Mark W. Barker Build Cost

Discussion board focusing on Great Lakes Shipping Question & Answer. From beginner to expert all posts are welcome.
GuestfromEU
Posts: 359
Joined: December 7, 2014, 10:33 am

Re: Mark W. Barker Build Cost

Unread post by GuestfromEU »

I cannot say exactly what the cost would be but USD 90m is low. There is a Norwegian company that owns several US-flag 50,000 DWT tankers which are bareboat chartered to US shipping companies. The Norwegian holding company issued a public report recently stating newbuild cost in 2022 is projected around USD 175m.

https://www.amscasa.com/wp-content/uplo ... v-2022.pdf

A bit larger still, Matson Navigation recently signed a contract to build three new containerships in Philadelphia with total project cost USD 1 billion. For reference, those containerships would cost approx USD 90m each to build in Korea (the ships are Hyundai design). I believe the Trillium class of Panamax self unloaders built for CSL c.2014-15 cost approx USD 70m each at Chengxi yard in China. Take China prices and multiply by 4 to get approx USA build cost.
Guest

Re: Mark W. Barker Build Cost

Unread post by Guest »

President of Rand Logistics has mentioned to the LLT crew on a ship visit that Interlake was spending roughly 90 million. This was the projected cost estimate in 2019
GuestfromEU
Posts: 359
Joined: December 7, 2014, 10:33 am

Re: Mark W. Barker Build Cost

Unread post by GuestfromEU »

Guest wrote: December 3, 2022, 9:59 am How are all the new Chinese and Croatian built ships working out in terms of quality and reliability?
It is an apples to oranges comparison. If comparing the ships built on the lakes in the 1960-1970 timeframe, any new ship will have more issues due to significantly more automation and more complex machinery. The actual machinery is just as reliable, if not more. Remember, companies like MAN stopped most production in Europe perhaps 10 years ago and moved to the Far East. Same with many European makers, or now they produce machinery in Europe and Asia, with many shipowners selecting the Asian built machinery for 50% of the cost. Equipment makers offer the same warranty and have the same quality control in both locations - it is bad for business to sell an unreliable product. Ships built 50+ years ago were also designed for 30-40 years of service life. Ocean ships have been built for 20-30 year max service life for many years, now 20 year maximum is the normal. With new emissions regulations a ship built to be compliant now may be beyond economical upgrade life in a shorter time. The truth is nobody knows exactly how the emissions rules will affect the industry as the technology does not yet exist to achieve the IMO mandates by 2050, at least in any economical form.

The cost to build the new Matson ships increased significantly since the last construction a few years ago. That is a result of new mandated technology and machinery cost increases amongst others. Then one needs to consider the cost of machinery. If a Japanese pump maker is selling a basic, simple, reliable design for $25.000 dollars and a European maker sells similar for $45.000 dollars, multiplied by the numerous pumps on a ship, it is easy to see how initial costs accumulate. That is a generic example but the point is made. Shipowners have to balance quality vs. cost and shipowners are notoriously conservative with money. Times changed in many ways since the 1970's and it is unfair to compare a ship like the Equinox or Trillium class with something built at Vickers or Collingwood in the 1960's in terms of "reliability". Reliability is no longer defined as running forever without problems. Now it is taken as an acceptable time running vs. time under repair and cost of repairs, parts, etc. There are different outlooks on repairs too. For example at many companies it is accepted to replace an electric motor under 10 or 20 kW because the cost to repair exceeds the cost of a new motor. Bearings are not expensive but the labour to pay the ship's electrician to spend one day to overhaul a motor is greater than the hour it takes to install a new motor. If the damaged motor needs re-winding or other repairs, the cost certainly is not a wise investment. That outlook is based on repairs at shipyards in China, so the variance in cost differential is multiplied by a greater amount at USA or Canadian shipyards.

The Mark Barker was likely in the 175-200 million dollar range, depending on when the construction contract stated steel prices would be invoiced. The price of shipbuilding plate steel has increased exponentially from 2020 to present. Combined with other equipment shortages and cost increases the total cost could vary a bit. The Mark Barker is a smaller ship than the Matson container ships so less steel is required, and the hull form is less complex which further reduces the cost of plate bending and block erection.
cpfan
Posts: 790
Joined: March 29, 2010, 2:04 pm
Location: Welland Ontario

Re: Mark W. Barker Build Cost

Unread post by cpfan »

Guest wrote: December 3, 2022, 9:59 am How are all the new Chinese and Croatian built ships working out in terms of quality and reliability?
May still be too early to tell. The first of CSL's Trillium Class was delivered in 2012 (Baie Comeau). The Algoma Equinox was delivered in 2013. I'm not aware of any big issues, but I'm not really in a position to hear much.
Guest

Re: Mark W. Barker Build Cost

Unread post by Guest »

How are all the new Chinese and Croatian built ships working out in terms of quality and reliability?
Guest

Re: Mark W. Barker Build Cost

Unread post by Guest »

Interlake Steamship has not disclosed how much the Mark W. Barker cost to build.

It's highly unlikely that she cost less to build than a Chinese or Croatian ship. I would think that American shipyard workers are paid far more than any shipyard workers in those two countries.

BTW, a very nicely written article on the Mark W. Barker: https://professionalmariner.com/article ... -w-barker/
Guest

Re: Mark W. Barker Build Cost

Unread post by Guest »

Neither party to the transaction cares to share financials. To give you an idea of US shipbuilding costs, Matson is spending a billion dollars for 3 US built container ships, which is about 5 times what a Chinese build would cost. So multiply what the Canadians are paying for their similar sized boats times 5.
Guest

Mark W. Barker Build Cost

Unread post by Guest »

How much did the Mark W. Barker build cost in total?

Was she built for less than the Chinese and Croatian built ships?
Post Reply