Jump to content

At what price is a good deal ?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 412
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

There is some financial information in the Oxera reports and some disclosed at UK Companies' House. The Steam Packet makes about £15-20m pa profit mainly on freight. Their tangible assets employed (th

Oh come on the longer the agreement we commit to the better multiple the shareholders will get on a sale. That's all this is about. Nothing else. It's got nothing to do with what's best for the IOM. I

Just to get back on the topic, why don't we consider "killing two birds with one stone"   i.e. Enlarge the harbour and at the same time provide a cruise ship berth. This might most economically be ach

The user agreement refers to the exclusive use of the government-owned link space at Douglas.

But Mr Quayle told iomtoday said: ‘One thing the government seems to have overlooked is the fact that we also own a linkspan.

‘We will be 196-years-old in 2026 and we are not going to go away.

‘We will continue to operate using our own link span and that could affect the attractiveness of the route for other operators.

That's an interesting angle and a bit inflammatory of the company. What if the government just turned around and either told them to shift their linkspan or denied them access to it through the harbour?

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, woolley said:

The user agreement refers to the exclusive use of the government-owned link space at Douglas.

But Mr Quayle told iomtoday said: ‘One thing the government seems to have overlooked is the fact that we also own a linkspan.

‘We will be 196-years-old in 2026 and we are not going to go away.

‘We will continue to operate using our own link span and that could affect the attractiveness of the route for other operators.

That's an interesting angle and a bit inflammatory of the company. What if the government just turned around and either told them to shift their linkspan or denied them access to it through the harbour?

Quite so.

Methinks Quayle might regret making those comments. His arrogance is matched only by that of Commodore Woodward. This latest spat by IOMSPCo reeks of desperation.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

"What if the government just turned around and either told them to shift their linkspan or denied them access to it through the harbour? "

Dont be silly.   How is that going to stand up in court (which is where  it will end up)?

It appears from the report that the IOMSPC offer was one made as a results of long and protracted negotiations and input from various parties.  If that IS the case then I can kind of see why it really is a take it or leave type offer.  If you've spent 12 months plus getting here then it is right that it is presented to Tynwald to vote on based on it being a final offer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, notwell said:

"What if the government just turned around and either told them to shift their linkspan or denied them access to it through the harbour? "

Dont be silly.   How is that going to stand up in court (which is where  it will end up)?

 

Oh I'm not so sure. If I was the company I would at least be a little more circumspect than to issue comments like that. Governments do have ways of making life difficult for you if they have a mind to.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

SPCo ("Mezeron competition is unfair"; "route can only support a single operator" etc) can change the rules of the game when it suits them. True colours are shining through now. I believe their ships are too old for the whole of the UA extension period - there is a 25 year old limit. So Govt can actually tell them to get ready to pack up now. At that point their business is unsaleable (we know this is their plan A) and they cannot raise any money easily to buy or build new ships.By 2020 marine emissions laws will mean the Ben will have to burn diesel and so become much more expensive for them to operate. Also the SPCo linkspan is pretty old. So this latest spoiler tactic which is in essence economic treason will not actually work. They will try to cherry pick freight but the Ben will not be competitive vs a modern freight roro out of Heysham. A fast modern ropax into the Mersey will provide back up and a more reliable all year round daily service than the Manannan (which won't in any case have access to an in-river berth shortly). And yes there are investors around to put up the money for this as long as Govt backs the plans and supports the ships with all Govt-related cargo and other measures.

Come on Govt - the SPCo are behaving like pirates. Stand by to repel boarders!

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, woolley said:

Oh I'm not so sure. If I was the company I would at least be a little more circumspect than to issue comments like that. Governments do have ways of making life difficult for you if they have a mind to.

Their linkspan is attached to IOMGs pier so all they have to do is charge them a whacking big rent and a whacking big handling charge for providing port security etc. Point made. It's pretty old and will need replacing at some stage anyway. Woodwards statement is just arrogant. I was suggesting we play them at their own game previously and renegotiate back to a position that's mutually acceptable whereas now I'm more falling into the "Tell them to f*** o**" category. That company is effectively almost worthless to any other investor without the user agreement therefore Woodwards threatening words are pretty empty unless he believes in mutually assured destruction. 

Edited by thesultanofsheight
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, notwell said:

"What if the government just turned around and either told them to shift their linkspan or denied them access to it through the harbour? "

Dont be silly.   How is that going to stand up in court (which is where  it will end up)?

It appears from the report that the IOMSPC offer was one made as a results of long and protracted negotiations and input from various parties.  If that IS the case then I can kind of see why it really is a take it or leave type offer.  If you've spent 12 months plus getting here then it is right that it is presented to Tynwald to vote on based on it being a final offer.

IOMG should not have entertained any offer from IOMSPCo as nothing was/is up for grabs as yet, and Tynwald did the right thing to what amounted to ignoring it for the time being.

IOMSPCo still have another 9 years to go on the current UA. When the time comes to open the bidding that's the time for them to make an offer whether there are other bidders or not (although I think there will be) and not before. They should not have been allowed to be in the driving seat.

We seriously do need to look at enlarging the harbour, otherwise this is going to be another project tin kicked down the road.

Edited by Andy Onchan
Typo
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Its beyond time the Government grew up and acted in a manner which represents their island and their electors interests, the interests of a foreign investment vehicle should come some way down the list of priorities ! tell those arrogant twits to take a running jump !

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Or say, "OK. You use your linkspan and we'll open ours to anyone who wants to use it. Come back when you want to talk again and meanwhile we'll monitor progress." Not a sustainable solution of course, but might concentrate minds.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, woolley said:

Or say, "OK. You use your linkspan and we'll open ours to anyone who wants to use it. Come back when you want to talk again and meanwhile we'll monitor progress." Not a sustainable solution of course, but might concentrate minds.

I can see Woodward potentially having issues with the shareholders over this now. Without the UA there's too much risk to the income that's servicing the pile of debt. A new deal makes the income generation more secure. He's made it quite a high stakes game now with his latest threat. As I said above its mutually assured destruction in a way as IOMG could make things very difficult if it wanted to. They might own the linkspan but they don't own the land it's tied to, and they dont control the Port or the Port security. We've now bought the £3.5m Plot in Liverpool too and can get Peel Holdings to develop it for us. 

Edited by thesultanofsheight
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...