Save the Squadron Boatyard

You don't fix a management problem by demolishing a facility.

The Squadron's own Members Update diagnoses an ageing base, falling membership and low engagement. Every one of those is a management and utilisation finding. None is a boatyard finding.

Membership — recruit and retain younger sailing members. A management task.

Facility utilisation — activate the clubhouse, dining and grounds seven days a week. A management task.

Space utilisation — make better use of the land we already have. A management task.

The boatyard — a scarce, revenue-capable asset few Harbour clubs still have. Not the problem.

Legal opinion — Senior Counsel

We are advised by Senior Counsel that closing the boatyard would be contrary to the founding constitution of the Squadron — and cannot be done by a Committee decision alone. It requires a special resolution of members to close the boatyard and change the constitution.

This is the members' decision to make — not the Committee's to take.

A Yacht Squadron, not a boat club

Why the boatyard matters

The clue is in the name. Founded in 1862 to promote yachting and racing — the boatyard is the working heart of that purpose.

The clubhouse and flagstaff above the Harbour — The clubhouse and flagstaff — one acre of absolute waterfront at Kirribilli.

Heritage you cannot rebuild

The Squadron has no marina. For the owners of larger yachts, the boatyard and slipway are the only practical marine service the club provides. Remove them and you remove the reason a serious sailor joins.

We are one of very few Sydney Harbour yacht clubs that still runs its own boatyard for members — scarce infrastructure. Once surrendered it can never be recovered, at the very moment the club most needs a differentiator.

The facility our members actually use

A working boatyard — and the lift that runs it.

Properly run, it should be profitable — as it is at RPAYC.

The marina, hardstand and clubhouse — The marina and hardstand, with the clubhouse above

The travel lift in the yard, hauling out Defiance — The travel lift in the yard

Three reasons it stays: scarce infrastructure that can't be recovered once gone; it serves the larger-yacht owners and crews who fund the club; and run commercially it is a revenue centre, not a cost. The proposed $1M travel-lift purchase could be leased or outsourced.

The real issue — utilisation & membership

The Board diagnosed it perfectly. Then drew the wrong conclusion.

The data and the proposal point in opposite directions.

What the data shows

70% of members aged 60 or over; a net loss of 125 in a year
Each lost under-45 member ≈ $350k in lifetime value
Average member uses just 2.25 of 27 activities
Members pay more in subs than they spend at the club
50,000 Sydneysiders open to joining a broader club

What the proposal does

Closes the hardstand precinct
Removes the draw for the under-45 sailors it needs most
Shrinks the offer instead of activating it
Takes away a reason to use the club
Surrenders a scarce, irreplaceable asset

The Board's own test: "the more reasons we give members to use the club, the stronger their sense of value." Closing a facility fails that test on the Board's own words.

A management issue, not a facilities issue

Activate what we have. Don't subtract what we can't replace.

And where is the business plan and financial justification for the new facilities?

Members under-use the club. You fix that by giving people more reasons to come down to the water — not by removing the one facility serious sailors rely on.

2.25of 27 activities used by the average member — the utilisation gap

~$350klifetime value of each younger member lost — retention is the highest-return action

$1Mlift purchase that could be leased; alternative quotes come in around $600,000

A better way forward

Modernise the Squadron and keep the boatyard.

None of the renewal the club needs requires closing the hardstand. The catchment is reached through the gate, not the crane.

Affordability is the real barrier: younger sailors can't meet the Squadron's membership cost, and it is cheaper at other clubs. A lower-fee pathway — not a smaller club — is how we reach them.

A low-fee, low-commitment sailing tier for the 25–45 cohort, with a pathway to full membership.

A club fleet and weekly twilight racing so members can sail without owning a boat.

A managed crew register connecting newcomers to owners who need crew.

Dining and grounds opened to non-members at a premium — a membership shop window.

Community open days and school partnerships across the Kirribilli catchment.

The boatyard retained and run commercially — members preferential, externals full rate.

Accountability

The questions members deserve answered

Put in good faith, in writing, to test whether the closure follows from the Board's own evidence.

Q1 Has the full boatyard P&L been released? +

Members are entitled to see revenue, direct costs and the actual contribution or loss — not an assertion that it is uneconomic. One of very few club-run boatyards on the Harbour shouldn't be surrendered on a claim.

Q2 Was it ever modelled as a commercial operation? +

A yard that loses money serving members only may be profitable serving external customers at full rates. With Harbour mooring wait-lists in the hundreds, the demand exists. If that model was never run, the obvious alternative was never tested.

Q3 Why buy the travel lift outright instead of lease it? +

Lifts are routinely leased with options to buy, refinance or return. A lease preserves ~$1M of capital and can be funded from haul-out revenue. Alternative quotes come in around $600,000. Committing to an outright purchase without comparing a lease asks members to commit capital blind.

Q4 What management initiatives were considered first? +

Better use of buildings, land and the marine operation — including outsourcing or commercial management of the boatyard — should be on the table before elimination. These are management levers. Members deserve to see what was weighed and why it was set aside.

Q5 Have all conflicts of interest been declared? +

When a scarce asset is proposed for closure and a large purchase alongside it, members are entitled to ask the conflict question plainly — any direct or indirect interest in the closure or the supply or financing of the lift — answered on the record.

Q6 What does dining and functions contribute? +

An acre at Kirribilli is among the most valuable club sites in the country; opening dining to non-members at a premium raises revenue and introduces prospective members in the most natural setting available.

Q7 Where is the written membership strategy? +

Members are entitled to see recruitment and retention targets by cohort, with dates — or an acknowledgement none yet exists and a commitment to produce one before any facility decision is taken.

Q8 Will the decision be deferred until the strategy is shown? +

Strategy and financials first; facility decision second. A scarce, irreplaceable asset shouldn't be surrendered ahead of the strategy that should determine its future.

For members who love this club

A fair compromise — and what happens if it's refused

We are not here to fight the Squadron. We are here to protect it. The first ask is simple: pause, listen, and find the middle ground.

"Keep it, prove it, review it."

Defer the closure vote until the strategy and full financials are put to members.

Retain the boatyard for a trial — 12 to 24 months — against agreed, published targets.

Run it commercially or outsource it — members preferential, externals full rate.

Lease the travel lift, don't buy it — preserving capital.

Pursue the membership plan in parallel.

Review openly at the end of the trial, with the numbers in front of members.

First — engage

Ask, in writing, for answers and a deferral

Put the questions to the Commodore and Committee in writing and request a deferral. Most disputes end here, and we hope this one does.

Then — compromise

Put the "keep it, prove it, review it" offer formally

Submit the compromise as a constructive proposal, backed by a visible body of member signatures.

Only if refused — accountability

Use the rights the constitution gives members

If engagement and compromise are both refused, members are not powerless. Under the club's constitution and the associations law that governs it, members may:

Requisition a general meeting — compelling the club to put a motion to all members.
Move resolutions — to retain the boatyard pending the strategy, or put the matter to a full member vote.
Hold the Committee to account at election.

This is not a hostile act. It is the ordinary, legitimate machinery of a member-owned club — used reluctantly, transparently, to ensure members decide their own club's future.

Please note: requisition thresholds, notice periods and voting rules are set by the Squadron's current constitution and NSW associations legislation, and must be confirmed against the constitution before any formal step. This page is general information, not legal advice.

You don't need to get rid of the boatyard.

You don't fix a management problem by demolishing a facility.

Why the boatyard matters

Heritage you cannot rebuild

A working boatyard — and the lift that runs it.

The Board diagnosed it perfectly. Then drew the wrong conclusion.

What the data shows

What the proposal does

Activate what we have. Don't subtract what we can't replace.

Modernise the Squadron and keep the boatyard.

The questions members deserve answered

A fair compromise — and what happens if it's refused

"Keep it, prove it, review it."

Ask, in writing, for answers and a deferral

Put the "keep it, prove it, review it" offer formally

Use the rights the constitution gives members

Questions, offers of help, or something to tell us?