|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Sept 12, 2005 22:05:02 GMT -8
Nick: one question leads to another:
What is "tri cities".
Just wondering again.
thanks.
I'm not from the greater vancouver area, so I'd like some clarification.
thanks.
ps: my guess on "tri cities" would be somewhere on the north shore of the fraser, something to do with Maple Ridge ?
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Sept 12, 2005 22:39:08 GMT -8
Port Coquitlam, Coquitlam, Port Moody
|
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Sept 12, 2005 22:39:18 GMT -8
port moody poco and coquitlam, i think. But i dont live there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Sept 12, 2005 22:40:16 GMT -8
nice timing
|
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Sept 13, 2005 4:57:01 GMT -8
I'll have to work in more Vancouver-Island acronyms & nicknames, to confuse you mainland guys !
(or maybe I'll get Mac to start a copycat forum, strictly for the vancouver island folks.......just kidding)
|
|
|
|
Post by YZFNick on Sept 13, 2005 5:04:42 GMT -8
Here's one Flugel Horn: MSA
|
|
|
|
Post by YZFNick on Sept 13, 2005 6:37:26 GMT -8
Anyone? HL Teen, can you field this one?
|
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Sept 13, 2005 7:49:38 GMT -8
Mission-Sumas-Abbotsford.
my sister lives there....so I know that one.
Or maybe the "M" is for "Matsqui" ?
|
|
|
|
Post by YZFNick on Sept 13, 2005 7:54:06 GMT -8
I think the M can stand for what ever you feel like having it stand for at the moment.
That's about it for abbreviations in the lower mainland. The rest are combined names like Burquitlam or Surdel, those are pretty easy.
Anyways, back to the subject.
|
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Sept 13, 2005 8:33:00 GMT -8
Doug,
The main problem with the private operator back in the mid 50's was caused by the Unions and there demands. Also a few of the big majors wanted to cherry pick a number of routes and not service the smaller routes - which didn't make money due to lack of people in the region.
We are having the same problem here in England. They want to privatizes the Royal Mail. There are large number of small routes where they lose a lot of money - even some of the northern Scottish routes - the ferry service can only break even as there is a Royal Charter to have a daily mail services - so the ferry carries the mail. In other places they use small planes to fly in the mail - as it is cheaper than a ferry service.
So getting back to the question - WAC Bennett had a very dark hand in stirring up the Unions and causing the trouble - as Brian pointed out - WSF was up and running - and Bennett wanted the same for the people of BC. Look at the figures for BC Ferries and you will see that it produces a LOT of cash which gets reused in the Province - so VERY good for the local economy.
I strongly believed that BC government should have owned and run the Ferry service - but I have changed in the last 15 years as the Government and senior management in BC Ferries have wasted so much money - which could have been used for better things in the Province - that I have completely losted faith in the Government to run any commercial business. I have seen some very good "State" business been turned over to the private sector and do very well - PLUS I have seen the private sector destroy the same business.
I think after 45 years maybe about time for some private sector operators to have a tried - they can't do any worse - as the fares are fixed and controlled.
|
|
Doug
Voyager 
Lurking within...the car deck.
Posts: 2,213
|
Post by Doug on Sept 13, 2005 15:23:31 GMT -8
The public simply would not allow it...we have a lot of whiners here...whether you have them in Europe or not, I don't know. When you say "Unions and their demands," do you mean the Union's demand or the demand of passengers? There is a union now, and you seen what it can do...remember back in December of 2003? The entire fleet was shut down.
And you have to remember, pretty much ALL of the routes here are on an ESSENTIAL SERVICE list. That's why the government should mainly be running the fleet. The private company is under contract and the changes are positive, so it is doing...fine right now.
So if BC Ferries buys fuel by the barrel, how much is it per barrel in any currency you know...?
|
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Sept 14, 2005 8:40:27 GMT -8
Doug,
History shows that the Unions put a lot of demands on the owners in return the passengers / customer were losing out - hence why Bennett want to do something - anything really. Part of the deal was pay and work conditions on board the vessel - I agree some were bad - and some were very good for the crew - just depends which vessel you worked on.
I have mention a few times in the past - I think & hope that the current management can do the job - but the fuel surcharge problem - they lose a little of my backing - which I am sure if it was still a crown business would have been worst - so I'll call it even.
Waiting and watching what they do next. There are a number of different thoughts about all this Sub-contracting out of services. Not sure which camp I am in - some services it is the way to go - with others I think they could do a better job with it been in-house. I know it is the current fad - but you could become unstuck very quickly - which will / could cost you a lot to get out of ect....
|
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Sept 14, 2005 8:56:39 GMT -8
Doug,
Sorry forgot to answer your other question - Fuel.
You purchase fuel in BCFS case by the ton - but they quote you prices to start with "per barrel" and in BC Ferries case it is via West Texas price - which is around $68 per barrel - now remember that is USA dollars - so you need to add to that the currency difference.
When you put on a hedge - you know what your consumption is - in BCFS case it is around 126,300,000 liters per year - (They quote in liters BCFS not tons) So if it was me I would pre-order 100M Liters of fuel at an agreed price - which at March / April 2005 was around $35 per barrel. With a hedge you can order as much or as little as you want. What then happens is that amount gets taken from the market - (Supply & demand) so there is 100M liter less on the West Coast of BC - you have forward fixed the order / contract. You then need to take delivery of the fuel or pay storage on it. Say you don't need all of the fuel - well then sell it on - say today at $68 per barrel you have just made a very nice profit.
If Southwest Airlines can pre-book (Hedge) there 2005 and part of 2006 (Q1) fuel requirement at a basic price of $26 per barrel - then why can't someone at BCFS do the same ?
Here in Europe - we work on Brent -Light plus we have the IPE market here - like they have in Chicago & New York.
What is interesting for us in Europe is that you have BCFS - claiming to be the biggest ferry fleet - per passengers / cars in the World and yet it has introduce a fuel surcharge - where as other "Big" Ferry and shipping companies in Europe have not done the same - Why?? - because they know that fuel is one - if not the major expense in running a vessel - hence they follow the market on a daily bases and use hedge programs to off set there fuel expense.
|
|
|
|
Post by kylefossett on Sept 14, 2005 14:34:34 GMT -8
Mission-Sumas-Abbotsford. my sister lives there....so I know that one. Or maybe the "M" is for "Matsqui" ? m- matsqui s- sumas a- abbotsford at one time abbotsford used to be three different municipalities. abbotsford and sumas amalgamated in the 60's abbotsford and matsqui amalgamated in 95 |
|
Doug
Voyager
Lurking within...the car deck.
Posts: 2,213
|
Post by Doug on Sept 14, 2005 16:03:41 GMT -8
Why doesn't every company that consumes fuel use this hedge? It would be something to consider...but what is so bad with the fuel surcharge? How come airlines worldwide are using it as well?
|
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Sept 15, 2005 7:45:06 GMT -8
Doug,
It's a very good question. Today two of the major Airlines in American are on the verge of Chapter 11 - and they are putting this down to Union demands and fuel prices. So 4 out of the top 6 airlines are in trouble. But on the flip side - the most successful airlines are the low cost ones - Jet Blue and Southwest - which have a lean, hungry, keen management team. Here in Europe two of the most successful - in number of passenger carried and revenue are the low cost carriers. BA is catching up - but had to do a lot of cost cutting - trimming of the fat from days of been the "State" carrier.
I said in the past who ever handle the Southwest Fuel hedge program - hire them on - and pay them a $1M in salary plus a bonus - given the amount that they have saved Southwest.
Based on the above - you would think this simple fuel hedge program - can make or break an airline - well it can do the same to any transport company - with heavy fuel consumption - like a ferry fleet.
Therefore it really is down to the management team in place - and how they understand there business. People on this forum have raised question marks over Hahn's knowledge of the fleet - so it goes to guess - maybe he doesn't understand the fuel hedge program.
In the accounts - they have a "forward check" on the $ currency for the Super C order - plus they appear to be going very aggressive in the Insurance market for the fleet - with there own Captive Insurance company within BCFS - so someone on the management team should know whats going on...or do they?
|
|
