GNSS base + rover for sale

You want prospective buyers to suggest an asking price?

Mr Holy Bull Cow has a cemetery to trade...

What did you get, that you like better?

(Win the lotto?)

N

?ÿ

I have a nearly identical set Nate, this is an extra set.?ÿ I am a tech junkie, it keeps me interested enough to keep doing this hard work.?ÿ I cycle through equipment?ÿ - as you know our accountants like us to buy stuff to help with taxes.?ÿ I sure miss the days when most things worked together and the local guy would fix it.

Posted by: @ralphieboy

as you know our accountants like us to buy stuff to help with taxes.

I've never understood this.?ÿ Let's say you're in a 37% incremental tax bracket (28% federal, 9% state).?ÿ You buy $20,000.00 worth of equipment and you deduct the whole thing under Section 179.?ÿ That reduces your tax bill by $7,400.00, and you have some spiffy new equipment that effectively cost you only $12,600.00.?ÿ But if you had kept the $20,000.00 and paid the $7,400.00 additional tax on it, you'd have $12,600.00 in your pocket to do with what you wish, like save for retirement or take a vacation.?ÿ Unless that new equipment materially increases your productivity, why buy it?

It's more the thrill of the hunt for new technology and most times there is productivity and precision to gain.?ÿ Some game changing things in the last decade or so with more on the way.?ÿ After 35 years, this keeps interested.

@jim-frame I've heard you get to write more off if you lease it??ÿ There are a lot of lease options that allow you to buy them for $1 at the end.

@jim-frame

But then you could not get new work because you don't have new reliable equipment. So you won't have the $12,600 in your pocket for retirement because you will be spending it while waiting for a work that you may not get because it was awarded to the other guy who had equipment that needed less personnel and could finish the work faster. In my experience, you are able to get bigger contracts if you have more equipment in your inventory. The cost of the equipment is sometimes less than 25% of the work that you are awarded. Not for lidar equipment, but it's getting there. For lidar, your need to get 2-3 work to recoup the hardware and software costs. It's a chicken and egg thing again.

Posted by: @jt50

But then you could not get new work because you don't have new reliable equipment.

I doubt that buying all new equipment every year makes sense in any environment, so there has to be something more to it than "spend a lot of money on equipment because you'll save money on taxes."?ÿ And for the small operator, the "could not get new work" advice simply doesn't pertain -- my RTK gear is 5 years old, but it's not the bottleneck in my workflow, I am.?ÿ There's only 1 of me, and I spend a lot more time driving to the points than I do shooting them.?ÿ ?ÿMy robot is also about 5 years old, and I'm sure there are faster ones available now, but the difference between 5 seconds per shot and 2 seconds per shot is less than half an hour on a 500-point day.?ÿ For boundary work the difference is irrelevant, the travel time in between shots is what counts.

I'm still not seeing it, but please keep trying because I'd like to understand the reason behind what seems to be standard advice.

Losing money is a very poor way to avoid paying taxes.

@jim-frame I think he said it with "tech junkie" 🙂 I have right now 2 total stations and 2 gps in RTK setup, old trimble 4000 and leica rx1250. I bought them all recenly. Not to work with them, but out of interest. And i am not surveyor. I am programmer and embedded electronics designer.

@jim-frame only makes sense if you need equipment to stay viable. New equipment just for sake of paying less taxes doesn't make sense and my CPA has always said that, only if you need something, then may as well take the tax break rather than pay the taxes. At some point in a business you probably have less and less need for equipment unless you are expanding, so you keep more cash.

My current GNSS gear has been a reliable workhorse for 13 years, but now while still reliable there are technology changes forcing upgrade or partially anyway. Some of the decision to upgrade is forced (3G sunset, MSM data format, unable to process some GLONASS data, etc.) and some is driven by the vast improvements in productivity with a now viable four constellations, L5 signals and IMU and camera on board a rover. Ignoring the forced to issues, for the first time in 13 years (and I may be a couple years late), I actually see new rovers adding value to production I do NOT currently have.

SHG

I used to buy "toys" to see if I could make them productive later on.?ÿ Now in my dotage I buy stuff to make work easier.

I may be losing money, but everyone is helping pay for 37% of my purchase (using Jim Frame's numbers).

I consider all survey related expenses as investments.

Posted by: @jim-frame

but it's not the bottleneck in my workflow, I am

You just answered your own question. So how do you widen the bottleneck in your operations? You hire more survey crews. But which comes first? The crew or the equipment? No sense in hiring an additional survey crew if they don't have the equipment to use. No sense in hiring additional hands if 2 crews will share 1 set of equipment. So in order for the additional crew to be productive, they must have the needed equipment.

Posted by: @jt50

So how do you widen the bottleneck in your operations? You hire more survey crews.

Ha!?ÿ That's the last thing I'm going to do -- if I wanted to be a manager I'd still be working for someone else.?ÿ The only reason I ever had employees was because I wasn't able to do the work by myself, but technology changed that years ago.?ÿ A solo operation is the only way to go for me.

Agreed for the most part on solo. ?ÿIdeally I would love to have another PLS to partner and cover when gone. ?ÿTwo guys that do it all and can combine on stuff 2x solo, and let each other have some time off. ?ÿItƒ??s the time off thing thatƒ??s the worst bc everyone wants stuff, in the nicest times of the year. ?ÿ

I draw the line at maintaining and paying for office space ????

Ralph, I have some questions about the equipment.?ÿ Give me a call at 2o9-2eight3-4sixsix5.

I enjoy these discussions here especially when it concerns money/equip/taxes.?ÿ Jim Frame is right on.?ÿ Section 179 is meant for massive tax liability and to spur sales of large equip/vehicles/etc to generate spending in an economy.?ÿ When gov't wants to change your behavior taxs and or tax breaks are introduced.?ÿ My CPA says only spend on new equip if you need it.?ÿ One year I went w/o RTK capability and used static and TS.?ÿ He was of course right.

Otherwise this looks like dandy equip and could help someone.

SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS