Condor Ferries confirms it will leave Weymouth next spring

The Austal 102 high speed ferry which will operate between the Channel Islands and Poole

Former town mayor Ray Banham

Dave Price of the hoteliers association

Julie Cleaver, president of the Weymouth and Portland Chamber of Commerce

Phil Say chairman of Weymouth Pavilion

First published in News
Last updated
by

CONDOR Ferries has confirmed it will leave Weymouth next spring.

Its new larger high-speed ferry, the Austal 102, will sail from Poole instead after Weymouth’s Port was deemed unsuitable and required £10 million worth of investment to make it viable.

However, Condor has said that the arrangement with Poole Harbour is a ‘medium-term’ arrangement to allow Weymouth and Portland Borough Council time to outline its plans for the port.

Condor will continue to operate the Vitesse vessel from Weymouth until Easter next year. The Austal will replace the Vitesse and Condor Express on a single sailing from the UK to the Channel Islands.

The company told Weymouth and Portland Borough Council earlier this year that £10million was required to refurbish Berth 1 at the harbour to allow the Austal to continue the cross-Channel ferry service.

The request came after the council spent £4million refurbishing the crumbling Berth 3 to allow Condor to return to the town but the company said the refurbished berth was unsuitable for the larger ferry.

If work to refurbish the berth did take place, it would be a minimum of two years from 2015 that Condor could return to Weymouth.

The news of Condor’s departure for Weymouth has been greeted with dismay by local residents and business leaders, with calls for the council to look elsewhere for ferry operators to sail from the harbour.

Others have said that this will give the council a clean slate in seeking a better future for Weymouth.

Councillor Mike Byatt, chairman of the management committee at Weymouth and Portland Borough Council, said: “This is news we have been aware of for some time that Condor Ferries has bought a new vessel that cannot fit into Weymouth Harbour meaning they may not be able to operate from Weymouth in the short term.

“This does, however, need to be set in the context of the town centre masterplan. We are developing a strategic vision for the future of the town over the next 10 years and as part of that we are looking at all the options regarding the peninsula site including whether they continue to operate from Weymouth or not.

“The borough council has already agreed it cannot afford to invest the £10 million required to upgrade the harbour to accommodate the bigger vessel, but we can help Condor look at other investment options including applications for Local Enterprise Partnership funding.

“We understand this is a commercial decision for Condor and will continue to have discussions with them about their medium and long term future operations.”

Condor has invested £50million into its fleet and the new state-of-the-art vessel will come into service in spring 2015.

James Fulford, Condor chief executive, said: “We plan to introduce the 102 in spring 2015 and, in the months ahead, we will be sharing more details about this superb new ship and announcing ways in which Islanders can be involved in our preparations.”

“Poole is a modern and well-connected port, well-liked by our customers.

“We recognise that this is disappointing news for Weymouth.

“However, given the need for berth improvements and an Environmental Impact Assessment, Weymouth is not currently in a position to accommodate the 102.

“Reaching a medium-term arrangement with Poole will give certainty to our customers, our Islands, and Poole Harbour Commissioners, while also allowing enough time for Weymouth & Portland Borough Council to establish their long-term plans for their port.

“We will continue to operate Condor Vitesse from Weymouth until spring 2015.”

  • Tony Rowbotham, chairman of the Guernsey Chamber of Commerce, said he was disappointed at the news but said the new vessel would secure the service for the island.

He said: “I think it’s more important for the island to have a modern, more reliable service to the United Kingdom and if we have to pay more for the service that is the price we have to pay.

“It’s disappointing that it will stop going to Weymouth but from the island’s point of view we recognise that Condor needed a new ferry and that can travel in rougher seas and so we have fewer cancellations, which is the most important thing.”

Popular route to come to an end in ferry changes

FORMER town mayor Ray Banham set up a Friends of Weymouth and Jersey group to celebrate the close relationship between the two towns, fostered by the ferry link.

Mr Banham said: “It has come as a bit of a shock, but it wasn’t completely unexpected. I really thought Condor might contribute something towards the berth extension and in actual fact I think Condor might be worse off following the move due to higher fuel costs and 98 per cent of the employees are based in Weymouth.

“We have got a year to look elsewhere and hope other companies come into the harbour, there are other options. It’s a huge blow to the town.

“There will be a year to look at options and if we can’t get other companies in or extend Condor then it will have an even bigger impact on the town. It will affect the local economy massively. It’s surprising how many people come down the day before and stop here.

“It is also quite a popular route and it will affect the relationships that have built up during the links.”

‘We need to operate more sailings’

WEYMOUTH and Portland Borough Councillor Ian Bruce has said if Condor stays in Weymouth, or other companies come into the town, there should be more sailings out of the harbour.

Cllr Bruce said: “I have said all along for us to be a ferry port we need more than one ferry sailing a day and it would be possible for Condor or for anyone else to sail at least twice a day.

“If we were to continue having a ferry in Weymouth we need another customer or another boat from Condor. We are almost asking the wrong question regarding the £10 million needed for repair works, because if there is only one vessel in use from the berth it’s unviable.

“I’m disappointed Condor didn’t go with the vessel that fits the Weymouth. If you run a ferry between ports then buy a ferry that fits the port. The difference with Weymouth is that they can come alongside the berth.

“The council will continue to work with Condor to see if any of their vessels, including the Austal 102, will fit into the existing facilities and continue to use Weymouth port.

New business opportunities in vessel move

WE WERE here before Condor, and we will be here after.

That was the defiant rallying call of one local business leader as business owners and managers reacted to the news of Condor’s departure from the town.

Business leaders said the local economy will be ‘massively’ affected by Condor leaving and have called on the council to explore the opportunities following the departure.

Dave Price, chairman of the hoteliers association, said: “This is a great shame.

“We now need to show Condor that we can do without them as well – the council and everybody needs to start looking to the future.

“We were here before Condor and we will be here after them. I personally think we need to forget about Condor and look after ourselves, look at developing Portland Port and Weymouth Port and then build on that and try to get more companies in.”

Julie Cleaver, president of the Weymouth and Portland Chamber of Commerce, described the news as a “bitter blow”.

Mrs Cleaver said: “We knew it was on the cards for a while now but it’s a bitter blow for local businesses.

“Being brought up in the town I can always remember there being a cross channel link and it’s incredibly sad to see that end.

“These are difficult times for business and key business decisions have to be made. The council hasn’t got £10 million to spend and Condor hasn’t got it either and they have to look at it from a business point of view. We need to remember businesses did have a taste of it when Condor was away for two years, but it will affect them massively.

“Taxis, hotels and restaurants will be hit the hardest, because of people staying the night before or the night after a ferry arrived.

“We do have other things coming up, such as challenge Weymouth and the town centre master-plan, and I’m not saying it’s a replacement, but there are different markets emerging that we as a business community now need to look at differently.”

Phil Say chairman of Weymouth Pavilion, said: “It’s a pity for the people locally that work with and on the Condor Ferries.

“Perhaps it will open up for other companies to use the site and the facilities. It’s a pity that £4 million was spent repairing the berth for just over one year, but as they say, every cloud has a silver lining.

Martin James, from Kelston Guest House, said: “It will affect us quite badly. It did the last time they pulled out two years ago. It never picked up to the same levels as before, but I think we will lose 10-15 per cent of our business when they leave.

“Anything that takes tourism away from Weymouth is negative. Take tourism away from the town and there will be nothing left and it is a shame they are leaving as they are one of the biggest employers.”

Gary Thorne, from Boaters Guest House, said: “We will definitely lose business, we will miss it. Over the past few years we have had quite a bit of business from it and we wish they would stay here.”

Comments (66)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:02am Thu 21 Aug 14

islandman says...

If huge cruise ships are able to berth in Portland, why don't they stop them coming and allow Condor to have access, at least they'de be here daily.
If huge cruise ships are able to berth in Portland, why don't they stop them coming and allow Condor to have access, at least they'de be here daily. islandman
  • Score: -19

7:27am Thu 21 Aug 14

FerryFan says...

Because Portland would need a specialised berth for high speed craft, which needs to be armoured against the thrust and scour of the vessels, which would need a lot of money spent building. Poole's is already armoured, the Express uses it. The propulsion systems of high speed vessels like this scour the seabed a LOT more than the large cruise ships and the berths needs specific armouring which Portland, I believe would have to do.
Because Portland would need a specialised berth for high speed craft, which needs to be armoured against the thrust and scour of the vessels, which would need a lot of money spent building. Poole's is already armoured, the Express uses it. The propulsion systems of high speed vessels like this scour the seabed a LOT more than the large cruise ships and the berths needs specific armouring which Portland, I believe would have to do. FerryFan
  • Score: 10

7:29am Thu 21 Aug 14

arlbergbahn says...

islandman wrote:
If huge cruise ships are able to berth in Portland, why don't they stop them coming and allow Condor to have access, at least they'de be here daily.
Have you looked there lately to see if there's a convenient ro-ro berth they can use? Whether there's space to accommodate 254 cars at one time? Whether there's any kind of suitable passenger terminal facilities? whether the road system in Portland port and the road access through Castletown would be remotely suitable?
And the cruise ships should be stopped coming to Portland because the only thing that matters is to bend over backwards for Condor?
[quote][p][bold]islandman[/bold] wrote: If huge cruise ships are able to berth in Portland, why don't they stop them coming and allow Condor to have access, at least they'de be here daily.[/p][/quote]Have you looked there lately to see if there's a convenient ro-ro berth they can use? Whether there's space to accommodate 254 cars at one time? Whether there's any kind of suitable passenger terminal facilities? whether the road system in Portland port and the road access through Castletown would be remotely suitable? And the cruise ships should be stopped coming to Portland because the only thing that matters is to bend over backwards for Condor? arlbergbahn
  • Score: 15

7:32am Thu 21 Aug 14

arlbergbahn says...

Coun. Ian Bruce (failed MP) once again showing how firm a grasp he's got on reality.

“I’m disappointed Condor didn’t go with the vessel that fits the Weymouth. If you run a ferry between ports then buy a ferry that fits the port."

If you run a ferry service, surely the best approach is to acquire the vessel best suited for you.
Coun. Ian Bruce (failed MP) once again showing how firm a grasp he's got on reality. “I’m disappointed Condor didn’t go with the vessel that fits the Weymouth. If you run a ferry between ports then buy a ferry that fits the port." If you run a ferry service, surely the best approach is to acquire the vessel best suited for you. arlbergbahn
  • Score: 15

7:38am Thu 21 Aug 14

arlbergbahn says...

And why does the Echo and the Council keep talking about the need to "Refurbish" Berth 1? It wouldn't need refurbishing, it would need constructing a completely new one. This is hardly practical.
Oh, and good to see failed MP Coun. Ian Bruce has a firm grasp of how to run a successful business. “I’m disappointed Condor didn’t go with the vessel that fits the Weymouth. If you run a ferry between ports then buy a ferry that fits the port."
Surely the best approach would be to find a vessel that's best suited for your requirements, and if one of the current ports you use (on a very small-scale basis, just one sailing a day) isn't suitable, well, that's their hard luck.
And why does the Echo and the Council keep talking about the need to "Refurbish" Berth 1? It wouldn't need refurbishing, it would need constructing a completely new one. This is hardly practical. Oh, and good to see failed MP Coun. Ian Bruce has a firm grasp of how to run a successful business. “I’m disappointed Condor didn’t go with the vessel that fits the Weymouth. If you run a ferry between ports then buy a ferry that fits the port." Surely the best approach would be to find a vessel that's best suited for your requirements, and if one of the current ports you use (on a very small-scale basis, just one sailing a day) isn't suitable, well, that's their hard luck. arlbergbahn
  • Score: 17

7:39am Thu 21 Aug 14

arlbergbahn says...

Sorry, the previous comment hadn't come up when refreshed the page, so I repeated it, as it turned out unnecessarily. I wasn't trying to spam, honest.
Sorry, the previous comment hadn't come up when refreshed the page, so I repeated it, as it turned out unnecessarily. I wasn't trying to spam, honest. arlbergbahn
  • Score: 4

7:42am Thu 21 Aug 14

Portland Rupert says...

It's going to be very difficult to attract anther ferry operation to weymouth because of the deal that condor have agreed with guernsey and jersey. This is that anther operator will ony be allowed on the route if they offer the same service commitment as Condor. This means that any new operator would have to offer a fast ferry service AND a conventional ferry. This is going a very big ask, and could not be serviced from Weymouth alone.
It's going to be very difficult to attract anther ferry operation to weymouth because of the deal that condor have agreed with guernsey and jersey. This is that anther operator will ony be allowed on the route if they offer the same service commitment as Condor. This means that any new operator would have to offer a fast ferry service AND a conventional ferry. This is going a very big ask, and could not be serviced from Weymouth alone. Portland Rupert
  • Score: 11

7:49am Thu 21 Aug 14

islandman says...

FerryFan wrote:
Because Portland would need a specialised berth for high speed craft, which needs to be armoured against the thrust and scour of the vessels, which would need a lot of money spent building. Poole's is already armoured, the Express uses it. The propulsion systems of high speed vessels like this scour the seabed a LOT more than the large cruise ships and the berths needs specific armouring which Portland, I believe would have to do.
Thanks Ferryfan, I can now not only dismiss this thought, but ensure I don't hear it again from my wife who keeps saying..............
.................
[quote][p][bold]FerryFan[/bold] wrote: Because Portland would need a specialised berth for high speed craft, which needs to be armoured against the thrust and scour of the vessels, which would need a lot of money spent building. Poole's is already armoured, the Express uses it. The propulsion systems of high speed vessels like this scour the seabed a LOT more than the large cruise ships and the berths needs specific armouring which Portland, I believe would have to do.[/p][/quote]Thanks Ferryfan, I can now not only dismiss this thought, but ensure I don't hear it again from my wife who keeps saying.............. ................. islandman
  • Score: 5

8:08am Thu 21 Aug 14

Get a grip says...

islandman wrote:
If huge cruise ships are able to berth in Portland, why don't they stop them coming and allow Condor to have access, at least they'de be here daily.
Portland is owned and controlled by Portland Port.

Presumably they have thought about this and decided against getting involved.
[quote][p][bold]islandman[/bold] wrote: If huge cruise ships are able to berth in Portland, why don't they stop them coming and allow Condor to have access, at least they'de be here daily.[/p][/quote]Portland is owned and controlled by Portland Port. Presumably they have thought about this and decided against getting involved. Get a grip
  • Score: 5

8:15am Thu 21 Aug 14

Rocksalt says...

I have asked this before without success, but will try again. Does anyone have any concrete evidence as to value of the business that the ferry brings to the town. All I ever see are anecdotal experiences of individual B&B owners ( which I don't doubt for a minute) and figures as to the total value ( which I do doubt as they appear to have been plucked from mid air).

Similarly, how many people who work for Condor actually live in the Borough? Of these people, how many are well paid officers and how many are seasonal staff ?

Without clarity and transparency about these things it's very difficult to assess whether or not this is a mortal blow, as some describe it, or a relatively modest set back that might be addressed through investment in alternative developments.

Incidentally, it's disappointing if Councillor Bruce's imagination stretches no further than finding an alternative ferry operator. Is that it ?
I have asked this before without success, but will try again. Does anyone have any concrete evidence as to value of the business that the ferry brings to the town. All I ever see are anecdotal experiences of individual B&B owners ( which I don't doubt for a minute) and figures as to the total value ( which I do doubt as they appear to have been plucked from mid air). Similarly, how many people who work for Condor actually live in the Borough? Of these people, how many are well paid officers and how many are seasonal staff ? Without clarity and transparency about these things it's very difficult to assess whether or not this is a mortal blow, as some describe it, or a relatively modest set back that might be addressed through investment in alternative developments. Incidentally, it's disappointing if Councillor Bruce's imagination stretches no further than finding an alternative ferry operator. Is that it ? Rocksalt
  • Score: 21

8:35am Thu 21 Aug 14

Simon 1965 says...

This is the problem with councillors - insufficient knoeledge. Condor only run one fast craft out of Weymouth as it is sufficient for the loadngs. At peak times, they can run a second trip per day with the same boat (something they can`t do at Poole ironically). Does councillor Bruce expect ferry companies to run three or four sailings out of Weymouth per day, most of which will be empty?

The problem with councillor Byatt`s ten year plan is that it will probably take ten years for anything to be agreed, which will almost certainly recommend a big new marina funded by residential development of the ferry terminal.

This is why is was so important to retain a ferry service as you will now be looking at a a big derelict space for many years to come.

Simon N.
This is the problem with councillors - insufficient knoeledge. Condor only run one fast craft out of Weymouth as it is sufficient for the loadngs. At peak times, they can run a second trip per day with the same boat (something they can`t do at Poole ironically). Does councillor Bruce expect ferry companies to run three or four sailings out of Weymouth per day, most of which will be empty? The problem with councillor Byatt`s ten year plan is that it will probably take ten years for anything to be agreed, which will almost certainly recommend a big new marina funded by residential development of the ferry terminal. This is why is was so important to retain a ferry service as you will now be looking at a a big derelict space for many years to come. Simon N. Simon 1965
  • Score: 0

8:43am Thu 21 Aug 14

cosmick says...

Well councillor Bruce, we now see one of the reasons we are in the position of the ferry going. YOU ARE NOT FIT TO DO THE JOB YOU DO WITHREGARDS THE FERRY AND WEYMOUTH HARBOUR. Its a joke that you and other members and Councillors are unable to see the loss to Weymouth. The jobs lost the money lost in all areas not just b/b but the spend money ie, passing trade to local shops , garages,food outlets cafes ect. Sadly people will now be put off from there jobs and the local councillors will be like fish out of water, with no ideas how to replace them or come up with any ideas of cost effective employment.
Its time to get councillors that are able to deal with the challange ahead.
Sadly that most of the councillors are up to the level of bussiness sence required.
They and WPBC can take the blame for this position we are left in.
Who takes the hit with money WE DO.
Well councillor Bruce, we now see one of the reasons we are in the position of the ferry going. YOU ARE NOT FIT TO DO THE JOB YOU DO WITHREGARDS THE FERRY AND WEYMOUTH HARBOUR. Its a joke that you and other members and Councillors are unable to see the loss to Weymouth. The jobs lost the money lost in all areas not just b/b but the spend money ie, passing trade to local shops , garages,food outlets cafes ect. Sadly people will now be put off from there jobs and the local councillors will be like fish out of water, with no ideas how to replace them or come up with any ideas of cost effective employment. Its time to get councillors that are able to deal with the challange ahead. Sadly that most of the councillors are up to the level of bussiness sence required. They and WPBC can take the blame for this position we are left in. Who takes the hit with money WE DO. cosmick
  • Score: 6

8:56am Thu 21 Aug 14

PHonnor says...

I'm not too sure how much more can be said, either by another story by the ECHO or commenters but do believe its time those who put themselves forward for election, business groups, think tanks and anyone else who has an input into this master plan for Weymouth step up to the mark. Plans may well be in place but time for talking is running out and its now time for action as Condor is leaving next spring.
I'm not too sure how much more can be said, either by another story by the ECHO or commenters but do believe its time those who put themselves forward for election, business groups, think tanks and anyone else who has an input into this master plan for Weymouth step up to the mark. Plans may well be in place but time for talking is running out and its now time for action as Condor is leaving next spring. PHonnor
  • Score: 7

9:21am Thu 21 Aug 14

scubadude says...

To me it seems mind-boggling incompetence on both sides is to blame, W&PBC should never have let the existing berth get into a state where it needed 3million of repairs on the other hand Condor should have been in constant dialog with the council about its requirements- you do not simply wake up one day and drop £50mil on a second hand boat, you plan for it for years... Both are as bad as each other.
However I do think Condor have been particularly underhand waiting until the council committed to the berth repair before dropping the new ship bomb- arguably if they had said- " before you start, we are thinking of getting a bigger vessel, could we work on a different berth instead?" things might have been different.... that is of course IF the council weren't in the loop, I would not be at all surprised to hear they knew and ignored the information, they seem well able to ignore everything residents say, why not a multi-million pound customer as well?
To me it seems mind-boggling incompetence on both sides is to blame, W&PBC should never have let the existing berth get into a state where it needed 3million of repairs on the other hand Condor should have been in constant dialog with the council about its requirements- you do not simply wake up one day and drop £50mil on a second hand boat, you plan for it for years... Both are as bad as each other. However I do think Condor have been particularly underhand waiting until the council committed to the berth repair before dropping the new ship bomb- arguably if they had said- " before you start, we are thinking of getting a bigger vessel, could we work on a different berth instead?" things might have been different.... that is of course IF the council weren't in the loop, I would not be at all surprised to hear they knew and ignored the information, they seem well able to ignore everything residents say, why not a multi-million pound customer as well? scubadude
  • Score: 12

10:17am Thu 21 Aug 14

FerryFan says...

islandman wrote:
FerryFan wrote:
Because Portland would need a specialised berth for high speed craft, which needs to be armoured against the thrust and scour of the vessels, which would need a lot of money spent building. Poole's is already armoured, the Express uses it. The propulsion systems of high speed vessels like this scour the seabed a LOT more than the large cruise ships and the berths needs specific armouring which Portland, I believe would have to do.
Thanks Ferryfan, I can now not only dismiss this thought, but ensure I don't hear it again from my wife who keeps saying..............

.................
No problems!! It is something I only learnt when the present Condor berth had to be repaired, there was a lot of discussion then about how high speed craft damage the berths with their waterjets. Having watched the Normandie Express waterjets in action from some vids, they are like massive water cannons/horizontal fountains and the rate the water gets fired out of them in incredible. The berths have to be armoured with rock I think. Pity you can't upload vids here, I know where to lay my hands on one, although not sure if it is available to publicly share, it is on a Facebook page, not sure if on you tube. Astonishing!!
[quote][p][bold]islandman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FerryFan[/bold] wrote: Because Portland would need a specialised berth for high speed craft, which needs to be armoured against the thrust and scour of the vessels, which would need a lot of money spent building. Poole's is already armoured, the Express uses it. The propulsion systems of high speed vessels like this scour the seabed a LOT more than the large cruise ships and the berths needs specific armouring which Portland, I believe would have to do.[/p][/quote]Thanks Ferryfan, I can now not only dismiss this thought, but ensure I don't hear it again from my wife who keeps saying.............. .................[/p][/quote]No problems!! It is something I only learnt when the present Condor berth had to be repaired, there was a lot of discussion then about how high speed craft damage the berths with their waterjets. Having watched the Normandie Express waterjets in action from some vids, they are like massive water cannons/horizontal fountains and the rate the water gets fired out of them in incredible. The berths have to be armoured with rock I think. Pity you can't upload vids here, I know where to lay my hands on one, although not sure if it is available to publicly share, it is on a Facebook page, not sure if on you tube. Astonishing!! FerryFan
  • Score: 2

10:24am Thu 21 Aug 14

FerryFan says...

FerryFan wrote:
islandman wrote:
FerryFan wrote:
Because Portland would need a specialised berth for high speed craft, which needs to be armoured against the thrust and scour of the vessels, which would need a lot of money spent building. Poole's is already armoured, the Express uses it. The propulsion systems of high speed vessels like this scour the seabed a LOT more than the large cruise ships and the berths needs specific armouring which Portland, I believe would have to do.
Thanks Ferryfan, I can now not only dismiss this thought, but ensure I don't hear it again from my wife who keeps saying..............


.................
No problems!! It is something I only learnt when the present Condor berth had to be repaired, there was a lot of discussion then about how high speed craft damage the berths with their waterjets. Having watched the Normandie Express waterjets in action from some vids, they are like massive water cannons/horizontal fountains and the rate the water gets fired out of them in incredible. The berths have to be armoured with rock I think. Pity you can't upload vids here, I know where to lay my hands on one, although not sure if it is available to publicly share, it is on a Facebook page, not sure if on you tube. Astonishing!!
Ahaaaa - it is on you tube, just google "normamdie express waterjets".

Wow! - this ship will be replacing Barfleur for a while while she goes to have her modifications done next year, she is really cool.
[quote][p][bold]FerryFan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]islandman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FerryFan[/bold] wrote: Because Portland would need a specialised berth for high speed craft, which needs to be armoured against the thrust and scour of the vessels, which would need a lot of money spent building. Poole's is already armoured, the Express uses it. The propulsion systems of high speed vessels like this scour the seabed a LOT more than the large cruise ships and the berths needs specific armouring which Portland, I believe would have to do.[/p][/quote]Thanks Ferryfan, I can now not only dismiss this thought, but ensure I don't hear it again from my wife who keeps saying.............. .................[/p][/quote]No problems!! It is something I only learnt when the present Condor berth had to be repaired, there was a lot of discussion then about how high speed craft damage the berths with their waterjets. Having watched the Normandie Express waterjets in action from some vids, they are like massive water cannons/horizontal fountains and the rate the water gets fired out of them in incredible. The berths have to be armoured with rock I think. Pity you can't upload vids here, I know where to lay my hands on one, although not sure if it is available to publicly share, it is on a Facebook page, not sure if on you tube. Astonishing!![/p][/quote]Ahaaaa - it is on you tube, just google "normamdie express waterjets". Wow! - this ship will be replacing Barfleur for a while while she goes to have her modifications done next year, she is really cool. FerryFan
  • Score: 2

10:44am Thu 21 Aug 14

MrTomSmith says...

islandman wrote:
If huge cruise ships are able to berth in Portland, why don't they stop them coming and allow Condor to have access, at least they'de be here daily.
Its got nothing to do with the Cruise Ships HOW MANY MORE TIMES?
[quote][p][bold]islandman[/bold] wrote: If huge cruise ships are able to berth in Portland, why don't they stop them coming and allow Condor to have access, at least they'de be here daily.[/p][/quote]Its got nothing to do with the Cruise Ships HOW MANY MORE TIMES? MrTomSmith
  • Score: 7

10:48am Thu 21 Aug 14

MrTomSmith says...

arlbergbahn wrote:
And why does the Echo and the Council keep talking about the need to "Refurbish" Berth 1? It wouldn't need refurbishing, it would need constructing a completely new one. This is hardly practical.
Oh, and good to see failed MP Coun. Ian Bruce has a firm grasp of how to run a successful business. “I’m disappointed Condor didn’t go with the vessel that fits the Weymouth. If you run a ferry between ports then buy a ferry that fits the port."
Surely the best approach would be to find a vessel that's best suited for your requirements, and if one of the current ports you use (on a very small-scale basis, just one sailing a day) isn't suitable, well, that's their hard luck.
Agree. Councillor Ian Bruce needs to retire. Everything he says here is complete rubbish
[quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: And why does the Echo and the Council keep talking about the need to "Refurbish" Berth 1? It wouldn't need refurbishing, it would need constructing a completely new one. This is hardly practical. Oh, and good to see failed MP Coun. Ian Bruce has a firm grasp of how to run a successful business. “I’m disappointed Condor didn’t go with the vessel that fits the Weymouth. If you run a ferry between ports then buy a ferry that fits the port." Surely the best approach would be to find a vessel that's best suited for your requirements, and if one of the current ports you use (on a very small-scale basis, just one sailing a day) isn't suitable, well, that's their hard luck.[/p][/quote]Agree. Councillor Ian Bruce needs to retire. Everything he says here is complete rubbish MrTomSmith
  • Score: 6

10:48am Thu 21 Aug 14

MrTomSmith says...

arlbergbahn wrote:
And why does the Echo and the Council keep talking about the need to "Refurbish" Berth 1? It wouldn't need refurbishing, it would need constructing a completely new one. This is hardly practical.
Oh, and good to see failed MP Coun. Ian Bruce has a firm grasp of how to run a successful business. “I’m disappointed Condor didn’t go with the vessel that fits the Weymouth. If you run a ferry between ports then buy a ferry that fits the port."
Surely the best approach would be to find a vessel that's best suited for your requirements, and if one of the current ports you use (on a very small-scale basis, just one sailing a day) isn't suitable, well, that's their hard luck.
Agree. Councillor Ian Bruce needs to retire. Everything he says here is complete rubbish
[quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: And why does the Echo and the Council keep talking about the need to "Refurbish" Berth 1? It wouldn't need refurbishing, it would need constructing a completely new one. This is hardly practical. Oh, and good to see failed MP Coun. Ian Bruce has a firm grasp of how to run a successful business. “I’m disappointed Condor didn’t go with the vessel that fits the Weymouth. If you run a ferry between ports then buy a ferry that fits the port." Surely the best approach would be to find a vessel that's best suited for your requirements, and if one of the current ports you use (on a very small-scale basis, just one sailing a day) isn't suitable, well, that's their hard luck.[/p][/quote]Agree. Councillor Ian Bruce needs to retire. Everything he says here is complete rubbish MrTomSmith
  • Score: 3

11:54am Thu 21 Aug 14

WykeReg says...

Nothing chills the blood quicker than hearing a politician utter words such as ''''master plan" and "strategic vision for the town."

For so many years it's been said that town planners have wrought more damage on towns and cities than the Luftwaffe could ever have done.

As a port with centuries of history you'd think that 'master plans' would have included investments in the port to make it suitable for whatever comes along. But that's the problem with such plans, their creators aren't 'masters' of anything.
Nothing chills the blood quicker than hearing a politician utter words such as ''''master plan" and "strategic vision for the town." For so many years it's been said that town planners have wrought more damage on towns and cities than the Luftwaffe could ever have done. As a port with centuries of history you'd think that 'master plans' would have included investments in the port to make it suitable for whatever comes along. But that's the problem with such plans, their creators aren't 'masters' of anything. WykeReg
  • Score: 5

11:56am Thu 21 Aug 14

Just-an-Opinion says...

How is all of this such a shock???

http://www.dorsetech
o.co.uk/news/1046353
4.Harbour_wall_cost_
branded__a_farce_/

from the article "Coun Petherick added: “It’s common industry knowledge that Condor is looking to get bigger boats, and they will not fit into berth three."
How is all of this such a shock??? http://www.dorsetech o.co.uk/news/1046353 4.Harbour_wall_cost_ branded__a_farce_/ from the article "Coun Petherick added: “It’s common industry knowledge that Condor is looking to get bigger boats, and they will not fit into berth three." Just-an-Opinion
  • Score: 4

12:23pm Thu 21 Aug 14

FerryFan says...

WykeReg wrote:
Nothing chills the blood quicker than hearing a politician utter words such as ''''master plan" and "strategic vision for the town."

For so many years it's been said that town planners have wrought more damage on towns and cities than the Luftwaffe could ever have done.

As a port with centuries of history you'd think that 'master plans' would have included investments in the port to make it suitable for whatever comes along. But that's the problem with such plans, their creators aren't 'masters' of anything.
Hear that all the time in Bournemouth and Poole - I treat statements like that with a large yawn. Think most people do in most towns with those kinds of statements. Town centre vision in Bournemouth I think, in our case just loads of large developments housing multiplexes, chain restaurants and apartments , apartments that are not going to be cheap.
Or else student blocks by the dozen housing hundreds of these youngsters. We really want a bus hub in the town centre - no it is going to be a large complex, this council has no idea either. So I agree about these 'master plan' things, they rarely include what residents really want.
[quote][p][bold]WykeReg[/bold] wrote: Nothing chills the blood quicker than hearing a politician utter words such as ''''master plan" and "strategic vision for the town." For so many years it's been said that town planners have wrought more damage on towns and cities than the Luftwaffe could ever have done. As a port with centuries of history you'd think that 'master plans' would have included investments in the port to make it suitable for whatever comes along. But that's the problem with such plans, their creators aren't 'masters' of anything.[/p][/quote]Hear that all the time in Bournemouth and Poole - I treat statements like that with a large yawn. Think most people do in most towns with those kinds of statements. Town centre vision in Bournemouth I think, in our case just loads of large developments housing multiplexes, chain restaurants and apartments , apartments that are not going to be cheap. Or else student blocks by the dozen housing hundreds of these youngsters. We really want a bus hub in the town centre - no it is going to be a large complex, this council has no idea either. So I agree about these 'master plan' things, they rarely include what residents really want. FerryFan
  • Score: 4

12:35pm Thu 21 Aug 14

PHonnor says...

FerryFan wrote:
WykeReg wrote:
Nothing chills the blood quicker than hearing a politician utter words such as ''''master plan" and "strategic vision for the town."

For so many years it's been said that town planners have wrought more damage on towns and cities than the Luftwaffe could ever have done.

As a port with centuries of history you'd think that 'master plans' would have included investments in the port to make it suitable for whatever comes along. But that's the problem with such plans, their creators aren't 'masters' of anything.
Hear that all the time in Bournemouth and Poole - I treat statements like that with a large yawn. Think most people do in most towns with those kinds of statements. Town centre vision in Bournemouth I think, in our case just loads of large developments housing multiplexes, chain restaurants and apartments , apartments that are not going to be cheap.
Or else student blocks by the dozen housing hundreds of these youngsters. We really want a bus hub in the town centre - no it is going to be a large complex, this council has no idea either. So I agree about these 'master plan' things, they rarely include what residents really want.
Thing is, you can ask 100 residents what they want and hear 100 different ideas, there are always going to be some who nose is put out of joint and as we have seen in the past, if you try and please everyone nothing gets built and that is not an option anymore.
[quote][p][bold]FerryFan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WykeReg[/bold] wrote: Nothing chills the blood quicker than hearing a politician utter words such as ''''master plan" and "strategic vision for the town." For so many years it's been said that town planners have wrought more damage on towns and cities than the Luftwaffe could ever have done. As a port with centuries of history you'd think that 'master plans' would have included investments in the port to make it suitable for whatever comes along. But that's the problem with such plans, their creators aren't 'masters' of anything.[/p][/quote]Hear that all the time in Bournemouth and Poole - I treat statements like that with a large yawn. Think most people do in most towns with those kinds of statements. Town centre vision in Bournemouth I think, in our case just loads of large developments housing multiplexes, chain restaurants and apartments , apartments that are not going to be cheap. Or else student blocks by the dozen housing hundreds of these youngsters. We really want a bus hub in the town centre - no it is going to be a large complex, this council has no idea either. So I agree about these 'master plan' things, they rarely include what residents really want.[/p][/quote]Thing is, you can ask 100 residents what they want and hear 100 different ideas, there are always going to be some who nose is put out of joint and as we have seen in the past, if you try and please everyone nothing gets built and that is not an option anymore. PHonnor
  • Score: 6

12:35pm Thu 21 Aug 14

JamesYoung says...

The ferry industry has been consolidating and battling lower margins for years. To my mind what has happened is inevitable. I suspect that it's value to Weymouth is in any case overstated. Councilor Bruce may be wrong in some of his comments, but he is right in one thing: if you have one customer (Condor) then you have a risk.
My view: let them go
, recognise that port traffic of the kind that Weymouth harbour can handle is in long term decline, develop the peninsula and look at options for the harbour itself (larger marina for example). An all weather water park, decent bowling rink and restaurants would attract more "tourist nights" than a quick overnight stop before catching a ferry.
The ferry industry has been consolidating and battling lower margins for years. To my mind what has happened is inevitable. I suspect that it's value to Weymouth is in any case overstated. Councilor Bruce may be wrong in some of his comments, but he is right in one thing: if you have one customer (Condor) then you have a risk. My view: let them go , recognise that port traffic of the kind that Weymouth harbour can handle is in long term decline, develop the peninsula and look at options for the harbour itself (larger marina for example). An all weather water park, decent bowling rink and restaurants would attract more "tourist nights" than a quick overnight stop before catching a ferry. JamesYoung
  • Score: 9

12:38pm Thu 21 Aug 14

JamesYoung says...

WykeReg wrote:
Nothing chills the blood quicker than hearing a politician utter words such as ''''master plan" and "strategic vision for the town."

For so many years it's been said that town planners have wrought more damage on towns and cities than the Luftwaffe could ever have done.

As a port with centuries of history you'd think that 'master plans' would have included investments in the port to make it suitable for whatever comes along. But that's the problem with such plans, their creators aren't 'masters' of anything.
Realistically, though, with ships getting bigger and more specialised, Weymouth harbour was never going to be a long term asset for ferries, cargo or cruise ships.
[quote][p][bold]WykeReg[/bold] wrote: Nothing chills the blood quicker than hearing a politician utter words such as ''''master plan" and "strategic vision for the town." For so many years it's been said that town planners have wrought more damage on towns and cities than the Luftwaffe could ever have done. As a port with centuries of history you'd think that 'master plans' would have included investments in the port to make it suitable for whatever comes along. But that's the problem with such plans, their creators aren't 'masters' of anything.[/p][/quote]Realistically, though, with ships getting bigger and more specialised, Weymouth harbour was never going to be a long term asset for ferries, cargo or cruise ships. JamesYoung
  • Score: 5

12:59pm Thu 21 Aug 14

Dorset Voyager says...

Perhaps someone with a lot more knowledge than me could explain why the new ship won't fit into Weymouth. I know that its 16metres longer than the present vessels, but we've had 2 of those in port at the same time. It has the same beam of 27meters, Perhaps it's draft is a problem. Many thanks in advance.

I posted the above yesterday but have not had a reply fron anyone. Perhaps somebody in the know could enlighten me. Many thanks.
Perhaps someone with a lot more knowledge than me could explain why the new ship won't fit into Weymouth. I know that its 16metres longer than the present vessels, but we've had 2 of those in port at the same time. It has the same beam of 27meters, Perhaps it's draft is a problem. Many thanks in advance. I posted the above yesterday but have not had a reply fron anyone. Perhaps somebody in the know could enlighten me. Many thanks. Dorset Voyager
  • Score: 4

1:06pm Thu 21 Aug 14

cosmick says...

JamesYoung wrote:
The ferry industry has been consolidating and battling lower margins for years. To my mind what has happened is inevitable. I suspect that it's value to Weymouth is in any case overstated. Councilor Bruce may be wrong in some of his comments, but he is right in one thing: if you have one customer (Condor) then you have a risk.
My view: let them go
, recognise that port traffic of the kind that Weymouth harbour can handle is in long term decline, develop the peninsula and look at options for the harbour itself (larger marina for example). An all weather water park, decent bowling rink and restaurants would attract more "tourist nights" than a quick overnight stop before catching a ferry.
James you put many comments on this site that i agree with. But the WPBC, and the COUNCILLORS said they ( if i am right) said they were talking to other ferry firms. Now that we have come to this who were they and what made them fall by the wayside. I do not think the ideas you put forward as a sound investment.
The port and harbour can be made good again but it needs planning and a commitment from WPBC in order that our assetts are not sold off.
I have some great ideas (i think) but whats the point of putting them forward to this load of wasters we have running the place now.
I belive we have councillors there for there egos and not the good of Weymuoth And Portland.
[quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: The ferry industry has been consolidating and battling lower margins for years. To my mind what has happened is inevitable. I suspect that it's value to Weymouth is in any case overstated. Councilor Bruce may be wrong in some of his comments, but he is right in one thing: if you have one customer (Condor) then you have a risk. My view: let them go , recognise that port traffic of the kind that Weymouth harbour can handle is in long term decline, develop the peninsula and look at options for the harbour itself (larger marina for example). An all weather water park, decent bowling rink and restaurants would attract more "tourist nights" than a quick overnight stop before catching a ferry.[/p][/quote]James you put many comments on this site that i agree with. But the WPBC, and the COUNCILLORS said they ( if i am right) said they were talking to other ferry firms. Now that we have come to this who were they and what made them fall by the wayside. I do not think the ideas you put forward as a sound investment. The port and harbour can be made good again but it needs planning and a commitment from WPBC in order that our assetts are not sold off. I have some great ideas (i think) but whats the point of putting them forward to this load of wasters we have running the place now. I belive we have councillors there for there egos and not the good of Weymuoth And Portland. cosmick
  • Score: 1

1:07pm Thu 21 Aug 14

islandman says...

Thanks Ferryfan, seen the video. Noted the comment that the fierceness of the jets, can fill an Olympic pool in 6 secs.
Thanks Ferryfan, seen the video. Noted the comment that the fierceness of the jets, can fill an Olympic pool in 6 secs. islandman
  • Score: 1

1:13pm Thu 21 Aug 14

Techie says...

In everything I've read about this, I've seen nothing at all to suggest that Condor won't be back if the issues around the berth can be sorted out. It's worth noting that they describe the agreement they have with Poole as medium-term. If WPBC can sort the funding out in principle they have a golden opportunity to get this business back in Weymouth.

As for who knew what when, once it was determined that the wall alongside berth 3 was in the state it was there was no way it could have been left in that state. Condor for their part maintain that at the time they had no plans around Austal 109, and it must be remembered that she was built speculatively in 2009 and has been sat around waiting to be sold since then, so it is entirely possible such a purchase could have happened fairly quickly.
In everything I've read about this, I've seen nothing at all to suggest that Condor won't be back if the issues around the berth can be sorted out. It's worth noting that they describe the agreement they have with Poole as medium-term. If WPBC can sort the funding out in principle they have a golden opportunity to get this business back in Weymouth. As for who knew what when, once it was determined that the wall alongside berth 3 was in the state it was there was no way it could have been left in that state. Condor for their part maintain that at the time they had no plans around Austal 109, and it must be remembered that she was built speculatively in 2009 and has been sat around waiting to be sold since then, so it is entirely possible such a purchase could have happened fairly quickly. Techie
  • Score: -2

1:19pm Thu 21 Aug 14

Rocksalt says...

Techie wrote:
In everything I've read about this, I've seen nothing at all to suggest that Condor won't be back if the issues around the berth can be sorted out. It's worth noting that they describe the agreement they have with Poole as medium-term. If WPBC can sort the funding out in principle they have a golden opportunity to get this business back in Weymouth.

As for who knew what when, once it was determined that the wall alongside berth 3 was in the state it was there was no way it could have been left in that state. Condor for their part maintain that at the time they had no plans around Austal 109, and it must be remembered that she was built speculatively in 2009 and has been sat around waiting to be sold since then, so it is entirely possible such a purchase could have happened fairly quickly.
In esssence, if you are correct we are no further on than before. The same question arises- is it worth investing £10m in a new berth. And the questions I posed above would remain pivotal. What credible figures are there in terms of the money generated by the ferry ? How many local people actually work on the ferry ?
[quote][p][bold]Techie[/bold] wrote: In everything I've read about this, I've seen nothing at all to suggest that Condor won't be back if the issues around the berth can be sorted out. It's worth noting that they describe the agreement they have with Poole as medium-term. If WPBC can sort the funding out in principle they have a golden opportunity to get this business back in Weymouth. As for who knew what when, once it was determined that the wall alongside berth 3 was in the state it was there was no way it could have been left in that state. Condor for their part maintain that at the time they had no plans around Austal 109, and it must be remembered that she was built speculatively in 2009 and has been sat around waiting to be sold since then, so it is entirely possible such a purchase could have happened fairly quickly.[/p][/quote]In esssence, if you are correct we are no further on than before. The same question arises- is it worth investing £10m in a new berth. And the questions I posed above would remain pivotal. What credible figures are there in terms of the money generated by the ferry ? How many local people actually work on the ferry ? Rocksalt
  • Score: 2

1:55pm Thu 21 Aug 14

Panyan says...

Wasn't there some news last year and the year before that someone was looking to operate a service to Cherbourg?
Wasn't there some news last year and the year before that someone was looking to operate a service to Cherbourg? Panyan
  • Score: 1

2:18pm Thu 21 Aug 14

sweetdreamgirl says...

At the end of the day its all about Condor
At the end of the day its all about Condor sweetdreamgirl
  • Score: -1

2:24pm Thu 21 Aug 14

sweetdreamgirl says...

Not sure what happened there the comment went too soon,was saying Condor was very controlling about what Weymouth should be doing to keep them happy, we've bent over backwards for them, so now its all about blackmail,we'll go to Poole if you dont do what we want,just let them go, we have enough in the way of big liners coming into Portland from there into Weymouth town ,let's say let Condor go,I for one wont miss them.
Not sure what happened there the comment went too soon,was saying Condor was very controlling about what Weymouth should be doing to keep them happy, we've bent over backwards for them, so now its all about blackmail,we'll go to Poole if you dont do what we want,just let them go, we have enough in the way of big liners coming into Portland from there into Weymouth town ,let's say let Condor go,I for one wont miss them. sweetdreamgirl
  • Score: 6

2:54pm Thu 21 Aug 14

John Dorey says...

FerryFan wrote:
islandman wrote:
FerryFan wrote:
Because Portland would need a specialised berth for high speed craft, which needs to be armoured against the thrust and scour of the vessels, which would need a lot of money spent building. Poole's is already armoured, the Express uses it. The propulsion systems of high speed vessels like this scour the seabed a LOT more than the large cruise ships and the berths needs specific armouring which Portland, I believe would have to do.
Thanks Ferryfan, I can now not only dismiss this thought, but ensure I don't hear it again from my wife who keeps saying..............


.................
No problems!! It is something I only learnt when the present Condor berth had to be repaired, there was a lot of discussion then about how high speed craft damage the berths with their waterjets. Having watched the Normandie Express waterjets in action from some vids, they are like massive water cannons/horizontal fountains and the rate the water gets fired out of them in incredible. The berths have to be armoured with rock I think. Pity you can't upload vids here, I know where to lay my hands on one, although not sure if it is available to publicly share, it is on a Facebook page, not sure if on you tube. Astonishing!!
It's got nothing to do with the water jets! Yes the jets are powerful and shift 110,000 litres a second - equivalent to emptying an Olympic swimming pool in 6 seconds but this is NOT the reason they cannot berth in Portland. Cruise ships only carry people not cars! There is no facility to get any sort of car onboard a ship - let alone 245 cars. A link span would have to be built which would cost the same amount as it would to put it in Weymouth!
[quote][p][bold]FerryFan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]islandman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FerryFan[/bold] wrote: Because Portland would need a specialised berth for high speed craft, which needs to be armoured against the thrust and scour of the vessels, which would need a lot of money spent building. Poole's is already armoured, the Express uses it. The propulsion systems of high speed vessels like this scour the seabed a LOT more than the large cruise ships and the berths needs specific armouring which Portland, I believe would have to do.[/p][/quote]Thanks Ferryfan, I can now not only dismiss this thought, but ensure I don't hear it again from my wife who keeps saying.............. .................[/p][/quote]No problems!! It is something I only learnt when the present Condor berth had to be repaired, there was a lot of discussion then about how high speed craft damage the berths with their waterjets. Having watched the Normandie Express waterjets in action from some vids, they are like massive water cannons/horizontal fountains and the rate the water gets fired out of them in incredible. The berths have to be armoured with rock I think. Pity you can't upload vids here, I know where to lay my hands on one, although not sure if it is available to publicly share, it is on a Facebook page, not sure if on you tube. Astonishing!![/p][/quote]It's got nothing to do with the water jets! Yes the jets are powerful and shift 110,000 litres a second - equivalent to emptying an Olympic swimming pool in 6 seconds but this is NOT the reason they cannot berth in Portland. Cruise ships only carry people not cars! There is no facility to get any sort of car onboard a ship - let alone 245 cars. A link span would have to be built which would cost the same amount as it would to put it in Weymouth! John Dorey
  • Score: 3

3:03pm Thu 21 Aug 14

Simon 1965 says...

JamesYoung wrote:
The ferry industry has been consolidating and battling lower margins for years. To my mind what has happened is inevitable. I suspect that it's value to Weymouth is in any case overstated. Councilor Bruce may be wrong in some of his comments, but he is right in one thing: if you have one customer (Condor) then you have a risk. My view: let them go , recognise that port traffic of the kind that Weymouth harbour can handle is in long term decline, develop the peninsula and look at options for the harbour itself (larger marina for example). An all weather water park, decent bowling rink and restaurants would attract more "tourist nights" than a quick overnight stop before catching a ferry.
James,

We have debated this point at length over the past few months in connection with the uncertainty over Condor.

Whilst I do (in the absence of a replacement ferry operator) would like to see a major attraction over there, it is just not going to happen.

The area is too small for any major private sector investment, and would also lack sufficient car parking spaces.
As I was told in no uncertain terms last week by financial experts I met through work, the only part of the UK where businesses (and more importantly their financiers) are willing to invest in new leisure attractions (without significant residential content and public sector incentives) is London. The Howard Holdings scheme of several years ago was the best chance the area had for a 21st century make-over (and at no cost to the council) - unfortunately, certain locals put paid to that, and its a different financial world now.

You mention bars and restaurants - most of the popular chains are under common ownership (not unlike the ferry industry!) and will go to the redeveloped Brewers Quay as soon as it is finished.

As I said in an earlier e-mail, if Condor do not return, expect a new marina to replace the ferry terminal paid for by a significant residential redevelopment of the area - not for a long long time though............

Cheers
Simon N.
[quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: The ferry industry has been consolidating and battling lower margins for years. To my mind what has happened is inevitable. I suspect that it's value to Weymouth is in any case overstated. Councilor Bruce may be wrong in some of his comments, but he is right in one thing: if you have one customer (Condor) then you have a risk. My view: let them go , recognise that port traffic of the kind that Weymouth harbour can handle is in long term decline, develop the peninsula and look at options for the harbour itself (larger marina for example). An all weather water park, decent bowling rink and restaurants would attract more "tourist nights" than a quick overnight stop before catching a ferry.[/p][/quote]James, We have debated this point at length over the past few months in connection with the uncertainty over Condor. Whilst I do (in the absence of a replacement ferry operator) would like to see a major attraction over there, it is just not going to happen. The area is too small for any major private sector investment, and would also lack sufficient car parking spaces. As I was told in no uncertain terms last week by financial experts I met through work, the only part of the UK where businesses (and more importantly their financiers) are willing to invest in new leisure attractions (without significant residential content and public sector incentives) is London. The Howard Holdings scheme of several years ago was the best chance the area had for a 21st century make-over (and at no cost to the council) - unfortunately, certain locals put paid to that, and its a different financial world now. You mention bars and restaurants - most of the popular chains are under common ownership (not unlike the ferry industry!) and will go to the redeveloped Brewers Quay as soon as it is finished. As I said in an earlier e-mail, if Condor do not return, expect a new marina to replace the ferry terminal paid for by a significant residential redevelopment of the area - not for a long long time though............ Cheers Simon N. Simon 1965
  • Score: 0

3:13pm Thu 21 Aug 14

John Dorey says...

Dorset Voyager wrote:
Perhaps someone with a lot more knowledge than me could explain why the new ship won't fit into Weymouth. I know that its 16metres longer than the present vessels, but we've had 2 of those in port at the same time. It has the same beam of 27meters, Perhaps it's draft is a problem. Many thanks in advance.

I posted the above yesterday but have not had a reply fron anyone. Perhaps somebody in the know could enlighten me. Many thanks.
The new vessel is capable of carrying heavy trucks which the current linkspan in Weymouth doesn't have the load capacity to load them on the vessel. Also the ramp on the Austal is at the centre stern of the vessel and around 15 metres wide. The Incat has two ramps around 4 metres wide at either side of the stern of the vessel. The new vessels ramp simply wouldn't line up with the current link span in Weymouth. The Dukes of Hazzard may be able to get their car onto the boat but I doubt the average Hyacinth Bucket from Jersey would be willing to take the jump. I believe there could be a draught issue also as the new vessel has retractable bow thrusters which enable the boat to move sideways alongside the birth
[quote][p][bold]Dorset Voyager[/bold] wrote: Perhaps someone with a lot more knowledge than me could explain why the new ship won't fit into Weymouth. I know that its 16metres longer than the present vessels, but we've had 2 of those in port at the same time. It has the same beam of 27meters, Perhaps it's draft is a problem. Many thanks in advance. I posted the above yesterday but have not had a reply fron anyone. Perhaps somebody in the know could enlighten me. Many thanks.[/p][/quote]The new vessel is capable of carrying heavy trucks which the current linkspan in Weymouth doesn't have the load capacity to load them on the vessel. Also the ramp on the Austal is at the centre stern of the vessel and around 15 metres wide. The Incat has two ramps around 4 metres wide at either side of the stern of the vessel. The new vessels ramp simply wouldn't line up with the current link span in Weymouth. The Dukes of Hazzard may be able to get their car onto the boat but I doubt the average Hyacinth Bucket from Jersey would be willing to take the jump. I believe there could be a draught issue also as the new vessel has retractable bow thrusters which enable the boat to move sideways alongside the birth John Dorey
  • Score: 5

3:28pm Thu 21 Aug 14

FerryFan says...

John Dorey wrote:
FerryFan wrote:
islandman wrote:
FerryFan wrote:
Because Portland would need a specialised berth for high speed craft, which needs to be armoured against the thrust and scour of the vessels, which would need a lot of money spent building. Poole's is already armoured, the Express uses it. The propulsion systems of high speed vessels like this scour the seabed a LOT more than the large cruise ships and the berths needs specific armouring which Portland, I believe would have to do.
Thanks Ferryfan, I can now not only dismiss this thought, but ensure I don't hear it again from my wife who keeps saying..............



.................
No problems!! It is something I only learnt when the present Condor berth had to be repaired, there was a lot of discussion then about how high speed craft damage the berths with their waterjets. Having watched the Normandie Express waterjets in action from some vids, they are like massive water cannons/horizontal fountains and the rate the water gets fired out of them in incredible. The berths have to be armoured with rock I think. Pity you can't upload vids here, I know where to lay my hands on one, although not sure if it is available to publicly share, it is on a Facebook page, not sure if on you tube. Astonishing!!
It's got nothing to do with the water jets! Yes the jets are powerful and shift 110,000 litres a second - equivalent to emptying an Olympic swimming pool in 6 seconds but this is NOT the reason they cannot berth in Portland. Cruise ships only carry people not cars! There is no facility to get any sort of car onboard a ship - let alone 245 cars. A link span would have to be built which would cost the same amount as it would to put it in Weymouth!
Waterjets do have a lot to do with it, any new berth would have to be armoured - I know what I am talking about. Yes a new linkspan would have to be installed, but ON TOP of armouring too.
[quote][p][bold]John Dorey[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FerryFan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]islandman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FerryFan[/bold] wrote: Because Portland would need a specialised berth for high speed craft, which needs to be armoured against the thrust and scour of the vessels, which would need a lot of money spent building. Poole's is already armoured, the Express uses it. The propulsion systems of high speed vessels like this scour the seabed a LOT more than the large cruise ships and the berths needs specific armouring which Portland, I believe would have to do.[/p][/quote]Thanks Ferryfan, I can now not only dismiss this thought, but ensure I don't hear it again from my wife who keeps saying.............. .................[/p][/quote]No problems!! It is something I only learnt when the present Condor berth had to be repaired, there was a lot of discussion then about how high speed craft damage the berths with their waterjets. Having watched the Normandie Express waterjets in action from some vids, they are like massive water cannons/horizontal fountains and the rate the water gets fired out of them in incredible. The berths have to be armoured with rock I think. Pity you can't upload vids here, I know where to lay my hands on one, although not sure if it is available to publicly share, it is on a Facebook page, not sure if on you tube. Astonishing!![/p][/quote]It's got nothing to do with the water jets! Yes the jets are powerful and shift 110,000 litres a second - equivalent to emptying an Olympic swimming pool in 6 seconds but this is NOT the reason they cannot berth in Portland. Cruise ships only carry people not cars! There is no facility to get any sort of car onboard a ship - let alone 245 cars. A link span would have to be built which would cost the same amount as it would to put it in Weymouth![/p][/quote]Waterjets do have a lot to do with it, any new berth would have to be armoured - I know what I am talking about. Yes a new linkspan would have to be installed, but ON TOP of armouring too. FerryFan
  • Score: -2

3:32pm Thu 21 Aug 14

FerryFan says...

Dorset Voyager wrote:
Perhaps someone with a lot more knowledge than me could explain why the new ship won't fit into Weymouth. I know that its 16metres longer than the present vessels, but we've had 2 of those in port at the same time. It has the same beam of 27meters, Perhaps it's draft is a problem. Many thanks in advance.

I posted the above yesterday but have not had a reply fron anyone. Perhaps somebody in the know could enlighten me. Many thanks.
I have also asked on the shipping forums I belong to for clarification of it all.
[quote][p][bold]Dorset Voyager[/bold] wrote: Perhaps someone with a lot more knowledge than me could explain why the new ship won't fit into Weymouth. I know that its 16metres longer than the present vessels, but we've had 2 of those in port at the same time. It has the same beam of 27meters, Perhaps it's draft is a problem. Many thanks in advance. I posted the above yesterday but have not had a reply fron anyone. Perhaps somebody in the know could enlighten me. Many thanks.[/p][/quote]I have also asked on the shipping forums I belong to for clarification of it all. FerryFan
  • Score: 1

3:49pm Thu 21 Aug 14

trymybest says...

Why can't Weymouth lease their boat and crew, there are two spare boats and crew going next year, Weymouth have the port all the facilities.
Why can't Weymouth lease their boat and crew, there are two spare boats and crew going next year, Weymouth have the port all the facilities. trymybest
  • Score: 1

4:02pm Thu 21 Aug 14

Simon 1965 says...

cosmick wrote:
Well councillor Bruce, we now see one of the reasons we are in the position of the ferry going. YOU ARE NOT FIT TO DO THE JOB YOU DO WITHREGARDS THE FERRY AND WEYMOUTH HARBOUR. Its a joke that you and other members and Councillors are unable to see the loss to Weymouth. The jobs lost the money lost in all areas not just b/b but the spend money ie, passing trade to local shops , garages,food outlets cafes ect. Sadly people will now be put off from there jobs and the local councillors will be like fish out of water, with no ideas how to replace them or come up with any ideas of cost effective employment. Its time to get councillors that are able to deal with the challange ahead. Sadly that most of the councillors are up to the level of bussiness sence required. They and WPBC can take the blame for this position we are left in. Who takes the hit with money WE DO.
What exactly are you blaiming the council for Cosmick?

If you look at the history of comments on this web-site since the uncertainty broke in April, very few people who post here wanted the council to spend 10 more million pounds on Condor.

To be fair to the council, they have indeed refused to fund this themselves, or borrow money to do so, so why they are now being blaimed for losing Condor?
[quote][p][bold]cosmick[/bold] wrote: Well councillor Bruce, we now see one of the reasons we are in the position of the ferry going. YOU ARE NOT FIT TO DO THE JOB YOU DO WITHREGARDS THE FERRY AND WEYMOUTH HARBOUR. Its a joke that you and other members and Councillors are unable to see the loss to Weymouth. The jobs lost the money lost in all areas not just b/b but the spend money ie, passing trade to local shops , garages,food outlets cafes ect. Sadly people will now be put off from there jobs and the local councillors will be like fish out of water, with no ideas how to replace them or come up with any ideas of cost effective employment. Its time to get councillors that are able to deal with the challange ahead. Sadly that most of the councillors are up to the level of bussiness sence required. They and WPBC can take the blame for this position we are left in. Who takes the hit with money WE DO.[/p][/quote]What exactly are you blaiming the council for Cosmick? If you look at the history of comments on this web-site since the uncertainty broke in April, very few people who post here wanted the council to spend 10 more million pounds on Condor. To be fair to the council, they have indeed refused to fund this themselves, or borrow money to do so, so why they are now being blaimed for losing Condor? Simon 1965
  • Score: 7

5:18pm Thu 21 Aug 14

MrTomSmith says...

FerryFan wrote:
John Dorey wrote:
FerryFan wrote:
islandman wrote:
FerryFan wrote:
Because Portland would need a specialised berth for high speed craft, which needs to be armoured against the thrust and scour of the vessels, which would need a lot of money spent building. Poole's is already armoured, the Express uses it. The propulsion systems of high speed vessels like this scour the seabed a LOT more than the large cruise ships and the berths needs specific armouring which Portland, I believe would have to do.
Thanks Ferryfan, I can now not only dismiss this thought, but ensure I don't hear it again from my wife who keeps saying..............




.................
No problems!! It is something I only learnt when the present Condor berth had to be repaired, there was a lot of discussion then about how high speed craft damage the berths with their waterjets. Having watched the Normandie Express waterjets in action from some vids, they are like massive water cannons/horizontal fountains and the rate the water gets fired out of them in incredible. The berths have to be armoured with rock I think. Pity you can't upload vids here, I know where to lay my hands on one, although not sure if it is available to publicly share, it is on a Facebook page, not sure if on you tube. Astonishing!!
It's got nothing to do with the water jets! Yes the jets are powerful and shift 110,000 litres a second - equivalent to emptying an Olympic swimming pool in 6 seconds but this is NOT the reason they cannot berth in Portland. Cruise ships only carry people not cars! There is no facility to get any sort of car onboard a ship - let alone 245 cars. A link span would have to be built which would cost the same amount as it would to put it in Weymouth!
Waterjets do have a lot to do with it, any new berth would have to be armoured - I know what I am talking about. Yes a new linkspan would have to be installed, but ON TOP of armouring too.
AND on top of all that, Condor have said they do not consider the road infrastructure between Weymouth and Portland good enough and have discounted Portland. So for the 100th time, they will NOT got to PORTLAND.
The reasons are it would cost too much to convert, and its hard to access.
Thats the view of Condor that the road is not good enough, not mine by the way. (Awaits further discussion on Boot Hill Traffic Lights)
[quote][p][bold]FerryFan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John Dorey[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FerryFan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]islandman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FerryFan[/bold] wrote: Because Portland would need a specialised berth for high speed craft, which needs to be armoured against the thrust and scour of the vessels, which would need a lot of money spent building. Poole's is already armoured, the Express uses it. The propulsion systems of high speed vessels like this scour the seabed a LOT more than the large cruise ships and the berths needs specific armouring which Portland, I believe would have to do.[/p][/quote]Thanks Ferryfan, I can now not only dismiss this thought, but ensure I don't hear it again from my wife who keeps saying.............. .................[/p][/quote]No problems!! It is something I only learnt when the present Condor berth had to be repaired, there was a lot of discussion then about how high speed craft damage the berths with their waterjets. Having watched the Normandie Express waterjets in action from some vids, they are like massive water cannons/horizontal fountains and the rate the water gets fired out of them in incredible. The berths have to be armoured with rock I think. Pity you can't upload vids here, I know where to lay my hands on one, although not sure if it is available to publicly share, it is on a Facebook page, not sure if on you tube. Astonishing!![/p][/quote]It's got nothing to do with the water jets! Yes the jets are powerful and shift 110,000 litres a second - equivalent to emptying an Olympic swimming pool in 6 seconds but this is NOT the reason they cannot berth in Portland. Cruise ships only carry people not cars! There is no facility to get any sort of car onboard a ship - let alone 245 cars. A link span would have to be built which would cost the same amount as it would to put it in Weymouth![/p][/quote]Waterjets do have a lot to do with it, any new berth would have to be armoured - I know what I am talking about. Yes a new linkspan would have to be installed, but ON TOP of armouring too.[/p][/quote]AND on top of all that, Condor have said they do not consider the road infrastructure between Weymouth and Portland good enough and have discounted Portland. So for the 100th time, they will NOT got to PORTLAND. The reasons are it would cost too much to convert, and its hard to access. Thats the view of Condor that the road is not good enough, not mine by the way. (Awaits further discussion on Boot Hill Traffic Lights) MrTomSmith
  • Score: 3

5:25pm Thu 21 Aug 14

FerryFan says...

For Dorset Voyager, had a reply to my query on the forum.

The new craft details:
Length overall 102.0 metres
Length (waterline) 101.4 metres
Beam (moulded) 27.4 metres

Hull draft (maximum) 4.5 metres

Present Condor craft :

Length overall 86.2 metres
Beam 26.2 metres.

A more traditional ferry, such as the "Maid of Kent"
Length Overall 113 Metres
Beam 18.3 metres.

So Weymouth would never have previously seen a ship which takes up so much area. (length x Beam)

Hope this helps.
For Dorset Voyager, had a reply to my query on the forum. The new craft details: Length overall 102.0 metres Length (waterline) 101.4 metres Beam (moulded) 27.4 metres Hull draft (maximum) 4.5 metres Present Condor craft : Length overall 86.2 metres Beam 26.2 metres. A more traditional ferry, such as the "Maid of Kent" Length Overall 113 Metres Beam 18.3 metres. So Weymouth would never have previously seen a ship which takes up so much area. (length x Beam) Hope this helps. FerryFan
  • Score: 1

5:29pm Thu 21 Aug 14

WykeReg says...

trymybest wrote:
Why can't Weymouth lease their boat and crew, there are two spare boats and crew going next year, Weymouth have the port all the facilities.
That is such a brilliant, elegant solution. Sadly the Councillors don't go in for that kind of thinking. But it's a great idea.

Here's another out-of-the-box thought. Why doesn't the council try to attract Austal to set up a shipbuilding operation in Weymouth/Portland? As well as ferries they build luxury yachts and offshore service boats. The firm is also building up to ten of the new Littoral Combat Ships for the US Navy in partnership with General dynamics at a shipyard in Mobile, Alabama. So they're not just in Australia. Think of the jobs.

Or shall we just open another burger shack on the beach? Yeah, that's the way to go - looks good in the master plan.
[quote][p][bold]trymybest[/bold] wrote: Why can't Weymouth lease their boat and crew, there are two spare boats and crew going next year, Weymouth have the port all the facilities.[/p][/quote]That is such a brilliant, elegant solution. Sadly the Councillors don't go in for that kind of thinking. But it's a great idea. Here's another out-of-the-box thought. Why doesn't the council try to attract Austal to set up a shipbuilding operation in Weymouth/Portland? As well as ferries they build luxury yachts and offshore service boats. The firm is also building up to ten of the new Littoral Combat Ships for the US Navy in partnership with General dynamics at a shipyard in Mobile, Alabama. So they're not just in Australia. Think of the jobs. Or shall we just open another burger shack on the beach? Yeah, that's the way to go - looks good in the master plan. WykeReg
  • Score: 0

5:30pm Thu 21 Aug 14

MrTomSmith says...

Simon 1965 wrote:
cosmick wrote:
Well councillor Bruce, we now see one of the reasons we are in the position of the ferry going. YOU ARE NOT FIT TO DO THE JOB YOU DO WITHREGARDS THE FERRY AND WEYMOUTH HARBOUR. Its a joke that you and other members and Councillors are unable to see the loss to Weymouth. The jobs lost the money lost in all areas not just b/b but the spend money ie, passing trade to local shops , garages,food outlets cafes ect. Sadly people will now be put off from there jobs and the local councillors will be like fish out of water, with no ideas how to replace them or come up with any ideas of cost effective employment. Its time to get councillors that are able to deal with the challange ahead. Sadly that most of the councillors are up to the level of bussiness sence required. They and WPBC can take the blame for this position we are left in. Who takes the hit with money WE DO.
What exactly are you blaiming the council for Cosmick?

If you look at the history of comments on this web-site since the uncertainty broke in April, very few people who post here wanted the council to spend 10 more million pounds on Condor.

To be fair to the council, they have indeed refused to fund this themselves, or borrow money to do so, so why they are now being blaimed for losing Condor?
Its the Ferry's greed pure and simple, they have played the public game of bluff by saying "Right, we are off then" Hoping that the council say "please don't go we will find the money" because they have left the door open, how nice! I notice that the possible Condor agreement to pay for the upgrade themselves would have to be repaid by the council as they would pay reduced rent over the coming years, cheeky that was. No not cheeky
Greedy!
[quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]cosmick[/bold] wrote: Well councillor Bruce, we now see one of the reasons we are in the position of the ferry going. YOU ARE NOT FIT TO DO THE JOB YOU DO WITHREGARDS THE FERRY AND WEYMOUTH HARBOUR. Its a joke that you and other members and Councillors are unable to see the loss to Weymouth. The jobs lost the money lost in all areas not just b/b but the spend money ie, passing trade to local shops , garages,food outlets cafes ect. Sadly people will now be put off from there jobs and the local councillors will be like fish out of water, with no ideas how to replace them or come up with any ideas of cost effective employment. Its time to get councillors that are able to deal with the challange ahead. Sadly that most of the councillors are up to the level of bussiness sence required. They and WPBC can take the blame for this position we are left in. Who takes the hit with money WE DO.[/p][/quote]What exactly are you blaiming the council for Cosmick? If you look at the history of comments on this web-site since the uncertainty broke in April, very few people who post here wanted the council to spend 10 more million pounds on Condor. To be fair to the council, they have indeed refused to fund this themselves, or borrow money to do so, so why they are now being blaimed for losing Condor?[/p][/quote]Its the Ferry's greed pure and simple, they have played the public game of bluff by saying "Right, we are off then" Hoping that the council say "please don't go we will find the money" because they have left the door open, how nice! I notice that the possible Condor agreement to pay for the upgrade themselves would have to be repaid by the council as they would pay reduced rent over the coming years, cheeky that was. No not cheeky Greedy! MrTomSmith
  • Score: 0

5:50pm Thu 21 Aug 14

cosmick says...

Simon 1965 wrote:
cosmick wrote:
Well councillor Bruce, we now see one of the reasons we are in the position of the ferry going. YOU ARE NOT FIT TO DO THE JOB YOU DO WITHREGARDS THE FERRY AND WEYMOUTH HARBOUR. Its a joke that you and other members and Councillors are unable to see the loss to Weymouth. The jobs lost the money lost in all areas not just b/b but the spend money ie, passing trade to local shops , garages,food outlets cafes ect. Sadly people will now be put off from there jobs and the local councillors will be like fish out of water, with no ideas how to replace them or come up with any ideas of cost effective employment. Its time to get councillors that are able to deal with the challange ahead. Sadly that most of the councillors are up to the level of bussiness sence required. They and WPBC can take the blame for this position we are left in. Who takes the hit with money WE DO.
What exactly are you blaiming the council for Cosmick?

If you look at the history of comments on this web-site since the uncertainty broke in April, very few people who post here wanted the council to spend 10 more million pounds on Condor.

To be fair to the council, they have indeed refused to fund this themselves, or borrow money to do so, so why they are now being blaimed for losing Condor?
Hi Simon,
Any business has to have money put into it, if the business is a new one it needs money that the business owner either has or borrows.
But if you have a business that is getting money in (which the ferry was) you have to reinvest this was not done and was part of the reason for the downfall of the service.
To refuse to borrow money to do repairs or upgrade the berth is like sticking your head in the sand.
Now we have jobs going, b & b , hotels will take less money, its not just the cost of the repair, its the cost of the consequence of what the WPBC and the COUNCILLORS have allowed to happen, they should all pack up not one of them to my knowledge had any other plans or ideas about this.
Again i say they said they were talking to other parties who were they what happened to the talks or was it just a pack of lies.
Weymouth needs a ferry. What we dont need is idiot councillors thinking they can do a proper business job when they are out of there depth.
Not one of them will take any responsibility of the rubbish job they did and are still doing.
I hope when next years election come we get some proper people in to do the job, i dont care what party there from just that they can show some balls and get the job done.
[quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]cosmick[/bold] wrote: Well councillor Bruce, we now see one of the reasons we are in the position of the ferry going. YOU ARE NOT FIT TO DO THE JOB YOU DO WITHREGARDS THE FERRY AND WEYMOUTH HARBOUR. Its a joke that you and other members and Councillors are unable to see the loss to Weymouth. The jobs lost the money lost in all areas not just b/b but the spend money ie, passing trade to local shops , garages,food outlets cafes ect. Sadly people will now be put off from there jobs and the local councillors will be like fish out of water, with no ideas how to replace them or come up with any ideas of cost effective employment. Its time to get councillors that are able to deal with the challange ahead. Sadly that most of the councillors are up to the level of bussiness sence required. They and WPBC can take the blame for this position we are left in. Who takes the hit with money WE DO.[/p][/quote]What exactly are you blaiming the council for Cosmick? If you look at the history of comments on this web-site since the uncertainty broke in April, very few people who post here wanted the council to spend 10 more million pounds on Condor. To be fair to the council, they have indeed refused to fund this themselves, or borrow money to do so, so why they are now being blaimed for losing Condor?[/p][/quote]Hi Simon, Any business has to have money put into it, if the business is a new one it needs money that the business owner either has or borrows. But if you have a business that is getting money in (which the ferry was) you have to reinvest this was not done and was part of the reason for the downfall of the service. To refuse to borrow money to do repairs or upgrade the berth is like sticking your head in the sand. Now we have jobs going, b & b , hotels will take less money, its not just the cost of the repair, its the cost of the consequence of what the WPBC and the COUNCILLORS have allowed to happen, they should all pack up not one of them to my knowledge had any other plans or ideas about this. Again i say they said they were talking to other parties who were they what happened to the talks or was it just a pack of lies. Weymouth needs a ferry. What we dont need is idiot councillors thinking they can do a proper business job when they are out of there depth. Not one of them will take any responsibility of the rubbish job they did and are still doing. I hope when next years election come we get some proper people in to do the job, i dont care what party there from just that they can show some balls and get the job done. cosmick
  • Score: -1

5:50pm Thu 21 Aug 14

Simon Nicholas says...

MrTomSmith wrote:
Simon 1965 wrote:
cosmick wrote:
Well councillor Bruce, we now see one of the reasons we are in the position of the ferry going. YOU ARE NOT FIT TO DO THE JOB YOU DO WITHREGARDS THE FERRY AND WEYMOUTH HARBOUR. Its a joke that you and other members and Councillors are unable to see the loss to Weymouth. The jobs lost the money lost in all areas not just b/b but the spend money ie, passing trade to local shops , garages,food outlets cafes ect. Sadly people will now be put off from there jobs and the local councillors will be like fish out of water, with no ideas how to replace them or come up with any ideas of cost effective employment. Its time to get councillors that are able to deal with the challange ahead. Sadly that most of the councillors are up to the level of bussiness sence required. They and WPBC can take the blame for this position we are left in. Who takes the hit with money WE DO.
What exactly are you blaiming the council for Cosmick?

If you look at the history of comments on this web-site since the uncertainty broke in April, very few people who post here wanted the council to spend 10 more million pounds on Condor.

To be fair to the council, they have indeed refused to fund this themselves, or borrow money to do so, so why they are now being blaimed for losing Condor?
Its the Ferry's greed pure and simple, they have played the public game of bluff by saying "Right, we are off then" Hoping that the council say "please don't go we will find the money" because they have left the door open, how nice! I notice that the possible Condor agreement to pay for the upgrade themselves would have to be repaid by the council as they would pay reduced rent over the coming years, cheeky that was. No not cheeky
Greedy!
I can`t think of any other port/airport/bus & coach station in the UK where the user would be expected to pay for infrastructure upgrades. Generally, if the ferry terminal/airport/sta
tion are owned by local authority or private sector organisations, the owners would pay for all the infrastructure costs - the users (ferry companies/airlines/b
us industry) then pay harbour/ landing /boarding fees relevant to their usage. Only if the users OWNED the infrastructure would they be expected to pay to upgrade their facilities.

Only if Weymouth was Condor`s ONLY option, would they have had to contribute (they would have no business without a UK port of exit), but they have Portsmouth and Poole as well, neither of which require any additional spend to accommodate them.

I am not happy with Condor at all, but they were never under any obligation to pay for improvements to a council owned harbour. With this boat being twice the size of the current ones, they would however be paying a CONSIDERABLE increase in berthing fees than what they are paying now. This was expected and budgeted for by Condor.
[quote][p][bold]MrTomSmith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]cosmick[/bold] wrote: Well councillor Bruce, we now see one of the reasons we are in the position of the ferry going. YOU ARE NOT FIT TO DO THE JOB YOU DO WITHREGARDS THE FERRY AND WEYMOUTH HARBOUR. Its a joke that you and other members and Councillors are unable to see the loss to Weymouth. The jobs lost the money lost in all areas not just b/b but the spend money ie, passing trade to local shops , garages,food outlets cafes ect. Sadly people will now be put off from there jobs and the local councillors will be like fish out of water, with no ideas how to replace them or come up with any ideas of cost effective employment. Its time to get councillors that are able to deal with the challange ahead. Sadly that most of the councillors are up to the level of bussiness sence required. They and WPBC can take the blame for this position we are left in. Who takes the hit with money WE DO.[/p][/quote]What exactly are you blaiming the council for Cosmick? If you look at the history of comments on this web-site since the uncertainty broke in April, very few people who post here wanted the council to spend 10 more million pounds on Condor. To be fair to the council, they have indeed refused to fund this themselves, or borrow money to do so, so why they are now being blaimed for losing Condor?[/p][/quote]Its the Ferry's greed pure and simple, they have played the public game of bluff by saying "Right, we are off then" Hoping that the council say "please don't go we will find the money" because they have left the door open, how nice! I notice that the possible Condor agreement to pay for the upgrade themselves would have to be repaid by the council as they would pay reduced rent over the coming years, cheeky that was. No not cheeky Greedy![/p][/quote]I can`t think of any other port/airport/bus & coach station in the UK where the user would be expected to pay for infrastructure upgrades. Generally, if the ferry terminal/airport/sta tion are owned by local authority or private sector organisations, the owners would pay for all the infrastructure costs - the users (ferry companies/airlines/b us industry) then pay harbour/ landing /boarding fees relevant to their usage. Only if the users OWNED the infrastructure would they be expected to pay to upgrade their facilities. Only if Weymouth was Condor`s ONLY option, would they have had to contribute (they would have no business without a UK port of exit), but they have Portsmouth and Poole as well, neither of which require any additional spend to accommodate them. I am not happy with Condor at all, but they were never under any obligation to pay for improvements to a council owned harbour. With this boat being twice the size of the current ones, they would however be paying a CONSIDERABLE increase in berthing fees than what they are paying now. This was expected and budgeted for by Condor. Simon Nicholas
  • Score: 4

6:08pm Thu 21 Aug 14

Simon Nicholas says...

cosmick wrote:
Simon 1965 wrote:
cosmick wrote:
Well councillor Bruce, we now see one of the reasons we are in the position of the ferry going. YOU ARE NOT FIT TO DO THE JOB YOU DO WITHREGARDS THE FERRY AND WEYMOUTH HARBOUR. Its a joke that you and other members and Councillors are unable to see the loss to Weymouth. The jobs lost the money lost in all areas not just b/b but the spend money ie, passing trade to local shops , garages,food outlets cafes ect. Sadly people will now be put off from there jobs and the local councillors will be like fish out of water, with no ideas how to replace them or come up with any ideas of cost effective employment. Its time to get councillors that are able to deal with the challange ahead. Sadly that most of the councillors are up to the level of bussiness sence required. They and WPBC can take the blame for this position we are left in. Who takes the hit with money WE DO.
What exactly are you blaiming the council for Cosmick?

If you look at the history of comments on this web-site since the uncertainty broke in April, very few people who post here wanted the council to spend 10 more million pounds on Condor.

To be fair to the council, they have indeed refused to fund this themselves, or borrow money to do so, so why they are now being blaimed for losing Condor?
Hi Simon,
Any business has to have money put into it, if the business is a new one it needs money that the business owner either has or borrows.
But if you have a business that is getting money in (which the ferry was) you have to reinvest this was not done and was part of the reason for the downfall of the service.
To refuse to borrow money to do repairs or upgrade the berth is like sticking your head in the sand.
Now we have jobs going, b & b , hotels will take less money, its not just the cost of the repair, its the cost of the consequence of what the WPBC and the COUNCILLORS have allowed to happen, they should all pack up not one of them to my knowledge had any other plans or ideas about this.
Again i say they said they were talking to other parties who were they what happened to the talks or was it just a pack of lies.
Weymouth needs a ferry. What we dont need is idiot councillors thinking they can do a proper business job when they are out of there depth.
Not one of them will take any responsibility of the rubbish job they did and are still doing.
I hope when next years election come we get some proper people in to do the job, i dont care what party there from just that they can show some balls and get the job done.
Yes, I understand what you are saying Cosmick, and the council have indeed been neglectful over many years. Bear in mind however that Condor only agreed to purchase this superferry last Autumn. It was one of four very different type of vessels that they were looking at.

What would the locals have said, a few years back say, if the council said "we need to upgrade the ferry terminal, it will cost millions of pounds, and that we are going to add a further 10 million to the rebuild just on the offchance that Condor decide to buy bigger boats in future" - they would have been laughed out of office.

As for the soundbite about "talking to other parties", they probably did to be fair - however they know nothing of the ferry industry or the costs involved, and would have soon realised that all these "big name" ferry companies are owned by closely related worldwide investment banks, who would never allow companies commonly owned to compete with each other.

Also, as somebody else commented, the Channel Islands will now only allow a competitive service to Condor if they offer the same level of service (fast cast and conventional ferry) - with no profitable freight traffic to pay for this, its never going to happen.

Its all very sad, but the harbour is the victim of a changing world - Condor have probably chosen the correct vessel to future proof their service going forward, and the council just can`t afford to pay to upgrade the harbour for it, neither could they have second guessed that Condor would opt of a vessel of this size.

I`m as heartbroken as most are - If I had the cash, I would offer to pay for the upgrade myself, but I haven`t!
[quote][p][bold]cosmick[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]cosmick[/bold] wrote: Well councillor Bruce, we now see one of the reasons we are in the position of the ferry going. YOU ARE NOT FIT TO DO THE JOB YOU DO WITHREGARDS THE FERRY AND WEYMOUTH HARBOUR. Its a joke that you and other members and Councillors are unable to see the loss to Weymouth. The jobs lost the money lost in all areas not just b/b but the spend money ie, passing trade to local shops , garages,food outlets cafes ect. Sadly people will now be put off from there jobs and the local councillors will be like fish out of water, with no ideas how to replace them or come up with any ideas of cost effective employment. Its time to get councillors that are able to deal with the challange ahead. Sadly that most of the councillors are up to the level of bussiness sence required. They and WPBC can take the blame for this position we are left in. Who takes the hit with money WE DO.[/p][/quote]What exactly are you blaiming the council for Cosmick? If you look at the history of comments on this web-site since the uncertainty broke in April, very few people who post here wanted the council to spend 10 more million pounds on Condor. To be fair to the council, they have indeed refused to fund this themselves, or borrow money to do so, so why they are now being blaimed for losing Condor?[/p][/quote]Hi Simon, Any business has to have money put into it, if the business is a new one it needs money that the business owner either has or borrows. But if you have a business that is getting money in (which the ferry was) you have to reinvest this was not done and was part of the reason for the downfall of the service. To refuse to borrow money to do repairs or upgrade the berth is like sticking your head in the sand. Now we have jobs going, b & b , hotels will take less money, its not just the cost of the repair, its the cost of the consequence of what the WPBC and the COUNCILLORS have allowed to happen, they should all pack up not one of them to my knowledge had any other plans or ideas about this. Again i say they said they were talking to other parties who were they what happened to the talks or was it just a pack of lies. Weymouth needs a ferry. What we dont need is idiot councillors thinking they can do a proper business job when they are out of there depth. Not one of them will take any responsibility of the rubbish job they did and are still doing. I hope when next years election come we get some proper people in to do the job, i dont care what party there from just that they can show some balls and get the job done.[/p][/quote]Yes, I understand what you are saying Cosmick, and the council have indeed been neglectful over many years. Bear in mind however that Condor only agreed to purchase this superferry last Autumn. It was one of four very different type of vessels that they were looking at. What would the locals have said, a few years back say, if the council said "we need to upgrade the ferry terminal, it will cost millions of pounds, and that we are going to add a further 10 million to the rebuild just on the offchance that Condor decide to buy bigger boats in future" - they would have been laughed out of office. As for the soundbite about "talking to other parties", they probably did to be fair - however they know nothing of the ferry industry or the costs involved, and would have soon realised that all these "big name" ferry companies are owned by closely related worldwide investment banks, who would never allow companies commonly owned to compete with each other. Also, as somebody else commented, the Channel Islands will now only allow a competitive service to Condor if they offer the same level of service (fast cast and conventional ferry) - with no profitable freight traffic to pay for this, its never going to happen. Its all very sad, but the harbour is the victim of a changing world - Condor have probably chosen the correct vessel to future proof their service going forward, and the council just can`t afford to pay to upgrade the harbour for it, neither could they have second guessed that Condor would opt of a vessel of this size. I`m as heartbroken as most are - If I had the cash, I would offer to pay for the upgrade myself, but I haven`t! Simon Nicholas
  • Score: 5

7:49pm Thu 21 Aug 14

Westlain says...

Rocksalt wrote:
I have asked this before without success, but will try again. Does anyone have any concrete evidence as to value of the business that the ferry brings to the town. All I ever see are anecdotal experiences of individual B&B owners ( which I don't doubt for a minute) and figures as to the total value ( which I do doubt as they appear to have been plucked from mid air).

Similarly, how many people who work for Condor actually live in the Borough? Of these people, how many are well paid officers and how many are seasonal staff ?

Without clarity and transparency about these things it's very difficult to assess whether or not this is a mortal blow, as some describe it, or a relatively modest set back that might be addressed through investment in alternative developments.

Incidentally, it's disappointing if Councillor Bruce's imagination stretches no further than finding an alternative ferry operator. Is that it ?
Agreed, good points very well made. In addition, what is the value of Condor to the council? The annual fee may be around £1000,000, give or take, but what about the cost of providing the berth along with harbour staff etc, as well as a large area of valuable pavilion peninsular land. I suspect that the net income is fairly low and more could be gained with a sympathetic (not massive) development of the peninsular. The reduction of seafront traffic would be good. This is an opportunity for the council to put some substance into their visions for the town.
[quote][p][bold]Rocksalt[/bold] wrote: I have asked this before without success, but will try again. Does anyone have any concrete evidence as to value of the business that the ferry brings to the town. All I ever see are anecdotal experiences of individual B&B owners ( which I don't doubt for a minute) and figures as to the total value ( which I do doubt as they appear to have been plucked from mid air). Similarly, how many people who work for Condor actually live in the Borough? Of these people, how many are well paid officers and how many are seasonal staff ? Without clarity and transparency about these things it's very difficult to assess whether or not this is a mortal blow, as some describe it, or a relatively modest set back that might be addressed through investment in alternative developments. Incidentally, it's disappointing if Councillor Bruce's imagination stretches no further than finding an alternative ferry operator. Is that it ?[/p][/quote]Agreed, good points very well made. In addition, what is the value of Condor to the council? The annual fee may be around £1000,000, give or take, but what about the cost of providing the berth along with harbour staff etc, as well as a large area of valuable pavilion peninsular land. I suspect that the net income is fairly low and more could be gained with a sympathetic (not massive) development of the peninsular. The reduction of seafront traffic would be good. This is an opportunity for the council to put some substance into their visions for the town. Westlain
  • Score: 3

8:08pm Thu 21 Aug 14

Pauldavid says...

You don't need to get up Boot Hill to get to Portland. If that's the only road argument against using Portland Port it's not relevant. Maybe if some of that £10 million + a lump from Portland Port was invested to improve existing facilities Condor could successfully use Portland. If I recall correctly the Americans launched their D-Day assault from Portland - it would have been chaos if they'd attempted the same thing from dear old, picture postcard, Weymouth harbour.

Let's face it Weymouth is fit for small pleasure craft, crabbing & ice cream but not for very big boats.

And one more thing. Why does everyone dismiss Portland out of hand. In this & the last thread very few people take any notice of pro Portland comments, not even deigning to respond to them in most cases. It seems like it's Weymouth or nothing - if Weymouth doesn't get Condor then Poole may as well have it! As a council tax payer on Portland, helping to prop up Weymouth it would be nice to get a bit of support now & then. Have a bit of vision & maybe it could work.
You don't need to get up Boot Hill to get to Portland. If that's the only road argument against using Portland Port it's not relevant. Maybe if some of that £10 million + a lump from Portland Port was invested to improve existing facilities Condor could successfully use Portland. If I recall correctly the Americans launched their D-Day assault from Portland - it would have been chaos if they'd attempted the same thing from dear old, picture postcard, Weymouth harbour. Let's face it Weymouth is fit for small pleasure craft, crabbing & ice cream but not for very big boats. And one more thing. Why does everyone dismiss Portland out of hand. In this & the last thread very few people take any notice of pro Portland comments, not even deigning to respond to them in most cases. It seems like it's Weymouth or nothing - if Weymouth doesn't get Condor then Poole may as well have it! As a council tax payer on Portland, helping to prop up Weymouth it would be nice to get a bit of support now & then. Have a bit of vision & maybe it could work. Pauldavid
  • Score: -3

9:33pm Thu 21 Aug 14

Simon Nicholas says...

Pauldavid wrote:
You don't need to get up Boot Hill to get to Portland. If that's the only road argument against using Portland Port it's not relevant. Maybe if some of that £10 million + a lump from Portland Port was invested to improve existing facilities Condor could successfully use Portland. If I recall correctly the Americans launched their D-Day assault from Portland - it would have been chaos if they'd attempted the same thing from dear old, picture postcard, Weymouth harbour.

Let's face it Weymouth is fit for small pleasure craft, crabbing & ice cream but not for very big boats.

And one more thing. Why does everyone dismiss Portland out of hand. In this & the last thread very few people take any notice of pro Portland comments, not even deigning to respond to them in most cases. It seems like it's Weymouth or nothing - if Weymouth doesn't get Condor then Poole may as well have it! As a council tax payer on Portland, helping to prop up Weymouth it would be nice to get a bit of support now & then. Have a bit of vision & maybe it could work.
Portland was NOT dismissed out of hand - Condor met with them. I certainly would have rather Condor had gone there rather than Poole. These however are the facts........
1) The road links (whatever you say) are not good enough.
2) Portland is a commercial port - they as such have to fund all enhancements themselves. As noted earlier, construction of a 21st century linkspan, associated terminal buildings, strengthing of the haroour wall and the laying out of a holding zone for up to 250 cars, would have cost millions. What would have happened if they had undertaken all that, and then Condor lost the channel islands contract. Its a risk a small privately owned port just could not take.
3) As a small privately funded port, if they had have undertaken the above works, they would had to have charged Condor significantly more in berthing fees than any of the alternatives, and an amount that Condor would not have been able to afford.
[quote][p][bold]Pauldavid[/bold] wrote: You don't need to get up Boot Hill to get to Portland. If that's the only road argument against using Portland Port it's not relevant. Maybe if some of that £10 million + a lump from Portland Port was invested to improve existing facilities Condor could successfully use Portland. If I recall correctly the Americans launched their D-Day assault from Portland - it would have been chaos if they'd attempted the same thing from dear old, picture postcard, Weymouth harbour. Let's face it Weymouth is fit for small pleasure craft, crabbing & ice cream but not for very big boats. And one more thing. Why does everyone dismiss Portland out of hand. In this & the last thread very few people take any notice of pro Portland comments, not even deigning to respond to them in most cases. It seems like it's Weymouth or nothing - if Weymouth doesn't get Condor then Poole may as well have it! As a council tax payer on Portland, helping to prop up Weymouth it would be nice to get a bit of support now & then. Have a bit of vision & maybe it could work.[/p][/quote]Portland was NOT dismissed out of hand - Condor met with them. I certainly would have rather Condor had gone there rather than Poole. These however are the facts........ 1) The road links (whatever you say) are not good enough. 2) Portland is a commercial port - they as such have to fund all enhancements themselves. As noted earlier, construction of a 21st century linkspan, associated terminal buildings, strengthing of the haroour wall and the laying out of a holding zone for up to 250 cars, would have cost millions. What would have happened if they had undertaken all that, and then Condor lost the channel islands contract. Its a risk a small privately owned port just could not take. 3) As a small privately funded port, if they had have undertaken the above works, they would had to have charged Condor significantly more in berthing fees than any of the alternatives, and an amount that Condor would not have been able to afford. Simon Nicholas
  • Score: 2

9:40pm Thu 21 Aug 14

tackleberry says...

By-By Condor, no more hour traffic jams when you come in, now the Council can put out to tender for a real ferry company or better still put a theme park on the site to bring in all year round business to the area.
By-By Condor, no more hour traffic jams when you come in, now the Council can put out to tender for a real ferry company or better still put a theme park on the site to bring in all year round business to the area. tackleberry
  • Score: -2

10:36pm Thu 21 Aug 14

JamesYoung says...

Simon 1965 wrote:
JamesYoung wrote:
The ferry industry has been consolidating and battling lower margins for years. To my mind what has happened is inevitable. I suspect that it's value to Weymouth is in any case overstated. Councilor Bruce may be wrong in some of his comments, but he is right in one thing: if you have one customer (Condor) then you have a risk. My view: let them go , recognise that port traffic of the kind that Weymouth harbour can handle is in long term decline, develop the peninsula and look at options for the harbour itself (larger marina for example). An all weather water park, decent bowling rink and restaurants would attract more "tourist nights" than a quick overnight stop before catching a ferry.
James,

We have debated this point at length over the past few months in connection with the uncertainty over Condor.

Whilst I do (in the absence of a replacement ferry operator) would like to see a major attraction over there, it is just not going to happen.

The area is too small for any major private sector investment, and would also lack sufficient car parking spaces.
As I was told in no uncertain terms last week by financial experts I met through work, the only part of the UK where businesses (and more importantly their financiers) are willing to invest in new leisure attractions (without significant residential content and public sector incentives) is London. The Howard Holdings scheme of several years ago was the best chance the area had for a 21st century make-over (and at no cost to the council) - unfortunately, certain locals put paid to that, and its a different financial world now.

You mention bars and restaurants - most of the popular chains are under common ownership (not unlike the ferry industry!) and will go to the redeveloped Brewers Quay as soon as it is finished.

As I said in an earlier e-mail, if Condor do not return, expect a new marina to replace the ferry terminal paid for by a significant residential redevelopment of the area - not for a long long time though............

Cheers
Simon N.
Yes, and maybe a residential development is the way that we have to go. When you say the area is too small, i'm assuming you are referring to the catchment area. However, Weymouth is a tourist town, so in summer season would, i guess, have a similar footfall as the Bournemouth conurbation. Torquay has Living Coasts. There's the Eden Project further down. Not to mention the Tate Gallery somewhere that i can't recall. I don't think that a waterpark is unfeasible - from what i can glean from elsewhere a modest one could be built for £10-15m. I am sure that there is room there for a residential development and a water park. I do, however, take your point that finance would be hard to come by, particularly in the current climate.
I'm actually no longer sure about by marina idea. There seem to be a lot of empty buoys in Portland Harbour this year and i'm told that the council no longer has a waiting list (not sure if thats true or not).
[quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: The ferry industry has been consolidating and battling lower margins for years. To my mind what has happened is inevitable. I suspect that it's value to Weymouth is in any case overstated. Councilor Bruce may be wrong in some of his comments, but he is right in one thing: if you have one customer (Condor) then you have a risk. My view: let them go , recognise that port traffic of the kind that Weymouth harbour can handle is in long term decline, develop the peninsula and look at options for the harbour itself (larger marina for example). An all weather water park, decent bowling rink and restaurants would attract more "tourist nights" than a quick overnight stop before catching a ferry.[/p][/quote]James, We have debated this point at length over the past few months in connection with the uncertainty over Condor. Whilst I do (in the absence of a replacement ferry operator) would like to see a major attraction over there, it is just not going to happen. The area is too small for any major private sector investment, and would also lack sufficient car parking spaces. As I was told in no uncertain terms last week by financial experts I met through work, the only part of the UK where businesses (and more importantly their financiers) are willing to invest in new leisure attractions (without significant residential content and public sector incentives) is London. The Howard Holdings scheme of several years ago was the best chance the area had for a 21st century make-over (and at no cost to the council) - unfortunately, certain locals put paid to that, and its a different financial world now. You mention bars and restaurants - most of the popular chains are under common ownership (not unlike the ferry industry!) and will go to the redeveloped Brewers Quay as soon as it is finished. As I said in an earlier e-mail, if Condor do not return, expect a new marina to replace the ferry terminal paid for by a significant residential redevelopment of the area - not for a long long time though............ Cheers Simon N.[/p][/quote]Yes, and maybe a residential development is the way that we have to go. When you say the area is too small, i'm assuming you are referring to the catchment area. However, Weymouth is a tourist town, so in summer season would, i guess, have a similar footfall as the Bournemouth conurbation. Torquay has Living Coasts. There's the Eden Project further down. Not to mention the Tate Gallery somewhere that i can't recall. I don't think that a waterpark is unfeasible - from what i can glean from elsewhere a modest one could be built for £10-15m. I am sure that there is room there for a residential development and a water park. I do, however, take your point that finance would be hard to come by, particularly in the current climate. I'm actually no longer sure about by marina idea. There seem to be a lot of empty buoys in Portland Harbour this year and i'm told that the council no longer has a waiting list (not sure if thats true or not). JamesYoung
  • Score: 1

10:39pm Thu 21 Aug 14

sweetdreamgirl says...

My head is spinning with all this chatter about Condor,I am sure it does not bring in as much revenue as some seem to think, let's bring the real figures into the open ,but my guess is that no one actually has any real facts as to whether we are even making any money from it.
My head is spinning with all this chatter about Condor,I am sure it does not bring in as much revenue as some seem to think, let's bring the real figures into the open ,but my guess is that no one actually has any real facts as to whether we are even making any money from it. sweetdreamgirl
  • Score: 1

10:47pm Thu 21 Aug 14

MrTomSmith says...

Pauldavid wrote:
You don't need to get up Boot Hill to get to Portland. If that's the only road argument against using Portland Port it's not relevant. Maybe if some of that £10 million + a lump from Portland Port was invested to improve existing facilities Condor could successfully use Portland. If I recall correctly the Americans launched their D-Day assault from Portland - it would have been chaos if they'd attempted the same thing from dear old, picture postcard, Weymouth harbour.

Let's face it Weymouth is fit for small pleasure craft, crabbing & ice cream but not for very big boats.

And one more thing. Why does everyone dismiss Portland out of hand. In this & the last thread very few people take any notice of pro Portland comments, not even deigning to respond to them in most cases. It seems like it's Weymouth or nothing - if Weymouth doesn't get Condor then Poole may as well have it! As a council tax payer on Portland, helping to prop up Weymouth it would be nice to get a bit of support now & then. Have a bit of vision & maybe it could work.
Told you.
[quote][p][bold]Pauldavid[/bold] wrote: You don't need to get up Boot Hill to get to Portland. If that's the only road argument against using Portland Port it's not relevant. Maybe if some of that £10 million + a lump from Portland Port was invested to improve existing facilities Condor could successfully use Portland. If I recall correctly the Americans launched their D-Day assault from Portland - it would have been chaos if they'd attempted the same thing from dear old, picture postcard, Weymouth harbour. Let's face it Weymouth is fit for small pleasure craft, crabbing & ice cream but not for very big boats. And one more thing. Why does everyone dismiss Portland out of hand. In this & the last thread very few people take any notice of pro Portland comments, not even deigning to respond to them in most cases. It seems like it's Weymouth or nothing - if Weymouth doesn't get Condor then Poole may as well have it! As a council tax payer on Portland, helping to prop up Weymouth it would be nice to get a bit of support now & then. Have a bit of vision & maybe it could work.[/p][/quote]Told you. MrTomSmith
  • Score: -2

10:50pm Thu 21 Aug 14

MrTomSmith says...

John Dorey wrote:
Dorset Voyager wrote:
Perhaps someone with a lot more knowledge than me could explain why the new ship won't fit into Weymouth. I know that its 16metres longer than the present vessels, but we've had 2 of those in port at the same time. It has the same beam of 27meters, Perhaps it's draft is a problem. Many thanks in advance.

I posted the above yesterday but have not had a reply fron anyone. Perhaps somebody in the know could enlighten me. Many thanks.
The new vessel is capable of carrying heavy trucks which the current linkspan in Weymouth doesn't have the load capacity to load them on the vessel. Also the ramp on the Austal is at the centre stern of the vessel and around 15 metres wide. The Incat has two ramps around 4 metres wide at either side of the stern of the vessel. The new vessels ramp simply wouldn't line up with the current link span in Weymouth. The Dukes of Hazzard may be able to get their car onto the boat but I doubt the average Hyacinth Bucket from Jersey would be willing to take the jump. I believe there could be a draught issue also as the new vessel has retractable bow thrusters which enable the boat to move sideways alongside the birth
What would make me really laugh, is if once they get this wonderful new boat/ship/ferry/ and it couldn't actually work out of Poole. Now that would be hilarious. I am sure not everyone sees the funny side, but there will be quite a lot that would.
[quote][p][bold]John Dorey[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dorset Voyager[/bold] wrote: Perhaps someone with a lot more knowledge than me could explain why the new ship won't fit into Weymouth. I know that its 16metres longer than the present vessels, but we've had 2 of those in port at the same time. It has the same beam of 27meters, Perhaps it's draft is a problem. Many thanks in advance. I posted the above yesterday but have not had a reply fron anyone. Perhaps somebody in the know could enlighten me. Many thanks.[/p][/quote]The new vessel is capable of carrying heavy trucks which the current linkspan in Weymouth doesn't have the load capacity to load them on the vessel. Also the ramp on the Austal is at the centre stern of the vessel and around 15 metres wide. The Incat has two ramps around 4 metres wide at either side of the stern of the vessel. The new vessels ramp simply wouldn't line up with the current link span in Weymouth. The Dukes of Hazzard may be able to get their car onto the boat but I doubt the average Hyacinth Bucket from Jersey would be willing to take the jump. I believe there could be a draught issue also as the new vessel has retractable bow thrusters which enable the boat to move sideways alongside the birth[/p][/quote]What would make me really laugh, is if once they get this wonderful new boat/ship/ferry/ and it couldn't actually work out of Poole. Now that would be hilarious. I am sure not everyone sees the funny side, but there will be quite a lot that would. MrTomSmith
  • Score: -4

10:55pm Thu 21 Aug 14

MrTomSmith says...

Simon Nicholas wrote:
Pauldavid wrote:
You don't need to get up Boot Hill to get to Portland. If that's the only road argument against using Portland Port it's not relevant. Maybe if some of that £10 million + a lump from Portland Port was invested to improve existing facilities Condor could successfully use Portland. If I recall correctly the Americans launched their D-Day assault from Portland - it would have been chaos if they'd attempted the same thing from dear old, picture postcard, Weymouth harbour.

Let's face it Weymouth is fit for small pleasure craft, crabbing & ice cream but not for very big boats.

And one more thing. Why does everyone dismiss Portland out of hand. In this & the last thread very few people take any notice of pro Portland comments, not even deigning to respond to them in most cases. It seems like it's Weymouth or nothing - if Weymouth doesn't get Condor then Poole may as well have it! As a council tax payer on Portland, helping to prop up Weymouth it would be nice to get a bit of support now & then. Have a bit of vision & maybe it could work.
Portland was NOT dismissed out of hand - Condor met with them. I certainly would have rather Condor had gone there rather than Poole. These however are the facts........
1) The road links (whatever you say) are not good enough.
2) Portland is a commercial port - they as such have to fund all enhancements themselves. As noted earlier, construction of a 21st century linkspan, associated terminal buildings, strengthing of the haroour wall and the laying out of a holding zone for up to 250 cars, would have cost millions. What would have happened if they had undertaken all that, and then Condor lost the channel islands contract. Its a risk a small privately owned port just could not take.
3) As a small privately funded port, if they had have undertaken the above works, they would had to have charged Condor significantly more in berthing fees than any of the alternatives, and an amount that Condor would not have been able to afford.
Very good, just waiting for the next one to come along.
"Has no-one thought about Portland" We will call for SN to explain.
[quote][p][bold]Simon Nicholas[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pauldavid[/bold] wrote: You don't need to get up Boot Hill to get to Portland. If that's the only road argument against using Portland Port it's not relevant. Maybe if some of that £10 million + a lump from Portland Port was invested to improve existing facilities Condor could successfully use Portland. If I recall correctly the Americans launched their D-Day assault from Portland - it would have been chaos if they'd attempted the same thing from dear old, picture postcard, Weymouth harbour. Let's face it Weymouth is fit for small pleasure craft, crabbing & ice cream but not for very big boats. And one more thing. Why does everyone dismiss Portland out of hand. In this & the last thread very few people take any notice of pro Portland comments, not even deigning to respond to them in most cases. It seems like it's Weymouth or nothing - if Weymouth doesn't get Condor then Poole may as well have it! As a council tax payer on Portland, helping to prop up Weymouth it would be nice to get a bit of support now & then. Have a bit of vision & maybe it could work.[/p][/quote]Portland was NOT dismissed out of hand - Condor met with them. I certainly would have rather Condor had gone there rather than Poole. These however are the facts........ 1) The road links (whatever you say) are not good enough. 2) Portland is a commercial port - they as such have to fund all enhancements themselves. As noted earlier, construction of a 21st century linkspan, associated terminal buildings, strengthing of the haroour wall and the laying out of a holding zone for up to 250 cars, would have cost millions. What would have happened if they had undertaken all that, and then Condor lost the channel islands contract. Its a risk a small privately owned port just could not take. 3) As a small privately funded port, if they had have undertaken the above works, they would had to have charged Condor significantly more in berthing fees than any of the alternatives, and an amount that Condor would not have been able to afford.[/p][/quote]Very good, just waiting for the next one to come along. "Has no-one thought about Portland" We will call for SN to explain. MrTomSmith
  • Score: 3

7:52am Fri 22 Aug 14

Get a grip says...

trymybest wrote:
Why can't Weymouth lease their boat and crew, there are two spare boats and crew going next year, Weymouth have the port all the facilities.
Not a good idea.

They do not have the skills required.
[quote][p][bold]trymybest[/bold] wrote: Why can't Weymouth lease their boat and crew, there are two spare boats and crew going next year, Weymouth have the port all the facilities.[/p][/quote]Not a good idea. They do not have the skills required. Get a grip
  • Score: 2

7:56am Fri 22 Aug 14

Rocksalt says...

Simon Nicholas wrote:
Pauldavid wrote:
You don't need to get up Boot Hill to get to Portland. If that's the only road argument against using Portland Port it's not relevant. Maybe if some of that £10 million + a lump from Portland Port was invested to improve existing facilities Condor could successfully use Portland. If I recall correctly the Americans launched their D-Day assault from Portland - it would have been chaos if they'd attempted the same thing from dear old, picture postcard, Weymouth harbour.

Let's face it Weymouth is fit for small pleasure craft, crabbing & ice cream but not for very big boats.

And one more thing. Why does everyone dismiss Portland out of hand. In this & the last thread very few people take any notice of pro Portland comments, not even deigning to respond to them in most cases. It seems like it's Weymouth or nothing - if Weymouth doesn't get Condor then Poole may as well have it! As a council tax payer on Portland, helping to prop up Weymouth it would be nice to get a bit of support now & then. Have a bit of vision & maybe it could work.
Portland was NOT dismissed out of hand - Condor met with them. I certainly would have rather Condor had gone there rather than Poole. These however are the facts........
1) The road links (whatever you say) are not good enough.
2) Portland is a commercial port - they as such have to fund all enhancements themselves. As noted earlier, construction of a 21st century linkspan, associated terminal buildings, strengthing of the haroour wall and the laying out of a holding zone for up to 250 cars, would have cost millions. What would have happened if they had undertaken all that, and then Condor lost the channel islands contract. Its a risk a small privately owned port just could not take.
3) As a small privately funded port, if they had have undertaken the above works, they would had to have charged Condor significantly more in berthing fees than any of the alternatives, and an amount that Condor would not have been able to afford.
I don't doubt that the harbour works alone would preclude Portland,but I do think that some of the other arguments are weak.

Far more people than will ever catch the ferry drive to work on ( and off) Portland every day. By and large they appear to manage this without great incident, otherwise the prison and IRC in particular would be in real trouble. In addition the current ferry sailing times largely seem to be at quiet times of day.

In terms of a holding zone for cars, there will soon be a rather sizeable area that currently houses the helicopter.

Anyway, moving on, muc of the debate here seems to be on what could and couldn't be done to develop the harbour. We need to think more laterally. If the harbour area isn't big enough then so be it. Use the land for housing and spend the money on something else in the Borough. Perhaps use any cash to pump prime one of the developments proposed for Portland.
[quote][p][bold]Simon Nicholas[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pauldavid[/bold] wrote: You don't need to get up Boot Hill to get to Portland. If that's the only road argument against using Portland Port it's not relevant. Maybe if some of that £10 million + a lump from Portland Port was invested to improve existing facilities Condor could successfully use Portland. If I recall correctly the Americans launched their D-Day assault from Portland - it would have been chaos if they'd attempted the same thing from dear old, picture postcard, Weymouth harbour. Let's face it Weymouth is fit for small pleasure craft, crabbing & ice cream but not for very big boats. And one more thing. Why does everyone dismiss Portland out of hand. In this & the last thread very few people take any notice of pro Portland comments, not even deigning to respond to them in most cases. It seems like it's Weymouth or nothing - if Weymouth doesn't get Condor then Poole may as well have it! As a council tax payer on Portland, helping to prop up Weymouth it would be nice to get a bit of support now & then. Have a bit of vision & maybe it could work.[/p][/quote]Portland was NOT dismissed out of hand - Condor met with them. I certainly would have rather Condor had gone there rather than Poole. These however are the facts........ 1) The road links (whatever you say) are not good enough. 2) Portland is a commercial port - they as such have to fund all enhancements themselves. As noted earlier, construction of a 21st century linkspan, associated terminal buildings, strengthing of the haroour wall and the laying out of a holding zone for up to 250 cars, would have cost millions. What would have happened if they had undertaken all that, and then Condor lost the channel islands contract. Its a risk a small privately owned port just could not take. 3) As a small privately funded port, if they had have undertaken the above works, they would had to have charged Condor significantly more in berthing fees than any of the alternatives, and an amount that Condor would not have been able to afford.[/p][/quote]I don't doubt that the harbour works alone would preclude Portland,but I do think that some of the other arguments are weak. Far more people than will ever catch the ferry drive to work on ( and off) Portland every day. By and large they appear to manage this without great incident, otherwise the prison and IRC in particular would be in real trouble. In addition the current ferry sailing times largely seem to be at quiet times of day. In terms of a holding zone for cars, there will soon be a rather sizeable area that currently houses the helicopter. Anyway, moving on, muc of the debate here seems to be on what could and couldn't be done to develop the harbour. We need to think more laterally. If the harbour area isn't big enough then so be it. Use the land for housing and spend the money on something else in the Borough. Perhaps use any cash to pump prime one of the developments proposed for Portland. Rocksalt
  • Score: 2

8:02am Fri 22 Aug 14

arlbergbahn says...

cosmick wrote:
Simon 1965 wrote:
cosmick wrote:
Well councillor Bruce, we now see one of the reasons we are in the position of the ferry going. YOU ARE NOT FIT TO DO THE JOB YOU DO WITHREGARDS THE FERRY AND WEYMOUTH HARBOUR. Its a joke that you and other members and Councillors are unable to see the loss to Weymouth. The jobs lost the money lost in all areas not just b/b but the spend money ie, passing trade to local shops , garages,food outlets cafes ect. Sadly people will now be put off from there jobs and the local councillors will be like fish out of water, with no ideas how to replace them or come up with any ideas of cost effective employment. Its time to get councillors that are able to deal with the challange ahead. Sadly that most of the councillors are up to the level of bussiness sence required. They and WPBC can take the blame for this position we are left in. Who takes the hit with money WE DO.
What exactly are you blaiming the council for Cosmick?

If you look at the history of comments on this web-site since the uncertainty broke in April, very few people who post here wanted the council to spend 10 more million pounds on Condor.

To be fair to the council, they have indeed refused to fund this themselves, or borrow money to do so, so why they are now being blaimed for losing Condor?
Hi Simon,
Any business has to have money put into it, if the business is a new one it needs money that the business owner either has or borrows.
But if you have a business that is getting money in (which the ferry was) you have to reinvest this was not done and was part of the reason for the downfall of the service.
To refuse to borrow money to do repairs or upgrade the berth is like sticking your head in the sand.
Now we have jobs going, b & b , hotels will take less money, its not just the cost of the repair, its the cost of the consequence of what the WPBC and the COUNCILLORS have allowed to happen, they should all pack up not one of them to my knowledge had any other plans or ideas about this.
Again i say they said they were talking to other parties who were they what happened to the talks or was it just a pack of lies.
Weymouth needs a ferry. What we dont need is idiot councillors thinking they can do a proper business job when they are out of there depth.
Not one of them will take any responsibility of the rubbish job they did and are still doing.
I hope when next years election come we get some proper people in to do the job, i dont care what party there from just that they can show some balls and get the job done.
You have to decide whether the investment would be cost-effective. This really would seem to be very questionable on that score. How long would it take to recoup the 14 million as it would have cost altogether from the amount of money Conder brings in, either directly in berthing fees or in these vague and intangible "massive benefits they bring to the economy"? I think the Council have (pause for gasp) made the right decision here; if Condor wanted this to be done, for their sole benefit, they should jolly well have paid for it themselves.
[quote][p][bold]cosmick[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]cosmick[/bold] wrote: Well councillor Bruce, we now see one of the reasons we are in the position of the ferry going. YOU ARE NOT FIT TO DO THE JOB YOU DO WITHREGARDS THE FERRY AND WEYMOUTH HARBOUR. Its a joke that you and other members and Councillors are unable to see the loss to Weymouth. The jobs lost the money lost in all areas not just b/b but the spend money ie, passing trade to local shops , garages,food outlets cafes ect. Sadly people will now be put off from there jobs and the local councillors will be like fish out of water, with no ideas how to replace them or come up with any ideas of cost effective employment. Its time to get councillors that are able to deal with the challange ahead. Sadly that most of the councillors are up to the level of bussiness sence required. They and WPBC can take the blame for this position we are left in. Who takes the hit with money WE DO.[/p][/quote]What exactly are you blaiming the council for Cosmick? If you look at the history of comments on this web-site since the uncertainty broke in April, very few people who post here wanted the council to spend 10 more million pounds on Condor. To be fair to the council, they have indeed refused to fund this themselves, or borrow money to do so, so why they are now being blaimed for losing Condor?[/p][/quote]Hi Simon, Any business has to have money put into it, if the business is a new one it needs money that the business owner either has or borrows. But if you have a business that is getting money in (which the ferry was) you have to reinvest this was not done and was part of the reason for the downfall of the service. To refuse to borrow money to do repairs or upgrade the berth is like sticking your head in the sand. Now we have jobs going, b & b , hotels will take less money, its not just the cost of the repair, its the cost of the consequence of what the WPBC and the COUNCILLORS have allowed to happen, they should all pack up not one of them to my knowledge had any other plans or ideas about this. Again i say they said they were talking to other parties who were they what happened to the talks or was it just a pack of lies. Weymouth needs a ferry. What we dont need is idiot councillors thinking they can do a proper business job when they are out of there depth. Not one of them will take any responsibility of the rubbish job they did and are still doing. I hope when next years election come we get some proper people in to do the job, i dont care what party there from just that they can show some balls and get the job done.[/p][/quote]You have to decide whether the investment would be cost-effective. This really would seem to be very questionable on that score. How long would it take to recoup the 14 million as it would have cost altogether from the amount of money Conder brings in, either directly in berthing fees or in these vague and intangible "massive benefits they bring to the economy"? I think the Council have (pause for gasp) made the right decision here; if Condor wanted this to be done, for their sole benefit, they should jolly well have paid for it themselves. arlbergbahn
  • Score: 0

8:04am Fri 22 Aug 14

sweetdreamgirl says...

arlbergbahn wrote:
cosmick wrote:
Simon 1965 wrote:
cosmick wrote:
Well councillor Bruce, we now see one of the reasons we are in the position of the ferry going. YOU ARE NOT FIT TO DO THE JOB YOU DO WITHREGARDS THE FERRY AND WEYMOUTH HARBOUR. Its a joke that you and other members and Councillors are unable to see the loss to Weymouth. The jobs lost the money lost in all areas not just b/b but the spend money ie, passing trade to local shops , garages,food outlets cafes ect. Sadly people will now be put off from there jobs and the local councillors will be like fish out of water, with no ideas how to replace them or come up with any ideas of cost effective employment. Its time to get councillors that are able to deal with the challange ahead. Sadly that most of the councillors are up to the level of bussiness sence required. They and WPBC can take the blame for this position we are left in. Who takes the hit with money WE DO.
What exactly are you blaiming the council for Cosmick?

If you look at the history of comments on this web-site since the uncertainty broke in April, very few people who post here wanted the council to spend 10 more million pounds on Condor.

To be fair to the council, they have indeed refused to fund this themselves, or borrow money to do so, so why they are now being blaimed for losing Condor?
Hi Simon,
Any business has to have money put into it, if the business is a new one it needs money that the business owner either has or borrows.
But if you have a business that is getting money in (which the ferry was) you have to reinvest this was not done and was part of the reason for the downfall of the service.
To refuse to borrow money to do repairs or upgrade the berth is like sticking your head in the sand.
Now we have jobs going, b & b , hotels will take less money, its not just the cost of the repair, its the cost of the consequence of what the WPBC and the COUNCILLORS have allowed to happen, they should all pack up not one of them to my knowledge had any other plans or ideas about this.
Again i say they said they were talking to other parties who were they what happened to the talks or was it just a pack of lies.
Weymouth needs a ferry. What we dont need is idiot councillors thinking they can do a proper business job when they are out of there depth.
Not one of them will take any responsibility of the rubbish job they did and are still doing.
I hope when next years election come we get some proper people in to do the job, i dont care what party there from just that they can show some balls and get the job done.
You have to decide whether the investment would be cost-effective. This really would seem to be very questionable on that score. How long would it take to recoup the 14 million as it would have cost altogether from the amount of money Conder brings in, either directly in berthing fees or in these vague and intangible "massive benefits they bring to the economy"? I think the Council have (pause for gasp) made the right decision here; if Condor wanted this to be done, for their sole benefit, they should jolly well have paid for it themselves.
Here here.
[quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]cosmick[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]cosmick[/bold] wrote: Well councillor Bruce, we now see one of the reasons we are in the position of the ferry going. YOU ARE NOT FIT TO DO THE JOB YOU DO WITHREGARDS THE FERRY AND WEYMOUTH HARBOUR. Its a joke that you and other members and Councillors are unable to see the loss to Weymouth. The jobs lost the money lost in all areas not just b/b but the spend money ie, passing trade to local shops , garages,food outlets cafes ect. Sadly people will now be put off from there jobs and the local councillors will be like fish out of water, with no ideas how to replace them or come up with any ideas of cost effective employment. Its time to get councillors that are able to deal with the challange ahead. Sadly that most of the councillors are up to the level of bussiness sence required. They and WPBC can take the blame for this position we are left in. Who takes the hit with money WE DO.[/p][/quote]What exactly are you blaiming the council for Cosmick? If you look at the history of comments on this web-site since the uncertainty broke in April, very few people who post here wanted the council to spend 10 more million pounds on Condor. To be fair to the council, they have indeed refused to fund this themselves, or borrow money to do so, so why they are now being blaimed for losing Condor?[/p][/quote]Hi Simon, Any business has to have money put into it, if the business is a new one it needs money that the business owner either has or borrows. But if you have a business that is getting money in (which the ferry was) you have to reinvest this was not done and was part of the reason for the downfall of the service. To refuse to borrow money to do repairs or upgrade the berth is like sticking your head in the sand. Now we have jobs going, b & b , hotels will take less money, its not just the cost of the repair, its the cost of the consequence of what the WPBC and the COUNCILLORS have allowed to happen, they should all pack up not one of them to my knowledge had any other plans or ideas about this. Again i say they said they were talking to other parties who were they what happened to the talks or was it just a pack of lies. Weymouth needs a ferry. What we dont need is idiot councillors thinking they can do a proper business job when they are out of there depth. Not one of them will take any responsibility of the rubbish job they did and are still doing. I hope when next years election come we get some proper people in to do the job, i dont care what party there from just that they can show some balls and get the job done.[/p][/quote]You have to decide whether the investment would be cost-effective. This really would seem to be very questionable on that score. How long would it take to recoup the 14 million as it would have cost altogether from the amount of money Conder brings in, either directly in berthing fees or in these vague and intangible "massive benefits they bring to the economy"? I think the Council have (pause for gasp) made the right decision here; if Condor wanted this to be done, for their sole benefit, they should jolly well have paid for it themselves.[/p][/quote]Here here. sweetdreamgirl
  • Score: 0

10:43am Fri 22 Aug 14

Simon 1965 says...

JamesYoung wrote:
Simon 1965 wrote:
JamesYoung wrote: The ferry industry has been consolidating and battling lower margins for years. To my mind what has happened is inevitable. I suspect that it's value to Weymouth is in any case overstated. Councilor Bruce may be wrong in some of his comments, but he is right in one thing: if you have one customer (Condor) then you have a risk. My view: let them go , recognise that port traffic of the kind that Weymouth harbour can handle is in long term decline, develop the peninsula and look at options for the harbour itself (larger marina for example). An all weather water park, decent bowling rink and restaurants would attract more "tourist nights" than a quick overnight stop before catching a ferry.
James, We have debated this point at length over the past few months in connection with the uncertainty over Condor. Whilst I do (in the absence of a replacement ferry operator) would like to see a major attraction over there, it is just not going to happen. The area is too small for any major private sector investment, and would also lack sufficient car parking spaces. As I was told in no uncertain terms last week by financial experts I met through work, the only part of the UK where businesses (and more importantly their financiers) are willing to invest in new leisure attractions (without significant residential content and public sector incentives) is London. The Howard Holdings scheme of several years ago was the best chance the area had for a 21st century make-over (and at no cost to the council) - unfortunately, certain locals put paid to that, and its a different financial world now. You mention bars and restaurants - most of the popular chains are under common ownership (not unlike the ferry industry!) and will go to the redeveloped Brewers Quay as soon as it is finished. As I said in an earlier e-mail, if Condor do not return, expect a new marina to replace the ferry terminal paid for by a significant residential redevelopment of the area - not for a long long time though............ Cheers Simon N.
Yes, and maybe a residential development is the way that we have to go. When you say the area is too small, i'm assuming you are referring to the catchment area. However, Weymouth is a tourist town, so in summer season would, i guess, have a similar footfall as the Bournemouth conurbation. Torquay has Living Coasts. There's the Eden Project further down. Not to mention the Tate Gallery somewhere that i can't recall. I don't think that a waterpark is unfeasible - from what i can glean from elsewhere a modest one could be built for £10-15m. I am sure that there is room there for a residential development and a water park. I do, however, take your point that finance would be hard to come by, particularly in the current climate. I'm actually no longer sure about by marina idea. There seem to be a lot of empty buoys in Portland Harbour this year and i'm told that the council no longer has a waiting list (not sure if thats true or not).
No James, its the size of the overall ferry teminal area rather than the catchment area - as you say, Weymouth is still an incredibly busy place to come to, its been a good year for tourist numbers as well, so no worries on that score. As you say, a figure of in excess of 10 million would be needed to develop a top class 21st century attraction on the site - however the business case for such a scheme in that small an area, especially as they would have to include a significant parking area as well, would be very hard to justify to any financiers.

I`m not trying to be overly negative here - its just that losing the ferry at this moment in time, economy wise, was the worst thing that could ever have happened - money to either upgrade the ferry terminal for Condor, or to redevelop the area for a new purpose, is going to be virtually impossible to find.
[quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: The ferry industry has been consolidating and battling lower margins for years. To my mind what has happened is inevitable. I suspect that it's value to Weymouth is in any case overstated. Councilor Bruce may be wrong in some of his comments, but he is right in one thing: if you have one customer (Condor) then you have a risk. My view: let them go , recognise that port traffic of the kind that Weymouth harbour can handle is in long term decline, develop the peninsula and look at options for the harbour itself (larger marina for example). An all weather water park, decent bowling rink and restaurants would attract more "tourist nights" than a quick overnight stop before catching a ferry.[/p][/quote]James, We have debated this point at length over the past few months in connection with the uncertainty over Condor. Whilst I do (in the absence of a replacement ferry operator) would like to see a major attraction over there, it is just not going to happen. The area is too small for any major private sector investment, and would also lack sufficient car parking spaces. As I was told in no uncertain terms last week by financial experts I met through work, the only part of the UK where businesses (and more importantly their financiers) are willing to invest in new leisure attractions (without significant residential content and public sector incentives) is London. The Howard Holdings scheme of several years ago was the best chance the area had for a 21st century make-over (and at no cost to the council) - unfortunately, certain locals put paid to that, and its a different financial world now. You mention bars and restaurants - most of the popular chains are under common ownership (not unlike the ferry industry!) and will go to the redeveloped Brewers Quay as soon as it is finished. As I said in an earlier e-mail, if Condor do not return, expect a new marina to replace the ferry terminal paid for by a significant residential redevelopment of the area - not for a long long time though............ Cheers Simon N.[/p][/quote]Yes, and maybe a residential development is the way that we have to go. When you say the area is too small, i'm assuming you are referring to the catchment area. However, Weymouth is a tourist town, so in summer season would, i guess, have a similar footfall as the Bournemouth conurbation. Torquay has Living Coasts. There's the Eden Project further down. Not to mention the Tate Gallery somewhere that i can't recall. I don't think that a waterpark is unfeasible - from what i can glean from elsewhere a modest one could be built for £10-15m. I am sure that there is room there for a residential development and a water park. I do, however, take your point that finance would be hard to come by, particularly in the current climate. I'm actually no longer sure about by marina idea. There seem to be a lot of empty buoys in Portland Harbour this year and i'm told that the council no longer has a waiting list (not sure if thats true or not).[/p][/quote]No James, its the size of the overall ferry teminal area rather than the catchment area - as you say, Weymouth is still an incredibly busy place to come to, its been a good year for tourist numbers as well, so no worries on that score. As you say, a figure of in excess of 10 million would be needed to develop a top class 21st century attraction on the site - however the business case for such a scheme in that small an area, especially as they would have to include a significant parking area as well, would be very hard to justify to any financiers. I`m not trying to be overly negative here - its just that losing the ferry at this moment in time, economy wise, was the worst thing that could ever have happened - money to either upgrade the ferry terminal for Condor, or to redevelop the area for a new purpose, is going to be virtually impossible to find. Simon 1965
  • Score: 2

11:06am Fri 22 Aug 14

arlbergbahn says...

Simon 1965 wrote:
JamesYoung wrote:
Simon 1965 wrote:
JamesYoung wrote: The ferry industry has been consolidating and battling lower margins for years. To my mind what has happened is inevitable. I suspect that it's value to Weymouth is in any case overstated. Councilor Bruce may be wrong in some of his comments, but he is right in one thing: if you have one customer (Condor) then you have a risk. My view: let them go , recognise that port traffic of the kind that Weymouth harbour can handle is in long term decline, develop the peninsula and look at options for the harbour itself (larger marina for example). An all weather water park, decent bowling rink and restaurants would attract more "tourist nights" than a quick overnight stop before catching a ferry.
James, We have debated this point at length over the past few months in connection with the uncertainty over Condor. Whilst I do (in the absence of a replacement ferry operator) would like to see a major attraction over there, it is just not going to happen. The area is too small for any major private sector investment, and would also lack sufficient car parking spaces. As I was told in no uncertain terms last week by financial experts I met through work, the only part of the UK where businesses (and more importantly their financiers) are willing to invest in new leisure attractions (without significant residential content and public sector incentives) is London. The Howard Holdings scheme of several years ago was the best chance the area had for a 21st century make-over (and at no cost to the council) - unfortunately, certain locals put paid to that, and its a different financial world now. You mention bars and restaurants - most of the popular chains are under common ownership (not unlike the ferry industry!) and will go to the redeveloped Brewers Quay as soon as it is finished. As I said in an earlier e-mail, if Condor do not return, expect a new marina to replace the ferry terminal paid for by a significant residential redevelopment of the area - not for a long long time though............ Cheers Simon N.
Yes, and maybe a residential development is the way that we have to go. When you say the area is too small, i'm assuming you are referring to the catchment area. However, Weymouth is a tourist town, so in summer season would, i guess, have a similar footfall as the Bournemouth conurbation. Torquay has Living Coasts. There's the Eden Project further down. Not to mention the Tate Gallery somewhere that i can't recall. I don't think that a waterpark is unfeasible - from what i can glean from elsewhere a modest one could be built for £10-15m. I am sure that there is room there for a residential development and a water park. I do, however, take your point that finance would be hard to come by, particularly in the current climate. I'm actually no longer sure about by marina idea. There seem to be a lot of empty buoys in Portland Harbour this year and i'm told that the council no longer has a waiting list (not sure if thats true or not).
No James, its the size of the overall ferry teminal area rather than the catchment area - as you say, Weymouth is still an incredibly busy place to come to, its been a good year for tourist numbers as well, so no worries on that score. As you say, a figure of in excess of 10 million would be needed to develop a top class 21st century attraction on the site - however the business case for such a scheme in that small an area, especially as they would have to include a significant parking area as well, would be very hard to justify to any financiers.

I`m not trying to be overly negative here - its just that losing the ferry at this moment in time, economy wise, was the worst thing that could ever have happened - money to either upgrade the ferry terminal for Condor, or to redevelop the area for a new purpose, is going to be virtually impossible to find.
You're not (I wish they had a choice of typographical options here, I'd have put it in italic) trying to be overly negative, but it's the worst thing that could ever have happened?? Why is it so incredibly vital? People just drive down, thus contributing to congestion, drive aboard, & off they go,often without even getting out of their car in Weymouth. They might, in view of the arrival times back, stay overnight in a Guest house, perhaps, but surely the numbers that might do so are significantly outweighed by other holidaymakers. The survival of the entire economy depends on one ferry sailing a day?
[quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: The ferry industry has been consolidating and battling lower margins for years. To my mind what has happened is inevitable. I suspect that it's value to Weymouth is in any case overstated. Councilor Bruce may be wrong in some of his comments, but he is right in one thing: if you have one customer (Condor) then you have a risk. My view: let them go , recognise that port traffic of the kind that Weymouth harbour can handle is in long term decline, develop the peninsula and look at options for the harbour itself (larger marina for example). An all weather water park, decent bowling rink and restaurants would attract more "tourist nights" than a quick overnight stop before catching a ferry.[/p][/quote]James, We have debated this point at length over the past few months in connection with the uncertainty over Condor. Whilst I do (in the absence of a replacement ferry operator) would like to see a major attraction over there, it is just not going to happen. The area is too small for any major private sector investment, and would also lack sufficient car parking spaces. As I was told in no uncertain terms last week by financial experts I met through work, the only part of the UK where businesses (and more importantly their financiers) are willing to invest in new leisure attractions (without significant residential content and public sector incentives) is London. The Howard Holdings scheme of several years ago was the best chance the area had for a 21st century make-over (and at no cost to the council) - unfortunately, certain locals put paid to that, and its a different financial world now. You mention bars and restaurants - most of the popular chains are under common ownership (not unlike the ferry industry!) and will go to the redeveloped Brewers Quay as soon as it is finished. As I said in an earlier e-mail, if Condor do not return, expect a new marina to replace the ferry terminal paid for by a significant residential redevelopment of the area - not for a long long time though............ Cheers Simon N.[/p][/quote]Yes, and maybe a residential development is the way that we have to go. When you say the area is too small, i'm assuming you are referring to the catchment area. However, Weymouth is a tourist town, so in summer season would, i guess, have a similar footfall as the Bournemouth conurbation. Torquay has Living Coasts. There's the Eden Project further down. Not to mention the Tate Gallery somewhere that i can't recall. I don't think that a waterpark is unfeasible - from what i can glean from elsewhere a modest one could be built for £10-15m. I am sure that there is room there for a residential development and a water park. I do, however, take your point that finance would be hard to come by, particularly in the current climate. I'm actually no longer sure about by marina idea. There seem to be a lot of empty buoys in Portland Harbour this year and i'm told that the council no longer has a waiting list (not sure if thats true or not).[/p][/quote]No James, its the size of the overall ferry teminal area rather than the catchment area - as you say, Weymouth is still an incredibly busy place to come to, its been a good year for tourist numbers as well, so no worries on that score. As you say, a figure of in excess of 10 million would be needed to develop a top class 21st century attraction on the site - however the business case for such a scheme in that small an area, especially as they would have to include a significant parking area as well, would be very hard to justify to any financiers. I`m not trying to be overly negative here - its just that losing the ferry at this moment in time, economy wise, was the worst thing that could ever have happened - money to either upgrade the ferry terminal for Condor, or to redevelop the area for a new purpose, is going to be virtually impossible to find.[/p][/quote]You're not (I wish they had a choice of typographical options here, I'd have put it in italic) trying to be overly negative, but it's the worst thing that could ever have happened?? Why is it so incredibly vital? People just drive down, thus contributing to congestion, drive aboard, & off they go,often without even getting out of their car in Weymouth. They might, in view of the arrival times back, stay overnight in a Guest house, perhaps, but surely the numbers that might do so are significantly outweighed by other holidaymakers. The survival of the entire economy depends on one ferry sailing a day? arlbergbahn
  • Score: 5

11:44am Fri 22 Aug 14

Simon 1965 says...

arlbergbahn wrote:
Simon 1965 wrote:
JamesYoung wrote:
Simon 1965 wrote:
JamesYoung wrote: The ferry industry has been consolidating and battling lower margins for years. To my mind what has happened is inevitable. I suspect that it's value to Weymouth is in any case overstated. Councilor Bruce may be wrong in some of his comments, but he is right in one thing: if you have one customer (Condor) then you have a risk. My view: let them go , recognise that port traffic of the kind that Weymouth harbour can handle is in long term decline, develop the peninsula and look at options for the harbour itself (larger marina for example). An all weather water park, decent bowling rink and restaurants would attract more "tourist nights" than a quick overnight stop before catching a ferry.
James, We have debated this point at length over the past few months in connection with the uncertainty over Condor. Whilst I do (in the absence of a replacement ferry operator) would like to see a major attraction over there, it is just not going to happen. The area is too small for any major private sector investment, and would also lack sufficient car parking spaces. As I was told in no uncertain terms last week by financial experts I met through work, the only part of the UK where businesses (and more importantly their financiers) are willing to invest in new leisure attractions (without significant residential content and public sector incentives) is London. The Howard Holdings scheme of several years ago was the best chance the area had for a 21st century make-over (and at no cost to the council) - unfortunately, certain locals put paid to that, and its a different financial world now. You mention bars and restaurants - most of the popular chains are under common ownership (not unlike the ferry industry!) and will go to the redeveloped Brewers Quay as soon as it is finished. As I said in an earlier e-mail, if Condor do not return, expect a new marina to replace the ferry terminal paid for by a significant residential redevelopment of the area - not for a long long time though............ Cheers Simon N.
Yes, and maybe a residential development is the way that we have to go. When you say the area is too small, i'm assuming you are referring to the catchment area. However, Weymouth is a tourist town, so in summer season would, i guess, have a similar footfall as the Bournemouth conurbation. Torquay has Living Coasts. There's the Eden Project further down. Not to mention the Tate Gallery somewhere that i can't recall. I don't think that a waterpark is unfeasible - from what i can glean from elsewhere a modest one could be built for £10-15m. I am sure that there is room there for a residential development and a water park. I do, however, take your point that finance would be hard to come by, particularly in the current climate. I'm actually no longer sure about by marina idea. There seem to be a lot of empty buoys in Portland Harbour this year and i'm told that the council no longer has a waiting list (not sure if thats true or not).
No James, its the size of the overall ferry teminal area rather than the catchment area - as you say, Weymouth is still an incredibly busy place to come to, its been a good year for tourist numbers as well, so no worries on that score. As you say, a figure of in excess of 10 million would be needed to develop a top class 21st century attraction on the site - however the business case for such a scheme in that small an area, especially as they would have to include a significant parking area as well, would be very hard to justify to any financiers. I`m not trying to be overly negative here - its just that losing the ferry at this moment in time, economy wise, was the worst thing that could ever have happened - money to either upgrade the ferry terminal for Condor, or to redevelop the area for a new purpose, is going to be virtually impossible to find.
You're not (I wish they had a choice of typographical options here, I'd have put it in italic) trying to be overly negative, but it's the worst thing that could ever have happened?? Why is it so incredibly vital? People just drive down, thus contributing to congestion, drive aboard, & off they go,often without even getting out of their car in Weymouth. They might, in view of the arrival times back, stay overnight in a Guest house, perhaps, but surely the numbers that might do so are significantly outweighed by other holidaymakers. The survival of the entire economy depends on one ferry sailing a day?
Thats not what I was saying as such.

The point I was making is that whatever they decide to do with the terminal area, it is going to need big money, and there has never been a worse time in recent economic history to find it, regardless of whether its a public or private sectior initiative.

At least until the end of March 2015, the ferry is still here, and the terminal area still therefore has a transparant economic purpose, and is as such a "living thing". There is nothing worse than looking at a prominent peace of land no longer required for its intendeded purpose, but this will be the situation come Easter 2015, and it will stay that way for many years to come while the council debate their ten year plan to death before realising none of it can be funded.
[quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: The ferry industry has been consolidating and battling lower margins for years. To my mind what has happened is inevitable. I suspect that it's value to Weymouth is in any case overstated. Councilor Bruce may be wrong in some of his comments, but he is right in one thing: if you have one customer (Condor) then you have a risk. My view: let them go , recognise that port traffic of the kind that Weymouth harbour can handle is in long term decline, develop the peninsula and look at options for the harbour itself (larger marina for example). An all weather water park, decent bowling rink and restaurants would attract more "tourist nights" than a quick overnight stop before catching a ferry.[/p][/quote]James, We have debated this point at length over the past few months in connection with the uncertainty over Condor. Whilst I do (in the absence of a replacement ferry operator) would like to see a major attraction over there, it is just not going to happen. The area is too small for any major private sector investment, and would also lack sufficient car parking spaces. As I was told in no uncertain terms last week by financial experts I met through work, the only part of the UK where businesses (and more importantly their financiers) are willing to invest in new leisure attractions (without significant residential content and public sector incentives) is London. The Howard Holdings scheme of several years ago was the best chance the area had for a 21st century make-over (and at no cost to the council) - unfortunately, certain locals put paid to that, and its a different financial world now. You mention bars and restaurants - most of the popular chains are under common ownership (not unlike the ferry industry!) and will go to the redeveloped Brewers Quay as soon as it is finished. As I said in an earlier e-mail, if Condor do not return, expect a new marina to replace the ferry terminal paid for by a significant residential redevelopment of the area - not for a long long time though............ Cheers Simon N.[/p][/quote]Yes, and maybe a residential development is the way that we have to go. When you say the area is too small, i'm assuming you are referring to the catchment area. However, Weymouth is a tourist town, so in summer season would, i guess, have a similar footfall as the Bournemouth conurbation. Torquay has Living Coasts. There's the Eden Project further down. Not to mention the Tate Gallery somewhere that i can't recall. I don't think that a waterpark is unfeasible - from what i can glean from elsewhere a modest one could be built for £10-15m. I am sure that there is room there for a residential development and a water park. I do, however, take your point that finance would be hard to come by, particularly in the current climate. I'm actually no longer sure about by marina idea. There seem to be a lot of empty buoys in Portland Harbour this year and i'm told that the council no longer has a waiting list (not sure if thats true or not).[/p][/quote]No James, its the size of the overall ferry teminal area rather than the catchment area - as you say, Weymouth is still an incredibly busy place to come to, its been a good year for tourist numbers as well, so no worries on that score. As you say, a figure of in excess of 10 million would be needed to develop a top class 21st century attraction on the site - however the business case for such a scheme in that small an area, especially as they would have to include a significant parking area as well, would be very hard to justify to any financiers. I`m not trying to be overly negative here - its just that losing the ferry at this moment in time, economy wise, was the worst thing that could ever have happened - money to either upgrade the ferry terminal for Condor, or to redevelop the area for a new purpose, is going to be virtually impossible to find.[/p][/quote]You're not (I wish they had a choice of typographical options here, I'd have put it in italic) trying to be overly negative, but it's the worst thing that could ever have happened?? Why is it so incredibly vital? People just drive down, thus contributing to congestion, drive aboard, & off they go,often without even getting out of their car in Weymouth. They might, in view of the arrival times back, stay overnight in a Guest house, perhaps, but surely the numbers that might do so are significantly outweighed by other holidaymakers. The survival of the entire economy depends on one ferry sailing a day?[/p][/quote]Thats not what I was saying as such. The point I was making is that whatever they decide to do with the terminal area, it is going to need big money, and there has never been a worse time in recent economic history to find it, regardless of whether its a public or private sectior initiative. At least until the end of March 2015, the ferry is still here, and the terminal area still therefore has a transparant economic purpose, and is as such a "living thing". There is nothing worse than looking at a prominent peace of land no longer required for its intendeded purpose, but this will be the situation come Easter 2015, and it will stay that way for many years to come while the council debate their ten year plan to death before realising none of it can be funded. Simon 1965
  • Score: 2

12:06pm Fri 22 Aug 14

Get a grip says...

Get a grip wrote:
trymybest wrote:
Why can't Weymouth lease their boat and crew, there are two spare boats and crew going next year, Weymouth have the port all the facilities.
Not a good idea.

They do not have the skills required.
Think about it they can not even run the council, a job they should be able to do.

How would you expect them to run a ferry company?
[quote][p][bold]Get a grip[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]trymybest[/bold] wrote: Why can't Weymouth lease their boat and crew, there are two spare boats and crew going next year, Weymouth have the port all the facilities.[/p][/quote]Not a good idea. They do not have the skills required.[/p][/quote]Think about it they can not even run the council, a job they should be able to do. How would you expect them to run a ferry company? Get a grip
  • Score: 4

12:06pm Sat 23 Aug 14

JamesYoung says...

Simon 1965 wrote:
arlbergbahn wrote:
Simon 1965 wrote:
JamesYoung wrote:
Simon 1965 wrote:
JamesYoung wrote: The ferry industry has been consolidating and battling lower margins for years. To my mind what has happened is inevitable. I suspect that it's value to Weymouth is in any case overstated. Councilor Bruce may be wrong in some of his comments, but he is right in one thing: if you have one customer (Condor) then you have a risk. My view: let them go , recognise that port traffic of the kind that Weymouth harbour can handle is in long term decline, develop the peninsula and look at options for the harbour itself (larger marina for example). An all weather water park, decent bowling rink and restaurants would attract more "tourist nights" than a quick overnight stop before catching a ferry.
James, We have debated this point at length over the past few months in connection with the uncertainty over Condor. Whilst I do (in the absence of a replacement ferry operator) would like to see a major attraction over there, it is just not going to happen. The area is too small for any major private sector investment, and would also lack sufficient car parking spaces. As I was told in no uncertain terms last week by financial experts I met through work, the only part of the UK where businesses (and more importantly their financiers) are willing to invest in new leisure attractions (without significant residential content and public sector incentives) is London. The Howard Holdings scheme of several years ago was the best chance the area had for a 21st century make-over (and at no cost to the council) - unfortunately, certain locals put paid to that, and its a different financial world now. You mention bars and restaurants - most of the popular chains are under common ownership (not unlike the ferry industry!) and will go to the redeveloped Brewers Quay as soon as it is finished. As I said in an earlier e-mail, if Condor do not return, expect a new marina to replace the ferry terminal paid for by a significant residential redevelopment of the area - not for a long long time though............ Cheers Simon N.
Yes, and maybe a residential development is the way that we have to go. When you say the area is too small, i'm assuming you are referring to the catchment area. However, Weymouth is a tourist town, so in summer season would, i guess, have a similar footfall as the Bournemouth conurbation. Torquay has Living Coasts. There's the Eden Project further down. Not to mention the Tate Gallery somewhere that i can't recall. I don't think that a waterpark is unfeasible - from what i can glean from elsewhere a modest one could be built for £10-15m. I am sure that there is room there for a residential development and a water park. I do, however, take your point that finance would be hard to come by, particularly in the current climate. I'm actually no longer sure about by marina idea. There seem to be a lot of empty buoys in Portland Harbour this year and i'm told that the council no longer has a waiting list (not sure if thats true or not).
No James, its the size of the overall ferry teminal area rather than the catchment area - as you say, Weymouth is still an incredibly busy place to come to, its been a good year for tourist numbers as well, so no worries on that score. As you say, a figure of in excess of 10 million would be needed to develop a top class 21st century attraction on the site - however the business case for such a scheme in that small an area, especially as they would have to include a significant parking area as well, would be very hard to justify to any financiers. I`m not trying to be overly negative here - its just that losing the ferry at this moment in time, economy wise, was the worst thing that could ever have happened - money to either upgrade the ferry terminal for Condor, or to redevelop the area for a new purpose, is going to be virtually impossible to find.
You're not (I wish they had a choice of typographical options here, I'd have put it in italic) trying to be overly negative, but it's the worst thing that could ever have happened?? Why is it so incredibly vital? People just drive down, thus contributing to congestion, drive aboard, & off they go,often without even getting out of their car in Weymouth. They might, in view of the arrival times back, stay overnight in a Guest house, perhaps, but surely the numbers that might do so are significantly outweighed by other holidaymakers. The survival of the entire economy depends on one ferry sailing a day?
Thats not what I was saying as such.

The point I was making is that whatever they decide to do with the terminal area, it is going to need big money, and there has never been a worse time in recent economic history to find it, regardless of whether its a public or private sectior initiative.

At least until the end of March 2015, the ferry is still here, and the terminal area still therefore has a transparant economic purpose, and is as such a "living thing". There is nothing worse than looking at a prominent peace of land no longer required for its intendeded purpose, but this will be the situation come Easter 2015, and it will stay that way for many years to come while the council debate their ten year plan to death before realising none of it can be funded.
Yes, this is the other side of the coin i suppose.
But i'm not sure that the land couldn't be exploited in the meantime.
Some thoughts off the top of my head
A signposted "Harbour Walk". Park at the Ferry terminal, follow the signs down to the rowboat ferry, walk up to the Nothe, then back along the Harbour, over the Town Bridge and back along the side with the railway lines to your point of origin. That would create some footfall that might encourage some enterprise to take on and refurbish the old cafe at the end of the pier there.
A sculpture park of some description - invite local artists to create it. Potentially zero cost to the council apart from levelling and landscaping.
Or why not throw up a "Seafood Village". A permanent sea food festival if you like, using wooden kiosks rather than canopies. Again, could be relatively low cost.
That's off the top of my head, but i'm sure the council could come up with something. The problem with all the above is that they depend on seasonal traffic. That's why i say that if we are serious about the long term future of the town, we need unique attractions that are all weather. A bowling alley in a back street doesn't cut the mustard.
[quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: The ferry industry has been consolidating and battling lower margins for years. To my mind what has happened is inevitable. I suspect that it's value to Weymouth is in any case overstated. Councilor Bruce may be wrong in some of his comments, but he is right in one thing: if you have one customer (Condor) then you have a risk. My view: let them go , recognise that port traffic of the kind that Weymouth harbour can handle is in long term decline, develop the peninsula and look at options for the harbour itself (larger marina for example). An all weather water park, decent bowling rink and restaurants would attract more "tourist nights" than a quick overnight stop before catching a ferry.[/p][/quote]James, We have debated this point at length over the past few months in connection with the uncertainty over Condor. Whilst I do (in the absence of a replacement ferry operator) would like to see a major attraction over there, it is just not going to happen. The area is too small for any major private sector investment, and would also lack sufficient car parking spaces. As I was told in no uncertain terms last week by financial experts I met through work, the only part of the UK where businesses (and more importantly their financiers) are willing to invest in new leisure attractions (without significant residential content and public sector incentives) is London. The Howard Holdings scheme of several years ago was the best chance the area had for a 21st century make-over (and at no cost to the council) - unfortunately, certain locals put paid to that, and its a different financial world now. You mention bars and restaurants - most of the popular chains are under common ownership (not unlike the ferry industry!) and will go to the redeveloped Brewers Quay as soon as it is finished. As I said in an earlier e-mail, if Condor do not return, expect a new marina to replace the ferry terminal paid for by a significant residential redevelopment of the area - not for a long long time though............ Cheers Simon N.[/p][/quote]Yes, and maybe a residential development is the way that we have to go. When you say the area is too small, i'm assuming you are referring to the catchment area. However, Weymouth is a tourist town, so in summer season would, i guess, have a similar footfall as the Bournemouth conurbation. Torquay has Living Coasts. There's the Eden Project further down. Not to mention the Tate Gallery somewhere that i can't recall. I don't think that a waterpark is unfeasible - from what i can glean from elsewhere a modest one could be built for £10-15m. I am sure that there is room there for a residential development and a water park. I do, however, take your point that finance would be hard to come by, particularly in the current climate. I'm actually no longer sure about by marina idea. There seem to be a lot of empty buoys in Portland Harbour this year and i'm told that the council no longer has a waiting list (not sure if thats true or not).[/p][/quote]No James, its the size of the overall ferry teminal area rather than the catchment area - as you say, Weymouth is still an incredibly busy place to come to, its been a good year for tourist numbers as well, so no worries on that score. As you say, a figure of in excess of 10 million would be needed to develop a top class 21st century attraction on the site - however the business case for such a scheme in that small an area, especially as they would have to include a significant parking area as well, would be very hard to justify to any financiers. I`m not trying to be overly negative here - its just that losing the ferry at this moment in time, economy wise, was the worst thing that could ever have happened - money to either upgrade the ferry terminal for Condor, or to redevelop the area for a new purpose, is going to be virtually impossible to find.[/p][/quote]You're not (I wish they had a choice of typographical options here, I'd have put it in italic) trying to be overly negative, but it's the worst thing that could ever have happened?? Why is it so incredibly vital? People just drive down, thus contributing to congestion, drive aboard, & off they go,often without even getting out of their car in Weymouth. They might, in view of the arrival times back, stay overnight in a Guest house, perhaps, but surely the numbers that might do so are significantly outweighed by other holidaymakers. The survival of the entire economy depends on one ferry sailing a day?[/p][/quote]Thats not what I was saying as such. The point I was making is that whatever they decide to do with the terminal area, it is going to need big money, and there has never been a worse time in recent economic history to find it, regardless of whether its a public or private sectior initiative. At least until the end of March 2015, the ferry is still here, and the terminal area still therefore has a transparant economic purpose, and is as such a "living thing". There is nothing worse than looking at a prominent peace of land no longer required for its intendeded purpose, but this will be the situation come Easter 2015, and it will stay that way for many years to come while the council debate their ten year plan to death before realising none of it can be funded.[/p][/quote]Yes, this is the other side of the coin i suppose. But i'm not sure that the land couldn't be exploited in the meantime. Some thoughts off the top of my head A signposted "Harbour Walk". Park at the Ferry terminal, follow the signs down to the rowboat ferry, walk up to the Nothe, then back along the Harbour, over the Town Bridge and back along the side with the railway lines to your point of origin. That would create some footfall that might encourage some enterprise to take on and refurbish the old cafe at the end of the pier there. A sculpture park of some description - invite local artists to create it. Potentially zero cost to the council apart from levelling and landscaping. Or why not throw up a "Seafood Village". A permanent sea food festival if you like, using wooden kiosks rather than canopies. Again, could be relatively low cost. That's off the top of my head, but i'm sure the council could come up with something. The problem with all the above is that they depend on seasonal traffic. That's why i say that if we are serious about the long term future of the town, we need unique attractions that are all weather. A bowling alley in a back street doesn't cut the mustard. JamesYoung
  • Score: 1

8:34pm Sun 24 Aug 14

lawrenceweston says...

Why don't the council privatise the harbour allowing major private investment into the town by those that understand business. Do away with WPB council entirely by merging WDDC and NDDC with WPB Council sell off the offices overlooking the marina ( ahuge investment opportunity that will be ruined by more housing) move the magistrate courts, the ambulance headquarters and allow some major development that will bring something unique to Weymouth showing off its history and culture but giving us hope for the future. Weymouth cannot continue as a fish and chip holiday destination only as it continues to grow in size. We need professionals leading us who understand the business world, not holding 'pop up' consultations when the majority of us are working, consulting everyone and everything before they make a bodged compromise mix of everyone's views that satisfies no one. Lead! Attract new people, new business, new investment. The same people missed the opportunity to have a dual carriageway direct to Dorchester, choosing to create an obvious bottle neck for everyone travelling to Dorchetser in the morning; ensured there was no legacy from the olympics other than an embarrassing sign saying it was held here - the sailing academy site is now like a ghost town. We all need to decide is Weymouth a small scruffy town in decline or whether Weymouth wants to be a part of the 21st century.
Why don't the council privatise the harbour allowing major private investment into the town by those that understand business. Do away with WPB council entirely by merging WDDC and NDDC with WPB Council sell off the offices overlooking the marina ( ahuge investment opportunity that will be ruined by more housing) move the magistrate courts, the ambulance headquarters and allow some major development that will bring something unique to Weymouth showing off its history and culture but giving us hope for the future. Weymouth cannot continue as a fish and chip holiday destination only as it continues to grow in size. We need professionals leading us who understand the business world, not holding 'pop up' consultations when the majority of us are working, consulting everyone and everything before they make a bodged compromise mix of everyone's views that satisfies no one. Lead! Attract new people, new business, new investment. The same people missed the opportunity to have a dual carriageway direct to Dorchester, choosing to create an obvious bottle neck for everyone travelling to Dorchetser in the morning; ensured there was no legacy from the olympics other than an embarrassing sign saying it was held here - the sailing academy site is now like a ghost town. We all need to decide is Weymouth a small scruffy town in decline or whether Weymouth wants to be a part of the 21st century. lawrenceweston
  • Score: -1
Post a comment

Remember you are personally responsible for what you post on this site and must abide by our site terms. Do not post anything that is false, abusive or malicious. If you wish to complain, please use the ‘report this post’ link.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree