Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Kent Online)   Not news: Ferry company goes into liquidation. News: The firm was award a £13.8 million contract by the UK Government. Fark: when the contract was awarded, the ferry company didn't own any ships   (kentonline.co.uk) divider line
    More: Facepalm, Kent, Tax, Councillor, Thanet councillor Karen Constantine, Universal quantification, Transport Secretary Chris Grayling, Dover's port, ferry firm  
•       •       •

451 clicks; posted to Business » on 23 Sep 2020 at 1:12 PM (8 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



14 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2020-09-23 11:45:31 AM  
That's some piss poor due diligence on the front end of the contract process.

TFA notes that the contract was canceled before any payments were made. Also, this was for freight, not ferry service. Still, this was a waste of time and resources to go through the process and not catch the fact that the applicant didn't possess any boats.
 
Xai [TotalFark]
2020-09-23 12:23:50 PM  
I smell a scam - the directors walk away from this with some very large pay packets and the public foot the bill. Funny that it's based in Farage's local area, isn't it?
 
2020-09-23 1:20:38 PM  

beezeltown: That's some piss poor due diligence on the front end of the contract process.

TFA notes that the contract was canceled before any payments were made. Also, this was for freight, not ferry service. Still, this was a waste of time and resources to go through the process and not catch the fact that the applicant didn't possess any boats.


THis, even though no money changed hands, it seems that checking to see if the company actually owned the vessels needed for the job would have been a prerequisite to giving them the contract.

At any rate money was wasted, far less than the amount of the contract but still unneeded waste.
 
2020-09-23 1:24:40 PM  

beezeltown: That's some piss poor due diligence on the front end of the contract process.

TFA notes that the contract was canceled before any payments were made. Also, this was for freight, not ferry service. Still, this was a waste of time and resources to go through the process and not catch the fact that the applicant didn't possess any boats.


IIRC the taxpayers did have to fork out something like £33m to a competitor though, as settlement for a lawsuit they brought against the government for circumventing tendering processes to award this idiot contract. So yeah, it remains an utter clusterfark.
 
2020-09-23 3:10:59 PM  

beezeltown: That's some piss poor due diligence on the front end of the contract process.

TFA notes that the contract was canceled before any payments were made. Also, this was for freight, not ferry service. Still, this was a waste of time and resources to go through the process and not catch the fact that the applicant didn't possess any boats.


TFA was stupid.

Its common to run services by leasing ships or airplanes. It means that the companies can be quicker to adopt to changing circumstances.

The company seemingly had other problems though.
 
2020-09-23 3:38:39 PM  

Ketchuponsteak: beezeltown: That's some piss poor due diligence on the front end of the contract process.

TFA notes that the contract was canceled before any payments were made. Also, this was for freight, not ferry service. Still, this was a waste of time and resources to go through the process and not catch the fact that the applicant didn't possess any boats.

TFA was stupid.

Its common to run services by leasing ships or airplanes. It means that the companies can be quicker to adopt to changing circumstances.

The company seemingly had other problems though.


Yeah, that's why I said "possess" instead of "own." It appears the company had no means to deliver on the contract at the time the contract was awarded. Ships, railcars, aircraft, drilling rigs, etc. are often not specifically "owned" by their operators for a number of reasons, but this company made promises they couldn't reasonably keep. The initial contract due diligence should suss out who's proposals should be considered.
 
2020-09-23 8:55:18 PM  

Ketchuponsteak: beezeltown: That's some piss poor due diligence on the front end of the contract process.

TFA notes that the contract was canceled before any payments were made. Also, this was for freight, not ferry service. Still, this was a waste of time and resources to go through the process and not catch the fact that the applicant didn't possess any boats.

TFA was stupid.

Its common to run services by leasing ships or airplanes. It means that the companies can be quicker to adopt to changing circumstances.

The company seemingly had other problems though.


Came here to mention the same thing. When Richard Branson bought into Virgin Atlantic (he didn't actually start the airline) they didn't own any planes. Train operators in the UK don't own any trains when they bid for a franchise. Bill Gates didn't have an OS when he agreed to licence an OS to IBM. Acorn told the BBC they had a working microcomputer when they didn't.
Looks like the government decided it wouldn't need this emergency service anyway. Would they company had collapsed had the contract gone ahead? Who knows?
 
2020-09-23 9:27:57 PM  

Ketchuponsteak: beezeltown: That's some piss poor due diligence on the front end of the contract process.

TFA notes that the contract was canceled before any payments were made. Also, this was for freight, not ferry service. Still, this was a waste of time and resources to go through the process and not catch the fact that the applicant didn't possess any boats.

TFA was stupid.

Its common to run services by leasing ships or airplanes. It means that the companies can be quicker to adopt to changing circumstances.

The company seemingly had other problems though.


Going from memory, the company had zero experience at any of the above. Worse all ferries they could have contracted were unavailable for the next 70+ years. This was hashed out on fark a long time ago. It stank to high heaven then and now it's fish guts in the wheel well.

/ They could have used the followup tag and the obvious tag for this one.
// in the old thread we had everything, even a stand up routine from ol' pewterschmidt.
 
2020-09-23 9:30:09 PM  
and speak of the incompetent bloated things, and they shall come.
 
2020-09-23 10:19:59 PM  

Xzano: Going from memory, the company had zero experience at any of the above.


In those threads I also pointed out that though the company had zero track record the actual execs had years of experience in the business.

Xzano: Worse all ferries they could have contracted were unavailable for the next 70+ years.

The people behind Seaborne Freight have many years of Channel ferry experience (Sealink, SeaFrance, MyFerryLink).
One of the ships is the former ro-pax trainferry SEAFRANCE NORD PAS-DE-CALAIS. She has been operating as FRS-owned AL ANDALUS EXPRESS between Motril and Tanger-Med, and is now at anchor near Cadiz.


Funny that in other threads at that time when the threat to Irish trade from having to ship stuff to and from the EU rather than go through the UK the attitude was "Well the Irish can just lease a few dozen ferries".

So there were apparently loads of ferries lying around just ready for Ireland to use but when the UK wants one "there are none available for 70+ years"?

Xzano: in the old thread we had everything, even a stand up routine from ol' pewterschmidt.


Dude, I'm not the one posting bullshiat like "there are no available ferries for 70+ years". What ferry would be contracted for 70+ years? Cite?
I've posted facts and links. You just made stuff up. But that's been the norm for the last four years in Brexit threads.
 
2020-09-23 11:03:33 PM  

Carter Pewterschmidt: Xzano: Going from memory,


You might want to sit down for a minute this will come as a big shock. You aren't the only person in a thread. Ok deep breath, you feeling better. Now congrats on recognizing how to put hyperlinks in a reply hopefully you will be able to recognize when others do so in the future and be able to navigate the aforementioned link.

Oh and note that first part , "going from memory," this is a heads up to any reader that I'm not going to plod through old links to find the relevant information that will pinpoint the exact vectors of a company goin to shiate, when in fact the company has already gone to shiate. So instead what follows are broad brush strokes.

But good to see you are still coming to brexit threads to give a nice stand up routine.

/ Oh and now for that random item you've posted from an old thread, "are you still angry at the condiments?".
// I'll leave it up to you to determine the old thread and any relevance.
/// Now do be quiet, folks are having important conversations. and if you are going to quote shiate, keep the shiate in context. the nick picking shiate can go back to the usenet pools it spawned in. To do any less would be uncivilized.
 
2020-09-24 7:17:22 AM  

Carter Pewterschmidt: Ketchuponsteak: beezeltown: That's some piss poor due diligence on the front end of the contract process.

TFA notes that the contract was canceled before any payments were made. Also, this was for freight, not ferry service. Still, this was a waste of time and resources to go through the process and not catch the fact that the applicant didn't possess any boats.

TFA was stupid.

Its common to run services by leasing ships or airplanes. It means that the companies can be quicker to adopt to changing circumstances.

The company seemingly had other problems though.

Came here to mention the same thing. When Richard Branson bought into Virgin Atlantic (he didn't actually start the airline) they didn't own any planes. Train operators in the UK don't own any trains when they bid for a franchise. Bill Gates didn't have an OS when he agreed to licence an OS to IBM. Acorn told the BBC they had a working microcomputer when they didn't.
Looks like the government decided it wouldn't need this emergency service anyway. Would they company had collapsed had the contract gone ahead? Who knows?


If they had kept their contract, and thus a secure future income, I assume that their bank would extend their credit.
 
2020-09-24 7:21:48 AM  

Xzano: Ketchuponsteak: beezeltown: That's some piss poor due diligence on the front end of the contract process.

TFA notes that the contract was canceled before any payments were made. Also, this was for freight, not ferry service. Still, this was a waste of time and resources to go through the process and not catch the fact that the applicant didn't possess any boats.

TFA was stupid.

Its common to run services by leasing ships or airplanes. It means that the companies can be quicker to adopt to changing circumstances.

The company seemingly had other problems though.

Going from memory, the company had zero experience at any of the above. Worse all ferries they could have contracted were unavailable for the next 70+ years. This was hashed out on fark a long time ago. It stank to high heaven then and now it's fish guts in the wheel well.

/ They could have used the followup tag and the obvious tag for this one.
// in the old thread we had everything, even a stand up routine from ol' pewterschmidt.


Denmark has no problems renting ferries suited for the task, whenever one in use has some sort of emergency. That would be of the same type of what the UK would require.

70+ years seems odd, if that was true, shipyards would be building ferries to meet the demand, rather than closing.

The lack of a proper dock sounds more problematic TBH.

What was this company doing beforehand, or was it created for this purpose?
 
2020-09-24 8:44:03 AM  

Xzano: Carter Pewterschmidt: Xzano: Going from memory,


You might want to sit down for a minute this will come as a big shock. You aren't the only person in a thread. Ok deep breath, you feeling better. Now congrats on recognizing how to put hyperlinks in a reply hopefully you will be able to recognize when others do so in the future and be able to navigate the aforementioned link.

Oh and note that first part , "going from memory," this is a heads up to any reader that I'm not going to plod through old links to find the relevant information that will pinpoint the exact vectors of a company goin to shiate, when in fact the company has already gone to shiate. So instead what follows are broad brush strokes.

But good to see you are still coming to brexit threads to give a nice stand up routine.


I remembered that I'd mentioned the fact that the actual execs had years of experience, and then posted a link to a source citing that the execs had years of experience, so what is the several paragraphs of drivel you posted in aid of? You criticise me for not digging up the old thread? I notice you haven't dug up the old thread to back up your claims....

Xzano: /// Now do be quiet, folks are having important conversations. and if you are going to quote shiate, keep the shiate in context. the nick picking shiate can go back to the usenet pools it spawned in. To do any less would be uncivilized.


Are you going to comment of the fact that they had a ship lined up, that was currently unused and available for lease? Didn't you claim "no ship was available for 70+ years"? Why haven't you provided a cite for that claim?

Ketchuponsteak: What was this company doing beforehand, or was it created for this purpose?


Founded in early 2017, a year before the Brexit contract was announced. So they either anticipated such a deal or it was lucky coincidence. Talk for "huge queues at Dover" etc had been around since the referendum result in 2016 so setting up a service in a different port would be a logical move.
 
Displayed 14 of 14 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.