Trader sizes
- Thread starter whartung
- Start date
pendragonman
Absent Friends Margrave
I suppose the general idea of Traveller implies that the costs of shipping something a week thru space, including jump space, is supposed to be as relatively inexpensive as shipping something pan Pacific is today.
I suspect your railroad analogy is ok, so far as it goes. In the 19th century, were there trains in lower Africa? Absolutely. Where they produced locally, no. Where they produced only a week or two away? Nope. This demonstrates the core reason behind trade between places with a tech level difference of probably more than one (19th century lower Africa average TL vs the 19th century European TL is likely more than one).
Now, lets take a look at your rice analogy. SOL III pop level today is about a 9. When we start bulk transport of rice from Alpha Centauri my guess is that our pop digit will likely be A nearing B. So it is likely that where we can grow rice today will be housing then. Since populations require bread and circuses to be minimally passive, bringing in bulk food like rice would be important.
Looking at ship designs, I'm starting to think a more optimum "small frieghter" is a 500 or 600 ton ship. Those usually have the room to have a good size small craft plus still have ~200 tons of cargo and 10 Passenger Staterooms. MgT has a 500 Ton RX Trader(variant of a Fat Trader) that looks like it could be fairly profitable. I'm thinking you'd see more of the 500 to 600 ton ships on the "side routes" plying trade off of the main routes rather than 200 tons small traders.
Short distance: Luxury trade, trade caused by comparative advantage, and trade caused by lower costs in the neighboring system than in this one.
Long distances: Luxury trade and trade caused by comparative advantage.
Really long distances: Luxury trade.
Hans
Interesting. I'm far from being an expert on financing, so I'm not about to reject your argument out of hand, but I do have some things that makes me wonder.
How often are small business loans made without collateral?
A Free Trader costs 37 million credits from new, which means the bank has to plunk down 29.6 million credits. Are unsecured small business loans usually around 100 million dollars?
What happens to the bank's profits if the owner decides to skip? How much does it cost to get it back, and what is the risk of not getting it back at all?
Hans
Whartung is right in a way, the models can become as complex as one wishes them to be, so much so that people would lose interest.
Sure. I was just pointing out that his 800 lb. gorilla is really a 1 oz. mouse.
A small craft is a cost (maintenance + lost cargo tonnage). It really doesn't add to profit. Probably why real world freighters don't have anything other than law required lifeboats.
In the world of finance, that IS considered a secured loan. It is secured against the ship (which is insured). Of course that is possible because of the 20% down.
One time, while researching idea for a Fantasy RPG I came across a really good chart/data set that showed a Timeline of how much a single farmer could produce as Ag Tech advanced. So, basically for each world's basic needs, depending on the TL, there's going to be a percentage of the population to serve those needs. And then there's environmental factors to deal with. So basically, to replicate the ease/availability of food products and other basic consumables needed for a planet's population to thrive(not just survive) you need the right conditions very similar to Earth's along with the right amount of Population to provide those needs. So, without the right amount of Population and the right Environment providing basic living needs of the planet's population, then there's obviously going to be a import market for whatever the planet can't provide. That would lead to planetary specialization, kinda like how some nations specialize in different markets now. Thus the need for Interstellar Trade. 
True to a point, but with scoops a Small Craft cuts down on how much time you need to scoop fuel from a GG, and thus time saved=money saved. Also, having a small craft gives you operational options beyond just cost savings. Things like being able to send out a party for any non-trade expedition. Or another thing to think of is to use the small craft to head to a Starport ahead while the main craft is scooping fuel, that way you get a day gained to have your ship's broker/faceman to start lining up deals and/or employment opportunities.
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
I use something similar, but not based on a Tech Level equals population exponent.
Tech Level 4, circa 1800 to 1900, I think that the minimum population for a full spectrum of production is in the millions, using England in the Industrial Revolution as a base.
Tech Level 5, circa 1900 to 1945, I use a minimum population of the tens of millions. That maybe can support Tech Level 6 too.
Any higher Tech Level requires a population in the hundreds of millions, and a population in the billions on a reasonably Earth-like can support any Tech Level.
A Balkanize world is treated a bit differently, as then you have to go with the various population levels of each nation. For that, a copy of the CIA World Factbook comes in handy. Another factor is how diffuse is the population? Several million people spread out over an area the size of the US or Australia has a lot lower production capability than a similar size population concentrated on say the island of Great Britain.
The one big item in interstellar trade that is a bit iffy is bulk food. For that to be economical it will require some form of transportation subsidy.
As HG_b succinctly put it - the starship is the collateral - it is the bank's until the mortgage is paid for.
As an asset that retains value, no other collateral is needed - and the 20% down not only effectively feeds back into the bank (yard financing and related industries), but is part of the banks 'insurance' in its investment - as the bank, not the shipyard, owns the mortgage on the asset and 100% of its value on default... the 20% goes to the yard (its buffer) not the bank - directly.
As outlined for MTU, the bank's recovery costs are negligible - since authorities take on responsibility for tracking down and seizing stolen (defaulted) ships.
Of course, there is risk that the ship will never be recovered, just as it could be destroyed, etc. The overall costs of this are built into the 'profit' model.
As mentioned IMTU - the bank would typical pass on losses to the yard. The bank would keep the asset on its books for full value till such time - probably quite long - that it is written off... and recovery becomes an issue for yard (who effectively has been forced to 'buy-back' the ship) and underwriters. For this reason, IMTU, skip-tracers are employed by agents of shipyards and third party investors - not banks. This means they have no government sanction - they walk a fine line between legal and illegal in most jurisdictions. Hence, they can be apprehended for B&E, stalking, etc. if they can't prove the identity of the ship and true ship's owner.
Note: not talking about a 'small business loan' for operating expenses, speculative trade and the like - there the risks to the bank would mean the bank would require more assurances (and probably tangible collateral) and likely demand higher interest.
The time to scoop isn't enough to have this as a, time = Cr. consideration that gets you ahead of the multi-million Cr you paid for the small craft.
Well yes, I'm talking Free Trader financial consideration only. not adventuring stuff.
Or another thing to think of is to use the small craft to head to a Starport ahead while the main craft is scooping fuel, that way you get a day gained to have your ship's broker/faceman to start lining up deals and/or employment opportunities.
No. Just fill up with unrefined at the star port. No time gained.
Enoki
SOC-14 1K
That is why I see the majority of these ships being company owned and leased to responsible parties who crew them on a lease. The company owns the ship but the leasor (Captain) is operating it such that the company gets a payment (for mega corporations they could take such payments on a coupon system anywhere they have offices) for the depreciation and a small profit while the leasor takes all the risk of operation.
Sort of a franchise system. This gets smaller ships out for working marginal routes and speculation that the corporation can move in on if it proves valuable enough. The cost is lower than outright ownership and the leasor has the backing of the corporation in terms of help with operating, maintenance (a break on price if the operator uses their facilities), and maybe cheaper fuel where they have that available.
The corporation is taking only a small overall risk, the costs are covered by the operator, and they make a small profit for very little effort.
Sort of a merchant version of the Imperial Scout Service if you will.
I'll regret posting this because you won't be able to understand it. Others reading this post will, however, and that's the important thing.
Traveller has always used history as an analogy. Traveller's designers were wargamers first and foremost. Being wargamers, those designers were also historians, either by degree or self taught. Being good designers, they used history as an analogy rather than as a blueprint or, in your case, a mental straightjacket.
Traveller looks at history to use the broad underlying patterns and not to mindlessly imitate the niggling details. Traveller than applies those underlying patterns to the "fictional specifics" of the far future.
When Traveller looks at a forest, it's to understand the effects of geology, water supply, temperature, weather, elevation, and other conditions on that forest. Traveller then applies that understanding to create a different forest from different conditions. What Traveller doesn't do is look at a forest in order to copy the twigs.
Traveller looked at how cargo between small populations in a backwater regions like the south and southwest Pacific has been historically and is now currently moved and came up with the Beowulf, Marava, and Type-R. What Traveller didn't do was look at the situation and recreate a LST. Instead, Traveller took the underlying pattern and applied it to the specifics of the situation.
That's the difference. Traveller uses history as an analogy or guide and not as a blueprint or straightjacket.
SpaceBadger
SOC-14 1K
I think of the subsidized Fat Trader in TTA, which was required to spend most of its time servicing a set route, and I wonder if banks making loans on starships might include similar requirements in the loan documents. In other words, until the loan is paid off, the ship is restricted to operation in a certain limited area, and if the captain wants to go somewhere else, either needs written permission from the lender or needs to re-finance with a new lender in the new operating area. Maybe the captain is required to send regular reports to the bank as teh ship travels from system to system. Those kinds of measures would give the lender a better chance of making repos or catching skips before they get too far away.
SpaceBadger
SOC-14 1K
But real world freighters can tie up alongside a dock for loading/unloading. A starship freighter may not be able to do that, depending on whether or not there is a highport, and whether the size of the ship makes landing planetside impossible or dangerous.
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
In the real world, you also have freighters that unload into lighters that are alongside, where you have essentially no capability to dock based on other conditions, and there also are ships that carry their own lighters, if they are frequently used in restricted waters.
You also have tug/barge combinations where the tug drops off a loaded barge to be unloaded at the port's ability and picks up an unloaded barge to bring back for another load.
Also, the nature of the cargo is going to dictate whether or not is can be unloaded in space, or must be delivered to the planet.
