panama canal fees to rise

[foolishsailor]

That's disappointing to hear.

Well maybe you should call these fellas

http://www.decastro-robles.com/en/in...d=69&Itemid=95

[barnakiel]

Originally Posted by foolishsailor

That's disappointing to hear.

Well maybe you should call these fellas

CLAIMS AGAINST THE PANAMA CANAL AUTHORITY

I believe this is what those with damage do.

I will rather go via Tex and Cal ;-) or the Magellhane's ;-(.

b.

[sneuman]

Originally Posted by susanna reiter

Thank You Jimmy Carter.....Thank you sooooo much.

Um, you do realize that a U.S.-run canal would be in the same position as the Panama-run one is now? With the proliferation of post-Panamax ships, the canal needs a multi-billion dollar expansion to even remain marginally relevant.

Thus a death-spiral rate increase. What makes you think that a U.S.-run canal would be exempt from the market forces in the shipping industry?

[colemj]

I'm sure everyone's circumstances and experiences are unique. We went through last November with friends on their boat. The experience was professional and the canal authority administration had no problem working with us on the paperwork without an agent. The two advisors were top-notch, knowledgable and very helpful with boat work. The lock workers were very professional. The bank refunded the deposit in a little over one week with no hassles. At the time, the canal was only taking small boats through E-W in the evening to Gatun Lake, leaving them overnight and continuing the next day - we were never asked about speed. Our first advisor stopped by the boat on a small runabout around midnight with 20lbs of ice for us for the next day!

Mark

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by foolishsailor

To steer this back on track and away from the mudslinging...

One thing that must also be considered is the minimum speed requirements for transit. They expect you to be able to hold an average 8kt speed. Neither of the boats I took through could hold is speed and we spent the night in Gatun Lake. This was back in 93 and 97.

This adds extra cost as you pay for your "pilot". This is typically deducted from your deposit.

In the 7 transits I've done this year and last 5 had a stop over in Lake Gatun for the night and 2 were done in one day. There is no additional charge if it is 2 day transit, even if you can only do 5.5 kts when you get on the water. The only boat that was charged a fee that I was on was one where we cancelled at 6:30am for a 7am scheduled transit because the engine would not start. The cost was $471.

[hellosailor]

Mark-
"After all, the canal is in "America", so it must be ours."
Possession being 9/10's of the law, yes actually.

We built the Canal, after ensuring the creation of Panama, for the purpose of building the Canal and owning it. Imperialistic to be certain, but that's how it was. In the meantime, since we built it, why on earth would we (or any other nation) simply give it up, walk away, and let some other nation make all the money from it? And control it.

So if we're going to suddenly "get religion" and restore the balance of universal harmony...that has to include restoring the balance all the way. Unring the bell, fill the ditch back in and plant nice things on top of it, and yes, I'm afraid that would also mean giving Panama back to Columbia, along with our apologies for the revolution.

But walking away and nothing more? Now, THAT'S absurd.

sneuman-
"What makes you think that a U.S.-run canal would be exempt from the market forces in the shipping industry? "
Ergh, the fact that it was being run by the same government that brings us the US Psotal Service? A similar chartered monopoly Who sadly never had a clue nor ever responded to market factors?
After all, how long did the US retain NAS Bermuda after it had no strategic value, except as a really nice reward for officers who liked to play golf?
Under a US regime, "give the yachties a break, they add color" might be justifiable. Under the Chinese government? Not qute the same, they're the folks who shoot you and then send your family a bill for the bullet. Oh no, no, never, not any more, sure, they've changed.

[colemj]

Originally Posted by hellosailor

Mark-
"After all, the canal is in "America", so it must be ours."
Possession being 9/10's of the law, yes actually.

We built the Canal, after ensuring the creation of Panama, for the purpose of building the Canal and owning it. Imperialistic to be certain, but that's how it was. In the meantime, since we built it, why on earth would we (or any other nation) simply give it up, walk away, and let some other nation make all the money from it? And control it.

So if we're going to suddenly "get religion" and restore the balance of universal harmony...that has to include restoring the balance all the way. Unring the bell, fill the ditch back in and plant nice things on top of it, and yes, I'm afraid that would also mean giving Panama back to Columbia, along with our apologies for the revolution.

But walking away and nothing more? Now, THAT'S absurd.

sneuman-
"What makes you think that a U.S.-run canal would be exempt from the market forces in the shipping industry? "
Ergh, the fact that it was being run by the same government that brings us the US Psotal Service? A similar chartered monopoly Who sadly never had a clue nor ever responded to market factors?
After all, how long did the US retain NAS Bermuda after it had no strategic value, except as a really nice reward for officers who liked to play golf?
Under a US regime, "give the yachties a break, they add color" might be justifiable. Under the Chinese government? Not qute the same, they're the folks who shoot you and then send your family a bill for the bullet. Oh no, no, never, not any more, sure, they've changed.

Your argument is absurd. You really think filling in the canal is a reasonable response? And that the US economy could sustain such a thing? It would bring the US to its economic knees, let alone the political ramifications. All for a bit of over-testosteroned posturing? And what happens when someone else digs it back out and starts operations again? How much of a chance will the US be given in THAT new economy? I guess we could just nuke them all and take it over again...

Do you think we should have kept Vietnam? Germany? Iraq? We possessed them and gave them back.

I am always surprised at these types of wild west responses without the least bit of examination - and it happens so often that my surprise at it surprises me.

I can only hope that you are purposefully using absurdities to make the opposite point and that it is escaping me.

Mark

[hellosailor]

"Do you think we should have kept Vietnam? Germany? Iraq? We possessed them and gave them back."

Each a different situation. I'd love to repond, but I suspect the mods would call thats politics, seriously OT, and chastise us all for digressing there.

So let's save that for another venue, and return to the economics of the Panama Canal. Hopefully our investment paid off, and we simply made a charitable contribution to two other nation states, Panama and China.

Operating a big ditch has to be expensive. Shelling out a grand to use it, as opposed to taking a couple of months and rounding the continent? Arguably still the cheapest way to travel.

[sneuman]

Originally Posted by hellosailor

sneuman-
"What makes you think that a U.S.-run canal would be exempt from the market forces in the shipping industry? "
Ergh, the fact that it was being run by the same government that brings us the US Psotal Service? A similar chartered monopoly Who sadly never had a clue nor ever responded to market factors?
After all, how long did the US retain NAS Bermuda after it had no strategic value, except as a really nice reward for officers who liked to play golf?
Under a US regime, "give the yachties a break, they add color" might be justifiable. Under the Chinese government? Not qute the same, they're the folks who shoot you and then send your family a bill for the bullet. Oh no, no, never, not any more, sure, they've changed.

Well, that's a kind of logic if you stretch the definition to the breaking point.

[zeehag]

1. panama canal is NOT run by panama..is run by chinese. go figger.
2-the rates increase july, 2012, yes, this year. will be as the article stated, 60-115 percent higher than now, depending on size of boat to pass.
3-the minimum speed needed is 5 kts steady
4-has the lake anchorage truly been discontinued?/ if so, where does one spend the layover night?
or does one motor straight thru??? mebbe boatman can tell us....

should be interesting to see how a hull speed rated 7 kts boat (private sailing boats)can go thru at 8 kts.... means no one can transit except ships...
5- re-read the article, which was posted in cruising compass recently. deals with soon to be rate hikes. the what is now stuff is totally IRRELEVANT.

[avb3]

Originally Posted by zeehag

1. panama canal is NOT run by panama..is run by chinese. go figger.

Actually, they do not.

That information came from an erroneous statement Hilary Clinton made back in 2006.

From the Newsmax story:

Tuesday, March 14, 2006 9:55 a.m. EST
Panama Canal: Hillary Clinton Wrong on Chinese Control

In late February, NewsMax.com reported that "Hillary Clinton Rips Bill's Panama Ports Deal."

The NewsMax report has not made the operators of the Panama Canal happy.

NewsMax received the following letter from the head of the Panama Canal Authority:

Dear Editor:

This pertains to a recent article printed in your publication on February 27, 2006, entitled "Hillary Clinton Rips Bill’s Panama Ports Deal.” The article pointed out that the Panama Canal is being run by the Chinese, which is completely inaccurate.

The Panama Canal is managed and operated by the Panama Canal Authority (ACP), an autonomous agency of the government of Panama. Contrary to statements and reports that the Canal is run by the Chinese, neither the Government of China nor a private Chinese company has anything to do with the management, operation or function of the Canal.

The Panama Canal is run by 9,000 dedicated and talented Panamanians who, for the past six years, have a stellar record improving and modernizing the Canal’s reliability, efficiency and safety. This past fiscal year, a record 279.1 million tons* of goods transited the Canal. All Panamanians are proud of these achievements.

The Dubai Ports World issue has brought up old and false rumors that the Canal is run by the Chinese. This began in 1999 after a Hong Kong firm won the rights to run two ports in Panama. The operation of ports is different, separate and unrelated from the Canal.

The Panama Canal is a national treasure – a part of the sovereign patrimony of the Republic of Panama – and the ACP is the sole manager and operator of this vital waterway. It is a Canal run by Panamanians for the people of Panama.

Sincerely,

Dr. Stanley Muschett

Manager of Executive Administration

The Panama Canal Authority

NewsMax Responds:

NewsMax's report correctly noted that as a result of a "1999 deal" . . . the goverment of Panama "let a Chinese company take over the ports at each end of the Panama Canal . . ." NewsMax never claimed that any Chinese company operated the canal itself.

However, Sen. Clinton did make such a claim.

Speaking at the 92nd Street Y in Manhattan, Clinton told the Jewish Community Relations Council: "There are those who say we can't [prevent foreign governments from operating U.S. ports] because look what happened in the last 20 years ... You know, we have the Chinese running the Panama Canal. We have other government-controlled entities controlling our ports."

We encourage the Panama Canal Authority to contact Sen. Clinton to clarify her remarks.

While China does not control the Canal, a Chinese-controlled entity called Hutchison-Whampoa has a subsidiary company, the Panama Ports Company. This company operates the ports Cristobal and Balboa located at each end of the Panama Canal. Some national security experts in the U.S. have argued that such control of the ports gives China strategic influence over the vital waterway.

[zeehag]

ok i am wrong with that....but the prices are still rising july of this year. that isnt changing.

[avb3]

Originally Posted by zeehag

ok i am wrong with that....but the prices are still rising july of this year. that isnt changing.

Are you going to be able to make it through before that or are you sitting out hurricane season in Mexico again?

[zeehag]

gonna sit in mexico again. isnt a bad place to sit--one of my first crew wants to help me and said willbe here in nov, wherever i am at that time--is all good--i am currently searching my bilges for a reasonable substitute for first born for the new fees to be....

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by zeehag

1. panama canal is NOT run by panama..is run by chinese. go figger.
Nonsense
2-the rates increase july, 2012, yes, this year. will be as the article stated, 60-115 percent higher than now, depending on size of boat to pass.
That's what the thread is about
3-the minimum speed needed is 5 kts steady
The way it works now is that everyone states 8kts as their max speed on the admeasurer form. Then when you get your adviser onboard you tell them how fast you want to motor. 6 kts is fine.
4-has the lake anchorage truly been discontinued?/ if so, where does one spend the layover night?
or does one motor straight thru??? mebbe boatman can tell us....
The larger moorings have been removed from the Lake Gatun anchorage, so you need to use your own anchor. The anchorage is very near where the new locks will enter the lake, so it will probably be moved in the future.
should be interesting to see how a hull speed rated 7 kts boat (private sailing boats)can go thru at 8 kts.... means no one can transit except ships...
That isn't true now and it is not going to be true in the future
5- re-read the article, which was posted in cruising compass recently. deals with soon to be rate hikes. the what is now stuff is totally IRRELEVANT.

Since the increases were given in percents, I'd say the current rates are relevant.

There's clearly some folks who have been to the Canal and had received some 'tude, and probably offered some 'tude too, that they didn't care for. But for those that haven't done it yet, its really a fun experience and the vast majority of yachties have a good time doing it and feel that the ACP is doing a decent job at a reasonable price.