Tragedy of the Commons.A bold claim.
Let's see if there's any validity to the assertion being made ... by doing math.
What prevents a market failure caused by oversupply from multiple, non-coordinating suppliers?
Pondering starship evolution
- Thread starter Spinward Flow
- Start date
What prevents a market failure caused by oversupply from multiple, non-coordinating suppliers?
Silverhawk
SOC-12
Nothing. But the enterprising might find other uses for the excess. What's to prevent someone from using modules as rental storage. Or con some other poor schmuk into a scheme that ends with the Mark holding the module and the bill while the entrepreneur jumps off to another enterprise. Might be an adventure in that. 
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
Ding ding ding ding!
We have a winner!
If a (humble) Cargo Box isn't/can't be used for interstellar transport services, it can still be used for interplanetary transport services.
Or it can be hired/rented/etc. for more "mundane" stationary storage purposes.
It could even be used for intra-planetary transport (via small craft delivery tug).
Nothing says it can't be used for shuttle runs between space stations and airless (atmosphere: 0-1) moons.
And that's just an "empty" box meant for hauling a variety of breakbulk cargoes around (conveniently).
Outfit a 20 ton Cargo Box with 5x Starship Staterooms and you've got yourself a "mobile habitat" that can be plunked down almost anywhere for use as housing. Daisy chain multiple Stateroom Boxes together and you've got yourself the beginnings of an Outpost/Base Camp for people to come home to, even in space.
Even in a stationary application, an array of Stateroom Boxes linked together could become the equivalent of a motel/hotel business opportunity. Just import the Stateroom Boxes and deposit them where the business wants to be, hire the staff and you've got an "instant" hospitality location.
Point being that the "usefulness" of the basic modular standard container is not limited to interstellar transportation exclusively. There will be a wider market for the services that the form factor can provide.
Nothing.
When not mobilized onboard starships/spacecraft, a simple Cargo Box could be used as "modular warehousing" space, if there's a need for that.
I can envision circumstances that involve Disaster Relief, in which a supply of Boxes (Cargo, etc.) are "stockpiled" by a governing authority in the event of a calamity for which they would need to be mobilized in a surge of transport capacity.
Also valid.
One man's trash is another man's treasure, after all.
The opportunity for shenanigans starts getting almost endless.Might be an adventure in that.
The point though is to make the "modular standard container" something that can become "ubiquitous" in a way analogous to the TEU ... albeit at a larger form factor (made possible by gravitics and 3D movement) than something that ought to be "road worthy" in some form or fashion.
Right now, testing out a wide variety of usage scenarios is yielding a result where the 20 ton Box form factor is tending to be the best compromise solution that fulfills an enormous variety of possible use cases (and thus, addressable markets).
For the record, I originally started this whole journey/research project founded on the 30 ton Modular Cutter Module ... but that was a "less than satisfactory solution" due to the packing losses (and wasted space) inherent in the cylindrical form factor. The 50 ton Modular Cutter also made for a "less than adequate" fighter craft when armed (too vulnerable to hostile fire, no computer, etc.), so I had to branch off and design my own bespoke alternative that could do the job(s) needed better.
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
That’s self financed. What I had in mind implied by the 40 years was financed.A bold claim.
Let's see if there's any validity to the assertion being made ... by doing math.
=====
Cargo Box (Type-AU, TL=9)
20 ton small craft hull, configuration: 4 (MCr1.2)
0 tons for Armor: 0 (TL=9)
* External Docking: 4x 20 = 80 tons capacity (MCr0.16)
20 tons for cargo hold
= 0+20 = 20 tons
= 1.2+0.16 = MCr1.36
Single Production Cost: MCr1.36 (100%)
Volume Production Cost: MCr1.088 (80%)
=====
Arbitrage yielding Cr100 per ton, per jump, in terms of differential between charter and non-charter pricing ... would mean that a third party owner of a 20 ton Cargo Box would be paying Cr18,000 at the interstellar charter price to a starship operator to transport the 20 ton load (per Cargo Box). The third party would then be able to sell freight tickets to customers for the 20 ton transport capacity at Cr1000 per ton ... so if a customer wanted all 20 tons, the third party operator would be earning Cr20,000 on the contract.
20,000 - 18,000 = Cr2000 per jump, net profit (best case scenario)
At MCr0.002 profit yield per jump ... how many jumps would a (volume production) Cargo Box owned by a third party need to make in order to recoup the cost of construction via arbitrage pricing of charter vs non-charter tickets?
Let's also assume that a Cargo Box needs annual overhaul maintenance (just like every starship does), which is going to cost Cr1088 (and 2 weeks downtime) to perform.
Question: How many jumps would such a Cargo Box need to make in order to break even on the costs of construction + annual maintenance, assuming an in-service lifespan of 40 years?
(1.088 + 0.001088*40) / 0.002 = 565.76 ≈ 566 jumps over 40 years
566 / 40 = 14.15 jumps per year to break even on construction + annual maintenance expenses
If a 20 ton Cargo Box owned by a third party jumps 15+ times per year ... the third party company that bought the Cargo Box is likely to turn a profit, just on selling cargo freight tickets to customers and then negotiating interstellar charter tickets to transport the Cargo Box with starship operators. Note that the third party could EASILY dabble in speculative goods arbitrage itself, which could potentially recoup the capital investment for a single Cargo Box in as little as a single jump!
Obviously, the more times a specific Cargo Box owned by a third party jumps per year, the more profit can be generated (go figure, eh?horsesstarships" at each starport).
If a Cargo Box jumps every 10 days (on different starships), it could jump up to 35 times per year (and still allow 2 weeks for annual overhaul maintenance during that year).
If a Starship jumps every 14 days, it can jump up to 25 times per year.
A third party business operation could probably find ways to keep each Cargo Box jumping 15-35 times per year (parsecs make no difference in CT for ticket revenues accounting) in order to turn a profit on their capital investment (MCr1.088 cash on delivery from the shipyard, minus the down payment to initiate construction, plus annual overhaul maintenance expenses) ... just if they were selling cargo freight tickets for the 20 ton capacity of each Cargo Box.
Even better yet, the (humble?) 20 ton Cargo Box is technically a small craft ... meaning that it can be constructed at ANY type B+ starport. Therefore, the modular transport starship built to jump/maneuver tug the Cargo Boxes will need to be built at a type A starport, but any type B starport (TL=9+) can construct the 20 ton Cargo Boxes that "make the laws of supply & demand operate profitably" for everyone concerned. In other words, not all of the tonnage in circulation for interstellar trade needs to come from type A starports exclusively (some of it does, but not all of it). This then makes it a LOT easier for type B starport worlds to "buy in" to the modular standardized container business model of interstellar trade, enlarging the pool of capital that can be invested and thus increasing the overall supply AND demand for interstellar trade capacity services.
If this were a "real world" defense contract, we would call that kind of "spread the wealth around" type of subcontracting (for the 20 ton Boxes) a form of Political Engineering™ ... because when more parties have "stakes" in the success of a program, there are more "interested parties" wanting it to succeed (so they can receive their "cut" of the benefits and proceeds).
In the setting of Traveller ... it means that it becomes possible for greater interstellar cooperation agreements to be signed.
For example, Grote/Glisten (type A starport) builds the starships ... and Caladbolg/Sword Worlds (type B starport) builds (all of) the small craft to supply the demand from the starship operators and the third party businesses that want to "expand their reach" and establish an economic hegemony for their products on an interstellar scale. That kind of mutually beneficial relationship winds up having all kinds of cultural, diplomatic, economic and military implications, for both Grote and Caladbolg ... and all of the star systems in the region where the starship operators ply their trade (under subsidy or as private enterprises).
If you have spare millions to invest in building it outright, I would argue save up and buy a ship instead since you are more likely to turn a profit by classic speculation and shenanigans.
The business case for this would probably be either subsidized as either a government or corporation wants to support development, or a firm of factors in a region supporting regular big steady contracts, speculation on a consistent basis, and providing LCL shipping for odd lots.
Another distinction I worked out was containers that fit the 10/5/1 lots built for internal cargo holds. They don’t need hull armor and thus are much cheaper- I settled on 10%. Like truck trailers, they don’t last as long, only 10 years, but are much easier to self finance and an entree for the lone starship operator.
Finally, the cost for building or renting containers that can handle chemicals, refrigeration, radioactives, explosives or other delicate, sensitive and/or dangerous cargo is higher than the Cr100 charge will cover.
These are more likely built and operated by the source corporation shipping their product or specialized container lines, but the free trader may invest in some to get a wedge into lucrative regular special contracts normally only the province of the big boys.
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
Why would you want to bank finance a MCr1.088 construction cost small craft?
Even with bank financing or a subsidy, as an "owner" you would still be obliged to come up with 20% of the construction cost as a down payment to begin construction.
1.088 * 0.2 = Cr217,600 for 20% down payment (required)
1.088 * 0.8 = Cr870,400 for 80% full volume construction cost payment (upon delivery from the shipyard)
So to be clear ... in your mind, it makes sense to take out a bank loan for the remaining MCr0.8704 that needs to be paid at the end of construction?
What would that ACTUALLY cost you over the 40 year lifetime service of a 20 ton Cargo Box?
Well, according to LBB2.81, p23 (meaning that I can cite my sources, unlike some people
) ... a bank loan financing plan requires the 20% down payment to be paid by the purchaser (see: computation above) and then payment of 1/240 of the (total) construction cost every month for 480 months.1,088,000 / 240 = Cr4533.3333 per month ... or Cr54,400 per (12 months) year
54,400 * 40 = Cr2,176,000 in mortgage payments over 40 years
Total cost of the bank loan financed purchase for the construction cost of a 20 ton Cargo Box?
217,600 + 2,176,000 = Cr2,393,600 = MCr2.3936
Total cost when paid in cash on hand when delivered from the starport construction yard ... MCr1.088 ...
Now let's do the lifetime expenses vs revenue arbitrage computation to figure out how many jumps a bank financed Cargo Box would need to make in order to break even on the bank loan financing option.
(2.3936 + 0.001088*40) / 0.002 = 1218.56 ≈ 1219 jumps over 40 years
1219 / 40 = 30.475 jumps per year to break even on construction + annual maintenance expenses
So, basically, a Cargo Box bought using bank loan financing would need to jump at least 31 times per year for 40 years just to break even on the bank loan financing ... because someone in the accounting department just wants to spend profit margins on bank loan interest payments, I guess?
It's DOABLE ... but as a third party operation you're going to have to HUSTLE in order to secure those 31-35 jumps per year on a bank loan financed Cargo Box.
Or you could just score a single BIG speculative goods arbitrage payout reward and pay off the bank loan after a single jump.
Your call.
Yes. I'm sure you would argue that.
A "brand new, fresh off the line" J1 Free Trader retails for MCr37.07 in a stock configuration. It can carry 6 high passengers and 82 tons of cargo in its stock (unarmed) configuration.
- Maximum ticket revenue (100%) = 60,000 + 82,000 = Cr142,000 per jump, before expenses
- Interplanetary charter revenue = Cr200 per hour, minimum 12 hours = Cr2400 per 12 hour interplanetary charter
- Maximum ticket revenue (100%) = Cr680,000 per jump
- Maximum interstellar charter rate expenses (90%) = Cr612,000 per jump
- Interplanetary charter revenue = Cr680 per hour, minimum 12 hours = Cr8160 per 12 hour interplanetary charter of 34x 20 ton Cargo Boxes
Oh and just to bring things back into the interplanetary realm ... at an interplanetary charter rate of Cr20 per hour, how long would it take to recoup the Cr1,088,000 construction cost for a 20 ton Cargo Box?
- 1,088,000 / 20 = 54,400 hours
- 54,400 / 8400 = 6.47619048 years
Hmmm ...
I'm not sure if such a business model could be considered profitable ...
Wait, I know!
Let's stack the deck against ourselves and buy the same 20 ton Cargo Box using bank loan financing!
- 2,393,600 / 20 = 119,680 hours
- 119,680 / 8400 = 14.24761905 years
Take all the time you need to figure out if 7 or 15 years is less than the 40 years of a standard bank loan finance deal for starships ...
And just to show there's no hard feelings, what would be the counterfactual case for a J1 Free Trader working at a charter rate of Cr200 per hour on interplanetary charters? Could a Free Trader "work off" its (baseline) construction cost using exclusively interplanetary charters for 350 days per year? Let's see!
- 37,070,000 / 200 = 185,350 hours
- 185,350 / 8400 = 22.06547619 years
Well I did that for the box that I live in, and it doesn't even have a revenue source.
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
Completely ignoring the speculative cargo part of my statement. Well you won the argument in your head and that’s the important thing.Why would you want to bank finance a MCr1.088 construction cost small craft?
Even with bank financing or a subsidy, as an "owner" you would still be obliged to come up with 20% of the construction cost as a down payment to begin construction.
1.088 * 0.2 = Cr217,600 for 20% down payment (required)
1.088 * 0.8 = Cr870,400 for 80% full volume construction cost payment (upon delivery from the shipyard)
So to be clear ... in your mind, it makes sense to take out a bank loan for the remaining MCr0.8704 that needs to be paid at the end of construction?
What would that ACTUALLY cost you over the 40 year lifetime service of a 20 ton Cargo Box?
Well, according to LBB2.81, p23 (meaning that I can cite my sources, unlike some people
1,088,000 / 240 = Cr4533.3333 per month ... or Cr54,400 per (12 months) year
54,400 * 40 = Cr2,176,000 in mortgage payments over 40 years
Total cost of the bank loan financed purchase for the construction cost of a 20 ton Cargo Box?
217,600 + 2,176,000 = Cr2,393,600 = MCr2.3936
Total cost when paid in cash on hand when delivered from the starport construction yard ... MCr1.088 ...
Now let's do the lifetime expenses vs revenue arbitrage computation to figure out how many jumps a bank financed Cargo Box would need to make in order to break even on the bank loan financing option.
(2.3936 + 0.001088*40) / 0.002 = 1218.56 ≈ 1219 jumps over 40 years
1219 / 40 = 30.475 jumps per year to break even on construction + annual maintenance expenses
So, basically, a Cargo Box bought using bank loan financing would need to jump at least 31 times per year for 40 years just to break even on the bank loan financing ... because someone in the accounting department just wants to spend profit margins on bank loan interest payments, I guess?
It's DOABLE ... but as a third party operation you're going to have to HUSTLE in order to secure those 31-35 jumps per year on a bank loan financed Cargo Box.
Or you could just score a single BIG speculative goods arbitrage payout reward and pay off the bank loan after a single jump.
Your call.
Yes. I'm sure you would argue that.
A "brand new, fresh off the line" J1 Free Trader retails for MCr37.07 in a stock configuration. It can carry 6 high passengers and 82 tons of cargo in its stock (unarmed) configuration.
34x 20 ton Cargo Boxes (detailed previously) have a construction cost of MCr36.992 in stock configuration. They can carry a combined 680 tons of cargo between them.
- Maximum ticket revenue (100%) = 60,000 + 82,000 = Cr142,000 per jump, before expenses
- Interplanetary charter revenue = Cr200 per hour, minimum 12 hours = Cr2400 per 12 hour interplanetary charter
The Free Trader is going to have a LOT of additional expenses to cover (crew salaries, life support, starport fuel purchases, etc.), many of which will be recurring whether the Free Trader is jumping (to bring in revenues) or not (sitting in a berth, waiting). A lot of those same expenses simply "won't apply" to Cargo Boxes (no crew, no life support, no fuel, etc.) for a third party business concern administering a "fleet" of Cargo Boxes (so they would have "office worker" staff expenses, but wouldn't be paying "starship crew" salary rates).
- Maximum ticket revenue (100%) = Cr680,000 per jump
- Maximum interstellar charter rate expenses (90%) = Cr612,000 per jump
- Interplanetary charter revenue = Cr680 per hour, minimum 12 hours = Cr8160 per 12 hour interplanetary charter of 34x 20 ton Cargo Boxes
Oh and just to bring things back into the interplanetary realm ... at an interplanetary charter rate of Cr20 per hour, how long would it take to recoup the Cr1,088,000 construction cost for a 20 ton Cargo Box?
For reference, a small craft working 350 days per year (leaving time for 2 weeks of annual overhaul maintenance per year) amounts to 8400 hours per year.
- 1,088,000 / 20 = 54,400 hours
So for the sake of simplicity, a 20 ton Cargo Box that is contracted out on interplanetary charters for 350 days per year will recoup the cost of its (volume) construction and maintenance in less than 7 years ...
- 54,400 / 8400 = 6.47619048 years
Hmmm ...
I'm not sure if such a business model could be considered profitable ...
Wait, I know!
Let's stack the deck against ourselves and buy the same 20 ton Cargo Box using bank loan financing!
So for the sake of simplicity (again), a 20 ton Cargo Box that is contracted out on interplanetary charters for 350 days per year will recoup the cost of its (volume) construction bank loan and maintenance in less than 15 years ...
- 2,393,600 / 20 = 119,680 hours
- 119,680 / 8400 = 14.24761905 years
Take all the time you need to figure out if 7 or 15 years is less than the 40 years of a standard bank loan finance deal for starships ...
And just to show there's no hard feelings, what would be the counterfactual case for a J1 Free Trader working at a charter rate of Cr200 per hour on interplanetary charters? Could a Free Trader "work off" its (baseline) construction cost using exclusively interplanetary charters for 350 days per year? Let's see!
Of course, that's not including any other operating expenses (annual overhaul maintenance, crew salaries, life support replenishment, starport/spaceport fuel, berthing fees, etc.) that would necessarily make that "break even" on investment time point push out even further.
- 37,070,000 / 200 = 185,350 hours
- 185,350 / 8400 = 22.06547619 years
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
ORLY?
Only because you completely ignored my earlier statement that directly addressed the point (and I've got the receipts to prove it, againNote that the third party could EASILY dabble in speculative goods arbitrage itself, which could potentially recoup the capital investment for a single Cargo Box in as little as a single jump!
).Even when you make demonstrably false assertions (#659) and then have them proven wrong repeatedly by DOING THE MATH (#660, #665) that you yourself were demonstrably unwilling to do (then or now) ... you're still as ungracious as ever when it comes to accepting the proofs and truth that has been placed in front of you, for all to see.
I didn't "win" any argument(s).
I supplied PROOF of my assertions. I used MATH to do it, and I showed my work (as cited in the links above).
You ... DID NOT.
Your ... attempts ... at proof can be politely distilled down to "Trust me, bro."
If there is to be any "winning" or "losing" on the merits here ... you lost BY DEFAULT.
Typically, I would expect loan financing to be used for something that is a large capital expense which cannot be paid for in a single lump sum. So bank loan financing for a (complete) starship, or a homestead property, I can understand.
But for "small" expenses, it doesn't make as much sense.
I mean ... would you take out a 40 year bank loan mortgage to pay for ... today's lunch?
Granted, there are some people who would be desperate enough to do that (for reasons various and sundry) ... but not many.
But let's take a counterfactual then.
Let's say that I've got enough cash on hand for the down payment on a stock J1 Free Trader (MCr37.07 construction cost, fresh off the line from a shipyard), but I don't have enough free capital to be able to pay off the construction cost on delivery. How much cash would I need to make the down payment?
- 37.07 * 0.2 = MCr7.414
- 1.088 * 6 = MCr6.528
Realistically speaking, a third party business that wants to get into the 20 ton Cargo Box "game" could do so with as little as MCr1.1 in starting capital for a single Cargo Box ... although "more" would be advisable, so as to have capital available to engage in speculative goods arbitrage more quickly (which is where the REAL profits are to be found!).
MCr1.1+ really isn't that high of hurdle to get over for a "new player" third party interest in the 20 ton Cargo Box supply & demand market when calculating the investment needed to own a single Cargo Box, free and clear, upon delivery from the shipyard.
I mean ... that's comparable to the price of 2x Air/Rafts (at MCr0.6 each).
Silverhawk
SOC-12
Of course, we don't know anything about the Imperial (or anybody else TU) tax code. But there are advantages to not fully owning an asset but being able to use it. Railroads in theory should be able to pay for new equipment when necessary but in fact will use financial instruments known as equipment trusts to spread out the payments while being able to defer or eliminate some tax burden. Southern Pacific back in the 1970's did this by setting up a subsidiary selling them a group of locomotives then leasing them back.
Reminds me of the machine that goes ping in Meaning of Life.
Reminds me of the machine that goes ping in Meaning of Life.
Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
I don't think the Imperium does tax rebates.
Perhaps, disaster relief.
Perhaps, disaster relief.
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
I'm (quite) sure that in the age of the megacorporation that there's all kinds of accounting chicanery possible ... and going on in the background ... of any Traveller setting. Fortunately, for our purposes (as Players and Referees), that's a level of Pencils & Paperpushing that we really don't need to worry about in order to have a fun gameplay experience.
There's ROLEplaying and then there's ROLLplaying ... but the true depths of hell are to be found in bureaucratic HELLplaying.
All Hope Abandon, Ye Who Venture There.
The normal rule of thumb is not to borrow for operational costs (like your lunch), because that way lies ruin, but borrowing for capital items is often sensible (as long as they'll make you more money than the loan costs). Now, if you have plenty of cash lying round, self-financing makes sense, but most businesses don't, or have better uses for cash.Typically, I would expect loan financing to be used for something that is a large capital expense which cannot be paid for in a single lump sum. So bank loan financing for a (complete) starship, or a homestead property, I can understand.
But for "small" expenses, it doesn't make as much sense.
I mean ... would you take out a 40 year bank loan mortgage to pay for ... today's lunch?
Granted, there are some people who would be desperate enough to do that (for reasons various and sundry) ... but not many.
That depends on what other uses you can put that MCr 6.5 and change to. If you can buy a whole lot of cargo that you 'know' will go for a ton of profit, you take out a loan for those containers and buy the cargo. If not, maybe owning the containers free and clear is the best use of the cash.But let's take a counterfactual then.
Let's say that I've got enough cash on hand for the down payment on a stock J1 Free Trader (MCr37.07 construction cost, fresh off the line from a shipyard), but I don't have enough free capital to be able to pay off the construction cost on delivery. How much cash would I need to make the down payment?
If I've got MCr7.414 in cash available for a down payment on a J1 Free Trader ...
- 37.07 * 0.2 = MCr7.414
... I've got enough cash on hand to pay for 6x 20 ton Cargo Boxes, paid in full upon delivery (no bank loan needed) ... and still have Cr886,000 left over for business operation expenses until the revenue starts pouring in. So why would I need a bank loan?
- 1.088 * 6 = MCr6.528
Having a parent company own capital assets and lease them out to an operating company is fairly common. The parent company can be set up in some tax haven, and the lease rates set high enough that the operating company (in some less tax-friendly place) never makes a profit. This also means that if the operating company goes belly-up the capital assets are safe from liquidation because they never belonged to the now defunct company. All this assuming that the place you're doing business in doesn't have laws to stop this sort of dodge, of course.
I had a talk to my players before the last Traveller game I ran about this. No shell companies, no tax shelters and other silly games, and I'd not be a bastard about taxes and stuff. Keep it simple, etc.
I'd have preferred to avoid the whole thing entirely, but one players measures success by profit made (regardless of game or setting), and was adamant that any spare space on a spaceship should be stuffed full of cargo.
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
Yup.
Min/max mentality.
"Next! To my know-it-all nephew Ralston-"
"This is SO PREDICTABLE."
"I bequeath a boot to the head."
"Ugh! I knew it."
"AND one for Jenny and the wimp!"
I addressed this perspective with respect to berthing vehicles onboard (which then generate "no revenue" since their tonnage can't be used for tickets, passenger or cargo).
If you're ROLLplaying the stats sheet for your starship, you don't want ANY vehicles or small craft ... because they're a 'waste" of tonnage that could otherwise be carrying cargo or passengers (and thus generating ticket revenues).
If you're ROLEplaying the life of a Traveller living aboard a starship, you WANT at least 1 vehicle(!) ... to make your job/life easier anytime you need to leave your ship and/or the starport.
Go figure, eh?
Hadn't heard that routine in a while. Thanks!Yup.
Min/max mentality.
"Next! To my know-it-all nephew Ralston-"
"This is SO PREDICTABLE."
"I bequeath a boot to the head."
"Ugh! I knew it."
"AND one for Jenny and the wimp!"
I addressed this perspective with respect to berthing vehicles onboard (which then generate "no revenue" since their tonnage can't be used for tickets, passenger or cargo).
If you're ROLLplaying the stats sheet for your starship, you don't want ANY vehicles or small craft ... because they're a 'waste" of tonnage that could otherwise be carrying cargo or passengers (and thus generating ticket revenues).
If you're ROLEplaying the life of a Traveller living aboard a starship, you WANT at least 1 vehicle(!) ... to make your job/life easier anytime you need to leave your ship and/or the starport.
Go figure, eh?
So, this is kind of funny.
When I bought my first condo, I had to go buy, like, 28 light bulbs. It was some crazy amount of lightbulbs.
And, naturally, I'm, like "Wow, these guys are so cheap they couldn't even provide light bulbs?"
And, no, that's the wrong tact. YOU (ME), the consumer, the purchaser, you're buying those light bulbs. The builder is not going to give them to you.
So, do you really want to have a 30 year mortgage on...a pack of light bulbs?
(Sure, modern LEDs last a long time...but...).
One of several unanticipated "cash flow events" that I got hammered with when I bought a new condo. My first year was, ahem, "rough", to say the least.
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
Hence this bit of advice ...
... to run your business until revenues start coming in.
Which is another way of saying that there's a REASON behind the notion of having a financial cushion/reserve when making ANY Big Purchase™ (whether it be a starship, spacecraft or homestead). There are going to be "unanticipated expenses" occurring after taking delivery, so best to have some financial reserves available to absorb those additional expenses while you get everything set up the way you want.
