|
Post by Low Light Mike on May 28, 2016 21:56:25 GMT -8
Lady Rose Marine Services has a history of renaming their ships (well, 1-for-1 record in renaming Rennessoy to Frances Barkley). So it wouldn't surprise me if they renamed Tenaka with something related to her new geographical market. No, the history is one for two. They never changed the name of the Lady Rose, right? Choosing a name that has an historical connection with its new service area would be good, I think. Well, I guess it depends on how far back we go to which era of Alberni Inlet ownership. Not needing to re-read "The Uchuck Years" history book right now, but wanting too have a feisty history scrap.... So, I can re-phrase: The established Alberni Inlet transportation company has a history of renaming the additional ships that they acquire for their Alberni Inlet service. I say this in the era after the Lady Rose was already established as the long-time lady of Alberni. But to invoke the spirit of David Hahn: "Names are names" I'm happy that my favourite shipping company has acquired a favourite ship of mine. A winning combination for me.
|
|
mrdot
Voyager
Mr. DOT
Posts: 1,252
|
Post by mrdot on May 28, 2016 21:57:40 GMT -8
hardly 'lady Rose 3!i'am still trying to digest Princess Marg-3 ! mr.dot.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on May 28, 2016 22:08:00 GMT -8
I am sort of anticipating a wave of not-so-positive reviews of this name choice, but it sounds to me like this is a name that is meant to appeal more to their tourism market. "Legacy" sort of invokes a cruise ship for seniors with an on board casino, does it not...? If I may channel J Peterman from Seinfeld for a moment, "she will always be Tenaka to me." Well, the tourism market is their main market, so the name had better appeal to the company's market. The company's success depends on the marketing of the Alberni area as a destination for tourism. This forum is a "BC Ferries" forum, and has shown itself to be BC Ferries centric in much of its thinking. It won't surprise me to see difficulty in viewing a ship through something other than a BC Ferries lens. A ship with a long ferry service history moves to join a different type of service for a company who's legacy is a long and storied one itself. We appreciate the ship. We can also appreciate the unique market that she will soon be working.
|
|
|
Post by Kather Anne on May 28, 2016 22:12:47 GMT -8
weeeeelllll, there's more to the name than meets the eye - take a look at the 64th share owners of the ship, and note that she did not fly a company flag on the trip to Port Alberni...
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on May 28, 2016 22:36:36 GMT -8
weeeeelllll, there's more to the name than meets the eye - take a look at the 64th share owners of the ship, and note that she did not fly a company flag on the trip to Port Alberni... Well, the vessel registry lists "1070837 B.C. LTD." and that numbered company was incorporated on April 14, 2016. (see, I can sleuth) So it's a new company, presumably incorporated for the purpose of owning this ship. The vessel registry says "64 shares" not "64 shareholders," so unless you're knowing more other information than I know, I assume you're assuming that the company is owned by a variety of local investors. I would be assuming that this new company is just another of the Lady Rose Marine Services owner's companies. But if you're knowing more than me from reliable sources, then you've got the advantage in understanding this situation. I have low patience for riddles at the best of times. I prefer the even playing field of understanding.
|
|
Nick
Voyager
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,078
|
Post by Nick on May 28, 2016 22:57:11 GMT -8
weeeeelllll, there's more to the name than meets the eye - take a look at the 64th share owners of the ship, and note that she did not fly a company flag on the trip to Port Alberni... Most (if not all) vessels are registered in Canada with 64 shares. Not sure what the reasoning behind that is, but if you look up any other vessel, whether it is government owned (CG for example) or privately owned (BCF), they are all listed as having "64 shares". Company flags are really an optics kind of thing - they don't really mean anything. I wouldn't read more into this than there is. The address of the numbered company is the same as LRMS, so I'm thinking it's probably for some financial reason to keep the new boat separate from LRMS until she actually enters service. Just a guess on my part...
|
|
|
Post by Starsteward on May 29, 2016 6:47:25 GMT -8
The separation of the newly acquired vessel from the rest of the company 'may' have something to do with insurance matters. Could it be that LRMS is keeping the new ship listed as a separate insurable asset during the period the vessel undergoes its major refit rather than being an insurable asset within the entire company? Perhaps some cost savings or?
The '64 shares' information is intriguing.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on May 29, 2016 7:20:01 GMT -8
Big thanks Nick on the "64 shares" explanation. Expertise is much appreciated.
Regarding the use of a separate company to hold a major asset, this is another common-practice item. Whether it be land & buildings or a ship, it makes sense for liability and creditor-proofing purposes to keep major assets in separate companies.
If something goes wrong with one company, the assets of the other company are kept safe. It's prudent business planning.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on May 29, 2016 8:37:21 GMT -8
My first reaction to the new name was perhaps it is just an 'interim' name (i.e. they will choose a real name later). That changed to "I'll get used to it". This morning, on reflection, I think it is indeed a 'marketing' name just the same as Coastal Renaissance or Northern Adventure. With time I may grow to like it, maybe.
This vessel has now had three names. Of the three, Tenaka is/was best, IMHO.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,187
|
Post by Neil on May 29, 2016 9:07:41 GMT -8
My first reaction to the new name was perhaps it is just an 'interim' name (i.e. they will choose a real name later). That changed to "I'll get used to it". This morning, on reflection, I think it is indeed a 'marketing' name just the same as Coastal Renaissance or Northern Adventure. With time I may grow to like it, maybe. This vessel has now had three names. Of the three, Tenaka is/was best, IMHO. I'm hoping you're right and it's just an interim name. If you wanted it to reflect some aspect of Alberni's legacy, why not name it for that, instead of just a generic term?
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on May 29, 2016 10:52:05 GMT -8
If you wanted it to reflect some aspect of Alberni's legacy, why not name it for that, instead of just a generic term? Bingo. This sums up exactly how I feel about this name.
|
|
|
Post by Queen of Nanaimo Teen on May 29, 2016 14:09:06 GMT -8
I'm assuming her funnels will be repainted in the Union Steamships' red and black theme. Has anyone else thought about this? I imagine it looking quite nice!
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on May 29, 2016 14:54:44 GMT -8
I'm assuming her funnels will be repainted in the Union Steamships' red and black theme. Has anyone else thought about this? I imagine it looking quite nice! Oh yes, I'm expecting the red and black treatment for her funnels.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Jun 16, 2016 16:48:01 GMT -8
Some excerpts from an Alberni Valley News story concerning ex-Tenaka: from HERE WITH PHOTO
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Jun 26, 2016 20:10:55 GMT -8
|
|
Mill Bay
Voyager
Long Suffering Bosun
Posts: 2,886
|
Post by Mill Bay on Jun 30, 2016 22:40:25 GMT -8
My mid-day look at Tenaka on June 25, 2016, at Lady Rose Marine Services - as someone who loves this ship, it was a great feeling to drive down Argyle Street hill and see her in the Quay. in-office display of the 2 ships DSC03465 by Mike Bonkowski, on Flickr You need to change this to your signature pic,
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Oct 23, 2016 16:50:32 GMT -8
Here's my night time view of ex Tenaka at Port Alberni, from October 20, 2016. She's at her "Marina Slip" that was constructed for her at Alberni Quay. Lady Rose Marine Services has added (since I was there last in June) a locked cage around the marina float entrance, and various security signage. As for the work being done on the ship, I'm not sure what's been done yet. I'm still expecting to see some work done this winter, but I don't know when in 2017 she will start to do her route(s). I suspect it will be later rather than sooner, just because of the amount of refit work that is likely involved to turn her into an everyday freight & passenger ship. I'm patient, and the owner strikes me as someone who carefully makes a plan and then gets it done. Here are my night views: (the donut-shop side of the Quay has lots of obstructed views, so please just ignore all the stuff that keeps this from being a clean shot....) DSC08274 by Mike Bonkowski, on Flickr . by Mike Bonkowski, on Flickr . by Mike Bonkowski, on Flickr With MV Frances Barkley . by Mike Bonkowski, on Flickr With Songhee floating B&B in foreground DSC08303 by Mike Bonkowski, on Flickr
|
|
|
Post by mybidness459 on Oct 26, 2016 11:47:46 GMT -8
I have been thinking the last couple of days that even though BC Ferries does not own the ship, they are still partly helping to pay for the operation through subsidiaries. Re Alberni Legacy.
I wonder if you would take away the government funds would they be able to stay in business?
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Oct 26, 2016 12:12:38 GMT -8
I have been thinking the last couple of days that even though BC Ferries does not own the ship, they are still partly helping to pay for the operation through subsidiaries. Re Alberni Legacy. I wonder if you would take away the government funds would they be able to stay in business? They would likely fail w/o the subsidy. So too would BCFS as all but a few routes are not self-sustaining. So too would almost all public transit systems. That is one of the reasons we pay taxes ...
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,187
|
Post by Neil on Oct 26, 2016 15:51:10 GMT -8
I have been thinking the last couple of days that even though BC Ferries does not own the ship, they are still partly helping to pay for the operation through subsidiaries. Re Alberni Legacy. I wonder if you would take away the government funds would they be able to stay in business? They would likely fail w/o the subsidy. So too would BCFS as all but a few routes are not self-sustaining. So too would almost all public transit systems. That is one of the reasons we pay taxes ... According to the CFS Contract, unregulated route 59 is subsidized with regard to Bamfield and Barkley Sound waypoints, but not service to Ucluelet. Chances are, their existing boat can provide the contracted level of service, so I'm not sure they would really get anything much to offset the recent purchase.
|
|
|
Post by mybidness459 on Nov 24, 2016 16:24:00 GMT -8
Anyone heard any updates as to the vessel status, is it in drydock yet?
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Nov 24, 2016 16:57:07 GMT -8
Anyone heard any updates as to the vessel status, is it in drydock yet? AIS still shows her at Alberni Quay. I saw here there in October. I will stop by again this weekend, and I expect that she's at the Quay in the water, with no visible outside changes.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 30, 2017 11:12:22 GMT -8
Finally some news on Tenaka: from HERE
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,187
|
Post by Neil on Mar 31, 2017 21:50:43 GMT -8
When I first read this story I thought... what a weird idea. Who would pay to take a car ferry when you can drive a highway for just the gas money? And then I thought... I would.
Anybody who's been there knows that it's really expensive to stay in any resort in the Tofino-Ucluelet area. Anyone who can afford the accommodations could probably also afford at least a one way, super scenic sea voyage there or back. I would love to take my car to combine a Barkley Sound trip with a stay on the west coast. I don't know what my max price limit would be, but I would probably be willing to part with $150, car and driver. If they go ahead with it, it will be interesting to see what they end up asking.
I don't know Port Alberni or Ucluelet well enough to know if there are any facilities that might allow ro/ro vehicle access to the Alberni Legacy. I can't imagine the company having the resources to construct any docks from scratch, or even significant rebuilds. But since this story seems to have some legs, there must be options.
If the infrastructure exists and they fix the old Tenaka up nicely, it might not be difficult to sell 21 vehicle spots each way, a couple of times a week. When LRMS bought the vessel, I wasn't thinking this was part of their potential service, so it would be pretty cool if they could make it happen.
|
|
|
Post by mybidness459 on Apr 1, 2017 15:55:32 GMT -8
One has to factor in the road between Port Alberni and Bamfield. Unlike the paved highway to Tofino the road to Bamfield is gravel and used by industrial traffic and logging equipment and can be full of potholes. This is something to consider if you have a vehicle that you don't want to bust up. Your vehicle can get pretty dirty after a typical West coast rain storm.
Who knows maybe the Nimpkish will join her.
|
|