23 MXZ coming?

[DocPhil]

I agree they need a big surf oriented boat, but I think that's what they are hoping the 25 will be. The G series aren't surf oriented boats, they surf well, but their greatness is in their wakeboard wakes. MC went surf oriented, and they do well, but aren't competition for the G series. Surf system wake wise the 23lsv is as good as any out there. Listed is going to fade into the sunset over time

You might be right but I think those are misguided hopes for 2 reasons

1)I don't think it will surf that well without 5K ballast. It is too big. I know folks are saying this thing surfs great but does it somehow defy the laws of physics that apply to every other giant surf boat? No. You need a gigantic crew or a ton of ballast. Plain and simple.

2)people don't want a boat just because it surfs well if it is 25 feet long. That is too big for most. At least in my area it is. Out west it might be more popular (or so I have heard on TMC)

Edited August 13, 2015 by DocPhil

[saxton15]

It's just so much boat. I saw a G25 a few weekends ago and the wave did not look much bigger than my buddies LSV that was dialed. Now the G25 did not look weighed down in the least and it was FULL of people.

So picture a 25LSV, it will need minimum 1100's in the lockers and likely something as big upfront. Maybe that belly bag Doc has will become a standard size.

Edited August 13, 2015 by saxton15

[CJAY]

You might be right but I think those are misguided hopes for 2 reasons

1)I don't think it will surf that well without 5K ballast. It is too big. I know folks are saying this thing surfs great but does it somehow defy the laws of physics that apply to every other giant surf boat? No. You need a gigantic crew or a ton of ballast. Plain and simple.

2)people don't want a boat just because it surfs well if it is 25 feet long. That is too big for most. At least in my area it is. Out west it might be more popular (or so I have heard on TMC)

I agree with both of these, and they both apply to the g23+ boats. you need a ton of ballast to make them surf well. If that's the world everyone wants to compete, then that's the reality.

25ft is just too big, I agree. The G25 doesn't sell well for this reason also, and it actually has the worst wakes in the series. I just think malibu is hoping the 25 will be their surf machine. They already have a great surf boat in the 23, hell the 22 surfs almost as well as the 23

[DarkSide]

I agree they need a big surf oriented boat, but I think that's what they are hoping the 25 will be. The G series aren't surf oriented boats, they surf well, but their greatness is in their wakeboard wakes. MC went surf oriented, and they do well, but aren't competition for the G series. Surf system wake wise the 23lsv is as good as any out there. Listed is going to fade into the sunset over time

Not entirely a 23 LSV can produce a great wave, only after adding PNP, bow sac, etc. A G Will produce a good wave and wakeboarding wake strait off the showroom floor. Same with MXZ it will create fantastic wakeboard wake, but you need bow bags, PNP, etc to get them where you want them for surfing. The G is setup better strait out of the box.

[oldjeep]

Has Malibu got all sorts of unused capacity that they really need to worry about Nautique filling a particular segment? I'd be more worried about the sheer number of models they are offering and if that is really the way for them to maximize revenue. I wonder how many molds they have for each current model?

[CJAY]

Not entirely a 23 LSV can produce a great wave, only after adding PNP, bow sac, etc. A G Will produce a good wave and wakeboarding wake strait off the showroom floor. Same with MXZ it will create fantastic wakeboard wake, but you need bow bags, PNP, etc to get them where you want them for surfing. The G is setup better strait out of the box.

Straight off the show room floor is 2850lbs of ballast. you have to have that much due to it's size to get a wave, with the LSV you get a good wave stock, great filling the PNP, which are right off the show room floor also. Both need lots of ballast for a great wave, each are achieved differently

[DarkSide]

Doc,

It is kind of odd the big MXZ sells very well here, so does 23LSV, but the smaller Malibu's do not sell as well. However the G23 is the sweet spot, they sell fairly well, G25 not so much, G21 does ok, but the G23 is the one that really sells.

[DocPhil]

Doc,

It is kind of odd the big MXZ sells very well here, so does 23LSV, but the smaller Malibu's do not sell as well. However the G23 is the sweet spot, they sell fairly well, G25 not so much, G21 does ok, but the G23 is the one that really sells.

My personal opinion is the 25 LSV will be a flop. What does it do better?

I would bet my hernia that it doesn't surf better. Its too big. More expensive. Does it wakeboard better? I doubt it. Ski better? No.

It will be a niche boat just like the X-46. It is for people that want a party barge

[67King]

I think it's completely necessary. You own a good portion of the market already. Why not take more? The G is nautique best seller. Build a boat to compete and take market share.

My point wasn't very clear, or maybe we're not really disagreeing overall, or what. Anyway, Nautique has 6 V-drive boats. Skier's Choice has 7. Mastercraft has 8. Malibu already has 12........TWICE as many as Nautique, and 50% more than Mastercraft. And that doesn't even include the fact that two of them can be had with two different hulls. That much complexity will absolutely drive up cost, and will make quality control that much harder. Does Malibu need a boat to better position itself against the G23? I don't mean to say that they don't.....but IMHO, they need to trim their line, not expand it.

Now, what do I *personally* think? I think that the whole MXZ line should be made more in line with that, and that the traditional bow boats should stay a more moderate size. Was kind of surprised the bigger LSV is what went out that way, rather than the 24 MXZ. But a 4th MXZ in and of itself seems a bit much.

[oldjeep]

And that doesn't even include the fact that two of them can be had with two different hulls.

Don't know if that is true any more. I think the new VTX is T-Diamond only - what is the other boat with a hull choice?

[67King]

Don't know if that is true any more. I think the new VTX is T-Diamond only - what is the other boat with a hull choice?

I know the VLX does. and I assume the 23 LSV still does.

[85 Barefoot]

My point wasn't very clear, or maybe we're not really disagreeing overall, or what. Anyway, Nautique has 6 V-drive boats. Skier's Choice has 7. Mastercraft has 8. Malibu already has 12........TWICE as many as Nautique, and 50% more than Mastercraft. And that doesn't even include the fact that two of them can be had with two different hulls. That much complexity will absolutely drive up cost, and will make quality control that much harder. Does Malibu need a boat to better position itself against the G23? I don't mean to say that they don't.....but IMHO, they need to trim their line, not expand it.

Now, what do I *personally* think? I think that the whole MXZ line should be made more in line with that, and that the traditional bow boats should stay a more moderate size. Was kind of surprised the bigger LSV is what went out that way, rather than the 24 MXZ. But a 4th MXZ in and of itself seems a bit much.

The diamond vs non-diamond hull is a total nonissue. They simply use a different hull mold.

What you're seemingly forgetting is that even though Malibu has more models than everyone else, they also sell more than anyone else! So, if CC has 15-18% market share with 6 models, each v drive is like 3% of the market. Malibu has what, 30-34%? So, each model is roughly 3% of the market. Yes I know they sell way more 23s than VTX and CC sells more G23s than sport 200s but you get the point. Why trim that?

I don't know what you mean about "complexity" of more models. Components all the same. Just cut vinyl and carpet shorter on some. There's really not that big of a difference.

[67King]

The diamond vs non-diamond hull is a total nonissue. They simply use a different hull mold.

What you're seemingly forgetting is that even though Malibu has more models than everyone else, they also sell more than anyone else! So, if CC has 15-18% market share with 6 models, each v drive is like 3% of the market. Malibu has what, 30-34%? So, each model is roughly 3% of the market. Yes I know they sell way more 23s than VTX and CC sells more G23s than sport 200s but you get the point. Why trim that?

I don't know what you mean about "complexity" of more models. Components all the same. Just cut vinyl and carpet shorter on some. There's really not that big of a difference.

All the boats are made in the same plant. Parts have to be stored. They have to be delivered to the assembly point. Complexity almost put Ford out of business (while I was an engineer there). It is never a good thing from a manufacturing perspective. Or development for that matter. More complexity equals more opportunity for mis-builds. And how many mentions have we had here lately about MC's quality control superiority to Malibu's? While many parts are the same from boat to boat, many are not. Badges are different. Trim is different, pieces of the rubrail are different. How much crossover is there in interior? MXZ's helm location is further aft of the traditional bow boats......does a VTX seat fit a 22 MXZ? It may, I don't know. It may not. How does the size of the hull affect the process? We know bigger boats will take more material.....opportunity for insufficient quantities to be mixed. or too much mixed, then has to be disposed of, etc. Complexity isn't just in parts, it is in processes, too.

Why do these boats cost 6 figures? As any automotive guy, I'd look at them and expect them to cost 1/5th to 1/4th of what they do.

But the real concern with all of that is less about the introduction of complexity, and the phenomenon known as "cannabalism." That's where you don't increase overall sales by much, but rather just reallocate, as the new product merely steals sales from existing product. I really, really don't see a 23 MXZ paying for itself when you consider the cannabalism from both the 22 and 24. You won't go from 1000 each of 22 and 24 to 1000 of each 22, 23, and 24. YOu'll probably go to 700 each. Yeah that's 100 more boats, but is that enough to justify the investment? Granted, this is speculation, but these are very basic concepts any business goes through.

[DarkSide]

I don't think there is as much complexity as you are thinking. The gel/fiberglass etc is all done by hand, no template anyway. The major thing would be the additional molds. Not just hull molds, but also stringers, swim platform, etc. That said, as sales volumes increase additional molds are required anyway.

So in the example above, if max production from one set of molds is 500 boats. If current 22 and 24 are each running at 450, creating a 23 that cannibalize both down to 375 would be a good thing.

[85 Barefoot]

All the boats are made in the same plant. Parts have to be stored. They have to be delivered to the assembly point. Complexity almost put Ford out of business (while I was an engineer there). It is never a good thing from a manufacturing perspective. Or development for that matter. More complexity equals more opportunity for mis-builds. And how many mentions have we had here lately about MC's quality control superiority to Malibu's? While many parts are the same from boat to boat, many are not. Badges are different. Trim is different, pieces of the rubrail are different. How much crossover is there in interior? MXZ's helm location is further aft of the traditional bow boats......does a VTX seat fit a 22 MXZ? It may, I don't know. It may not. How does the size of the hull affect the process? We know bigger boats will take more material.....opportunity for insufficient quantities to be mixed. or too much mixed, then has to be disposed of, etc. Complexity isn't just in parts, it is in processes, too.

Why do these boats cost 6 figures? As any automotive guy, I'd look at them and expect them to cost 1/5th to 1/4th of what they do.

But the real concern with all of that is less about the introduction of complexity, and the phenomenon known as "cannabalism." That's where you don't increase overall sales by much, but rather just reallocate, as the new product merely steals sales from existing product. I really, really don't see a 23 MXZ paying for itself when you consider the cannabalism from both the 22 and 24. You won't go from 1000 each of 22 and 24 to 1000 of each 22, 23, and 24. YOu'll probably go to 700 each. Yeah that's 100 more boats, but is that enough to justify the investment? Granted, this is speculation, but these are very basic concepts any business goes through.

67, there's literally only a handful of different things. Trim is not different, nor are rubrails. Parts that need to be stored are not model-specific. Every interior is cut using the same machines (in house), just to different sizes, the materials are all the same, as is the hardware, colors, carpet, glass, windshields, wiring harnesses, towers, electronics, engines, accessories, heck even down to the decals and cleats. Your qualms about "mixing" the right amount of (assuming you mean glass, resin, and gel) is not a concern with more models. The layup room is spraying and rolling myriad different model boats, all at the same time, all day long. There is no different "process" for one boat and another for another. In other words, they could add 5 more models and its changes nothing nor complicates the production of any other models.

As to cannibalising sales, sure.

67, if you're in Knoxville, have you been to the plant? I'm not saying more models makes anything any simpler by any means, but it's not comparable to a major automotive producer and supply chain issues, J.I.T. problems and the like. I totally understand what you're saying, but these boats are not that different from one another. In fact they're not even that different than one another when they're a decade old, either.

Edited August 13, 2015 by 85 Barefoot

[67King]

67, there's literally only a handful of different things. Trim is not different, nor are rubrails. Parts that need to be stored are not model-specific. Every interior is cut using the same machines, just to different sizes, the materials are all the same, as is the hardware, colors, carpet, glass, windshields, wiring harnesses, towers, electronics, engines, accessories, heck even down to the decals and cleats. Your qualms about "mixing" the right amount of (assuming you mean glass, resin, and gel) is not a concern with more models. The layup room is spraying and rolling myriad different model boats, all at the same time, all day long. There is no different "process" for one boat and another for another. In other words, they could add 5 more models and its changes nothing nor complicates the production of any other models.

As to cannibalising sales, sure.

67, if you're in Knoxville, have you been to the plant?

Yes, I've been to the plant. Matt B. was my tour guide when he was still focused exclusively on Axis, this was Spring, 2011. I'm trying to get back again, soon. Been talking to Mike Q about it.

Rubrails are stamped steel, not tape. A 22' boat cannot have the same rubrails as a 23' boat. A picklefork can't have the same as a traditional bow boat. Can they mix and match, maybe the LSV's rear portion with as 22 MXZ's front? Possibly. But now you are introducing process complexity. Trim on a 22 VLX that has the words "22 VLX" stamped into it is not going to be the same as anything other than a 22 VLX.

Yes, I know that it is a very vertically integrated plant. And yes, I know that it doesn't really resemble a modern day assembly line. But even still, there is WIP that is different. And yes, a 25 LSV will require MORE fiberglass, MORE resin, MORE gelcoat, etc, etc. etc. than a 20 VTX. So yes, there IS a different process for that. Perhaps not the fiberglass, which is the same from boat to boat, but certainly for the gelcoat. Templates for things such as cleat placement must be different. There is a term in manufacturing called "standardized work" that describes the goal of a process. The more you can standardize the work that goes in, the less likely there are to be mistakes. And the higher quality gets: Here, http://www.lean.org/Workshops/WorkshopDescription.cfm?WorkshopId=20

Are there poka-yokes in place for all of the process complexity drivers? I don't recall seeing anything like that when I went. Sure would stink to drill a hole for a cleat in the wrong place. Don't get me wrong, I know they know what they are doing, but that doens't negate risk.

Misbuilds already happen. My Axis actually had to be sent back for a few weeks. May have bene that the dealer incorrectly entered the order, I dont know, but it was built with no options, whereas I had ordered the wedge, depth finder, pull-up cleats, docking and transom lights, P&P, etc. None was installed. Even after the re-work, the rockers for the lights and P&P were not fixed. My VLX was misbuilt, albeit only a very small thing (no bracket for table mount).

Anyway, I don't really care. I'm just saying that overall, I would be very surprised if they'd do it. I think that between cannibalization, manufacturing, and development costs (which on a per unit sold basis have got to be very high in the marine industry) it would be very hard to justify. I may be wrong. Some folks rebutting my points may actually build them for all I know. But I have had more exposure to managing that kind of stuff than the average Joe (and yeah, I had to deal with UAW issues, which I'm sure amplifies it!!!!). And in most industries (which are much more automated), complexity is a bad thing, and is to be avoided unless the customer sees a great benefit. The customer may! I don't know, but I just don't think the tradeoff is there.

[IXFE]

Doc,

It is kind of odd the big MXZ sells very well here, so does 23LSV, but the smaller Malibu's do not sell as well. However the G23 is the sweet spot, they sell fairly well, G25 not so much, G21 does ok, but the G23 is the one that really sells.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again... Nautique is a ONE boat company.

Malibu does not need to be chasing these guys

[85 Barefoot]

Yes, I've been to the plant. Matt B. was my tour guide when he was still focused exclusively on Axis, this was Spring, 2011. I'm trying to get back again, soon. Been talking to Mike Q about it.

Rubrails are stamped steel, not tape. A 22' boat cannot have the same rubrails as a 23' boat. A picklefork can't have the same as a traditional bow boat. Can they mix and match, maybe the LSV's rear portion with as 22 MXZ's front? Possibly. But now you are introducing process complexity. Trim on a 22 VLX that has the words "22 VLX" stamped into it is not going to be the same as anything other than a 22 VLX.

Yes, I know that it is a very vertically integrated plant. And yes, I know that it doesn't really resemble a modern day assembly line. But even still, there is WIP that is different. And yes, a 25 LSV will require MORE fiberglass, MORE resin, MORE gelcoat, etc, etc. etc. than a 20 VTX. So yes, there IS a different process for that. Perhaps not the fiberglass, which is the same from boat to boat, but certainly for the gelcoat. Templates for things such as cleat placement must be different. There is a term in manufacturing called "standardized work" that describes the goal of a process. The more you can standardize the work that goes in, the less likely there are to be mistakes. And the higher quality gets: Here, http://www.lean.org/Workshops/WorkshopDescription.cfm?WorkshopId=20

Are there poka-yokes in place for all of the process complexity drivers? I don't recall seeing anything like that when I went. Sure would stink to drill a hole for a cleat in the wrong place. Don't get me wrong, I know they know what they are doing, but that doens't negate risk.

Misbuilds already happen. My Axis actually had to be sent back for a few weeks. May have bene that the dealer incorrectly entered the order, I dont know, but it was built with no options, whereas I had ordered the wedge, depth finder, pull-up cleats, docking and transom lights, P&P, etc. None was installed. Even after the re-work, the rockers for the lights and P&P were not fixed. My VLX was misbuilt, albeit only a very small thing (no bracket for table mount).

Anyway, I don't really care. I'm just saying that overall, I would be very surprised if they'd do it. I think that between cannibalization, manufacturing, and development costs (which on a per unit sold basis have got to be very high in the marine industry) it would be very hard to justify. I may be wrong. Some folks rebutting my points may actually build them for all I know. But I have had more exposure to managing that kind of stuff than the average Joe (and yeah, I had to deal with UAW issues, which I'm sure amplifies it!!!!). And in most industries (which are much more automated), complexity is a bad thing, and is to be avoided unless the customer sees a great benefit. The customer may! I don't know, but I just don't think the tradeoff is there.

67, your experience and background is well-taken. No point in disagreeing over the minutiae, but Malibu producing 12 boats a day or 16 a day is the same contrast as them adding another model. It's just not that big of a deal. There's no gelcoat mixing for a particular boat or size, they switch the color on the gun and spray away, just the same as they would making more boats a day as they would adding a new model. It's no more complicated for a worker to pull the 23 MXZ jig for underwater gear than it is for him to grab the 22 VLX. There's a jig for each boat, for every single hole. They're not just willy-nilly drilling holes where they think they should go, in which case, I would totally agree adding another model to the mix would be problematic from a QC perspective. Given their vertical integration (I like that, Rockefeller) its just not like an assembly line where orderes were needed 2 months in advance for the supply chain to keep up and one part arriving late throws off the whole dance. Sure, build mistakes happen. In yours, rest assured the order didn't get submitted right. Get back down there to check out the automated QC checks at each station they use. I bet you'd be impressed with both the malleability and efficiency of the line.

[Cory]

Malibu has increased the number of boat offerings in recent years, but these different boats have become more and more similar. The VLX and LSV used to have different beams, which meant different tower, different dash molds, etc. Now these two boats have identical beams. I'm guessing they use the same tower and dash molds for both boats to reduce sku counts. I wouldn't be surprised if overall sku count has been reduced even though the number of boats has gone up.

[DarkSide]

IXFE,

I would disagree a 17% market share, from a "one boat company" should not be ignored.

Separate Malibu from Axis, Malibu has roughly a 23% market share with 9 Malibu models (70/30 Malibu/Axis 33% total market share). So not paying attention would be a mistake. If Malibu by itself was outselling 2:1 then i would absolutely agree, but that is not the case.

I would suspect the G23 sells very similar numbers to 23 LSV. When you look closer Malibu only has a 6 point lead over Nautique, with a deeper lineup, so not exactly dominating the market as much as pie wedges first indicate.

"Lies, damn lies, and statistics"

[DarkSide]

Malibu has increased the number of boat offerings in recent years, but these different boats have become more and more similar. The VLX and LSV used to have different beams, which meant different tower, different dash molds, etc. Now these two boats have identical beams. I'm guessing they use the same tower and dash molds for both boats to reduce sku counts. I wouldn't be surprised if overall sku count has been reduced even though the number of boats has gone up.

Even dash itself is now standard, 2014 had different dashes/instrument cluster guages, depending on model. Now all WakeSetter are the same.

[85 Barefoot]

IXFE,

I would disagree a 17% market share, from a "one boat company" should not be ignored.

Separate Malibu from Axis, Malibu has roughly a 23% market share with 9 Malibu models (70/30 Malibu/Axis 33% total market share). So not paying attention would be a mistake. If Malibu by itself was outselling 2:1 then i would absolutely agree, but that is not the case.

I would suspect the G23 sells very similar numbers to 23 LSV. When you look closer Malibu only has a 6 point lead over Nautique, with a deeper lineup, so not exactly dominating the market as much as pie wedges first indicate.

"Lies, damn lies, and statistics"

Keep in mind too how many ski nautiques CC sells. While I personally don't know the numbers, anecdotally, they seem to sell way more than malibu with the txi.

Also, getting back to 67's point, prior to Axis, the splits were more similar than dissimilar. Axis has cannibalized Malibu to some extent no doubt.

Edited August 13, 2015 by 85 Barefoot

[IXFE]

IXFE,

I would disagree a 17% market share, from a "one boat company" should not be ignored.

Separate Malibu from Axis, Malibu has roughly a 23% market share with 9 Malibu models (70/30 Malibu/Axis 33% total market share). So not paying attention would be a mistake. If Malibu by itself was outselling 2:1 then i would absolutely agree, but that is not the case.

I would suspect the G23 sells very similar numbers to 23 LSV. When you look closer Malibu only has a 6 point lead over Nautique, with a deeper lineup, so not exactly dominating the market as much as pie wedges first indicate.

"Lies, damn lies, and statistics"

Good points, but there is NO way Nautique sells as many G23's as 23 LSV's. No way.

[67King]

. Get back down there to check out the automated QC checks at each station they use. I bet you'd be impressed with both the malleability and efficiency of the line.

I'd like to, and I need to. I'd love to take my 10 y/o daughter, who wants to be an engineer (and no, she doens't have that personality - she's a stud athlete and way too extroverted to be mine!), as I think one of their engineers is a female, though I don't know if they'd let her go.

And again, may be right, may be wrong. Just pointing out reasons I don't see it happening, that's all!

The point about Axis cannibalizing Malibu......a bit off topic, but Axis has really changed a lot over the past few years. Wasn't it supposed to be a $40K boat? And it may have been in 2009. My 2011 was still close to half the price of a Malibu. But now, maybe 10%? I'll say this, it got me into the Malibu "family," and I stayed when I upgraded. I'm a bit sad to see them go so far upscale that they aren't as affordable as they used to be.

[IXFE]

And one more thing... I'm not suggesting Malibu "ignore" the G as you say. I would argue that the G has already influenced Malibu. Their movement to deeper, heavier boats is no coincidence. It started in '14 with the 23 LSV, then the VLX follows, then the 25 LSV, then the VTX. Etc.

Just because Malibu didn't do a blatant G23 rip off like Tige tried doesn't mean they are watching and SUBTLY designing similar concepts into their boats... they're just doing it in the Malibu way.