Bertram Closing Merritt Island Facility?

I went to look at the test you reference, PacBlue. A 2007 Hatteras 60GT with twin 1800's 32 knots, 98 gph. However, on that same site, I found a 2010 Hatteras 60GT with twin 1900 CAT's and at 1750 rpm it ran 32.6 knots and used 116 gph, so confirms CaptJ's numbers. So now that we have two sets of numbers from the same site, one supporting each of your experiences, perhaps it's time to admit that perhaps both of you have in different boats had the experience you claim.

And FYI, the 2007 WOT was 42.2 knots, 190 gph and the 2010 WOT was 40.5 knots and 200 gph. And the 2010 supposedly weighed 12,500 lbs less.

And since print is the key for you, which one of those numbers do you claim is right? People do have real life experiences and just because they don't coincide with yours, doesn't mean they're not true.

We had a Cobalt 302 on the lake that ran 5 knots faster than any of Cobalt's test numbers on the boat. And, yes, it was checked with GPS. But then we also know GPS can vary. All we know for sure is that's what the equipment showed and compared to other boats the numbers appeared accurate. One boat. And that was after quite a few hours on it as it did get faster after the first 50 hours.

Thanks for the clarification. All along I have asked for is reliable data, if you have it, show it, nothing to hide/hold back. The two tests describe the load/weather/outfit conditions,trim (tower/fuel/etc.) and it still differs than what was originally posted. Same thing with the 50 knot SF myth, if you got the data, just show it. I have been looking for it for years. It has to be somewhere, as it is too valuable to the successful builder that hits the 50 knot threshold to keep it to himself. The data is better and more reliable than anecdotal/dock talk.

With the data it would have been relatively easy to determine your 5 knot difference from your Cobalt example as well. Weight would have been the first issue as most builders' prototypes of those size boats can be heavier with more options than their production boats. Weight is the single most critical factor. LCG, Trim, engine/props, bottom surfaces/paint can be a factor, as well as the fact that the builder could have made changes to the tooling in production - bottom hook or wedges etc. Not such a big mystery when all the factors and data are available.

We really didn't care why. Probably bottom in some way. But also just better running engines perhaps too. Didn't matter. We weren't upset about it. Verifying it was only out of curiosity since it surprised us.

And just because there is not published data doesn't make something untrue. We didn't publish any data. I have no problem believing the boat CaptJ says hit 50 knots, did so. And just because others didn't doesn't mean it didn't. I've seen some amazing things like a 20' Correct Craft/Ski Nautique hitting some amazing speeds one Sunday. Now, I happened to know how and why. It had spent a few days in a race shop, they made quite a few changes to it, and was turning a few thousand more rpm than normal. They just ran it that way one day and then it was back to normal. The boat was owned by a former Nascar driver. I'm sure you would have said, no data published so didn't happen.

Personally, I have no idea what the Jim Smith's did or what some Hatteras have done as the only SF I have been on in the last 10 years is a 62' Viking and the only before that were fishing charters on the NC coast.

And all of this doesn't change the fact Bertram currently isn't building any boats.

Oh and there is more than one SF builder for sale right now. Would you think it would be a good investment for someone or is that a market one would be a fool to enter?

Since you asked, it all depends on who/what/where/when. Bertram can be revived with the right group/right distribution and right capital investment. A marquis name for sure.

The others remain to be seen.

I form an opinion because I trust CaptJ and he was there. Just as I trust what you're saying about the ones you've been in. Neither of you have shown me a reason not to believe you at this point.

I'm not so sure what value Bertram has. Let me ask you this. They have basically no market share today. You restart them. Who do you take market share from as it has to come from someone to make them successful? And with the damage they've done to their reputation plus the fact you'd probably be talking about at least a year gap from their last shipment to your first, do you think it's still viable?

Market share would have to come from Viking or Hatteras or custom builders but you'd have to take business from many custom builders at one or two boats a year to be viable.

I'll add another question. Is there any builder you would see as a logical purchaser of Bertram, assuming it's for sale? Anyone you think they would be a good fit for and would be capable of reviving them?

So one problem in the Hatteras/Viking/Bertram clash falls under the category of the business rule of the top three. Usually 2 can thrive and one is fighting to climb back, I will relate it to the auto world - GM/Ford vs Chrysler. Chrysler survives but lags behind the two for many years, surviving on one or two car lines, although admittedly the business model has changed now with globalization and foreign ownership, but it still holds some decent truth.

Who would want Bertram now? Brunswick has shown a distaste for the large SF market, and their is always Irwin Jacobs lurking, if a deal is to be had, hard to count this ex-Hatteras owner out, even given his untidy industry reputation.

Most likely an investment group that can keep a key management/employee group together, preferably domestic not foreign with a solid distribution plan. A five year financial commitment at minimum. Bertram has significant potential for global sales as well, and new fresh energy with non-Italianized models could do it. Get away from that raised almost trunk like foredeck, get the right mix of freeboard/foredeck and cabin styling, go back to its roots, think Corvette/Viper instead of Lincoln Mercury/Cadillac sedan. I would love to see the styling incorporate a modern twist on their classic/broken sheer line as well.

I personally do not think their past mistakes/misfortunes/structural failures/poor customer support can not be overcome. Need the right front man that can sell the message, a marine Iaccoca (think K-cars) or in todays sports driven world, a presence/force like Saban from Alabama. Believe it/Plan it/Sell it/Execute it.

I searched online for a link to the boat you describe and couldn't find it- got a link?

"speed merchant 67 tribute boat 1000 hp cats" and other variations.

See the link below, I have not been on her so someone who has please comment.

Gary Grant Design

The problem is, as far as I understood, is that there is no "key team" to be retained (or even re-hired, as the last team happens to be "The Delaminators"), nor there are molds or designs worth a bite.
So it's basically a naked brand and all the work has to be done/invested from a scratch.

Maybe even better, so they can wipe the slate clean, start with one or two select models and re-invent themselves. It would then be a wide-open slate, even have the possibility of getting back in the MY world like Viking has recently.

The big challenge would be how to deal with the crop of unhappy customers and warranty liabilities. You can only go back so far, only have pockets so deep until it starts to hinder moving the brand forward in a new way.

Doubt anyone would assume the warranty liabilities. And with wanting a clean slate, then what advantage to someone over just starting a new company? That's back to the question of whether the name still has value. But I see by the time someone could set up a factory and produce the first boats a year or more from the date of purchase.

Plus it's not like SF's are selling that well or producing that kind of profits. And certainly not like Bertram was.

Prompted me to look back to The Thread.
Now we can say we've seen it coming!

So start a new SF company, what are you going to name it, what catches the public's ear? I like the sound of Bertram, appreciate the legacy and am just offering a scenario to survive after it has lost its' way.

I am not sure what you mean by SF's not selling well? There has been a company in NJ that has been doing pretty well, through all the ups and downs, still kicking it out. So what is well in your opinion?

Yes, one company is doing very well, Viking. Do you see a start up competing with them? You have big volume by Viking. A bit with Hatteras. And then 1 or 2 boats a year by a lot of other builders.

Some names - Southern Cross, Vista, Titan, Pacifica, how are they doing now? Not so good, even if I am going a ways (80's) back.

What new or relatively NW SF has been able to be a commercial success? Cabo, Maritimo, Jupiter and Regulator come to mind, I am sure there are others (maybe), but they escape me at the moment. But it wasn't their first rodeo.

Extremely difficult to come in with a no-name, unless you have been building boats for decades prior. Have to be a helluva marketer and then some. Percentages would favor a re-launch of Bertram as it is a global name.

No re-launch or start-up is going to come out the gate at #1 or #2, it is a 3 -5 year process to get some traction. The best window to begin is usually at the bottom or downturn of the Industry, as there is no where to go but up. That window has already slipped some, so I am not saying it would be easy.

We will see how the ex-Cabo group does with their new Mag Bay Yachts line, if anyone can pull it off, they can, for the reason cited above.

They'll probably do better than Cabo is doing......

Who knows...maybe they'll end up with Cabo again...won't be the first time such as that has happened.

How long ago would you say since they were "rock solid"? I'm asking as I'm wondering what percentage of today's potential buyers relate to that.

I've been involved with focus groups before evaluating names we felt had great history and following and stood for quality, only to find out the association no longer existed with many people.