maumee

[Gary Schweitzer]

I heard a rumor from a reliable source that they were even looking at the Iglehart for a conversion to a traditional self unloader. Not sure where that idea stands now. She's small and in good shape so it might actually make some sense. The problem is, would LeFarge sell her?

[Norskellunge]

I'm sure the name would change, but for the sake of looks...

[Zac]

I was supposed to do some service on the Maumee this winter at Bay Ship. For now, it is put on hold they will not be docking. 'Rumors' of scrapping are out there. but there is No truth in this until it is actually ordered. Situations could change daily and none of us can anticipate what the backbone of the company will decide. There are so many viable options each company could execute at any time.

[Chris M]

anyone good with photoshop that could take a picture of the CTC 1 and alter it so she was in LLT colours?

[Leo]

the other option is take the CTC and make a barge out of her.

The repowering of the Cuyahoga and the Saginaw over the past decade, and the pending repowering of the Michipicoten suggest otherwise. I would think if and when the day comes that this hull is needed, she would remain a ship and recieve a modern powerplant in line with these other projects. Clearly they consider this a more financially viable approach for their business plan then a conversion to a unpowered barge. I don't see why the CTC #1 would be any different (The state or type of her powerplant doesn't matter a whole lot when we're talking about repowering since it's all going to be ripped out and replaced anyways).

Has it occurred to anyone that, although expensive, the long-term prospects may make it logical to do both? Rand Logistics' success has been based on their client diversity which is largely based on their ability to serve Ports which fleets with larger ships can't or won't serve. Reading their Quarterly Reports, it is obvious that they expect their business to expand .

I think the scrapping of the Calumet, the passing on the Frantz and the Willowglen (They inspected at least the Willowglen with an eye towards possibly purchasing it), and the very wording of their acquisition of the CTC #1 (A "strategic asset") suggest that she's being bought with an eye towards eventually replacing a current hull down the road now that they're looking towards the day when the Maumee is too old and elderly to be a financially viable member of their fleet.

I don't think they expect a huge increase in business that requires the use of ~600' ships, or the Calumet would be sitting idle today at a dock just in case they couldn't acquire another hull down the road in case business increased enough where a refurbishment was justified. And they wouldn't of passed on the Willowglen if they thought that (I wonder if they're second guessing not purchasing her now).

Should be interesting to see what happens. Would be nice to see the CTC #1 return to doing what she was built to do after such a length of inactivity.

[southsideriverrat]

I drive by the C.T.C. No. 1 frequently. As presently positioned her bow is visible to the east from I-94 around 125th St on Chicago's SE side. It is the same berth where the Sherman sat for several years. With all of the scrappings of much younger ships in the past 30 years one could have never imagined that she could ever be returned to service.

A couple of questions:

If she were to be returned to active service why would it not be with a notch as a barge? Is there present advantage to a shipping company to have a self-powered laker instead of a barge? I understand labor costs are much lower for tug/barge combo's under current regulations.

What are ideal dimensions for LLT vessels? I noticed that several of their boats are 70 ft wide.

What is the condition of C.T.C. No. 1's hull? The thing has sat rusting for almost 30 years and looks pretty rough to me.

Dan

[joe1]

The hull on the maumee is in pretty bad shape from haulin salt if it was taking on water. The ctc no. 1 is a better investment because it has never hauled salt and the inside of the hull is still probably in pretty good shape. One less thing they would have to fix.

[bhale849]

Brent suggested that LLT may be better off investing $5 Million in the Maumee, rather than spending $20 to $30 Million restoring the CTC No. 1. Has it occurred to anyone that, although expensive, the long-term prospects may make it logical to do both? Rand Logistics' success has been based on their client diversity which is largely based on their ability to serve Ports which fleets with larger ships can't or won't serve. Reading their Quarterly Reports, it is obvious that they expect their business to expand (probably mostly by serving ports which only smaller vessels can serve). If they refurbish the Maumee, chances to expand are very limited. The same is true if they retire the Maumee & replace her capacity with the rebuilt CTC No. 1. However, spending what is necessary to keep the Maumee running for 10 years and rebuilding the CTC no. 1 gives them the ability to expand. And, as has already been said, other than the CTC No. 1, there are no available 60-foot beam ships left on the Lakes.

[Guest]

If it was financially possible to spend money to refurb the Maumee and furthermore worth the $ to repair her, could they do the work in Erie? Is that shipyard still active?

Yes, they could do the work in Erie. The shipyard is still active and would seem to, if Maumee were to have to be towed to a shipyard, be the best choice if the bidding is close, considering the cost of a tow.

[Guest]

If it was financially possible to spend money to refurb the Maumee and furthermore worth the $ to repair her, could they do the work in Erie? Is that shipyard still active?

[Brent]

In buying the CTC, they have bought a hull and cabins. I am sure that she will need to be completely stripped and start over. It may be better and cheaper to just dump 5 million or so in the Maumee and fix everything that's wrong and get another 10 years or so out of her. Bottom line is that whomever said it is correct-There isn't much out there to replace her. the other option is take the CTC and make a barge out of her.

[Guest]

Rand Logistics did indeed purchase the C.T.C No.1. Mention of it's acquisition is in the November 10, 2010 Earnings Conference call, available on their website. She is what the company calls a "strategic spare asset". At the time of the earnings conference call no decision on investment in the ship had been made beyond it's acquisition.

[colt45]

Well if you really think about it, there are very few smaller sized ships left on the lakes, and GRN/LLT owns most of them. to build a new one would be 100+ million, to get the CTC back into shape 20-30 million, which is the better investment for a company dedicated to the loads no one else wants and makes a great deal of money doing so. Even if the CTC was not stripped, 30 years of sitting and inactive, would make most of the equipment useless anyway and far outdated, its all going to have to get brought up to standards anyway, so why not give it a full refit, repower and conversion while they have her in peices. Makes sense to me and if they have the financial backing, go for it.

[Guest]

I wonder if this is actually it for the Maumee, or if it's just that they couldn't arrange a tow to Sturgeon Bay in time for her scheduled date with the drydock, since she can't leave Cleveland under her own power. It still seems possible that she could spend the winter in Cleveland and be towed to Sturgeon Bay in the spring. If they were planning to spend the money to get her through her 5-year up until this point, is a little extra plate work really going to be a showstopper?

[joe1]

i heard that they had gotten some new contracts set up that require a ship with a small beam to be able to enter the rivers that the maumee was able to. thats why they havent tried very hard to get the valor or fortitude or any other ships.

[TWilush]

That would contravene the Jones Act.

[Northup]

It would take a lot of money and work to get the C.T.C No.1 sailing again. From what I heard, the vessel is pretty-well stripped. Why wouldn't Lower Lakes go and buy a foreign hull and convert it a self-unloader to replace the Maumee?

[Guest]

You can't reflag a ship that has been flagged in another country without an act of congress.

[TWilush]

Would it not be possible for them to purchase one of the ASC steamers, flag it Canadian so it does not compete with ASC, then reflag American one of their American built, Canadian flag vessels? This would be inaccordance with the Jones act and not compete with ASC. Would probably be much less costly then reactivating, reengining and converting CTC No.1.

[joe1]

There going to convert the ctc 1 to self unloader to replace the maumee in the long term picture. Short term they don't have a ship to carry out her loads.