MMH - Marsden Maritime Holdings

[GTM 3442]

Could some kind person take Mayor Phil to one side and explain why the financial centre in London called Canary Wharf is called Canary Wharf.

Boop boop de do
Marilyn

Is it because it was the main entry port for the canaries they used in the coal mines?

[Scrunch]

Could some kind person take Mayor Phil to one side and explain why the financial centre in London called Canary Wharf is called Canary Wharf.

Boop boop de do
Marilyn

Agreed or nearer to home Docklands in Melbourne. Googling Docklands old and new does the trick.

[Balance]

Phil Goff is a career politician. What else would you expect but piling on more consultants and reports?

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/117...says-new-study

The fat cat empire POA strikes back with its Auckland ratepayer paid NZIER report.

Fatal flaw in the report is that there's no mention of how much Auckland and NZ is paying each year for the traffic congestion, roading & infrastructure spend and maintenance due to the Port being sited where it is.

So lovely, isn't it, for the trucking firms and POA to be so heavily subsidised by everyone else?

I have seen one Report which estimates the cost at $2 billion a year.

[sb9]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/117...says-new-study

The fat cat empire POA strikes back with its Auckland ratepayer paid NZIER report.

Fatal flaw in the report is that there's no mention of how much Auckland and NZ is paying each year for the traffic congestion, roading & infrastructure spend and maintenance due to the Port being sited where it is.

So lovely, isn't it, for the trucking firms and POA to be so heavily subsidised by everyone else?

I have seen one Report which estimates the cost at $2 billion a year.

Here's link to interview with Tony Gibson, CEO of POA. Everyone agrees the port should move and time has come, but no one is taking the bull by horns to make firm decision.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/progr...-possible-move

[mondograss]

He just doesn’t want to lose the income. But of course they’d make a lot in rates if the land was developed, it would be interesting to crunch the numbers and see what the difference actually is. Can’t do much worse than the current dividend surely.

[RTM]

He just doesn’t want to lose the income. But of course they’d make a lot in rates if the land was developed, it would be interesting to crunch the numbers and see what the difference actually is. Can’t do much worse than the current dividend surely.

IMO he should seize this as an opportunity to really really make a difference in Auckland.
This is so so frustrating.
Phil....get outa bed on the other side tomorrow morning. Listen to Auntie Helen.
Help Jacinda do the right thing ! Its gotta go sometime. Make it now ! Lets do this !

[Balance]

He just doesn’t want to lose the income. But of course they’d make a lot in rates if the land was developed, it would be interesting to crunch the numbers and see what the difference actually is. Can’t do much worse than the current dividend surely.

$6 billion of land - just 2% pa return will give the council $120m a year.

[Balance]

https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU19...rt-of-cost.htm

How did this idiot ever got into a leadership position?

He has read enough reports to last 10 lifetimes on POA and he cannot decide on how and what are potentially the best options to shift the port to?

[Balance]

10 THINGS YOU MAY NOT KNOW ABOUT THE PORT ISSUE - FROM NZ HERALD

1. That wall of containers on port land at the bottom of the Strand: they're empty. Any stack three of more high is just storage.

2. The working group talked to 78 companies in the freight business, or impacted by it, and over 90 per cent said they wanted better rail services.

3. The price of goods does not go up, in general, the further they have to travel. Christmas toys cost the same in Ashburton as they do in Auckland. This is because prices are not usually set on a cost-plus basis. So the idea that a longer supply line will increase costs to consumers is debatable, at best.

4. If moving the port and transferring freight haulage to rail succeeds, Auckland probably won't need a new harbour crossing for decades.

5. Short of closing all schools, moving the port would reduce traffic on Auckland roads more than any other single measure.

6. The Port of Tauranga has not been ignored or rejected. The plan says it should expand quickly and take up what capacity it can. But there are geographic constraints. Northport has the bigger potential.

7. The Auckland port currently employs 500 people. But not for much longer. Most of the container operation will be automated, probably next year.

8. Ports of Auckland and consultancy NZIER say GDP will fall by $1.3 billion if goods have to enter the country at Northport and Tauranga and be rail freighted to Auckland. That's an analysis of transport costs, and is disputed by the working group. Further, it doesn't take account of the opportunity cost of keeping the port at Auckland or of developing the whole of Northland on the back of Northport.

9. A 1000-tonne train with a diesel engine can take the load of 30 large trucks, with only a third of the carbon emissions. Emissions from an electrified train are much less again.

10. How many cars can you get on a train? So many, this many - picture shows hundreds.

[Blue Skies]

Nothing definite but looking positive for moving the port. PM has said Auckland is not a long term viable solution for the port, and an announcement on the port to be made later this week by Shane Jones.

Driving along Quay St today, there's a solid wall of rusty containers stacked 6,7,even 8 high, blocking the view of the harbour, and container truck after container truck after container truck grinding their way along the Strand heading for the choked motorway system.