Mezeron & Steam Packet Master Thread

[gilf_uk]

The suggestion that Tesco were hawking is interesting. My understanding is that the SPCo went direct to Tesco and offered a deal behind the backs of Graylaw. It was Graylaw who had the Tesco contract. That pissed off Graylaw who then moved heaven and earth to get another operator to tranship. The suggestion that Tesco money is in the Mezeron service is a non starter, the boats are chartered and Doehle own and fund Mezeron

 

The above is interesting and no-one else has picked up on it, so I will.

 

If MW has made a commercial decision to go after one of SPCo's customers contracts directly, in the name of 'competition', and it has subsequently backfired, they cannot suddenly go to the government cap in hand, because they don't like the fall out (i.e. competition). If the above is true, SPCo is completely to blame for the introduction of competition as it has itself created the demand for it from customers who would have previously and for sometime, remained loyal.

 

And all this worry about what is going to happen with SPCo, if jobs will be lost and passenger services suffer - there is and there will continue to be a demand for a ferry service to and from the Isle of Man. If SPCo can't do it, someone else will. People will not pay exhorbanent rates for ferry travel, therefore in order to make it viable they will offer similar fares to the SPCo, just as airlines offer cheaper fare in advance and more expensive fares at short notice. Thinly veiled threats from the SPCo just don't wash.

 

In the year to date at September 2010, 545,385 passengers and 150,273 vehicles had travelled through Douglas harbour. I can't see anyone passing up the opportunity to make a profit on that, be it 10, 20 or 30 %. (http://www.gov.im/lib/news/transport/harbours/douglasharbourtr42.xml)

[Terse]

 

I agree, but what's to stop Mezeron doing the same should they take over the SPC ?

 

Maybe a solution would be for the government not to have a UA, but to charge for the use of the linkspans and hand that money back to whichever operator in the form of a passenger subsidy. That would leave the business open to competition but still promote a passenger service. Bearing in mind that we still have a viable tourist industry which needs to be nurtured

Stand again next year - please.

[pongo]

In closing, we are f****d

 

No we aren't. These things are never all or nothing. Everyone on all sides understands what the issues are. Döhle are only one of several groups who have been looking at the UA for ages.

 

More likely is that out of this will come a variety of more sustainable solutions which go some way to addressing all of the various issues in a way which is more equitable and sensible. There is a wealth of knowledge about shipping here and also lots of people who are good at putting deals together.

 

Change was inevitable. Macquarie + UA was like a fault-line.

[Lost Login]

1.Competition is good for businesses and for the people.

 

It can be good but it is not always good and that is the concern. If as an example Mezzeron took away sufficient freight business from the steam packet that it led to price rises and reduced level of services how is that good for those businesses and people.

 

If it forced the SP to fold and nobody stepped in to service the remains of the IoM SP's business how is that good for those people and business. That is the problem we understand that some of the shipping to and from the IoM is very profitable, we understand that some is not but it is deemed vital/very important. How do ensure that the latter is covered as well as the former. That is the concern

 

It gives the IOMSPCo the motivation it has lacked for a few years to also look at other ways of supplementing it's single income stream by looking at other possible routes in addition to it's current Manx routes.

You keep repeating this, but this could only happen if the owners put their hand in their pockets to fund, At present all SP profits are paid to the owners to pay the interest and the borrowing of the owners. The Group appears to be financed up to the hilt because of what they bought the SP for. Without a capital injection whether or not the SP has motivation is irrelevent as it ain't got the funding in palce

 

D. It gives the Government a much needed kick in the arse to properly legislate for the future of sea transport so that they could take proper ownership of the Harbours and make it a pre condition that anyone can use the linkspans subject to a realistic fee being charged and that any such operators must build in an element of regular (Daily) passenger transport into their services as well as freight.

You are basically describing the current position. Mezzeron are shipping without using the Link Spans so per your approach would not have to provide any element of regular passenger transport. The SP would

 

 

It goes to show how weak the company was if it was so reliant on two of it's clients to survive. It begs the question as to whether it should be in business at all.

It may be able to survive perfectly well without the clients. But to do so it may well cut a lot of services and costs increase. That is what people are concerned about. I do not give diddly sqaut about who runs the ferries to the IoM. What I am very concerned about is that by Mezzeron cherry picking the top slice of profitable income other services may be lost and not replaced and prices increased.

[Sean South]

1.Competition is good for businesses and for the people.

 

It can be good but it is not always good and that is the concern. If as an example Mezzeron took away sufficient freight business from the steam packet that it led to price rises and reduced level of services how is that good for those businesses and people.

 

If it forced the SP to fold and nobody stepped in to service the remains of the IoM SP's business how is that good for those people and business. That is the problem we understand that some of the shipping to and from the IoM is very profitable, we understand that some is not but it is deemed vital/very important. How do ensure that the latter is covered as well as the former. That is the concern

 

It gives the IOMSPCo the motivation it has lacked for a few years to also look at other ways of supplementing it's single income stream by looking at other possible routes in addition to it's current Manx routes.

You keep repeating this, but this could only happen if the owners put their hand in their pockets to fund, At present all SP profits are paid to the owners to pay the interest and the borrowing of the owners. The Group appears to be financed up to the hilt because of what they bought the SP for. Without a capital injection whether or not the SP has motivation is irrelevent as it ain't got the funding in palce

 

D. It gives the Government a much needed kick in the arse to properly legislate for the future of sea transport so that they could take proper ownership of the Harbours and make it a pre condition that anyone can use the linkspans subject to a realistic fee being charged and that any such operators must build in an element of regular (Daily) passenger transport into their services as well as freight.

You are basically describing the current position. Mezzeron are shipping without using the Link Spans so per your approach would not have to provide any element of regular passenger transport. The SP would

 

 

It goes to show how weak the company was if it was so reliant on two of it's clients to survive. It begs the question as to whether it should be in business at all.

It may be able to survive perfectly well without the clients. But to do so it may well cut a lot of services and costs increase. That is what people are concerned about. I do not give diddly sqaut about who runs the ferries to the IoM. What I am very concerned about is that by Mezzeron cherry picking the top slice of profitable income other services may be lost and not replaced and prices increased.

Look, going on the Port arrivals/departure figures for last year, the SP has to have taken in around £18-£20 million in sales just from Domestic (cars and passengers) businesses. And that's without making any real effort. So you honestly believe that if they folded nobody would go after that businesses? Hell, I'll do it myself if nobody else does!

[Lost Login]

 

I agree, but what's to stop Mezeron doing the same should they take over the SPC ?

 

Maybe a solution would be for the government not to have a UA, but to charge for the use of the linkspans and hand that money back to whichever operator in the form of a passenger subsidy. That would leave the business open to competition but still promote a passenger service. Bearing in mind that we still have a viable tourist industry which needs to be nurtured

Stand again next year - please.

Flaw in that is that Mezzeron are not using the link span so basically you again have what you have now. The only difference is that rather than the freigt to passenger subsidy being internally done by the ferry operator the government would be doing! Alterative candidate please!

[Tempus Fugit]

 

Look, going on the Port arrivals/departure figures for last year, the SP has to have taken in around £18-£20 million in sales just from Domestic (cars and passengers) businesses. And that's without making any real effort. So you honestly believe that if they folded nobody would go after that businesses? Hell, I'll do it myself if nobody else does!

 

when did you fail your economics exam ?

 

I would think £18-20 million would be just the crumbs left under the table, you'd get Karina doing passenger services to Fleetwood for that

Edited November 3, 2010 by Tempus Fugit

[Cambon]

 

To be fair, they probably make a bit of money back on the extras - 1st Class lounges, food etc. It probably helps fund the people who bring their own sandwiches.

 

If not there would not be any reason to do it.

A bit? Are you taking teh piss? Why do you think they don't open until 12 miles off IOM and 2 miles off UK? So they don't have to pay VAT and duty on alcohol sold. Yes, at £3.50 a pint, they are making about £2.50 profit!

[Tempus Fugit]

 

Why do you think they don't open until 12 miles off IOM and 2 miles off UK? So they don't have to pay VAT and duty on alcohol sold.

 

isn't it the stupid manx licensing laws which required the 'nominated official' to be in attendance all the time it was open ?

[Shit3hawk]

the extra business for Mezeron/Dohle won't compensate for the 20 or so office staff who Dohle made redundant a while ago

i'm sure they where all offered the chance to relocate within the company structure.........

[John Wright]

The probable end game scenario is that the banks will sell off the assets for as much as they can, maybe a question over when. Those are

 

1. The vessels

 

2. The goodwill

 

3. The User Agreement

 

1. has some value, but not what they are in hock for, and two are no longer required or useful, apart from the need under the UA

 

2. Must be close to zero

 

3. Is not worth anything whilst Mezeron is around and competing

 

Solution, they line up a buyer who will buy both. That buyer will then want to amend the UA to include no large scale lift on lift off service, get rid of the fast craft etc.

 

No doubt new purchaser will be Stena or DFDS or similar. ie a current RoPax operator

 

Government has to stand firm. It controls the harbours for any user. In emergency it could nationalise the boats and take over the business, of both, temporarily before putting up the operation for sale by tender tender. Legally it would have to pay adequate compensation, but that would not be £240 million, but what it got for the combined deal split between the two operators

 

The ideal is two boats like the Ben,ie RoPax, operating to two different ports in the NorthWest of UK sharing the linkspans and pssenger facilities in IOM and so being on a level playing field. There should be sufficient traffic.

 

It would mean moving from the pier head as that canot handle freight. It would give a level playing field for the operators who in a regulated regime could compete

 

The UA would state minimum service levels for each and require publication of annual accounts and set a maximum fare increase and provide for discount fares. Freight would be open to competition on the level playing field provided.

 

The alternative is a sole operator, with regulated feight tarrifs and passenger fares and a service level specified and an investment requirement into a Ben sister ship and eventually a Ben successor

 

I see no problem with either alternative to a public subsidy on passenger fares, a residents pass, lets say.

[John Wright]

 

Why do you think they don't open until 12 miles off IOM and 2 miles off UK? So they don't have to pay VAT and duty on alcohol sold.

 

isn't it the stupid manx licensing laws which required the 'nominated official' to be in attendance all the time it was open ?

 

Its is all VAT and duty paid. They cannot do Duty Free to UK as we are a common customs area.

 

The IOM is down to licensing and the fact the Steam packet won't apply for a vessel licence as that would impose obligations on the designated offifial to control drunkeness. No crew member was willing to take on the responsibility, that any publican has, after a mauling by Mike Moyle folowing a prosecution of persons involved in a drunken brawl on board an IOM inbound sailing. The 2 mile UK end is because all crew have to multifunction on arrival and departure and can't serve alcohol when doing those other tasks.

[The Old Git]

Why do you think they don't open until 12 miles off IOM and 2 miles off UK?

 

I though it was because they didn't have a degignated official on board each sailing to satisfy the licencing laws, but I'm probably wrong.

 

ETA - taht will teach me not go and make a brew before relying

Edited November 3, 2010 by The Old Git

[Lost Login]

The probable end game scenario is that the banks will sell off the assets for as much as they can, maybe a question over when. Those are

 

1. The vessels

 

2. The goodwill

 

3. The User Agreement

 

1. has some value, but not what they are in hock for, and two are no longer required or useful, apart from the need under the UA

 

2. Must be close to zero

 

3. Is not worth anything whilst Mezeron is around and competing

 

 

There may be little goodwill according to an english literacy definition but there may well be according to acountancy definition.

 

 

The ideal is two boats like the Ben,ie RoPax, operating to two different ports in the NorthWest of UK sharing the linkspans and pssenger facilities in IOM and so being on a level playing field. There should be sufficient traffic

 

 

I think you only need one boat like the Ben. I think you also need one which is in a non freight boat. In essence for cars and passengers. I also think it should be a fast craft in some shape or form. I do not care what type of boat it is but we must be looking at a boat capable of doing a 2 1/2 hr crossing from Liverpool

[Cambon]

In the year to date at September 2010, 545,385 passengers and 150,273 vehicles had travelled through Douglas harbour. I can't see anyone passing up the opportunity to make a profit on that, be it 10, 20 or 30 %. (http://www.gov.im/li...harbourtr42.xml)

 

And this is where we see the truth start to come out. MW spits the dummy because of the freight situation. Only one of the three SPCo boats that have been running all summer carries freight. MW's rantings would therefore have you believe that passenger carrying is a loss leader. BOLLOCKS!!!

 

In reality, freight is quite a small part of their business. The basically ignored passengers are literally taken for a ride. Of those three boats that ran all summer, one is tied up in Liverpool (they must be doing well if they can afford to leave a boat idle), one is still limping on three engines (or is it?) The other is doing two half empty runs a day to Heysham. The liverpool run is about to go to Birkenhead again so Christmas shopping day trips and football days out are off the agenda (a certain loss of revenue).

 

The figures about equate to about 700K PAX a year and 200K vehicles. Lets just say conservatively that each passenger paid £20 for their ticket each way, and each car was £100. THese are not unrealistic figures, but woudl add up to £34,000,000 before credit card charges, on board spends, change fees, TT subsidy, etc. The company make s a fortune out of transporting passengers.

 

This is simply a call for a handout from the tax payer to stop his bosses asking questions!