Adrian Stott wrote: [Something utterly unrelated by someone else that you stuck in here for no reason at all removed. Why the hell do you go out of your way to make it difficult for people to engage with you. You are the only person in the entire world who buggers around with posts like this]
> Nick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> The demand for moorings at any site varies enormously, with the seasons, >> with the day of the week, with local events, with the weather. Unless >> you have some spectacularly complicated system involving everybody >> linked into some sort of computer mediated auction system that works >> dynamically[1] you are never going to be able to set the price at >> precisely the level that you sell just the right number of moorings. > > I agree. The charge can feasibly only approximate the market-clearing > price. But I think that is much better than "free" moorings which are > always fully occupied when you arrive. > >> Sell more moorings than there are, and why bother selling them? - you're >> still on first-come-first-served, and have (now very) unhappy people to >> refund. > > In fact, what tends to happen is that the supplier is likely to set a > price slightly above the market-clearing one, to ensure there are > always some vacancies. It is possible to be just a little more > sophisticated at not much admin cost by simple measures such as > checking the moorings later in the day and, if too many are vacant, > lowering the price for later arrivals. > >> [1] - even if it does alter dynamically, what happens when I've bought >> my mooring for 20p and settled down at 2pm, and Adrian turns up at 6PM >> ready to pay a tenner? Am I cast adrift? > > See above. How is this administered? A mooring operator with a cap and a ticket machine, or an on-line system? Or what? >> [2] - and that in turn is mad: filling 5 moorings at a tenner each may >> get more revenue than 10 at 1 quid each, but it leaves 5 people unable >> to moor and 5 spaces empty - that cannot be right. > > See above. > > There is no need to operate the thing rigidly. I presume by "rigidly" you mean "on a simple set of rules". I really hope any system that involved me having to pay for something that previously had been free was operated "rigidly" in the generally accepted sense of the world (ie, in a way that means that the mates of the person operating it don't get an advantage). >> The problem with the market is that it does require both competition, >> and the ability of new supply if demand and willingness to pay are >> there. That's often not the case with moorings in towns, for example. > > It can be. If moorings were more profitable, riparian owners might > well find it worth their while to create more of them. Not for the sort of honey-pot moorings we are talking about. After all, you could argue that this entire system is already in operation but BW are undercutting by selling their moorings for nothing (which, in a market, they are perfectly entitled to do - we've established that running existing moorings has almost no cost - and I'm sure it's less cost than running a mooring management system). If there was the demand, and the return, then the riperian owner could do this right now and reap the benefit. It makes no difference at all to him what price BW are selling their small supply of moorings for if there really is a demand and people willing to pay. Thought experiment: what effect does me giving away 5 loaves of bread have on the local corner shop's ability to sell bread. Is it any different at all than if I sell 5 loaves of bread for 1p cheaper than the shop does? >> First come first served is not "fair" - it penalises those who for some >> bonkers reason actually want to do some cruising (I'm one - I rarely >> stop before 6 or 7) but it at least maximises use and - for something >> like moorings in a popular location that *has* to be the prime test of >> any system. > > Maximising the use is easy. Will you explain how? Tom, Dick and Harry come past a between 2pm and 3pm and aren't prepared to pay your current price. At 5PM you have three empty moorings and lower the price. No-one now comes along. They have missed out on mooring where they want to, and you have not taken any money from the moorings. This is a loss all round. > But that isn't the only criterion for a > successful pricing/allocation regime. Maximising convenience and > availability are just as, if not more, important. If I need > something, it isn't much solace to me that it is priced very cheap but > none is available. No, but apart from the fact you clearly can, and are willing, to pay - is it any better than you want some but aren't prepared to pay the asking price for it. Am I any worse off if the garage gives away a single Ferrari to someone other than me? If so, how? [Another pile of stuff you've glued on removed again. Tosser]
