Making a Jump 2 freighter profitable

[BetterThanLife]

OK after the long discussion on Starship economics I did some number crunching and research to find a way to actually break even with a Far Trader that is bank financed. (Also would work for other Jump-2 cargo vessels. It should work for Jump-3 vessels as well if you can find the same circumstances.) The problem in the spinward marches is that there are only two places to make this work. (And no places to make Jump-3 work.) I still am a firm believer that making a person pay per parsec travelled (both for passage and cargo) is the way to make the economic model work. In T20 you are allowed to carry "Priority cargo" which is charged per Parsec instead of per jump. If you are on a high population world you are likely to find some. If you find a pair of High Pop worlds. (POP 9+) with tech levels that are within a couple points of each other you can probably fill your hold with priority cargo and make a profit. In the Solomani Rim there are numerous places where you can do this. In the Spinward marches there are only 2. Sacnoth-Gram and Mora-Fornice. NOt a fun way to play the game running back and forth between two planets but it is actually possible. There is no place in the Spinward Marches to pull the same trick with a Jump-3 ship. You can of course carry hazardous Cargo or Security Cargo butto ensure you fillthe hold you still have to stick to the High Population worlds. Under this economic model there won't be much trade off the Spinward Main in the Marches and the Sword Worlds would be economically stronger than the Imperium.

Under those circumstances only Jump 1 freighters are economically viable with a loan (no matter what size you are building). The most expensize parts of a ship are the Jump Drive, the Power Plant and the Computer. The higher jump ships not only lose the space that is required by the fuel tanks (In proportion to the size of the ship) and the cost of the Jump Drives, Higher Jump capable computers and larger required Power Plant. I have tried all sorts of bulk carriers, passenger liners and other combination at Jump 2 and higher. As long as they have to charge by jump and not by parsec the Jump 1 ship will be the only ship financed and virtually the only ship plying the space lanes.(And District 268 would definitely be within hte Imperium to keep the Glisten Sector along normal trade lanes.

Anyone find another way to consistently make your finance payments on a Jump-2+ ship on the per jump model in T20? (I'll also accept CT.

 

[far-trader]

Originally posted by Bhoins:

Anyone find another way to consistently make your finance payments on a Jump-2+ ship on the per jump model in T20? (I'll also accept CT.

Yes and no, it depends

In T20 if I have to take the TL11 standard design I agree the way you outlined might be the only way.

Now if I can have a redesigned Far-Trader at TL13+, even a custom model (i.e. no 20% discount) then I think it works.

Heck I think a little tweaking of the standard model can even do it. Swap the 2G maneuver for a 1G maneuver (bonus, you get agility or power for weapons) and drop a TL12 fuel purifier in the recovered volume. Now you can skim (if it has scoops) or just buy unrefined fuel. Just putting a TL11 fuel purifier in your cargo hold (if the ref allows) will be money in the bank even if you have to buy unrefined fuel (assuming no scoops).

Another simple option is to cut back on the crew. The rules allow Combined Positions (ed.1 pg.348) so you can get by with say equal partners as Pilot/Medic and Astrogator/Steward. Each will collect a monthly salary of cr6,000 (saving 25% in salaries). More to the point it opens up two more staterooms for revenue (up to 8 paying high passengers).

And as a final budget stretcher sell that Air/Raft and convert the hanger space to 5 more tons of cargo or 10 more low berths, or some mix of the two (5 tons is just right for a mail contract too if you should be so lucky).

 

[Commander Drax]

I agree, the problem with the far trader, is not the cost, its the cargo space, when I design ships for my players, I often make sure that no space is wasted carrying subordinate craft, such as air/rafts. Apart from giving the crew more potential revenue, it also forces them to get off their ship and hire local transport when adventuring which makes for a more interesting and varied game (I'm sure we've all had the pc group who wouldn't leave their ship or their souped up air/raft/speeder etc, because they wanted to stay safe, behind all that technology and firepower). Also I consider that many far traders would most likely be a pure cargo design, a lot like the Reliant Class Fat Trader, which again raises potential revenue when speculating, (some PC groups just hate carrying passengers). By the same token though I have designed a highly profitable minimal cargo/passenger specialist, (a reefer ship), the bulk of the internal space given over to low berths) which guarantees CR2000 per ton (in T20) as opposed to Cr1000 for freight, though admittedly not so useful when away from those high population worlds.

In reality, though you would find freighters of all sizes and capability in and around the higher tech worlds, as sufficient markets would exist for all, faster ships would make more money by tailoring their services to the priority market (T20) whilst subsidized merchants, free traders and chartered vessels would service the lower pop worlds as after all the government would be paying for this in order to foster economic development in local economies.

I would envisage that your tramp feighters earning more through speculation than freight, would actually develop markets sufficient to cover costs and earn a small profit, when the market reaches critical mass you would probably find the system going corporate, with bigger firms and bigger ships (freightliners) gobbling up all of the trade and squeezing out the independants, pushing them into the frontiers again wheron they would develop new markets and start the cycle again.

This seems in essence similar to the ethos of Imperial expansion. Needless to say life on the frontier would command higher prices than life within the corporate zone as corporate competition is generally ruthless and forces prices down. It is implied in all versions of traveller that the ticket prices for passage and freight are just that common corporate prices charged by large passenger carrying lines. If prices charged above smaller ships were higher then the low cost of 'low berth' would be even more appealing, risky or not.

 

[BetterThanLife]

The problems with speculation is that is is dicey (pun intended) at best. These ships should be inherently profitable. The biggest cost of these ships isn't the crew salary, 5 tons of cargo isn't going to matter in the grand scheme of things (I would always carry an Air/Raft for planetside exploration. Matter of fact I will usually buy a Grav Bike at my first opportunity as a PC because I hate to have to walk or rely on public transportation.)

The major cost is the ship's payment, which amounts to over Cr250000 per month. You also have to set aside 1/12 of that each month so that when your ship is in Maintenance you can still make the payment. Running a Far trader with a Crew of 3. (Pilot/Astrogator, Steward and Medic. (Both doubling as Gunners in a pinch.)) I would rather carry an engineer but one isn't needed as I have less than 35 tons of engine. Even if you carry a Crew of 6 Steward, Medic, 2xgunners and engineer and the Owner-Pilot-Astrogator (Who takes his money out of profits instead of salary.) Your payroll only amounts to Cr11000 per month with an additional Cr1000 set aside for vacation pay. Where you lose with a big crew is in loss of passenger space.

Fuel, landing fees etc is again a drop in the bucket compared to your payment.

For the sake of illustration lets use the standard Far Trader. As long as you stick to the Pop 6 and above you should be able to keep your ship full. We'll use T20 for this illustration. (CT doesn't work as well.

)

Your expenses. (Crew of 3.) Per month (Pilot/Astrogator/Engineer/Owner) (No Salary but Cr1000 per 2 weeks Life Support.)
Steward/Gunner 5000 per month plus 250/month set aside for vacation pay.
Medic/Gunner 4250 per month plus 188/month vacation pay.

Total salary plus life support = 11688 per month (Note that you can shave Cr1000 per month by feeding them as crew instead of officers.)

Maintenance= Cr68138 per year or 5679 per month.

Fuel Unrefined. (As a purification plant takes up 1.5 tons and only costs Cr6800 I think it is worth while.) Many planets won't allow you to skim, (Cuts into their revenue after all.

84 tons per month Cr 8400.

Landing and berthing costs no more than Cr1200 per month.

Starship Payment Cr283,909 per month.
Maintanence Month payment Cr23660 Per month.

Total cost per month to fly ship. Cr334,536

Revenue for standard Cargo and High Passengers and Low Passengers.

7 High Passengers each leg of the month Cr9000 per passenger per jump (10000-1000 life support) Cr 126000 per month.

4 Low Passengers 950 each per jump. Cr 7600 per month

Cargo (I lost 1 ton to purification and made up for the other half ton because the Air/Raft only displaces 4.2 tons.) 65 tons at Cr 1000 per ton per jump. Cr130000 per month.

Total Revenue: Cr263600 per month. Profit per month Cr -70936.

Ooops can't operate at a profit. Now if you take only Priority cargo and always Jump 2 that adds 130000 per month to your ledger. Giving you a profit margin of Cr59064 per month. Only problem is that unless you are jumping between two worlds that are both POP 9+ and within a couple of TL of each other you can't fill your hold with priority cargo. The same with Hazardous or Security Cargo. By the way it doesn't say how big one of these cargos is? Major Cargo is 10-60 tons, Minor cargo is 5-30 tons each incidental cargo 1-6 tons each. If they are the same size as incidental cargo you will be hard pressed to fill your hold.

You will find the math tends to work the same way no matter what the size of the ship. (Though as you get bigger you are less likely to be able to fill it.) And you will have smaller revenue with farther jump ships. A Jump one ship does make a profit. Especially a Free Trader. Your payment and set aside totals Cr231834 you get 90 tons of cargo (If you carry an Air/Raft and purify your fuel. Your fuel costs drops to 42000 per month.)

Total cost = Cr254601 per month
Revenue = Cr313600 per month
Profit = Cr58999 per month.
Without worrying about Priority, Security or Hazardous cargo.

Under the pay per jump then more than Jump 1 starships can't make their bank payments. (Consistently, you might get lucky occasionally with special cargo types or Trade and Speculation charts.) Or you sit on a route that you only visit Pop 9+ worlds at the limit of your jump with close tech levels. (Ie 2 parsecs apart.) Then you are marginal but should make your payment. The problem with this is you are stuck generally between two worlds and never get to go travelling, well after the ship is paid off you can.

In the Spinward Marches you only have two places you can do this with a Far Trader and no places where you can use a Jump-3 ship like this. (And one of the two places is in the Sword Worlds.

)

 

[flykiller]

The problems with speculation is that is is dicey (pun intended) at best.

I sat down one day and just rolled dice for the book 2 trade and commerce tables, in the area of glisten and aki. admin-2 was available. after about two years the ship was completely paid off. there were long dry spells, but speculation works over time ('least by those rules). I'd say that any company willing to loan money for a ship should be willing to throw in an additional 1MCr cash-back to prime the economic pumps for action.

 

[BetterThanLife]

T20 allows you some more choices than CT did. If you have money you can make money but your margins are fairly small and can actually be serious loses. (With one bad roll.) You might end up buying high and selling low. And that mortgage compnay wants their payment anyway. Granted if you have 58 milion lying around why get a loan?

I am sure you can probably even get a discount for cash.

Originally posted by flykiller:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />The problems with speculation is that is is dicey (pun intended) at best.

I sat down one day and just rolled dice for the book 2 trade and commerce tables, in the area of glisten and aki. admin-2 was available. after about two years the ship was completely paid off. there were long dry spells, but speculation works over time ('least by those rules). I'd say that any company willing to loan money for a ship should be willing to throw in an additional 1MCr cash-back to prime the economic pumps for action. </font>[/QUOTE]

 

[Straybow]

/me stirs up trouble

Change commodities to mass tons instead of dtons. Even if you limit the load to 2 tons per dton (instead of 5T/dT) in order to keep within the jump-2 mass limit, your initial calc becomes a 60k/mo profit instead of 70k/mo loss.

 

[BetterThanLife]

If you try to carry twice your allowed mass in cargo, as long as it is a cargo load of Canaries and you can keep half of them flying at all times you are alright.

(I know I paraphrased it from STTNG but it fits.

Originally posted by Straybow:
/me stirs up trouble

Change commodities to mass tons instead of dtons. Even if you limit the load to 2 tons per dton (instead of 5T/dT) in order to keep within the jump-2 mass limit, your initial calc becomes a 60k/mo profit instead of 70k/mo loss.

 

[far-trader]

Originally posted by Bhoins:
If you try to carry twice your allowed mass in cargo, as long as it is a cargo load of Canaries and you can keep half of them flying at all times you are alright.

(I know I paraphrased it from STTNG but it fits.

Well since we're parapharsing

"Oh, yeah, African Canaries, maybe, but not European Canaries... "

 

[mike wightman]

A "cheat" I've just noticed that may help reduce the build cost of your Far Trader under the T20 system. Use a close structure hull and upgrade the streamlining/ avionics ( ). It still works out cheaper than using an already streamlined configuration (over 10 MCr for the SD Far trader)

 

[far-trader]

Hey! That's not a cheat, its the way we build them at Journeyman Design Bureau!

Actually its only lots cheaper if you don't mind the slightly compromised handling in atmosphere, if you want the ship to handle properly you'll have to upgrade the avionics as well. Though it will still be cheaper the savings aren't quite as dramatic, at least on the smaller designs.

That actually reminds me I keep meaning to add to this (or some) thread that maybe its not the economic system (price per Jump regardless of range) that's broke but some of the designs.

The T20 TL11 Far-Trader for example says "that it cannot really compete on a main", so it must have a certain market niche to fill, maybe something like Bhoins pointed out above. And if its not in that niche it won't make its payments.

As for financing and ship rolls in mustering that's always been a "show me a good business plan and we'll set you up" deal (at least imtu). "So you want to make a go of it as an independant Far-Trader, no problem as long as you have found a route that will pay."

The real easy way to fix it of course is to design a "standard" Far-Trader that can work within the rules. And all you need to do there is build it at TL13 or higher and maximize the revenue generators (passengers, both warm and cold).

The other option would be to use some kind of currency exchange rate tied to energy production (i.e. powerplants) so that it makes economic sense to build ships at the lower TLs. After all its long been canon that the Imperium supports builds across all TLs. So it'd be a good idea to have a fair reason for it, like it being cheaper to build a TL11 Far-Trader than a similar performance TL13 Far-Trader. A difference of enough that the first can make as good a go of it as the latter.

 

[mike wightman]

Originally posted by far-trader:
That actually reminds me I keep meaning to add to this (or some) thread that maybe its not the economic system (price per Jump regardless of range) that's broke but some of the designs.

The T20 TL11 Far-Trader for example says "that it cannot really compete on a main", so it must have a certain market niche to fill, maybe something like Bhoins pointed out above. And if its not in that niche it won't make its payments.

Good point. If a planet is 2 parsecs from a main, but has lots of trade potential, then a jump 2 ship becomes desirable since a jump 1 ship must make a deep space jump (which costs in life support overheads, salaries, and the cargo hold wasted with fuel tanks) to get there.
Try also to stick to worlds that are going to give you good passenger numbers.

The other option would be to use some kind of currency exchange rate tied to energy production (i.e. powerplants) so that it makes economic sense to build ships at the lower TLs. After all its long been canon that the Imperium supports builds across all TLs. So it'd be a good idea to have a fair reason for it, like it being cheaper to build a TL11 Far-Trader than a similar performance TL13 Far-Trader. A difference of enough that the first can make as good a go of it as the latter.

Another good idea.

 

[Straybow]

If you try to carry twice your allowed mass in cargo

But there is no "allowed mass" since the actual mass of cargo is never given.

/me ducks behind corner

Use a close structure hull and upgrade the streamlining/ avionics

Why have streamlining at all? With grav drive you can slow down to any arbitrary speed before descending into the atmosphere. You can VTOL at low velocity (a couple hundred km/hr) because you aren't using velocity or lift to achieve orbit or landing. What's it gonna do, add an hour each way to the trip time?

 

[Commander Drax]

All merchant ships should be built as cheaply as possible in order to minimize costs, and if that means using the close structure hull configuration and low grade avionics, then so be it, compromises to atmospheric performance should be the norm when weighed against profit, any starship only spends a fraction of its life in atmosphere in any case, so the gains (lower cost/higher profits) would far out weigh the losses (poorer performance). The Tl-11 Far Trader presented in the main rules, has 2G accelleration, which for a merchant is an unnecessary luxury, though useful if running blockades and smuggling etc.

In short as in earlier posts cut this to 1G, and use the cheapest hull build, and this soon becomes profitable, also Install a fuel processor (you don't need fuel scoops) as ships can simply land in oceans and open fuel cocks to draw in water and begin refining.

I'm thinking that there might even be a market for a long haul jump 3 merchant (unstreamlined/cheapest hull config possible) with a big hold, using local shuttles to load and unload cargo, also taking on unrefined fuel with an onboard processor(when I get two minutes I'll design one)

Also large cargos might be lifted from surface to orbit by tugs (though they wouldnt be able to bring them back down this way)...

Hmmm.... (head scratching)

 

[far-trader]

Cross posted from my post in "Traveller Cargo Standards":

I found the bit I was remembering, in CT of course, and oddly enough the example used is Firearms (aka Guns, maybe that's why my memory twigged). I guess Straybows Cr3,000/ton was a simple typo (should be Cr30,000/ton). For those who don't have access to CT (from Book 2, Trade and Commerce):

When determining the contents of a cargo, the players and referee must be certain to correlate the established price of goods with the cost per ton. For example, the base price of a shotgun is Cr150, while a ton of firearms as trade goods has a base price of Cr30,000. A strict weight extension of the shotgun (3.75 kg per shotgun) would indicate 266 shotguns. Extension should be instead based on price, with weight as a limiting factor. Thus one ton of shotguns would contain 200 guns, at Cr150 each. The extra weight can be considered packing and crates. Similar calculations should be made to keep prices in line on other trade goods.

Some goods (those results 51 - 56, and 66 on the table) are sold individually instead of by the ton. Quantity is expressed in single units; tonnage and base prices must be determined by the players or referee in accordance with established prices and equipment.

note: 51 - 56, and 66 on the table are vehicles and vacc suits

I found this interesting and illuminating. Trade goods clearly ship by weight not volume. So too does freight, at Cr1,000 per ton of weight. It then follows that (originally at least) much or all the ship descriptions of tons must be weight and not volume. The notable exception seeming to be hull volume, specifically called mass displacement and noted as being (roughly) 14 cubic meters per ton.

So it seems in CT at least, contrary to my memory we were always talking (metric) tons (1,000 kg) and any displacement of volume by that weight was a little arbitrary (use roughly 14 cubic meters per ton, calling a ton 1.5m x 3.0m x 3.0m, plus or minus up to 20%

) Suddenly many more of those old deckplans become less problematic for me and my old "1/2 deckplan guidelines" make even more sense.

This gives me another mtu/ytu idea, in relation to the "Making a Jump 2 freighter profitable" thread.

What if, since we're talking weight we allowed the drives to haul one ton of cargo per rated ton of cargo hold per drive rating? A ship with maneuver drives rated 1G would be able to carry 1 ton (weight) of cargo per rated ton of cargo hold volume. A 2G maneuver drive would allow 2 tons (weight) of cargo per rated ton of cargo hold volume.

The same limits would also apply to the Jump drive so a ship rated J1 could only Jump with 1 ton (weight) of cargo per rated ton of hold volume, even if it could carry 2 tons (weight) of cargo per rated ton of hold volume due to a 2G maneuver drive. And vice versa a ship with a 1G maneuver drive and a J2 drive could jump with denser cargo than it could lift on its thrusters, all you have to do is get it there, maybe by shuttle.

So to make ships with bigger drives pay you need to look for denser cargos to make the most of your bigger drives and the players and referee will have to figure out said densities.

For example a ton (weight) of shotguns, being 200 units at 3.75 kg each (and 250kg packing) might rate only half a ton of hold volume.

So drives rated 1 could only carry one lot of shotguns (1 ton weight) per rated ton of hold volume. It would take up half a ton in the hold volume and another half a ton of hold volume would have to stay empty or the ship won't go.

If however the ship had drives rated 2 then it could carry two lots of shotguns (2 tons weight) per rated ton of hold volume. The two lots would take up one ton of hold volume.

In the first case the ship would charge Cr1,000 for shipping it as freight while in the second case the ship gets to charge Cr2,000 for the same hold volume (but at twice the weight its still the standard rate of Cr1,000 per ton weight). Et voila! The Far-Trader makes money without hacking the economics of per jump rates, by returning to the roots of Traveller economics as weight based. At least for cargo. And passenger rates are now closer to the freight rates.

Have I just fixed a major break by invoking and without breaking canon?

Does that make some sense and track or have I slipped a cog?

 

[RainOfSteel]

In the Spinward Marches, what about Porozlo/Rhylanor (Pop-A TL-B) and Rhylanor/Rhylanor (Pop-9 TL-15)? Are their tech levels too far apart?


Overall (still discussing the Spinward Marches, as well), I've got to say, that excellent though these various cost-analyses are, they make the dangerous full-load assumption. Yes, I acknowledge that it is probably a part of the premise being made here that ships aren't profitable even at full-loads. However, those apparently profitable Free-Traders, stuck on their J-1 routes, are going to hover around a few ideal locations just as the Far Traders, because many worlds along the J-1 routes don't have a population large enough to cause the holds and berths to fill up. If they make big expeditions up and down the Spinward Main, they'll go broke.

Realistically speaking, the big, High-Pop worlds are actually going to have a lot of high-grade, competitive travel and shipping options available, established and well known transport companies. Would you ship with Fed-Ex or Joe's Courier service? I think that independents would have to scratch and claw for cargo and passengers on High-Pop worlds just as much as they would anywhere else. Especially since there are going to be many more independents also there, trying to do the same thing.

Personally, I think it might be wise to allow PCs to negotiate for base rates on cargo. I'd think, depending on good Broker, Diplomacy, Admin, or Liaison rolls, that rates may go up to 1500Cr. I've even given thought to setting the base rate at 1500Cr, and then assigning a throw that would raise or lower it by up to 500Cr. Then, extra options can stack on top of this, as desired, from the various editions (Priority, etc.).

Speculative Trading, even with good Broker Skill, is just that, Speculative. In a true speculative market, boom will be accompanied by bust. When PCs face a really big finanical loss from this, that can often trim their liking for it, just as it does for small investors who take a red bath in, say, Wall Street stocks on today's Earth. In short, doing this regularly will run into failures which can drain money as rapidly as a success or two builds it.

Into this rides the GM, with shady deals and offers with extra money. Of course, for starship owners, to make it attractive enough to stop jumping long enough to go adventuring, it's going to have to be in the hundreds of thousands . . .

This goes back to a post I made over on the Traveller Cargo Standards thread. We need two mechanics. One for the PCs on campaign. And another to simulate the background of Trade & Commerce in general among the stars, so that background/worldbuilding junkies like me (and, I assume, many others here) have the common framework with which to build similar economics and trade visions in their interstellar nations, instead of having lots of House Rules (no matter how good they are).

 

[Straybow]

I guess Straybows Cr3,000/ton was a simple typo (should be Cr30,000/ton). For those who don't have access to CT (from Book 2, Trade and Commerce)

No, since MT or TNE says a dT is 10-15 tons, that would make a ton mass of guns only Cr3k, which makes the problem worse.

Yes, that paragraph is the canonical example. 1 ton mass per ton "mass displacement" doesn't fit the dTon standard except for fuel, and doesn't fit pricing for some cargos as I showed in some examples. It also makes no allowance for extreme values on the trade purchase/sale rolls, positing the retail price as the given base value.

Yes, far-trader, in lieu of a more detailed break-down of cargo mass and load limits. 2 tons cargo plus some allowance for structure is still short of the average total ship mass per dTon, but it keeps interstellar trade from being too easy.

Aramis said that TNE ships assume mass of 10-15 tons/dT for cargo, but since ships more typically total 5 tons/dT the upper end is way off-base and 10 tons/dT should be heavily penalized. A cargo container might normally allow 10 tons/dT, but accessibility and stabilization will consume some portion of hold space. Load balancing will also play a role even with compensation.

aragraph: Try this: for loads above 2 tons/dT but less than 5 tons/dT (of hold space) reduce Jump/Maneuver factor by 1 (except Jump-1 is permitted 4 tons/dT). For loads 5 tons/dT or above divide load/dT by 4 (rounding up) for the number of Jump/Maneuver ratings to diminish performance. For each Maneuver rating below 1 gee divide acceleration by 2.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by far-trader:
That actually reminds me I keep meaning to add to this (or some) thread that maybe its not the economic system (price per Jump regardless of range) that's broke but some of the designs.

The T20 TL11 Far-Trader for example says "that it cannot really compete on a main", so it must have a certain market niche to fill, maybe something like Bhoins pointed out above. And if its not in that niche it won't make its payments.

Good point. If a planet is 2 parsecs from a main, but has lots of trade potential, then a jump 2 ship becomes desirable since a jump 1 ship must make a deep space jump (which costs in life support overheads, salaries, and the cargo hold wasted with fuel tanks) to get there.
Try also to stick to worlds that are going to give you good passenger numbers. </font>[/QUOTE]That is great in Theory, only problem is that it still pays no matter the distance of the jump. Just because a Jump-1 freighter can't get there doesn't mean you are allowed to charge more for the trip. It just means the planets that aren't on the main aren't going to see ships. (Well they may see some but since Jump-2 ships take losses whenever they travel, (except Priority Cargo, Security Cargo and Hazardous Cargo) it doesn't help that there isn't any jump one ships that can get there. The stop just isn't profitable so nobody goes there. Now if we charge per parsec, for everything, instead of per jump...... Suddenly the Liner and Far Trader are as good as the Free Trader and the Fat Trader for making money. Trade flows and everyone is happy. (Well perhaps everyone except those people sitting on interdicted worlds.

) The funny thing about it is that in most cases you recoup your 20% down in about the same time frame no matter what the jump potential of your ship is. A Jump-1 Ship that plies the main will make its 20% down in profits about the same time a Far Trader does and about the same time a Liner does. Since the ship costs vary the amount of time does vary depending which rule set you are using. Also remember that if you are travelling about, like a typical adventurer, intead of trying to stick to two Rich, Industrial, Hi-Pop, close to even tech level worlds that are at the limit of your jump, you aren't always going to get your full jump potential out of each leg. If you average 1 jump less than your max per month, (Jump-1 vs Jump-2) you still stay ahead, if you are short 2 in a month then you are behind. IMHO this makes things a bit more interesting in terms of playing the game instead of just trying to cut your costs to nil just to keep your ship. You can shave a little here and a little there but unless you build your freighter at TL-15 instead of 11 you don't save much. And the major costs of a high jump ship are the Powerplant, the Jump Drive and the Computer. The hidden cost is the required size of your fuel tanks.

 

[ChaserCaffey]

Originally posted by far-trader:

The other option would be to use some kind of currency exchange rate tied to energy production (i.e. powerplants) so that it makes economic sense to build ships at the lower TLs. After all its long been canon that the Imperium supports builds across all TLs. So it'd be a good idea to have a fair reason for it, like it being cheaper to build a TL11 Far-Trader than a similar performance TL13 Far-Trader. A difference of enough that the first can make as good a go of it as the latter.

There are actually rules for this in the TNE main book. It basically answers the question "when is a credit not a credit?", and answers "when you're not on a TL-15 world with an active starport". Currencies on worlds with lower TLs or smaller starports are worth substantially less.

Now, the TNE rules say that the bank financing the ship's construction will usually be on the same world, but if the characters are getting financed as part of a muster-out benefit you can imagine them getting financing from a bank at their muster-out station, which might well be (for example) Rhylanor. If that's true, then buying a TL-11 far trader might offer a substantial advantage, since they'll need fewer of those TL-15 loan credits to buy a comparable ship.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by RainOfSteel:
In the Spinward Marches, what about Porozlo/Rhylanor (Pop-A TL-B) and Rhylanor/Rhylanor (Pop-9 TL-15)? Are their tech levels too far apart?

Actually yes they are. That gives you a -4 on the trip from Rhylanor to Porozlo and can result in less than a full load. The reason to keep within one tech level is the -1 won't hurt you on high pop worlds is you are still travelling full of Priority cargo. You go -4 and you might not even be able to load your 6-7 High Passengers, and you certainly won't be able to carry a full load of Priority Cargo.

Overall (still discussing the Spinward Marches, as well), I've got to say, that excellent though these various cost-analyses are, they make the dangerous full-load assumption. Yes, I acknowledge that it is probably a part of the premise being made here that ships aren't profitable even at full-loads. However, those apparently profitable Free-Traders, stuck on their J-1 routes, are going to hover around a few ideal locations just as the Far Traders, because many worlds along the J-1 routes don't have a population large enough to cause the holds and berths to fill up. If they make big expeditions up and down the Spinward Main, they'll go broke.

Which is why I set the parameters as I did. High pop worlds with TL +/-1. Under those circumstances with a Far Trader your ship is generally full. Get to the big ships and it won't be.

<SNIP!>

Into this rides the GM, with shady deals and offers with extra money. Of course, for starship owners, to make it attractive enough to stop jumping long enough to go adventuring, it's going to have to be in the hundreds of thousands . . .

But of course. However my point is the ship needs to be inherently profitable so that the characters are out advneturing to make up short falls or because something caught their eye. Not because the ship can never pay for itself without adventuring. Otherwise characters will tend not to own those types of ships. The party will be in a Scout Ship or travelling as passengers/crew on someone elses ship.

This goes back to a post I made over on the Traveller Cargo Standards thread. We need two mechanics. One for the PCs on campaign. And another to simulate the background of Trade & Commerce in general among the stars, so that background/worldbuilding junkies like me (and, I assume, many others here) have the common framework with which to build similar economics and trade visions in their interstellar nations, instead of having lots of House Rules (no matter how good they are).

The funny part of the whole world building sequence when accompanied with the economic model of price per jump regardless of distance is that many High Tech, High Pop worlds are off the mains and therefore should be backwaters instead of centers of commerce. You can't get to or from Trin or Rhylanor without a Jump-2 ship. But you can't finance a J-2 ship so you can go there. Catch-22. It isn't profitable to run into Rhylanor or Trin so very few trade ships will go there. It is even less profitable to leave. Therefore they can't be Trade Centers or well developed systems because they are cut off from everywhere. That is the inherent problem with the system of charging per jump regardless of distance. It isn't simply that a Jump-2+ ship can't be operated at a profit. It is the implications that follow.

Now Trin and Rhylanor have a substantial economy and can use that to subsidize ships to go in and out of the clusters that they are located in, however if the ships have to be operated at a loss then the economy will be bankrupt eventually. The big reason to offer subsidies is to stimulate trade. Since the ships will be operating at a loss they aren't really stimulating trade, because unless you have a subsidy you can't go there.