Discussion in 'Sea Ray Yacht' started by PacBlue, Dec 6, 2017.
Yes, 10%. Number three most every way you define the market.
I think a Sundancer with a flybridge isn't a Sundancer anymore. Not a bad build concept, just thinking about the naming. Maybe a new model name? Or maybe even a Sundancer "Something" (anything but "Fly," which has always sounded too Eurpoean for my tastes) to differentiate?
But Sundancer Fly is what it is.
For those in the know, the Sundance is a DA, the Sedan Bridge is a DB. Inside lingo.
Sundance Fly is awkward, as is any model description that calls a flybridge a "fly". No real appealling connotation that one can relate to.
280, 000 boats a year - typo????
Maybe 23,000 boats a year at a peak in all pleasurecraft history?
You need to recognize the shift in recreational dollar spending, as the pursuit of recreational activities has changed and production volume declines are endemic to all brands in that era. It is not just a SR thing.
The most valuable question is wide open, as it is difficult to carve all the numbers out from individual builders that are part of larger groups. I would say SR is profitable once you carve out the disastrous L line warranty issues. But small boat builders who don't have L line product are not a real accurate comparison.
No, the numbers should read, once sold 28,000 a year. Now about 3,000 . One decimal off.
There are no small boat builders with L line in the US. Small is small, big is big. SR is very modestly profitable. Their problems are more than the L line. The entire line has had poor sales. They didn't have what is in demand. They finally came with the outboards. They don't have inboard wake or ski boats. They don't have pontoon boats. And, their distribution is heavily dependent on one marine group.
Then you are not comparing apples to apples, it just confuses the matter.
Are 300o units poor or average or good for their production footprint today? The new buyer would have to make that assessment, and I get the feeling they are already in process with them.
No question there are great opportunities to adjust product mix at the plants, that is the jewel of the deal. They had ski boats in the past and jet boats and fishing boats, etc. The new owners will have a lot of fun creating the right mix of products.
without the Brunswick driven product decisions, the opportunity can be considered to have a lot of upside especially given the fact that they have a ready made dealer network.
It's starting to look like a better acquisition opportunity the more I look at it.
You should also cite your sources and the fact that these numbers are reported or estimated but may not be absolutely accurate.
Would be nice to have the peak production numbers for Chapparral as well, how are they sized today versus pre-2008 era?
Their units are middle of the road, average. The L Series doesn't significantly impact that. The volume is smaller boats and they were once #1, now #3 in stern drives. Not bad. Problem is the market volume isn't in stern drives. Can't compare apples to apples when there's only one apple. I compare them with the companies they've always considered their major competitors and to well run small boat companies in the US. The profits of Sea Ray and the profits of all boat businesses in Brunswick have been at substandard levels.
I do think it's got great potential but it requires a huge investment on top of the purchase price. Going outside the boundaries set by Brunswick requires investment. It may even require another acquisition to make it quicker. We'll know more when we see who buys.
One more fear. Brunswick really stopped doing needed things in Hatteras and Cabo while they lingered on the market. I fear we'll see no progress and some steps back for Sea Ray while they sit.
My entry was simply a typo, one I saw and thought I'd corrected. Actually it was a voice-o as I was speaking, not typing. The numbers, now that they're correct, are verified through multiple sources including their annual report and their competitor's annual report plus an article in boat test and a couple more. They may not be precise but they're very good ballpark. Some are also verified from a paid source whose information I can not republish. I will get you Chaparral's numbers.
Ah, Didn't realize, haven't seen one, nor an ad for one. Thought only the L models were Flies (so to speak).
I don't have their market research, so can only speak from my own guesses, but my gut says mimicking Fairline, Princess, Sealine, Azimut... in design and in product naming... isn't a great way to set their products apart....
As Pac says, no real appeal... And I thought their earlier "Sedan Bridge" models were names "OK enough" at the time, even if "sedan" in the boating world is a fairly squishy product description.
Marine Products annual boats sold.
Now, there has been a big shift in their sales from Sterndrive to Outboard/Robalo. I would estimate their stern drives are about 40% of peak, including their jets. A little less if you don't include the jets.
It doesn't set it apart but allows them to compete and allows them to fulfill the need of the dedicated Sea Ray owner. At one time they were good at getting a Sea Ray buyer early and keeping them as their needs increased. I was in that pattern as I had a 17' Sea Ray at the age of 13, traded it for a 22' at the age of 18, traded it for a 24' at the age of 23. At the age of 29 though, they lost me to Cobalt.
Brunswick shot themselves in the foot many times over the years.
First, they were conceited enough to virtually walk away from the repower market. Then they rolled over on the catalytic converter issue and now their new motors don't fit in many applications. Recent years, dealers can buy CPO motors to fill this need but this is kind of a back-door sales operation. Then they had sporadic production cycles. Pretty big turn off to tell a customer that you can't readily get a fuel cooler and when you could, the price was steep.
This does not even touch on the Bravo 3 debacle. Overall the best stern drive they ever built. However, installation issues at their own factories and a lack of concern over the customer fallout gave this drive a bad reputation. I still tell customers, use OEM parts and keep up with the mercathode or suffer the consequences.
If this is a way to expand their new installations to provide an alternative to Volvo, then it makes some sense.
All speculation, but I'd expect them to include some sort of engine commitment in the sale of Sea Ray so Sea Ray isn't completely free to do as they wish immediately.
Outside of that, the sterndrive business is a much smaller market than it was so they'll be protecting their portion of a small market. I don't see them doing anything aggressive, but just trying to hold the course.
The profits are now in outboards and in losing Sea Ray they aren't impacted much there.
Brunswick has had greater profits per unit for stern drive installations versus outboards. Thus the desire to keep certain builders geared towards that product.
Mercury and Yamaha are in price wars on OBs as they both have approximately 40% market share and they rest fight for the last 20%.
It is probably no coincidence that the demise of the stern drive popularity came when emissions criteria kicked in and they had to have emission controls, aka, catalytic converters. More expensive to purchase and maintain, along with reliability concerns is not a good formula for success. And then the tide turned, OBs had more builder focus and creativity in new builds.
Hatteras is trying that with their 45 EX.
Pretty funky looking and a good testament why an Express or Sundancer does not translate into a good looking flybridge model.
One example of the Searay/Brunswick engine debalacle is the 59' L series. It has Triple 600hp Zues, cruises at 22 knots at 78 GPH and the motors, (the fly only cruises at 21 knots) you can't even stick an arm between. It's SLOW by today's standards, and if they simply went with Twin 900 HP Volvo 1200 IPS, it would probably get 20% more speed and less fuel burn and would have been an ideal match for that in comparison. But ohhhhhh NO, Brunswick won't let them go with the better propulsion choice.
I run a 2007 62' Predator with 2-1100 HP Man's. It cruises at 28 knots and burns 86 GPH and is about 1/3 more volumous than the Searay. Much taller and more interior room. So how/what does this 59' Searay compete with in today's market????? Even the older Searays in the mid 2000s that size would cruise 24-25 knots.
Volvo Penta will not sell IPS to a Brunswick brand no matter what, put SR in a no win position.
The fact that the L line has missed its mark in comparison to its competition is a direct result of the SR big boat product line management and Brunswick Boat Group executives lack of know how, it was bound to catch up with them when they went beyond thier comfort zone. They would have been much better off reaching outside to get a better new product.