Lloyd's List Newsroom Blog headlines from www.lloydslist.com

Glorious food

David Osler — Mon, 12 May 2008 00:00:00 GMT

NOTORIOUSLY potty-mouthed and an inveterate publicity seeker he may be, but Gordon Ramsey is arguably Britain�s best-known chef. Unsurprisingly, his demand that the government outlaws out-of-season food from every restaurant in Britain has generated considerable controversy.

Part of the argument is that use of locally produced seasonal food will elevate culinary standards, an area in which some might say the UK has not traditionally excelled despite the recent efforts of the Jamie Olivers, Nigella Lawsons and Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstalls of this world.

But, as with everything else these days, there is an appeal to environmental considerations. With oil running out and climate changing, everybody would be better off if restaurants were not dependent on airlifted Kenyan sugar snaps or Peruvian asparagus.

He�s right, up to a point. But what is obvious from this rare profanity-free utterance on Mr Ramsey�s part is that he is unaware of the fantastic and eco-friendly role that refrigerated shipping has played for a century and more in ensuring that produce of sunnier climes can be enjoyed in Britain.

From the pioneering efforts of Shaw Savill and New Zealand Shipping Company from the 1880s, which put lamb, beef, butter and cheese on working class dinner tables, to the consignments of citrus fruit that arrive today in reefer boxes, shipping delivers delicious food all the year round.

There is something horribly authoritarian in a call for state bans on selected foodstuffs.]]>

Delivering debate

Neville Smith — Fri, 9 May 2008 00:00:00 GMT

ANOTHER month, another IMO committee, another address by the secretary-general, another swathe of regulations to be agreed and adopted.

This week�s Maritime Safety Committee feels a lot like MEPC, with too many agenda items chasing too little time. As MEPC proved, IMO can get work done when it needs to, but there is also a tinge of the student leaving things to the last minute.

This time, the hot potato is Long Range Identification and Tracking, a system that many member states do not want and fewer still want to pay for, but which has a drop-dead implementation date a little over six months away. That the intercessional working group has done a terrific job in putting together the technical backbone for the system cannot mask the fact that there are big issues to be resolved.

Efthimios Mitropoulos made clear in his opening address that the IMO�s history of delivery demanded another demonstration, but as some members regularly complain, every item is these days considered urgent. They also grumble that they and the industry are being asked to pay for the security requirements of one country rather than for a system that is a global benefit to all nations.]]>

Hapag-Lloyd - the real loser in tug of war

Katrin Berkenkopf — Thu, 8 May 2008 00:00:00 GMT

TUI chief executive Michael Frenzel has been a hard nut to crack for many unhappy shareholders since he took the helm at the group in 1994.

Thwarting John Fredriksen�s first appearance in the German corporate landscape is only likely to bolster this reputation.

The Tui AGM voted down Mr Fredriksen�s motion for a resignation of the supervisory board chairman after a marathon battle, which was preceded by a dispute fought through the media to an extent not seen before.

Mr Fredriksen�s right-hand man Tor Olav Troim immediately underlined his determination to continue battle.

Understandable as his anger is about the obvious u-turn in strategy which the Tui management undertook with regard to Hapag-Lloyd, his appearance in Hanover was not always consistent or convincing.

Outside the conference centre, young aides were distributing papers repeating Mr Fredriksen�s call for two seats on the supervisory board. Inside, the decision had long been taken that he would in fact be content with only one post, as was announced shortly after by Mr Troim.

This one seat has in fact been offered by the management, but Mr Troim said it would not be accepted as long as his call for the resignation of the board chairman had not been heard.

That seems more stubbornness than economic sense. Why not try to influence things from inside than just moan outside?

Perhaps equally unwise was the decision to float unproven allegations about Tui management hiring private detectives to spy on the Fredriksen camp. It may have given journalists something to get their teeth into, but it was only ever going to unsettle the many private investors in the centre whose support Mr Troim needed to win.

After all, these are characters already watching foreign investors with scepticism.

The downside to all the public battling, is that the future of Germany�s largest liner carrier, Hapag-Lloyd, has almost become a secondary issue.

It has been the plaything of Tui�s fragile fortunes for too long and it can only be hoped that now that the battlefield has been temporarily vacated, management and shareholders will return with a renewed focus on selecting the best possible course for the company.]]>

Lighthouses under spotlight

Janet Porter — Thu, 8 May 2008 00:00:00 GMT

SHIPOWNERS face two formidable foes of history and politics in their campaign for a reform of the general lighthouse authorities responsible for providing navigational aids around the British Isles, and the fees charged for this service.

The controversial issue of light dues levied on ships calling at ports in the UIK and Ireland is a sore point for those lines that pay this charge.

But questions are also being raised about the whole system of maritime safety. Does it make sense to have three lighthouse authorites, Trinity House for England and Wales, the Northern Lighthouse Board for Scotland and the Commissioner for Irish Lights for Ireland?

Why are these three separate from the Maritime and Coastguard Agency, and how does the Royal National Lifeboat Institution fit in?

To those working on the front line, this peculiar patchwork probably makes perfect sense. The organisations work well together, as shown whenever there is an incident in British waters.

The government probably has little stomach for a challenge to Trinity House, with its Royal Charter granted by Henry VIII, or with the Northern Lighthouse Board at this sensitive time between London and Edinburgh. And tackling the Irish subsidy is always going to be delicate.

But the key concern should be safety, and whether a single supervisory organisation would be more efficient and effective. After all, that was the thinking behind the Sosrep concept, with one person taking sole charge in the case of a shipping accident.

So perhaps now is the time for a review of how the GLAs, MCA and RNLI work together, and whether this really is the best arrangement.]]>

Tradition lives on

Julian Bray — Wed, 7 May 2008 00:00:00 GMT

THE more things change, the more they stay the same. So it seems in the shipping markets this week with two fascinating factoids for the news junkies.

First to catch the eye were reports from Hong Kong that venerable shipping group Wah Kwong planned a return to the market after nearly a decade�s absence with a $200m-$300m initial public offering.

The dry bulk group was founded in 1952 by Chao Tsong-yea after his family fled Shanghai after the communists took power in China in 1948. The group floated on the Hong Kong stock exchange in 1973, battling both good and mostly bad markets until going private again under George Chao in 2000.

Buoyed by the resurgence in recent years of the dry bulk and tanker markets, the company now has 12 vessels with plans to build another 19. Led by sponsor Cazenove, the group now reportedly plans to return to the public market.

Meanwhile, in that other booming economy, India, a less well-sourced story has suggested the giant Tata industrial group plans to form its own shipping company to transport raw materials and finished goods for the entire firm.

If such a plan comes to reality, it could once more mark the rise of the great trading group as global shipowner, a phenomenon lost in recent years as markets have urged firms to succeed through specialisation.

So far there is a lack of detail, or official confirmation, in either of these stories. Nevertheless, where there appears to be real change, there are echoes of long-standing traditions. Plus �a change, plus c�est la m�me chose.]]>

Weighting game

Neville Smith — Fri, 2 May 2008 00:00:00 GMT

TWICE in as many weeks we have heard calls for greater transparency on the weight of containerised cargo. Weighing every container before it is loaded might be a practical difficulty at present but the argument for better information on the weight of container contents can only get stronger.

Classification societies commenting on the MSC Napoli casualty investigation maintain that container weight is only an issue in heavy seas and where the storage plan has not been correctly followed.

But the case of Annabella is a reminder that it need not be big ships that are vulnerable to losses over the side or collapse � indeed small ships are probably more at risk.

The fault for stack collapse or container loss could lie with equipment failure, weather conditions or human error and as such clearing up the mess is a legal nightmare.

Intense shipping schedules put more and more pressure on crew and the master who are at the sharp end of the problem.

It would be no simple task to assign legal responsibility to a particular party in the supply chain ahead of shipment rather than after an incident has occurred. But between cargo owner, shipper, forwarder, terminal operator, shipowner, P&I Club, hull underwriter and cargo insurer, surely there can be found a common interest in improving working practices.

Indeed, for an industry which pays increasing amounts of lip service to best practice and the importance of voluntary standards to drive up quality, this is a classic shipping industry case of pass the parcel. ]]>

Talent spotting

Janet Porter — Thu, 1 May 2008 00:00:00 GMT

WILL container freight rates move up, down or sideways when the conference system ends later this year? Is further consolidation inevitable or unlikely? Has the industry over-ordered new ships or judged future demand correctly?

Will niche carriers struggle or flourish under the new regulatory regime? Is liner shipping a service or a commodity? Can ship sizes continue to increase? Will the industry become more or less secretive when lines lose their antitrust immunity? Do carriers fully understand the law and the consequences of infringement?

The best brains in the business disagree on the future shape of container shipping and how it will evolve over the coming months and years.

But what most do agree on is the need to attract much more top talent to a business that is the motor of world trade, and yet still has such a low profile � except of course when there is an accident.

That lack of awareness makes it even harder to compete for the cream of recruits against more glamorous or highly-paid professions, but with so much at stake as shipping grapples with change on all fronts, the industry cannot afford to settle for second best.

That goes for shippers, forwarders, terminal operators and others involved in the supply chain as well as the lines themselves.

Shipping is a high risk business. The total loss of a loaded containership could run to several billion dollars. Managing an organisation that may have dozens of these leviathans on the high seas at any one time needs first rate management skills, dedication and commitment.

That is why lines must start talking about what they do, rather than hiding away, in order to attract the highflyers they need.]]>

Blue sea thinking

Julian Bray — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 00:00:00 GMT

FEW could have predicted that this week freight rates would reach a record high for the year. The Baltic Exchange Dry Index touched 9,344 earlier this week, up 39% since it hit a low in January. The benchmark dry freight index is now within 2,000 points of its all-time record of 11,039 reached last November.

With such volatility and underlying market strength it is no surprise that the freight derivatives market is winning more interest from investors outside shipping.

The latest to join is investment bank UBS. However, rather that just playing the forward freight agreement market, it is launching a creative new tool aimed at attracting investors who may have otherwise been put off by the byzantine world of freight futures.

The UBS Blue Sea Index, to be launched later in May, will be a tradeable instrument that factors in shipping supply and demand, alongside commodity prices and an all important measure of port congestion.

UBS believes that the index will attract investors who seek some refuge from the volatility in financial and equity markets, but who retain an appetite for the exposure to the further expansion of China�s economy.

Underpinning this new interest in shipping is evidence of the explosive growth in freight derivatives. In 2007, the freight derivatives market more than doubled to $117bn from $55bn a year earlier, and it is forecast to climb by another 20% this year as more banks and hedge funds get into the market.

This new UBS initiative deserves to be watched as it may introduce a new level of sophistication to the freight derivatives market by opening it up to investors who are not necessarily freight professionals.

The Blue Sea Index is indeed blue sky thinking.]]>

New wars, new risks

David Osler — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 00:00:00 GMT

THEY say that if something ain�t broke, don�t fix it. But is the system in place to protect seafarers from war risk really working all that well?

Existing arrangements � under the aegis of the national maritime warlike area operations committee, known as WOAC � bring together shipowners and seafarers to discuss when and where the temperature in trouble spots is sufficiently elevated to be designated a war risk area.

Naturally, the two sides see things very differently. Owners are understandably reluctant to pay double salaries and increased insurance premiums. Seafarers � equally understandably � feel that they should be well compensated for serving in areas where bullets are flying.

On top of this in-built tension, it is indisputable that the types of dangers faced by merchant shipping have considerably changed since the system was initiated. In this day and age, the risk is not so much falling victim to a U-boat during a transatlantic convoy as being held hostage by pirates in Somalia or militants in the Niger Delta.

Unions want to see WOAC revise its terms of reference and update the criteria used to determine what constitutes a war risk zone, which does not seem an unreasonable request. On the other hand, shipowners will need reassurance that any changes are not abused.

After all, piracy does happen sporadically almost everywhere outside the developed world. It would be untenable for all of Africa and Latin America and most of Asia permanently to be declared war zones because of a small chance of pirate attack.

But it shouldn�t be beyond the two sides to hammer out mutually agreed reforms that reflect the realities of our post-9/11 age.]]>

IMO's makeover

David Osler — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 00:00:00 GMT

WELCOME home, International Maritime Organization. Everybody knows that having the builders in can be a disruptive experience, especially when it necessitates temporary residence elsewhere.

But the only United Nations agency to be based in London has now returned to its Albert Embankment headquarters, almost two years after it was forced out to allow a complete refit to be carried out.

Externally, the office block remains � how to put this politely? � as physically unprepossessing as it always was. But, we are assured, it is beautiful on the inside, and, as homely-looking girls have traditionally been told, that is surely what counts.

Both employees and delegates will now have the benefit of fully refurbished offices, meeting spaces and catering facilities. It can only be right for the sometimes unsung and under-rated IMO to have premises that are fit for purpose.

What is more, in keeping with general secretary Efthimios Mitropoulos�s visionary drive to spread environmental best practice throughout the shipping industry, the newly kitted out building will be highly energy efficient.

Hopefully, all the work will have been carried out to the high standards to which the UK construction industry aspires, but notoriously does not always achieve.

Especially that bloke who did this writer�s kitchen a few years back. But that�s another story.

Meanwhile, the way in which the IMO continued to operate efficiently throughout its exile is testimony to the dedication and professionalism of its staff and Mr Mitropoulos�s considerable managerial abilities. Well done, everybody. We hope the housewarming party went well.]]>

Class act needed

Neville Smith — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 00:00:00 GMT

�UNTIL the next maritime disaster.� A chilling phrase, especially when used by a rapporteur to the European Parliament.

Though the tide of legislation has not turned, the news of "almost zero" support among national governments for the European Union�s civil liability directive is proof that right can prevail.

Work by the International Group and others should be applauded for tirelessly seeking to point out to Brussels that not only does the P&I Club system already provide for a rational level of compensation, but also that an unlimited liability system fails to tackle the root of the problem.

The European Union has already changed the shape of the tanker market forever and despite the moaning, undoubtedly for the better. To seek to play the other side of the deal by demanding unlimited compensation is the kind of cynical knee-jerk reaction that the industry so disdains.

The source of the problem, as we were reminded so forcefully last week, is in assuring the highest standards of shipbuilding, maintenance and operations � at least two of which fall into the category of moral obligation as they do enforceable rules.

Loss prevention is about more than classification but one cannot help but feel that class, already under the commercial microscope, will be next in line for the regulators� attention. Common rules guide shipbuilding standards but individual class society criteria make them opaque. In the mind of law-makers, doesn�t that create the conditions for the next maritime disaster? ]]>

Jones Act iniquities

Janet Porter — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 00:00:00 GMT

FOR visitors to the US, mile-long freight trains are an exciting sight. So are the huge trucks with their gleaming chromework that thunder along the freeways.

To Americans, both are just a nuisance, holding up commuter trains or clogging up already congested and badly maintained highways.

So any effort to find an alternative means of transport that would relieve the nation�s railways and roads is to be applauded, and moves now afoot to develop coastal feeder services clearly make sense. There are plenty of ports along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts, in particular, that could handle shortsea freight traffic.

There has been little incentive in the past, because of such a well-developed inland infrastructure, but after years of under-investment, the network is barely able to cope at times with the level of private and commercial traffic.

But only lines with US-built, flagged and manned ships will be able to operate domestic coastal under the restrictions of the Jones Act.

Once again, the country that preaches free trade to the rest of the world and rarely shies away from heavyhanded action to open up foreign markets to its own manufacturers and service companies, will guard its merchant marine from competition from abroad.

That means any US shortsea services are likely to be operated with elderly tonnage rather than the state-of-the-art vessels now being built in Asia.

The iniquities of the Jones Act are frequently raised at the World Trade Organisation, to little effect, with the US refusing to budge. But the rest of the world has to keep up the pressure to end such blatant protectionism.]]>

Should class societies be subject to external regulation?

Lloyds List Poll — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 00:00:00 GMT

]]>

Self-regulation: heal thyself

Julian Bray — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 00:00:00 GMT

THE myth of the effectiveness and rigour of unfettered self-regulation has perhaps been the greatest victim of the MSC Napoli casualty. That is certainly the clear implication of the report into the incident from the UK�s Marine Accident and Investigation Branch.

From its design, through building, to its final fateful voyage down the Channel, it is a catalogue of rules that were either ineffective, bent, or ignored. For example, while Samsung Heavy Industry built the ship according to its drawings, not all its longitudinal girders in the double bottom were continuous where the ship snapped.

Further, while the grades of steel used in building were generally as specified in the ship�s drawings, or of higher grade, a sample that did not meet the required properties was the centreline girder, where mild steel was used instead of high tensile steel.

At the time of its construction, class society Bureau Veritas' rules had no requirement for buckling calculations around the engine room, where the hull finally failed. Neither did the yard make its own calculations. And when DNV took on classification of the vessel in 2002 a reassessment of the hull scantlings was not undertaken, because it was not obliged to under IACS rules.

Meanwhile, shippers overloaded 20% of the containers on the MSC Napoli with more than 3 tonnes over their stated weight, while Europe�s ports do not bother weighing boxes before they are loaded. Some 7% of the containers were in the wrong position.

When the vessel left its berth in Antwerp, ballasting meant it was exceeding its maximum seagoing bending moment, although this was cut to within the limits by the time it reached open seas. And finally, the ship�s speed remained high, only reduced because of engine problems and not severe weather. One of the few successes of this story was the abandonment of the ship by the crew and their rescue. The MAIB said this was praiseworthy.

If the class system is to be taken seriously it has to be effective at doing its primary job of ensuring the engineering integrity of maritime transport. If it fails in that task, then it is handing a golden opportunity to those such as some in Brussels who would like to refashion the entire sector.

Ultimately, self-regulation has to be more than just a cypher for �bending the rules when business demands�.]]>

Valid exception

David Osler — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 00:00:00 GMT

DOCKERS� unions in many countries once refused to handle cargoes in solidarity with those campaigning against apartheid in South Africa. With the demise of that reprehensible regime of organised racism, dockers in South Africa have now decided not to handle a cargo of arms likely to be used for repressive purposes in Zimbabwe. Can such measures ever be justified?

Lloyd�s List would as a rule argue against action in restraint of trade. Whatever one�s ethical position on arms dealing, it is a legal business. Harare has presumably paid Beijing an agreed price for the AK-47 ammunition and rocket-propelled grenades on the Cosco boxship An Yue Jiang.

Nor is it normally this newspaper�s policy to pass judgement on the governments of sovereign states. Employees will invariably have their private opinions, but corporately we generally like to keep out of it.

However, we find ourselves applauding what the South African Transport and Allied Workers� Union has done in this instance. Rather than instituting a blanket ban on all trade with a country of which it disapproves � which would have harmed those it purports to support � it has intelligently selected a symbolic cargo, thereby achieving worldwide headlines.

Gesture politics this might be, but sometimes gestures are appropriate, and this is exactly such a case. Robert Mugabe�s administration is deficient by any yardstick. How his departure is arranged is a matter for the Zimbabwean people; but a departure there must be if this once prosperous nation is to resume its place in the regional economy. ]]>

A sad loss

Neville Smith — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 00:00:00 GMT

THE death of Gwyneth Dunwoody leaves a considerable gap in the oversight of transport policy in the UK.

Not only was Ms Dunwoody a forceful personality unafraid to speak her mind on the issues, she was also an old-fashioned raconteur, politically astute enough to understand what audiences wanted to hear.

Her most valuable contribution in recent years was to provide, along with the members of the transport select committee, a robust and implacably critical position on the Galileo satellite navigation project.

Earlier this year the Royal Institute of Navigation bravely asked her to address a meeting on the subject and received an ear-bashing that was both erudite and very funny.

She could get away with it because the hard work had already been done. The sub-committee had again and again questioned the rationale for the project, excoriated its new funding structure and its assumptions of operational and fiscal payback.

Prove the operational need for Galileo and provide a rigorous cost-benefit analysis and we will leave you alone, its report implied.

TheUK space industry has been unable to do so, despite never denying that the future revenues from telematics should be lucrative.

One suspects Ms Dunwoody simply saw a simmering EU fudge factory that sought to satisfy national political interests under a banner of advancing European technology and space know-how.

The project now seems unstoppable, though most maritime people agree it is of limited interest to them. Other transport sectors must hope Ms Dunwoody�s successor is as rigorous as she was. ]]>

Queen for a day

Julian Bray — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 00:00:00 GMT

IN the absence of a real queen, Dame Helen Mirren is perhaps the next best thing in modern Britain. In fact, she may even be better than the real thing having no qualms about expressing her quick wit in public, all delivered in the elegant manner that so memorably won her an Oscar.

So she was a logical choice as Godmother for P&O Cruises� new vessel Ventura, grandly described by the company as �The superliner designed for Britain�.

Before you ask, no that doesn�t mean there are gangs of hoodie wearing youths in every stairwell, people throwing up outside its bars, and the threat of negative equity on cabin bookings.

Rather, it means tasteful interior design from Britain�s Nick Munro, art events run in conjunction with Tate Modern, children�s fun with Noddy and Scalextric, and a restaurant overseen by Marco Pierre White.

Sadly, what �the superliner designed for Britain� doesn�t run to is being registered in its �home� port of Southampton. Instead it is registered in Bermuda, which although part of The Red Ensign group of flags is certainly not the mainland register.

But why should this matter? Haven�t cruiseships been registered everywhere from the Lofoten Islands to Liberia for years?

In the run up to the introduction to the UK�s tonnage tax, then P&O chairman Lord Sterling promised reflag up to 50 vessels, including cruise ships, back to the UK register. The break-up of P&O drew a line under those plans, with P&O Cruises being bought by Miami-based Carnival Corp in 2003. For all its renowned hard-headedness when it comes to business, Carnival has certainly not shunned the UK flag. The Queen Victoria, the latest vessel built for its Cunard brand, flies the Red Ensign and is registered in Southampton.

The choice of Bermuda for Ventura is a disappointment, showing that for all the hard work of recent years, the UK flag remains at times uncompetitive. As another, this time real, Queen reputedly once said: �We are not amused.�]]>

Name and shame

Janet Porter — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 00:00:00 GMT

SHOULD we name and shame them - those two dozen container lines that agreed to pay a vast sum of money to sponsor a new website explaining what they do and how essential they are to global well-being - and then slinked back into their bunkers?

Well, there�s no need to name them - they are all clearly identified on the website of the Container Shipping Information Service that was launched three months ago as part of an initiative �to give the global container shipping industry a voice with which to communicate with the world.� So what has happened? Has the industry gone down with a collective bout of laryngitis?

That is unfair. Some lines are communicating well, whether it is good news or bad. Sadly, they are the exception.

News on the CSIS website consists entirely of press cuttings from numerous publications, including Lloyd�s List, all highly selective.

There are no business stories, nothing about the changing shape of the industry, market developments, or regulatory issues. In fact, there is little that really throws much light on container shipping.

That is not really surprising, given that this is a joint initiative between lines with vastly different ideas of how to deal with the media.

But if container shipping really wants to be better understood, start with the trade press and learn to give a few straightforward answers to simple questions, rather than hiding behind bland, meaningless news releases devoid of any context, or delegating responsibility for PR to the CSIS.

And those same uncommunicative communications departments should be dragging their bosses out into the open rather than throwing a ring of steel round them.

OK, a few brave souls are willing to face the public. And we understand that promotional campaigns are being prepared. But will these still be bankrolled if profits shrink as the global economy chills?

A previous attempt to raise the profile of container shipping fizzled out after a few months. Let�s hope this effort does not go the same way.]]>

One to watch

David Osler — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 00:00:00 GMT

ALEXANDER Cornelissen and Peter Hammarstedt � master and first officer of Farley Mowat � stand charged with deliberately ramming a Canadian coastguard icebreaker in the name of animal rights.

The men claim they are the victims of the piece and it was their vessel that was rammed by the coastguard, while peacefully observing a seal cull in the Gulf of St Lawrence. The veracity or otherwise of their account is a matter for the Canadian courts to decide. But what is not in dispute is that Farley Mowat, owned by the controversial animal rights campaigner the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, has got form.

Two years ago, while fitted with a device it dubbed a �can opener�, the then-master of Farley Mowat informed the master of a Japanese whaling support ship that he was acting under the authority of the United World Charter for Nature to uphold international conservation regulations prohibiting the slaughter of whales in the Antarctic Whale Sanctuary.

�We backed up the message by slamming our starboard hull against their starboard hull,� the master said.

Conservation of marine species is an important issue. But deliberately engineering a collision, in a manner that could put human lives at risk, is not the way to do it.

With a track record of glorifying in dangerous behaviour, the suitability of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society to be a shipowner at all is open to question.

The eyes of the maritime world will be upon its latest brush with the law, and rightly so.]]>

Snapshots of life in shipping

Richard Meade — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 00:00:00 GMT

WHEN Tor Olav Troim stood up in Connecticut last month to honour his friend and boss John Fredriksen, he recounted a story about the day they met. He had found the Frontline chief in his office watching teletext, having just lost $50m on a trade. Enough to ruin most people�s breakfast, you might think, but big John was adamant that everything was under control.

Of course, the next time he saw him, shortly after that, the money had been recouped and then some. He is after all John Fredriksen and making money is what he does best.

While the speeches and celebrations were still taking place, a young Filipino cadet was preparing to leave the port of Newark on board a containership headed down the coast to Norfolk. When he finishes his 12-month contract on board later this year he will have earned over three times as much as some of his friends he left behind.

It goes without saying that the experiences of these two individuals at opposite ends of the industry are poles apart. Their attitude towards money, for a start, is likely to be unrecognisable to each other. Yet it is perhaps worth reminding ourselves that without each of them and thousands of others like them, the shipping industry and world trade would grind to a halt.

Starting tomorrow, Lloyd�s List will publish a series of feature-length profiles looking at four very different roles being performed within the industry. Tomorrow, we start with the crew of that boxship heading for Norfolk, and tomorrow will be the turn of the ship�s master. Then we take a look at the role of a ship finance banker working at the heart of New York�s maritime capital markets, and finally we will finish the week with an in-depth look at Mr Fredriksen�s latest industry-defining deal.

Each of the four subjects represents very separate aspects of the modern shipping industry. Their attitudes towards the industry, their reasons for joining, and indeed staying, all differ widely.

At some level it is predictably �all about the money�, as our banker explains, but the value placed on Mr Fredriksen�s $50m hiccup and the cadet�s yearly wage are oceans apart. There is also more to it than basic finance. Whether it is the ambition to captain your own vessel or the industry �getting into your blood�, the reasons behind their continued dedication are as diverse as their respective pay-packets.

The features are not intended to pass judgement or promote; they simply aim to offer a snapshot of what it is like for four very different people to work in today�s shipping industry.

It has become something of a clich� to talk about shipping being the lynchpin of world trade. We all know the statistics and the significance of our globalised industry.

The fact that over 90% of world trade is carried by the international shipping industry is proudly repeated in speeches like a mantra by officials, politicians and industry leaders the world over. Without shipping, the import/export of affordable food and goods would not be possible � half the world would starve and the other half would freeze.

Of course, shipping is the lifeblood of the global economy, and this is something we should be unhesitatingly proud of. But we also need to recognise that this is a disparate industry made up of increasingly specialised sectors and a diverse array of workers.

The view from ground level can often provide a very different perspective from the view presented by those who focus on the big picture.

As an industry we need to continue to provide opportunities across the board that are both attractive enough to lure people into work and rewarding enough to make them want to stay and climb the ladder.

Click here to read the feature articles for free.]]>