Suez blocked by stuck ship!
Discussion
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Unloading 20 000 containers onto a train would make a train longer than the canal itself.20 000 x 40 ft = 800 000 ft = 150 miles.
I’ve seen trains well over a mile long but the have several locomotives , (6-8?), so that 150 mile train would need potentially 1000 ?, hardly feasible.
Talksteer said:
The Israelis already have a pipeline which bypasses the canal, this does go across the Negev, it's transit fees are based on the Suez fee. Oil is the only commodity which it would make sense to do this with.
The Egyptians already have this. An oil pipeline runs from Ain Sukhna to Sidi Kerir. It's usual practice for loaded vlccs bound for Europe to discharge part cargo in Ain Sukhna to o get to a transit draft. Transit the canal then reload at Sidi. Suez Canal Authority cuts Ever Given compensation demand
THE Suez Canal Authority has reduced its nearly $1bn compensation demand against Ever Given, the
boxship whose grounding caused a six-day shutdown of the key waterway in March, to around $600m.
Even $600m is still far more than most sector observers see as justifiable, and protracted
negotiations over the claim are inevitable. Arbitration remains a practical possibility.
Ever Given is entered with the UK Club, which “has seen the public comments made by SCA chairman
Osama Rabie indicating that the SCA has reduced its claim from $916m to $600m”, the International
Group affiliate said.
“The reduced amount has not been reflected in the SCA’s claim filed at court and the Ever Given’s
owners still have not been provided with evidence that would support a claim of this size, which
remains exceptionally large. The Ever Given’s interests continue to negotiate in good faith with the
SCA.”
THE Suez Canal Authority has reduced its nearly $1bn compensation demand against Ever Given, the
boxship whose grounding caused a six-day shutdown of the key waterway in March, to around $600m.
Even $600m is still far more than most sector observers see as justifiable, and protracted
negotiations over the claim are inevitable. Arbitration remains a practical possibility.
Ever Given is entered with the UK Club, which “has seen the public comments made by SCA chairman
Osama Rabie indicating that the SCA has reduced its claim from $916m to $600m”, the International
Group affiliate said.
“The reduced amount has not been reflected in the SCA’s claim filed at court and the Ever Given’s
owners still have not been provided with evidence that would support a claim of this size, which
remains exceptionally large. The Ever Given’s interests continue to negotiate in good faith with the
SCA.”
If SCA big their heels in for too long, the amount will be moot. A large amount of what's on board will, one way or another, perish or be written off. If they stick out for too much, for too long, they then end up with the liability of doing something with the vessel themselves. At a certain point in negotiations it could become a liability, rather than an asset.
Digga said:
If SCA big their heels in for too long, the amount will be moot. A large amount of what's on board will, one way or another, perish or be written off. If they stick out for too much, for too long, they then end up with the liability of doing something with the vessel themselves. At a certain point in negotiations it could become a liability, rather than an asset.
Egyptian street-market haggling methods don't look too smart on the world stage.Simpo Two said:
Digga said:
If SCA big their heels in for too long, the amount will be moot. A large amount of what's on board will, one way or another, perish or be written off. If they stick out for too much, for too long, they then end up with the liability of doing something with the vessel themselves. At a certain point in negotiations it could become a liability, rather than an asset.
Egyptian street-market haggling methods don't look too smart on the world stage.
GliderRider said:
There is a bit of difference between filling the Dead Sea up to its previous, recent history, level, and filling it to the level of the Red Sea. It is 1,412 ft below sea level, so there is an awful lot of land that would be flooded in the process. The Jordanians might not be too happy either, given that one side of it is theirs.
It it buries the Dead Sea Scroll site, can see some people getting excited, not in a good way. Ayahuasca said:
GliderRider said:
There is a bit of difference between filling the Dead Sea up to its previous, recent history, level, and filling it to the level of the Red Sea. It is 1,412 ft below sea level, so there is an awful lot of land that would be flooded in the process. The Jordanians might not be too happy either, given that one side of it is theirs.
It it buries the Dead Sea Scroll site, can see some people getting excited, not in a good way. Cliffe60 said:
Unloading 20 000 containers onto a train would make a train longer than the canal itself.
20 000 x 40 ft = 800 000 ft = 150 miles.
I’ve seen trains well over a mile long but the have several locomotives , (6-8?), so that 150 mile train would need potentially 1000 ?, hardly feasible.
Duh!20 000 x 40 ft = 800 000 ft = 150 miles.
I’ve seen trains well over a mile long but the have several locomotives , (6-8?), so that 150 mile train would need potentially 1000 ?, hardly feasible.
You obviously double stack the containers on the train to overcome this.
Problem solved.
If they started with a ludicrous $1 Bn, now down to $ 680 mil demand, for a few weeks inconvenience what the hell would they be gunning for if the vessel actually broke up in the Canal!!??
its a joke.
I do wonder when will the findings come out of what actually happened.
The world is watching and the longer it drags on the worse the SCA will look. Some carriers will simply not want to take the risk of transiting. Not to mention the underwrites probably asking for additional premiums if and when their ships use it.
its a joke.
I do wonder when will the findings come out of what actually happened.
The world is watching and the longer it drags on the worse the SCA will look. Some carriers will simply not want to take the risk of transiting. Not to mention the underwrites probably asking for additional premiums if and when their ships use it.
zorba_the_greek said:
If they started with a ludicrous $1 Bn, now down to $ 680 mil demand, for a few weeks inconvenience what the hell would they be gunning for if the vessel actually broke up in the Canal!!??
its a joke.
I do wonder when will the findings come out of what actually happened.
The world is watching and the longer it drags on the worse the SCA will look. Some carriers will simply not want to take the risk of transiting. Not to mention the underwrites probably asking for additional premiums if and when their ships use it.
Utter, greedy, mendacious pillocks.its a joke.
I do wonder when will the findings come out of what actually happened.
The world is watching and the longer it drags on the worse the SCA will look. Some carriers will simply not want to take the risk of transiting. Not to mention the underwrites probably asking for additional premiums if and when their ships use it.
If they'd made a reasonable and quantifiably justifiable demand, all would have been resolved, with zero reputational loss or disruption.
Some behind the scenes, strong-arm diplomacy would seem to be the order of the day, for everyone's sake.
Digga said:
Utter, greedy, mendacious pillocks.
If they'd made a reasonable and quantifiably justifiable demand, all would have been resolved, with zero reputational loss or disruption.
Some behind the scenes, strong-arm diplomacy would seem to be the order of the day, for everyone's sake.
Agreed.If they'd made a reasonable and quantifiably justifiable demand, all would have been resolved, with zero reputational loss or disruption.
Some behind the scenes, strong-arm diplomacy would seem to be the order of the day, for everyone's sake.
saaby93 said:
Evoluzione said:
And why it doesnt pull straight across the bendGassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff