Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
I am now looking at the Growth past and future .
Freight Traffic.
Over the past 20years,the number of road haulage vehicles {RHVs}useing the port of Dover has more than doubled to over 2.3million units. Looking ahead over the next 30years,both ourselves and the Government have forecast substantial growth in the ro-ro freight traffic.
Whilst growth has been experieced mainly in the freight sector, the port of Dover is nevertheless synonymous with tourist travel.
With 2.9 million tourist vehicles passing through the ferry port annually and also the UK 2nd busiest cruise port. This equates each year over 14million passengers.
I am now looking at the forecast table, it reads like this =
(1)Freght Vehicles per Million units,2005 it was 2.0 in 2009 it is 2.3 this out of date already with over 2.8 ,but we go on,
in 2014 we have 2.0-2.5 million, 2024, 2.0-3.2million and last 2034 3.0-4.1 million units.
Tourist vehicles per million units over the same years reads as 2.7, 2.9, 3.0, 3.4, and 3.7 this is millions.
The last one is Passengers.
Again in millions and same years, 13.3, 13.1,13.7,14.8,and the last one 16.2. millions . more to come later on.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
Link to DHB Corporate Reports might be easier
http://www.doverport.co.uk/?page=AnnualReports
£20m net profit in 2007, £10m in 2008 and £7.4m in 2009 - on the way up Vic ?
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Thanks for that Paul I have just done a financial review of the port and lost it all , and I am not doing it all again tonight I need to get a new pc this one is over 12years old and cuts out on me when I am useing it.
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
BarryW
Actually I have read it, and he offers no solid guarantees. You should read it again.
I am and always have been, for, developing Dover & Deal and working together we can achieve more than has happened so far.
You want to sell the Port off, I don't.
I think Ed's "cash cow" is the reason behind the sell off.
I want more money to be channelled from the Port into Dover/Deal and I don't think we need to sell the Port to achieve that.
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Again well said Gary ,I have not read it and sorry but no wish to.
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,700
Gary, whilst I am also of a mind that the port ought not to be sold, I am also a realist.
DHB have commenced discussions with the Department of Transport over selling the port; as a trust port the decision resides with the Minister for Transport; what you, I or any other ordinary member of the public thinks or wants counts for naught. Hence the need for our MP, who hopefully as he is in the same party, has the ear of the Minister and can make a representation of an alternative to the DHB sale proposal.
But let's not fool ourselves, the government is looking to make a significant dent in the national deficit and the prospect of somewhere close to £0.5bn as the proceeds of a sale of the port all helps towards that goal
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Admission there Vic - a closed mind.
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
Let's be honest and say, in principal, Charlie's plan sounds like an alternative to the status quo. The problem with taking it seriously and giving it some credibility is that it was borne out of lies.
Mr Elficke stood on the strand in Deal and announced he would continue where Gwyn left off and promised to continue to fight, the selling off, of the Port. I asked him if he was successful in getting elected and knowing that many of his colleagues wanted to sell off the Port, would he then promise to continue the fight to the sell off and he replied "that he would".
Please don't tell me he only came up with this idea after he was elected.
So if it is such a great idea and is his preferred way forward, why did he not fight for election on the back of this great idea, instead of telling us all, that he would continue to fight to sell our Dover Port?
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Perhaps he hadn't inherited Gwynn's "hospital car park appeasement paper" in time Gary.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Again sorry about last night I done the full financial Review on the port and press a key and lost the lot.
Tonight I am only doing the Operating cost for 2009&2008.
(1)Employee costs 2009 it was 16.2million and in 2008 it was 19.6 that is a -17.3%
Well that is good for the D,H,B, but not so good if you was one of the staff who lost their Jobs.
And just to add to this DR Bob Goldfield Chief Executive and Register wages for 2009 was over £190.000, makes you think.
Other operating cost was £19.5 million in 2009 and 17.1 million in 2008. 14.0%.
And the last one is Depreciation £11.0million in 2009 and £10.3million in 2008 6.8%.
The Totals are £46.7million in 2009 and £47.0million in 2008 a -006%. Well that is all for tonight but more on Sunday.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Gary - remember when this debate first occured (this time round) I warned both Charlie and Gwyn that they should avoid just being negative and try to find a deal to benefit Dover. Dover's best interests would not be served by the DHB scheme getting forced through as a result of a lack of alternative. I did point out that there were a variety of privatisation models available that would answer the objections.
Charlie wisely decided that he should do just that.
From your postings it is clear that you are opposed to privatisation full stop, regardless of the specific case.
What Charlie is proposing though is totally different and is truly an alternative, it is an original idea that could be followed elsewhere.
This does not involve selling the port to a commercial interest at all. It does not involve any risk of the owner (freeholder if you like) being anything or anyone other than a Trust controlled by local people. It actually means the Port becoming publically owned by the community of Dover.
That is what is different. Charlie has remained opposed to privatisation, in the traditional sense and found a way forward that should be able to attract the support of most people.
Other than those who simply cannot accept new ideas that is. Dover needs new ideas. If things carry on to be done as they have been since the war we are set to get the same results. Zero, zilch - decline......
We have to break out of this impasse and Charlie has found a way forward.
Guest 673- Registered: 16 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,388
"New" ideas have to be evaluated and only adopted if they are an improvement on the status quo. Anybody can come up with a really, really daft idea which is a monumental step back in time and immensely injurious to the body concerned, and use the meretricous appellation "new" to sell it to the gullible. "Hey, this is new, new, new, and you lot opposing it are all hidebound and blinkered not to fall for it. New is Good. Old is Bad. Black is White."
"New" is the cheap marketing hype the snake oil salesman employed when he diversified into flogging the Sinclair C5.
"New" is a buzzword which theoretically symbolises the prospect of progress but can equally apply to a truly disastrous change of path. Do you remember what happened to our great industrial conglomerate GEC, a century-old ever-expanding global colossus under the wise guidance of Arnie Weinstock? Renamed Marconi under his successor George Simpson and devoted to the "new" idea of focussing narrowly on telecoms in the dot.com boom, it was utterly destroyed in less than a decade.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Dover needs something 'new' or nothing will change. Maybe that something 'new' might mean a leap of faith, a spot of risk, a 'leap in the dark' I am sure more metaphors could be mixed, but one thing is sure, if nothing new happens then nothing will change and the decline will continue.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
new council,new ideas,new money,need i go on.
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
BarryW.
I am against selling it off because I do not think it is necessary, I don't even aspire to the theory that the board members should change, although it might help. All that needs to change, is the way the profit is dealt with. Money is wasted year in and year out and not channelled into Dover as it should be, this is the problem. In your words the last government was not strong enough to change this, so lets see this government do it.
It is Dover/Deal that needs to benefit from our Port not some business that you or Charlie cannot say for certain will be British, let alone from Dover. If his proposal goes through and no local or British offer is tendered, do you really think this government won't sell it to overseas buyers?
Who, locally, in your view has the clout to buy our Port, with the view to divert profits into Dover?
But that has all been said before.
What I asked in my last post was why did Charlie not run his campaign on the back of this alternative idea?
I and I believe other's, would have given him and his new idea much more credence had he run with this during his campaign instead of the lip service he showed to everyone in saying he would oppose any sell off?
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Ross Miller- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,700
Gary - fair enough but no change of board means no change of policy and that policy is a commercial sale, so in order to get what you want there must be a change of board.
Further the current charter limits the amount of funds DHB can channel into the locale - I believe it is a max of £100k and even that is caveated with conditions galore.
It would be fantastic if the local area could benefit to a greater extent from profits generated by DHB, but that will require a Port Revision Order to be approved by a Minister who has just seen a whopping great 25% cut from his budget and is in need of anything that will raise significant sums of money; so I think for the foreseeable future it is unlikely he will approve anything other than some form of sale. Equally it is not about whether this or the last government were or were not "strong enough" it is about political will and neither of them had/have the political will to change the status quo in this respect.
Ultimately I believe Charlie's proposal will come to naught and the government will support and back a trade sale/IPO and we will get nothing.
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
sadly i rather believe that ross may be right on this one.
however, i believe we must all back charlie to the hilt, his plan cannot work otherwise.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Howard,sorry I do not back it and I told our MP that when he asked me at the DDC office on Friday,but it will not happen anyway there is not the cash around to do it,if it is sold off it will go to a overseas company.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Vic - if the attitudes that you and Gary display reflect the majority in Dover then the Port will certainly be sold off to some foreigner.
Dover deserves better than that.
Charlie has come up with an idea that, regardless of what you keep repeating Gary, does guarantee British ownership, indeed Dover ownership of the Port.
If we dont get behind Charlie then it will be sold off to commercial interests.
Try reading what Charlie actually says and while you may not fully understand the complex financing issue at least accept that some of us do. He deserves a chance.
May I also remind you that Charlie is also saying that he is proposing that his idea, if the government is minded to move in that direction, would be subject to a community vote. A point ignored by the carpers.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
I do hope you are right on the voting because the public of Dover will vote along side Gary and myself with a very big no like they have done in the pass.
