Jump to content
Coronavirus topics renamed and some locked. No new topics. ×
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
craggy_steve

Steam Packet to be sold

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, P.K. said:

The "profitability" bit worries me somewhat.

Because as a regular user any profits going into IOMG coffers will mean I'm being taxed twice.

The "profitability" bit that worries me is that it will all be spunked away once it hits the IOMG bank account.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said:

The "profitability" bit that worries me is that it will all be spunked away once it hits the IOMG bank account.

Those massive lump sums and pensions won't pay themselves I suppose....

  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/7/2018 at 4:54 PM, P.K. said:

The "profitability" bit worries me somewhat.

Because as a regular user any profits going into IOMG coffers will mean I'm being taxed twice.

Which is why 

A) most of the profitability should be used to go back into the service and financing new vessels

B) treasury should ringfence returns for exclusive use in the upkeep, maintenance and development of the whole island's marine infrastructure.

Then the arguments on pricing should be lessened, and the perception would not be that the profitability of the business is being milked to fund the pensions deficit.

Also helps with the 'arms length free from political interference' argument.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I alone in thinking that the new Liverpool landing stage and terminal site should be subleased, at commercial rent to the Steam Packet who should build and operate it, not the government.

User pays - not tax payer.

As I understand it the Government will completely refinance the Steam Packet going forward in any event so after the first 6 or 8 years of ownership the purchase price will have been repaid, so no cost to taxpayer, and all new tonnage cost will be met out of non government funds, ie NOT the taxpayer.

So there’s no first cost to taxpayers to even give rise to PK’s being taxed twice suggestion.

If it’s run as an arms length, commercial transaction and operation, not a social enterprise, surely its aims are to serve its customers, invest to be able to operate going forwards, and generate a profit and return, a dividend, on capital employed by its shareholders, us taxpayers.

A dividend is a bonus for taxpayers, reducing other taxation needs.

Dont confuse traveller fare paying status with owner tax payer status. The two are not identical communities, although there are overlaps.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, John Wright said:

Am I alone in thinking that the new Liverpool landing stage and terminal site should be subleased, at commercial rent to the Steam Packet who should build and operate it, not the government.

 

 

Would the directors of the Steam Packet choose to lease that site / new development given a free choice? Maybe not. Based on the passenger facilities at other SPCo embarkation points I suspect they'd probably go for a more basic / cheaper / lower overhead option instead of the planned development.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, craggy_steve said:

 

Would the directors of the Steam Packet choose to lease that site / new development given a free choice? Maybe not. Based on the passenger facilities at other SPCo embarkation points I suspect they'd probably go for a more basic / cheaper / lower overhead option instead of the planned development.

The site is the only option. What they constructed would be up to them. They neither own, nor operate, and thus have no say in design, or facilities, in Douglas, Heysham, Dublin, Belfast or Birkenhead. The first four are the port owners. Birkenhead is Stena on land leased from the port owner. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely the freight side of the business is a massive overlap that involves every taxpayer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, P.K. said:

Surely the freight side of the business is a massive overlap that involves every taxpayer?

You confuse taxpayer with consumer and assume its universal.

You can live on Island with virtually nothing brought in by steam Packet.

milk, butter, eggs, cheese, flour, bread, meat, fish and seasonal fruit and vegetables.

Petrol or diesel, gas, electricity never see the inside of Ben or Arrow.

Building materials come into Ramsey.

But the point remains, we pay for the freight service as consumers, we pay for passenger or car trips as consumers. The vast majority of the Manx population aren’t taxpayers, many don’t use the boat to travel.

It may be an Island lifeline, but it’s a commercial service.

Why shouldn’t it make a return and pay a dividend just because it’s shares are owned by a government department?

The dividend means reduced taxes. It doesn’t mean being taxed twice.

The old nationalised industries didn’t aim to return a profit, however U.K. government did have other “investments”, such as 48% of BP. Where it left them be to run commercially they got a dividend.

Where they interfered and didn’t separate out ownership, control, operation, etc, they were poorly invested and run. They lost billions.

We have an opportunity with the Steam Packet, owned at arms length and commercially, to have reliable sea services, price control, ongoing investment and a dividend.

You wouldn’t expect a privately owned company to not turn a profit or pay a dividend.

I hope that medium to long term, once structure is resolved, the Government will sell off some of the shares, perhaps locally, perhaps to a shipping partner, and keep a proportion and a golden share. Not practical if it’s run at break even.

I also live in hope that many of government assets, housing, buildings, etc, will be incorporated and run commercially, with outside investors and the government owning shares.

Theyd have a value, and an income, which could help meet tax payers liabilities. Our very own sovereign wealth fund.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/4/2018 at 12:20 PM, Donald Trumps said:

Austal confirmed yesterday the contract with government of Trinidad & Tobago for building one 94m long High speed Auto Express 94 Ropax. Delivery is set for Mid-2020.
Contract is valued AUD 97.7m or USD 72.2m.
AUto Express 94 will have capacity for 926 passengers and 250 cars.
Top speed will be 37.5 knots.

 

 

image.thumb.png.dd5763565785aa54cbe717c5e4a39295.png

Looks impresive, but could it cope with the irish sea ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/7/2018 at 3:54 PM, P.K. said:

The "profitability" bit worries me somewhat.

Because as a regular user any profits going into IOMG coffers will mean I'm being taxed twice.

The IOM post office was also profitable untill the government wanted £1,000,000 a year from it, i wonder what they will be demanding from the IOM Steam Packet ?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, John Wright said:

Petrol or diesel, gas, electricity never see the inside of Ben or Arrow. But the provision of these services is reliant to some extent on the SPCo, e.g. staff travelling, shipping of various items of equipment

The vast majority of the Manx population aren’t taxpayers, many don’t use the boat to travel.  Ahh - VAT catches virtually everyone unless you're really off the grid.

We have an opportunity with the Steam Packet, owned at arms length and commercially, to have reliable sea services, price control, ongoing investment and a dividend.

I hope that medium to long term, once structure is resolved, the Government will sell off some of the shares, perhaps locally, perhaps to a shipping partner, and keep a proportion and a golden share. Not practical if it’s run at break even.

Apologies for the nitpicking, but I agree totally with your last two paragraphs I qoute above.  I suspect that either a parial sell-off or some sort of managemetnt agreement is the endgame.

Edited by Bobbie Bobster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, John Wright said:

You confuse taxpayer with consumer and assume its universal.

You can live on Island with virtually nothing brought in by steam Packet.

milk, butter, eggs, cheese, flour, bread, meat, fish and seasonal fruit and vegetables.

Petrol or diesel, gas, electricity never see the inside of Ben or Arrow.

Building materials come into Ramsey.

But the point remains, we pay for the freight service as consumers, we pay for passenger or car trips as consumers. The vast majority of the Manx population aren’t taxpayers, many don’t use the boat to travel.

It may be an Island lifeline, but it’s a commercial service.

Why shouldn’t it make a return and pay a dividend just because it’s shares are owned by a government department?

The dividend means reduced taxes. It doesn’t mean being taxed twice.

The old nationalised industries didn’t aim to return a profit, however U.K. government did have other “investments”, such as 48% of BP. Where it left them be to run commercially they got a dividend.

Where they interfered and didn’t separate out ownership, control, operation, etc, they were poorly invested and run. They lost billions.

We have an opportunity with the Steam Packet, owned at arms length and commercially, to have reliable sea services, price control, ongoing investment and a dividend.

You wouldn’t expect a privately owned company to not turn a profit or pay a dividend.

I hope that medium to long term, once structure is resolved, the Government will sell off some of the shares, perhaps locally, perhaps to a shipping partner, and keep a proportion and a golden share. Not practical if it’s run at break even.

I also live in hope that many of government assets, housing, buildings, etc, will be incorporated and run commercially, with outside investors and the government owning shares.

Theyd have a value, and an income, which could help meet tax payers liabilities. Our very own sovereign wealth fund.

I agree with a lot you say.

When you drill down through how UK nationalised industries were run you eventually reach the politics and realise that they were being driven by amatuers.

On the other side of the coin a look at the UK railway system isn't exactly the best advertisement for the private sector....

Yes you could live on purely island produce but would you want to? Especially when you think seasonal and Manx wine for example.

I'm also afraid experience has given me a healthy scepticism towards statements such as "The dividend means reduced taxes. It doesn’t mean being taxed twice."  If IOMSPCo continues to be very profitable how long before the politicos view it as an "opportunity" shall we say....?

This surprised me I readily admit "The vast majority of the Manx population aren’t taxpayers, many don’t use the boat to travel" and fair enough. Not something I was aware of. But with return fares IOM - > LPL at less than £40 then I guess why would you?

I hope shares are offered to residents I must say if like the Chunnel they come with a reduced fare sweetener.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those who suggested price increases in respect of the SPCO were entirely correct, a courier company we use has just written to us to illustrate the the SPCO has raised its prices by 5% at the beginning of January making a total of 16% over the past three years. This cannot be a good thing for island business trying to compete with off island suppliers !

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/9/2018 at 2:51 PM, P.K. said:

 

On the other side of the coin a look at the UK railway system isn't exactly the best advertisement for the private sector.....

 

the problems with the railways is union staff and the public sector part which is also run by the unions.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, asitis said:

Those who suggested price increases in respect of the SPCO were entirely correct, a courier company we use has just written to us to illustrate the the SPCO has raised its prices by 5% at the beginning of January making a total of 16% over the past three years. This cannot be a good thing for island business trying to compete with off island suppliers !

 

I blame the owners

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


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...