Page Sixty-Seven

19 JANUARY 2006

"I was just too busy..."

34º | Hi 44º / Lo 34º |

"These included operating under the U.S. flag (pilotage), developing a broader marketing program and funds to support it, resolving the Rochester port issues, developing other revenue (public and private), in order to close the revenue/expense gap."

Conspicuously absent is the completely UNHEARD OF thought that maybe the expected revenue estimates held as much credibility as Squeaky Froome.  Holding the line on unrealistic passenger revenue numbers in a attempt to close a bottom line gap is nothing but an accounting shell game.  It came back to bite the Ferry Board on the butt.

"We need to move forward, now, without acrimony."

Translation: "Let's just forget about it.  No use crying over spilt milk.  Water under the bridge.  Can't change the past.  Forgive and forget.  Get over it and move on."

Sorry.  No can do.  Accountability in government requires assigning credit where credit's due and blame where blame's due.  If that comes across as acrimonious, mean-spirited or just plain nasty... "If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen".  With the Golden Ring of Leader-gag-ship beckoning, many people are finding the dizzying heights of personal and/or career achievements come with some very unpleasant perks... screwing up becomes subject to intense scrutiny under a microscope.

Don't like it?  Don't apply for the job.

"Industry experts believe the ferry will sell for around $15 - $18 million. "

Up to a 25% discrepancy in the projected sale price of the ferry?  And exactly 'WHO' are these so-called 'industry experts'?

Are Rochesterians immediately humbled by words like 'expert', 'professional', consultant' or the ever-popular 'leader' without further questioning?  Are superficial titles supposed to take the place of proven practical results and expertise?

The World's Image Capital, indeed.

Ontario ferry flop won't sink Erie bid   Fri, January 20, 2006 By CP CLEVELAND -- Promoters of a Lake Erie ferry service between Cleveland and Port Stanley are undeterred by the failure of a Lake Ontario ferry between Rochester, N.Y., and Toronto. Rochester's new mayor, Robert Duffy, rejected a $11.5-million US loan request to bankroll the Lake Ontario ferry service this year. Rochester's decision to halt its ferry service won't affect Cleveland, said Rose Ann DeLeon of the Cleveland-Cuyahoga County Port Authority, which is pushing the local effort to start a Lake Erie service by next year. The uncertain future of the harbour at Port Stanley has contributed to delays. The municipality is trying to buy the property from the Canadian government. Ownership must be settled before Royal Wagenborg, the Dutch company negotiating to operate the service, signs a contract. Unlike Rochester, Cleveland's ferry would carry commercial traffic as well as passengers. A proposal for a Lake Erie ferry between Port Burwell and a port northeast of Cleveland also is being held up by talks in Canada, said Mayor Chris Conley of Grand River, Ohio.

Just for reference: The blue line is the proposed Cleveland-Port Stanley route; the highlighted red dot is Port Burwell.

As is plainly obvious, the proposed cross-Erie route has some merit... although depending on the origin/destination of the commercial traffic, it may be somewhat limited.  Canadian snowbirds from Southern Ontario might find the shortcut appealing and with the explosion of development and unchecked economic growth in London and along the 401 corridor to Toronto, trucking companies might find the service useful.

I-77 starts in Cleveland and ends in Columbia SC... a direct route to the sun and fun for those Canadians wishing to avoid the winter routine.  THIS ferry might stand a far better chance of surviving than the Toronto-Rochester route could have ever hoped to achieve.  The drive time savings alone makes it more attractive as the Ambassador Bridge can be as bogged down as the Buffalo-Niagara bridges.

But again, since I'm familiar with both Port Stanley and Port Burwell, I have to admit I'm fairly reluctant to see such a commercial undertaking wreck the character of these two hidden beauties.  I don't live there though, and the residents may welcome the influx of cash.

"The uncertain future of the harbour at Port Stanley has contributed to delays. The municipality is trying to buy the property from the Canadian government.  Ownership must be settled before Royal Wagenborg, the Dutch company negotiating to operate the service, signs a contract."

I'm a bit leery about this aspect as well.  Only guessing here: I suspect the waterfront/docking facilities are owned and managed by Ports Canada or some such branch of the Federal government and Port Stanley may have to actually own the facility -- so Royal Wagenborg has a 'little guy' to sue in the event of a disagreement.  Taking on the Canadian government in court on their own soil could present a real problem for a Dutch-based company -- whereas a small town could be blown out of the water in the courts by a multinational with formidable cash and a team of lawyers on its side.   It's called leverage.  Just guessing, though.

The ferry route might work if that's what BOTH Cleveland AND Port Stanley want.  In the case of the Toronto-Rochester route, only one side really wanted (needed?) the ferry and it sure wasn't Toronto.

Toronto sort of played along with the charade... somewhat unenthusiastically and grudgingly... and when it was all over politely asked, "Is the game over so soon?"

Yup.  Despite 14-year lease agreements, it's not worth playing the game if your partner has no interest.

Businesses, like some marriages, are like that sometimes.  Time to file for a separation and put an end to the charade.

Got a bad feeling about the election here.  Liberal minority government coming?

22 JANUARY 2006

Mark Hare... Provincial Prince of Rochester.

35º | Hi 45º / Lo 30º |

The ferry is no more, and this is a sad day indeed Mark Hare (January 12, 2006) — I don't know where to begin. So let's just say I'm sad. Very sad. The high-speed ferry was probably the coolest thing to happen here in the last 50 years. Mark Hare has been a local columnist for the Democrat and Chronicle since 1997. Before that, he was editorial page editor for the afternoon Times-Union, and before that deputy editorial page editor for the Democrat and Chronicle. He began his career there as a reporter in 1984. He is a native of Owego, Tioga County. He is a graduate of St. John Fisher College and the State University at Brockport. He was a high school teacher for six years before switching to journalism.   It was never going to save Rochester, but it had the potential to redefine our city as a port, to stimulate development along the lake, the river and the canal. And that's important. And it could have generated traffic through the region. That's also important. But I accept Mayor Bob Duffy's decision to pull the plug. I'm not sure the ferry couldn't have been turned around. But I respect Duffy's judgment. I've been a ferry supporter since forever. I thought it would succeed as a private company, and when it failed after 90 days, I thought the city could make it work. When the service lost $10 million in a year, I still thought that, with a good marketing plan, it could be a success. (In the face of reality, still a die-hard optimist, eh Mark?) I reluctantly supported former Mayor Bill Johnson's call to borrow $11.5 million more to give it one last shot. But Duffy's people did the math and couldn't see a way to make it work. Double the ridership, increase fares by 20 percent and avoid any major unplanned expenses and it would still lose $2.7 million this season, he said. The implication being that sooner or later, taxpayers would have to take on more debt.  (That's no mere 'implication', Mark.  That's pure 'fact'.) And then there was the matter of the city paying Toronto $250,000 a year (plus $1 per passenger and $3 per car) to dock the ship. It may have been public information, but most of the public didn't know. If the ferry had been successful, it would have been nothing, but under the circumstances, it may have been the last straw. This venture has been riddled with mistakes and missteps — which is often the case with new ideas. I don't believe for one minute that Johnson or City Council set out to deceive anyone. If we could start all over again, I think the city or a private developer might be able to make it work. You'd get a much smaller ship (or maybe two, to keep the service running even when one ferry is in for repairs). A comprehensive marketing plan would have been launched a year before the start with all kinds of outreach to carefully target traveling populations. The ship would sail under the U.S. flag to avoid costly piloting fees. But I don't know if we can get there from here, at least with this ship. So it's done. And city taxpayers will have to pay off $20 million to $30 million in debt (depending on how much the ship sells for) over the next several years. As a city taxpayer, I'm not happy about it. But we'll survive. (Of course you will; YOU have a job.) And we'll learn from this, and Bob Duffy and his people will have to work even harder. Without the ferry it will be harder to redevelop the port, but no less important. Reacting to Duffy's decision, Lisa Raitt, the head of the Toronto Port Authority, expressed disappointment but in a statement promised that the terminal will "continue to host Great Lakes cruise ships and pursue alternative tenants." We should do the same. Bring in the cruise boats and the tall ships — generate traffic and give people a reason to visit the port. The lake and the river are still among our most important assets. There are no guarantees in life. (Wrong.  Despite the triteness of Hare's statement, poor planned and executed ideas always yield poor results.) If Rochester is to reinvent itself, it will have to continue to take chances and manage risk. There's no risk-free recovery. The ferry failed. Coulda, woulda, shoulda doesn't mean a thing. And to the I-told-you-so chorus: I was wrong. You were right. But this is a sad day, no matter which side you were on.

 "There's no risk-free recovery."

Wrong again.  The more tenuous the situation, the lower the tolerance for risk.  An already shaky business model would be foolish to throw the dice and sink more money into an unproven and untested future.  It amounts to gambling and guessing... neither of which are hallmarks of proactive strategic planning and development.

The ferry was nothing but a gamble from its inception; there was nothing but assumptions and misguided beliefs used as the basis for the success of the ferry service.  Assuming Torontonians and Canadians would have enough interest to hop on a single-destination transportation link was risky at best as the entire project hinged on the erroneous belief that the Rochester area offered enough incentive to make the thing work.

"And to the I-told-you-so chorus: I was wrong. You were right."

Of course he was wrong.  How could he NOT be?  Without knowing anything about Hare other than what he writes in his column, it doesn't take too long to see Hare sticks pretty close to home in the Rochester area.  His myopic and provincial views are proof of this.  He's not alone by any stretch of the imagination... if more locals would get out of town on a regular basis, the Rochester area would gain a valuable perspective on how other communities and regions address similar problems.

Instead, too many locals remain within their comfort zone of all that's familiar and predictable.  Weekends are spent close to home and days off from work are spent putzing around the area.  When locals DO venture out, instead of exploring a different community/region's unknown features, they actively seek out only the most popular and well-known attractions.  That may explain the preoccupation with Yonge Street and the urban (as opposed to suburban) mall known as the Eaton Centre.

"But this is a sad day, no matter which side you were on."

Geez.  Hare just can't seem to get it right even while his own newspaper is churning out the public praise for Duffy's decision to pull the plug.  All the polls are pointing to the public not being 'sad' about the ferry's demise, but absolutely DELIGHTED it's over. 

It's not a 'sad day'; it's a 'happy day' except for those few pockets of ferry supporters like Hare and City Newspaper Editor Mary Anna Towler.  These local media opinion writers who are lamenting the loss of the ferry are finally admitting they were as wrong as it gets... even though they certainly waste few words trying to give the appearance they know what they're talking about.  Their credibility gap just got a lot wider.

Aren't you about ready to retire, Mark?  Going out as some antiquated has-been is better than being forced out because of a view so hopelessly irrelevant it trashes any career highlights.  Why are you working anyway?  You work to live - or - live to work?  Either way, you need to get out more often to see how the rest of the world works instead of burrowing your nose into the close and familiar world you seem to live in.

Sunday   January 22, 2006

Rochester's Fast Ferry Duffy: Others Interested in Ferry   by Anthony Pascale & Lisa Carino Published Jan 22, 2006 Rochester’s mayor says selling the fast ferry won't be easy, but Bob Duffy says the city is getting interest from people near and far. Duffy said he's gotten a call from a group in Turkey with interest in the Cat. He said hiring a broker to sell the vessel may not be necessary. Duffy remains confident he made the right decision to end ferry service. “There was no one that could even come close to convincing me that the ferry would be financially viable, not this year, not in 5 years. So my goal is to dispose of this and keep an open mind and a pathway to our port for a ferry service from the private sector,” said Duffy. The city hopes to get at least $20 million for the ferry. The City of Rochester

"The city hopes to get at least $20 million for the ferry."

Doesn't hurt to say, "We HOPE...".  Doesn't mean they'll get that much, but nobody can say they were wrong by HOPING to get the desired amount.

"Duffy said he's gotten a call from a group in Turkey with interest in the Cat. He said hiring a broker to sell the vessel may not be necessary."

Red flags just popped up.  And if General Manager Dr. Ahmet Paksoy of Istanbul Fast Ferries Company, Inc. is involved, the Rochester Ferry Board is about to take a business beating the likes of which haven't been seen since the Toronto Port Authority pulled off the 14-year $250,000 annual rental charge (plus the $1/passenger-$3/car additional fee).

Dr. Paksoy is one sharp authority when it comes to the fast ferry business.  Not only does he  have a Doctorate, but he teaches at Istanbul University and has been the GM of the Istanbul Fast Ferry Company -- which has a fleet of 4 ferries and 26 seabuses -- for more than ten years.

Rochester is clearly out of its league if it tries to negotiate with that amount of expertise.  Some backwater burg's legal team has no prior experience with dealing with an international authority which specializes in ferry transactions.... which is pretty much what Dr. Paksoy told the locals when he visited last year.

That's why trying to dispense with the cost of hiring a broker... a firm which specializes in such dealings... is like Hank and Bess trying to sell the house they've owned for the past sixty years on their own.  The opportunity for being at a severe seller's disadvantage is too great when the professionals roll into town.

But the Rochester myopia prevents taking much more than a cursory glance at perfectly obvious (and accessible) details behind any prospective buyers and their potential strategies.  Looking inward, instead of outward, has distinct disadvantages... as the sale of the ferry is about to demonstrate.

THIS story is FAR from over.