Original Correct Craft Molds

I agree about keeping these boats simple. I dont know if correct craft needs to have an entry level boat. They sell all of there boats at unreal prices so why would they make something that they would not make as much money on at the cost of producing there high end models.
Malibu and Mastercraft have recently come out with entry level wake boats (vride and X1) but at 40k I would hardly call them cheap.

I think our best bet is for someone to make their own molds.
I have realized that they do make the exact boat that I want. If you look at the hull of a new 210 you will notice how similar it is to a 2001, Just a little bigger. The problem is new price = 60k. I would say if they ever make an "entry level boat" it will be the 210 and will still cost over 40k.

That boat was/is real nice, but remember how long it took to sell? There are plenty of us that think it's a great idea but not many ready to front the $$$.

Bill,

Me too. But do the few of us that would like a new and improved retro small boat warrant the investment in production. This topic came up a year or so ago,

old thread

I think the consensus back then was that as much as a few of us think that its a great idea, it just wouldn't sell enough to warrant production, as suggested by the short life of the 176. Maybe the retro lines and graphics rather than new lines but with attributes of new boats (like all fiberglass) would sell more, but it would seem that smaller boats have little market now. As far as another company being launched to do it...well they wouldn't be correct crafts and hence a hard sell to correct craft fans...plus how would it be branded   Ski Teek or Ski Nauteek. And still, would it sell. Would you want a reproduction Model A? (On the other hand, as noted above, the retro Ford Mustangs are doing quite well and the T-Bird was great, although now out of business again)

Not raining on anyones parade and its not that I dont think its a good idea, I love my little Tique and think a modern one would be great, but I don't think they could be built for the prices people are suggesting here ($8,000 in 1979 $ is probably about $20,000 in todays $).

Well with all that negative crap being said, of course its a neat idea. I'd like to hear how CC responds. If someone starts a new company to do it, I will probably live to regret not being one of the initial investors.

Bill,

Agreed, and there is certainly no harm in that. And you just never know, just like Spencer Boat Works in your neck of the woods can make a living making specialty boats, one of the enterprising guys on this site just might surprise us.

jon4pres wrote: If you look at the hull of a new 210 you will notice how similar it is to a 2001, Just a little bigger. The problem is new price = 60k. I would say if they ever make an "entry level boat" it will be the 210 and will still cost over 40k.

Funny,I just heard that exact thing may actually be coming,from someone who should know.He didn't mention the price,though.Makes me a little nervous as it may affect the value of mine.I'm really starting to appreciate the lines,look,and sound of the older boats.I do like the idea and yes we do have a new retro looking Mustang,but be careful what you wish for guys.If you could buy a new,retro looking,reliable,modern boat for 25k,and in 3-4 years it's worth 18k or so,where does that leave the value of your mid 80's boat?Obviously the reason they hold their value now is because guys like you who keep them nice and pour your heart and soul into them,are outweighed by the people that want them.They just don't build them like they used to,but to be honest,after spankin' my wifes new "GT" down the road,I would have no desire to buy an old one....unless it was a Shelby GT500 of course! I hope this didn't come across as negative,It was meant to be more of a "caution"
and is only one persons opinion.Good luck with it.

   Mike

Ugh...I had a long post and lost half of it. Anyhoo, Let's assume from a marketing pov that the wakeboading market is bigger than the pure ski market (at least families that want to do both). The 2001 is still a contender evidenced by the number of people wakeboarding in the old models. Some people might think of them as gadgets, but I think min req's would be a tower, perfect pass, and an internal ballast system (maybe a place to put one with some DIY instructions). A quick look @ wakeworld's boat guide shows the cheapest new wakeboat @ about $31K. I think a quality entry level wakeboat that throws a great wake in the $20K - $25K range could be a winner.

From my un-educated view it seems that alot of the reason the new boats are priced the way they are is that the market will bare it. An 18ft Bayliner MSRPs for 20,735...does it really cost 10K more to make a Moomba? The boats that used to be considered cheaper alternatives to CC, MC and Supra (Malibu, Tige, Moomba) have crept up into the $31K - $66K range. Yes, the Malibu 25LSV MSRPs for $66.5K, how many of those do they sell? I guess enough to keep the boat in production. If anything it seems that the boat manufacturers are going after the high end market...not entry level. I guess they've determined there are enough people out there willing to pay 40K+ for a new boat and the entry level is served by people buying up 1980's CCs at inflated prices :)

Sorry for the novella, I like the idea of a "new" retro CC. Or there might be room for a new low cost wakeboat manufacturer. the fact that it's not a "true" CC could be an issue, but people buy Taurus handguns knowing they are built in an old Beretta factory.

Dank,

It's a numbers issue. Yes, it does cost a lot more to make a moomba than a bayliner.

I don't know the exact number of moomba's made per year, but I'm guessing less than 200.
Bayliner just makes a lot more boats. With greater production comes economies of scale.

The entire ski boating industry, including ski and wake boats is about 4000 boats per year. BKH

not thinner than MY wife, just the friends! LOL! although mine will NOT wear a bikini for anything.

If the exact same high quality and well proven vintage CC hull is re-manufactured, I wouldn't think we'd have quality concerns. I would put a used 60's, 70's and 80's boat up against a new $30K I/O boat with a tower anytime.

Financing a $50K boat for 15 years at a reasonable rate would be $40,000.

Ken

That would be interesting to see.

81, good point. I would agree that those boats const*tute entry level boats. What makes them more popular though? I would guess...price, seating room, better fuel consumption(?) and maybe a smoother ride in rougher water (although do new boaters know this is the case?)

David...yep, got it right, ski shores, back on the left side where you park when all the front spots are full. We're big fans of that place. Was that you out on lake austin this morning? By your post times I guess not, but it sure looked like your boat.

I might stir a revolution, I have to disagree with dchris17 about boat quality. I agree that bayliners have very questionable quality, and having owned a malibu too, I have to add that they are not much better. but having owned 3 correct crafts and currently owning a centurion and a correct craft (and done abundant work on all of them), I am surprised to see that centurions are considered to be at the same level as the first two I mentioned. I have to say that they are at almost the same quality level of the correct craft products in materials, craftmanship and design. I love my super sport, but my concours is great too. If dchris has had bad experience with a centurion, I'd love to hear about it, with details. Thanks from friendly Texas (where only Tig�s and SkiPros are made).

Alalor has called me on the carpet and I have to admit to having no direct experience with Centurion quality. Therefore, I would like to recant my comments and confess to slander. Gosh! What a frickin' idiot (me, not Alalor). It's easy to make comments without thinking twice about them, until someone who actually knows chimes in.

I think I have simply become a CC snob. I worked hard to get mine, as many of you know, and I love it. I think I might be just a little too proud of it though, if I am beginning to assume that boats that aren't CC are low quality. Thanks Alalor!

Well, I have to say, my 87 centurion has been great. It has the same engine and transmission that most boats had in those days. A 351W by PCM, and a Velvet-Drive 71C. So, I am not eager to compare boat quality just by engine mishaps, because it tends to be just luck, since they all had the same. Now, as soon as we get away from the engine and transmission, it is there where all the boats begin to be different. I was just very unluky with my 85 malibu, it broke down all the time, but it had the same engine as my CCs and the Centurion and the Supra (all reliable), so I can't say Malibus are bad just based on that. Everything else on the Malibu was sub-standard quality, so that discouraged me and I will probably never have a Malibu again.

CC wants to be in the higher end of the market, like most companies. That way they can make the most amount of money out of each boat, like Ford, that makes like $14,000 profit out of each Navigator but only like $140 out of a focus.
CC tried for a while to be in both markets, the built the American Skier for a few years, didn't work out and sold it. Low end of the market is not easy. You need a lot of volume to make up for lower margins. And high volume can mean more warranty claims, more liability, etc. It can also mean lots of exposure (good and bad) and opportunities. But in ski boats, except for Bayliner, nobody seems to thrive in the low end, Moomba's volumes aren't that great. Tige didn't do that well with the switch. It is a wierd, tough market.
I think we'll soon see that the cheapest Nautique will have an MSRP of $50K