Return to Great Lakes & Seaway Shipping Great Lakes & Seaway Shipping Online
Discussion Boards
Please click to visit our sponsor
It is currently November 27, 2021, 11:47 pm

FAQ | Instructions | Help
Search for:



Post a reply
Username:
Subject:
Message body:
Enter your message here, it may contain no more than 60000 characters. 

Font size:
Font color
Options:
BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are OFF
Disable BBCode
Do not automatically parse URLs
Question
What is the word before the "&" in the header of this Discussion Board?:
This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
   
Upload attachment
If you wish to attach one or more files enter the details below.
Filename
File comment
 
   

Topic review - Ships And Shipping Funds
Author Message
  Post subject:  Re: Ships And Shipping Funds  Reply with quote
Andrew wrote:
Doubling? Wow, then its much worse than people have thought. Preliminary numbers from the first appraisal said $20 million.


That "appraisal" came from a fireman in Sturgeon Bay - hardly an authority on shipboard repairs.
Post Posted: October 14, 2021, 8:40 am
  Post subject:  Re: Ships And Shipping Funds  Reply with quote
Quote:
In the worst shape is CN/GLF, who has half their ships at the wall this year. Munson is in good shape and so is the Anderson and Clarke, though both of them need repowering. Callaway needs work and repowering, which doesn't exactly put her at death's door, but with talk of CN trying to sell off the fleet and exit the shipping business, were that to happen and a competitor buy them out, I don't see them putting money into the Callaway. Blough could easily be the odd one out as being under 1000 but too big to haul stone regularly, and once again, if a competitor picks them up, I don't see them dropping 20 million into fixing her. Were a competitor like VTB pick up the fleet, or part of it, rest assured, the AAAs would end up as barges.


I don't see VTB purchasing any vessels from competetors in the near future. They just built a new barge, and dumped some considerable money into two tugs. I am genuinly interested in the future of the Joe Thompson barge. Thats one of the older barges out here, and is definetly a work horse. It seems to be in good shape. However, paint is clearly neglected on their vessel hulls.
Post Posted: October 13, 2021, 7:57 pm
  Post subject:  Re: Ships And Shipping Funds  Reply with quote
Doubling? Wow, then its much worse than people have thought. Preliminary numbers from the first appraisal said $20 million.
Post Posted: October 12, 2021, 12:43 pm
  Post subject:  Re: Ships And Shipping Funds  Reply with quote
Andrew wrote:

LLT/Rand will be interesting to watch, because they will likely slowly shift their ASC assets in to take the place of the aging vessels in their fleet. Cuyahoga is likely getting close to the end of the line, Ojibway is anyone's guess. Michipicoten and Saginaw probably have extra time since they were repowered about a decade ago.

LLT has been working internally on what is needed to get another decade out of the Cuyahoga.

Quote:
Blough could easily be the odd one out as being under 1000 but too big to haul stone regularly, and once again, if a competitor picks them up, I don't see them dropping 20 million into fixing her.


Try at least doubling that amount to fix the Blough.
Post Posted: October 12, 2021, 10:46 am
  Post subject:  Re: Ships And Shipping Funds  Reply with quote
I think on the Canadian side we will continue to see a slow purge of the older vessels as newer ones take their place, since they can be built overseas for considerably less money. Within the next ten to fifteen years, I suspect that there will be nothing left in Algoma or CSL besides Equinox and Trillium ships. The next on the block are probably Oakglen, Frontenac, the Viken bulkers, Leitch, Dool, Algoma Transport, and CSL Tadoussac. Since the cost effectiveness of building overseas is considerably less than it is to build in Canada, it doesn't make sense to upgrade the old ships. Since these ships spend a lot of time on the seaway, the locks and exposure to salt put a lot more wear on these ships than US ones. Normally, you expect to get 30-50 years out of a Canadian bulker.

LLT/Rand will be interesting to watch, because they will likely slowly shift their ASC assets in to take the place of the aging vessels in their fleet. Cuyahoga is likely getting close to the end of the line, Ojibway is anyone's guess. Michipicoten and Saginaw probably have extra time since they were repowered about a decade ago.

On the US side, things look good for Interlake and Cliffs. Interlake has put considerable money into upgrading their older vessels, which should see them ply the lakes for many more years. Their building the Mark Barker is filling a niche that cannot be filled by the Sherwin, but it also says that the fleet is financially stable. Cliffs has enough business to keep the Sykes and Block busy, and the Sykes received major engine upgrades back in 2016. The Sykes making trips to Duluth is a very good sign, because normally what kept her off Lake Superior in the past was that it wasn't worth the cost of sending her up, but apparently the demand is there. Cliffs also plans to expand their operations and build some new mills, so that could bode well for the entire great lakes.

In the worst shape is CN/GLF, who has half their ships at the wall this year. Munson is in good shape and so is the Anderson and Clarke, though both of them need repowering. Callaway needs work and repowering, which doesn't exactly put her at death's door, but with talk of CN trying to sell off the fleet and exit the shipping business, were that to happen and a competitor buy them out, I don't see them putting money into the Callaway. Blough could easily be the odd one out as being under 1000 but too big to haul stone regularly, and once again, if a competitor picks them up, I don't see them dropping 20 million into fixing her. Were a competitor like VTB pick up the fleet, or part of it, rest assured, the AAAs would end up as barges.

Alpena is in good shape, her 4,000 hp 1942-era turbine was in good enough shape to repair after a fire back in 2016 as opposed to barging her, so that bodes well. However, I think Alpena will inevitably face the same fate as the St. Marys Challenger, when that day will come, again, is anyone's guess.

Then one has to remember the IMO exhaust upgrades which will supposedly take effect in 2024. Which vessels will get upgrades/will the Jones Act intervene and allow for an exception for Great Lakes vessels, or allow an extension? Anyone's guess. But were there to be no extension, it puts every ship on the lakes in a tough spot, so I think upgrades will happen. Remember, the cargo has to get moved by something, and repairs are cheaper than newbuilds. If a hull is in good shape, there's no reason to think that it will get kept. The last time a good hull went to the heap on the American side was the Courtney Burton, and that was a freak deal. Before that, it had been a while.

Steel mills are in transition now, but I think they will continue to operate on the lakes in some capacity. I don't see the steel industry leaving the lakes, because the easiest, cheapest, and most environmentally friendly way to get it from the iron range to the plants is by ship. Cliffs is supposedly building some new ones soon. Time will tell.
Post Posted: October 12, 2021, 8:38 am
  Post subject:  Ships And Shipping Funds  Reply with quote
Just a curious question. With the state of the economy and the demand for steel, what will drive the decisions to spend money on ships that need maintenance and/or upgrades? With many lakers approaching increased age, upgrades will definately be needed. Will more modern ships sail while older ones sit a the wall?
Post Posted: October 9, 2021, 10:07 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours



Return to Great Lakes & Seaway Shipping  
Copyright Boatnerd.com All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Use of this site is based on the Terms of Use
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group