Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
16 August 2010
22:4565778I have now done this 3times and lost it 3times,so my last try tonight.
Is the DHB being open to the public about the portand sell of it?
I do not think they are,They are telling us about the bigger Traffic Growth of the port over the next 3years,but we can see that is not working out that way.
This is how I see it.in five years time we will have only one ferry company in Dover and that will be PO by then they will have much bigger ships then the ones they have today,so that means less sailings to.
I think that the members of the D.H.B know this to and want out now with one last big payoff each before all this happens.There will be no need for the new Ferry Terminal 2 and with only one ferry company working the port there is lots of room for any other passengers or tourist ships to use
There would be need of some develoment but not the big ones they are saying we need.All it would need is the deeper births for Cruise ships,and without all the ferrys coming in and out they could use both sides of the port.I think this is one big cover up just to get out by the members of the DHB."But I could be wrong but also I could be right."
I think that if the town is to get any funding out of the port we need to look at a bigger marina and a lot better one where owers will stop and stay in Dover for a few days not like the ones on the Cruise ships who just stay in the port for afew hours then off again.
16 August 2010
22:5265781You'd be great on a conspiracy theory show Vic.
Bigger ships for P&O doesn't equate to less sailings, just more traffic carried in the same number as now.
DFDS are moving in, it will be at least 5 years before they recoup investment.
SeaFrance will survive through illegal French subsidies, the unions will see to that.
So, 3 ferry companies at least.
Traffic is lower now because of the recession. In three years time we will be reaping the benefits of proper fiscal management in the UK and emerging strongly into the commercial markets.
So, I don't share your doom and gloom scenario and feel very upbeat about the direction our nation is now heading in.
Just a shame there appear to be fiscal shenanigans going on at a local level now. Still, with a Labour majority still, it is rather inevitable I suppose.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
16 August 2010
22:5765783stunned by that comment sid, the new giant vessels will mean fewer sailings as a matter of course.
ok sea chance will be around for the reasons that you mention the rest will find things a struggle though.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
16 August 2010
23:0165785I am adding to my post of above so please keep reading it ,because if I let it run for some time then it goes and i have to do it all again.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
16 August 2010
23:0665786We can build on the keyside like other ports even London has done it real nice homes and the owers have their boats mored up just outside the front door this is the kind of development that we need and would bring in funding for our own shops etc,it would bring with it more jobs and cash to our area,.
16 August 2010
23:1065788Good idea Vic, but I thought that was part of the DHB Master Plan?
16 August 2010
23:1165789Howard, the last time P&O introduced bigger ships they increased the frequency. I don't expect that to happen again, but I'd be surprised if they sailed less, the economics don't work if the ships are tied up.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
16 August 2010
23:2165790No it is not at this very time I have in front of me what they saying needs to be done I have all the bookets about it. nowhere do they say new homes on the keyside, also the new Marina will be smaller,this is their wording not mine.
The marina business does not sigifcanty contribute to the ports profitability and operationally is not required within the T2 proposals. Therefore, from a purely commercial perspective, building a new marina to replace the current capacity being infilled as part of t2 would be hard to justify.
I put it to the members of this forum that the town of Dover take more cash from the public useing the Marina than all the Cruise ships and the ferrys. They will take away alot of the Marina and put a very small one outside which when at low tide can not be used.They are saying that a new marina will be bigger then the ones we have, but sorry I do not see that happing.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
17 August 2010
07:1265806Vic
Within the Western Docks redevelopment. there will be ferry terminals, a hotel, apartments and retail outlets as well as a new/enlarged marina.
No extra cruise terminals it is true, but they will be modernised.
DHB is NOT the monster you paint it to be; they may not be universally loved, but their development will also benefit Dover.
Roger
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
17 August 2010
08:1265823I have in front of me the Strategic REview of the port of Dover 2009,also with that I have the DHB Corporate Structure for the Port of Dover,2009, and the DHB plans on the next generation ferry terminal 2. I also have the same for 2008,2007,2006.
on the 2009 they have the forcasts of the traffic Growth and they put that at going up each year, but what we see at the port ferry companys pulling out that means there is not the trade for them all, I do not agree with their Traffic Growth,with the cost of fuel going up and up, I think the Growth will go down in real terms .
We already hear of more train companys going to use the Railway tunnel,that means less trade for Dover ,+what I see is more goods trains also useing the railway making a very big fuel saving,the trains can load up in the UK and take the goods right across the whole of the continent and the same with tourist,and passengers,and they will hire cars when they get to where they are going,we are seeing that happing now in just the UK Tourist are going round by air,train,bus and when there get there they hire a bus.
there is already talk about a new tunnel being build we will end up just like the Darford crossing,and the D,H,B, also see it this way and their members want to get out.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
17 August 2010
08:2165826The current plans for T2 is a cut through so that Wellington Dock can continue to be used.
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
17 August 2010
08:5165827You are right PAUL I have the plans in front of me, but in forward thinking I feel it will not go ahead as the plans show the new buyer if there is one will be looking at the Curernt Performance and wait and see what happens to the Growth of the port before he or they spend out on any next Genertion ferry terminal if the forcast is wrong and what I am saying is right then it will not go ahead, and the ferry companys will need their 64million back long before the port is sold off anyway.
Sue Nicholas- Location: river
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 6,024
17 August 2010
09:0165831Roger is spot on .We have received presentations bt DHB and that is certainly the pictute I have in my head .
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
17 August 2010
11:4765853Not often that I defend Vic on here, but he does have a point on the T2 development. The 'proposed' hotel/apartment/retail developments shown at every exhibition and presentation (with artists impressions of how they could look) exist only as ideas. The proposals only state that the sites will be made available for another developer to "possibly" put in such facilities. Should this remind anyone of the DTIZ?
Other possible problems with the design include the moving of the lifeboat station to inside the suggested ferry routes and behind the areas designated as 'yacht holding' (where they wait for a gap in the ferries to reach open sea). And, of course, there is the access roads. The proposed layout offers no relief for the blocked in residents of Aycliffe and would extend our problems with traffic to any proposed development of the Western Heights.
However, it should also be considered that the proposed T2 is just that, a proposal. What DHB are doing is offering the port for sale "with planning permission" and any purchaser is almost certain to have their own ideas of how to proceed with any redevelopment.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
17 August 2010
11:5265854No Development will be done of anykind by the DHB unless it stays in there ownhands if the sale goes ahead then it will be up to the new owners and at this time that would not happen.
The DHB are trying to con the public by saying they will do the T2 but that is not true because there will be no DHB it would have gone,
Guest 697- Registered: 13 Apr 2010
- Posts: 622
18 August 2010
21:3566120Thanks for refering me to this thread, Vic. It's clear that the ferry companies are having a tough time at present, but that has more to do with the economy than a long-term decline in ferry use. It is true to say the ferry industry has been going through a structural market change in which freight is now the most important element.
As a result, as the economy contracted, so did freight traffic. The reality is that we don't manufacture much any more in the UK, so rest assured, as the economy improves - as it inevitably will at some stage - so the traffic will increase. Whilst the economy is having an impact on traffic predictions, DHB are more than likely right in their assessment of the long-term growth.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
18 August 2010
21:5566125The long term picture between 1990 and 2005 was a doubling of lorries from 1 million to 2 million. You cannot build trends of extrapolate from times of recession.
If dover doesn't prepare for further increases when recession is over (like Kevin says nearly everything we live on is now imported) then it will come to a stand-still and they will move to other routes......
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 643- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 1,321
18 August 2010
22:3966131Let's face it, at the moment nothing is happening in Dover. If the port is sold then maybe, just maybe, we will have people in charge who will have the finance and the get up and go attitude to make something more out of what is one of the busiest ports in the world. Surely this can only bring work to our town in the shape of jobs, more visitors, more trade and a more interesting town in general. One liner company has already pulled out of Dover, preferring Southampton which has more facilities for its passengers, how long before others follow? Some of you lot moan and wring your hands at the state of Dover but when there is a chance to improve things those same people get up in arms and try to stop progress. How crazy is that? I say bring it on - I'd love to see Dover moving forward, and soon.
There's always a little truth behind every "Just kidding", a little emotion behind every "I don't care" and a little pain behind every "I'm ok".
Guest 673- Registered: 16 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,388
19 August 2010
12:1466180Jacqui, your post appears to be contradictory. You say that this is one of the busiest ports in the world. That is no accident. It is because it is a Trust Port and all the profits have accordingly been continuously reinvested in the immense expansion which has made this possible. In a sense, we are getting this port for nothing, as the nation owns it and does not charge us a rental fee for the privilege. It has to be acknowledged that it is a curious arrangement and one that we are fortunate to have.
Once it is privatised, the new owners will have to use these profits to pay the interest on the massive sum they will have invested, and will also need to provide a return for their shareholders. Any money for expansion can only come from raising the berthing fees charged to port users still higher. At what point the latter decide that operating from Dover is no longer tenable and the cross-channel, cruise and cargo trade moves elsewhere time will tell. Privatisation simply has to make the port more expensive to use as the infrastructure will no longer be provided free gratis. Whether this results in the port ceasing to grow, or even going into decline, we shall have to see.
Regarding your point regarding MSC Cruises shifting to Southampton. The reason that we have this flourishing cruise traffic in the first place is that the Trust Port constructed two cruise terminals and won a lot of the traffic that previously would have used Southampton and other ports. Cruise companies will vary which ports to use dependent on the itineraries they choose to offer. MSC are running as many cruises southwards to Spain and Portugal next year as they are northwards to the Norwegian fjords and the Baltic. It is six of one and half a dozen of the other which port they choose to base their cruises from. The same applies to other operators and Dover may equally benefit from other companies transferring the other way.
Guest 697- Registered: 13 Apr 2010
- Posts: 622
19 August 2010
19:5666202I would have said that Dover is one of the busiest ferry ports in the world because of its geography - as the shortest crossing between the UK and mainland Europe. Trust Port status has clearly played a part in its development as any profits made are reinvested in the port. However, I don't think ownership alone has determined its success.
Clearly a commercial operator would want to make a return, pay dividends to shareholders, and interest on any loans. But surely it's the ability of a private operator to raise funds for future investment that is one of the key aspects of the current plans for restructuring. I think everyone is agreed that what Dover needs is investment.
The port would actually be a very attractive investment, precisely because of its location. Whilst the cruise and general cargo trades are a more competitive market, the cross-Channel business will inevitably be drawn to Dover/Calais - hence the closure of peripheral routes - and providing any investor with a stream of regular cashflow.
