Far Trader cargo/Freight manifest questions

[jwdh71]

Bhoins wrote:

A free trader makes a profit at about a 75% load. All the Jump-1 ships do. Crank it up to a Far Trader and make a bank payment and a profit.

And I personally can't justify charging more to a passenger taking a Jump-1 ship 2 parsecs vs a Jump-2 ship going the same distance in a third of the time. Especially considering the regular cost for passage and by extension who the typical passenger would have to be, getting there slower is more expensive?

One of the things I woiuld do if I were to run a merchant campaign would be to add plus or minus DMs to rolls based on the jump number of your ship, and the distance between origin and destination planets. The reason, cargo and passenger brokers are more likely to pick the best ship for a particular run. For passengers that have to go 2 parsecs from planet A to C, it makes no economic sense for them to book passage on a jump 1 ship, so passengers like that will gravitate to jump 2 or above ships for that run.

Premium cargos are the same, Priority, Hazardous and Security cargos shipped from one planet to another will go on ships that can make the trip in the least amount of jumps, so most free traders should be locked out of those cargos unless there are NO ships of the proper jump capability to haul the cargo. This is the sort of thing that merchant adventures are made of. Why aren't there any ships available to take that Hazardous cargo a single jump 2 away? Why is this broker trying to hire a jump 1 ship to take it, for twice the money?

I actually, without crunching the numbers, see that the jump 1 free trader is going to stick to its little portion of a main or cluster, and mostly going to be stuck hauling the regular freight and passengers from one world of it's established route to the next. Far traders and their larger corporate brethren will be hauling the more lucrative types of freight, and passengers, and going off the mains more, to where the interesting stuff is.

As always, YMMV
John Hamill
jwdh71@yahoo.com

 

[BetterThanLife]

You are absolutely correct that it makes more economic sense to find a ship going directly there. (It even makes more economic sense to take the ship directly there if you have to pay the same cost because you get there faster and you don't have a layover.) It makes lots of sense to pay half price for a trip for the passenger. The only question is where are you going to find the ride? It makes absolutely no economic sense to run a Jump-2 or higher freighter under those circumstances.

I am willing to say it is per jump regardless of distance. Somebody please show me how to consistently make a profit with a Far Trader when my outlay of funds is over KCr350 each month. (Hell I'll settle for breaking even consistently.)

Originally posted by jwdh71:

One of the things I woiuld do if I were to run a merchant campaign would be to add plus or minus DMs to rolls based on the jump number of your ship, and the distance between origin and destination planets. The reason, cargo and passenger brokers are more likely to pick the best ship for a particular run. For passengers that have to go 2 parsecs from planet A to C, it makes no economic sense for them to book passage on a jump 1 ship, so passengers like that will gravitate to jump 2 or above ships for that run.

Premium cargos are the same, Priority, Hazardous and Security cargos shipped from one planet to another will go on ships that can make the trip in the least amount of jumps, so most free traders should be locked out of those cargos unless there are NO ships of the proper jump capability to haul the cargo. This is the sort of thing that merchant adventures are made of. Why aren't there any ships available to take that Hazardous cargo a single jump 2 away? Why is this broker trying to hire a jump 1 ship to take it, for twice the money?

I actually, without crunching the numbers, see that the jump 1 free trader is going to stick to its little portion of a main or cluster, and mostly going to be stuck hauling the regular freight and passengers from one world of it's established route to the next. Far traders and their larger corporate brethren will be hauling the more lucrative types of freight, and passengers, and going off the mains more, to where the interesting stuff is.

As always, YMMV
John Hamill
jwdh71@yahoo.com [/QB][/QUOTE]

 

[jwdh71]

Bhoins wrote

You are absolutely correct that it makes more economic sense to find a ship going directly there. (It even makes more economic sense to take the ship directly there if you have to pay the same cost because you get there faster and you don't have a layover.) It makes lots of sense to pay half price for a trip for the passenger. The only question is where are you going to find the ride? It makes absolutely no economic sense to run a Jump-2 or higher freighter under those circumstances.

I am willing to say it is per jump regardless of distance. Somebody please show me how to consistently make a profit with a Far Trader when my outlay of funds is over KCr350 each month. (Hell I'll settle for breaking even consistently.)

I agree that the numbers seem messy, but since by your conclusion of only jump 1 ships being profitable, that would mean that large numbers of planets in canon that do carry on trade would not, since they aren't either on a main or in a cluster, we have to look for other methods of supporting higher jump number ships. A few suggestions;

1. Premium charges on freight for "Express" shipping. If a jump 2 or higher ship can deliver the product to market quicker, maybe there should be a higher charge for the ability.

2. Changing either the pricing or the financing of ships, to allow better terms for increased profitability. This change would affect not only higher jump ships, but all ships, and is probably too much of a change.

3. Changing the rates charged for freight and passengers to make higher jump ships more profitable. Again any change will likely affect both jump 2 or higher as well as jump 1 ships.

4. Any world off the mains will automatically subsidize jump 2 traders to carry it's freight to the worlds on the mains, therefore easing the financial burden on Far Traders and other ships equipped with higher jump engines. Or, merchant vessels in the Imperium with jump 2 or above are purchased with Imperial subsidy, under the assumption that they are subject to Imperial callup as auxiliary merchants during wartime, due to their being able to keep up with the fleets better than jump 1 merchants.

Just some ideas right off the top of my head. It's important to note, if the jump 1 merchant vessel is the only one that's profitable, we have to change canon to reflect that worlds off the mains and out of the clusters are trading dead zones, and since not all of them are we do need some reason to keep canon the same.

As always, YMMV
John Hamill
jwdh71@yahoo.com

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by jwdh71:

I agree that the numbers seem messy, but since by your conclusion of only jump 1 ships being profitable, that would mean that large numbers of planets in canon that do carry on trade would not, since they aren't either on a main or in a cluster, we have to look for other methods of supporting higher jump number ships. A few suggestions;

1. Premium charges on freight for "Express" shipping. If a jump 2 or higher ship can deliver the product to market quicker, maybe there should be a higher charge for the ability.

2. Changing either the pricing or the financing of ships, to allow better terms for increased profitability. This change would affect not only higher jump ships, but all ships, and is probably too much of a change.

3. Changing the rates charged for freight and passengers to make higher jump ships more profitable. Again any change will likely affect both jump 2 or higher as well as jump 1 ships.

4. Any world off the mains will automatically subsidize jump 2 traders to carry it's freight to the worlds on the mains, therefore easing the financial burden on Far Traders and other ships equipped with higher jump engines. Or, merchant vessels in the Imperium with jump 2 or above are purchased with Imperial subsidy, under the assumption that they are subject to Imperial callup as auxiliary merchants during wartime, due to their being able to keep up with the fleets better than jump 1 merchants.

Just some ideas right off the top of my head. It's important to note, if the jump 1 merchant vessel is the only one that's profitable, we have to change canon to reflect that worlds off the mains and out of the clusters are trading dead zones, and since not all of them are we do need some reason to keep canon the same.

As always, YMMV
John Hamill
jwdh71@yahoo.com [/QB][/QUOTE]

Why not just charge per parsec. The economics then work fine.

Beats the hell out of all these assumptions.

 

[jwdh71]

Bhoins wrote:

Why not just charge per parsec. The economics then work fine. Beats the hell out of all these assumptions.

Because the per parsec numbers work for the ships, and the free traders who own them, they do not work for trade overall. If you use the per parsec numbers, either nothing gets shipped more than a handful of parsecs away from its point of origin, or you are adding hundreds of percent to the cost of the trade goods. That would mean that the ONLY cargos worth transporting any distance would be luxury goods able to be bought extremely cheaply on their planet of origin, and fetch massive prices anywhere else. Using the per parsec numbers kills most canon trade as well.

As always, YMMV
John Hamill
jwdh71@yahoo.com

 

[Hal]

Originally posted by jwdh71:
Because the per parsec numbers work for the ships, and the free traders who own them, they do not work for trade overall. If you use the per parsec numbers, either nothing gets shipped more than a handful of parsecs away from its point of origin, or you are adding hundreds of percent to the cost of the trade goods. That would mean that the ONLY cargos worth transporting any distance would be luxury goods able to be bought extremely cheaply on their planet of origin, and fetch massive prices anywhere else. Using the per parsec numbers kills most canon trade as well.

Not Neccessarily:

Example: Item ships 1,000 items per Dton, and is worth $100 creds per item when sold at the destination. You ship it 1 parsec - at 1,000 credits per dton - the added price per "unit" in your cargo is 1 credit. This is only 1% of the item's value. What? You don't like the idea of there being 1,000 units in the container that takes up 1 dton? Ok, lets make it nastier - there are only 100 items in the dton container. That 1,000 credits is spread amongst 100 items, or adds roughly 10% of the item's value to shipping. It would take roughly 10 parsecs worth of travel to make the item double in value. Question is? How much are you willing to pay for an item that will insure that your soldiers can beat all the other soldiers that your rivals might muster up (say, laser carbines and their batteries and their rechargers)? In a truly free capitalistic environment, prices are driven by demand. Something whose value has increased by a factor of 2 or even 3 hundred percent is not a major impediment if you have a monopoly on the manufacture of such goods (say a TL 10 world selling to a TL 8 market?).

 

[Anthony]

Originally posted by jwdh71:
Because the per parsec numbers work for the ships, and the free traders who own them, they do not work for trade overall. If you use the per parsec numbers, either nothing gets shipped more than a handful of parsecs away from its point of origin, or you are adding hundreds of percent to the cost of the trade goods.

No, it means the only stuff shipped long distances is stuff with a high value density. If a dton of freight is worth Cr 100,000, and shipping costs are Cr 500 per dton per parsec, you can ship that dton of freight 100 parsecs with only a 50% increase in cost.

 

[daryen]

Originally posted by jwdh71:
Because the per parsec numbers work for the ships, and the free traders who own them, they do not work for trade overall. If you use the per parsec numbers, either nothing gets shipped more than a handful of parsecs away from its point of origin, or you are adding hundreds of percent to the cost of the trade goods. That would mean that the ONLY cargos worth transporting any distance would be luxury goods able to be bought extremely cheaply on their planet of origin, and fetch massive prices anywhere else. Using the per parsec numbers kills most canon trade as well.

Yes, No, and No.

Yes, it is true that almost nothing gets shipped more than a handful of parsecs away from its point of origin, but that is the case regardless of the trade system used. Nothing in canon implies anything different, anyway. The only things that are transported long distances are very rare items (Terran brandy, Darrian fire art, etc.) and information.

No, as mentioned before, it doesn't have to be cheap luxury goods. It just has to be high value items that customers are willing to pay a premium for, or are already hideously expensive. Again, no canon problems here, either.

And no, this doesn't kill trade. Under either system, the most common type of trade players will encounter, jump-1 freight, is identical under either system.

With the per jump model, though, what is killed is any form of freight (or passenger) transport that is greater than jump-1. With per parsec, you are able to then reintroduce the idea of transportation at jump-2 and jump-3.

 

[jwdh71]

I understand the argument for the per parsec model, I somewhat agree with it, but the numbers completely destroy canon trade. Take the Terran Brandy example, say you can get a dton of Brandy, the really good stuff, at Terra for Cr100,000. To get it to the Imperial core (for example sake a round number of 100 parsecs), you double the price of it, to go to the Spinward Marches (for example sake another 50 parsecs) you make it 150% additional to its purchase price, or Cr250,000. Better be really good brandy, or really over-hyped at the least.

What I am most worried about is that the canon bulk trade in agricultural products and raw materials is killed, unless their markets happen to be within 2 or 3 parsecs. Any further and there is no economic justification to ship bulk raw materials, of any sort. It also means that worlds off the mains and out of clusters WILL be economic backwaters, as shipping anything except high-value items to or from them isn't justified by the high shipping costs.

The only "official" per parsec trade rules is in GURPS Traveller: Far Trader, and even there they knock the per parsec, per dton price down to the point where it's still worth it to ship more than a handful of jumps.

Now speculative trading might have a better time with this system, since the ship is essentially "eating" the freight cost of the spec cargo, but if there isn't a buyer willing to pay top dollar for that spec cargo, then you're better off shipping someone elses freight.

I don't have the math skills or the spreadsheet-fu to do a study of this, but if someone would take a look at the trade numbers, not from the ship standpoint, but from the standpoint of what shipping costs the canon systems could bear, I'm pretty sure that the per parsec model will be vastly higher.

As always, YMMV
John Hamill
jwdh71@yahoo.com

 

[daryen]

Sorry I wasn't clear.

Yes, you are correct that by using the per jump model shipping is cheaper than with the per parsec model.

However, that "cheapness" is an illusion. The reason is that no one will ever provide service better than jump 1, other than pure speculators. No one, outside the military and adventurers, will even install better than jump-1 drives.

So what good is the opportunity to save money on a jump-2 transport when no one is around to actually offer the service? (And even if there is someone, they will either charge "non-traditional" rates, or be out of business soon.)

 

[rancke]

Originally posted by daryen:
So what good is the opportunity to save money on a jump-2 transport when no one is around to actually offer the service? (And even if there is someone, they will either charge "non-traditional" rates, or be out of business soon.)

Daryen is right. If it costs so-and-so much to build a starship and so-and-so much to run it, then transporting stuff on a starship has a minimum cost of so-and-so much, and somebody has to pay it. And all the regulations in the universe can only shift the cost around, not lower it.


Hans

 

[robject]

Daryen++; great postings here.

However, that "cheapness" is an illusion. The reason is that no one will ever provide service better than jump 1, other than pure speculators.

This is not a problem IMTU; I prefer the 'sparser Imperium' model. Of course, such a model depends utterly on subsidized merchants and interstellar corporations.

 

[robject]

Any insterstellar ship might be an exception rather than a rule. Think of how few people in the Traveller universe travel, and how few companies have an interstellar presence.

Also, there are special cases where I prefer a jump-2, -3, etc, vessel: (1) in those instances where there are two 'important' worlds close to each other. Rhylanor-Porozlo, for instance. That's a money-making route. (2) When a group of worlds, which subsidize a ship for transport duty for a long period of time, decide they want to subsidize a jump-2 vessel.

Other than that, well, for the 'average' NPC trader, why bother?

 

[Anthony]

Originally posted by jwdh71:
I understand the argument for the per parsec model, I somewhat agree with it, but the numbers completely destroy canon trade. Take the Terran Brandy example, say you can get a dton of Brandy, the really good stuff, at Terra for Cr100,000. To get it to the Imperial core (for example sake a round number of 100 parsecs), you double the price of it, to go to the Spinward Marches (for example sake another 50 parsecs) you make it 150% additional to its purchase price, or Cr250,000. Better be really good brandy, or really over-hyped at the least.

First problem is that Cr 1,000 per parsec is too high; it might be that on a free/far trader, but main route traders can be cheaper due to more control over cargo loading.

That said, all you've done is increased the price of a single bottle of brandy from about Cr 100 to about Cr 250. You can fit an awful lot of bottles of brandy in a dton.

 

[kaladorn]

And just comparitively, I'm fairly certain a bottle of scotch does not cost $65-100 Cdn to produce (for an average single malt). The lion's share of goods costs are taxes and whatnot. Markups of 100, 200 or 300% from wholesale to retail are not unheralded. So incrementing the wholesale cost by even 100% will have an impact, but it is peanuts compared to later markups.

Bulk trade in low value goods *should* be rarer, unless there is a good justification (import or die... but that justifies high value... such planets better have good alternative revenue sources to afford this.... or they will starve).

You can't have workable trade (I've come to the conclusion, using CT/MT numbers) WITHOUT per parsec costs. And furthermore, given the nature of things, it makes NO sense not to have them from an economic cost perspective. It simply costs more to go farther, full stop.

Here's an excercise for the student: Find out to what degree the price of a low value commodity like grain or coal is increased by shipping it across the major part of the globe by sea or rail. Then find out the impact on shipping a high value good (say the scotch I had in mind).

I think you'll find that a dTon of grain, worth not a lot, shipped with fixed costs for shipping a ton of stuff, gets significantly (on a percentage basis) more expensive. The Scotch, having a higher value per dTon to start with, has its cost increased by a smaller percentage (same absolute increase). Thus, yes, the only things you ship offworld are valuable things.

But this just makes sense.... at least, to me.

 

[R_Kane]

OK, following the assumption that companies would either 1) pay more for speedier deleivery or 2) expect a price discount for slower delivery, I've come up with this model below.

I have not heavily crunched the numbers yet, so modifications will probably be needed.

+++++++++++++
Cost(per dTon) = 500Cr + ((500Cr/parsec) * CF)
CF = 1 - (0.05 * (JR -1))

CF = Cost Factor (adjustment based on delivery time)
JR = # of Jumps required to reach destination
+++++++++++++

If I've figured correctly, all 1 parsec deliveries cost 1000Cr per dTon. The cost of further deliveries will depend on how speedily the merchant ship can get the cargo there.

2 parsecs on a J2 (or higher) ship = 1,500Cr (500+1000*1.00))
2 parsecs on a J1 ship = 1,450Cr (500+(1000*0.95))

3 parsecs pn a J3 (or higher) ship = 2,000Cr (500+(1500*1.00))
3 parsecs on a J2 ship = 1,925Cr (500+(1500*0.95))
3 parsecs on a J1 ship = 1,850Cr (500+(1500*0.90))

etc etc

::EDIT:: I also meant to note that the Cost Factor maxes out at 0.75 (a 25% decrease in the per parsec cost of shipping). ::

Any comments? Any holes in this method?

 

[Anthony]

Well, the proper way to figure it out is to design an optimized trading ship within your ruleset, and then set the cargo rate equal to (cargo capacity)/(net operating costs, including payment on principle) +x%, where X would range from about 25% for prescheduled scheduled bulk transit (where 90% cargo utilization is normal) up to above 100% for more typical far trader activity.

 

[BetterThanLife]

If the model doesn't work for the ships and the people that own them then there will be no trade at all. There will only be trade if the economics make sense for the people doing the carting. There will only be trade along the main in the per jump model then only one parsec at a time. Anyone not on the main is backwater, but for some reason along the Spinward Main is the low tech worlds. the high tech worlds are all well off the main. Go figure.

Originally posted by jwdh71:
Bhoins wrote: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Why not just charge per parsec. The economics then work fine. Beats the hell out of all these assumptions.

Because the per parsec numbers work for the ships, and the free traders who own them, they do not work for trade overall. If you use the per parsec numbers, either nothing gets shipped more than a handful of parsecs away from its point of origin, or you are adding hundreds of percent to the cost of the trade goods. That would mean that the ONLY cargos worth transporting any distance would be luxury goods able to be bought extremely cheaply on their planet of origin, and fetch massive prices anywhere else. Using the per parsec numbers kills most canon trade as well.

As always, YMMV
John Hamill
jwdh71@yahoo.com </font>[/QUOTE]

 

[BetterThanLife]

I believe that you will still wind up short when financing a Far Trader or a Sub-Liner. Remember to break even you have to ship full loads 3 parsecs per month with a Far Trader. Which means you could run about 75% full for 4 parsecs per month to break even as well. In your model to break even you have to run full cargo max jump capacity. You will not make a profit for 40 years. You can't always run full loads, you can't always run full jump capacity. Adventuring being what it is the ship won't stay ahead of its payments. It is an interesting compromise though.

Originally posted by R_Kane:
OK, following the assumption that companies would either 1) pay more for speedier deleivery or 2) expect a price discount for slower delivery, I've come up with this model below.

I have not heavily crunched the numbers yet, so modifications will probably be needed.

+++++++++++++
Cost(per dTon) = 500Cr + ((500Cr/parsec) * CF)
CF = 1 - (0.05 * (JR -1))

CF = Cost Factor (adjustment based on delivery time)
JR = # of Jumps required to reach destination
+++++++++++++

If I've figured correctly, all 1 parsec deliveries cost 1000Cr per dTon. The cost of further deliveries will depend on how speedily the merchant ship can get the cargo there.

2 parsecs on a J2 (or higher) ship = 1,500Cr (500+1000*1.00))
2 parsecs on a J1 ship = 1,450Cr (500+(1000*0.95))

3 parsecs pn a J3 (or higher) ship = 2,000Cr (500+(1500*1.00))
3 parsecs on a J2 ship = 1,925Cr (500+(1500*0.95))
3 parsecs on a J1 ship = 1,850Cr (500+(1500*0.90))

etc etc

::EDIT:: I also meant to note that the Cost Factor maxes out at 0.75 (a 25% decrease in the per parsec cost of shipping). ::

Any comments? Any holes in this method?

 

[Hal]

Another way to look at the shipping costs for CT and anything based on it?

Two merchants each competing to sell their service of transportation. The J-1 Free trader needs to charge 1,000 credits per ton to be financially viable. Cost to ship a consignment of 10 dtons 3 parsecs via a J-1 ship will be:

3 x 1000 x 10 = 30,000 credits.

A Jump 3 ship has two choices. It can either charge the SAME rate as what the J-1 ship does and get it there faster (which is a plus for some shippers) or they can charge LESS than the J-1 ship but only enough that is economically viable for them to stay barely above water.

Why?

Because if one J2 ship exists with a monopoly on shipping, people will have to pay their price. When TWO or more competitors exist, they will try to steal each other's customers - and that entails a price war of sorts.

You can argue the point saying "Ok, the J3 ship can set prices that the others will adhere to - fixing the market IF there is enough work to go around. You'd be right too

When enough people WANT to get into the market of shipping because it is THAT profitable, then yes, they will do so. It is the GLUT of shipping firms and services that will drive the market prices down. Since Traveller's 3rd Imperium is supposed to be a 365,000 day old environment, it is safe to assume that there are a LOT of mature markets there where the prices have been driven down to the bare minimum. Shipping that has become ultra efficient (read that as HUGE bulk carriers) can charge even LESS and remain finacially afloat.

Odd, but that seems to be precisely the environment that FAR TRADER discusses