Deepwater for Cruise Ships

[IOMSA]

So, time for my interest to be declared. I am Treasurer for the Isle of Man Shipping Association and happy to share the below facts about the proposals from my direct personal involvement.

Last Tuesday we invited two speakers to a networking event for our members (which was also open to non-members) to speak on the benefits the Cruise Sector has brought to their respective local.

• Angela Redhead (Head of Cruise Britain, and Director of Operations Liverpool Cruise Terminal)
• Michael Morrison (Business Development Manager, Marine Services, Orkney Islands Council)

About 80/90 people attended. The same presentations were made to Tynwald earlier in the day.

 

Let’s be absolutely clear, there are no hidden agendas here in terms of who stands to gain from this project, and no-one is being paid huge consultancy fees for these opinions. There is a wealth of maritime experience within our membership, and IOMSA wishes to work collaboratively with Government to share that experience for the benefit of the whole Island.

 

IOMSA invited these guests to provide a flavour of what can be achieved given the right attitude and backing. Within 3 hours of being on the Island, Michael Morrison freely stated that our tourist offering in terms of attractions and day excursions is far superior to Orkney’s and that there is a fantastic opportunity to capitalise on the cruise industry for the Island.

 

If Government wishes to take this opportunity, it cannot be done half-heartedly.

 

IOMSA have been looking at the issue for a couple of years and have contributed to a feasibility study for a 350m floating deep water berth located outside of Alexandra Pier.

Technically, we are being told it is entirely possible. Our waters are nowhere near as challenging as North Sea conditions in terms of wind/wave heights and there, oil/gas platforms don’t move in these conditions.

 

To cater for the biggest cruise liners (currently 362m long and approx. 6,500 passengers, and 2,000crew, draft 10m), the only real possible location (prevailing weather and draft) and type of berth (floating, not fixed pier, and 350m length) is what we are proposing in Douglas.

 

This is our proposal for where a floating deep water cruise berth should be located based on the feasibility study from the engineers that designed the Monaco floating breakwater, which is similar in size, but moored in considerably deeper waters.

 

 

 

In terms of the cruise berth, above picture is nonsense, drawn up by architects without any consideration of the practicalities or costs of putting a berth there. This is NOT what our proposal is.

 

With regards to the projected cost £50m, this is an estimate of all associated costs of construction, linking to shore and landside ground/ infrastructure amendments (highway & remodelling).

Let me be also clear, the press erroneously have picked up on a “5 year payback period” which clearly is also nonsense for a £50m project. As has been pointed out, private sector funding would be all over it if that was the case. We are talking more like 20-30 years.

 

The 5 years, I think, was a quote from Angie in relation to the payback of the £16m Liverpool terminal. I do stand to be corrected on that though.

 

Clearly the financing is an area that needs a lot more work in terms of the transference of risk to the private sector, so that the taxpayer doesn’t sit on the hook for the whole lot.

 

We have mooted the possibility of an infrastructure bond as a method, but this would need to be addressed in much greater detail by producing a business case for the idea, once the political will to explore the project was there.

For cost comparison, Orkney berth and supporting infrastructure cost a total of £29m (it was built 2002 then extended 2014). However, their berth is semi-sheltered, and has approx. 2m tidal range, where as ours is more like 7m. The current economic benefit to their local economy is estimated at £7m p.a.

 

Our conservative projections for the project would be 60,000 cruise visitors per annum (this is 50% of current Orkney level, and 50% of an industry report commissioned by Government in 2014), and the industry standard calculation for economic benefit of a cruise passenger is £70 per head. Also please be clear, economic benefit is very difficult to quantify and cannot be taken as direct cash benefit.

Again, these figures would be thrashed out in the business case.

 

Our heritage sites and attractions are crying out for visitors to stem their losses, cruise is the only quick fix for that as they are ideal for day trips.

 

Cruise is an international market and is big business, the opportunity is there, is the willingness and the business case? Let’s see.

 

Go big or not at all. To build something that would not be able to cater for the biggest ships would be a waste of time, effort and money.

 

It is a proposal, and one that the IOMSA believes should be looked at seriously, if we want to capitalise on the sector. Clearly if the business case doesn’t stack up, then it’s a non-starter, but we wanted to get the debate out there, and so far, feedback has been mostly positive.

 

PM if you would like further information or have further feedback, don’t really want to get into a forum debate on the issue.

 

​<edit few typos/vessel parameters>

Edited January 19, 2017 by IOMSA

[Tarne]

That's more sensible at 25-30 years, though starting off at 60,000 cruise ship passengers is daft, as is the £7 m per annum to the Orkney Islands used as a bench mark, as it's only recently hit that. In 2014 it was only £3 million. Orkney looks good at the minute because it's grown substantially as a cruise ship destination in the past 5 years so bear that in mind - it can easily disappear in that short span of time too.

 

Thanks for posting however, cleared up a lot.

Edited January 19, 2017 by Tarne

[Lxxx]

So, time for my interest to be declared. I am Treasurer for the Isle of Man Shipping Association and happy to share the below facts about the proposals from my direct personal involvement.

Last Tuesday we invited two speakers to a networking event for our members (which was also open to non-members) to speak on the benefits the Cruise Sector has bought to their respective local.

• Angela Redhead (Head of Cruise Britain, and Director of Operations Liverpool Cruise Terminal)
• Michael Morrison (Business Development Manager, Marine Services, Orkney Islands Council)

About 80/90 people attended. The same presentations were made to Tynwald earlier in the day.

 

Let’s be absolutely clear, there are no hidden agendas here in terms of who stands to gain from this project, and no-one is being paid huge consultancy fees for these opinions. There is a wealth of maritime experience within our membership, and IOMSA wishes to work collaboratively with Government to share that experience for the benefit of the whole Island.

 

IOMSA invited these guests to provide a flavour of what can be achieved given the right attitude and backing. Within 3 hours of being on the Island, Michael Morrison freely stated that our tourist offering in terms of attractions and day excursions is far superior to Orkney’s and that there is a fantastic opportunity to capitalise on the cruise industry for the Island.

 

If Government wishes to take this opportunity, it cannot be done half-heartedly.

 

IOMSA have been looking at the issue for a couple of years and have contributed to a feasibility study for a 350m floating deep water berth located outside of Alexandra Pier.

Technically, we are being told it is entirely possible. Our waters are nowhere near as challenging as North Sea conditions in terms of wind/wave heights and there, oil/gas platforms don’t move in these conditions.

 

To cater for the biggest cruise liners (currently around 380m long and approx. 5,000 passengers, and 1,500 crew, draft 10m), the only real possible location (prevailing weather and draft) and type of berth (floating, not fixed pier, and 350m length) is what we are proposing in Douglas.

 

fbwposition.png

This is our proposal for where a floating deep water cruise berth should be located based on the feasibility study from the engineers that designed the Monaco floating breakwater, which is similar in size, but moored in considerably deeper waters.

 

architectvision.png

 

 

In terms of the cruise berth, above picture is nonsense, drawn up by architects without any consideration of the practicalities or costs of putting a berth there. This is NOT what our proposal is.

 

With regards to the projected cost £50m, this is an estimate of all associated costs of construction, linking to shore and landside ground/ infrastructure amendments (highway & remodelling).

Let me be also clear, the press erroneously have picked up on a “5 year payback period” which clearly is also nonsense for a £50m project. As has been pointed out, private sector funding would be all over it if that was the case. We are talking more like 25-30 years.

 

The 5 years, I think, was a quote from Angie in relation to the payback of the £16m Liverpool terminal. I do stand to be corrected on that though.

 

Clearly the financing is an area that needs a lot more work in terms of the transference of risk to the private sector, so that the taxpayer doesn’t sit on the hook for the whole lot.

 

We have mooted the possibility of an infrastructure bond as a method, but this would need to be addressed in much greater detail by producing a business case for the idea, once the political will to explore the project was there.

For cost comparison, Orkney berth and supporting infrastructure cost a total of £29m (it was built 2002 then extended 2014). However, their berth is semi-sheltered, and has approx. 2m tidal range, where as ours is more like 7m. The current economic benefit to their local economy is estimated at £7m p.a.

 

Our conservative projections for the project would be 60,000 cruise visitors per annum (this is 50% of current Orkney level, and 50% of an industry report commissioned by Government in 2014), and the industry standard calculation for economic benefit of a cruise passenger is £70 per head. Also please be clear, economic benefit is very difficult to quantify and cannot be taken as direct cash benefit.

Again, these figures would be thrashed out in the business case.

 

Our heritage sites and attractions are crying out for visitors to stem their losses, cruise is the only quick fix for that as they are ideal for day trips.

 

Cruise is an international market and is big business, the opportunity is there, is the willingness and the business case? Let’s see.

 

Go big or not at all. To build something that would not to be able to cater for the biggest ships would be a waste of time, effort and money.

 

It is a proposal, and one that the IOMSA believes should be looked at seriously, if we want to capitalise on the sector. Clearly if the business case doesn’t stack up, then it’s a non-starter, but we wanted to get the debate out there, and so far, feedback has been mostly positive.

 

PM if you would like further information or have further feedback, don’t really want to get into a forum debate on the issue.

 

 

Thanks for that. Dispels a few myths but also fleshes out the detail. Why not look into it in greater detail, we don't have the capacity to get anywhere near that many tourists here nor have places for them to stay, nor things for them to do after the first 24 hours. Cruise ships do make sense in that respect, you only wish this would have been thought of earlier before the reserves had reached the empty level.

[Bobbie Bobster]

@IOMSA Nice post, adds a lot of light to the heat.

[Max Power]

I'm even more positive about it now.

 

I really think that this could be the kickstart that tourism needs to get moving again. It may not benefit the hospitality industry immediately, but it puts the island on the tourism map once again.

It could encourage further investment and therefore make us a destination in our own right, which will provide benefits for all.

[NoTail]

I think we have a distinct advantage over Orkney in that we are half way between Liverpool and Ireland, both big attractions.

[Andy Onchan]

The thing I like most about this proposal is that it's being driven from the private sector and not some jumped up egotist from DED.

 

Well done to IOMSA.

[Douglas Prom]

Can it have a link span attached to it?

[Lxxx]

I do like it when these forums occasionally prove useful instead of just being a means to expel a lot of hot air and garbage.

[Lxxx]

I think we have a distinct advantage over Orkney in that we are half way between Liverpool and Ireland, both big attractions.

 

Once we get that monorail running from Liverpool to Dublin via here we'll be quids in.

[Stephen Carter]

With respect, I was at the meeting and I think it was Mr Ugland who stated it would repay its costs in 5 years

Edited January 19, 2017 by Stephen Carter

[Andy Onchan]

With respect, I was at the meeting and it was Mr Ugland who stated it would repay its costs in 5 years

 

Wellrthat does rather depend on the construction cost I suppose.

[homarus]

So, time for my interest to be declared. I am Treasurer for the Isle of Man Shipping Association and happy to share the below facts about the proposals from my direct personal involvement.

Last Tuesday we invited two speakers to a networking event for our members (which was also open to non-members) to speak on the benefits the Cruise Sector has bought to their respective local.

• Angela Redhead (Head of Cruise Britain, and Director of Operations Liverpool Cruise Terminal)
• Michael Morrison (Business Development Manager, Marine Services, Orkney Islands Council)

About 80/90 people attended. The same presentations were made to Tynwald earlier in the day.

 

Let’s be absolutely clear, there are no hidden agendas here in terms of who stands to gain from this project, and no-one is being paid huge consultancy fees for these opinions. There is a wealth of maritime experience within our membership, and IOMSA wishes to work collaboratively with Government to share that experience for the benefit of the whole Island.

 

IOMSA invited these guests to provide a flavour of what can be achieved given the right attitude and backing. Within 3 hours of being on the Island, Michael Morrison freely stated that our tourist offering in terms of attractions and day excursions is far superior to Orkney’s and that there is a fantastic opportunity to capitalise on the cruise industry for the Island.

 

If Government wishes to take this opportunity, it cannot be done half-heartedly.

 

IOMSA have been looking at the issue for a couple of years and have contributed to a feasibility study for a 350m floating deep water berth located outside of Alexandra Pier.

Technically, we are being told it is entirely possible. Our waters are nowhere near as challenging as North Sea conditions in terms of wind/wave heights and there, oil/gas platforms don’t move in these conditions.

 

To cater for the biggest cruise liners (currently around 380m long and approx. 5,000 passengers, and 1,500 crew, draft 10m), the only real possible location (prevailing weather and draft) and type of berth (floating, not fixed pier, and 350m length) is what we are proposing in Douglas.

 

fbwposition.png

This is our proposal for where a floating deep water cruise berth should be located based on the feasibility study from the engineers that designed the Monaco floating breakwater, which is similar in size, but moored in considerably deeper waters.

 

architectvision.png

 

 

In terms of the cruise berth, above picture is nonsense, drawn up by architects without any consideration of the practicalities or costs of putting a berth there. This is NOT what our proposal is.

 

With regards to the projected cost £50m, this is an estimate of all associated costs of construction, linking to shore and landside ground/ infrastructure amendments (highway & remodelling).

Let me be also clear, the press erroneously have picked up on a “5 year payback period” which clearly is also nonsense for a £50m project. As has been pointed out, private sector funding would be all over it if that was the case. We are talking more like 25-30 years.

 

The 5 years, I think, was a quote from Angie in relation to the payback of the £16m Liverpool terminal. I do stand to be corrected on that though.

 

Clearly the financing is an area that needs a lot more work in terms of the transference of risk to the private sector, so that the taxpayer doesn’t sit on the hook for the whole lot.

 

We have mooted the possibility of an infrastructure bond as a method, but this would need to be addressed in much greater detail by producing a business case for the idea, once the political will to explore the project was there.

For cost comparison, Orkney berth and supporting infrastructure cost a total of £29m (it was built 2002 then extended 2014). However, their berth is semi-sheltered, and has approx. 2m tidal range, where as ours is more like 7m. The current economic benefit to their local economy is estimated at £7m p.a.

 

Our conservative projections for the project would be 60,000 cruise visitors per annum (this is 50% of current Orkney level, and 50% of an industry report commissioned by Government in 2014), and the industry standard calculation for economic benefit of a cruise passenger is £70 per head. Also please be clear, economic benefit is very difficult to quantify and cannot be taken as direct cash benefit.

Again, these figures would be thrashed out in the business case.

 

Our heritage sites and attractions are crying out for visitors to stem their losses, cruise is the only quick fix for that as they are ideal for day trips.

 

Cruise is an international market and is big business, the opportunity is there, is the willingness and the business case? Let’s see.

 

Go big or not at all. To build something that would not to be able to cater for the biggest ships would be a waste of time, effort and money.

 

It is a proposal, and one that the IOMSA believes should be looked at seriously, if we want to capitalise on the sector. Clearly if the business case doesn’t stack up, then it’s a non-starter, but we wanted to get the debate out there, and so far, feedback has been mostly positive.

 

PM if you would like further information or have further feedback, don’t really want to get into a forum debate on the issue.

 

What can I say you state clearly that the mock up graphics are nonsense ,without showing any realistic planning as to what you muppets propose ,but obviously expect IOM GOV to pitch in 50 mill or so to fund your fantasy.

"'Go big or not at all"" .

Fucking astounding!!

 

ETA.

 

Fair play though you've turned the cruise liner around from the original cartoon!

Edited January 19, 2017 by homarus

[asitis]

We have gone big on a lot of projects in the past and these have proven to be the wrong decision and some are a millstone around our necks. Is it true that the largest cruise liners cannot pass around the North of the Island ?

[Andy Onchan]

We have gone big on a lot of projects in the past and these have proven to be the wrong decision and some are a millstone around our necks. Is it true that the largest cruise liners cannot pass around the North of the Island ?

 

I think Bahama Bank is an issue for most vessels, but I'd be surprised if it would stop cruise liners travelling North/South entirely.

 

Perhaps Capt. Carter can advise us?

Edited January 19, 2017 by Andy Onchan