Ok, this is getting weird. I haven’t been closely following but that is one of the oddest rants/Ted Talks I’ve ever read. I hope everyone is enjoying their fall cruising. Cheers, Louis Dark Star > On Oct 25, 2024, at 10:59 AM, sentoa-request@lists.sentoa.org wrote: > > Send Sentoa mailing list submissions to > sentoa@lists.sentoa.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via email, send a message with subject or > body 'help' to > sentoa-request@lists.sentoa.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > sentoa-owner@lists.sentoa.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Sentoa digest..." > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: 1.5% of sale for 30 seconds work (Preston Claytor) (P MVKW) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2024 13:59:24 -0400 > From: P MVKW <public.mv.clockwork@gmail.com> > Subject: [Sentoa] Re: 1.5% of sale for 30 seconds work (Preston > Claytor) > To: sentoa@lists.sentoa.org > Message-ID: > <CAGXY2UDcZwixodwWNJ_UagoTuCJpusMZ14BS8XxwBOoY=GwC5Q@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > boundary="000000000000c8d4a0062550e19b" > > Hi Preston, > > > > Thank you for looking out for me. I don’t check this list often as I’m a > committed former boater (love the boat.. hate “other things”).. and another > person from the list texted me to check my boat email. > > > > I need lots of tough love for lots of things, but I don’t think we’re quite > there yet on the boat.. I’ll explain. I recognized your name from a > thoughtful post about accepting a chartering business offer for my boat. > 90% of what I hear on the web is quietly dropped into the > “google-smart/forum-smart bucket” and prioritized accordingly. I have a > memory of that reply’s excellence and felt your actual knowledge of that > space fell into the other 10% and was immediately appreciated. > > > > A lot going on, but from the above, I am obliged (happily) to return the > favor you did for me. Two things about this note.. I can report you truly > could have done some homework on the business side to justify your > conclusions. Truly, all of that was covered, usually in multiple places and > your three options for why I still have it, respectfully, don’t line up > with reality at my end. All that’s covered, but if you have a boat, why > read my site? Well... if you’re going to diagnose my judgment or boat at a > distance and reduce the risk of replacing fact with a contrary assumption > that fits into a bucket you saw someplace else. It’s considered good form > to raise criticisms one on one, and especially when a faulty assumption > might influence the thinking of anyone who might have heard it... like > potentially interested buyers. You might start off making room for other > possibilities... that are easily discoverable if you’re truly committed to > sharing your opinion. > > > > Here’s something I don’t share outside of close friends that might provide > a reason to not make simple assumptions about my decision-making on this.. > EVERY DAY of my adult life, and I’m ancient now, I wake up committed to > being different than everyone I meet that day to build skills and learn new > things that make me useful in ways most cannot be. Nobody makes room for > that guy, and no problem. Thinking mistakes have put a lot of food on the > table and will sell some books. Look at the endorsements on my site.. I’m a > freak. Practitioner’s experience (years and hours) and a formalist’s > training (years and hours).. I can’t waste hours of life being regaled by > friends in their cockpit sipping wine and watching yet another sunset, with > accounts of how cosmically perfect their new Italian marble counters are, > or how their massively optioned new Range Rover FINALLY got exactly the > right shade of white. Kill me. I’m a freak like I said, but to quote cop > friend, “better that than being a serial murderer”. Though I’m sure he only > says that because I know how to adjust his clutch in the field, and blow > him away in the cones... and I have a backhoe that can dig down 7’, while > cadaver sniffing dogs are only good to 3’:) I’m sorry to push this blather > out.. I know I’m broken/different than you’re used to, but hopefully in a > useful way. But still, I’d prefer to not get into any of this in public > settings like forums. Hey.. .I don’t trust most people’s judgment either, > and I get that too. If you have something to share I can potentially use, I > VERY much wish to hear it, but non-destructively. > > > > Regarding brokers.. covered in spades too. I have 40+ years running a tech > company I began and I was both the top technical (fun) and business > (boring) guy. I can clean a bathroom better than any employee too. > Operating on 4 continents. It presented bottomless opportunities to develop > my rules of engagement and to never risk my reputation or the outcome with > a relationship I shouldn’t be in. Under that umbrella, include never > pretending I didn’t compute to potential to violate that ROE when I read > the anti-trust/anti-competitive behavior alleged in the class action suit > linked in this: https://tinyurl.com/yv7deenz. But read the details.. I made > 4 sincere efforts when I decided to sell. Never again. > > > > Business judgment is always subject to the deciders squishy rules about > things you can’t hold in your hands. On the other hand, when you get into > systems and practical stochastic reasoning/decision, you’re squarely in my > wheel house and this is the part of your note I feel obligated to put back > on the tracks. Diving in... > > > > > > By Preston: ... your common theme is that the mechanical fuel pump > Cummins products are superior… this is an opinion. > > > > Multiple issues ruin that... > > > > First.. I’m sorry Preston, but where you came off the tracks (respectfully) > the most is to confuse the line between opinion and math. Nearly the > opposite of each other. I’m sure typing in “opinion vs math” into a search > engine will fill in the details. > > > > Literally the first blog I ever wrote (https://tinyurl.com/mv8fd9hr) on the > site showed the math of how parts-count drives failure rate and it attempts > to assume the reader is not an astronaut. I must have repeated this next > point 20 times in recent writing...... > > > > ------------ IF IT’S NOT THERE, IT CAN’T BREAK -------- > > > > Friends gave me crap for repeating it so much recently. You have to though > when you’re audience is very unlikely to have an engineering/systems > background. Repetition is the soul of education, if you ask the Jesuits. > But no matter.. forget the math.. all you need to remember are those seven > words. Inarguable. > > > > Second... Saying my position is that mechanical fuel pumps are superior to > electronic also comes at the point from the wrong direction... an “Escher > shift”. My ACTUAL point is to respect the truth that as the count of parts > that can stop the show (and # system states) increases, so will the failure > rate of the system..... Assuming the non-control elements of the engine’s > under comparison being approximately equal, the electronically controlled > engine has a barge full of things THAT CAN FAIL and kill the system on the > spot, that the mechanical engine does noT. > > > > > > ------------ IF IT’S NOT THERE, IT CAN’T BREAK -------- > > > > > > They aren’t intrinsically superior.. they just haven’t had numerous > vulnerabilities designed/built in to them because some hippies at the EPA > “had an idea”. > > > > Don’t miss this detail I failed to put in the note on the web site that > might be a different path to clarity.. adding one single part that performs > a critical function to a collection of parts decreases that system’s > reliability/MTBF. > > > > And don’t gloss over it being only about the fuel pump... on the > electronic, but not the mechanical, you have a universe of sensors, servos, > network/connections, and infinitely more state-spaces. They are enumerated > in the comparison note.... > > > > Third.. I see you refer to Cummins and that is secondary to the point. My > boat competes with other Nordic Tugs and they all use Cummins, but in the > comparison of electronic vs mechanical (https://tinyurl.com/bd6jdu66) is *about > one control **type** vs another*, and is in the end irrespective of brand. > Math and physics don’t understand brand. I was fortunate to be able to > enlarge the data set using Cummins truck engines and still retain a > connection to Cummins and to the time frame. The non-zero possibility both > marine and truck control systems being design by the same design culture > and maybe even the same people. > > > > Fourth... about.... > > > > NOT PAYING MORE FOR something older with less functionality > > > > I’m dead certain you won’t, but you should. They ARE more reliable for > reasons you don't seem to accept as valid. I wish I were better at > explaining this. You aren’t unique in this but this perspective is never > heard from people who are more technically educated/experienced (high > hours), and who are mechanically inclined and long-term engine guys... who > play with engines for fun. This stuff is what I do for a living. This stuff > is exactly what I used to select my boat 10 years ago. I’ve been involved > in flying around the world to debug system designs since the late 80’s. > Pointless complexity (parts count/system states) NEVER adds to reliability. > I have been on rescue consults where that toxic pointless complexity was > the root cause of the problem. > > > > Different try... Read up on the first vacuum tube computers like Eniac or > Colossus.. up to 2000 tubes... 500hr tube MTBF.. which translates to > FREQUENT system failures. To reduce the ultimate system failure rates, > designers worked to lower the parts (tubes) count, and to make the > constituent parts more reliable. There are accounts that the run time for > some problems were not infrequently longer than the mean projected system > up time. Identical to the elevator problem in that first blog... imagine > the elevator can’t move if certain individual bulbs are out. Same as > electronically controlled engines. There’s nobody with design > responsibility who doesn’t know this but it doesn’t trickle down to the > user. They don’t put it in the brochure next to the super models. I knew > this going in when I decided I had to sell it myself and tried to educate. > I’d say 1/3+ of the people who contact the site are believers by the time > they fill out the form and most get there eventually. As with 100% of the > people I speak with about technical decision/risk, the most interested are > military and surgeons who “get” don’t F up or death follows. > > > > Re: the “less functionality” you refer to... the complete phrase would be: > > > > “less functionality not essential to the mission” > > > > The mission is to keep the engine running no matter what. What comes after > that is entertainment. > > > > The “older” you refer to won’t matter in your lifetime. There is a > too-simplistic view of “old” about machinery at work in the leisure class. > I’ve got 75% of the factory projected engine life left on mine and one > person in a position to know said that actual projected engine life is > actually about 50% more than published projected. You personally won’t pay > for it but “old, simple *and well-cared*“ for has plenty of people > competing for. A real thing. Look up the Lindy Effect. > > > > If you read the multiple places where I said it, my position on > mechanical/electronic is for PRE-DECISION PEOPLE... NOT POST-DECISION. I’m > ecstatic you’re so satisfied with your boat... best of luck going forward. > And while either of your electronically controlled engines are absolutely > more vulnerable than my 6CT, your SYSTEM reliability (the vessel able to > still move) is much higher than mine given you have two of them. I said > that in the note too. > > > > > > I gotta end this because I wrote it ALL down in much more careful detail > already, but honestly.. this isn’t that hard. The 7 magic words. Every > system is the elevator problem. Give that note I put up comparing > reliability of mechanical vs electronic a read without having an initial > mindset I'm a screw up. I make a tolerable living at these things and > nobody ever stood up during a talk while I was speaking and screamed “I > would gladly pay another Kreutzer if this would simply stop!!” (As happened > to Beethoven, while conducting the debut of his Eroica symphony in Vienna > when an audience member found it a little too long.) > > > > Thank you again for looking out for me. Appreciated. Safe sailing. > > > > Take care, > > M > > > > > >> Message: 4 >> Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 08:57:59 -0400 >> From: Preston Claytor <lelandtrawlers@gmail.com> >> Subject: [Sentoa] Re: 1.5% of sale for 30 seconds work >> To: "South East Nordic Tugs Owners' Association (SENTOA)" >> <sentoa@lists.sentoa.org> >> Cc: P MVKW <public.mv.clockwork@gmail.com> >> Message-ID: <AF095210-CB5B-4CB2-A49D-311AFC2F893E@gmail.com> >> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; >> boundary="Apple-Mail=_311953C0-9A8B-4066-9F80-9F54264184C8" >> >> Miguel, >> Perhaps its time for some tough love ….. >> I’m pretty sure that this boat has been for sale for several years. >> NTs are fairly marketable which leads us to several possibilities… >> 1. There is something wrong with it (I doubt it) >> 2. It is over priced …. (likely) >> 3. You don’t really want to sell it (no clue) >> If you really wanted to move the boat, one call to a reputable broker and >> a reasonable price would sell it …. >> Lastly, your common theme is that the mechanical fuel pump Cummins >> products are superior … this is an opinion. Is there anything wrong with >> the older engines …. no …. but …. >> I have a pair of common rail Cummins in my current boat and they are >> bullet proof machines that produce for more useable information than the >> analog gaged older models … that is a fact and my opinion is that they are >> equal or superior to the older models. >> I personally wouldn’t pay extra for something older with less >> functionality … >> Preston >> Former NT owner (sold mine quickly by the above method) >> >> >>> On Oct 18, 2024, at 11:05 AM, P MVKW via Sentoa <sentoa@lists.sentoa.org> >> wrote: >>> >>> Greetings, >>> >>> Two points, >>> >>> First, I need to reclaim the time I spend creating blogs for Clock >> Work's web site.. 95% of the time, those were written out out of necessity >> to drive eyeballs to the site and it worked very well... it lead to a bunch >> of good leads, to interesting/fun conversations, and most importantly, some >> new friends, but.. life is short and getting shorter. I need to replace the >> "finder" (i.e. awareness) function that that provided. The replacement plan >> is to deputize anyone as a replacement buyer brokers, or well-paid >> recommenders if you prefer. It's astonishing how often this channel was >> discovered in casual conversation at the marina. >>> >>> So, anyone who knows someone looking for or interested in a nice Nordic >> Tug 42 can just introduce them (with their permission, please) to Clock >> Work via its web site. If that person ends up buying her, YOU.. the >> introducer.. get most of that buyer-broker's commission... 1.5%. NO other >> work to do whatsoever, other than upwards of 30 seconds of clicking/typing >> to introduce your suggestion using the contact screen. >>> >>> Using the Option-1/market price, $525k as an example.. you're paid >> $7875 if your guy buys her. Read up on the higher-than-you-might-think odds >> in your favor at the link below. >>> >>> Details at: >> https://www.clockwork-usa.com/post/the-clock-work-common-broker-program >>> >>> >>> Second thing.. did a note on my engineering/systems take wrt fully >> mechanical vs electronic diesel engine control considerations, which comes >> up with literally everyone I speak with about Clock Work. It's located >> right next to the "common broker/introducer program blog". Important.. the >> note is intended for the person in the process of deciding, when a choice >> exists, between those decisions. Not for the person who already made the >> decision. >>> >>> Safe sailing/raking, >>> Miguel >>> >>> -- >>> MV Clockwork >>> >>> Nordic Tug 42, available for purchase: https://www.clockwork-usa.com/ >>> fully-mechanical Cummins 6CT (reliability by design) >>>> 75% of factory projected engine life remaining >>> gen-2 layout with bridge >>> see more at the site >>> If you know someone looking for a NT42 or other reliable trawler, pls >> look at the recommender program that pays 1.5% to whomever recommends the >> ultimate buyer.. >>> example: ~$7.5k for 30-60 sec "work" cf: >> https://tinyurl.com/yr9n572y >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Sentoa mailing list -- sentoa@lists.sentoa.org >>> To unsubscribe send an email to sentoa-leave@lists.sentoa.org >> >> Subject: Digest Footer >> _______________________________________________ >> Sentoa mailing list -- sentoa@lists.sentoa.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to sentoa-leave@lists.sentoa.org >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> End of Sentoa Digest, Vol 161, Issue 10 >> *************************************** >> > > > > -- > MV Clockwork > > Nordic Tug 42, available for purchase: https://www.clockwork-usa.com/ > > - fully-mechanical Cummins 6CT > - > 75% of factory projected engine life remaining > - gen-2 layout with bridge > > If you know someone looking for a NT42 or other reliable trawler, pls look > at the recommender program that pays *1.5% to whomever recommends the > ultimate buyer..* > example: ~$7.5k for 30-60 sec "work" cf: https://tinyurl.com/yr9n572y >

Agreed. Here’s hoping a sale comes soon! Steve Paul Penny-wise NT37-203 828 Casterline Rd. Endicott, NY. 13760 C: 607.768.4024 > On Oct 25, 2024, at 5:23 PM, Louis via Sentoa <sentoa@lists.sentoa.org> wrote: > > Ok, this is getting weird. I haven’t been closely following but that is one of the oddest rants/Ted Talks I’ve ever read. > > I hope everyone is enjoying their fall cruising. > > Cheers, > > Louis > Dark Star > > >> On Oct 25, 2024, at 10:59 AM, sentoa-request@lists.sentoa.org wrote: >> >> Send Sentoa mailing list submissions to >> sentoa@lists.sentoa.org >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via email, send a message with subject or >> body 'help' to >> sentoa-request@lists.sentoa.org >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> sentoa-owner@lists.sentoa.org >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of Sentoa digest..." >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. Re: 1.5% of sale for 30 seconds work (Preston Claytor) (P MVKW) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2024 13:59:24 -0400 >> From: P MVKW <public.mv.clockwork@gmail.com> >> Subject: [Sentoa] Re: 1.5% of sale for 30 seconds work (Preston >> Claytor) >> To: sentoa@lists.sentoa.org >> Message-ID: >> <CAGXY2UDcZwixodwWNJ_UagoTuCJpusMZ14BS8XxwBOoY=GwC5Q@mail.gmail.com> >> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; >> boundary="000000000000c8d4a0062550e19b" >> >> Hi Preston, >> >> >> >> Thank you for looking out for me. I don’t check this list often as I’m a >> committed former boater (love the boat.. hate “other things”).. and another >> person from the list texted me to check my boat email. >> >> >> >> I need lots of tough love for lots of things, but I don’t think we’re quite >> there yet on the boat.. I’ll explain. I recognized your name from a >> thoughtful post about accepting a chartering business offer for my boat. >> 90% of what I hear on the web is quietly dropped into the >> “google-smart/forum-smart bucket” and prioritized accordingly. I have a >> memory of that reply’s excellence and felt your actual knowledge of that >> space fell into the other 10% and was immediately appreciated. >> >> >> >> A lot going on, but from the above, I am obliged (happily) to return the >> favor you did for me. Two things about this note.. I can report you truly >> could have done some homework on the business side to justify your >> conclusions. Truly, all of that was covered, usually in multiple places and >> your three options for why I still have it, respectfully, don’t line up >> with reality at my end. All that’s covered, but if you have a boat, why >> read my site? Well... if you’re going to diagnose my judgment or boat at a >> distance and reduce the risk of replacing fact with a contrary assumption >> that fits into a bucket you saw someplace else. It’s considered good form >> to raise criticisms one on one, and especially when a faulty assumption >> might influence the thinking of anyone who might have heard it... like >> potentially interested buyers. You might start off making room for other >> possibilities... that are easily discoverable if you’re truly committed to >> sharing your opinion. >> >> >> >> Here’s something I don’t share outside of close friends that might provide >> a reason to not make simple assumptions about my decision-making on this.. >> EVERY DAY of my adult life, and I’m ancient now, I wake up committed to >> being different than everyone I meet that day to build skills and learn new >> things that make me useful in ways most cannot be. Nobody makes room for >> that guy, and no problem. Thinking mistakes have put a lot of food on the >> table and will sell some books. Look at the endorsements on my site.. I’m a >> freak. Practitioner’s experience (years and hours) and a formalist’s >> training (years and hours).. I can’t waste hours of life being regaled by >> friends in their cockpit sipping wine and watching yet another sunset, with >> accounts of how cosmically perfect their new Italian marble counters are, >> or how their massively optioned new Range Rover FINALLY got exactly the >> right shade of white. Kill me. I’m a freak like I said, but to quote cop >> friend, “better that than being a serial murderer”. Though I’m sure he only >> says that because I know how to adjust his clutch in the field, and blow >> him away in the cones... and I have a backhoe that can dig down 7’, while >> cadaver sniffing dogs are only good to 3’:) I’m sorry to push this blather >> out.. I know I’m broken/different than you’re used to, but hopefully in a >> useful way. But still, I’d prefer to not get into any of this in public >> settings like forums. Hey.. .I don’t trust most people’s judgment either, >> and I get that too. If you have something to share I can potentially use, I >> VERY much wish to hear it, but non-destructively. >> >> >> >> Regarding brokers.. covered in spades too. I have 40+ years running a tech >> company I began and I was both the top technical (fun) and business >> (boring) guy. I can clean a bathroom better than any employee too. >> Operating on 4 continents. It presented bottomless opportunities to develop >> my rules of engagement and to never risk my reputation or the outcome with >> a relationship I shouldn’t be in. Under that umbrella, include never >> pretending I didn’t compute to potential to violate that ROE when I read >> the anti-trust/anti-competitive behavior alleged in the class action suit >> linked in this: https://tinyurl.com/yv7deenz. But read the details.. I made >> 4 sincere efforts when I decided to sell. Never again. >> >> >> >> Business judgment is always subject to the deciders squishy rules about >> things you can’t hold in your hands. On the other hand, when you get into >> systems and practical stochastic reasoning/decision, you’re squarely in my >> wheel house and this is the part of your note I feel obligated to put back >> on the tracks. Diving in... >> >> >> >> >> >> By Preston: ... your common theme is that the mechanical fuel pump >> Cummins products are superior… this is an opinion. >> >> >> >> Multiple issues ruin that... >> >> >> >> First.. I’m sorry Preston, but where you came off the tracks (respectfully) >> the most is to confuse the line between opinion and math. Nearly the >> opposite of each other. I’m sure typing in “opinion vs math” into a search >> engine will fill in the details. >> >> >> >> Literally the first blog I ever wrote (https://tinyurl.com/mv8fd9hr) on the >> site showed the math of how parts-count drives failure rate and it attempts >> to assume the reader is not an astronaut. I must have repeated this next >> point 20 times in recent writing...... >> >> >> >> ------------ IF IT’S NOT THERE, IT CAN’T BREAK -------- >> >> >> >> Friends gave me crap for repeating it so much recently. You have to though >> when you’re audience is very unlikely to have an engineering/systems >> background. Repetition is the soul of education, if you ask the Jesuits. >> But no matter.. forget the math.. all you need to remember are those seven >> words. Inarguable. >> >> >> >> Second... Saying my position is that mechanical fuel pumps are superior to >> electronic also comes at the point from the wrong direction... an “Escher >> shift”. My ACTUAL point is to respect the truth that as the count of parts >> that can stop the show (and # system states) increases, so will the failure >> rate of the system..... Assuming the non-control elements of the engine’s >> under comparison being approximately equal, the electronically controlled >> engine has a barge full of things THAT CAN FAIL and kill the system on the >> spot, that the mechanical engine does noT. >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------ IF IT’S NOT THERE, IT CAN’T BREAK -------- >> >> >> >> >> >> They aren’t intrinsically superior.. they just haven’t had numerous >> vulnerabilities designed/built in to them because some hippies at the EPA >> “had an idea”. >> >> >> >> Don’t miss this detail I failed to put in the note on the web site that >> might be a different path to clarity.. adding one single part that performs >> a critical function to a collection of parts decreases that system’s >> reliability/MTBF. >> >> >> >> And don’t gloss over it being only about the fuel pump... on the >> electronic, but not the mechanical, you have a universe of sensors, servos, >> network/connections, and infinitely more state-spaces. They are enumerated >> in the comparison note.... >> >> >> >> Third.. I see you refer to Cummins and that is secondary to the point. My >> boat competes with other Nordic Tugs and they all use Cummins, but in the >> comparison of electronic vs mechanical (https://tinyurl.com/bd6jdu66) is *about >> one control **type** vs another*, and is in the end irrespective of brand. >> Math and physics don’t understand brand. I was fortunate to be able to >> enlarge the data set using Cummins truck engines and still retain a >> connection to Cummins and to the time frame. The non-zero possibility both >> marine and truck control systems being design by the same design culture >> and maybe even the same people. >> >> >> >> Fourth... about.... >> >> >> >> NOT PAYING MORE FOR something older with less functionality >> >> >> >> I’m dead certain you won’t, but you should. They ARE more reliable for >> reasons you don't seem to accept as valid. I wish I were better at >> explaining this. You aren’t unique in this but this perspective is never >> heard from people who are more technically educated/experienced (high >> hours), and who are mechanically inclined and long-term engine guys... who >> play with engines for fun. This stuff is what I do for a living. This stuff >> is exactly what I used to select my boat 10 years ago. I’ve been involved >> in flying around the world to debug system designs since the late 80’s. >> Pointless complexity (parts count/system states) NEVER adds to reliability. >> I have been on rescue consults where that toxic pointless complexity was >> the root cause of the problem. >> >> >> >> Different try... Read up on the first vacuum tube computers like Eniac or >> Colossus.. up to 2000 tubes... 500hr tube MTBF.. which translates to >> FREQUENT system failures. To reduce the ultimate system failure rates, >> designers worked to lower the parts (tubes) count, and to make the >> constituent parts more reliable. There are accounts that the run time for >> some problems were not infrequently longer than the mean projected system >> up time. Identical to the elevator problem in that first blog... imagine >> the elevator can’t move if certain individual bulbs are out. Same as >> electronically controlled engines. There’s nobody with design >> responsibility who doesn’t know this but it doesn’t trickle down to the >> user. They don’t put it in the brochure next to the super models. I knew >> this going in when I decided I had to sell it myself and tried to educate. >> I’d say 1/3+ of the people who contact the site are believers by the time >> they fill out the form and most get there eventually. As with 100% of the >> people I speak with about technical decision/risk, the most interested are >> military and surgeons who “get” don’t F up or death follows. >> >> >> >> Re: the “less functionality” you refer to... the complete phrase would be: >> >> >> >> “less functionality not essential to the mission” >> >> >> >> The mission is to keep the engine running no matter what. What comes after >> that is entertainment. >> >> >> >> The “older” you refer to won’t matter in your lifetime. There is a >> too-simplistic view of “old” about machinery at work in the leisure class. >> I’ve got 75% of the factory projected engine life left on mine and one >> person in a position to know said that actual projected engine life is >> actually about 50% more than published projected. You personally won’t pay >> for it but “old, simple *and well-cared*“ for has plenty of people >> competing for. A real thing. Look up the Lindy Effect. >> >> >> >> If you read the multiple places where I said it, my position on >> mechanical/electronic is for PRE-DECISION PEOPLE... NOT POST-DECISION. I’m >> ecstatic you’re so satisfied with your boat... best of luck going forward. >> And while either of your electronically controlled engines are absolutely >> more vulnerable than my 6CT, your SYSTEM reliability (the vessel able to >> still move) is much higher than mine given you have two of them. I said >> that in the note too. >> >> >> >> >> >> I gotta end this because I wrote it ALL down in much more careful detail >> already, but honestly.. this isn’t that hard. The 7 magic words. Every >> system is the elevator problem. Give that note I put up comparing >> reliability of mechanical vs electronic a read without having an initial >> mindset I'm a screw up. I make a tolerable living at these things and >> nobody ever stood up during a talk while I was speaking and screamed “I >> would gladly pay another Kreutzer if this would simply stop!!” (As happened >> to Beethoven, while conducting the debut of his Eroica symphony in Vienna >> when an audience member found it a little too long.) >> >> >> >> Thank you again for looking out for me. Appreciated. Safe sailing. >> >> >> >> Take care, >> >> M >> >> >> >> >> >>> Message: 4 >>> Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 08:57:59 -0400 >>> From: Preston Claytor <lelandtrawlers@gmail.com> >>> Subject: [Sentoa] Re: 1.5% of sale for 30 seconds work >>> To: "South East Nordic Tugs Owners' Association (SENTOA)" >>> <sentoa@lists.sentoa.org> >>> Cc: P MVKW <public.mv.clockwork@gmail.com> >>> Message-ID: <AF095210-CB5B-4CB2-A49D-311AFC2F893E@gmail.com> >>> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; >>> boundary="Apple-Mail=_311953C0-9A8B-4066-9F80-9F54264184C8" >>> >>> Miguel, >>> Perhaps its time for some tough love ….. >>> I’m pretty sure that this boat has been for sale for several years. >>> NTs are fairly marketable which leads us to several possibilities… >>> 1. There is something wrong with it (I doubt it) >>> 2. It is over priced …. (likely) >>> 3. You don’t really want to sell it (no clue) >>> If you really wanted to move the boat, one call to a reputable broker and >>> a reasonable price would sell it …. >>> Lastly, your common theme is that the mechanical fuel pump Cummins >>> products are superior … this is an opinion. Is there anything wrong with >>> the older engines …. no …. but …. >>> I have a pair of common rail Cummins in my current boat and they are >>> bullet proof machines that produce for more useable information than the >>> analog gaged older models … that is a fact and my opinion is that they are >>> equal or superior to the older models. >>> I personally wouldn’t pay extra for something older with less >>> functionality … >>> Preston >>> Former NT owner (sold mine quickly by the above method) >>> >>> >>>> On Oct 18, 2024, at 11:05 AM, P MVKW via Sentoa <sentoa@lists.sentoa.org> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Greetings, >>>> >>>> Two points, >>>> >>>> First, I need to reclaim the time I spend creating blogs for Clock >>> Work's web site.. 95% of the time, those were written out out of necessity >>> to drive eyeballs to the site and it worked very well... it lead to a bunch >>> of good leads, to interesting/fun conversations, and most importantly, some >>> new friends, but.. life is short and getting shorter. I need to replace the >>> "finder" (i.e. awareness) function that that provided. The replacement plan >>> is to deputize anyone as a replacement buyer brokers, or well-paid >>> recommenders if you prefer. It's astonishing how often this channel was >>> discovered in casual conversation at the marina. >>>> >>>> So, anyone who knows someone looking for or interested in a nice Nordic >>> Tug 42 can just introduce them (with their permission, please) to Clock >>> Work via its web site. If that person ends up buying her, YOU.. the >>> introducer.. get most of that buyer-broker's commission... 1.5%. NO other >>> work to do whatsoever, other than upwards of 30 seconds of clicking/typing >>> to introduce your suggestion using the contact screen. >>>> >>>> Using the Option-1/market price, $525k as an example.. you're paid >>> $7875 if your guy buys her. Read up on the higher-than-you-might-think odds >>> in your favor at the link below. >>>> >>>> Details at: >>> https://www.clockwork-usa.com/post/the-clock-work-common-broker-program >>>> >>>> >>>> Second thing.. did a note on my engineering/systems take wrt fully >>> mechanical vs electronic diesel engine control considerations, which comes >>> up with literally everyone I speak with about Clock Work. It's located >>> right next to the "common broker/introducer program blog". Important.. the >>> note is intended for the person in the process of deciding, when a choice >>> exists, between those decisions. Not for the person who already made the >>> decision. >>>> >>>> Safe sailing/raking, >>>> Miguel >>>> >>>> -- >>>> MV Clockwork >>>> >>>> Nordic Tug 42, available for purchase: https://www.clockwork-usa.com/ >>>> fully-mechanical Cummins 6CT (reliability by design) >>>>> 75% of factory projected engine life remaining >>>> gen-2 layout with bridge >>>> see more at the site >>>> If you know someone looking for a NT42 or other reliable trawler, pls >>> look at the recommender program that pays 1.5% to whomever recommends the >>> ultimate buyer.. >>>> example: ~$7.5k for 30-60 sec "work" cf: >>> https://tinyurl.com/yr9n572y >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Sentoa mailing list -- sentoa@lists.sentoa.org >>>> To unsubscribe send an email to sentoa-leave@lists.sentoa.org >>> >>> Subject: Digest Footer >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Sentoa mailing list -- sentoa@lists.sentoa.org >>> To unsubscribe send an email to sentoa-leave@lists.sentoa.org >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> End of Sentoa Digest, Vol 161, Issue 10 >>> *************************************** >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> MV Clockwork >> >> Nordic Tug 42, available for purchase: https://www.clockwork-usa.com/ >> >> - fully-mechanical Cummins 6CT >> - > 75% of factory projected engine life remaining >> - gen-2 layout with bridge >> >> If you know someone looking for a NT42 or other reliable trawler, pls look >> at the recommender program that pays *1.5% to whomever recommends the >> ultimate buyer..* >> example: ~$7.5k for 30-60 sec "work" cf: https://tinyurl.com/yr9n572y >>