Maxime Needs to Pass The Adventure 40 Baton

Maxime took over the Adventure 40 project a bit over four years ago.

Since then he has:

  • Selected a naval architect.
  • Executed a Gofundme campaign to pay for the preliminary design.
  • Supervised the preliminary design process through to completion.
  • Come up with many of the innovations in the design, particularly those in the cockpit, which will make the Adventure 40 the best double-handed live-aboard offshore voyaging boat out there.
  • Participated in the spirited discussions of each design reveal.
  • Managed the engineering of a keel that will be resistant to grounding damage.
  • Found a builder interested in both building a prototype and the production boats.
  • Secured funding for the prototype.

However, sadly, the person who was funding the prototype recently, and unexpectedly, passed away.

Maxime has overcome many setbacks over the years, but this one caused him to take stock of his personal situation, and he has decided to set the Adventure 40 free so that another entrepreneur can continue the project.

I’m grateful to Maxime for taking the project from an idea detailed in a bunch of articles to a designed boat, and I completely understand his decision to refocus on his family and full time job after years of putting countless unpaid hours into the Adventure 40.

So the question becomes, who is going to pick up the Adventure 40 baton and run it over the finish line?

At the time of writing there are 810 of you who have signed up as interested in buying an Adventure 40.

And a look around at the lack of good offshore boats available, new or secondhand, combined with the advent of remote work and Starlink, confirms that there has never been a better time for the Adventure 40.

The market is there.

So who will:

  • Licence rights to the design from Maxime.
  • Negotiate a final deal with the builder, or select a different yard.
  • Supervise the final design and engineering.
  • Secure and manage the seed funding.
  • Manage the prototype build and testing.
  • Get the production boats built.

Sure, there’s much left to do, but on the other hand, a huge amount has already been done, particularly verifying a market (email list), and designing the boat, so whoever takes over will be way ahead of most entrepreneurs starting a business.

And perhaps best of all, both Maxime and I are happy to advise.

Of course some people will view this situation as a failure, but all that means is that they don’t understand that starting a business is all about overcoming setbacks on the way to success.

Or to put it another way, if starting a business were easy, everyone would be doing it. Are you one of the rare people who has what it takes, a real entrepreneur?

If that’s you, email us and we will put you in touch with Maxime to figure out the handover.

That said, please do not email me to discuss this development or ask questions. I will not engage. As always with the Adventure 40, all discussion happens in the open, so please leave a comment, so everyone can read the answers and participate.

37 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Warren Cottis

I doubt an Individual Investor(s) or a Corporation will step up for this without a detailed “here’s where we are” document that also outlines the Next Steps and the Dollars to be raised for the launch of Hull 1

At the same time, all 810 subscribers need to be asked again… What is your level of Interest and in what time frame?

Armed with that information a Collaboration Team could be formed to also pursue crowdfunding

There’s still plenty of money out there looking for a good investment

Cheers
Warren

Warren Cottis

And John this needs to happen…

I’m not sure there ever will be a “spec sheet” per sec. A simple spec sheet would never do the concepts behind the boat justice and gets us into competing on which boat has the coolest stuff, which is a battle the A40 would always lose and a misguided way to buy a boat.
That said, I do intend a complete re-write of all the chapters to reduce duplication and make understanding the boat a faster read. (The present chapters appeared over the years and therefore could do with tightening up). I have done some already, and hope to finish this winter.

From there… to create Marketing Sizzle we need Deep Dive Bullet Points re Why the Adventure 40 is Special

It’s time now with a Minimal Viable Product to focus on the Marketing and really testing the Market Potential in my humble opinion

Warren Cottis

Hi John and just feedback…

I contributed to the GofundMe raising and apart from your technical updates, I’ve heard very little that nurtures more enthusiasm…

So re: “Sure, there’s plenty to do on marketing, but we already have a lot of that done”… I feel this project is still under-marketed concerning the market’s awareness of it.

By “deep dive bullet points” I meant “value add / point of difference bullet points”

I regret using the word “Team” at all… because “Collaboration” was my intent and a “Collaboration” can be as small as two… and I completely agree that there must be a passionate Driver.

Robert Tichauer

John,

Have you considered META near Lyon, France? https://meta-yachts.com/en/
I visited them earlier this year. They were competent and open to working with me on developing a ~50′ DS yacht. Philippe Brabetz () is the owner. Marin Docoux (), who used to work for Boréal, is his head designer.

Cheers,
Robert

Stein Varjord

Hi Robert,

Meta is cool, but they’re a metal boat builder, nowadays aluminium, which means they’re not able to get anywhere close to one of the core goals of the Adventure40: A low price.

The minor extra step in robustness one gets one gets from going from well built glass fibre to aluminium is a big step in cost. Way more money than the difference is worth for most adventure sailors. I’m definitely a fan of aluminium in boats, but glass fibre moulding is the only smart option for the Adventure 40.

Robert Tichauer

My mistake, Stein!

I thought she would be an aluminum boat, knowing how much John likes Boréal! Of course, at that length, GRP will be more cost-effective.

Good luck with the project! She will need to be longer for our needs.

Cheers,
Robert

Stein Varjord

HI John and Maxime,

I feel sorry for all that work having been put into this, and then hitting a wall. There are many walls to hit in any such project, of course, but the death of a core person is a bad one. I understand how that can deplete the energy and motivation.

I’m not the right person to take this over, but for a moment I did actually feel tempted. I’m 100% sure someone suitable will want to take over. It’s an obviously good idea. The question is just: How to make said person discover the opportunity?

This article is a good start. Also, if each of us here think about all the people we know of, is there one or more we think could be the right one? Should we talk to that person? This might spread the news quite effectively…

Maxime Gérardin

Hi Stein,

thank you.

Just one note: in my opinion, one of the requisites for leading the project is to have very good understanding of what AAC is. Most people who haven’t been through the path of getting to know AAC by themselves won’t, at first, realize its true power(s).
Not at all saying that we shouldn’t speak of the project “outside”, but just that explaining AAC is a very substantial part of the pitch – and of what an interested person should be willing to listen to.

Jean-Louis Alixant

Bonjour Maxime,
Thank you for maturing the Adventure 40 so quickly – just a few years! – into an optimal concept that is ready for the next phases of development.
I would like to emphasize the point you make about the need for the next project leader to understand AAC, and the consequences of not meeting this attribute: the Adventure 40 could rapidly become something very different from what its core principles carry. And that applies doubly to any investor that would see A40 as a profit opportunity without being primarily guided by the AAC spirit. The low-cost ambitions could be the first to be put aside.
In terms of project development, the selection of the next leader(s) is THE most critical decision the A40 has faced and is likely to face. Take your time.

Scott Arenz

Hi John and Maxime,

I’m very sorry to hear of the investor’s passing, and that Maxime must let the project go. The Adventure 40 Project has undergone brilliant and sustained progress under his leadership.

As a longtime A40 fan, I offer my sincere gratitude for Maxime’s effort and creativity. He is to be commended not only for the numerous innovations and project milestones he has achieved, but also the self-awareness to know the right moment to step away and turn his focus elsewhere. It takes courage to start such an ambitious project; it takes both courage and wisdom to say, “that’s enough”, and to plan a graceful succession.

In sum, Maxime has made his mark on the Adventure 40 not only as a talented entrepreneur and engineer but also as a conscientious person. 

A less wise leader might have left chaos behind. But John’s words show that Maxime leaves the Adventure 40 project in a state that’s both stable and with plenty of momentum, ready to be driven to the next set of milestones by they who grasp the baton.

So I’m sure I’m not the only one who wishes to say, “Thank you, Maxime!” And best wishes for you and your family in the chapter you are now beginning, no matter what that might be.

***

Lastly, for the sake of transparency, I’ll disclose that I’ve corresponded with Maxime and John in the course of my volunteer design work for the project’s preliminary logo and class insignia, t-shirts, business cards and video titles. I also set up the current shop for merchandise. These were small yet joyful projects, and working with Maxime as client and collaborator was a true pleasure!

Maxime Gérardin

Hi Scott,

thank you!

Conversely, your involvement is a great exemple of what is so special when working on this project: has anyone ever heard of another commercial project where a designer spontaneously pops out as soon at the very begining, and then comes up with a professional-grade logo that nails it from the first try?? Thank you again!!

Scott Arenz

Hi Maxime,

Thanks for the kind words!

Scott Arenz

Hi John and/or Maxime,

I’m curious about a few of details of the current state of planning. General answers to these questions would help give potential self-selecting entrepreneurs a notion of the overall scale of the venture.

1) Does the estimated prototyping and testing budget fall in the range of six or seven figures?

2) What level of non-English language proficiency is needed to effectively communicate with the selected builder?

3) Is there any preliminary information (that can be disclosed publicly) regarding the number of deposits that the builder would need in order to commit to the production line?

Thanks in advance!

Maxime Gérardin

Hi again Scott,

thank you for helping clarify.

1) it does depend on the exact protoyping/investing/etc strategy, but yes, when you sum all the upfronts, including the fact that even after a prototype the first boats of a production run are a bit more expensive than the following ones, you approach or enter the 7-digit domain.

2) if it is to be done with the builder I had selected, ability to work in french would be necessary. That said, a new person can re-open the choices.

3) more generally, answer 1) implies that investing requires investors who assess a long production run as a high probability. More in detail, there can be one of the fund injections relying on a number of deposits, but this is probably not the very core of the setup to work out.

Scott Arenz

Maxime, thanks for the details.

1) “Around one million” seems to be the intuitive estimate from other commenters as well, so thanks for confirming the general ballpark.

Out of curiosity, did you find much variation in the prototyping cost estimates between the various builders with whom you spoke?

2) Merci. Le vocabulaire d’architecture navale français est un autre défi!

3) That makes sense; the investor is the greater risk taker compared to the builder.

Maxime Gérardin

Hi again Scott,

No, not much variation between builders. The main learning would rather be that, the more experienced they are, the more they think that the series production cost, hence price, can be fully worked out only after the prototype build.

Scott Arenz

Good to know; thanks again Maxime!

Don Watkins

Thanks to Maxime and John for bringing us to this point.

I totally agree that a dedicated entrepreneur with the desire and funds is essential. I am a small business owner, so I understand this.
You mentioned that someone with the AAC community has already raised their hand.
That would be wonderful and fast baton hand off. 

However, if for some unfortunate reason things don’t pan out with an entrepreneur/angel with a certain time frame (3 – 6 months? year?) to cleanly pick up the baton, I’m sure there is interest/talent/experience within the community that may have ideas (and willing time and contributions) to at least take the A40 to the next higher stage of preparation and possibilities, furthering attractiveness to potential entrepreneur/angel.

Brainstorming/ identifying worthy future milestones/ thinking outside the box, especially with leveraging possibilities online would keep the dream alive and momentum forward.

I’m sure that I speak for others here, that every A40 update is like a breath of fresh air, of hope, possibility, and excitement. I’d hate to see it stall.

The audience of anyone who has dreamed of crossing oceans is BIG. Even if they are too young/ too broke/ too old/ unable due to life circumstances.

Many people would love the A40 “story.”

The A40 story isn’t as niche as you think, even though only two sailors would be sitting in the actual cockpit.

You are presenting an industry “disruptor” story/solution, which happens to be a very popular theme right now.

The number of online followers of “younger” cruisers online platform is HUGE, like https://svdelos.com.

Anyone who has spent longer than 10 minutes “cruising sailboat shopping” could identify with the pain points you present in Model T article. Many people would like to see the A40 story unfold as future tangible milestones are hit, even if they aren’t potential A40 owners (yet)

I’m not proposing that the A40 story will “go viral” as my kids say and solve all problems, however I think there may be other tangible ways to market this dream and help the project move forward.

There is more than one way to raise a million bucks and get the first A40 built.

I’ll leave it at that for now….

Don

George L

Really sorry to hear about the sad passing away of the kind funder of the prototype.

Having gone through this process over the last few years myself has been a sobering experience. Double or triple your assumed cost and it will be about right – it is an endless string of a few thousand here, the cost of a mid-sized car or two there. All the stuff that goes into a boat is very expensive even with astute purchasing. Producing in the EU, the States or Canada is prohibitively expensive due to red tape, 5 government leeches per productive member of society and a resulting tax regime that isn’t just expensive but also grossly unfair, etc etc etc. I am sure Maxine knows this only too well. If it takes a few thousand hours in labour to produce such a ship and if the shop rate is let’s say 70 Euros, your hoped-for target cost is spent in labour alone. No materials, none of all the stuff that goes into it. And then the usury VAT (19 to 21 %) on top of that if you are unfortunate enough to reside within the EU.

It is what it is. But while I do not consider the aimed for cost target remotely realistic, there still are ways to minimize the cost. If the hull is produced to high standards and accuracy and if the parts of the furniture can be ordered CNC produced and perhaps kits for the other parts be arranged, then the hours should drastically come down and even self-finishing would be realistic – at least the owner knows the boat in and out in the end.

One option would be forming a cooperative made up of the core of the interested parties that are willing to make the necessary sacrifices to get it. That would provide a clear vehicle for sharing the remaining development and certification cost, to acquire the rights from Maxine and for the forms. Every new owner becomes a member of the cooperative and pays his/her share; previous owners get a refund, accordingly. Incidentally, a cooperative would be the best fit to the spirit of AAC, and quite frankly, I don’t think that this is a project for an entrepreneur, especially with the economy in vast stretches of the Western world in a nose-dive – of the difficult to recover variety at that.
Secondly, the hulls need to be produced somewhere. At this size, South Africa with shipping two hulls in a container would be feasible; it is done with Class 40 yachts routinely. I am sure there are some places in Asia. Turkey might work out, or if it must, absolutely must be the EU, Portugal would be an option. However, building GRP boats requires meticulous work, so whoever does it must be competent and trustworthy.

For each of those, the complete buildout could be done there as well.

Stein Varjord

Hi George,

The below rant is partly an answer to topics you mentioned, but this got me inspired to comment on related ideas I’ve seen from others too:

I don’t think a cooperative model or self finished boats are good ideas. That will quickly loose all the benefits of a competent builder with a simple and tight plan. The A40 definitely has an interesting slot in the market, unless its core values get watered out…The western market may have some bumpy roads ahead, nobody really knows, but by the time the A40 is ready for market, all may have changed. The right timing for a project like this is when others are pessimistic, so they don’t do anything interesting.

I think it’s important to delete all ideas of making a boat so cheap that anyone can buy it Such a boat would be expensive in the long run, since it would need major upgrades before any use and need significant maintenance too early. That’s the exact opposite of the goal for the A40.

I also think we need to completely discard the original price target number. It’s become meaningless. Since we have had a period of quite high inflation, (real inflation way higher than the official numbers), which is far from ended, the original price target number is just a shot in the dark. Not useful. I’m not competent enough to give realistic numbers, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the same value today was approaching double of the original target some years ago. Many boats have more than double the price the same model had back then. This isn’t only caused by greed. The target price for the A40 must be related to the current money value and the other boats on the market, not to wishful thinking. Denying that points to quick bankruptcy.

My point is just that a 40-something foot ocean ready sailboat of high build quality and reasonable cost is still a significant amount of money. It MUST be built professionally with very tight control. If not, it’s neither high quality nor low cost. That doesn’t mean one shouldn’t look for ways to reduce costs. If looking for a relatively cheap production country inside the EU, Poland has a proven track record. There are also options in the Balkans. Elan is built there.

George L

Hi Stein,

Not a rant at all; just another take on the same conundrum.

The reason why I would give self-finished a shot is that everything else can be done from 3D models quite accurately, predictably and with parts fitting reasonably well where they need to go. GPR can be done by a firm set up to do it competitively as well and the places you mention would all be options. Finishing work with hiqh-quality and well-fitting components can be done by someone who is good with his hands, after all look at all the people doing massive refits themselves – it is about the same skill base and that’s where a lot of the hours are.

Fully agree with your points on prices, and yes, true inflation has been really bad. Except for being too optimistic with estimates, I have never thought cheap – we pick what we consider the best and we work with healthy sizing-reserves, but if labor-cost can be substituted with sweat-capital without hurting quality, then that’s an obvious angle.

The reason why I would not discard the cooperative model, it spreads the risk much better, it provides a support community and it avoids the pain when the builder goes belly-up. The fact that the “neoliberals” loath them alone should be a seal of approval warranting a second look. Furthermore, while busy, even places with strong builder’s communities such as in the Netherlands struggle with finding young people willing to take over, most are owned by old geezers who will be the last in their families doing this. I know of one, who is over 70 already and completely booked up till 2028. Last but not least, many yards that used to build now only service – there is plenty of work and it is charged by time and material, hence little risk.

Yes, timing is a key point.

Last, but not least, getting to a tight plan with a small series is very difficult. Theoretically, it can be all optimized in specs, plans, 3D files and the like; realistically, it isn’t nearly as tight as desirable and one little error throws the planning off or results in a problem for the customer later on. It would take serious iterative improvements over a few builds, which means the first few boats would cause a considerable loss. I have heard reports of production boats that had so many issues that they could be hardly moved off the yard on the keel because one thing after another failed. This is the biggest struggle for reputable, experience builders – if a couple of workers don’t work out or if there has been a mistake estimating (and they do have highly refined models for that), they are out a couple of hundred thousand. This is not for the faint of heart, for sure.

George L

Hi John,

As any association, a coop lives from the participates that engage. The membership at large makes it economically feasible. There are many entrepreneurs with the right product on the right time, the right competence and the heart at the right spot, but they still fail because economies are brutal – especially nowadays where loans for anything but B-flat projects are near-impossible to get, even if the ROI flys through the roof. This is where I think a coop could be the solution, but the decision will be anyways with the people who take the project on.

Just reread the referenced articles. Your first, and the Dashews’, argument is that this essentially comparable to a 32 footer in cost. Point taken. The second argument, concerning unbundling, is spot on, as well, and a good approach for any small builder.

I do not think that marketing cost of production boats is anywhere near 50%; the dealers will be somewhere around 10% and while the shows are very expensive, the cost is spread over many models and units. In many cases the dealers are invited to be part of the show, free of charge but also working the customers free of charge for the builder, so the firms get a lot of play for their money.

Last, but not least, it doesn’t cost much less to develop a small boat and get it ready for the market than it takes a big one.

Will be interesting to see with what target price you will come up.

So or so, I’d be thrilled to see the project succeed!

George L

Hi John,

I hope you are right on this one as I would love to see this project succeed.

My son’s trade is setting up production runs of 500 to 5000 items for completed, tested and otherwise promising designs. It’s a cliffhanger every single time and he really knows what he is doing. Silly things like that only screws with the wrong head can be sourced can cause a stop of weeks. While on a custom project, errors increase the cost of the ship, they may very well kill the entire project before it even gets into producing. The no-options approach helps. The complex systems are a non-issue, in most cases they are add-ons; the basic ship is still the same. All I am saying, building just a basic ship in good quality at reasonable cost is a challenge, even for experienced yards with decades of experience.

Igor Asselbergs

Firstly, from my own experience I have to agree that any sort of venture needs a leader. A person who will do what is necessary to get things done. But that said, there is a very strong example of how a effective a collective can be. The Dutch East India Company (Vereenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie or: Collective East India Company) started out in the 17th century as a collective of entrepreneurs that put money together to build bigger boats. These boats enabled them to sail to South Asia and establish a spice business. Along the way they invented public shares and became the founders of modern capitalism. The VOC went on to become the most valuable business the world has ever seen, more valuable than Google, Microsoft and Apple put together. Amsterdam was largely built on VOC money. The VOC never had a dominant leader. Things were always hashed out collectively.
Secondly, one of the most important establishments in the VOC network was Ceylon, nowadays Sri Lanka. It may have nothing to do with it, but as it happens Sri Lanka today has some very able and forward thinking businesses involved in boat building and water sports. I should know, because I work with some of them as a consultant and designer. The local rates are way lower than the rates in the western world. Some Dutch high quality yachts are built on Sri Lanka. I could pass some names in a private message.