Fixing the Economics

[CosmicGamer]

do your costs associated with a stateroom (whether per passenger or per dTon) include a share of the cost for the Pilot and Engineer and fuel and bank payment for the ship?

No, and my posts do indicate this. I hope there was no confusion.

EDIT 4: (#1) For clarification. This "profit" is not accounting for fuel, crew salaries other than steward, and so on. Items that would still need to be paid no matter if the space was used for cargo or staterooms.

These costs are important in determining the overall expenses and profit for the ship. I really didn't want to do any of the number crunching but I either couldn't figure out the math provided regarding other peoples statements about passengers and cargo or there were errors, or the data was not complete, or they just plain wouldn't post it, or the math was never done in the first place. So I took on the task but saved some crunching by ignoring the costs that would be the same in a side by side comparison of cargo vs passenger. For example, the fuel cost for a 200dt ship to jump would not change based on how the interior is configured.

 

[atpollard]

@CosmicGamer:
OK, fair enough.

Then I guess that Aramis point is simply that your passenger costs are not the TOTAL cost per passenger, but rather just how much more a passenger costs compared to cargo (since the cost for cargo without the cost of operating the ship is zero credits). Which you say your post already acknowledges.

Personally, I like CT High Guard and LBB2 Speculative Trade, so all these MgT statistics are of only passing interest to me. That's why I am only following the general flow rather than the minute details. Sorry if my noise to signal ratio suffered because of it.

Arthur

 

[CosmicGamer]

Contradictory rules entry; the ship design rules call for 1 STEWARD, not one level of steward.

You'll have to give a specific page reference for me because the two places I see stewards mentioned in the CRB ship design section do say per level.

I believe it was you that mentioned a beta version? Is that what you are going by and not the final version?

 

[Nerhesi]

Great post guys.

To me it is clear however, that expense has no dependency on "How much I could have made if I did XXX instead of carrying people". From an RL perspective, whether we are discussing Enterprise level expenses or expenses of a small business, an expense is strictly the following:

(a) A cost of doing business regardless of the business I choose to do;
(b) A cost of doing business associated with the specific detailed business decisions I choose to do;

Translated to Traveller:

(a) Cost of simply owning the ship
(b) Cost of carrying X Passengers; OR running X Cargo

I totally understand Aramis' point of view; but I wouldn't consider making a bad business decision an expense. It is a lost opportunity that may result in less revenue, but regarding my bottom-line; I am NOT burdened with additional costs if I do not consider that option. Example: I dont have to directly pay more money, for choosing to run Cargo over passengers or vice versa.

It just may mean I suck and I'm not doing my homework as a trader and it may take me longer to pay off my Ship-mortgage!

Anyways, really enjoying this thread and the math behind it - keep it going

 

[HG_B]

Example: I dont have to directly pay more money, for choosing to run Cargo over passengers or vice versa.

But, you DO have to directly pay more money for a ship fitted to carry passengers over one fitted for cargo only. Which determines what ships would actually be built given the rates...

 

[Nerhesi]

But, you DO have to directly pay more money for a ship fitted to carry passengers over one fitted for cargo only. Which determines what ships would actually be built given the rates...

Of course! So maybe perhaps a sweet spot? Or just commit to one and bite the bullet that in some trips you may not run a profit because you can't switch? Or Generalize? (ick)

 

[HG_B]

Of course! So maybe perhaps a sweet spot? Or just commit to one and bite the bullet that in some trips you may not run a profit because you can't switch? Or Generalize? (ick)

For a J1 Free trader, all cargo is the only option. For J-2, mix maybe. But, you're likely to default either way. The only real way to do it is to toss the passenger & freight rules out the window and start from scratch. Unless IYTU products out on the frontier don't get shipped off planet except in dire circumstances.

 

[atpollard]

I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong. I just don't see, or understand the math behind the summaries and statements.

All the work is in the spreadsheet. LOOK IN THE spreadsheet. There are literally several hundred ship designs. I'm not about to post "all the work" let alone do it all longhand.

OK, confession time.
My first thought was "What Spreadsheet?"
Then I searched every post in the topic for a link that I assumed I must have missed, but found none.

After a few days and another post on another topic, I found it ... in the FILE LIBRARY on the COTI Features pull-down menu (under Spreadsheets, from many years ago).

Since I may not be the only one who would enjoy looking at the raw data for each specific ship size, here is a link to Aramis' spreadsheet:
Calculations of freight cost per ton in MGT


[FYI: it was worth the search.]


@CosmicGamer:
Here you go, access to the breakdown for the designs on lots of ships of different sizes with different Jump numbers. I hope it helps.

 

[CosmicGamer]

Then I searched every post in the topic for a link that I assumed I must have missed, but found none.

I had the same issue.

Since I may not be the only one who would enjoy looking at the raw data for each specific ship size, here is a link to Aramis' spreadsheet:
Calculations of freight cost per ton in MGT

@CosmicGamer:
Here you go, access to the breakdown for the designs on lots of ships of different sizes with different Jump numbers. I hope it helps.

Thanks for the link atpollard.

 

[aramis]

You'll have to give a specific page reference for me because the two places I see stewards mentioned in the CRB ship design section do say per level.

I believe it was you that mentioned a beta version? Is that what you are going by and not the final version?

I'm going by the final. Have two different PDF versions of the final. Typos in one of them.

Note that the Trade rules list skill levels on 160, but do not match the crew requirements (113).

Still, the average merchant steward is skill 1, simply due to the average steward being 1st term as a steward. (there will be far more skill 1 stewards than skill 2, due to attrition.)

You can make more profit by level 2 stewards, but that's not a reliably fillable skill level.

 

[CosmicGamer]

Have two different PDF versions of the final. Typos in one of them.

I'd suggest that the one with typos is not the "final"?

My book is the earlier printing and steward is not even listed on page 113 crew requirements. The initial errata did just say "One per 2 high or 5 middle". That is up to individual interpretation, I guess. "One per" not specified as to one steward or one skill level - but the errata did refer you to page 142 which does clearly indicate per level and that level 0 is a level for these purposes.

The more recent version pdf I have does clearly state that it is per level and not per steward and refers one to page 142.

Both page 160 and 142 are quite clear even in my early printing, so I never had any issues with it. I assumed steward was not required crew - you don't HAVE to carry passengers.

Still, the average merchant steward is skill 1, simply due to the average steward being 1st term as a steward. (there will be far more skill 1 stewards than skill 2, due to attrition.)

You can make more profit by level 2 stewards, but that's not a reliably fillable skill level.

Not sure what you are saying here. Underlined the wordage that is vague or unclear to me.

 

[aramis]

I'd suggest that the one with typos is not the "final"?

My book is the earlier printing and steward is not even listed on page 113 crew requirements. The initial errata did just say "One per 2 high or 5 middle". That is up to individual interpretation, I guess. "One per" not specified as to one steward or one skill level - but the errata did refer you to page 142 which does clearly indicate per level and that level 0 is a level for these purposes.

The more recent version pdf I have does clearly state that it is per level and not per steward and refers one to page 142.

Both page 160 and 142 are quite clear even in my early printing, so I never had any issues with it. I assumed steward was not required crew - you don't HAVE to carry passengers.Not sure what you are saying here. Underlined the wordage that is vague or unclear to me.

You are again, DEAD WRONG.

Both were "final" — mongoose released the book, then released a second edition a few months later. The beta is unmistakably different. No art, power points system, and flat prices per parsec...

They just decided to ignore a bunch of open beta input. It really soured me on Mongoose as a company - their later efforts confirmed that opinion.

 

[CosmicGamer]

I'd suggest that the one with typos is not the "final"?

You are again, DEAD WRONG.

Both were "final" — mongoose released the book, then released a second edition a few months later. The beta is unmistakably different. No art, power points system, and flat prices per parsec...

They just decided to ignore a bunch of open beta input. It really soured me on Mongoose as a company - their later efforts confirmed that opinion.

My English is not the greatest. I did put final in quotes because I realize words often can have different meaning than I think and I was perceiving we were not thinking the same thing. I just looked it up and the dictionary says

1. pertaining to or coming at the end; last in place, order, or time: the final meeting of the year.

if

I'm going by the final. Have two different PDF versions of the final. Typos in one of them.

one came last, no? Sorry if you didn't understand me. Hope I've cleared up any confusion.

 

[atpollard]

Still, the average merchant steward is skill 1, simply due to the average steward being 1st term as a steward. (there will be far more skill 1 stewards than skill 2, due to attrition.)

You can make more profit by level 2 stewards, but that's not a reliably fillable skill level.

Not sure what you are saying here. Underlined the wordage that is vague or unclear to me.

"average steward"
Of all the stewards in the Traveller Universe, most will be skill-1.
So most of the stewards that you meet on a starship will be skill-1.

due to attrition
On a typical passenger ship, Steward is one of the lowest paying jobs and one of the easiest skills to learn (there are many more people who can serve a meal than there are people who can fly a starship). So a merchant character is likely to start out as a steward for his first term, but as soon as he has two useful skills (say Steward-1 and Engineer-1), he is more likely to transfer to a higher paying Engineer job than choose to continue working as a Steward. So most of the Stewards you meet, are likely first term (18-21 years old) and studying at night to get a better job.
"Attrition" means that most stewards will move on to do something else so that multi-term stewards with Steward-2+ will be rare.

reliably fillable
Since Steward-2+ is a rare skill, a ship may or may not be able to find someone with Steward-2 to hire. A ship with twenty stewards is more likely to attract Steward-2+ to be the boss over many lower stewards (perhaps training Steward-0 characters to be Steward-1). This means that it is unwise to design a free trader to require Steward-2 to fill its passenger rooms, since it may not be able to find someone with high skill to fill the position.
Even if it finds someone, a larger ship will quickly hire them away for a better paying position and a chance to move up into some administration position.

I am not agreeing with all of this ... I never gave it enough thought ... I was just explaining Aramis point in the underlined quote.

 

[aramis]

You missed the other elements of "attrition" - a small portion of stewards die or are crippled out of work prior to making steward-2, and a goodly number wash out for various other reasons (failed reenlistment) before making steward level 2.

Mechanically, a steward level 2 without some higher paying shipboard skill is pretty rare.

 

[CosmicGamer]

"average steward"
Of all the stewards in the Traveller Universe, most will be skill-1.
So most of the stewards that you meet on a starship will be skill-1.

Thank you for the explanation. This explains why I didn't understand what was being said at first. I was thinking the comments were something based on the rules and not personal judgement/logic - which from an early age people always commented that I didn't think like the average person. "That's Cosmic logic." was something often said. I substituted Cosmic for my RL first name.

My comments are not intended to be adversarial, people have different opinions and one persons logic may not match with anothers because the world is not black and white. I believe multiple YTU's can all follow the OTU and still be quite different.

due to attrition
On a typical passenger ship, Steward is one of the lowest paying jobs and one of the easiest skills to learn (there are many more people who can serve a meal than there are people who can fly a starship). So a merchant character is likely to start out as a steward for his first term, but as soon as he has two useful skills (say Steward-1 and Engineer-1), he is more likely to transfer to a higher paying Engineer job than choose to continue working as a Steward. So most of the Stewards you meet, are likely first term (18-21 years old) and studying at night to get a better job.
"Attrition" means that most stewards will move on to do something else so that multi-term stewards with Steward-2+ will be rare.

I can see what your getting at, but I don't universally agree.

My first reason is how does this person who starts out as a steward get the training to become a Engineer? If they had the intellect, desire, and/or resources, why start as a steward?

Next, when did employees start dictating to employers "I want to be an engineer instead of a steward". I know lots of skilled tech people from before the tech and economy downturn that had to take jobs they were not trained for in sales and food services. The opposite, I believe, of what is being suggested.
======
I'm still a little confused as to the purpose of the post. Was it to highlight what was perceived as a problem with the rules based mechanic of perhaps needing a level 2 steward?

First, using the logic, wouldn't multiple merchant crew members have moved up to Engineer and Pilot by being stewards first. Why can't a crew with "secondary" skill as stewards be performing multiple functions?

Second, using the rules, wouldn't all (unless they had another career first) merchant career characters have at least steward 0? Why can't all the crew pitch in and help out with stewarding duties? The Pilot keeping a passenger entertained with a game of chess. The engineer serving up some hooch he made.

 

[HG_B]

Why can't all the crew pitch in and help out with stewarding duties? The Pilot keeping a passenger entertained with a game of chess. The engineer serving up some hooch he made.

If that is the level of service, it is NOT High Passage. So, it doesn't really matter as you can only handle Mid passage clients. No one, in their right mind, is going to pay twice as much to play chess or drink some "hooch" brewed up in the engine room. Unless maybe a mid-passage includes daily floggings after a Captain's Mast...

 

[aramis]

Doing two jobs at once, you count as 1 level less skilled in both. In other words, to be a competent engineer and a competent steward, you have to be level 2 in each... which guarantees you're at least a second term character with a charmed existence, or more likely, a 4th or 5th term character.

 

[rancke]

If that is the level of service, it is NOT High Passage. So, it doesn't really matter as you can only handle Mid passage clients. No one, in their right mind, is going to pay twice as much to play chess or drink some "hooch" brewed up in the engine room. Unless maybe a mid-passage includes daily floggings after a Captain's Mast...

No one is going to pay High Passage to travel on a free trader for the service anyway. The only way someone who is used to travelling by high passage would travel by free trader is if he has some ulterior motive. Perhaps the free trader is the only one going in the direction the passenger wants to go; perhaps he wants to avoid leaving behind records of his travel; perhaps theres some other reason. The bottom line is, though, that the presence or absence of the proper level of personal service isn't going to affect his decision to travel by that free trader one way or the other. (Especially since the food he'll get will be the same as that of the medium passengers).

So when Richie McRichguy shows up at the entry hatchway of the Slovenly Bastard, he'll either pay for a mid passage or he'll be told that the ship is full up already, in which case he'll whip out a High Passage (or Priority Passage Voucher as I call it) and get his passage anyway.


Hans

 

[CosmicGamer]

Doing two jobs at once, you count as 1 level less skilled in both. In other words, to be a competent engineer and a competent steward, you have to be level 2 in each... which guarantees you're at least a second term character with a charmed existence, or more likely, a 4th or 5th term character.

I thought I read previously somewhere about performing double duty and what the pay was for such but after a quick look in the areas I thought it might be I could not find it in the rules.

Where is this information regarding doing two jobs?