A shift the refit industry must embrace if it wants transparency, accuracy, and trust.
Across the superyacht refit ecosystem, the call for more transparency in quotations has become almost ritual. Owners demand clearer pricing; management companies want comparable offers; shipyards want to avoid disputes. And yet, as the experts of the think tank“Investing in Refit Infrastructure & Business Models” agreed, the industry keeps looking for solutions in the wrong place.
The problem is not the quotation.
The problem is the scope.
During the session, shipyards, captains, and managers reached an unusual level of consensus: there can be no accurate quote if the refit scope is unclear, incomplete, or technically weak. Standardising quotation formats will never fix the core issue if the information that feeds them varies wildly in quality.
The root cause: inconsistent, incomplete, or unrealistic worklists
One of the most striking points came from Víctor Perez (Commercial Director at Astilleros de Mallorca), who, from the audience, stated plainly:
“Without an accurate specification, it’s impossible to have an accurate quotation.”
This reality is well known inside shipyards. Many refit requests arrive with vague worklists, insufficient technical detail, outdated information, or contradictory priorities. Often, captains are expected to prepare the scope during the season—something the panel unanimously agreed is unrealistic.
Several management companies echoed the same concern: the industry expects shipyards to produce highly detailed quotations while giving them incomplete inputs.
This mismatch forces yards to spend extensive time clarifying what is and isn’t included, adding explanatory notes, or supporting the captain to refine the actual work. As Manuel di Tillio (Technical & Sales Director at AMICO) explained, in as many as 25–30% of cases, the shipyard must provide detailed guidance so the client can “compare apples with apples.”
Why standardising quotations will not solve the problem
The idea of a “standardised quotation format” did arise during the session. But while some saw potential, others strongly warned against it.
Rob Papworth (Managing Director at MB92) noted that too much standardisation could actually slow down innovation and reduce the competitive differences between shipyards:
“You have to sell your own product in your own way…
A standardised form will slow down innovation.”
Eric Robert-Peillard (CEO at Adriatic42) added another key point: superyacht refits are not a standardised industry. Even for similar vessels, conditions, usage, maintenance histories, and hidden issues differ dramatically. Trying to force industrial-style quotation templates onto such variability misses the essence of the craft.
In other words, even a perfect quotation format cannot fix an imperfect scope.
What needs to be standardised: the inputs, not the outputs
The think tank identified the real opportunity: a standardised approach to defining the refit scope before quotations are requested.
This means:
- Clear technical descriptions of each task.
- Definitions of what should be included (e.g., scaffolding, storage, access).
- Accurate vessel documentation and maintenance history.
- Realistic assumptions on timelines and dependencies.
- Early involvement of technical experts—not just crew.
In fact, several captains noted that the most successful refits they experienced were those where shipyards conducted early technical inspections before issuing the quote. Not because the quote became longer, but because the scope became true.
The industry is currently trying to compare quotes that are built on different scopes, different assumptions, different inclusions, and different definitions of the problem itself.
No software, no template, no AI comparison tool can fix that.
Creating a refit scope framework: a shared responsibility
One notable intervention came from the audience, highlighting the increasing cost and time shipyards invest in preparing quotations:
The shipyard invests heavily in the estimating phase, often without clarity on the client’s real expectations… the process must include guidelines for how a client should approach the yard.
This exposed a structural imbalance: shipyards are expected to deliver precision without being given the foundations for precision.
A sector-wide scope framework would rebalance the process:
- For captains: It relieves the unrealistic expectation that they should draft technical scopes mid-season.
- For managers: It enables comparable tenders because the starting point is coherent.
- For shipyards: It prevents wasted hours, misinterpretation, or omissions that later become disputes.
- For owners: It reduces the risk of budget overruns caused by Additional Works that could have been identified earlier.
The industry needs clarity before it needs comparability
The strongest message from the think tank was simple: the accuracy of a quotation can never exceed the accuracy of the scope behind it.
Calls for “more transparent quotes” will remain unfulfilled until the sector adopts a more disciplined way of defining the work itself. The superyacht world is now mature enough to embrace shared standards for the refit request phase—without sacrificing innovation, competition, or yard identity.
Refit projects are increasingly complex. Vessels are larger, systems more integrated, and expectations higher. The industry cannot continue relying on inconsistent inputs and hoping the output will magically align.
If the industry wants better quotes, it must start by building better scopes.
Standardising quotations may be attractive, but it is not where the real impact lies. The future of refit transparency begins long before the quote is written.
