Tramp trade in the Aramis Subsector

[Murphy]

This weekend our group steps away from fantasy and returns to playing our custom version of The Traveller Adventure campaign (which I call Traveller: Season 2).

Now, I'm not into modelling trade with lots of tables and checks, but this campaign is meant to be heavy with trade flavor. (The "Season 1" was about mercenaries). So, instead of preparing commodity lists and price fluctuation rules, I want to prepare a list of "opportunities" for each world, avaliable by asking brokers for freight contracts, skimming the commnet for cheap goods and sweeping the bars for odd jobs.

I'm currently researching opportunities for speculative trade that might come up for the PCs.

I like realism, or at least internal consistency, in my games. So I realize one can't just find a pair of worlds with different prices and profit endlessly shipping between them. There will be competition and price difference will drop back to just the cost of transport. In fact it has probably already happened.

To profit, you don't just look for an industrial world near an agricultural one. You look for opportunities that are not yet fully exploited. So now I'm tasked with inventing such opportunities for players to find.

Okay, now to an example. Take Aramanx. It's probably not exporting any technology. It might export raw materials, but there is no demand for that in the whole subsector. Any ore it sells is probably shipped off by Tukera to far elsewhere. It may have textiles and other low-tech industrial produce. And food, not as much as Pysadi or Zila but still.

It's surrounded mostly by mining worlds with sparse populations, where there might be markets for food and supplies. These markets are too small for megacorps but that doesn't mean they are not saturated by the effort of small firms and free traders.

However, according to background info, Feneteman has only been re-opened for individual prospecting a few years ago and there is still an influx of people going there. So there may be a chance that market isn't saturated yet and one can profit if he brings a kind of food that other free traders don't bring. Can grab some passengers along the way too, it's not like any liners go there.

Carsten, on the other hand, is being exploited longer, and on top of that, it enjoys being on a major trade route from Pysadi and Zila. At least some of the big freighters are J-2 and so have to stop at Carsten to refuel, which means people there can stock on food more easily.

But! Perhaps you just came from Zila and know that there was no J-2 freighter outbound in like six weeks. So the market at Carsten might be temporarily unsaturated. Profit to be had! Of course your info is 3 weeks old so you are admitting some risk there.

Any more ideas for trade in the subsector? What opportunities might PCs come at?

 

[rancke]

Carsten, on the other hand, is being exploited longer, and on top of that, it enjoys being on a major trade route from Pysadi and Zila. At least some of the big freighters are J-2 and so have to stop at Carsten to refuel, which means people there can stock on food more easily.

Actually, because of the astrography, almost all trade to Aramanx from Rhylanor subsector would go by jump-3 through Zila and bypass Carsten (barring any trade-distorting political factors). Two jumps-3 are cheaper than two jumps-2 and two jumps-1[*], especially if all four jumps are performed by a jump-2 ship.

[*] L'ouel d'Dieu to Pysadi to Zila to Carsten to Aramanx is two jumps-2 and two jumps-1.​

Trade from Regina subsector would probably go through Paya and Violante to Zila and then transship to a jump-3 ship bound for Aramanx, though transshipping to jump-3 from Violante to Carsten and then transshipping to jump-1 from Carsten to Aramanx might be a viable alternative.


Hans

 

[HG_B]

Actually, because of the astrography, almost all trade to Aramanx from Rhylanor subsector would go by jump-3 through Zila and bypass Carsten
Hans

That sounds logical but, based on the monthly cost for a J-3 ship and the cargo rates, would anyone ship? I've tried to design a J-3 freighter (hauling cargo rate) but the margins when considering loan payments don't make it financially worthwhile...

 

[far-trader]

Something to consider for making J3 profitable is Route service vs Tramp trade:

The tramp traders require more time to round up freight and passengers (1 week for one roll on the tables) because they are not scheduled ahead of time to arrive and depart to a known system. The J3 ship would be operating on a schedule and have local factors at both ends ensuring a full (or nearly so) load of both is WAITING when the ship arrives on schedule (within a day at any rate).

This means the route service J3 ship is going to be making more trips a year than the tramp trader, meaning more income. It also means the J3 ship is going to have more of both than the tramp trader can drum up in a week for that one roll on the tables. At the very least, imo, the J3 won't be rolling but should simply get the fullest possible result.

Subsidies are the other side of the equation of course. Because it is on a scheduled route the J3 ship is going to be subsidized and not mortgaged like the tramp trader making profits less of a concern.

 

[DangerousThing]

I'm currently researching opportunities for speculative trade that might come up for the PCs.

If you're looking for realism, how about "mail order brides?"

This might appeal to women from a world with a population with extreme poverty. It might also be an ethnic or religious thing: marry a woman from the homeland or marry within the faith.

Things like this in the real world are almost always driven by economics, but the other two reasons have been used also.

I could picture several scenarios based on bringing in a group of prospective brides for farmers.

 

[rancke]

That sounds logical but, based on the monthly cost for a J-3 ship and the cargo rates, would anyone ship? I've tried to design a J-3 freighter (hauling cargo rate) but the margins when considering loan payments don't make it financially worthwhile...

If you believe that the canonical per jump costs actually apply "in reality" and are not just a game artifact to simplify refereeing merchant campaigns, then no. But then, if you believe in that, there will be no jump-3 and jump-4 freight or passenger service (since they'd go bankrupt with monotonous rgulartity), and we know for a fact that jump-3 and jump-4 passenger service exists.

If you accept that people are allowed by a benevolent (or impotent[*]) Imperium to charge fees that will actually cover their expenses[**], then jump-3 traffic will be the economic alternative whenever astrography does not make jump-2 a better choice. Jump-2 and jump-3 ships are more expensive and carries less cargo than jump-1 per jump, but it is cheaper per parsec. So jump-1 is cheaper only for one-parsec routes. Jump-2 and jump-3 is roughly the same (depending on the shipbuilding rules you believe is most correct, one is slightly better than the other), so the choice boils down to astrography. Jump-2 is better for two-parsec and four-parsec routes, jump-3 is better for three-parsec routes.

Incidentally, jump-4 is only around 25% more expensive than jump-2, so whenever astrography forces a jump-2 route to make a detour, jump-4 will actually be cheaper. One jump-4 beats three jumps-2.

[*] Any regulation about freight rates can easily be circumvented by the ship "buying" the freight, shipping it as speculative cargo, and "selling" it to the recipient for a set "profit" that just happens to equal what it would have charged as freight rates. Won't work for passengers, of course, but that brings us back to those Tukera Longliners and Al Morai ships.

[**] And allow a profit on their investment similar to the profit a bank earns on a ship loan.​

Hans

 

[rancke]

As for Murphy's original question, the two keys to tramp trading is (IMO) that it takes place in the 'cracks' between the regular shipping and that it is performed by 40+ year old worn-out ships sold by regular shipping companies because they were getting too breakdown-prone.

This means that the monthly expenses are much lower than those of regular ships. If there's a bank loan, it is for a much smaller amount, and many of them are owned outright with no bank loan at all. This allows the tramp to compete against the advantages Dan outlined in his post above. A tramp can afford to take five days to line up cargo and passengers. It can afford to wait an extra week if there's nothing to be found right away. The crew can afford to let it sit idle for a few weeks while they're off having a (hopefully profitable) side adventure on the current world. It can even survive being put out of commission for a week or two by minor breakdowns and to pay for minor repairs.

However, sooner or later, the ship is going to have a medium or major breakdown that will take months and cost millions of credits to repair. If there is not enough money in the kitty to pay for the repairs and tide them over a couple of income-less months, they'll go bankrupt and the bank will seize the ship, pay the repairs, and sell it to the next bunch of raving optimists.

Basically a tramp owner is betting that the ship can make enough money to pay for repairs before a breakdown occurs. Those who win that bet goes on to found fledgeling lines; those who lose that bet has to find themselves a desperate adventure to provide the missing money or lose the ship.


Hans

 

[Murphy]

Does time matter much?
I would expect J-3 to be more expensive because it gets the cargo to destination in one week instead of J-1 lugging it for three weeks.

Probably doesn't matter for constant shipping, unless we're talking of passengers or perishable cargo. But good luck finding any freight for your fat trader to carry farther than one parsec. Am I wrong?

On mail-order brides - o:
Never knew it still happened until google enlightened me.

 

[rancke]

I would expect J-3 to be more expensive because it gets the cargo to destination in one week instead of J-1 lugging it for three weeks.

That might be the case if the choice was between a jump-1 solution and a jump-3 solution. As soon as the choice becomes between different jump-3 solutions (and assuming no price-distortion from cartel agreements), competition would reduce the cost of jump-3 to its true level. Which is cheaper than jump-1 for long-distance shipping.

(This is actually even more true if you accept the canonical prices. Shipping something to a world three parsecs away will cost you Cr3000 by jump-1 and only Cr1000 by jump-3. I tend to overlook that because I do not believe in the canonical prices).


Hans

 

[HG_B]

If you believe that the canonical per jump costs actually apply "in reality" and are not just a game artifact
Hans

It is not a "belief", it is the rule. Either play by the rules and have a common point of reference to discuss them or, not. If the latter, then a "J-1" ship can go 50 parsecs/week because we aren't using the rules to discuss the game...

 

[HG_B]

Something to consider for making J3 profitable is Route service vs Tramp trade:

The tramp traders require more time to round up freight and passengers (1 week for one roll on the tables)

Even considering max jumps (remember a day to/from planet for jump and at LEAST a day in port, the math doesn't work for freight rates vs. cost of a J3 starship...

 

[rancke]

It is not a "belief", it is the rule.

Not if you're discussing the setting rather than the rules. How many rules in historical roleplaying games can you think of that actually reflects historical reality 100%? There are some, of course, but only those that cover extremely simple things. Anything as complex as trade will be simplified for the sake of game play. It will HAVE to be in order to be playable.

A Traveller universe is supposed to be every bit as complex as the real world. Some bits are different, but they're still (supposedly) just as complex.

A simple Wild West game may ignore the need to reload guns, and that may work very well for a gaming session, but that doersn't mean that in reality guns could be fired indefinitely without reloading them. The game reflects reality (you can shoot bullets from guns) just not 100%.

Similarily, Traveller ship combat rules may ignore the need to carry spare missiles and allow ships to fire limitless rounds of missiles, but that doesn't mean that "in reality", ships carry limitless numbers of missiles.

Similarily, trade rules may require PCs to carry passengers at loss in order to force them to go on adventures to earn extra money, but that doesn't mean that "in reality" ships can't charge enough to cover their expenses.

(And neither are PCs, actually. There's an episode in The Traveller Adventure (p. 43) where there is no passengers, freight or cargo available because Akerut grabs it all (never mind that the RAW requires the ref to roll for passengers, freight, and cargo regardless of the local situation) the patron wants them to carry some cargo of his for free and is only willing to go as high as Cr500 per ton. When they refuse the offer (as the writer expects them to), he offers a barter exchange instead -- one that is worth Cr50,000 for transporting 120T of cargo. Don't ask me why they accept a Cr50,000 barter over Cr500 per ton, because I couldn't tell you, but the point is that there is no mention of carrying for half price being illegal.)

The rules are quite obviously just simplified generic rules and do not reflect "reality" to any great degree. They work well for a roleplaying campaign, though.

Either play by the rules and have a common point of reference to discuss them or, not. If the latter, then a "J-1" ship can go 50 parsecs/week because we aren't using the rules to discuss the game...

I am using the rules to discuss the game. In this case the shipbuilding rules, which tell us how much a ship capable of carrying X tons of cargo Y parsecs costs.

EDIT: That is to say, they tell us roughly how much ships cost. They are, after all, simplified. :devil:


Hans

 

[mike wightman]

In the CT Alien Realms adventure there is an example of a merchant captain charging non standard fares for ex-military personal and carrying them in the livestock cargo hold.

Both of which are against the rules but are part of the setting for the adventure.

By the way, if you are not using the Mongoose Traveller version of TTA you may want to check out the Mongoose website - they have a free download for all the ships that appear in the adventure apart from the March Harrier, all the megacorp ships.

 

[HG_B]

Not if you're discussing the setting rather than the rules.
Hans

The rule we are talking about IS setting specific. So, your not making sense to me.

 

[rancke]

The rule we are talking about IS setting specific. So, your not making sense to me.

Try reading the rest of the post where I elucidate on the first line.


Hans

 

[rancke]

The rule we are talking about IS setting specific.

I just provided an example that showed that the rule wasn't setting-specific and Mike provided another. What evidence do you have that it is setting-specific?


Hans

 

[HG_B]

I just provided an example that showed that the rule wasn't setting-specific and Mike provided another. What evidence do you have that it is setting-specific?


Hans

In the rule books (basic ones) it gives set prices. The ONLY way they would be "set" is by gov fiat NOT market forces. Which would be setting specific. Unless one assumes that all gov's in all possible settings operate the same.

So, just using logic. What other evidence do you need?

 

[rancke]

In the rule books (basic ones) it gives set prices. The ONLY way they would be "set" is by gov fiat NOT market forces.

Unless it is a game artifact.

The rules provide one price for most pieces of equipment. Don't tell me the cost of, say, a snub pistol is the same from one end of Charted Space to another. The price lists are a game artifact that gives the referee a generic price for a selection of equipment. Nothing more.

Which would be setting specific.

The rules are supposed to cover all possible Traveller settings. It can't possibly be less setting-specific.

Unless one assumes that all gov's in all possible settings operate the same.

But that's exactly what the rules say they do, if you take them at face value. Those are generic rules.

So, just using logic. What other evidence do you need?

Setting evidence, of course. An adventure where it is stated that there are laws that fixes the prices that may be charged. A reference to an Imperial Edict that fixes the prices. Something to contradict the two examples above. I was just wondering if there were any such anywhere and just what the text said.

Absent that, those two examples proves that the rules are not setting-specific. With something like that we'd at least have a canon conflict.


Hans

 

[Riik O'Shae]

In the CT Alien Realms adventure there is an example of a merchant captain charging non standard fares for ex-military personal and carrying them in the livestock cargo hold.

Both of which are against the rules but are part of the setting for the adventure.

Nothing wrong with an intrepid captain earning some extra credits by providing Steerage for those a little light on capital.

Imo...

eldar

 

[sabredog]

That sounds logical but, based on the monthly cost for a J-3 ship and the cargo rates, would anyone ship? I've tried to design a J-3 freighter (hauling cargo rate) but the margins when considering loan payments don't make it financially worthwhile...

I don't remember where I read about it a long, long time ago but I'm pretty sure it was in either White Dwarf or The Space Gamer. There was an article that described jump-boosters that could be rented on worlds so Free Traders and similar could make the hop across some of the gaps in their routes.

The booster was rented for like the cost of fuel + some fee (but I can't remember the calculation), and attached to the trader. After jump the booster was disengaged by the rental company at the target world.

That might be a possibility so long as it was an expense that didn't happen so often that it ate all the profits up till the point you needed to use it. it could be another line item on the ship's books.