MMH - Marsden Maritime Holdings

[Balance]

PS as I understand it under the amendment to the Public Works Act re compulsory acquisition if it is no longer required for the purposes that it was acquired for then it has to be offered back to its original owners (Maoris ) read, BIG BUN FIGHT !!!

No issue as you go to the waterfront, you can see land freed up being used for other purposes (residential & commercial) already. Some are even sold as freehold.

[Scrunch]

No issue as you go to the waterfront, you can see land freed up being used for other purposes (residential & commercial) already. Some are even sold as freehold.

Correct, and even if there was an issue - that's a problem for Auckland City council and its related subsidiaries. Auckland City council collected just under $5b in revenue in 2018/19. It has net assets of $39b. If Auckland City council wanted to find the money to reinvest in a port in Northland, they have the resources to find this, irrespective of what happens to the existing waterfront issue.

For shareholders in Marsden the Auckland city council is only one of many options around additional capital, should it be required.

[mondograss]

Correct, and even if there was an issue - that's a problem for Auckland City council and its related subsidiaries. Auckland City council collected just under $5b in revenue in 2018/19. It has net assets of $39b. If Auckland City council wanted to find the money to reinvest in a port in Northland, they have the resources to find this, irrespective of what happens to the existing waterfront issue.

For shareholders in Marsden the Auckland city council is only one of many options around additional capital, should it be required.

The land around the railway lines was part of Ngati Whatua's settlement, so they own it, develop it and lease it out. But the main port footprint is 100% reclaimed land I believe, so no claim available there.

[whatsup]

The land around the railway lines was part of Ngati Whatua's settlement, so they own it, develop it and lease it out. But the main port footprint is 100% reclaimed land I believe, so no claim available there.

Sea shore and other issues that the Maori want resolved sometime in the future !

[RTM]

https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/natio...?ocid=msedgntp

For those interested.

[traineeinvestor]

https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/natio...?ocid=msedgntp

For those interested.

Thanks for posting. A couple of quotes:

"Previous studies have noted dredging would have to be done annually, but Young said continuous dredging would be required and both the channel and the entrance to the harbour would need to be dredged."

"Brown said UNSCIS had dismissed Manukau Harbour right at the start based on safety concerns after it received a warning from the insurance industry that it would not insure ships that docked at Manukau Harbour."

I would assume that either of these issues would be sufficient to kill any thoughts of turning Manukau into Auckland's port.

[Aaron]

I might have to concede to whatsup's view.

Shane Jones has admitted not being able to get consensus for a move North. Manukau harbour apparently has the inside running.

Dredging and insurance versus distance from up North.

Not good for the price of MMH.

[RTM]

Thanks for posting. A couple of quotes:

[FONT="]"Previous studies have noted dredging would have to be done annually, but Young said continuous dredging would be required and both the channel and the entrance to the harbour would need to be dredged."
[/FONT]
"Brown said UNSCIS had dismissed Manukau Harbour right at the start based on safety concerns after it received a warning from the insurance industry that it would not insure ships that docked at Manukau Harbour."

I would assume that either of these issues would be sufficient to kill any thoughts of turning Manukau into Auckland's port.

Yes, agree....we seem to be heading down the paralysis by analysis route faster and faster. Another $2mil, another report. Maybe this is the real reason that whatsup might be right. We just can not make a decision and get on with it.

[RTM]

I might have to concede to whatsup's view.

Shane Jones has admitted not being able to get consensus for a move North. Manukau harbour apparently has the inside running.

Dredging and insurance versus distance from up North.

Not good for the price of MMH.

We are getting some of the building blocks established for moving the port.
Refurbishing the railway north.
I think the spur to North Port is to be constructed.
These will be needed when the decision is eventually made. Hope it has not rusted away by then.

[tango]

Manukau seems more logical geographically but if insurers won’t cover the ships then it’s a no go. Also as someone who was brought up in the area the sand bar and the dredging are a huge issue. It doesn’t seem viable.

Politically/economically Northland need this more. The refinery is on its last legs. The economy is going to tank and job creation is limited. There was talk of stimulating the north with more cruise ships but that’s not going to happen! The north is going to need some strong campaigning to get this over the line