Bertram Sportfish Yachts Coming Back???

Problem is. Bertram already tried a re-invented 54' the 57'. It didn't sell all that well. The 63' outsold it much much better. I think they should've at least looked to that size. It's the size you need if doing serious fishing/travelling, the additional storage/rod storage space, fuel capacity, freezer room, etc. I think Vikings best selling size is the 74' (aside from the little ones).

I agree, new boat prices are astronomical. Your contruction company owners and such are now big center console guys. But so have the prices of raw materials. Even though fuel has come down, prices on consumer goods have not. Even though scrap prices have come down by over half, prices of bronze piping and various items have not.

Yeah, I feel Ullberg was trying to bring the "gamefisher look" back though, as Zuccon looks to be more into his "pleasure boats" in the other brands that he designs for... maybe a direction Bertram was pushing for...? Cheers

Far

I agree, I think as stated in the previous post, maybe Bertram where trying to get into a different market, focusing on buyers from the pleasure side, rather than the fishing side...? Zuccon was obviously a logical choice for that, which you could really see in that B800 line...? Cheers

Far

Out of interests, why wouldn't they come out with a smaller model - like the 48, inline with the current design and direction - filling in the size range and building up to there flagship...? Cheers

Far

At least here in the U.S. that size is completely dead and completely taken over by large Center Consoles. People would rather have speed, rent a house/cottage in the Bahamas, and only the guys go fishing, not the entire family if they don't want to wake up at 6am to go fishing or get off the boat for the day.

You have to follow what the strategy is. They are going back to their two most successful iconic models and designing the best new version. Exactly the formula I would use to bring them back to life. No need to rush into the 60- 70-80' SF market yet, as most of those owners are moving up from trade-ins. The larger you go, the more of a challenge it is to get it built right, something I wouldn't jump into until I have a solid production line established.

Build the base, build the company. There is a saying in the boating business, build it and they (customers) will come. Now just focus on construction technique, quality and customer service , and you have the beginnings of a successful run.

The typical short term corporate returns on investment panic button would say hey, the 70' class is red hot, we must get in on that action right now? But take a deep breath, get your strategy lined up for the long haul, stick to your well thought out 5 year plan, this isn't going to happen overnight.

That's a good plan. You know Bertram also built non sportfish boats as well that seem to have gotten lost in the shuffle, but have their own followers just as well. Some of them had very nice lines. But a small stab into those like a center console and some of the under 30' run abouts they made and retro ones of those might be good moves to get the brand moving again and buyers working their way up the line. It's funny you go to Harbor Island and so many of the ferries are those, it's like being in a different era.

Bob Sherman, one of the bean-counters friendliest to the sales guys, mentioned to this writer, that (this is 1988) any Bertram smaller than 37 feet would be a money loser. Variable overhead & assorted arcane accounting theory basis.
The old 31 was a lovely boat--graceful sheer, cramped innards, wet ride, and all that--but she could handle any sea with aplomb, 330 Mercs or Cummins diesels, or GM 4-53s for the codgers out there.. Am speaking from mucho experience, here. She was NOT a killer rock-n-roller in a beam sea like the 42 & 46. Hey, we had Company Boats for thems who cared to partake.
Back to the 31.
As a model for the new 35, I dunno. A niche market for a diminishing boomer buyer?
Hmmm.
Lee Dana, the Engineering VP under Russ Specht, once told me over a beer, that if someone designed a boat like that "today" (1984-ish), "They'd be fired".
David Napier's brilliant 54/60 hulls were the creme de la creme in the '80s. They were dry and smoked the Brands H and V at the time.
So....why re-invent the wheel? All the hyper styling does not counter the ride quality, as it is, after all, your ass out there going someplace out in perhaps an unwelcoming ocean, yet thankful that you have a Decent Hull under you and yours.
Reinvent? Sure, that's where Ray Hunt's design and Dick Bertram's marketing turned the markets on their ear forever with the original 31.
I am with the earlier posters here opining that the sub-40-foot stuff belongs to the center console multi-outboard giga HP segment.
A 35 Bertram, as seen thus far, is simply mental masturbation, IMHO.

Caveat: Look , I wish the new guy well over at The New Bertram, really.
Anyone who cares about the marque, as he obviously does, deserves all the best, and I wish him all the success in the world.
My old friend, Brud Hodgkins, who headed up the International Sales, back in the day, was fond of reminding us that there were many more filing cabinets filled with cancelled dealers than there were of existing dealers.

Hmm, I just did...

Ah, but Lars, I/Os make a lot of sense.And a double in the vee--how did you manage that!?

You mean the Queen Bed? Looks like this...

Great insight to the goings on in old Bertram, thanks for the insider opinion.

The interesting Industry picture is that , from my perspective, and maybe a few others, Bertram could not make money in the under 40' range, but you have a company like Cabo that came along and cleaned their (financial) clock (and Blackfins) with 35' and 31' models. So the question I like to ask, is why?how?

Now I hazard a guess that the Bertram production line was not all that efficient. I did get a chance to visit it in the early '90s, and there was a lot of material and labor waste/inefficiency. Nothing comparable to how well run Cabo's production line was, and certainly nothing like the most efficient boat builder production line for that size I have ever seen, the Sea Ray Merritt Island Plant (now defunct).

My guess is that the production line was taken over by the hourly work culture, aka, the old guard Cuban boat building "mafia" for lack of better term. The fox was guarding the hen house, and the upper crust management were not doing their due diligence. No profits until you got to the cash cow 54/60, which I still hold in high esteem today.

Just my 2 cents

Maybe someone should design something in 35-40' that's affordable, maybe Cabo did that, that would compete on price against the C/C. It's interesting the C/C market over there is so big (in length), and I did noticed every builder is trying to fit more and more into the console, toilet, beds etc - they soon become an express walkaround.
Maybe Bertram should of designed a 35 C/C walkaround, similar layout as the Jarrett Bay 34...? Cheers

Far

Ooh, a 32' walk-around with a weekender cabin, 4-stroke outboards that trim out of the water and can be trailered at a pinch?

What's not to like?

Chances of wifey staying overnight aboard a 30-40' center console are lower than zip. A 35' convertible -- or maybe something like AMG's express-with-tower -- could work for our overnight and longer trips. (OTOH, we use the bridge a lot...)

More than two outboards is just clutter.

I'd buy a center console in a heartbeat, but it'd be a play boat -- maybe even a fishboat -- not something we could use together much as a family. (I don't really care all that much about fishing, even though our "fishing month" starts in about 15 days. I use it more as boat shake-down for the season.)

Yes, market trends suggest we'd be in the minority. Too bad...

-Chris

The beauty of a CC is it's openness. Every sq ft of the boat is open for people or things, no rooms, no doors. Until....

Then people do start pushing for coverage and protection from the sun so tops get bigger and bigger. Until....

People decide they need a head, a private one in a decent space. So that goes under the console. Until....

People decide a bed would be nice occasionally if one just wants to lay down a while, so that goes under the console.

Guess one can spend the night on one. We have a 39' Contender for the crew that would be possible on. No one ever has though.

As to the "More than two outboards is just clutter." I might have agreed before actually looking at CC's and getting involved in the purchase. Two was my initial preference. 30-35' two worked on several brands. Not on bigger though. The torque of three is needed. So we have 3 x 300 Yamahas. We did go with 300's rather than 350's for dependability.

Defenitely a play boat. Our personal playboat is a 44' Riva. How do they compare for play? Well, the CC is faster and has more range. Ride in rough conditions I'd give to the Riva. Convenience for day cruising with space to move around and openness to the CC. Comfortable cruising with galley and nice stateroom for overnight and full head to the Riva. Contender the passengers are more spread out from end to end of the boat. Riva you have more communal socializing as all sitting closer. Contender feels like a sports car. Riva like a sports coupe. Contender a Mustang convertible. Riva a Lexus convertible.

The cabin for a weekend. I would spend a weekend on AMG's design. I would check into a hotel on a 32' CC.

Building a 30-40' express that's affordable to the volume business.

That's the problem. A lot more into building a Cabo type boat vs. a CC. You're not even in the same ballpark price wise and can't get there. Just look at the boat...the hull, the interior. Then go to the engines vs. outboards.

The CC appeals to the customer who isn't going to spend the amount the Express or small SF costs. They buyer who then will buy the express or small SF however isn't as price conscious. They already showed that by not turning to CC. So, they will also move up in size to more boat. They are not price conscious or they wouldn't be looking at express or SS in the first place.

One other comment, going back to the statement Loren quoted:

Bob Sherman, one of the bean-counters friendliest to the sales guys, mentioned to this writer, that (this is 1988) any Bertram smaller than 37 feet would be a money loser. Variable overhead & assorted arcane accounting theory basis.
​

True, but lets take exactly what it says. It says building using Bertram methods, a Bertram facility, with a Bertram overhead structure you couldn't be profitable. Sea Ray is very profitable building in that size range. It's got to be built in an efficient assembly line set up. Built as a production boat with a few options but not customized like a SF might be. Built to stock and for immediate sale, not for order. Built economically, not cheaply. Big difference. Economically means using volume buying power, consolidating on fewer parts and brands, selecting vendors who offer good pricing and good products. One vendor for electronics. One vendor for generators. One vendor for engines. Maybe just one engine offering for a specific boat but no more than a couple.

Yeah, fair enough, but at the point where a CC (size, weight, shape, whatever) needs three or more outboards... is about the time I lose interest.

Ditto with other boat designs; any more than two engines, not interested.

Partly influenced by doing much of my own maintenance, and given that, I'd often be happier with a single.

FWIW, I'd also lose interest if I have to get somebody else to drive the boat, too. Not bad for some, boring for me. OTOH, I don't mind somebody else cleaning the thing!

-Chris

Typically twins are used through 32' or so in CC. It's difficult sometimes to ascertain what is really needed on the boat as sportfishermen want the speed. However, it was clear that a 39 needed triple and a 32 was fine with twins. 35' is where it didn't seem as clear to me although most had triples.

I was as negative toward three as you are, but ultimately I don't think now of three outboards being as bad as if they were inboards or pods as is often the case.