Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Brexit ferry contract awarded to company with no ships

13»

Comments

  • #102
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    end of the road wrote: »
    no, it is the company being unable to deliver on the contract, and the government not being more careful as to who they awarded the contract to, which has meant there won't be ferry services. supposed sensationalist journalism would make no difference and no amount of it would have stopped the services if the company actually had been able to deliver. the british government screwed up again, just like they always do.

    Seaborne were in discussions with the Harbour company about setting up a ferry service long before they were in discussions with the British government.

    The $13m the Government offered was only if they got up and running and was designed to basically help a start up company get off the ground and get funding. Until the media got hold of it and turned it in to a Brexit/political hot potato.

    it's a shame no one is doing anything similar in Dun Laoghaire.

    have a read https://theisleofthanetnews.com/2018/06/18/ramsgate-port-has-made-losses-of-20million-over-eight-years/


  • #103
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,140 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Aegir wrote: »
    Seaborne were in discussions with the Harbour company about setting up a ferry service long before they were in discussions with the British government.

    The $13m the Government offered was only if they got up and running and was designed to basically help a start up company get off the ground and get funding. Until the media got hold of it and turned it in to a Brexit/political hot potato.

    it's a shame no one is doing anything similar in Dun Laoghaire.

    have a read https://theisleofthanetnews.com/2018/06/18/ramsgate-port-has-made-losses-of-20million-over-eight-years/

    sorry but there is no way i can believe the media are to blame for this contract being canceled. it just does not make any sense to me that a few headlines would cause the canceling of a contract. if the company were able to and did deliver this service then no amount of media headlines would have stopped them or caused that contract to be canceled as they would have delivered.
    what i believe happened is that upon further checks the DFT decided that the company were unlikely to be able to deliver the service as contracted so rightly pulled the plug.

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words.



  • #104
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 92,471 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Don't put away the popcorn yet.

    UK sued by Channel tunnel firms over Brexit ferry plans They're claiming it's an unfair subsidy for ferry companies.

    The regulator forced Eurotunnel to shut down their own ferry company, MyFerryLink, a few years ago so I'd imagine they are a little miffed about the whole thing.


    To quote something I saw elsewhere Brexit continues to be a f*cktacular omnishambles.


  • #105
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    end of the road wrote: »
    sorry but there is no way i can believe the media are to blame for this contract being canceled. it just does not make any sense to me that a few headlines would cause the canceling of a contract. if the company were able to and did deliver this service then no amount of media headlines would have stopped them or caused that contract to be canceled as they would have delivered.
    what i believe happened is that upon further checks the DFT decided that the company were unlikely to be able to deliver the service as contracted so rightly pulled the plug.

    We'll never know, will we. The whole thing was ticking along, albeit very slowly, until the media turned it into a complete toxic **** show.

    And now the town of Ramsgate is even less likely to have a ferry service than it was before.


  • #106
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,140 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Aegir wrote: »
    We'll never know, will we. The whole thing was ticking along, albeit very slowly, until the media turned it into a complete toxic **** show.

    And now the town of Ramsgate is even less likely to have a ferry service than it was before.

    in what way was the whole thing ticking along?
    as i understand, the company had no ships, either owned or leased, and as i understand ramsgate port is only able to take a certain specification of ship so that limits the supply of potential ships to lease or buy. also the port i believe required a lot of other things to be sorted out before it could be suitible for a ferry service.
    the service was to be up and running when, in march wasn't it? if the whole process was ticking along then surely there would have been something to show for it? so what was there to show for it? a ship? negotiations to lease or buy a ship from another operator who may be selling one that might be suitible to operate out of ramsgate? advertisements for staff? or maybe even staff already hired? some movement to get the port ready? anything? surely there must have been 1 thing at least, big or small?

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words.



  • #107
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    end of the road wrote: »
    in what way was the whole thing ticking along?
    as i understand, the company had no ships, either owned or leased, and as i understand ramsgate port is only able to take a certain specification of ship so that limits the supply of potential ships to lease or buy. also the port i believe required a lot of other things to be sorted out before it could be suitible for a ferry service.
    the service was to be up and running when, in march wasn't it? if the whole process was ticking along then surely there would have been something to show for it? so what was there to show for it? a ship? negotiations to lease or buy a ship from another operator who may be selling one that might be suitible to operate out of ramsgate? advertisements for staff? or maybe even staff already hired? some movement to get the port ready? anything? surely there must have been 1 thing at least, big or small?

    you obviously didn't read the article I linked to.


  • #108
    branie2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,305 ✭✭✭✭branie2


    A ferry company with no ships? Daft, if you ask me


  • #109
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,140 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Aegir wrote: »
    you obviously didn't read the article I linked to.

    i did but it only tells me that there are lots of different potential plans by the council, + they have been in negotiationss to put on a ferry service from the port with no success, since the previous operator seased operation. i'm unsure what point you were using the article to try and prove?

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words.



  • #110
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,513 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Aegir wrote: »
    Seaborne were in discussions with the Harbour company about setting up a ferry service long before they were in discussions with the British government.

    The $13m the Government offered was only if they got up and running and was designed to basically help a start up company get off the ground and get funding. Until the media got hold of it and turned it in to a Brexit/political hot potato.

    it's a shame no one is doing anything similar in Dun Laoghaire.

    have a read https://theisleofthanetnews.com/2018/06/18/ramsgate-port-has-made-losses-of-20million-over-eight-years/


    So basically Seaborne are the latest in a long line of failed attempts to re-establish a ferry service from ramsgate. Ticking along indeed.


  • #111
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    So basically Seaborne are the latest in a long line of failed attempts to re-establish a ferry service from ramsgate. Ticking along indeed.

    hence the government trying to support them with the offer of a £13m contract if they managed to get services up and running.


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,513 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Aegir wrote: »
    hence the government trying to support them with the offer of a £13m contract if they managed to get services up and running.


    Did they actually finish the dredging that was required?


  • #113
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    Did they actually finish the dredging that was required?

    I can't see it from my office, but a ten second look at google tells me it has started

    https://theisleofthanetnews.com/2019/01/04/second-day-of-dredging-at-ramsgate-port-for-proposed-ferry-service/


  • #114
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 40,290 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Aegir wrote: »
    I can't see it from my office, but a ten second look at google tells me it has started

    https://theisleofthanetnews.com/2019/01/04/second-day-of-dredging-at-ramsgate-port-for-proposed-ferry-service/
    I kind if half expected a report about a dredging shelf company


  • #115
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,513 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Aegir wrote: »
    I can't see it from my office, but a ten second look at google tells me it has started

    https://theisleofthanetnews.com/2019/01/04/second-day-of-dredging-at-ramsgate-port-for-proposed-ferry-service/

    i know it started. no mention anywhere that it has finished. Which is odd because it as due to finish at the end of january.


  • #116
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 92,471 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    It's all sorted now.


    The UK Government will be handing over £33m to a company that isn't allowed to operate ferries.


  • #117
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 92,471 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    The latest in this saga is that finally a company with actual Ferries has entered the game.


    P&O are now suing HMG over the handing over £33m to Eurotunnel.
    If unlawful state aid is found, the government would have to recover the aid in full, with interest, and damages may be payable to P&O.


Advertisement