One factor not mentioned in the above quotes is that a great many of the "young & fit" lakers became excess tonnage when all the footers came out. When one footer can carry what five 600+ lakers can carry with one crew and less fuel that's a huge cost differential. Also most of those boats that went by the wayside in the early 80's were straight deckers. With only a few exceptions, the American lakes fleets by 1985 were either built as selfunloaders or a conversion.tarcticus wrote:Aren't those circumstances are exactly why one might worry about the ex-Inland boats? However unlikely...the economy can turn upside down in a year or two. One or two corporate mergers and corporate perspectives on assets and liabilities can change drastically.PDBLK25 wrote:Take a closer look at the "young and fit" Lakers that went to scrap. The '80s were the worst economic times on the Lakes since the Great Depression. Many of the ships scrapped were sold by liquid-cash starved steel firms with new but idle boats. Other boats scrapped (the T-2 & C-4 Conversions) were fuel hogs. As for the American Fortitude -- she is being scrapped by ASC, a firm that prefers MVs, never wanted steamers in the first place, and it's mistakes getting her to scrap make you suspect their true intent. None of this applies to the Sykes or Ryerson.
Economic recession, near depression, of fairly rapid onset in 2008.
Inland to Ispat to Mittal (spun off to CML). All of that change since 1998.
I am an industry outsider with only a geographic connection preceeding my interest in all of this. I would seriously be interested in a more opinions from insiders on whether, in particular the Sykes, can be *reasonably* assumed to be low risk from retirement in the coming decade or two. Would be great to put the thought out of my head.
The Sykes and the Block are very versatile boats and have many years of profitable service ahead of them. If CML ever went under, you can rest assured that LLT/GR would jump at the chance to have them.