Used Boats of the Future

[chrisk]

This is something I was thinking about the other day and was interested to hear everyone's opinion.

So it's pretty common to be able to pick up a fairly nice, bone stock 80's Supra Sunsport (for example) for around $5-6K. We all usually have to put towers on them and stereos and lights and ballast and accessories and on and on and on. What I'm curious about, what will Used Boat Buying be like say 28 years from now? (I used 28 because that's how old my boat is).

I don't have the answer, thus why I'm asking the question, and I'll try to post some thoughts about it below:

In 1985 a brand new Supra didn't cost as much, relatively, as a brand new Supra does today. I know there's been inflation and all, but the price of the boats has been inflating much faster than the inflation of the US dollar. So what will used boats cost in 28 years?

In 1985 brand new Supras came with pretty standard, mechanical dash instruments, usually in circles. Today, every boat manufacturer has custom made LCD touch screens with hundreds of functions and crazy complicated ECU's. Boats deteriorate faster than cars, relative to their use, and so it's necessary to buy worn out parts over time. What will parts buying be like in 28 years?

What will the dynamic of brand loyalty be like in 28 years? Right now, I feel pretty brand loyal to Supra and Moomba, however I don't know why? My boat was made probably under a different set of management, with probably different tooling, nothing is the same anymore. I suppose the brand loyalty comes from my involvement on this forum, but SC barely even pays attention to the two forums, and it seems much more so the Moomba. So, I have a boat that shares exactly nothing in common with the boats that Supra is constructing today, I receive zero support/recognition in my ownership of a 28 year old relic, and yet I feel brand loyal. What will it be like in 28 years when the pinnacle of water sports boats has risen even further, and lowest point of old used boats has dropped further in the past?

I know I'm rambling, it's early, but I think it's an interesting topic. Thanks for entertaining me.

If you think I'm wrong about anything, PLEASE, correct me or let me know why.

[Salty87]

scary to think what the lcd screens will be like in 28 yrs. doubtful they'll last that long so they will have been replaced, maybe a few times. parts prices probably won't come down too much as the numbers aren't there for after-market suppliers to get into the market.

i suspect i'll have a 50+ yr old supra by then. the classic supras have shown they have timeless looks and the mechanicals are simple enough to survive. how will a pickle fork look to us in 28 yrs?

[Jetlink]

how will a pickle fork look to us in 28 yrs?

Still look like a pickle fork and still ugly in my eyes. Maybe it will take 29 years to grow on me...

[chrisk]

It's interesting because we're all taking these old boats and constantly ADDING things.

The "used boats of the future" will have come straight from the factory with all these things. Things such as towers, speakers, ballast, etc. So 28 years is a long time for those parts to break down.

Sure the boats today are built a lot better. But will as many be in operation on the water due to maintenance costs?

[haugy]

Sure the boats today are built a lot better. But will as many be in operation on the water due to maintenance costs?

I'm going to beg to differ with you there. They are built with more advanced components, but not better.

I've seen more issues with the newer boats than I have in any of mine. And I'm not talking about electrical gremlins and high-tech failures. I'm talking about hull seperations, delaminations, strut mis-alignments, flimsy helm stations, etc.

I've seen the older ones take hits and keep coming. While they are inferior in advanced components, as stated by Salty, that inferiority is what makes them last. Simplicity.
They were built super strong because they wanted to storm the market with a new design. They didn't focus on streamlining the timeline to build, or cutting every cost for profit. They were built as barnstormers to the heavily dominated MC and Nautique market. And they did. That energetic passion and ambition built some of the best boats I've seen. I've run MC's and Nautiques and when you put them side by side they can all last if maintained, but which one has the style over the others? Which one has the better hull structure and design over the others? Supra.

I don't think we will see the resurgence of these more modern boats since most of the "add-ons" are a fad. Almost everyday I regret putting a tower on my boat. But I use it for more than just looks and wakeboarding. So it has value. But these newer ones, nah, they won't have the following. They don't last like the older ones do. I'm not bashing on the new ones, just comparing the way of building from one generation to the next. It's just like cars. Cars back in the 60's and 70's were built to be awesome, not built to cut costs to increase profit margins.

If I pick up another Supra, it will be back to stock for it.

[chrisk]

I agree with some of that and disagree with other parts of it. I like your statement comparing them to cars of the 60's and 70's, which were "built to be awesome." I think that is true. But the big thing that eats at me as far as build quality goes is wood. The 80's were obviously the days of wooden stringers, wooden seat frames, wooden everything. There are no wood pieces on new boats unless it's teak and a platform at the back of the boat.

That said, I believe a Supra pulled off the line today would last longer, structurally, than a Supra pulled off the line of yesteryear.

[chrisk]

I think the reason I've enjoyed my Supra so much is that it was a blank canvas for me to begin with... and I know this is purely a statement for the crowd that likes to customize boats. A used boat of the future might not be as "fun" to own for a person like me. Haugy, I know people like you have completely different reasons for ownership - function, pride, and sustaining classic design among those reasons, correct?

[haugy]

Very true. No doubt about that. But they were built with what commonplace and available. Wood can be replaced. Poor structural design or misalignments can't.

I may have misunderstood your question. Will they last? Sure, there isn't much to rot or wither away like you said. But will they last in operational status and still be running? I'm leaning towards less likely. With foreign components, inferior metals, and cheapest bid pieces they just are built to last the test of time.

[Jetlink]

They are built to be reliable as long as the warranty plus a few months to a year. Then it's $$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

[chrisk]

Wood can be replaced. Poor structural design or misalignments can't.

I like that ^^^.

As far as my question goes, I don't really know what the question is. Just curious to hear predictions about what the used water sports boat scene will be like.

Hopefully this "phenomenon" doesn't lead to the demise of water sports. The way I see it, good used ski boats are getting fewer and "farrer" between, just because of time. So, as the number of boats with manageable cost of ownership decline - cost of ownership of the average ski/wake boat will continue to rise as time goes on. Basically, owning a 28 year old boat, 28 years from now will cost more, relatively, than it does for me to own a 28 year old boat now. So, I personally see that as a severe threat to the water sports industry, as it exists now.

That make sense to anyone else?