No need for JA compliant ships on that run, even if US-flagged, unless they also intend to carry cargo from LA/LB to Hawaii. (Guam does not require US built, only US flag)
I’d imagine they were being sarcastic, and with a splash of dark humor. It’s JA compliant only because it’s being built here. But any shipyard in the world would build the identical ship to spec for less than half the cost and and have it floating in a year. You literally can’t get a deal this bad anywhere else in the world.
When I worked in Korea we put out some of the most complex floating vessels ever built in less than two years. Four years for a box boat is a joke, and a tragic one at that.
And they get away from doing their part in repositioning empties from USWC to Far East, which is an expense for other carriers.
What do they carry from Hawaii to China (beside pineapples)?
Look, I know from your previous posts that you’re a smart guy so I won’t type things here about economies of scale and the need to have domestic shipbuilding capability so that when the likes of china soft or hard pressures the likes of Korea to not build ships for us that we won’t be screwed as I figure you know all that.
The bottom line is that without the Jones Act there would be ZERO domestic commercial shipbuilding business for deep sea vessels. And I (and so far, our Congress), believe that to be unacceptable.
Yeah, I get it, and I’m in favor of the Jones Act. I decided not to use the Maersk EEE example as that was going on when I was overseas as well, because you are certainly correct that you get a much better deal when you’re building 18+ ships.
But as I said in my first post in this thread, these three are $68 million more each than the first two. Thats adjusted for inflation. That’s dollar for dollar, the cost of the first two ships in 2022 dollars, the second three are vastly more expensive.
We all know that US build cost will necessarily be much more than foreign factory shipyards putting out 40-50 hulls per year, for reasons already discussed ad nauseum. But the fact that the disparity appears to be getting much worse is a problem.
Some differences from the first two… LNG capable and LNG ready is a wide gap. For instance, the Inouye didn’t even have the LNG storage tanks installed much less any of the other required equipment to have the engines run on LNG. Second, these new ships will have to be tier III compliant which was not the case with the first 2 ships. How much does an EGR or SCR setup cost? Third, it wouldn’t surprise me if shaft generators were installed on these ships… Frankly, I was shocked to find out that shaft generators were not installed on the first two. Fourth, will they install EGCS systems on these ships from the builders yard? If so, that’s another big upfront expense. Fifth, will they stick with the original 7S90 engine or go with a ‘G’ series long stroke engine for greater efficiency (like on their Kanaloa Class Con-Ro ships)? Extra cost there?
Without the final plans to compare with the original ships, it’s hard to say.
But they DO carry cargo from China to LB, just like the Matson ships are intended to do.
Maybe Matson should start to take their part in the burden of repositioning containers like APL does.
BTW Lots of containers are owned by Leasing companies, some of them US entities.
They would not like it if their property is just left by the wayside by the leases.
I remember reading that Matson is finding some of the project with US Shipbuilding capital funds held by the US government. So it might not be as bad of a deal for them, still not as cheap as foreign ships but it will definitely cost them less than 1 billion.
think they are using CCF - Capital Construction Fund - now from a shaky memory - Ship owners can defer taxes on income earned from operation, these unpaid taxes go into an account - that if used to build another vessel do not have to be repaid - in effect, an interest free loan.
Many years ago when I worked for a US carrier & depending on how you add we received 7 kinds of subsidies. Several were related to Navy requirements. Build this way they give you this much. Seems to me high US Shipyard cost is linked to Navy procurement procedures.
If the government needs access to the vessel on demand or has a specific build requirement paying for a share is not unreasonable how the money is spent another matter. At the time & my level in the company not was not fully aware of the specifics just the effect. Since read “The Abandoned Ocean” good study on American Maritime Policy.
Frankly I’m not sure I’m correct, it’s just a guess, but my thoughts are the Monoa is running now, and the Mahi just laid up an the Moki is Ro-Con, and Horizon didn’t maintain the D-7’s all that well, but like I say,who knows?