sharetrader
Page 5 of 17 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 169
  1. #41
    Dilettante
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Down & out
    Posts
    5,407

    Default

    Agree with the sentiments here that this is a very bad look for Sanford and a stain on its otherwise good reputation. The breach itself was a minor one really (record keeping failures onboard) and should have been accepted and dealt with properly by Sanford, rather than obstructing Coast Guard officers doing their job and denying any wrongdoing on their or their crew member's part. A bad performance indeed.

    MM the age of the vessel in this case was not a factor at all.

    I do however not agree with W69 that Sanford pays lip service to sustainability. That is not the experience with them here in NZ where they take their environmental responsibilities very seriously and have for example been consistently at the conservative and outspoken end of the industry with regard to setting of quota levels. They have also worked diligently on improving existing operations and developing new methods to minimize the unavoidable interaction with the environment, with lasting positive results.
    But agree with you W69 that the leadership failed on this issue, resulting in the management culture being brought into question.
    I wonder if the recent management restructure, where overall responsibility of the Pacific operation changed hands, contributed to this fiasco.

    The substantial fines will obviously need to paid but what concern me more is the 3 years probationary period where Sanford vessels can not enter US ports. As far as I understand, Pago Pago is the only port with decent infrastructure to deal with these vessels and their catches in that part of the World so it will be interesting to see how Sanford will operate their fleet up there from now on.

    Although this is not going to have a huge effect on Sanford's performance, I am happy to be out of Sanford at present while watching how this pans out.

  2. #42
    Speedy Az winner69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    37,737

    Default

    Iceman. ....I wasn't really doubting Sanfords commitment to sustainability .....just saying that often other things like making profit and keeping shareholders happy tend to lessen that commitment ....and leaders don't keep reinforcing that commitment ... The culture changes ...and things like what has happened happen

    Maybe lip service the wrong phrase ....but recently maybe the commitment has not really been there




    Y

  3. #43
    percy
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    christchurch
    Posts
    17,221

    Default

    Funny enough 3 of the best performing companies on NZX; RYM,EBO and MFT have retained their commitment.!

  4. #44
    Speedy Az winner69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    37,737

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by percy View Post
    Funny enough 3 of the best performing companies on NZX; RYM,EBO and MFT have retained their commitment.!
    Means a lot eh percy

    Probably means that corporate purpose and values are well and truly embedded in the company culture ... from the boss down to the troops .....and decisions at levels have to pass the test 'is this the way we do things around here?'

    Mind you i would say that cracks (even though small ones) are appearing in Mainfreight as they get bigger and bigger .... think how many deaths and serious injuries to staff (or family as they call them) the last few years

  5. #45
    percy
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    christchurch
    Posts
    17,221

    Default

    Yes I think that is a fair statement.Bigger,more widespread and very different cultures and languages let the cracks get bigger.

  6. #46
    Dilettante
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Down & out
    Posts
    5,407

    Default

    [QUOTE=winner69;390071]
    Probably means that corporate purpose and values are well and truly embedded in the company culture ... from the boss down to the troops .....and decisions at levels have to pass the test 'is this the way we do things around here?'/QUOTE]

    A very valid point you have raised W69 and I suspect complacency has indeed been a contributing factor in this multi million (8-10 in my view) dollar fiasco and damage to reputation. Would be a good thing to bring up at the AGM for someone attending !

  7. #47
    Permanent Newbie
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,496

    Default

    Just talking to someone who may have some idea re the charges laid. My understanding may be a bit confused but ended up only being a lack of record keeping and not for any actual discharge. The record keeping related to a forward compartment not normally checked as little/no chance of discharge into the sea.
    The charges were more likely US authorities over there looking to help the US boats that that fish the same areas. More US protectionism at work. trying to ban access to ports/cannery all part of it. Support from NZ would be good.

  8. #48
    Dilettante
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Down & out
    Posts
    5,407

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron View Post
    Just talking to someone who may have some idea re the charges laid. My understanding may be a bit confused but ended up only being a lack of record keeping and not for any actual discharge. The record keeping related to a forward compartment not normally checked as little/no chance of discharge into the sea.
    The charges were more likely US authorities over there looking to help the US boats that that fish the same areas. More US protectionism at work. trying to ban access to ports/cannery all part of it. Support from NZ would be good.
    That's my understanding too Aaron, that no actual discharge took place. It was a record keeping error, or in fact falsification if my understanding is correct. Sanford then handled this badly by trying to deny anything was out of the ordinary. So I don't think we can blame anything other than failure of Sanford's procedures in this case, with very expensive results. I do note that they have now created a new position of compliance manager which hopefully will ensure such mistakes are not made again.

  9. #49
    Dilettante
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Down & out
    Posts
    5,407

    Default

    I have been hearing on the grapevine for some time now that things are looking good for Sanford so far this year. Very good Tuna catches during the very long and hot summer and prices stable. Deep sea fleet also doing well with main deepwater quotas increasing and looking for steady further increases in the near future.

    It will be interesting to see who will be the new CEO. Rumour is that we have 3 internals in contention and a search on outside the company, both nationally and internationally. While the 3 internal candidates are all highly experienced and suitable for the job, I think it may be time for look for a strong candidate from overseas that can nudge Sanford and the fishing industry in general a bit from the stagnation I feel we have seen in recent year.

    But overall looking good for Sanford which appears to have adjusted its operation to the high dollar and may well benefit significantly when it eventually falls again, whenever that may be !

    I am slowly adding SAN again

  10. #50
    Dilettante
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Down & out
    Posts
    5,407

    Default

    Looks like I am not the only one expecting a good results announcement soon. Only about $3k worth of shares for sale and at much higher than last sale. I am watching this one with interest !

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •