Tattoo 26 Production Suspended, factory relocating

[BOAT]

If you google earth that address you can see some interesting stuff. What looks like from the shadow maybe the hull of a 22 in the front. On the side is maybe a whole 22 and in the back is maybe part of a mold...maybe.
Don't know the date of the photo, but probably not more than a year old.

THAT, is the factory??? It's TINY!!! There is NO WAY they could even THINK of producing a boat a day in such a tiny place!! I had no idea the factory was so small. I looked at the satellite picture that Lee Ward said to look at and I was shocked - the place was way too small.

To pump out boats in a production line I would think they would need stalls and bays for at least 6 stages of production but I don't think they could even get 5 boats into that tiny building! And you also need half as much more for ware house storage - !

I dunno, one thing is for sure - they really do need bigger digs.

I thought the whole idea was to leave California so they could pollute the air as much as they wanted and pump out several boats a day because in California they could only do one boat a day? So they were going to do MORE than one boat a day in THAT place??? I don't think so.

In Florida they are allowed to pollute the air with as much VOC's as they want - so if that's what the big advantage is to Florida they should take advantage of it, they really should get a HUGE place and make MANY MANY boats per day as fast as they can while it's still legal to pollute the air - that's the only way to make money unless they plan on joining the thousands of other "high-end" custom boat builders who make boats for rich people. If that's the case there was no reason at all to move the plant to Florida in the first place.

[mastreb]

Should have moved the factory to Ensenada and kept the sales office in Costa Mesa. That would have solved all of their problems in one fell swoop.

When I get rich enough to lose a few million making boats, that's what I'm going to do. With all the west-coast sailboat builders gone and cross-country shipping and stepping going for $15..$20K, there's considerable margin in doing it locally, especially since 80% of the west coast market is within two day's sail.

[BOAT]

Should have moved the factory to Ensenada and kept the sales office in Costa Mesa. That would have solved all of their problems in one fell swoop.

When I get rich enough to lose a few million making boats, that's what I'm going to do. With all the west-coast sailboat builders gone and cross-country shipping and stepping going for $15..$20K, there's considerable margin in doing it locally, especially since 80% of the west coast market is within two day's sail.

That's really a great idea. All the electrical manufactures I work with have done just that - They all make their encapsulated transformers in Baja now. Since Los Angeles is 50% of the market it makes huge shipping sense. Also, the weather in Baja is WAY better than the weather in Florida.

[Russ]

Should have moved the factory to Ensenada and kept the sales office in Costa Mesa. That would have solved all of their problems in one fell swoop.

You mean ship jobs out of the country? Might get some people mad.

When I get rich enough to lose a few million making boats, that's what I'm going to do. With all the west-coast sailboat builders gone and cross-country shipping and stepping going for $15..$20K, there's considerable margin in doing it locally, especially since 80% of the west coast market is within two day's sail.

Then there is the import tax and who knows what regulations for importing a boat. Still, would probably be cheaper than CA regs and taxes.
I remember the luxury yacht tax in the 90s that really hurt the boat building industry and caused boat builders to deliver boats 12 miles offshore.


The Tattoo production has been strangely quiet. No word since Feb 2015. Has anyone in FL spotted the 22 floating?

[vizwhiz]

A couple days ago I wrote on their website contact form asking Laura to please come update us. I'm sure there is a good explanation, as ramping production up for a facility such as that could take quite a while...

[kmclemore]

I have Laura's personal email address - we've corresponded a lot in the past with regard to making this the 'official' Tattoo forum (which it now is) and also gaining written approval to use their trademarked logos (which we have).

I emailed to her back on 2/3/15, raising her awareness about the plant closure rumors and I suggested she might like to update us if she so chooses. I received no reply and saw nothing here on the forum, so I must assume she's either not ready to say anything yet or that she's simply too busy, or that some other event(s) or circumstances are causing her not to reply.

[Lee Ward]

I was just about to post that I was pretty sure they were aware of the questions and speculation, this being one of their premier online venues, IMO. I wish them luck, and hope it all works out.

[BOAT]

If it were me in their position I would seriously be thinking for a long time what direction to go too. a really good study of the demographics of this country would be in order and Roger's model of high volume production might not garner the economy of scale that it did back in the 1970's, in other words: Things Change.

I think their experience in the overseas market might be a place to tap an emerging growing market, but here in the US? Not so sure. That further exacerbates the whole issue of manufacturing in Florida. An overseas market might be better served by an overseas production. Then there is Greece - and problems LIKE Greece - so it gets even more crazy off shore. Yeah, I would be taking my time too.

Shopping around for a large plant, studying the market, evaluating your employee base, and gauging the future of disposable income is more than enough task to take several months, but add into that the possibility of other investors interested in buying out the company and everything is even more complicated: do you take the money and run? If YOU were going to commit to a ten year mold for your boat production what would YOU do? It's not like the market is just sitting there waiting for you like it was in the 70's.

Roger committed to one 70 foot mold, but now he makes all his money back on ONE BOAT! That's not gonna happen with a 22 or a 26 foot boat. Again, Roger seems to be ahead of the trends.

For his kids, it's gotta be a tough decision. In my uneducated opinion: there is a market for the epoxy boat - roger would not be making one if this were not true. IN FACT: an EPOXY boat COULD be a revolution in the TRAILER-ABLE market - imagine a 31 foot boat that weighs the same as a 26 foot boat? But that is a 8 foot beam of a challenge. Who could design such a beast?

[K9Kampers]

...But that is a 8 foot beam of a challenge. Who could design such a beast?

While far from being practical as a trailerable, the Bob Perry design Far Harbor 39 has a beam of 7' 5".

[BOAT]

...But that is a 8 foot beam of a challenge. Who could design such a beast?

While far from being practical as a trailerable, the Bob Perry design Far Harbor 39 has a beam of 7' 5".

And as a point of fact - narrow long boats are a MacGregor SPECIALTY. Narrow boats deliver a smoother ride, and they are faster. The key to a narrow boat is the BALLAST. If you can get a good keel down low in the water with enough ballast on the end of it a narrow boat can perform EXCEPTIONALLY well. Yes, a 32 or even a 35 foot trailer able boat with an 8 foot beam would be a GREAT offshore cruiser capable of transpacific travel that could park in the driveway along the side of your house! But the key is: how do you do that and stay under 2500 pounds? There may be one answer: EPOXY.

An epoxy boat fitted with the right water ballasted retractable dagger board with a big enough bulb on the end and a pump to fill it (and drain it) just might be able to come in under 2500 pounds dry and still take on 1500 pounds of ballast in the water. A giant plastic submarine. It would be blazing fast and cut through 30 foot seas like a knife. The underside of the hull would need a hollow in the center to hold the DB bulb in retracted position for trailering. I'm not sure how that would work on the hull shape. Or maybe the bulb could be flat - it's definitely a design challenge.

[Russ]

I emailed to her back on 2/3/15, raising her awareness about the plant closure rumors and I suggested she might like to update us if she so chooses. I received no reply and saw nothing here on the forum, so I must assume she's either not ready to say anything yet or that she's simply too busy, or that some other event(s) or circumstances are causing her not to reply.

Hey Kevin,
How about dropping her another friendly email to say the rumor mill is churning. A quick post on this forum would go a long way to quiet them. Of course as you stated, there may be no news, however no news would be better than silence.

[kmclemore]

I emailed to her back on 2/3/15, raising her awareness about the plant closure rumors and I suggested she might like to update us if she so chooses. I received no reply and saw nothing here on the forum, so I must assume she's either not ready to say anything yet or that she's simply too busy, or that some other event(s) or circumstances are causing her not to reply.

Hey Kevin,
How about dropping her another friendly email to say the rumor mill is churning. A quick post on this forum would go a long way to quiet them. Of course as you stated, there may be no news, however no news would be better than silence.

OK, I'll ping her again. Don't not want to be a pest, though!

On edit: Done. I'll let you know if I hear anything.

[vizwhiz]

OK, I'll ping her again. Don't not want to be a pest, though!

I prefer to think we are "enthusiastic fans"!

All we need is a "Ka-chow" every now and then...

[mastreb]

...But that is a 8 foot beam of a challenge. Who could design such a beast?

While far from being practical as a trailerable, the Bob Perry design Far Harbor 39 has a beam of 7' 5".

And as a point of fact - narrow long boats are a MacGregor SPECIALTY. Narrow boats deliver a smoother ride, and they are faster. The key to a narrow boat is the BALLAST. If you can get a good keel down low in the water with enough ballast on the end of it a narrow boat can perform EXCEPTIONALLY well. Yes, a 32 or even a 35 foot trailer able boat with an 8 foot beam would be a GREAT offshore cruiser capable of transpacific travel that could park in the driveway along the side of your house! But the key is: how do you do that and stay under 2500 pounds? There may be one answer: EPOXY.

An epoxy boat fitted with the right water ballasted retractable dagger board with a big enough bulb on the end and a pump to fill it (and drain it) just might be able to come in under 2500 pounds dry and still take on 1500 pounds of ballast in the water. A giant plastic submarine. It would be blazing fast and cut through 30 foot seas like a knife. The underside of the hull would need a hollow in the center to hold the DB bulb in retracted position for trailering. I'm not sure how that would work on the hull shape. Or maybe the bulb could be flat - it's definitely a design challenge.

Carbon/Expoxy could definitely make your weight limit, but it would be expensive. The right business answer is to offer the same hull in both a full carbon "racing" edition and a glass/epoxy "cruiser" edition that would weight 2X as much and cost half as much. As long as you're using compatible epoxies you should be able to use the same moulds and bagging equipment.

Tow beasts are what they are. There are a lot of seemingly large cars that cannot tow at all, for example all the hybrids. Electrics won't do it either. I don't think the number of people who aren't willing to buy a "real" tow beast but want to trailer is pretty small. Especially when you can get an old diesel in serviceable condition for $5000.

I'd put the upper weight limit at the class III maximum.

As for narrow beams, there's nothing wrong with them except curb appeal. Good interior design can make a narrow boat attractive. Companionways and ladders do not have to be on the centerline, aft cabins don't have to be symmetrical, and the V-area doesn't have to be a separate cabin. Now, there are good reasons for a lot of the things that are done in cabin design, but there's also a lot of old mythology reluctance to change. Since you're already dealing with a technically unique boat, the cabin design can follow.

[jbpatents]

"Companionways and ladders do not have to be on the centerline, aft cabins don't have to be symmetrical" Bavaria Vision 42/46. The vision is actually a very good asymmetrical design.
"the V-area doesn't have to be a separate cabin" Bene Oceanis 35/38. Separate if you want it, integrated is not. Great design.
I want the combination of both...