Making a Jump 2 freighter profitable

[Anthony]

The only remotely coherent trade system which has been published for Traveller is GURPS Traveller: Far Trader, and, well, it represents a complete overhaul of the trade rules. Notably, it does use a (modified) per parsec cost model.

I also don't especially recommend using it, or really any trade system. A sensible trade system means that operating a free trader is stunningly boring, and is about as PC friendly as being crew on a modern cargo plane.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

And, I should specify that it should be cheaper to go J2 than 2 J1s, but it should be more expensive to go J2 than J1 (for the client, that is).

 

[robject]

Originally posted by daryen:

While it may be a personal problem, I disagree with giving PCs and NPCs totally different rules.

...if NPCs can make the economics of a J2 (or J3) tramp trader work, but a PC can't, then the PCs are morons. And if the PCs can milk a "money run" purpetually, but NPCs can't ever "find" it, then the NPCs are morons. Having a system that does both at the same time boggles the mind.

I understand what you mean. The word I think of when reading the above is "consistency", or lack thereof.

"Hey, we can't make money here. How can they?"
(Actually, that sounds eerily similar to the "impossible UWP problem", doesn't it?)

I haven't sorted out all the implications -- it doesn't sink in that deeply for me. Perhaps part of the problem is that CT didn't develop concepts very far, and so we run up against its limitations quickly.

Granted that NPC ships have to play by the same Universal Rules of Economics that players play in, then I suppose they'll be on routes that will support them: pairs (or sets) of important worlds, complementary worlds, or subsidized routes?

Ah, then you worry about traders who show up on the random encounter list. Well, what more can I add?

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Fritz88:
I would actually not go with a per parsec model, but an inverse per week model. As daryen says, time is money. A J2 making a J4 run (with a midway refuel or some such) should be better (for the client) than 6 J1s around the long way. At least, if time IS money for him. There are some things that nobody will care to send the shorter route, but plenty of things that WILL get sent that way.

Maybe the definition of Priority cargo is broken? (After all, when this was written, FedEx was just becoming big. Now, it is common to send everything except large, heavy items by 2-day or overnight.)

Actually T20 is the first time I encountered Priority Cargo. Granted I don't have LBB7 but I do have MT and it isn't there. By the time T20 was published every major shipper has an overnight for a premium fee. By the time MT was published FedEx was competeing with Airborne, UPS, USPS and a couple of other companies. (ANd they were running the "when it absolutely positively has to get their over night" commercials.)

In the per parsec travelled model, the higher jump ships get to charge at worst the same amount as the J1 ships and if they can "cut the corner" it would be cheaper to go from point A to point C on a J2+ ship than a J1 ship. Forget about the savings in time.

For example going from EFATE to REGINA. On a J1 ship or series of ships the trip takes just over 6 weeks to 12 weeks. Taking the same trip on a J2 ship or a series of J2 ships takes 3-6 weeks. On a J3 -J5 ship it takes 2-3 weeks and on a J6 ship one week. According to the per jump model the trip costs the most if you take the 6-12 weeks to get there. It costs the least on a J6 courier. I personally wouldn't mind that, if the J2+ ships were inherently capable of making their overhead. Unfortunately they are not. The faster ships need to charge more to make a profit. Coincidentally the profit margin becomes about equal between the J1, J2 and J3 ships if you get the most out of your jump drive and charge per parsec. (And all of these choices become economically viable at the same time.)

Under the per parsec model you are still going to run into problems. You are still going to have situations where you might have to deadhead. Situations where you have to accept a less than ethical solution to your problems, and/or that can be used as an adventuring hook. But a ship that can never, under normal merchant proceedures, make its overhead, isn't a merchant ship it would only get built as a military vessel or a yacht, where profit margin no longer matters.

If I had a ship that consistently cost more to operate than it could generate then I would ditch the ship and adventure without owning a ship. At that point the ship becomes a liability not an asset.

 

[far-trader]

I don't think Eris Reddoch will mind my sharing a formula he posted elsewhere recently. It's CT based but might give some ideas of another way to tackle this...

Originally posted by erisred (some edits):

A game mechanic to handle this might be to set a price something like...

Shipping Cost = Cr500 + (Cr1,000 (number of parsecs shipped) - (Cr500 (number of weeks for delivery)

For example: A cargo on System A needs to be shipped 4 parsecs to System B.

> Ship 1: (J1) 500 + (1,000 * 4) - (500 * 4) = 2,500 cr per dton

> Ship 2: (J2) 500 + (1,000 * 4) - (500 * 2) = 3,500 cr per dton

> Ship 3: (J4) 500 + (1,000 * 4) - (500 * 1) = 4,000 cr per dton

...to which I replied (some edits):

Well speaking for myself I like this suggestion, as long as it's done as you said per time actually required to make the delivery. I only mention it because your examples all presume the shipper does nothing but jump. The J1 ship could be adding as much as 3 weeks for intermediate stops, dropping his payment to Cr1,000 per ton.

And if the J1 ship were too tardy, say needing repairs along the way, and it takes him 9 weeks total to get there he's going to get zip. Any longer and he'll pay a penalty. There might be a limit on the penalty, say the value of the cargo plus the shipping rate for the replacement.

No point just spacing it after 9 weeks either, that'll just earn you an immediate fine for the value plus shipping as well as word that you're not a reliable shipper.

...and eris answered (some edits):

Doing it by actual time, rather than number of jumps is even better!

It was my first thought... and I think this would be the right way to go. It fits with the real world where there are often bonuses for fast deliveries, and penalties for slow deliveries of freight.

Eris

 

[Fritz_Brown]

I like that layout, far-trader. It nicely gets to the idea that a J2 shouldn't just be double a J1, but there is a premium for getting it there faster.

FedEx/UPS/Airborne/DHL/etc. all charge you by "zone" - essentially how far you are shipping the product. (And, how inaccessible the destination is - it cost a bundle to ship something from Thailand to Guam if you weren't willing to wait forever.) Of course, to reinforce Bhoins critique of my idea, US Postal Service will send your package just about anywhere (in the US) in two nights, for a set price. (Of course, they are still not a private company - subsidized merchants, anyone?)

 

[daryen]

For what it is worth, the GT:Far Trader system is purely per-parsec. So, in CT terms, it would look like this:

FREIGHT
Cr900/dton/parsec if either world is hi-pop (9+).
Cr1000/dton/parsec if not.

PASSENGERS
High: KCr10/passenger/parsec
Middle: KCr8/passenger/parsec
Low: KCr1/passenger/parsec

The qualification for the lower freight cost is simplified, but works.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Fritz88:
I like that layout, far-trader. It nicely gets to the idea that a J2 shouldn't just be double a J1, but there is a premium for getting it there faster.

FedEx/UPS/Airborne/DHL/etc. all charge you by "zone" - essentially how far you are shipping the product. (And, how inaccessible the destination is - it cost a bundle to ship something from Thailand to Guam if you weren't willing to wait forever.) Of course, to reinforce Bhoins critique of my idea, US Postal Service will send your package just about anywhere (in the US) in two nights, for a set price. (Of course, they are still not a private company - subsidized merchants, anyone?)

The USPS will also ship anywhere in the US in one night, well almost anywhere, for a flat rate. (Even delivering on Sundays and Christmas.) Only the weight of the package matters. There probably should be a premium for speed, however in CT, MT and T20, you don't need it, in most cases to make the standard designs work. SImply charging per parsec does the trick. And flat rates keeps the Imperium trading without barriers to trade. (Which is what the Imperium is about.) Unfortunately the rate per jump is a barrier to trade so I can't see the Imperium using it. (Because it makes many places unreachable.) Further the per parsec model, again in CT, MT and T20, keeps the profit margins about the same so you aren't eliminating the Jump1 ships or making trade along the main less profitable.

It isn't about the gorss profits it is about the margin. If you spend more then you should make more. You might get economies of scale, but given the charts that currently exist, Bulk Freighters are impractical and the Type-M (Liner) needs a high jump number so it can stick to the well populated systems and better quality starports so it can remain full. Once you get into the 1Kton+ merchants it becomes more difficult to keep them full.

 

[BetterThanLife]

So no takers on showing me how T20 Spec trade is the way to make payments on a Far Trader? And all these people were screaming, because the system was designed to work using spec trade, is why you should only need to charge per jump.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Anthony:
The only remotely coherent trade system which has been published for Traveller is GURPS Traveller: Far Trader, and, well, it represents a complete overhaul of the trade rules. Notably, it does use a (modified) per parsec cost model.

I also don't especially recommend using it, or really any trade system. A sensible trade system means that operating a free trader is stunningly boring, and is about as PC friendly as being crew on a modern cargo plane.

But operating a free trader or a far trader, in and of itself should be fairly boring, safe and profitable. Well the basic operations should be. But that is why the game is generally played on the fringes of civilized space. If it wasn't inherently profitable there wouldn't be mortgages for starships. (Banks don't gamble that much.) Note you can't get a ship mortgage in Vargr space. And I'll bet if you get caught spending serious time in Vargr space the bank will probably call your loan, as it is an unacceptable risk.

Funny how most of Traveller is played in a war zone. That brings up the adventuring possibilities. But the adventure hook shouldn't always be, "Damn it, we are short for the mortgage payment again, how is this supposed to work?" More like "Damn it, if it weren't for that Corsair we could have made the payment, now we have to find another source of income." Or "that stupid, used TLG powerplant is on the fritz again, how are we going to pay to fix that plus make the payment." Or "But Officer, what do you mean the machine parts we were carrying for Grrrvak, an honest business vargr, were actually concealing enough small arms to fight the Solomani Rim War?" Or the classic "We need to get to <Insert Name of system here> but only if it is on a fast ship, no questions asked and we would prefer to avoid any Imperial entanglements."

Just because the ship is supposed to work, safely and profitably, doesn't mean it actually will. Just because the space lanes are supposed to be safe doesn't mean the Players shouldn't arm their ships either.

 

[Anthony]

My recommended merchant system is this:

A sensibly designed and operated merchant ship makes a modest profit (10-20% over operating costs). As long as a ship is operating as a sensible merchant, the GM should ignore the details of how it works. He should be aware that a ship operating as a sensible merchant on an established route jumps three times a month, and is probably deathly dull; one operating on a speculative route probably jumps twice and is more likely to have adventures in the process.

If the PCs decide to go haring off on some peculiar wild goose chase, the GM should start keeping track of finances. Ships engaged in 'adventuring' should normally be assumed to make no revenue; ships which are trying to mix trading with their adventuring should be assumed to make about half normal revenue, which will normally cause losing money quite fast (better hope that adventure is profitable).

If one assumes that a far trader is a sensible design, revenue for small J2 trade ships should be about Cr 4,000 per dton of cargo and passenger space; I don't happen to know the stats for a free trader, but it should probably be around Cr 2,400 per dton.

On a speculative route, jumping twice per month with 80% cargo fill, the J2 ship should charge about Cr 2,500 per dton cargo per jump. The J1 ship should charge about Cr 1,500. On main routes, both numbers drop by about a third.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

Oh man, Anthony, if you don't count every Cr, then we can't have fun discussions like this!

 

[BetterThanLife]

More wand waving and silly incantations. Is this a "Hard Science" SFRPG or Harry Potter goes to Space?

 

[mike wightman]

Ahem,
grav plates
null grav modules
inertial dampers
reactionless thrusters
jump drive
plasma guns
fusion guns
antimatter power plants
nuclear dampers
meson guns
meson screens
black globes
superdense armour
bonded superdense armour
alien races
Virus
psionics
etc.

Enough magic to make H.Potter look reasonable

One more - to have a Far Trader break even with Traveller economics is Clerical magic

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
Ahem,
grav plates
null grav modules
inertial dampers
reactionless thrusters
jump drive
plasma guns
fusion guns
antimatter power plants
nuclear dampers
meson guns
meson screens
black globes
superdense armour
bonded superdense armour
alien races
Virus
psionics
etc.

Enough magic to make H.Potter look reasonable

One more - to have a Far Trader break even with Traveller economics is Clerical magic

Hey now some of those things are, if not real right this second definitely probable.

Reactionless thrusters. Well the Thrusters in Traveller aren't exactly reactionless, they just don't have an exhaust. They are obviously reacting with something. As for exhaustless thrusters I can think of a couple right now. Battery operated propeller aircraft. And Battery operated car. The MT description of Thruster Plates, on the other hand is a bit far fetched.

Jump drive? Jump drive defines the Traveller Universe and is the basis for the game. Can't leave it out. (Besides there is ample evidence that Einstein didn't quite go far enough. C may not actually be teh speed limit.

)

An economical Fusion plant? Fusion plants have to be able to work, after all we have one we can all see every day. Fusion plants do work, but so far they take in more energy than they put out. Unless you count the short duration Fusion Plants that appear to work extremely well (H-Bombs).

Plasma and Fusion Guns? Well we have to solve the Fusion generator problems first for Fusion gun but I seem to remember reading about Natick or DARPA working on a prototype Plasma Gun. Part of the SDI project. Man portable, well that is another matter.

Anti-Matter powerplants? Well the problem isn't the anti-matter it is containg it. There are some interesting new theories on that.

Alien Races? Well now that one is virtually statistically impossible not to have Alien races out there. (Aliens here, now that is an entirely different matter.)

Superdense armor? What else would you call what they have on the Newest version of the M-1 Tank. It is a composite armor which includes Depleted Uranium. (Which is why virtually no weapon currently in existance can penetrate it.)

Now Artificial Gravity, Contra Gravity (2 sides of the same coin), Inertial dampers (Probably along the same lines of physics.), and Psionics may not now nor ever in the future exist, but they are fairly common within Science Fiction.

Black Globes, Nuclear Dampers, Meson Screens, Meson Guns, White Globes, might never exist. But the theoretical physics isn't all that bad. Implementation would be the cast iron bitch of these.

Something as simple as Capitalist economics should work.

 

[jatay3]

Maybe because I am more interested in human sciences then natural sciences, but I find social unrealism more irritataing then natural. I don't mind jump space, but the trading sure better look something like trading even though the details need not be gone over with a fine tooth comb.
Also when we get into that level of science we are getting into areas where lines become blured. Maybe present day scientists say that faster-than-light is impossible but "new discoveries" can be made or imagined.
Also I tend to feel that human nature(in the collective rather than individual sense) is only so variable, wheras natural science is unpredictable. Actually one of the things I like about SciFi is simply trying out old principles in new environments.

 

[jatay3]

Also I tend to feel that human nature(in the collective rather than individual sense) is only so variable, wheras natural science is unpredictable. Actually one of the things I like about SciFi is simply trying out old principles in new environments.
-----------------------------------
That doesn't mean that nature doesn't follow laws, but that I think we know more about the laws that govern collective human nature(individual human nature is another matter:there is more there than is drempt of by your shrinks) than about the universe. Scientists who study that sort of thing would do well to remember that they are much like those who try to guess what a mosaic looks like by studying a piece of glass.
Thus I am not annoyed by faster-than-light: it has not been proved impossible. However I do get annoyed when on Star Trek they claim that they have eliminated, war, poverty, tyranny, crime, bigotry, strife, and the curse of sin in general from earth in two generations because I know perfectly well that that is simply impossible.

 

[jatay3]

Scientists who study that sort of thing would do well to remember that they are much like those who try to guess what a mosaic looks like by studying a piece of glass.
---------------------------
This is not to insult scientists except for those who get arrogant in their knowledge and thus need to have their balloons popped for the sake of science itself as much as for their own souls and the peace of mind of their neighbors. Such types do exist in science as well as in other places.
But anyway this is not to insult scientists. The fact that they know little of all their is to know is not a call to give up. It is rather an inspiration and a reminder that their are more pots of gold at the end of the rainbow of knowledge, waiting to be found by the intrepid.

 

[BetterThanLife]

OK back to the Far Trader Issue. I rolled up a Merchant in T20 last night. SInce I had today off, I spent a little time with the spec trade charts a set of dice and my Spinward Marches map and stats. He had a brand new Far Trader. (Substituted for the Free Trader because I wanted to see this work.) He mustered out with KCr190 and spent less than KCr20 on essentials, which is significantly less than I would normally spend and quite a bit less than any Player I have ever seen start a character out with.

(All the goodies look so tempting.)

I figured KCr170 should be enough for seed capital. After 4 attemtps here is where he wound up. The longest the seed capital lasted was 4 months. Twice it lasted 3 months in the shortest attmept it only lasted 2 months. After the periods listed there was no money and all of the expenses were not met. I was never forced to buy high and sell low. I was never forced to hold a load because I couldn't unload it and I always found a load. I never had to travel empty and mostly was able to travel absolutely full.

 

[kaladorn]

Interesting. It would be interesting to do this for the various flavours of era/trade rules, with some standardized ship designs, just to see how they perform relatively speaking. I bet *all* of them are money losing propositions.