The superyacht brokerage industry is one of the few remaining markets where it is considered normal for the person representing your interests to also be paid by the person selling to you. The same broker who presents the vessel, facilitates the negotiation, and guides you through the purchase contract is, in the majority of transactions, earning a commission from the seller.

This is not illegal. It is disclosed, in most standard agreements, in a paragraph that no first-time buyer reads carefully. And it creates a structural conflict of interest that runs through every aspect of the transaction — from the initial price guidance to the interpretation of the survey results to the urgency applied to your decision.

Understanding this conflict is not a reason to avoid the brokerage system — which, in superyacht transactions, is effectively unavoidable. It is a reason to understand exactly what the MYBA Memorandum of Agreement says, which clauses are negotiable, and what the broker prefers you not to examine too closely.

The MYBA Agreement: What You're Actually Signing

The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) used in the majority of superyacht transactions is derived from the MYBA standard form — a template developed by the Mediterranean Yacht Brokers Association that reflects decades of accumulated practice across international maritime law.

The standard form has many virtues: it is widely understood by maritime lawyers across multiple jurisdictions, its terminology is established, and its structure covers the essential elements of any yacht purchase transaction. It also has specific provisions that are more favourable to sellers and brokers than to buyers — provisions that experienced buyers' counsel routinely negotiate away but that inexperienced buyers accept as "standard."

The 11 clauses that require the most careful attention:

1. The deposit percentage and conditions: Standard MYBA agreements specify a 10% deposit on signature, held in escrow by the selling broker. Buyers' counsel typically negotiate for an independent escrow agent and explicit conditions under which the deposit is returnable.

2. The survey contingency (the most important clause): The buyer's right to withdraw based on survey findings. In broker-friendly versions, this clause requires the buyer to negotiate with the seller on remediation costs before exercising withdrawal rights. A properly negotiated survey contingency gives the buyer an absolute withdrawal right if remediation costs exceed a specified threshold, with no obligation to negotiate.

3. The sea trial provisions: The buyer's right to conduct a sea trial before completion. Standard forms give the buyer a limited sea trial window; negotiated forms specify minimum trial conditions (sea state, duration, propulsion testing requirements) that protect the buyer against a cosmetic sea trial in calm conditions.

4. The delivery condition: What condition is the seller required to deliver the vessel in? Standard language is often vague. Negotiated language specifies all mechanical systems operational, all documentation current, and all defects identified in survey remediated or purchase price adjusted.

5. The crew liability clause: Who bears liability for crew salaries, crew claims, and crew repatriation costs during the transition period between exchange and completion? Standard forms vary significantly on this point. A clear, explicit allocation of these liabilities prevents disputes at completion.

The Flag State Decision: The Most Consequential Structural Choice

The flag state — the country whose flag the vessel flies — determines the vessel's regulatory framework, crew certification requirements, safety inspection regime, and, for vessels operated in European waters, its VAT exposure.

The Cayman Islands Shipping Registry (Red Ensign Group) is the most widely used flag state for UHNWI superyacht ownership. The combination of English law framework (providing familiar legal architecture for UK and international buyers), professional regulatory standards, and the VAT implications of non-EU flagging make it the default choice for professional yacht management advisors.

The VAT mechanism: A Cayman Islands-flagged vessel operated commercially — which means available for charter, even if never actually chartered — qualifies for Temporary Importation (TI) status in EU waters. TI allows the vessel to remain in EU territorial waters for up to 18 months in any 24-month period without triggering EU import VAT.

At the Italian VAT rate of 22% or the French rate of 20%, the TI exemption on a €15 million vessel represents a €3–3.3 million VAT exposure that is legally deferred indefinitely through correct structuring. On a €50 million vessel, the figure exceeds €10 million.

This is why flag state selection is not a formality — it is a structural decision with material eight-figure financial consequences for vessels spending significant time in European waters.

"Most buyers discover the flag state decision at the point of signing. By that stage, they are committed to a vessel and the broker presents the Cayman Islands registration as a routine administrative step. In reality, it should have been part of the pre-purchase feasibility analysis, and the buyer should have received independent legal advice before the choice was made," said one partner at a leading marine law firm, speaking in a legal conference context.

Crew: The Variable Nobody Models Correctly

Crew costs are the most consistently undermodelled operating expense in superyacht ownership. The standard industry estimate — "crew costs approximately 40–50% of your annual budget" — is accurate as a percentage but is frequently applied to an underestimated annual budget, producing a figure that surprises most first-time owners.

For a 30-metre yacht, a professional crew of five (Captain, Chief Officer, Engineer, Chef, and Steward/ess) will cost, including salaries, training, certifications, travel, and MLC (Maritime Labour Convention) compliant employment packages, approximately €400,000–€600,000 annually.

For a 50-metre yacht with a crew of 12: €800,000–€1,200,000 annually. For an 80-metre yacht with a crew of 18–22: €1.5–2.5 million annually.

The Maritime Labour Convention 2006 (MLC) applies to vessels above 500 gross tonnes used commercially and requires specific employment contracts, working hour compliance, repatriation provisions, and social security arrangements. MLC compliance, which most reputable owners maintain regardless of technical applicability, adds administrative cost but protects against crew claims that can become expensive legal disputes.

The Charter Question: Offsetting Costs with Income

The economic argument for placing a superyacht on a charter programme is compelling on paper and more complex in practice.

A 30-metre motor yacht in excellent condition, well-positioned in the Mediterranean, can gross €150,000–€200,000 per week at peak season rates. With 8–10 charter weeks annually — a realistic expectation for a well-managed vessel — gross charter income of €1.2–2 million is achievable.

Against running costs of €1.5–2 million annually, this appears to leave a small net cost or near-breakeven position. What the gross charter income calculation typically omits: additional crew costs during charter weeks (overtime, higher provisioning standards), accelerated maintenance from charter use (approximately 30% higher annual maintenance for an active charter vessel versus a private one), and management fees on charter income (typically 15–20% to the central agency and 15% to the managing broker).

Net of all costs, a €15 million yacht on an active charter programme typically produces a net loss of €600,000–€1 million annually — meaningfully less than the €2 million+ annual cost of a purely private vessel, but not a profit, and not the proposition that brokers sometimes suggest.