Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
You should read up on the scheme and find out about it Vic before opposing it.
I suspect that people will have a bit more imagination and understanding than what you suspect.
Guest 673- Registered: 16 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,388
QUOTE from BarryW: "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." UNQUOTE
What Charlie says in his proposal is: "The monies required by HM Treasury could be raised by the Trust through (i) a joint venture with a ports operator (ii) the provision of finance by an infrastructure fund (iii) the provision of finance by a finance party or (iv) an offer of bonds to the public with a return backed by Port revenues."
Is this what you are referring to as it seems pretty straightforward? Alternatively could you point us to the complex financing issue details with which you are au fait, and perhaps help us to understand them?
The sources quoted appear to be more or less the same as those from which DHB propose to raise finance.
If you are privy to the complex financing issue details then obviously you must have a rough idea of the figures involved or the whole proposal is meaningless. The Peoples Port proposal stands or falls on whether the figures add up.
Can you give me a rough idea of the following figures:
(1) How much do you think the port is worth?
(2) How much do you expect the Treasury to sell it for?
(3) What percentage return would a global infrastructure fund, or other purchaser, expect to get for an investment of this magnitude?
(4) What are the annual profits for the Port of Dover after all operating costs, maintenance and essential everyday construction works have been deducted?
(5) What amount would you expect the Town of Dover to receive annually?
I have my own idea of what these sums are and it would appear to me, with my non-existent financial acumen, that they do not add up. I have grave doubts that the annual profits for the Port of Dover give anything like a reasonable return for the full purchase price of the port, let alone that there would be anything left over for the Town of Dover. If that were to be the case then there can be nothing in this for the Town of Dover, which is what it is all about. I would welcome your expert financial viewpoint, with a considered estimate of the ballpark figures.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Ed - do you really want the Port sold off to a foreigner, it seems as if you do seeing you seem merely to want to undermine the only alternative, one that will result in the Port remaining in British and more specifically local ownership.
You perhaps, might understand the workings of bonds, in frastructure funds etc but I expect that most people dont. The detail is also less important than getting the agreement to the principal, then the work of raising the finance and putting together the details can progress, not before.
Please stop acting like a dinosaur opposed to any change. Somthing must change but we need change that will help Dover most.
What you are doing is the easiest thing in the world, to pick and critisise without offering a constructive alternative, The status quo is a non-starter and is one that has failed the town of Dover and continues to do so.
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
BarryW.
So if the Port gets sold off to an overseas buyer, then it will be my fault will it, is that called Hedging your bets?
I presume, yet again, you are not willing to answer my previous questions?
"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 673- Registered: 16 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,388
QUOTE: Ed - do you really want the Port sold off to a foreigner, it seems as if you do seeing you seem merely to want to undermine the only alternative, one that will result in the Port remaining in British and more specifically local ownership. UNQUOTE
No, I very much want the port to remain in British ownership as you well know. I have no confidence that this will be so with either your plan or that of DHB. Furthermore, there is no question whatsoever of it entering into local ownership and I think we have covered the reasons for that pretty comprehensively.
QUOTE: You perhaps, might understand the workings of bonds, infrastructure funds etc but I expect that most people don't. The detail is also less important than getting the agreement to the principal, then the work of raising the finance and putting together the details can progress, not before. UNQUOTE
Charlie states that he has had early discussions with various sources and maintains that funds can swiftly be obtained. I fail to see how there can be any agreement as to the principle without the proponents seeming to have the first idea of what sums are required or what returns can be expected on same. I find it remarkable that this plan appears to be totally uncosted and question whether Charlie has merely drafted a version of your old election-losing privatisation plan from years ago, for appearances sake, in order to deflect attention away from the fact that his stance today is diametrically the opposite of that a few short weeks ago when he was standing for election on a platform of adamant opposition to privatisation of the port. "Not on my watch" in his own words.
QUOTE: Please stop acting like a dinosaur opposed to any change. Something must change but we need change that will help Dover most. UNQUOTE
I do not accept that opposing this change is acting like a dinosaur. I have a nasty suspicion that neither your plan nor the DHB plan will work in the interests of the nation or of the Port of Dover and that, in consequence, the Town of Dover will suffer rather than benefit.
QUOTE: What you are doing is the easiest thing in the world, to pick and criticise without offering a constructive alternative, The status quo is a non-starter and is one that has failed the town of Dover and continues to do so. UNQUOTE
It is indeed the easiest thing in the world to criticise, but unfortunately it has to be done since to remain silent when one suspects that untold damage is about to be inflicted on our port and town would be invidious. I do indeed have a constructive alternative, namely to retain the status quo which has brought immeasurable benefits to Dover.
Continuous reinvestment of the profits made by the port over a period measured in centuries, plus immense investment of national funds in the construction of the harbour walls by the Admiralty, has resulted in the thriving port of today; the pre-eminent ferry port in Western Europe and the conduit for £80 billion worth of trade annually.
The benefit of this to the Town of Dover, albeit seemingly unrecognised, is in the enormous amount of jobs and services directly resulting from proximity to the port. That the town has failed to capitalise on this source of wealth, as symbolised by the giant empty structures of the planners' follies in the DTIZ wasteland out beyond the dock gates, is not a reflection on the port but on the town.
The single most damaging factor to affect the towns prosperity in the last twenty years was as a result of an earlier privatisation, that of Sealink. The disappearance of this fleet of ferries manned by crew domiciled in Dover, the complete disappearance of the Port of Folkestone, and the subsequent related introduction of live-onboard crews from around the country and abroad on the Dover ferries, has resulted in the loss of countless millions of pounds to the local economy over the ensuing years. The nation as a whole witnessed a sum in excess of £300 million given away to foreign investors.
The people of Dover, of all people, are not going to be easily taken in by the promise of great riches as a result of any further privatisation.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
So sad to see such a negative attitudes from you Ed.
Thankfully there are people who have Dover's interests at heart who also are more constructive, realising that the status quo is not good enough for Dover. Change is needed and change must come. Charlie has a plan, far better for Dover than the DHB plan, that offers a chance of a better future for the town. We must just hope he prevails.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
You are only saying that Barry because your MP is blue what if the reds had put that plan forward, you would not be saying the same then.
No I have not read it and will not ,like most of the public in DOVER the port should say as it is but if there are members on their board that wish to go without a big payout each then let them go.
I would just like to add to that ,it is the council job to run the town and the D,H,B. to run the port.
I have said at lots of meeting that the best thing to do is that the council handover the town to the D,H,B. to run because all the things that the DHB do looks the part and nice ,and things the council do or should I say not do does not look the same.
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,700
I think Ed makes some very valid points and his request for cost estimates is perfectly valid, it is indeed difficult to evaluate the merits of the only 2 proposals without this number. DHB have at least indicated they expect a trade sale to be for an amount in the region of £350m; so is this the number Charlie thinks his plan needs to raise?
With regard to returns on investment DHB are making somewhere in the region of £15m per annum net profit which would suggest a 23 year payback period and an annualised return of 4.3% based on the trade sale proposed by the DHB. What sort of return on investment is proposed in Charlie's plan?
I am not opposed to Charlie's proposal as I think it has a better structure to it than a straight trade sale and has a wider appeal to a large group of stakeholders. Having said that, like Ed, I would like more details and more clarity around what level of benefit the town could expect on an annual basis, what form any guarantees around ownership would take, what the trust boards voting structure would be and how this related to investment levels, what protection is proposed to stop the commercial interests taking control and voting through changes in constitution etc.
"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 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
The cost of buying the port of DOVER IS WELL OVER THE £1 BILLION MARK not millions
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i am now totally lost i admit.
having read the original plan from charlie and his sidekick blue barry, all for the buyout, then reading the eloquent and well researched stuff from ed, then the views of ross and vic that are rather more doubtful, i reach the conclusion that ordinary dover people like me have not got a clue which way to go.
i notice that paul the fuhrer has skillfully avoided being dragged into this argument.
my suspicion is that he made a wise move.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Well Howard I go to all the meeting,s and have talked alot to members of the DHB over alot of years so I think I know what I am talking about.
Ross Miller- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,700
Vic the figures published by DHB are £350 - £500m
You may like to believe that it is worth more but things are only worth what people will pay for them
"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
apologies vic, i meant that the views of you and ross were doubtful about the plan.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Ross I know that was the story going round but it is not true sorry to tell you that but at the last meeting I did get up and put it to the board they said this"We do not know what the cost would be to buy it at this time and they agreed with me that the cost could well be over the Billion mark.The £400 to 500 million came up because that is the cost of the new structure of the port, some times the press get it wrong and they did that time.
What is the big deal with just amending the Charter or getting a new one issued that reflects what we all want to see? No sell off required, no investors, bo political shenanigans, just a redirection of the funding arrangements.
Is it too obvious for words?
Guest 673- Registered: 16 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,388
SID: That would indeed be the ideal solution but there has clearly always been a reluctance to do it for some reason. Obviously it would not be an amendment to the original charter, which as I pointed out together with illustrations on a previous thread, is in medieval Latin and of no relevance today. It would be an amendment to the most recent legislation governing the operation of the port. As far as one can judge, it is not going to happen and a sale of the port along the lines proposed by the last Labour government is seemingly inevitable. The Conservatives did promise to review the matter after the election but it would appear that we can take that with a pinch of salt.
ROSS: Thanks for that useful analysis. Refreshing to get an intelligent slant on the figures involved, which incidentally accord with my own layman's interpretation of the DHB Corporate reports. What particularly struck me when perusing these was how small an operation the port is in financial terms and how little there is to be gained from siphoning off a modest proportion of the profits for the town. All the value is in the infrastructure which has been built up little by little over a very long period of time. One can well see why there is now such a clamour to cash in on this legacy.
Charlie would appear to value the port at £400m going by his comment in "Dover docks sell off" on his chatmap back in March:
"The talk is that Gordon Brown has agreed management and employees will get 10% of the sale price. That will be in the region of £40m."
http://elphicke.com/chatmap/Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
I have already told you the value of the port is put at beween £1 and 2billion Charlie and all the others are wrong by saying it would cost less to buy,sorry but I do not make it up in my head that is what it is worth and that is how much it would cost to buy but lost of the port to Dover would be even alot higher than that and to think that a buyer would give funds each year into the town is also wrong no buyer would take the port on with that hanging over their heads.
All you are being told is what they want you to think but I am right and they are all wrong.
Guest 673- Registered: 16 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,388
You have it in a nutshell, Vic. The port can only be sold for what a buyer is prepared to pay for it, bearing in mind the tiny profits that it is making even when all its major users are protesting stridently that they are being charged too much.
The lesson from previous privatisations is that the family silver was sold off for a fraction of what it cost the nation to build up over many generations. This is particularly true in the case of the ports as, for example, the ten ports of Sealink together with all their other assets were sold abroad for the princely sum of £66m at a time when the country was broke as usual but not in the dire economic situation that it is today.
As a rule of thumb, privatisations result in the nation receiving about a quarter of what its assets have cost to build up. The announcement this week of the proposed sale of High Speed 1 (the Channel Tunnel Rail Link) for £1.5 billion is in exactly that ratio. It is expected that the most likely purchaser will be Groupe Eurotunnel S.A., the French owners of the Channel Tunnel.
I would imagine that the Port of Dover would also have to be sold to a foreign buyer as an internal sale from the government to a British buyer would not alleviate the debt of UK PLC one whit.
The small ray of hope in all this is that the port will be knocked down for such a pittance that even the Government will see that it would make so little difference to the huge debt burden hanging over the nation that it is not worth the effort.
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
Sid, that is the answer and that is the one that the people of Dover/Deal should push for.
BarryW, I still dont understand , if Charlie's plan is such a revelation. Why did he not fight his campaign on the back of it?
"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"
Steady on GaryC. Remember, we are on complete opposite sides of the political divide. What will people think?