I believe so, but not in recent years. There was a time not very long ago, where shipping companies on the lakes didn't care. They themselves sold their retired vessels to the highest bidder.Guest wrote:Has IMS ever sold a laker after they purchased it?
But the success of Lower Lakes, the decline in viable hulls, the good condition of some of these vessels, and the huge expense in new construction has changed that story over the past 15 years.
While I understand what you're getting at, if a vessel has a lot of life left in it and can be put to useful service for decades more to support domestic industry and employ people, it's hard to accept it going to scrap just because they're scared of Lower Lakes Shipping.Guest wrote:With all due respect, do the right thing for who?
It's good for ASC's bottom line, but there's certainly an argument for the other line of thought as well.
Been shown to not hold up, several times.JMc wrote:Is IMS is even legally allowed to resell? I would imagine there is a legal contract signed that ASC sells the hull to IMS to be scrapped, and only scrapped; nothing more, nothing less.
Plus, they bought her from Brownsville, not from ASC. Brownsville likely fulfilled their part of the contract by selling her to another scrapyard when they decided not to expend more money into sending her south.
Unless Brownsville signed a contract with them and took them to court (And why would they?), I don't see an avenue for anyone to lodge what surely would be a futile protest.
The only thing that will certainly see to her demise, is that IMS is a going concern in the business of scrapping ships, with retired lakers the bulk of their business. They're not going to take a little extra money here and risk further dealings with Great Lakes fleets in the years to come.