1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar




Seasteading start up budget.

Home Forums Community General Chat Seasteading start up budget.

This topic contains 99 replies, has 11 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of OCEANOPOLIS OCEANOPOLIS 3 years, 1 month ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 76 through 90 (of 100 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #11156
    Profile photo of J.L.-Frusha
    J.L.-Frusha
    Participant

    Jason, very valid points – The more people you bring in, the harder is it to make a living for the group. The more isolated you go – the less chances for making a living you have.

    That all depends on your business plan… If you have a plan that only requires a few people and do not need a large facility, then you are looking at something more like the single-family seastead…

    The start up budget – can be a few dollar (like Richard Sowa) – depends on local factors more than anything. But in general i would say – If we can not make it work as business and extract a living – consider it just a hobby.

    Wil

    concretesubmarine.com

    European Submarine Structures AB

    Start-up budget depends on the purpose. The problem is backing. The ‘contest’ that nobody gets replies from is just a way to buy IP. You do the work, all the planning and business modeling and get some minimal credit and a chance to wish you had the money to do your start-up…

    If you have a good business plan and the ability to do all the work for the bogus ‘contest,’ you have everything you need to make the presentation to major financial institutions, which is exactly what the lazy cheapskates are planning to do… Give minimal credit… ‘so-and-so had this idea,’ pay the ‘winner’ enough to say ‘Oh, you did a good job,’ then seal-up the package, get it going and not a snow-balls’ chance in hell that the ‘winners’ will get the funding for their seastead, just a chance to be some low-ranking dumb-butt on ‘their’ plan, rather than actually reward the winner with the backing to be the head of the new start-up and a pay-back, down the line, of a percentage of the profits… Nada, zip, zilch, no-how/no-way.

    Later,

    J.L.F.

    Never be afraid to try something new…

    Remember, amateurs built the ark, professionals built the Titanic.

    #11158
    Profile photo of OCEANOPOLIS
    OCEANOPOLIS
    Participant

    JL has a good point. “That all depends on your business plan… If you have a plan that only requires a few people and do not need a large facility, then you are looking at something more like the single-family seastead…” To continue on that line of thinking, If you have a business plan that requires 3-4 SFS rafted up, then from the begining you design each of them highly specialized to a certain seasteading business. The owners, they will all be running one specific business, the one that they know best. Keep in mind that not everybody knows how to fish+ how to run a marina+ how to manage hospitality industry+ how to run a snorkling, diving parasailing business, etc, in the same time.

    Thus, making a living as a group has good chances of success. Not only that, but this businesses will be symbiotic in nature and everybody will profit. For example, if we will undertake on a business venture as a group, than, lets say that Octavian will design part of his SFS as a party place, with a bar and restaurant. If his marketing efforts are smart, he will pack his place up. Will, who ownes a few docks, some jet skies, and a cabin cruiser will make a bundle too, because Octavian, who is very busy running his joint will gladly pay Will for ferrying his customers in. Also, after a nice dinner and few martinis in Octavian’s place, for sure some people will take a sunset cruise or go snorkle the reef on Will’s boats. Meanwhile, JL, who’s got a maintemamce shop on his SFS, will do very good too. He will make sure that the AC, refrigeration, water supply, plumbing, sour, waste disposal, power supply, maintenance on the boats and docks, fuel supply, etc, are running smoothly. Octavian and Will will pay for that. So on and so forth. No man is an island, guys,…

    Will, I agree with the “pre- design”, concept. What I meant about Sowa’s first Spiral Island is the fact that it got washed to pieces during hurricane Emily in 2005. That happend because of conceptul AND design flaws. Conceptual because it wasn’t mobile so he could have moved it away from the hurricane’s path. Remember, Emily make land fall as a Category 3, 135 Mph winds, straight over Cosumel. If he could have been only 200nm off,…Design, because it wasn’t build strong enough to sustain even tropical depression strong winds, forget about a hurricane force. The deck was built of .wooden crates covered with plywood…. I dont know if you have noticed, but Sowa learned his lessons. (the hard way). The new Spiral Island’s deck is ferrocement now.

    #11159
    Profile photo of Pastor_Jason
    Pastor_Jason
    Participant

    Octavian (Oceanopolis), you weren’t one of the people I said came along with demands. Many of those were done by PM to me. It was mostly non-contributors who got excited and wanted a piece of the action without any input. The whole idea of SO:BIZ was the community effort, the family dinner where we all bring a dish. Your ideas were generally solid and you had a ton of positive contributions.

    This thread finds itself once more in the same position SO:BIZ was in early on. There is an agreement that SFS is the way to go. Some business plans are being made. There is an understanding that the initial group will need to lean on each other to make it work. Now those who are interested need to organize, agree to certain conditions of operating and be honest with the upfront costs as well as the available capital.

    I’m rooting for you guys and I understand exactly what you are facing. In some ways I hope you don’t grab Wil off the market… I’m sorta hoping he’ll still be making concrete subs over the next couple of years. Shallow depth submersion with a safe snorkle is a rather low tech solution to extreme weather dangers in the deep ocean. In a few years we’ll see which model serves best in this environment.

    Live Well!

    -Jason

    #11167

    One of the the hardest things to do is organize groups of people to share upfront costs. Upfront costs mean that you have a shared vision and invest “good money” into a “incertain future”.

    It is quite easy to convince shareholders when you have a working business and revenues to show. So it seems natural to keep the “upfront” amount as low as possible.

    Either we get a billionaire for who a million is still “a small amount of money to spend for testing a exotic idea” or we make a startup with a money amount that is a “small amount” even for us – the point is – it must be a small amount.

    I mistrust projects where a group of people gives their last cents into a “upfront money pool” – this is highly volatil business.

    I would prefer to test my own ideas on my own budget – that leaves me with nobody to fight when things become difficult.

    I am a fan of of the small scale approach – bring something up on a small scale that is so good that people ask you to sell them your product.

    Grow organically by selling and reinverting the revenues. Come to the “group aproach” later.

    Discussing groups with diverse visions, financial frustration groups, uncertain futrure groups, untested group concepts with high upfront money needs and long wait for return on investment, are very toxic mixes…

    Leave it to the market which concept you follow and which you dismiss – not to heated and frustrated group discussions…

    Wil

    #11171
    Profile photo of OCEANOPOLIS
    OCEANOPOLIS
    Participant

    which “way” is better. So far, all I see its just talk, and no action from “both” sides. The billionaire or the poor. With one exeption that is Richie Sowa.

    Regrdless of how the first seasteads will be financed, it will be a catch 22. If is gonna be on a “big fat wallet”, will be just another business with the profits going back in that wallet. The “seasteader”, singing brave new words patriotic tunes, in reality will be nothing short of an outsourced work force “on location” with no rights of making any decision, mostly living a life of disillusioned fantasies of being a part of the next “big” thing. The whole “show” will be run by the Seasteading Corporate Headquarters Office.

    If on a “small wallet” that it will became successfull, it will still end up as above. The initial group of investors will get rich and powerfull, therefore arrogant and greedy and become the “seasteading nomenklatura”. They will then slam that door shut behind them and chain it down with a big lock (actualy they will weld it shut for good) so nobody can come in. Now they have a “big fat wallet”. History always repeat itself, gentlemen,….

    Its just human nature. Until we change that, the seasteading “revolution” is doomed to fail.

    #11172
    Profile photo of tusavision
    tusavision
    Participant

    OCEANOPOLIS wrote:

    which “way” is better. So far, all I see its just talk, and no action from “both” sides. The billionaire or the poor. With one exeption that is Richie Sowa.

    Regrdless of how the first seasteads will be financed, it will be a catch 22. If is gonna be on a “big fat wallet”, will be just another business with the profits going back in that wallet. The “seasteader”, singing brave new words patriotic tunes, in reality will be nothing short of an outsourced work force “on location” with no rights of making any decision, mostly living a life of disillusioned fantasies of being a part of the next “big” thing. The whole “show” will be run by the Seasteading Corporate Headquarters Office.

    If on a “small wallet” that it will became successfull, it will still end up as above. The initial group of investors will get rich and powerfull, therefore arrogant and greedy and become the “seasteading nomenklatura”. They will then slam that door shut behind them and chain it down with a big lock (actualy they will weld it shut for good) so nobody can come in. Now they have a “big fat wallet”. History always repeat itself, gentlemen,….

    Its just human nature. Until we change that, the seasteading “revolution” is doomed to fail.

    Pessimism doesn’t help anything and is normally self-fulfilling. If we follow an open source model, there will be no door to lock/weld shut.

    #11173
    Profile photo of OCEANOPOLIS
    OCEANOPOLIS
    Participant

    between pesimism and realism, Tusa. I am not a pesimist nor an exuberant optimist. I was just simply stating how usually things tend to develop based on the historical records and facts. Seasteading is a projected revolution. An intelectual revolution if you wish, possible without a potential bloodshed. For now. But all the revolutions failed, more or less, meaning that the end result is far off from the initial projected expectations. That is because all the revolutions, in time, generated the formation of a “nomenklatura” of some sort.

    The men who new how to make fire were kings. When the lighter came on, the men who knew how to get oil and gas became kings. And still are. Basicaly the same people who allegedly “evolved”. There were, are and always be “nomenklaturas”. In time, they might have changed names, and faces, but never their ideology. They are here to rule over mankind and self serve only their petty interests.

    The future “seasteading nomenklatura” will be no different.

    #11174

    Is richi sowa the only seasteader ? We have found that the famous “seasteading start up” is a tricky thing – everytime someone makes an effort it seems to fail due to several reasons from finincial to social. It might be that this is just so because we selected the “term seasteading” that way that it applies only to things that nobody does – and the fact that “nobody does it at the moment” is for a good reason.

    Maybe we should focus on things that already exist and that are less ambitious like “floating housing”, a better more affordable and more permanent “Yachting” a “floating marina development” etc… At the end when enough money and people flow into those developments they will develop into seasteading anyhow.

    We should just let go the idea to do step 20 first and start with step 1 – take what “everybody does already” and push it a little bit further… a boring aproach? maybe but this is also what makes it realistic. I find it fascinating to make a YACHT that allows you to keep coffe cup on the table in any sea condition. It is pushing yachting a bit further to permanent ocean living capacity. Is this seasteading ? – not by TSI definition – but the “high ambition in the definition” may be the problem in the first place why the startups always fail.

    Wil

    concretesubmarine.com

    European Submarine Structures AB

    #11175
    Profile photo of OCEANOPOLIS
    OCEANOPOLIS
    Participant

    Or @ least its implying that. So, any seasteading effort should keep that in mind. I dig “less ambitious” projects if they will eventualy lead to the ultimate goal. That’s why I thought that 1 (one) 60′ seagoing module will do, to start with.

    And why talk about a start up failure? We didn’t start nothing, yet. :-)

    #11220

    When we speak of Ocean colonization we should look for a model that has done this before – there is one mother nature. Mother nature gives us a couple of interesting lections…

    One of the most interesting ones is that there is literally not a single animal swimming and living on the ocean surface. Animals live in the waterbody (fish, whales, etc.) or they live in the air above the ocean (birds) – they use the surface for short stay but not for “permanent living”.

    If evolution has not found a way to colonize the ocean surface – there should be solid reasons why that is so. The most obvious is that the surface is the place where ocean and athmosphere have their most violent interchange.

    Maybe we have been too quick by dismissing submerged structures as first choice when talking about ocean colonization.

    Wil

    concretesubmarine.com

    European Submarine Structures AB

    #11221
    Profile photo of tusavision
    tusavision
    Participant

    Is richi sowa the only seasteader ? We have found that the famous “seasteading start up” is a tricky thing – everytime someone makes an effort it seems to fail due to several reasons from finincial to social. It might be that this is just so because we selected the “term seasteading” that way that it applies only to things that nobody does – and the fact that “nobody does it at the moment” is for a good reason.

    Maybe we should focus on things that already exist and that are less ambitious like “floating housing”, a better more affordable and more permanent “Yachting” a “floating marina development” etc… At the end when enough money and people flow into those developments they will develop into seasteading anyhow.

    We should just let go the idea to do step 20 first and start with step 1 – take what “everybody does already” and push it a little bit further… a boring aproach? maybe but this is also what makes it realistic. I find it fascinating to make a YACHT that allows you to keep coffe cup on the table in any sea condition. It is pushing yachting a bit further to permanent ocean living capacity. Is this seasteading ? – not by TSI definition – but the “high ambition in the definition” may be the problem in the first place why the startups always fail.

    Wil

    concretesubmarine.com

    European Submarine Structures AB

    Nail on the head IMHO.

    Something that comes to mind is the cliche of the “Last one standing” contest.

    Choose a location,(New Orleans?) set a prize amount,($10,000?) and tie people’s hands on the money invested: (< $1000? Must provide reciepts)

    No contact with the outside world. Everyone gets rations delivered daily(3 packages of top ramen, a bottle of rubbing alcohol, 2 gallons of water)

    Get a radio station to sponsor the contest, and let the chaos ensue. That’s the type of shit that SPIKE TV eats up.

    #11222
    Profile photo of tusavision
    tusavision
    Participant

    When we speak of Ocean colonization we should look for a model that has done this before – there is one mother nature. Mother nature gives us a couple of interesting lections…

    One of the most interesting ones is that there is literally not a single animal swimming and living on the ocean surface. Animals live in the waterbody (fish, whales, etc.) or they live in the air above the ocean (birds) – they use the surface for short stay but not for “permanent living”.

    If evolution has not found a way to colonize the ocean surface – there should be solid reasons why that is so. The most obvious is that the surface is the place where ocean and athmosphere have their most violent interchange.

    Maybe we have been too quick by dismissing submerged structures as first choice when talking about ocean colonization.

    Wil

    concretesubmarine.com

    European Submarine Structures AB

    It’s the only viable solution IMHO. How much pressure does it take to fit 200 cubic feet of air in a scuba tank?

    Now how much pressure does it take to fit 200 cubic feet of air in a fishing boat?

    How long will 200 cubic feet of air last on a cryogenic rebreather with a bottle of liquid oxygen?

    How long can a SNUBA compressor feed you air from a snorkel with 50 gallons of diesel?

    What’s the NDL of a coffin sized 1 ATM pressure hull? Unlimited.

    What’s the Max depth of a $100 coffin sized 1 ATM pressure hull? 40 feet?

    What’s the NDL of a coffin sized 1 ATM pressure hull pressurized to 12meters/40 feet(2ATM)? 130 minutes

    What’s the Max depth of a $100 coffin sized 1 ATM pressure hull pressurized to 12 meters/40 feet(2 ATM)? 40 feet? + 40 Feet

    How long do you have to make a decompression stop at “15 feet”(1ATM Max depth+5 meters) if you exceed your NDL?

    How long can a SNUBA compressor keep you alive at “15 feet”? With a rebreather? With the assistance of a bottle of pure medical oxygen?

    The reason why seasteading has disregarded submersible storm proofing is because of a phenomenom called “bike shedding.”

    Everyone can fantasize about eccentric billionaires throwing money at engineering monstrosities.

    Not everyone knows dive medicine.

    Not everyone knows that submarines don’t have to go 600 ft deep to hide from storms.

    Not everyone knows that humans can stay dry at pressures other than 1ATM.

    Not everyone knows that a submarine doesn’t have to maintain 1ATM.

    Not everyone knows that your furnature can stay dry at ANY pressure.

    Not everyone knows that with a dive bell and unlimited SNUBA: your bottom time is limitless.

    Not everyone knows that storm proofing a house and storm proofing a human are 2 seperate problems that are very expensive to combine.

    A submarine lifeboat is the solution to surviving storm waves.

    Using your house as a submerisble dive bell is the solution to your property surviving storm waves.

    I propose that a submersible house is just a giant scuba tank/decompression chamber.

    I propose that a SNUBA compressor and tank of diesel is easier to storm proof than a house.

    I propose that a submarine lifeboat without propulsion/life support can dive to 100 feet and can be built for less than $1000.

    I propose that all of these life support systems do not have to be fool proof if you can bail out of your lifeboat wearing a life jacket, wetsuit, emergency distress radio, GPS, and distress LED flasher.

    Seasteading is a victim to feature creep. These solutions to the wave problem shrink the seastead design specifications back to spiral island levels.

    #11223

    A submerged structure does not mean that you break connection with the surface completly. You can have an air-intake above the surface (snorkel) and a ventilation sistem very much the same as the aircon ducts in a normal building on land. Certainly there is no elevated ambient pressure nor scuba tanks nor CO2 scrubbing nor special life support as usual in submarines involved. The air tech would be pretty much the same as in a underground shopping mall so nothing you would have to invent,t or take from submarines and build to city size.

    What concerns pressure resistance, a positive buoyant cylinder structure made from normal concrete does have a structural destruction depth of 1400m – so plenty of safety factor when you submerge it just a couple of feet. A lens shape could take some 70m – a sphere shape much deeper.

    Once submerged you are not only storm safe, you have also the dynamic positioning energy cost dilema solved, and the need for heating and cooling is gone as the surrounding water does the job. You have a big advantage in cost of mobility as locomotion cost for submerged objects is about 5 times lower than for surface travel.

    Some people will hate the idea of being submerged – but this should not be worse than “flight fear” for people living in a highrise building.

    Wil

    concretesubmarine.com

    European Submarine Structures AB

    #11228
    Profile photo of tusavision
    tusavision
    Participant

    A submerged structure does not mean that you break connection with the surface completly. You can have an air-intake above the surface (snorkel) and a ventilation sistem very much the same as the aircon ducts in a normal building on land. Certainly there is no elevated ambient pressure nor scuba tanks nor CO2 scrubbing nor special life support as usual in submarines involved. The air tech would be pretty much the same as in a underground shopping mall so nothing you would have to invent,t or take from submarines and build to city size.

    What concerns pressure resistance, a positive buoyant cylinder structure made from normal concrete does have a structural destruction depth of 1400m – so plenty of safety factor when you submerge it just a couple of feet. A lens shape could take some 70m – a sphere shape much deeper.

    Once submerged you are not only storm safe, you have also the dynamic positioning energy cost dilema solved, and the need for heating and cooling is gone as the surrounding water does the job. You have a big advantage in cost of mobility as locomotion cost for submerged objects is about 5 times lower than for surface travel.

    Some people will hate the idea of being submerged – but this should not be worse than “flight fear” for people living in a highrise building.

    Wil

    concretesubmarine.com

    European Submarine Structures AB

    I agree completely. A snorkel and air compressor make the problem of breathing virtually non existant. Particularly if you have a rigid pressure hull which is giving you 1 ATM at a safe depth. Using 2 snorkels with one way valves to eliminate dead air was one of my first ideas(reinventing the wheel I’m sure) when I “discovered” seasteading.org, and I seem to have come full circle back to the simplicity of a 1 man pressure hull breathing off of snorkels.

    Give me a “shark egg sack” and a netbook and I’ll be happy. I spend most of life in bed dreaming. Might as well do it underwater.

    #11230
    Profile photo of OCEANOPOLIS
    OCEANOPOLIS
    Participant

    There are no sunsets nor sunrises,…no dolphins swimming on your bow,.. no blue moon or silver stars,…no gentle night breeze in your hair,….no tropical sun when laying in the cockpit on a long passage,…no flying fish landing on deck when you’re just out of bait,…no catching blue fin just in time for lunch,…no salty, seaweed ocean smelll,…no good night sleep while rooling @ anchor,….no spray over the coaming,…no adrenaline rush while surfing down a long, big swell,…no glowing plankton in your wake,…no fun like drinking rum while waiting for the tide when stuck aground,…nope,…not to much fun 300 ft down. And what is to be achieved while living down bellow? Plus, all the extra money needed to maintain that artificial environment,…where is it gonna come from?

Viewing 15 posts - 76 through 90 (of 100 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.



Posted on at

Categories:

Written by

Blog/Newsletter

Donate