|
Post by Low Light Mike on Feb 24, 2012 16:13:49 GMT -8
BCFS announced their 3rd quarter results today (fiscal period from April 1, 2011 to December 31, 2011).
- the MD&A report that I usually review will be available on SEDAR.com tomorrow, so I'll review it then.
The press release today had this item: (underline is my own emphasis)
|
|
|
Post by DENelson83 on Feb 25, 2012 12:08:06 GMT -8
www.castanet.net/news/Business/71502/The-trouble-with-BC-FerriesI really think this is a vicious circle that BC Ferries has fallen into. Fewer people are taking BC Ferries because they don't have the money to pay for it. But you know who does? The rich! BCF should go after them if it wants more revenue. Edit: Now that I think I've made this point enough, I don't need to bring it up again.
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Feb 25, 2012 12:23:19 GMT -8
Hate to break it to you, but anyone of the 1% will be flying.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Feb 25, 2012 12:37:30 GMT -8
I really think this is a vicious circle that BC Ferries has fallen into. Fewer people are taking BC Ferries because they don't have the money to pay for it. But you know who does? The rich! BCF should go after them if it wants more revenue. Let me step in (after reading this, and a few previous posts by Mr. Nelson) and say that we should stay away from that type of general comment, because I don't think it could ever lead to productive discussion on a ferry forum. That type of general "soak the rich" comment doesn't add anything to the discussion of the issues. - and a two-tiered ferry fare system based on wealth is likely a bad topic choice too. But I'll respond to your idea to say that I think it's ridiculous, and is the 2nd worst suggestion that I've ever seen on this forum. ;D (some humour intended with that comment). But seriously, lets keep the class-warfare rhetoric off this forum, please. - If you have a specific proposal of how your idea would work, then let's hear it, please. But if the premise is "The rich have money, so they should pay higher fares", then I don't think you'll get much support for your idea. If not, then please don't make the suggestion... But then again, maybe I'm wrong in my assumptions on people's appetite for this discussion here?
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,192
|
Post by Neil on Feb 25, 2012 12:39:35 GMT -8
Hate to break it to you, but anyone of the 1% will be flying. No, I think he's on to something. There should be an income test for everyone arriving at the terminal, and customers earning over $100,000 a year should pay double. There should also be a ten dollar 'rich surcharge' on the burgers, and particularly on the chocolate cake with strawberries, because we all know how rich people like their decadent desserts, and I'm tired of finding the dessert cooler depleted when I'm looking for treats. And now that we've dispensed with the serious stuff, Mr Horn can give us the SEDAR summary.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Feb 25, 2012 13:18:54 GMT -8
My highlights from the BCFS "Management's Discussion and Analysis" report, for the 3-quarter's ending December 31, 2011.
This is a report that's filed on SEDAR.com and is an official public company disclosure item. Because of this, I place a lot of credence in what is said in this type of official report, rather than in news releases or press-interviews. Here is what interested me:
Traffic decline, except for the North.
---------
I've underlined the last part for emphasis. This proposal still might happen.
---------
Here's what the financial markets rating agencies are saying about the Ferry Commissioner's recent report and the possible impacts on the financial-market view of the BCFS company. - these are the agencies that impact BCFerries ability to raise money in the bond-market, for the money that they use to finance the newbuilding of ships. (I think this market is kinda tapped-out now.....)
---------
Traffic on the major routes
---------
Northern traffic increase - but no reason why
---------
Minor-routes traffic decline
---------
Update on the long-term debt - they've paid-down some debt, but have put-off some of the other German debt repayment to a later date (by amending the repayment terms). - Bonds are due to be repaid in 2014 & 2015, but they hope to just refinance this with a new bond issue. Those bonds are debt arising from the recent newbuild activity.
---------
- $8.3million has been spent on the Hornby Island ferry dock rebuild. - $5.2milllion has been spent on same thing for Denman's Gravelly Bay.
....I thought that Gravelly Bay was still in-progress, when I was there in early February.
---------
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Feb 25, 2012 22:36:39 GMT -8
Traffic is up because WCK & his wife used the service during this period, as did WCK's brother Walter & his wife. Several other people I know also partook of the NorEx. ;D
Here is my not so tongue-in-cheek theory. I call it the NorEx effect. People up this way are now more inclined to use the service during the fall & winter months as they have a reasonably comfortable ship which is more likely to: A - make the trip, & B - depart '& arrive on time' C - less likely to give you a violent case of motion sickness
There are other advantages, too. Put the NorAd back and watch traffic fall off again.
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Feb 26, 2012 9:47:09 GMT -8
Hate to break it to you, but anyone of the 1% will be flying. On their own Global Express Jet, eating just caught shrimp washed down with Champagne.
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Feb 26, 2012 11:53:22 GMT -8
Hate to break it to you, but anyone of the 1% will be flying. On their own Global Express Jet, eating just caught shrimp washed down with Champagne. Hey. Hey. Hey. Get it right. Us wealthy buggers prefer prawns to shrimp any day. We eat them boiled to perfection in a salty brine, then we dip them in a lemon-garlic butter sauce on the side.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Jun 15, 2012 12:16:16 GMT -8
BCFS year end results for the fiscal year ending on 31 March 2012 have been posted on their website. For more info click here. There is plenty of red ink due to declining vehicle & passenger traffic.
|
|
|
Post by paulvanb on Jun 15, 2012 17:30:04 GMT -8
For a lot less money I can take my family of four to the Washington Beaches including getting a hotel, cheaper fuel - while investing the same amount of time. And this is from leaving from North Vancouver. Even when our dollar was worth 65 cents in 2001 this was a better deal!
|
|
|
Post by dofd on Jun 15, 2012 21:43:47 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Jun 16, 2012 9:04:21 GMT -8
My highlights from reading the 3/31/2012 annual MD&A (Management's Discussion and Analysis) report, available on www.sedar.com. ========================= Major routes annual traffic comparison to prior year: Vehicle traffic volume Decreased by 4.3%, but vehicle Revenue $s decreased by only 0.8% - this difference in the 2 figures shows that prices have increased a lot in the last year (same trend as before) and that the 2 issues of customer-demand and price-point are a big problem at BCFerries. - with traffic volume decreasing, total revenues from those fewer customers was still within 1% of the prior year. - You'd think that if the price-point was lowered a bit , traffic-volume might increase, and then the total revenue would also increase because of the traffic volume in spite of the lower price. (Lemonade-Stand economics) Minor-routes foot-passengers also have an interesting trend: - Foot traffic volume is Down 2.2% - Foot tariff revenue is Up 1.8% You might think this is good, that with fewer customers to serve you've actually made more money from the smaller group. But the customer base is being eroded, the the key to long term growth and to growing ancillary revenues is to have a larger customer base and to grow through volume (not through price). - A higher price point softens-the-blow temporarily from a customer decrease, but that's no way to grow a business. ....and a temporary sale such as Coast-Savers (on the major routes) is not a good way to measure price/demand elasticity, because traffic patterns' response to price is a long term thing, based on people's changing travel habits and on long-term choices of where and how to live on the coast. You can't expect people to change habits (to increase their travel) just because of a 3-week sale on fares. ------------------------- An interesting shopping trend: - I'm the contrarian customer: I won't buy "quality apparel" on a ferry, but I will occasionally buy a book or magazine. ------------------------------- Here is some fluff. No planned for-sure items, it's all still undecided and subject to change from above (the Govt). The 3 Rs: Replace or Renew or Rebuild.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Jun 16, 2012 14:56:59 GMT -8
Their claim of seven new builds is a bit much; I make it five plus two acquired second hand boats ( NorAd & Kuper). The Kuper was 20+ years old when acquired. The Norad dates from 2004 (but due to its previous history was more like a 10 year old ship when acquired). Then there is the claim re the average age in the fleet today for 'major vessels' (33 years 'before' versus 19 'now'). I am unable to calculate the same numbers. When I do the math for the year 2002 versus 2012 I get averages ages of 23.6 years in 2012 versus 29.9 years in 2002. I have included these vessels in making these calculations: all those used on routes 1, 2, 3 & 30, & the Nanaimo & Burnaby, and the QotN, QPR & their replacements. If you include the minor vessels in these calculations the numbers look much worse. Nevertheless, they can take credit for the fleet renewal that has happened. Fleet renewal would have happened with or without the quasi-privatization. At this point, however, further & much needed vessel replacements seems to be stalled indefinitely.
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Former Account) on Jun 16, 2012 15:09:41 GMT -8
Then there is the claim re the average age in the fleet today for 'major vessels' (33 years 'before' versus 19 'now'). I am unable to calculate the same numbers. When I do the math for the year 2002 versus 2012 I get averages ages of 23.6 years in 2012 versus 29.9 years in 2002. I have included these vessels in making these calculations: all those used on routes 1, 2, 3 & 30, & the Nanaimo & Burnaby, and the QotN, QPR & their replacements. BC Ferries counts "major vessels" as those that serve 1, 2, 3 and 30.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Jun 16, 2012 17:53:24 GMT -8
So I have redone my math and have considered only the 11 vessels operating on the major routes as stated by Scott above. In 2002 the average age of the 11 vessels in service at that time was 26.6 years. In 2012 the average age is 24.3. In between those two dates three of the oldest vessels were retired (Esquimalt, Saanich & Vancouver) and replaced with the new-build Coastal trio. Perhaps BCFS uses the years 2007 & 2009 to make the comparison so as to make the numbers look as dramatic as they can?
And Paul the Kuper & NorAd were bought second hand. I don't know how anyone could call either of them new. Yes the Kuper had very substantial work done on it. If you can say that that makes it new, then I guess the NIP was new in 1971, and the QNWM was new in 2009?
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,192
|
Post by Neil on Jun 16, 2012 21:22:58 GMT -8
You've essentially answered your own question. Kuper and NorAd were bought second hand as was the Queen of the North, Howe Sound Queen, Sunshine Coast Queen. So, with those they were new acquistions to the fleet and were considered "new" as they were not members of the fleet before acquired. Another series of example is the North Island Princeess. She was acquired to the fleet and as new (as were other vessels formerly with the Department of Highways). So they are all in esscence when enjoined into the fleet, new. The Kuper was at the time enjoined into the fleet "new" even though at the time she joined the fleet she received major reconstructive work. The Howe SOund Queen sailed briefly with her original open deck, with side superstructure (like an aircraft carrier), but later received an over the deck modification. But was not a "new" vessel as she had joined the fleet earier, but is "new" in terms of reconfiguration. The other "new' is the of the kind of your example the NIP and QNW. QNW is not "new" in terms of being a "new" vessel as in a new acquisition but rather can be said to be "new" based on reconfiguration and renovation,. But is not a "new acquisition" or "new vessel" to the fleet as she was "new" after she was launched and joined the fleet in the 1960s. She is then a "newly rennovated" or "new rebuilt" vessel. The Island Sky is also another "new" vessel being a new acquistion. The New Build references new acquisitions either through purchase or through from the keel to mast construction activity. WCK is right: BC Ferries is trying to count purchased vessels as new ones. The North Island Princess, Howe Sound Queen, and others were never passed off as new vessels by the old regime. This bunch of execs counts the Kuper as a newbuild, and tells us that we were wading through cesspools in the washrooms before they took over. Of course, they won't talk about the disgraceful condition of the Queen of Burnaby not so long back, nor will they explain how their new-regime maintenance has the Queen of Nanaimo's deck sprouting rust patches two weeks after she's painted, as I saw a couple of years ago. History sometimes depends on who's doing the writing, and why.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,192
|
Post by Neil on Jun 16, 2012 21:35:54 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Aug 25, 2012 8:15:53 GMT -8
The 2012/13 year's first quarter is now reported.
The Management's Discussion & Analysis report is what I look for, and here are some highlights of things that interested me: ------------------
---------------------
---------------------
---------------------
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Nov 17, 2012 10:33:35 GMT -8
BCFS 2012/13 2nd Quarter report is now released and available on www.sedar.com. This covers July-September 2012. Here are my highlights from the MD&A (Management's Discussion & Analysis) report: ===================== Traffic decline -------------- Traffic declined, but revenue rose (by almost 4 times the rate of traffic decline). - that is the effect of increased ferry fare tariffs. Fewer customers, but those remaining are paying a lot more. -------------- Northern routes traffic -------------- Other (minor) routes: - high ratio of use-pay -------------- Sewage project is now completed -------------- I'm thinking that this new 'Rupert item will allow a 2nd ship to be tied-up alongside the berth. But that doesn't make sense, because it would be in the way of the Alaska berth. - Does anyone else have an idea ? -------------- Wow, here's a really long-term project... - hopefully the end product works well and allows for changes to how reservations and fares are done. --------------
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Former Account) on Nov 17, 2012 10:57:36 GMT -8
I'm thinking that this new 'Rupert item will allow a 2nd ship to be tied-up alongside the berth. But that doesn't make sense, because it would be in the way of the Alaska berth. - Does anyone else have an idea ? This marine structure was installed on the shore side of the berth at Fairview. I am currently on my tablet and am unable to check my computer, but here's a link to a photo Jim took... www.flickr.com/photos/41465870@N04/8083550609/
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Nov 17, 2012 11:04:26 GMT -8
A huge thank you to a certain recent recruit to BCF's, currently working our SSI routes....
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Nov 17, 2012 11:35:39 GMT -8
I'm thinking that this new 'Rupert item will allow a 2nd ship to be tied-up alongside the berth. But that doesn't make sense, because it would be in the way of the Alaska berth. - Does anyone else have an idea ? This marine structure was installed on the shore side of the berth at Fairview. I am currently on my tablet and am unable to check my computer, but here's a link to a photo Jim took... www.flickr.com/photos/41465870@N04/8083550609/We saw this work underway at the Fairview terminal in early October. It was not clear what they were up to. Perhaps they intend to be able to tie up a second vessel on the shore side of the berthing structures you see in this photo. Do they have enough water depth to tie up a second ship between the main berth & the shore? When the NorEx & NorAd are both in service next spring we shall see.
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Nov 17, 2012 19:14:50 GMT -8
The Dock work that was occuring at Prince Rupert was done in order to allow for a better tie up of the Northern Expedition. The Outflow winds in the winter proved to be a major issue with a ship that has more windage there. With this new dolphin, there is now a more secure anchoring point for the ship to connect to so it doesn't move around in the high winds.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Apr 9, 2013 20:25:44 GMT -8
Here's the BCFS Operations Summary report for October-December 2012 quarter, to the Ferry Commissioner www.bcferrycommission.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/FY13-Q3-Operations-Summary-Report.pdfFor those interested in statistics, it includes: - by route: round trips, AEQ's, capacity utilization, etc. - cancelled round trips, by route & type (Comox - Westview has the most cancellations) - extra trips (big surprise, Denman-Buckley Bay is the leader by far, and Hornby route is #2 on a year-to-date basis)
|
|