The Swallow from the movie up for auction

As most of you are aware by now Swallow from the movie is on the auction block, I wonder if TARS will bid for her.

I would really like to see TARS or the NBT bid for her, and am happy to put my money where my mouth is. I'd like to see her go to a home whereby she is kept sailing, and available to everyone, not hidden away.

Magnus -

on balance, I'm inclined to agree with you. TARS currently has  nearly £50k in reserves, but it's not so much about buying it as where you keep it; who will be responsible for looking after it; how will it be used - could any member borrow it etc. But these are all superable issues, and while it is not an AR boat - and I don't think the original Swallow exists - all his other boats are privately owned except Cochy, yet this boat is very dear to the hearts of the millions who've seen the video. I'm also inclined to the view that apart from being perhaps 12" shorter it is unusual in being very similar with no centreboard housing.

Maybe it would make a good tender for Nancy though?

Rob

We could then rent her out to the BBC for their movie if it happens.

Robin

Right then, I can put away my cash then! But I will contribute a garage space, some elbow grease, some varnish, a car with a towbar....

She's a million milles from the real Swallow(s), but with the film link, and her general style/age, I still think she makes a worthwhile purchase (hopefully less than £50k). Since she is not so utterly precious as the original Swallow, it will be possible to keep her sailing again!

Can we have some feedback from the higher echelons of the committee? Are they considering it at present?

I paid £500 for my 1953 clinker dinghy, Titty Walker, with a trailer (could use a better one) so apart from the film connection I'd reckon it should go for about the same, without a trailer - Titty is only 11' 3" but is older (I think - Swallow does look older than a 1970's build-date)

The Trustees just met only a week ago, so I guess this has missed the boat (sorry!). I don't know if the Chair has the power to make emergency decisions or to authorise expenditure up to say £1K.

Your point about having a less-valuable (than say Cochy and certainly Amazon) boat to sail is well made. Geraint did have the idea a few years ago about building a replica Swallow for this very reason, and the recent controversies over Cochy and her submersion at the IAGM last year should encourage this view.

But I suspect that TARS will not be able to move quickly enough, and that Swallow becoming a tender for Nancy Blackett might be a more realistic goal. 

Rob

They have a month until the auction closes. I would like to think that 5 people can have had a phone conversation with each other by then!

Magnus - who are the "5 people" ???

Re the replica Swallow idea discussed within TARS a few years ago: I should point out that this wasn't my idea alone, but something that a number of members had discussed or thought about for a while. My main contribution was to do a feasibility study so that the TARS Board had a "business case" which they could use as the basis for a formal discussion. 

If I recall correctly the feasibility study concluded that building and maintaining a replica Swallow offered many advantages to TARS (a project that members could get involved in, research interest, promotional opportunities for AR & the Society, opportunities to use the boat, etc) but also that there were some significant risks involved (costs, both initial and ongoing maintenance, insurance, storage, etc).

The feasibility study did identify reasonable solutions for all of these - for instance  a firm option for storage and a couple of interesting options for build location. But there was one critical exception to this, which could only become evident when the study was discussed, both by the Society's Board and by the wider membership. If my memory serves the bulk of member feedback was favourable (about 90% positive to 10% negative), although the intensity of the feedback was the other way round (those opposed were really opposed, whereas many of those in favour liked the idea, but perhaps not enough to do anything about it - ie, volunteer). Meanwhile the Board were equally lukewarm/cold.

Taken together, that effectively "killed" the idea, because it showed that it wasn't feasible for TARS to build a replica boat. That's because the primary requirements in such a project (or any Society project) are volunteers: people prepared to commit themselves long term. I'm not sure Rob is quite accurate in saying that not proceeding with a Swallow replica marked a turning point for TARS, but what it did do is highlight some longer term issues that TARS as a Society has been facing and continues to face.

These problems would affect any decision to acquire another boat, such as the 1974 movie Swallow. Some of the issues are practical, eg could TARS afford to buy it? Where would they keep it? What purpose would it serve? Can they afford to maintain it? etc. I would say that  in theory "TARS" (or any other organisation) should be able to address all of those issues and that practical solutions could be found. But in practice TARS can only do that if enough members, with the right mix of skills and abilities, catch a "vision" for a project and then commit themselves to the time and unseen effort required to see it through. 

It's easy enough to say "TARS should do this", but you have to remember that TARS can't actually do anything - it's only its members who can, either by volunteering to serve as committed and active Trustees or other committee members, or by volunteering to perform the various activities that give TARS life, be they editing publications, writing articles, contributing material to the website, getting involved in a project such as building a boat or whatever.

Re the 1974 film movie boats: I think Magnus asked the question on Tarboard "what happened to the movie Amazon"? Well, I'll reply here, seeing that TarBoard is currently down. Basically the movie Amazon went into private ownership, I think fairly soon after the fiolm completed. The people who bought her found her in storage at the boatyard in Coniston and they made her available for the BBC short documentary about the making of the movie (part of the Big Screen Britain series) in 2004. If you look at the scrolling pictures on the home page of this website you'll find several pictures of "Amazon" there, incl one of her under sail. My memory of her is that she's comparatively small. One of the photos shows her on the  far side of the Peel Island Harbour, beyond Peggy Blackett (which has an identical hull shape to Coch y Bonddhu at 13'4"). It was very obvious when the two boats were side by side that the 1974 movie makers had opted for boats that were considerably smaller than the fictional Swallow and Amazon - my guess is that this was to make it easier for the child actors to sail them and to manhandle them on shore when necessary.  

I was all set to log on in order to sketch out the reasons why TARS cannot at short notice bid for boats at auction, only to find that Geraint had already summed it all up neatly, and I am grateful for that! There is, as Geraint observes, a tendency for people to go onto the AR Forums and ask "Why doesn't TARS do this?" or "Why doesn't TARS do that?". The answer is: because it is a democratic society. As we all know, democracy is the only fair method of governing, but it takes ages to reach a decision because everyone has to be consulted (through their appointed reps). Fascist states (and societies, if there are any) can reach an instant decision via their absolute dictator. The Chairman of TARS is not such a dictator, would you believe, so she cannot spend £1,000 of the members' money without democratic consultation. The process could be speeded up by the use of electronic conferencing, but the current Board show no wish to use such methods. And anyway, as Geraint has also noted, there would be mixed reactions to the idea of buying a boat which had no direct, actual, link to AR.

But Magnus & Co should not despair. If they really feel strong enough about the boat currently for sale, why not try to get together a syndicate, beg, borrow or  . . .  no not steal - this is Ransome territory after all, but get sponsorship, whatever. If you could scrape together enough to secure the boat, then you'd have time to come to TARS and suggest a project whereby TARS members could contribute to the upkeep, restoration, repayment of debt, mooring, whatever, of the boat in return for a chance to sail her. And you could even form your own small organisation - after all, that is what Peter Willis did with Nancy, on a much larger scale, so it can be done. What won't help at all is posting up 'wish-lists' on this website. You might just as well write to Father Christmas . . .

I didn't save the link, and Tarboard is down, but no-one had bid when I looked. I'd guess that as a boat it is worth c. £500, but of course it might sell for a lot more with its film connection.  However, it is likely to be a lot less than the replica Swallow would have cost if that was a major factor in the consideration. My memory is the replica Swallow was estimated at £8k to £10k in 2006. I can't remember this project being put to the membership at an IAGM however.  Geraint also wrote a very good article about the project in Signals - summer 2006?

I'd have thought it was worthwhile for TARS to go for it especially with the issues over Cochy. One way to do it would be to set up a (ho-ho) sinking fund of say £5,000 to pay for future repairs, maintenance, insurance, storage etc etc. And of course, at the end of the day we've risked (probably) £500 and could sell her again.

Re the five people - the inside cover of Signals lists the Trustees/Directors, but it doesn't make it clear the Regional Reps are fully Trustees/Directors as well. There are therefore 13 Trustees/Directors. The Company Secretary (Peter), membership Secretary (Andrew) and assistant (David) are not Trustees, nor are the Overseas Co-Ordinators. Whereas a phone discussion is still possible, I'm not sure if this is allowable under our constitution, unless it was a form of extraordinary Trustee meeting. Some constituions also allow the Chair and another Trustee to make emergency decisions - and as I say we may only be talking about £500 here (the cost of an issue of Outlaw!).

Rob

Previously Peter Hyland wrote:

Magnus - who are the "5 people" ???

Oh, I was only imagining a handful of appropriate committee members who might decide if it is worth progressing further with the idea, thats all. I wasn't suggesting they would solve the entire problem at once, merely deicide if the ball should begin rolling.

Just in case I was misunderstood, note that I originally said "I would really like to see TARS or the NBT bid for her", not "I demand that TARS bids for her" !!!

Whilst this fake Swallow isn't a critical part of AR heritage, it will be a shame to see a private buyer squirrel her away. I gues the crucial aspects of volunteers in a situation like this is their location; we'd need most of the helpers to live in the same region. That requirement effectively dilutes the volunteer numbers I guess.

I shall keep an eye on the auction, and consider all posibilities. Maybe she's worth it, maybe she isn't....it's a hard call to make.

The link to the auction is on the first post (mine) of this thread, currently 0 bids.

Ideally and time is the factor would be to get members to donate to buy her, but again it would mean having somewhere to keep her and maintain her.

Looking at the video of Big Screen Britain I thought it was Geraint at the helm.

Sorry, Robin! The discussion is now up to 14 messages so I lazily didn't look back. 

Sorting out where to keep her and how to maintain her could be done after purchasing her. Because Apex seem to be an asset clearance firm, clearing the assets of Turks Launches, not a specialist boat auction firm, it may not attract much attention and she might well go for £100.  But if we bid a maximum of say £500, if storage, maintenance etc plans fell through the most we'd have spent would be - £500 (less any price we got for selling it on). I'm tempted to offer £50 now towards a group purchase! TARS actually risked more - £800 - on printing each Calendar.

The difference with the replica Swallow project was that it was £8,000 to £10,000 that was at risk. I don't think there was a 'democratic' survey of member's views on this (i.e. a sort of referendum) - at the end of his Signals article Geraint only asked people to get in touch if they were interested or had any thoughts.

Actually, a lot of societies do allow their Chair to take emergency spending decisions. A maximum bid of £500 is 1% of our reserves, 2% of our annual income. But I am willing to accept that TARS may not allow for such a Chair's decision. However, it would be well within the first declared aim of TARS:  to "encourage children and others to engage, with due regard to safety, in adventurous pursuits". Nor does it require any modern electronic means of communication - a paper could be posted to all 13 Trustees, and a week later they could have a phone discussion!

Of course, maybe there are some great plans to use the £50K reserves, and obviously the Society needs some money just in case.  

Lastly, I'd have thought that using this Forum for this sort of discussion is exactly one of its purposes.

"emergency spending decisions"

I am quite confident that Trustee agreement could be obtained in an emergency, by various methods, including the method Rob mentions. However, I and no doubt many other TARS members do not consider that the sale of one small boat, which has no actual connection with AR, constitutes an 'emergency'. I personally think that buying boats should not be part of TARS policy. This concentrates membership funds in one small object. I favour the use of funds in projects of a kind which fit in with the Ransome philosophy, as far as that can be ascertained, ie they should benefit the maximum number of members possible in ways which would develop into the future. A boat is a depreciating asset, and one which, let's face it, will only be used by a handful of members who are lucky enough to live near the place where it is kept.

Actually, when a nice boat is over 40 years old it's value will increase gradually, it won't depreciate! But the annual running costs are significant of course.

I agree that it would be hard to transfer any boat around the country enough to give most TARS members a chance of seeing/sailing her, and in that respect it doesn't represent the best interests of everyone.

Apart from Swallow they have some other interesting boats for sale several from different movies and TV series also a couple of steam launches, there is a ships lifeboat, anyone want to build a Death and Glory?. I notice the boat that appeared in Harry Potter seems to be thought to fetch higher bids than Swallow.

I am still very keen to see this Swallow kept sailing and made available to all, despite the various problems that we have discussed. In all seriousness, I am staying true to "grab a chance and you won't be sorry..." because I don't think we will feel sorry overall, if we succeed!

A handful of us have mentioned an amount we are willing to put into the kitty, and as I seem to be the most impatient one, I've been publicising this attempt on various discussion forums. It really needs greater publicity though. I would like to ask those that feel it appropriate, to email any other Ransome fans they know, just to make them aware of this 'syndicate' that are bidding. Please help us spread the word as I think it important to make a proper attempt, despite the fact that we may be outbid by a rich private buyer.

My email is grabachance@merlinrocket.co.uk and it would be great to hear from anyone who wants a chance to sail Swallow. Thank you.

I think it is worthwhile to save this Swallow, especially as many younger people will have known about SA from the film lnk.

It is important that we do not bid against each other, and notify all AR enthusiasts whether TARS or not though TarBoard, Wiki, Facebook et al that a group would like to purchase this boat.

I would contibute a £100 a properly organised bid for the purchase, although unable to help with storage or maintenance.

ATB

Thanks to everyone who has contributed - you are wonderful! We have nearly reached 40% of the estimated total we need, the last group of donations coming all the way from various AusTARS members!

There is now a greater level of detail on our project, for those seeking more information:

http://sites.google.com/site/swallowbid/

There is still a big chunk of cash to find, and only 17 days to go....

Latest news - we've hit 50% of our estimated total. The AusTARS members responded magnificently after I talked to their leader! Time is still tight though; 15 days left to get the other 50% is a tough call. If we could just reach more Ransome fans I think we could do it.

If anyone has any bright ideas on how to (legally) dodge the VAT, that would help tremendously. Or 'gift aid' is another method that would help....but we are not able to manage this alone, I think?

Previously Magnus Smith wrote:

Latest news - we've hit 50% of our estimated total. The AusTARS members responded magnificently after I talked to their leader! Time is still tight though; 15 days left to get the other 50% is a tough call. If we could just reach more Ransome fans I think we could do it.

If anyone has any bright ideas on how to (legally) dodge the VAT, that would help tremendously. Or 'gift aid' is another method that would help....but we are not able to manage this alone, I think?

Magnus, VAT is similar to all expenses such as Buying commissons Transport and delivery charges

Insurance, They should all be included in your costings to determine the level of bid that you decide to make at an auction. The seller should also consider those costs when stting a reserve price,Practical realism is required. I have already pledged the limit of my support and that included the expenses and VAT. I will not be paying beyond my pledge. Good luck. Swallows forever. John

Magnus

There is no way to "legally dodge" VAT. The auctioneers will charge it to whoever wins the auction, and the bidder (you, if you're successful) will have to pay it up front when they do.

The only way to reclaim VAT is to become a VAT-registered trader. Of course to do that you need to be operating a legitimate business and the boat would have to be a legitimate expense relating to that business (you couldn't, for instance, reclaim the VAT on the boat purchase if you just happen to be registered as a bookshop or an aluminium can manufacturer, or anything like that).

I suppose in theory you could try to register your "Swallow" activities as a business in its own right. Voluntary VAT registration is (or certainly used to be) allowed, for businesses whose  turnover falls below the VAT threshold. Assuming you did that, then you would be able to reclaim some or all of the VAT you paid to purchase the boat (what is known as "input tax") . However, you'd still face a cash flow issue, because you'd only get the money back sometime after paying it out. Also, you would then have to charge VAT ("output tax") at the appropriate rates on any sales your "Swallow business" makes (presumably the charges you levy for people to use the boat). And you may also face questions from HRMC, if they conclude that the level of such sales are so small as not to represent a legitimate business activity (being professionally cynical types, they may conclude that your business doesn't really exist, and all you are really trying to do is dodge the input tax on an essentially private purchase).

Personally, I'd suggest you bite the bullet and accept that VAT is an irrecoverable expense that you have to factor into your calculations.

The above does, however, raise the question of who will actually purchase and own the boat, if your appeal succeeds? Are you envisaging a formal organisation of any sort, or a partnership, or what?     

John, your support is really appreciated, I certainly wouldn't ask for more! You've been great.

----------------------------

Geraint, I was mistakenly thinking that charities could reclaim VAT. Of course, the tax man will get you one way or the other. I just wanted ideas from someone more educated!

We have already factored VAT into our calculations, yes.

There will of course be a formal arrangement for boat ownership, but details are dependant on some 'talks' we are currently participating in...

----------------------------

Latest news: Pledges have hit 65% of what we need, with 14 days to go. John Sergeant is on board!!

Magnus, Thank you for your comment. I think that you are great to have taken this on. I admire the steps you have taken and  I hope you have assistants helping you to cope with such an undertaking. You may be interested to know that for more than fifteen years I was a VAT Area supervisor in the Customs and Excise. Regards John

Dear all I visited Swallow at Turk's Boatyard during the week, had a close look at Swallow and took some photos - the results - detailed report and picture album – are up on the Nancy Blackett site. Later I watched the film again, to compare the the condition of the boat now and in the film - I was struck by how many good close-ups there are of Swallow (many more than of Amazon) - she really is quite a star!

I'm sorry to be a wet blanket but Peter Willis has provided important information in his set of photographs taken at Turk's Boatyard. I am sure that he is correct in his conjecture that this is in fact a rowing boat which was modified by the addition of a rig for filming. The mast step thwart does not match the other thwarts and is apparently unsupported by knees and I assume it was added purely to permit the stepping of a mast for filming. Obviously with neither a centreplate nor any keel at all, the boat will not sail except off the wind. It would be a complicated business to build in a centreplate case, supported by the main thwart and the slot could not be cut through the existing keel which means costly and complicated woodwork.  Sorry.   

A Swallow with a centreboard? That would be just plain wrong! I think a sensitive and careful bit of work to add a keel, like the real Swallow had, would be a suitable move to improve her 'authenticity' and sailing performance. Nothing has been decided yet though.

It may be true that she was an adapted rowing boat, but nevertheless she is the boat that was used in the film, and is as close as you can get to Swallow, for the money, without building anew. The gaff rig and wooden spares are just as important as the hull.

Obviously Peter Willis knows exactly what she is, having examined her carefully. Yet he still went to the board of the Nancy Blackett Trust and reccommended they assist our project. I can now announce that the NBT are happy to handle our initial finances, collecting donations so that 'Gift Aid' can be applied (for UK taxpayers). This extra 28% on approx two-thirds of our pledges makes all the difference, and means we are finally in a position to make a decent bid at the auction.

I am really grateful to Peter and all at the NBT who looked carefully into the tedious legal/financial aspects of this arrangement. Three million cheers for them all!

Our website has been updated with the latest news and details of how to donate by cheque or Paypal. All questions about the process should be answered by those pages....though I might as well say now that yes of course we will be refunding all donations in full if we do not win the auction.

http://sites.google.com/site/swallowbid/

I look forward to inviting you aboard for a sail.