip, under KiteTug, would
take less than a week, both out and back (24 kts out, 8 kts back = 3.5 days). One
single such salvage per year would dramatically change the financial outlook for
a KiteTug:</P>
<H4>Gross profit approach:</H4>
<P>
<TABLE BORDER="0" CELLPADDING="0" CELLSPACING="5" WIDTH="90%">
	<TR VALIGN="TOP">
		<TD>Domestic prototype gross profit:</TD>
		<TD WIDTH="20%" ALIGN="RIGHT" VALIGN="TOP">
			<P ALIGN="RIGHT">$735,500
		</TD>
	</TR>
	<TR VALIGN="TOP">
		<TD>Asian prototype gross profit:</TD>
		<TD WIDTH="20%" ALIGN="RIGHT" VALIGN="TOP">
			<P ALIGN="RIGHT">$897,500
		</TD>
	</TR>
	<TR>
		<TD>Asian production gross profit:</TD>
		<TD WIDTH="20%" ALIGN="RIGHT" VALIGN="TOP">
			<P ALIGN="RIGHT">$963,000
		</TD>
	</TR>
</TABLE>

<H4>Simple payback approach:</H4>
<P>Domestic prototype 2.45 years <BR>
Asian prototype 1.64 years <BR>
Asian production 1.31 years</P>
<P>This activity is obviously very profitable and KiteTug dispatch services will
seek such commissions for their Tugs.</P>
<H3><B>Option 3)</B> Add 20% to paying days at sea</H3>
<P>(presumes &quot;pure&quot; sailed days, which generate $8,550/day in fees) This
may be done by reducing deadhead days (through finding closer &quot;back tows&quot;),
reducing &quot;at harbor&quot; days, reducing &quot;sail assist&quot; days, towing
larger ships, or any combination of all four. It only needs to add 20 average days/year
to the mix.</P>
<H4>Gross profit approach:</H4>
<P>
<TABLE BORDER="0" CELLPADDING="0" CELLSPACING="5" WIDTH="90%">
	<TR VALIGN="TOP">
		<TD>Domestic prototype gross profit:</TD>
		<TD WIDTH="20%" ALIGN="RIGHT" VALIGN="TOP">
			<P ALIGN="RIGHT">$506,500
		</TD>
	</TR>
	<TR VALIGN="TOP">
		<TD>Asian-built prototype gross profit:</TD>
		<TD WIDTH="20%" ALIGN="RIGHT" VALIGN="TOP">
			<P ALIGN="RIGHT">$668,500
		</TD>
	</TR>
	<TR>
		<TD>Asian-built production Tug:</TD>
		<TD WIDTH="20%" ALIGN="RIGHT" VALIGN="TOP">
			<P ALIGN="RIGHT">$734,000
		</TD>
	</TR>
</TABLE>

<H4>Simple payback approach:</H4>
<P>Domestic Prototype: 3.02 years <BR>
Asian prototype: 2.01 years <BR>
Asian production: 1.61 years</P>
<P>Fairly small increases in utility of the system can make dramatic differences
in profitability.</P>
<H3><B>Option 4)</B> Fuel doubles in cost:</H3>
<H4>Gross profit approach:</H4>
<P>
<TABLE BORDER="0" CELLPADDING="0" CELLSPACING="5" WIDTH="90%">
	<TR VALIGN="TOP">
		<TD>Domestic Prototype profit:</TD>
		<TD WIDTH="20%" ALIGN="RIGHT" VALIGN="TOP">
			<P ALIGN="RIGHT">$1,378,000
		</TD>
	</TR>
	<TR VALIGN="TOP">
		<TD>Asian Prototype profit:</TD>
		<TD WIDTH="20%" ALIGN="RIGHT" VALIGN="TOP">
			<P ALIGN="RIGHT">$1,540,000
		</TD>
	</TR>
	<TR>
		<TD>Asian production unit:</TD>
		<TD WIDTH="20%" ALIGN="RIGHT" VALIGN="TOP">
			<P ALIGN="RIGHT">$1,615,500
		</TD>
	</TR>
</TABLE>

<H4>Simple payback approach:</H4>
<P>Domestic prototype: 1.61 years <BR>
Asian prototype: 1.07 years <BR>
Asian production: 0.86 years</P>
<P>Here we see that a doubling in fuel prices (a likely scenario within the foreseeable
future) brings payback of a production KiteTug to less than one year. While materials
costs for the Tug itself will likely also rise, its raw materials, though petroleum
based, are a relatively small proportion of its all-up cost. Perhaps a 10-15% increase
is foreseeable, which will still keep paybacks under one year.</P>

<P><A HREF="cashflow.html">Previous Chapter | </A><A HREF="cost_15k.html">Next Chapter
| </A><A HREF="KiteTugs.html">Table of Contents</A>

</BODY>

</HTML>

Anon7 - 2021