Political damage control has since been practiced to the tune of $500,000 in sales tax and $70,000 in boat excise tax payments to Commonwealth coffers on the Senator’s $7 million vessel (with the Senator maintaining the taxes were intended to be paid all along). The story illustrates a short-sighted lack of judgment, but on whose part?

Thousands of men and women of the Massachusetts recreational marine trades are struggling statewide to stay afloat in a burdensome tax environment in a down economy. Massachusetts boat tax policy is the gift that keeps giving to out-of-state beneficiaries, sending jobs to tax-free Rhode Island, New Hampshire, and more recently Maine, with its reduction of its sales or use tax rate to 2 percent for non-residents who register their boats there.

If John Kerry weren’t a U.S. Senator, would we have even noticed that his primary residence and boat were registered in different states? Could anyone really be blamed for registering a boat “Anywhere But Here”?

Sandwiched between tax-free havens to the north and south, fewer and fewer boats are being built in, bought in, registered in and docked in Massachusetts, reducing the overall demand for marine trade employees statewide. Changing the Commonwealth’s boat tax policy is about jobs, not creating a tax haven for affluent recreationalists.

Massachusetts must adopt its own competitive boat tax policy. Reasonable, incremental efforts to do so have been made for years but have never advanced beyond the compulsory legislative committee stage. For nearly a decade the Massachusetts Marine Trades Association has actively supported legislation to make boats built or rebuilt in-state tax-free.

This narrowly written bill would preserve in-state boatbuilding and repairing jobs — consider that Sen. Kerry’s $7 million yacht was built in New Zealand, and he maintains that the initial Rhode Island registration was based on location for repair work — yet it has never been given serious consideration, and the bill’s sponsor has retired. Indeed, just this past weekend Massachusetts residents enjoyed a tax-free weekend, yet boats were expressly excluded in the enabling legislation.

Rhode Island’s 1993 boat sales tax repeal increased its marine industry employment by 20 percent within two years, and within five years gross revenues in the Rhode Island marine industry grew by 52 percent. This type of forward thinking promotes long-term gain sans the short-term pain — after all, the New England boating season is short; for a better part of the year most people aren’t thinking about boat buying, thereby eliminating boat taxes as a consistent state budget booster.

If the Massachusetts legislature and governor supported boat tax policy similar to our neighbors, there would be little to be lost but much to be gained. Those who have already purchased and registered their boats in the Commonwealth aren’t going to chart a new course for another heavy boat tax state in protest! Indeed, many Massachusetts boaters might even take the opportunity to buy new boats in-state, providing a desperately needed boost to all things boating, including dealers, brokers, builders, repairers, technicians and increasingly specialized electricians, fiberglass workers and vessel outfitters.

The best part of a boat tax friendly Massachusetts? Jobs! But not just for the boating industry. The elimination of state boat taxes would be offset by the influx of new boaters spending their money on Massachusetts goods and services as well as the employment tax revenues. It has been documented in a 2006 study by Michigan State University that spending by transient boaters at Boston’s Constitution Marina supported 30 direct and indirect seasonal or year-round jobs. The more boats built, purchased and registered in Massachusetts, the more direct job growth within the marine industry, but also indirectly at restaurants, hotels, gas stations and grocery stores.

We are fortunate in Massachusetts to have a committed Legislative Boating Caucus. Its 50-plus members show up and follow up. Its collective, non-partisan voice has accomplished much in just over five years, including opening the Boston Convention and Exhibition Center to gate shows and streamlining the outdated abandoned vessel disposal process.

The Gate Show Bill faced powerful union and neighborhood opposition; prior approaches to handling abandoned vessels languished for years. The Boating Caucus prioritized each and got each passed. Today the BCEC’s annual winter boat show keeps the Business of Boating in Massachusetts afloat. Today Massachusetts marinas and boatyards are able to dispose of abandoned vessels without seeing the inside of a court room. With the political will comes the way.

Boasting more than 1,500 miles of saltwater coastline and more than 2,500 square miles of inland waters, Massachusetts possesses the “infrastructure” to rebuild its historic marine industry and recapture a boating population that is increasingly setting sail for tax-friendlier waters. If the recent popular vote for U.S. Senate is any gauge, ordinary voters seem to understand tax policy affects ordinary jobs. Again, all that is needed is the political will to navigate the way toward long overdue necessary changes to Massachusetts boat tax policy.

— Jack Kent III
President, Massachusetts Marine Trades Association

In that same column, I shared a few case studies of how two different marine companies dealt with their own PR challenges. One was proactive and reached out to all of its various audiences, including dealers, customers, prospects and press. The other hid behind its legal eagles and refused to comment or address allegations, to its ultimate detriment. The company suffered resulting brand reputation damage, unhealthy media speculation, loss of dealer confidence, and a direct bullet to the bottom line.

Over the past 85 days I have been reminded of this column as the oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico continues to unfold. Notwithstanding the horrendous environmental implications and massive loss of wildlife and jobs caused by this wretched disaster, I have watched in disbelief as global giant BP has transformed itself into an oily monster, not only because of the spill but also because of its appalling lack of sound public relations.

In short order, BP CEO Tony Hayward became America’s public enemy No. 1 with his multiple series of regrettably stupid and embarrassing PR gaffes that delivered prime time and front page fodder on a daily basis.

To wit:

“What the hell did we do to deserve this?” he allegedly said to his executive team, following the spill, reported by the New York Times April 29. I might ask the same question of him as it relates to our coast, our people and our livelihood.

And to The Guardian: “The Gulf of Mexico is a very big ocean. The amount of volume of oil and dispersant we are putting into it is tiny in relation to the total water volume.” In a later interview with reporters, he described the environmental impact to be “very, very modest,” when in fact it has since been described as one of the worst disasters in modern history.

When asked if he could sleep at night, his flippant response: “Of course I can.”

While others were trying to pick up the pieces of their lives, not to mention the tar balls that have changed the complexion and smell of our beaches, Hayward traipsed off to watch — of all things — a yacht race!

And who could forget the verbal bomb he dropped about the scores of “small people” impacted by the spill, including the tragic boat captain who took his own life?

Perhaps his most contemptible blunder was when he tried to make a public apology but in the same breath, added, “There’s no one who wants this over more than I do. I would like my life back.” What a thoughtless, insensitive jerk. No longer the objective media observer, I was fueled by anger and seethed at this highly offensive remark.

I’m thankful that a cap is finally in place, and I pray it will stop the flow of oil. However, BP’s bloody gush of its own bad press will live on in infamy. No doubt, this incident will serve as a major case study of what not to do in PR textbooks for years to come.

There is much we can and should learn from this public relations disaster.

1. Having a crisis communication plan in place is a necessary and prudent business protocol. You never know when some tragic incident can make your company front-page news. Are you prepared?

2. The CEO may be a great leader but may not be the best face or voice to represent the company in a crisis. The company should have a designated spokesperson, and that individual should be groomed and trained to deal with the media. This is a learned skill that embraces not only the spoken word but also intonation and non-verbal body language.

3. Be pre-emptive. Don’t be put on the defensive. Be the first to address the issue. Take responsibility. Tell what transpired, how the company is addressing the problem, and how you will prevent it from happening again. Be proactive. Embrace the role of problem-solver.

4. In crisis situations, it is important to be perceived as caring, concerned and especially sensitive to those whose lives are directly affected. It may be more important to listen than to defend, rationalize or attempt to diminish the scope or impact of the issue. Why was Hayward walking around the beach with his jacket on instead of rolling up his sleeves and working to cleanse wildlife drenched and dying in oil, or meeting with the families whose livelihoods — or lives — were lost?

5. Companies need to be accountable and accept responsibility. I appreciate the fine line between legally protecting assets and opening up your company to lawsuits. However, never forget that failure to openly acknowledge the issue often translates into denying responsibility. Company execs, PR strategists and attorneys should collaborate.

So what are your observations? Agree or disagree? Suggestions or additional insight?

Wanda Kenton Smith is president of Orlando, Fla.-based Kenton Smith Marketing and president of Marine Marketers America.

Then came the comments from friends and family members: Aren’t you afraid to go there? Is it really safe? Are you sure it’s a good idea?

No, I wasn’t afraid to go. Yes, it’s really safe. Yes, it was an excellent idea.

The show was held about an hour or so outside of Suwan, a city in the Gyeonggi Province. This province, and the city of Seoul that it surrounds, contains a third of the country’s population — about 23 million people.

At no time did I feel unsafe or in danger. I walked around on my own, and people were helpful and friendly. Granted, I didn’t walk around at 2 a.m., but I wouldn’t do that here in the U.S. either. I didn’t feel any more unsafe in South Korea than I would in Miami, New York or any other major metro area of this country.

I think many people in this country have misconceptions about South Korea because of its portrayal in the media. We hear about the ongoing tensions between South and North Korea, and think bombs could explode any minute. Well, maybe they could, but as we know all too well, the same can happen right here in the United States.

In my humble opinion, that’s no reason not to do business there.

South Korea is a world leader in shipbuilding and semiconductors, and is among the top producers of cars and communication devices. In the decades since the end of the Korean War, it has transformed itself from a Third World country to a modern, vibrant, technologically advanced nation.

Obviously, doing business in South Korea is not right for every company. But it shouldn’t be dismissed off-hand because of outdated stereotypes that don’t paint an accurate picture of the country or its people.

Look for my report on the Korea International Boat Show in the August issue of Soundings Trade Only.

— Beth Rosenberg
b.rosenberg@tradeonlytoday.com

As if hurricanes, fuel prices, closed fishing areas and a recession weren’t enough, we now must face an oil spill — just as things are looking up. The hope is that BP should make good on damages, but care must be taken to thoroughly document claims.

First, go to the Florida Sea Grant Web site and check out “Finding Economic Relief” under “Florida Oil Spill Resources.” There are links to several valuable sites that describe how and where to file a claim. If you have an immediate need and do file a claim, be certain you are not waiving future claims by doing so. If there is any doubt, contact an attorney.

Gather your financial records and business logs. If possible, go back five years. Imagine having 10 minutes to describe your business, what has happened and how much your business has been impacted. But while your story may be spell-binding, it hardly matters if you don’t have financial records to back it up. The more the better. Large marinas with sophisticated accounting programs should have much of what is needed, but the small businesses may need to start digging out records.

For marinas, make note of occupancies, rental rates, service revenue, and fuel and boat sales. For the last few years, document the size of boats, the propulsion, number of launches and when. Survey your customers. Find out where they are from, how far they drive to the marina, what they do when they get there, and where they go, such as fishing out in the Gulf. And ask how their habits changed after the oil spill. Did they cut back or completely stop use of the boat? Were they simply nervous, or were their fishing or cruising grounds closed by the government?

Hotels should do the same, documenting occupancies, ADRs (room rates), advance bookings and cancellations. Survey your customers, particularly those who cancel. Where are they from? Have they been doing this trip each year? How far did they drive? Why did they cancel? Keep restaurants, bars, gift shops and other departments separate.

For charter boats, note days booked, head counts and length of trips. What are you fishing for? How many did you catch? Are the middle grounds closed and you wound up bay fishing? Make less money? Have to relocate to better waters? Survey your customers, particularly those who cancel.

For commercial fishing boats it can be easy, because you may not be able to go out at all. You made a little bit last year and nothing this year. But some are going farther south or into the Atlantic to try to find fish, so keep careful records of both your expenses as well as revenues. Chances are you will be spending more money to go farther and sell fewer fish at lower prices.

Once you have your records together, prepare projections for 2010 and 2011 and beyond, based on conditions before the oil spill. In other words, what were you expecting business to be like this year, before the oil spill? Be realistic.

Although it can be done by hand on bookkeeping paper, its best to create an Excel chart on your computer. Then you can add or subtract categories and add calculations and comments. QuickBooks and most other programs can export to Excel, or we can send a blank form if you ask.

Make it easy to read. Make a column for each year, with income and expense categories down the left side, with historic 2008 and 2009 information to the left and 2010 to the right. For projections, monthly columns are best so you can record the actual numbers as the months go by, then total them to the right. So two columns for each month, budget and actual.

More details of how to file a claim will be coming soon from many sources. Of course, some were negatively affected from the first day, but many have yet to experience a downturn and may not. Just be prepared if it happens.

Linwood Gilbert, MAI
President, Urban Realty Solutions
Tampa, Fla.
www.UrbanRealtySolutions.com
(813) 876-1808

Crowds were out and buying boats, accessories, gear and services — maybe not setting all-time industry records, but hey, deals were made and cash was transacted. One major boat manufacturer reported it was the best show he’d seen there in four years. This was really exceptional news and very encouraging for the sailing industry.

Some recent powerboat shows, likewise, have reported favorable results.

I’m absolutely thrilled to hear we are seeing an uptick in sales. I so want to be riding on the happy turnaround bandwagon, I really do. So why am I not spinning cartwheels and leading an all-industry cheer?

Anybody who follows my marketing column in Trade Only magazine knows the proverbial glass is always half full; I am an optimist. However, the past 18 months has tempered my natural-born cheery optimism. My psyche has shifted, and I’ve become more pragmatic.

So here’s my dilemma about the economy and its impact on our biz.

I’ve got this niggling little doubt about whether we have really turned the corner, or if we’ve just experienced a short-term microburst of pent-up demand. Is what we’ve seen recently sustainable? Or have our most loyal and few remaining creditworthy customers finally emerged to grab up the fast and easy deals?

I was speaking with Joe Lewis of Mount Dora (Fla.) Boating Center & Marina, a Top 100-ranked dealer and one of the smartest operators in the biz. He’s been at it a long time and is very much a “hands-on manager.” He’s successfully moved his old inventory to all the bottom feeders (my description, not his) that were scooping up great deals.

But now he’s hit a brick wall — qualified buyers are still poking around, he says, but they no longer want to buy the available 2010 new product at new-product pricing. And, he tells me, many other dealers are in the same boat.

His question to me: “Will they buy or bail?” Good question. BIG question.

By aggressively purging the dated inventory in the pipeline, have we in essence, created a new profit-sucking monster? Is this “new deal mentality” our new nemesis?

My latest marketing column in the upcoming May issue of Trade Only is on financial guru Suze Orman. Well, one of the most compelling things she told me is that she doesn’t see a turnaround or recovery in the U.S. until 2014 or 2015. She cautioned us to be careful.

She said it will look like we’re moving out of recession, but we won’t be quite yet. She predicts it will continue to be difficult for small business owners and consumers alike to get loans, and all the major bucks will go to big business.

So while I really want to be totally gung-ho about the recent flurry of sales activity, her counsel haunts me. Last I looked, it’s still 2010; 2014 and ’15 are a long way away.

When I asked Suze what she thought it would take to get the affluent to buy our products and services in today’s market, she said we have to offer the “deal of a lifetime.” She believes it is better to sell something now and hope to make it up in the future when things turn around.

And that throws me headfirst into a 360-degree exorcist-force spin right back to Lewis’ initial concern. If we don’t mimic the crazy discounting of the past 18 months, will our new product prospects buy . . . or bail?

I try to think like the customer. Hasn’t your mindset about buying big ticket items — shoot, any discretionary item — changed drastically? In my family, we don’t buy anything on impulse anymore, and the only way I’d even consider anything major is if it were a “deal of a lifetime,” and even then, I’m not sure we would buy. Nearly all of my upper crust, middle class friends, family and professional colleagues have adopted this same brutal budgeting mindset. So why would our average boating customer think differently?

Your thoughts?

Do you think we’ve turned the corner?

Do you think we’re experiencing a short-term sales burst, or are recent show results the early indicator of better days ahead?

Do you believe our new reality and future will be built upon skinny profit margins?

Do you think our current customers seeking the deal of a lifetime now will buy . . . or bail?

I know. It’s complicated.

Wanda Kenton Smith is president of Kenton Smith Marketing and president of Marine Marketers of America. She has handled boat show marketing and public relations for more than a decade, including this year’s Strictly Sail Pacific.

With apologies to all the police officers out there, it’s easy to dislike a cop — it’s easy to dislike anyone who is responsible for enforcing the rules. And in New England, it’s especially easy to dislike NOAA’s top cop, who has the unfortunate responsibility of enforcing often unpopular decisions against one of our most beloved groups: our fishermen and women.

Everyone likes fishermen. What’s not to like? These down-to-earth men and women are some of the nicest people you could ever hope to meet. Although my career has often thrown me in the path of frustrated fishermen — justifiably exasperated by complex regulations, rules and requirements — we have always been able to work together and get the job done. After all, we all want the same thing: a healthy and thriving New England fishery.

But fishery management decisions are complex. The rules are filled with technical jargon, and the requirements can be near impossible to decipher. We joke that you need a lawyer, an accountant and a full administrative staff to properly run a commercial fishing boat.

Of course, most fishermen are not lawyers or accountants or administrators. They are hard-working men and women who manage a boat or two. How are they supposed to find the time and expertise to navigate the complexities of closed areas, research set-asides, gear size restrictions, and an almost endless list of acronyms like VTR, LOA, SFD and VMS?

It is absolutely unfair how the regulations for fishing are stacked against fishermen. One simple mistake, and suddenly a law has been violated and a fine must be paid. No wonder Dale Jones was so unpopular.

But here’s the thing. If fishery regulations don’t change — if they stay as complicated as they are today — then NOAA’s top cop will always be unpopular. There’s no way to win if the rules you need to enforce are too complicated to understand and affect a popular group of people.

The truth is that we need fisheries regulations. As unpopular as they are, we need rules and limitations to ensure that we’ll have enough fish to support New England’s commercial fishing industry in 2011 and 2111. We need the regulations, but we don’t need them to be so complex or confusing. As long as the regulations are difficult to understand, their enforcement will appear arbitrary, and their enforcers will be loathed.

And that’s really what happened to Dale Jones. I’ve had the opportunity to meet Chief Jones several times over the past decade, and even though he and I rarely saw eye-to-eye, the man I know simply doesn’t fit the portrait so many news stories painted. Chief Jones and NOAA’s fishery enforcement agents are a top-notch outfit working in a challenging environment where every decision is likely to be an unpopular one.

Before we berate NOAA’s fishery enforcement team, let’s consider their accomplishments.

Under the leadership of Dale Jones, NOAA’s enforcement unit earned certification from the Commission for Law Enforcement Accreditation, the gold standard for law enforcement authorities. NOAA’s enforcement agents have made our seas safer for observers through the Community Oriented Policing Program, which prevents violations in the first place and ensures that observers are not harassed. They’ve protected endangered species by enforcing CITES regulations and recently put an end to an illegal market in rare black coral. It was NOAA’s enforcement agents who busted a California sushi restaurant for selling whale meat. Their work has also protected whales from Stellwagen Bank to the Hawaiian islands.

NOAA’s enforcement agents are the ones who enforce the regulations that preserve our fisheries and protect our fishermen. They aren’t just doing their jobs. They are also protecting the livelihood of every commercial fisherman, from New England to Puget Sound.

Their achievements don’t end at the shore, either. After the terrorist attacks in New York City, the men and women of NOAA’s enforcement team volunteered as air marshals and helped restore air travel safely and quickly. They dug though the rubble of the fallen World Trade Center beside New York City’s police officers and firefighters. They helped locate and identify the remains of victims so their families and loved ones could find some closure. Under Chief Jones’ leadership, NOAA’s enforcement agents stepped up when our country was at its most vulnerable.

Honestly, I’m disappointed at how quickly we have rushed to judge Chief Jones for the smallest of issues — shredding papers, for example. It’s been the subject of countless front-page stories, but information security is a routine thing at NOAA and throughout the federal government.

Yet the accusations flew. Before we could even confirm what was shredded, politicians were calling for his ouster. I can’t help wonder if our love of commercial fishermen — and disdain for the rules-enforcers — helped fuel the fire.

It’s all really too bad. In the end, enforcement problems don’t stem from any one person. And as much as we might not like the guys who enforce the rules, the commercial fishing industry can’t police itself.

In the end, I fear we will all lose. Dale Jones — the straw man here — loses his job and reputation. NOAA loses a good leader. And fishermen lose because a weaker enforcement of regulations will only mean less fish to catch every year.

The only winner here is the existing collection of overly complicated fisheries regulations. Because with Dale Jones taking the heat, the regulations are not likely to face reform any time soon. And that’s a shame, because nothing in NOAA needs reform as much as the way our fisheries are managed. Until that happens, all of us, including our fishermen, are condemned to losing.

Jacob Levenson, 32, is a marine biologist with a bachelor of science degree in marine science from the University of New England, a master of science in criminal justice from Boston University, and a master of science in non-profit management from Northeastern University. He holds a 100-ton captain’s license and has worked aboard everything from whale-watch vessels to sailing schooners. Levenson has worked with the International Fund for Animal Welfare, for NOAA in the Office for Law Enforcement, and the National Marine Fisheries Service’s Fishery Statistics Office.

U.S. Deputy Attorney General David Ogden noted that the “current economic downturn has already meant an upswing in some areas.” A survey of mayors and police chiefs across the country also supported this finding, with 42 percent of cities surveyed indicating that crime in their cities is a direct function of economic conditions.

As for marinas, economically driven criminal activity often manifests itself in acts of arson and/or sabotage. These risks, in addition to other common exposures, including fires, environmental, natural disasters and human error, demand that marinas adhere to sound practices to mitigate risks and associated liabilities.

Starting with the threat of fire, for example, there are many real and present dangers to marinas. From the flammable material composition of boats and their rack, dry rack or nestled storage, to the presence of gasoline and petroleum-based products, the conditions are conducive to fires.

The data on fire risks for marinas is compelling. The National Fire Protection Association Fire Analysis and Research Division’s Summary of Loss Data for Marinas and Boatyards, August 2008, reported on many major fires and their associated costs. Among the report’s findings was a fire involving a marina building constructed of corrugated steel and unprotected steel beams, which caught fire and caused the destruction of 52 boats and $4 million in damages.

In another fire stat, the NFPA report cited an 82-boat fire occurring where there were no dividers in three-boat tall storage racks, which also caused the facility to collapse. The NFPA does have requirements for marinas (i.e., fire detectors in interior or covered locations not protected by a fixed automatic sprinkler system) and is continually enhancing its NFPA 303, Fire Protection Standard for Marinas and Boatyards, and NFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems. There are also specific best practices marinas should implement to prevent fires.

Beyond fire, marinas must comply with a host of environmental laws, such as the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and the Clean Water and Clean Air Act stipulating how solid waste and hazardous waste is handled. There are also various initiatives underway by the Environmental Protection Agency to encourage marinas’ best practices relating to environmental improvements.

One such initiative, “Clean Marinas — Clear Value,” which the EPA instituted in conjunction with the U.S. Office of Water, presented significant cost savings to marines that implemented trash, water and fuel recycling programs, as well as hull serving improvements.

Understanding all of these and other risks associated with marinas and best practices to minimize risks is critical for all facilities.

Click here for the full text of Griffin’s article.

Sean H. Griffin
Account Executive/Marine Specialist
Commercial Insurance Division
Cook, Hall & Hyde Inc.

The consumers walking the docks at FLIBS seemed to have found their collective sea legs. They were back testing the waters and looking for deals. Builders and dealers were talking about either making — or having made — a bottom. And their attention was now trained on the slow climb out. The survivors of the tumult of the last 12 months were at Lauderdale.

The number of big boats was up, small boats down. Attendance was flat or up a smidgen. The convention center exhibitors fit on one floor rather than three. And some who had been in the convention center got in-water space for the first time.

Smaller is to be expected. Smaller will be the new norm. As one builder told me: “Normal is not going to be back to where it was, not for a long, long time.”

There were a number of new boat and product introductions at FLIBS, although the volume was down. New product eventually will help jumpstart those consumers who are still just nibbling on the idea of a new boat. And innovations such as pod drives and joystick steering will give early adapters a reason to come back in.

Longer term, whatever changes builders can make to pull costs out of boats — fewer options, more modest power, perhaps — also will help as we move forward.

Bill Sisson
Trade Only Editor

Nearly five years after the NRC’s official results proved that the current approach to statistical analysis in the recreational sector is wrought with “serious flaws in design or implementation” and uses “inadequate analysis methods that need to be addressed immediately,” the National Marine Fisheries Service is still using the same “fatally flawed” data as the “best available” science within the recreational sector.

As the Recreational Fishing Alliance (RFA) points out, when you couple this faulty science with arbitrary rebuilding deadlines required under federal law, it’s a recipe for disaster that’s denying anglers access to America’s No. 1 outdoor pastime while leading to a financial collapse within coastal communities nationwide.

The federal fisheries service’s inability to implement these congressionally mandated changes coming from the scientific community is having a grave impact on the entire marine industry. As boat, motor and marine manufacturers and dealers weather the continuing economic storm, the RFA warns it’s time to brace for a new round of gloomy NOAA advisories.

Click here for the full text of Hutchinson’s position paper/treatise.

Jim Hutchinson Jr.
Managing director
Recreational Fishing Alliance

For boaters, high repair bills can be a whole lot easier to swallow if the personnel at their service yard are professional, polite and patient. This summer I took my 1998 Neptune walkaround with a 2002 150-hp Mercury OptiMax to MarineMax in Sarasota, Fla. The engine had been overheating and then refused to start.

I tried to troubleshoot the problem, but after many hours of toiling away, I decided to take it to a certified Mercury dealer. MarineMax’s Mike Barron was my service advisor.

Barron, who was a marine technician for 12 years before coming to MarineMax, did an exemplary job of staying in touch with me as technicians went through the troubleshooting process. And he was willing to jump on the phone a few times with the technician who had worked on the engine when I lived in Connecticut. MarineMax welcomed his input and found it helpful.

The total bill was substantial, but I knew the job had been done right. And dealing with MarineMax was painless. Mike Barron was professional, polite and patient — the three “Ps” of quality service. When it was time to write the check, I felt like I had spent my money wisely.

Too often, unfortunately, service calls don’t end with satisfied customers. And those experiences can make people think twice about owning a boat. The industry must do a better job of catering to the customer, especially at a time when more people are upgrading their boats rather than replacing them.

— Chris Landry
Trade Only senior reporter