Headline in B'Ham Paper 11-16-2010

R

R-Matey

Member
Couldn't help but pass along a few tidbits that showed up today in the B'Ham newspaper......

Headline: Boat Maker Shuts Down
Local Firm Idles 35 Workers; built watercraft with aluminum hulls.....

Aluminum Chambered Boats announced on Monday, November 15, that it is ceasing operations. Interim president Tom Latham said the recession, mounting debt, etc........

Latham, who had been hired as director of operations in March, became interim president in July.......
 
WOW, that's big news. I thought that ACB had managed to secure some government contracts. Our Fire/Rescue boat is the first Fire/Rescue boat they ever built and it has been a fantastic vessel for our operation. We have never had any problems with it and it is about 10 years old. It is kept in fresh water 24/7. The only time it was in salt water was when the aircraft carrier USS Lincoln returned from war. We assisted the CG, Navy and local law enforcement vessels in keeping civilian vessels a safe distance from the Lincoln as it returned to port.
 
I was in bellingham this morning on business and a local business owner told me the new. Yes they had a lot of government contracts but were not making any money off of them. That's what i was told, I'm sure tom lathram did not help.

I was also told that the cdory hulls that went for auction sold for $2500 each. That's right $2500 each. wow
 
I hate to kick someone when they're down... but, I would think his involvement with ANY business could now be considered "a track record." Sad, truly sad. Another good boat builder tanks. At what point is it the economy and when does the blame lie with management?

The times I spoke with him, I didn't feel the need to pull any punches. I gave him some customer input that could not have been more dismissed. In spite of that attitude, it is sad to see any builder have to call it quits.
 
Well from what I've read, the troubles with Aluminum Chambered Boats started long before Tom Latham got there. Personally, I find the news about ACB interesting but think that we've kicked Mr. Latham around too much already on this site. I think the just be nice rule should apply to all. The "if you don't have anything good to say about somebody, don't say anything about them" rule my mom taught me seems like a good one in this case.
 
Who knows what sank ACB, but certainly Latham would not have helped. He was completely arrogant and dismissive of customers, which is what successful business people understand their business is actually about. I would not have expected that attitude to change at ACB. He also had terrible judgment, witness his idea to "Baylinerize" manufacture and sale of C-Dorys and the abomination that was the C-Dory 29.


rogerbum":11776cd0 said:
Well from what I've read, the troubles with Aluminum Chambered Boats started long before Tom Latham got there. Personally, I find the news about ACB interesting but think that we've kicked Mr. Latham around too much already on this site. I think the just be nice rule should apply to all. The "if you don't have anything good to say about somebody, don't say anything about them" rule my mom taught me seems like a good one in this case.
Click to expand...
 
Can we please stop bashing the C-Dory 29? While certainly different from the smaller C-Dory's, I don't find it to be an "abomination".

There are C-Dory dealers with these boats in stock, with lots of money tied up in them, and if someone were to come along and read a few posts here, would assume that there is something wrong with the boat and to avoid it at any cost.

The reality is that while not a perfect boat, it does have some very good design characteristics, and would make a fine cruiser for a family or a couple wanting more room than the smaller C-Dory's. The idea of having a "step-up" boat in the C-Dory line was a good one. It would also be a good boat for those wanting to keep it in the water.

We don't have one of these in stock, but we were impressed with the one we saw at the factory, and can find a number of good attributes to the design. If the boat had continued, there were some changes I would have recomended, but all were very minor nit-pick type of items.
 
Matt, I guess everyone is entitled to their opinion, but let us just say that every C-Dory owner who looked at the so-called "C-Dory 29" up close pretty much unanimously concluded this boat was not in fact even a true C-Dory in that it had NONE of the characteristics we value in our C-Dorys. We all shook our heads and said "What in the world were they thinking?"

This boat dates back to the Reynolds / Latham era C-Dory company, only a handful were manufactured, and if any dealer STILL has this boat in stock, it speaks volumes to its lack of market acceptance. The one that was at Master Marine for a couple of years appears to be gone, and I was wondering if it got sold or what happened to it. I do not think a dealer that truly understood what C-Dorys were about would have ordered this boat.

Matt Gurnsey":1ypee530 said:
Can we please stop bashing the C-Dory 29? While certainly different from the smaller C-Dory's, I don't find it to be an "abomination".
Click to expand...
 
Pat, I don't think the boat was designed for existing C-Dory owners, but an attempt to capture a new segment of the market. The same thing was done with the Tomcat- which was completely removed from previous C-Dory designs (a high speed catamaran from a builder of dories?).

What I find wierd is that the C-Brats site has embraced Cape Cruiser owners as "kin", Tomcat owners, the Marinaut, and is friendly toward Ranger Tug owners. But some are completely dismissive of the C-Dory built 29 Venture, because it is not a "true" C-Dory (even though it was built by C-Dory), and dismissive of the buyers of the product by extension, because they don't "get" what a "true" C-dory is.

The Tomcat is further removed for the "true" C-Dory than the 29 in many respects, so I don't see what the vitriole is all about.

My opinion, as I have no dog in this hunt, your mileage may vary.
 
Matt Gurnsey":37z0e59f said:
Pat, I don't think the boat was designed for existing C-Dory owners, but an attempt to capture a new segment of the market. The same thing was done with the Tomcat- which was completely removed from previous C-Dory designs (a high speed catamaran from a builder of dories?).

What I find wierd is that the C-Brats site has embraced Cape Cruiser owners as "kin", Tomcat owners, the Marinaut, and is friendly toward Ranger Tug owners. But some are completely dismissive of the C-Dory built 29 Venture, because it is not a "true" C-Dory (even though it was built by C-Dory), and dismissive of the buyers of the product by extension, because they don't "get" what a "true" C-dory is.

The Tomcat is further removed for the "true" C-Dory than the 29 in many respects, so I don't see what the vitriole is all about.

My opinion, as I have no dog in this hunt, your mileage may vary.
Click to expand...

I am also dogless. (OK, maybe I might have a Teacup Yorkie in the fight - after all, my boat was a "Venture" before the 29 existed. And design/ size/and heritage wise, my boat is more like a C-Dory than the 29 . . .:lol:)

I'll grant that some people just don't like the 29, but my guess is that some of the animosity stems from a couple of things not directly related to the characteristics of the boat itself. First, the other boats you mention (some valid examples of non-"dory" boats, to be sure), were either Toland designed, or are not called "C-Dories". Second, the person in question in the instance of the 29 was in command when the fleet, so to speak, went on the rocks, and the course he had set was, shall we say, "questioned" by many Brats (as was his approach to customer relations, etc, etc.).

By the way, who did design the 29? Could I be mistaken? Is it a Toland boat?
 
NORO LIM":lwtemrob said:
By the way, who did design the 29? Could I be mistaken? Is it a Toland boat?
Click to expand...

I spoke with a C-Dory employee at the time and was told, "Can you believe we paid a naval architect for this?" The only thing it has in common with a Toland design is the pilothouse "look". I don't have a dog in this fight, and my cat has no interest. While some may like this boat, it has no appeal for me. It is (IMHO) very indicative of how the owners/management at the time were totally disconnected from their customer base. The large investment of design, molds, and construction took resources away and for what? If the management was interested in increasing their customer base, why not find what interest there might me IN that market? If it were to make a boat that current C-Dory owners could move up to, an updated version of Tom's 27 makes more sense. If they weren't interested in that customer base (and my experience shows that they weren't), then why not a bold move towards something that didn't look similar, with bloated proportions... admittedly, beauty is in the eye of the beholder... but when something looks "right" (like the base product, the 22 Cruiser), most people can agree that it is pleasing.

Frankly, I like the idea of a 29' boat with a diesel. I don't like the idea of the head blocking the view for the co-pilot. Or just "scaling up" a design. Or the wheel so low that you'd have to steer with your feet. Since most of us are cruising couples, why not design a boat for a COUPLE?? A decent size berth and good storage (with easy access). Comfortable seats. Good visibility.

Again, Ranger Tugs has proven that there IS a demand for that size boat. Take a look at the proportions of that boat vs the C-Dory Venture 29. Compare the amenities and ergonomics. Ranger Tugs communicated with their owners, so they knew there was a viable market for their upsize boat.

While the original post that started this thread may have been in regards to another boat company biting the dust, it is news here because of who was at the helm. This horse that I'm beating isn't just dead, it suffered before it gasped its last breath. Who would put this guy in charge of another horse?
 
I suspect that at least a large part of the animosity toward the '29 had/has less to do with the boat itself than with the general feeling toward C-Dory leadership at the time. I think people were predisposed against the boat because of the path the company seemed to be taking at the time, i.e. getting rid of most of the old smaller dealers across the country, forcing boats on the remaining dealers, the whole Cape Cruiser fiasco, Latham's dismissing the brats as irrelevant, etc. etc. I went to see the new boat at the Bellingham gathering. My first impression was that it was huge and bulbous. I have never seen one in the water (Not sure there are any actually in the water!) and it may appear much better afloat. I have never heard anything about how it actually handles on the water. I have sympathy for dealers that have one on their lot, that's a lot of money that is unrecoverable. In a way I think the boat is similar to something one partner does in an ugly divorce, the husband/wife just can't do anything right no matter what!
 
You know the funny thing about my boat is this. ( all further info is second hand from several unnamed sources over the last three years) when the factory wanted a 25 design a local , now ex dealer, drew up planes for what would have been some thing along the line of my boat. a larger 22 with a head. Long thin and a bigger back deck. It was meet with no enthusiasm what so ever. and so the wider, short deck small table 25 ( I list these because of the complaints by many on these items) was born. And it has sold very well despite the small deck, small table, smaller head, and less storage then the design presented to the company. I think that the un built design would have also been a good seller and the old factory showed again that they can ignore someone, hell anyone, offering customer feed back.

Now the 29 was a boat that i was looking forward to seeing when it was talked about. but as stated the designer and factory real screwed the pooch, as they say, on that one. it was presented in the worse way. On a trailer parked right next to us. It looked hugh on the trailer and that turned people off right from the start. it was not a flat bottom boat so the fuel numbers were not going to look good ( no idea if they did or not but i doubt it) Then the inside was a mess. the bath room in the wrong spot, the steering wheel was un useable. the speed number's, all though fine for some folks, were not what I was looking for. And those are the only complains I had with it but those where so bad that it made the boat unbuyable. Well Susan said I could buy it but I would have to move into it if I did. More to the point it was a floating testaments to the closed ears of the factory and their Desiree to be bayliner.

now I would very much welcome any 29 owner to the site and any gathering I am at. I would love to talk to them about there boats and go for a ride.

a word about the tomcat. it fit a buyer that wanted a c dory looking boat but a faster boat. it fit a need. the 29 was a boat looking for a buyer or need.

The ranger tug is filling a need that the cdory factory left open or missed. many a company has raised or fallen for less.
 
With very few differences (perhaps a couple spelling corrections), I agree with Tom's assessment of the CD 29.

I always had this nagging hunch that Mr. Latham was brought on board at C-Dory because the company's failure was already inevitable and he was hired to guide them to the least costly demise. Seeing the news of his short tenure at ACB lends a great deal of credence to that hunch. So why would he/they invest so much in the CD29? Maybe it was a lifelong dream someone wanted to live knowing it would be cost-free since they weren't going to pay the bills anyway! Or quite possibly, the company needed a plausible reason failure other than what may have actually brought said failure about? (This is why I have not become a businessman myself. I don't know much about it, and I am prone to conspriacy theories!)
 
At the beginning of this thread I mentioned that I thought ACB had some government contracts. In googling the subject, I found that on 5/19/10 "it was announced that ACB had been awarded a USCG contract that could mean construction of up to 80 boats and $37.7 million in revenue. The 32' 9" vessel won out in competition for the Transportable Port Security Boats".

I can only speculate, that perhaps part of the reason for their "collapse" was that they underbid the contract in their eagerness to expand the business to the point that it was a loss to them.

They are definitely sound boats that provided a great niche for many recreational and work boat enthusiasts.
 
Dave,
That's essentially what I put together from reading a variety of sources and reading the comments made by former/current employees on the newspaper articles. It appears that they weren't able to turn a profit on the contracts. Worse yet, many gov't contracts have delayed payments with payment subject to testing and approval etc. So big contracts can really screw up cash flow for a small company.
 
We once sold a trailer to a government agency. It took nine months to get payment (and this was not a cheap trailer) which tied up a bunch of money that we really needed to use elsewhere.

We're very leery of government purchases, and quite often decide it isn't worth our time and energy.
 
Back
Top