Steam-Packet New Ferry survey

[woolley]

1 minute ago, John Wright said:

That doesn’t mean that 25 years after she was designed, with 100’s of dual use RoPax designed, built and used since, from 100m to 200m, that there aren’t design solutions which could bring passenger capacity up to 800.

Many, of even the largest cruise ferries, have much more cabin capacity. A 2 sleeping berth cabin can accommodate 4 seated during the day. So they tend to be short on passenger lounges, even for short crossings. And they all have much more deck seating and walking areas. This could be built out over the open car freight deck at level 5

I appreciate that it's an off the peg design capable of carrying additional passenger accommodation above the open deck. I believe her Condor sister has this feature. My beef is not that the option to do it doesn't exist but that it wasn't taken up.

[John Wright]

44 minutes ago, woolley said:

I appreciate that it's an off the peg design capable of carrying additional passenger accommodation above the open deck. I believe her Condor sister has this feature. My beef is not that the option to do it doesn't exist but that it wasn't taken up.

But oddly Clipper only carries 500 passengers, and Ben, without the additional aft upper accommodation, 630. 
 

Just shows that with better design and configuration the facilities and carrying capacity of the Ben could be much improved.

And that’s important for peak periods and cheaper fares.

[Non-Believer]

Ah. We don't do cheaper fares. 

[John Wright]

Just now, Non-Believer said:

Ah. We don't do cheaper fares. 

Fares on special offer are cheaper, in real terms, after inflation, than those offered by Manx Line in 1978/79, and in turn those fares, and the sailing schedule, were significantly cheaper, and twice as frequent, as the steam packet offered for 5 months of the year

[Donald Trumps]

The survey appears to show IOMSPC or the government seeking to have as many higher priced ticket options as possible

Presumably standard class on the new ship will be roach

[foxdaleliberationfront]

You could make the ferry free and still people would complain about it. 

[Albert Tatlock]

1 hour ago, John Wright said:

Fares on special offer are cheaper, in real terms, after inflation, than those offered by Manx Line in 1978/79, and in turn those fares, and the sailing schedule, were significantly cheaper, and twice as frequent, as the steam packet offered for 5 months of the year

Govt owned, it now has a duty to lower costs and refuce profits to subsidise visitors and the transport of food etc. to lower the cost of living. IMO.

But no...it will be a CS pension cash cow.

[John Wright]

3 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

Govt owned, it now has a duty to lower costs and refuce profits to subsidise visitors and the transport of food etc. to lower the cost of living. IMO.

But no...it will be a CS pension cash cow.

Only if they take out dividends in excess of the return on the funds they’ve put in to buy it. 
 

There’s two new boats to buy first, and the paying off of the loan carried on its books.

At arms length, and subject to regulatory control of headline fares and the requirement for 2/3 fares to be discounted, government has done its job. It mustn’t be allowed to intervene in day to day operations, nor to use tax payers money to subsidise any fares. 

[foxdaleliberationfront]

31 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

Govt owned, it now has a duty to lower costs and refuce profits to subsidise visitors and the transport of food etc. to lower the cost of living. IMO.

But no...it will be a CS pension cash cow.

It had a duty to pay back its loans. That's about it

[the stinking enigma]

10 hours ago, Grounds Keeper Willy said:

It’s simply terrible. It’s no advert for our tourism sector. Concrete gloom next door to a nuclear power station. 

Helps prepare one's soul for the sight of douglas. If they ever do heysham up we are well and truly fucked. 

[doc.fixit]

5 hours ago, hissingsid said:

Never had a problem sailing on any of the boats and had some horrendous trips weatherwise, perhaps it is more to do with sea legs rather than boat design.

You've not been on the Peveril then?

[hissingsid]

Yes.

[Manximus Aururaneus]

The comments on this thread are very informed, they are also very laudable.

But, with the greatest of respect, they are all wrong, as is the IOMSP questionnaire as to what you would like on the boat.

Everybody, including IOMSP,  has launched into the design of the boat - that is totally incorrect.

The starting point is not to design / specify the boat (let alone give consideration as to what facilities it should / should not have onboard).

The starting point is to specify the service requirement. Then you design the boat best suited to meet that service specification.

Sorry to be a party pooper, but you are all being spoofed by IOMSP.

Get them to ask you what service you want - then hold their feet to the fire to provide what YOU want, not what THEY would prefer to provide.

The issue of Coffee machines is not a service specification consideration. Sorry.

Force them to consider your opinion at the beginning of the service requirement - do not allow them to use public opinion on the choice of coffee machines to satisfy their duty to the customer.

You are being well and truly spoofed by IOMSP and IOMG. Tell them what minimum service requirement you want - not how you want their chosen service to be decorated.

[John Wright]

1 minute ago, Manximus Aururaneus said:

The comments on this thread are very informed, they are also very laudable.

But, with the greatest of respect, they are all wrong, as is the IOMSP questionnaire as to what you would like on the boat.

Everybody, including IOMSP,  has launched into the design of the boat - that is totally incorrect.

The starting point is not to design / specify the boat (let alone give consideration as to what facilities it should / should not have onboard).

The starting point is to specify the service requirement. Then you design the boat best suited to meet that service specification.

Sorry to be a party pooper, but you are all being spoofed by IOMSP.

Get them to ask you what service you want - then hold their feet to the fire to provide what YOU want, not what THEY would prefer to provide.

The issue of Coffee machines is not a service specification consideration. Sorry.

The service requirement is already set and there was a consultation.
 

It is embodied in the Sea Services Agreement which is signed, specifies minimum service levels, specifies new tonnage and freezes and then caps increases, and the number of discount fares. It all comes in force on 1/1/2020.

Of course, what it contains may we’ll be wrong, probably is ( anything countenancing another fast craft and tying in to £40 million on a Liverpool terminal is almost certainly wrong ).

But your step one has been done, and in accordance with the outcome, the first new boat is being spec’d and public opinion is being sought.

Keep up at the back, Manximus.

[Manximus Aururaneus]

In which case, tell em to FRO!

Tell them we want a 21st century service not a 19th century one.

Tell them them we don't want to be half asleep in vehicles on a shitty dockside for a 2:15am departure.

Tell em we would like to arrive in the UK at a time to enable a same day meeting.

Or tell em, to listen to JW and keep up with the back.

Tell em, as long as we have 'A boat in the morning' - then that's good enough. 

Actually, in real world measurements, it's shite, which ever way you look at it. Total, utter, amateur, condescending shite.

But if you're happy with it ..............