|
|
Post by zargoman on Mar 28, 2010 18:08:09 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by EGfleet on Mar 29, 2010 6:51:10 GMT -8
Read that a little closer. It's not for a third party, it's for a foreign-hulled ferry. WSF would still operate the boat. |
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Mar 29, 2010 8:03:55 GMT -8
I think we discussed this in another thread some time back... I keep coming back to the same response for all the stuff like this:
With what money?
(Besides, read the specs. There aren't a whole lot of vessels out there that meet them and those that do aren't old enough to be for sale. And WSF has NO business acquiring a vessel that is that route-specific.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Mar 29, 2010 9:15:25 GMT -8
There aren't a whole lot of vessels out there that meet them and those that do aren't old enough to be for sale. And WSF has NO business acquiring a vessel that is that route-specific. I fully agree. What are the chances of this route being killed at this point? I stil believe that's the way to go. |
|
|
|
Post by chokai on Mar 29, 2010 9:25:26 GMT -8
Fiftieth Anniversary? What about 1922-1959? (I missed EGF's post somehow. Oops.) As for the 'new' Anacortes dock... didn't the new Sidney dock open the same year? I know the brand-new Sidney visited the facility, so it was in place by then... This article from the Vancouver Sun yesterday would seem to indicate that's the case and that is what the "50th Year Anniversary" is about. www.vancouversun.com/entertainment/Chelan+return+marks+50th+anniversary/2737626/story.html |
|
|
|
Post by EGfleet on Mar 29, 2010 13:03:21 GMT -8
There aren't a whole lot of vessels out there that meet them and those that do aren't old enough to be for sale. And WSF has NO business acquiring a vessel that is that route-specific. I fully agree. What are the chances of this route being killed at this point? I stil believe that's the way to go. Not a chance now. It's considered too much of a political football--and San Juan Islanders know that if they cut the Sidney run, that ferry will simply go away completely, reducing the number of sailings/boats in the islands. No one up here wants that, and they've got the representation in the Washington legislature to make sure that the run keeps going. If WSF would just promote it a little more, the numbers would pick up. Although I half expect it to rebound a little this year, now that people have had time to adjust to the passport requirements. |
|
|
|
Post by dofd on Apr 1, 2010 20:38:02 GMT -8
Found this on You Tube.... From: sjiTV — March 30, 2010 — Celebrate the 50th Anniversary of the Washington State Ferries International sailing route from Anacortes, WA through the San Juan Islands to Friday Harbor, and on to Sidney, British Columbia in Canada. A "Bridge Between Borders", this ferry run has been connecting two countries, two cultures, and three vitally important areas for tourism for 50 years. www.sanjuanislandstv.com |
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Apr 2, 2010 6:24:01 GMT -8
I'm going to have to e-mail the Public Affairs office at WSF. They HAVE to have been the ones who put out "fiftieth anniversary" in a press release because it has been spread so far.
|
|
|
|
Post by EGfleet on Apr 2, 2010 6:44:57 GMT -8
I'm going to have to e-mail the Public Affairs office at WSF. They HAVE to have been the ones who put out "fiftieth anniversary" in a press release because it has been spread so far. They did post a slight correction: www.pnwlocalnews.com/sanjuans/jsj/lifestyle/89626957.htmlThey managed to count in all the WSF years operating the run, but still didn't factor in Black Ball/Captain Crosby where it started in 1922. |
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Apr 16, 2010 22:01:45 GMT -8
The Sidney terminal is now (as of September/07) managed by BCFS. Is this still accurate? |
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Former Account) on Apr 16, 2010 22:17:22 GMT -8
The Sidney terminal is now (as of September/07) managed by BCFS. Is this still accurate? Yes, until September 2047... |
|
|
|
Post by EGfleet on Apr 20, 2010 9:05:28 GMT -8
Sidney in the 1950's before the dock moved. Footage includes the Forrest/Gooch Island and Spieden Island with a Steel Electric (likely the Klickitat) heading past toward Sidney. More footage of the Island docks from the Vashon.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Apr 20, 2010 20:11:32 GMT -8
Great video.
|
|
|
|
Post by EGfleet on May 7, 2010 14:04:27 GMT -8
The question came up some time ago about the Elwha's SOLAS status.
Barnacle just emailed me from the Elwha to let me (and you) know that she has in been issued a new SOLAS certification.
Also interesting to note, the maintenance schedule which was updated on 27 April shows the first few week of fall--which indicates the Elwha will be on the Anacortes-Sidney run--at least for that week.
***Edit: Barnacle now informs me it is only a temporary SOLAS certificate. It seems the ferry will be going in for further inspections later on this year.***
|
|
|
|
Post by EGfleet on Aug 10, 2010 8:22:37 GMT -8
This just in from C-Fax 1070 (and sorry for the caps, that's how it was posted...)
SIDNEY FERRY TERMINAL CHANGES HANDS
Aug 10, 2010
THE B-C FERRY CORPORATION HAS AGREED TO CANCEL ITS LEASE ON THE INTERNATIONAL FERRY TERMINAL IN SIDNEY, SO THAT THE TOWN CAN TAKE OVER MANAGEMENT OF THE FACILITY.
MAYOR LARRY CROSS SAYS SIDNEY INTENDS TO SEND A MESSAGE TO WASHINGTON STATE FERRIES AND THE STATE GOVERNMENT THAT SIDNEY IS SERIOUS ABOUT KEEPING THE ANACORTES FERRY CONNECTION. HE SAYS SIDNEY APPRECIATES THE WORK THAT B-C FERRIES HAS DONE TO IMPROVE THE TERMINAL OVER THE PAST THREE YEARS
|
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Aug 10, 2010 8:28:18 GMT -8
And the angels sing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Aug 10, 2010 8:42:44 GMT -8
This just in from C-Fax 1070 (and sorry for the caps, that's how it was posted...) SIDNEY FERRY TERMINAL CHANGES HANDS
Aug 10, 2010 THE B-C FERRY CORPORATION HAS AGREED TO CANCEL ITS LEASE ON THE INTERNATIONAL FERRY TERMINAL IN SIDNEY, SO THAT THE TOWN CAN TAKE OVER MANAGEMENT OF THE FACILITY. MAYOR LARRY CROSS SAYS SIDNEY INTENDS TO SEND A MESSAGE TO WASHINGTON STATE FERRIES AND THE STATE GOVERNMENT THAT SIDNEY IS SERIOUS ABOUT KEEPING THE ANACORTES FERRY CONNECTION. HE SAYS SIDNEY APPRECIATES THE WORK THAT B-C FERRIES HAS DONE TO IMPROVE THE TERMINAL OVER THE PAST THREE YEARS Good to hear! Obviously let's hope this isn't just talk and that Sidney isn't simply trying to retain rights to use of the land foreseeing a shutdown of the route. This just in from C-Fax 1070 (and sorry for the caps, that's how it was posted...) ...THE B-C FERRY CORPORATION...What quality reporting! I'm so glad to hear that BCFS is now a Crown Corp again!  |
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Aug 10, 2010 8:52:29 GMT -8
Good to hear! Obviously let's hope this isn't just talk and that Sidney isn't simply trying to retain rights to use of the land foreseeing a shutdown of the route. I think Sidney is sincere about keeping the run going. WSF was threatening to simply pass the raise in rent back to BC residents by balancing it on their fares. This just in from C-Fax 1070 (and sorry for the caps, that's how it was posted...) ...THE B-C FERRY CORPORATION...What quality reporting! I'm so glad to hear that BCFS is now a Crown Corp again! [/quote] I didn't even catch that! Good spot, although I'm pretty sure it was unintentional. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Aug 10, 2010 19:50:29 GMT -8
Good to hear! Obviously let's hope this isn't just talk and that Sidney isn't simply trying to retain rights to use of the land foreseeing a shutdown of the route. I think Sidney is sincere about keeping the run going. WSF was threatening to simply pass the raise in rent back to BC residents by balancing it on their fares. What quality reporting! I'm so glad to hear that BCFS is now a Crown Corp again! I didn't even catch that! Good spot, although I'm pretty sure it was unintentional. ;D Frankly I was being all too speculative without enough facts, my bad. I was relying way too much on how what sometimes can be an obvious possibility in this kind of case can also be what's behind the curtain. Going on conjecture is not a good habit to be in, and this is a good lesson for me right off the bat coming back into this game of pickup. (The Mariners didn't get a Triple Play recently by accident, for example) - Granted, if we don't take such words with a grain of salt we wouldn't be doing our jobs as consumers of such short and fast jabs of equally well-thought-out media stories.  |
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Aug 10, 2010 20:09:05 GMT -8
This just in from C-Fax 1070 (and sorry for the caps, that's how it was posted...) SIDNEY FERRY TERMINAL CHANGES HANDS
Aug 10, 2010 THE B-C FERRY CORPORATION HAS AGREED TO CANCEL ITS LEASE ON THE INTERNATIONAL FERRY TERMINAL IN SIDNEY, SO THAT THE TOWN CAN TAKE OVER MANAGEMENT OF THE FACILITY. MAYOR LARRY CROSS SAYS SIDNEY INTENDS TO SEND A MESSAGE TO WASHINGTON STATE FERRIES AND THE STATE GOVERNMENT THAT SIDNEY IS SERIOUS ABOUT KEEPING THE ANACORTES FERRY CONNECTION. HE SAYS SIDNEY APPRECIATES THE WORK THAT B-C FERRIES HAS DONE TO IMPROVE THE TERMINAL OVER THE PAST THREE YEARS So could this mean that "B-C Ferries Corporation" might be coming across some surplus dough to maintain their own terminals, and potentially refit the exteriorly aging Queen of Burnaby? |
|
Neil
Voyager 
Posts: 7,307
|
Post by Neil on Aug 10, 2010 22:38:03 GMT -8
SIDNEY FERRY TERMINAL CHANGES HANDS
Aug 10, 2010 THE B-C FERRY CORPORATION HAS AGREED TO CANCEL ITS LEASE ON THE INTERNATIONAL FERRY TERMINAL IN SIDNEY, SO THAT THE TOWN CAN TAKE OVER MANAGEMENT OF THE FACILITY. MAYOR LARRY CROSS SAYS SIDNEY INTENDS TO SEND A MESSAGE TO WASHINGTON STATE FERRIES AND THE STATE GOVERNMENT THAT SIDNEY IS SERIOUS ABOUT KEEPING THE ANACORTES FERRY CONNECTION. HE SAYS SIDNEY APPRECIATES THE WORK THAT B-C FERRIES HAS DONE TO IMPROVE THE TERMINAL OVER THE PAST THREE YEARS So ends perhaps the oddest episode since the Hahn era began. It never was clear what BC Ferries hoped to gain from this venture, aside from perhaps gouging WSF for as much as they possibly could. The initial announcement, and subsequent mentions in annual reports or at AGMs, never made clear the possible benefits of operating this terminal or where management envisioned new business coming from. I remember dear old Cascade muttering darkly about a plot to force WSF off the international run; at least that would have explained the move, if it had been true. Strange. |
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Aug 11, 2010 7:55:18 GMT -8
I hardly doubt a machiavellian move against WSF was the reason for BC Ferries move into managing the terminal. The bad PR from forcing WSF out would have put BCF in the doghouse for many years.
I think more likely it was a move to strengthen the management services of BC Ferries a la YVR and YYZ Airport Authorities. Both airports have side businesses managing and consulting with other airports. There is good money in the consulting and sometimes you learn something somewhere else you can bring back and apply.
Perhaps it was a pre-emptive move mind you to prevent a competitor from managing the terminal and setting up a direct compete service. Or the drop trailer service.
|
|
Mill Bay
Voyager
Long Suffering Bosun
Posts: 2,887 
|
Post by Mill Bay on Aug 11, 2010 9:52:58 GMT -8
I wouldn't say machiavellian in terms of any plans BCFerries might have had. The most likely reason they held onto the terminal management for so long was they were more hoping Washington state would pull the plug willingly on their own, and then BCFerries could benevolently step into the gap with a plan to offer service on the route. That seems to be the way things work with BCFerries... they are far more subtle and opportunistic, than they are heavy-handed and machiavellian in their corporate moves.
The tone of the latest announcement seems to make it sound as though Sidney officials are putting the pressure on WSF and want to see Washington make the move to keep the service going, so BCFerries has probably realized its potential window of opportunity has closed for the time being as long as it appears that the state is not going to quietly give up on the service.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,307
|
Post by Neil on Aug 11, 2010 11:09:22 GMT -8
I wouldn't say machiavellian in terms of any plans BCFerries might have had. The most likely reason they held onto the terminal management for so long was they were more hoping Washington state would pull the plug willingly on their own, and then BCFerries could benevolently step into the gap with a plan to offer service on the route. That seems to be the way things work with BCFerries... they are far more subtle and opportunistic, than they are heavy-handed and machiavellian in their corporate moves. The tone of the latest announcement seems to make it sound as though Sidney officials are putting the pressure on WSF and want to see Washington make the move to keep the service going, so BCFerries has probably realized its potential window of opportunity has closed for the time being as long as it appears that the state is not going to quietly give up on the service. The route is a chronic money loser, there is no subsidy available from the province, there is no spare boat available to operate it, and they would be taking over a service previously operated by a foreign government. On what level would it have made sense for BC Ferries to take over this route, benevolently or otherwise? As for putting pressure on WSF, I don't think a small Canadian town like Sidney has the leverage to do anything other than offer the most attractive rates possible, and hope that WSF stays. NE's suggestion about keeping out the competition is a possibility, but even there one has to ask, what competition? Aside from WMG's tentative proposals a few years back to use the fastcats in some sort of service to Vancouver Island, I've not heard a credible whisper of anyone wanting to get into the car ferry business across Georgia Strait since, oh, about the time BC Ferries took over in 1960. NE's remark about BC Ferries seeking credibility for their terminal management endeavor might be the likeliest explanation for this short venture. |
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Aug 11, 2010 14:44:19 GMT -8
The most likely reason they held onto the terminal management for so long was they were more hoping Washington state would pull the plug willingly on their own, and then BCFerries could benevolently step into the gap with a plan to offer service on the route. Even if WSF did pull the plug, which I kind of hoped they would (more on that later), I don't think BC Ferries could just step in and take over the route. If I recall, there are clauses and contracts which specifically prohibit a competitor from operating out of, or even near, WSF's facilities, so that means a run to Friday Harbor and Anacortes would be out. As for WSF keeping Sidney in its system, as much as I like the route, the economics of it do not justify its existence, especially in the current state the Ferries Division is operating under. In my opinion, the benefits of dumping the route far outweigh anything they might get back from it, especially since it loses money. Think about it: no landing fees, no paying for Customs officials, Anacortes Terminal can re-claim space currently used for Customs, and dedicate it to parking or more staging, no more expensive upgrades to vessels to make them SOLAS-compliant, and best yet, a vessel dedicated 100% to domestic duty. That last benefit is actually a bit of a sticking point with the San Juan Ferry Advisory Committee because WSF has said it would remove the 4th vessel in the Winter, Spring, and Fall, and only have 3 boats running in the islands (if it were to discontinue Sidney). That didn't go over too well with the citizens, so that's the primary reason they want to keep the Sidney route alive. Personally, I would like to see the Sidney route killed, place 4 vessels in the San Juans year-round, and call it good. The winter schedule would stay as it is now, the fall and spring would benefit from having that 4th vessel dedicated 100% to domestic duty. The summer schedule would be mostly the same, too, only without the Sidney sailings. None of this really matters, anyway. It looks like the Sidney route is here to stay. |
|
