Ok, I’ll bite on this one. A Jones Act company faces a replacement cost of, for example, $250M whereas a foreign FOC company can replace that same ship for $40M. It would make sense to me that the US operator would try to squeeze the maximum life possible out of that ship whereas the FOC guy might look a the costs at the 7.5 year or 10 year drydocking of a fully depreciated ship and compare it to the cost of a new ship and choose to replace the ship. Based on that, it seems that the Jones Act does contribute to an older fleet.
What am I missing?
But to me the counterpoint is to say so what? If the ship is well built and well maintained, what’s wrong with having an older average ship age?