M'sia to build cynic bridge
-
why want such fancyful bridge? crazy..
-
I feel sad for Malaysians for having this kind of government.
-
Water is no longer the issue, as Singapore with new tech like new water and purification can easy have enough water even malaysia don't sell to us.Originally posted by jxjoox:It's all about water isn't it?
New bridge will not have the pipe to carry water. If SG wants water from M'sia, M'sia can then demand higher water price before building the pipe citing the costs of building the pipe will be very high.
The issue is on their side ! Just think of it, how much money go into building the malaysia bridge ? Millions , big projects - business man make money, politician who help to push this project and help business man get the contract also get big money.
In fact once it is build it will be there to remind the malaysia people of the crooked politician who waste their country money. -
Dr M caused these trouble lahOriginally posted by chikopek:I feel sad for Malaysians for having this kind of government.
Even he started Tg Pelepas port to complete with SG, see now, they are fighting with own ppl - Port Klang for volumes now... The worst, it is now the slowest growing port in Asia recording 3% growth vs 8.7% for SG or 6% for Klang... Or building the KLIA
He just wants his prestige -
yes i agwee with you. our port business is one of our lifelines, so we're hanging on the water excuse to prevent them from taking more of our port businesses. water pipes can go undersea actually so if they have the will they might just pull it off.Originally posted by JI^guy:Well, the whole point of building the bridge is to take business away from Singapore. Currently, ships must sail around Singapore to get from the Strait of Malacca to the South China Sea but with the causeway dismantled, ships can sail directly from Tanjung Pelapas to Pasir Gudang without going around Singapore. Therefore, businessmen would choose Malaysia over Singapore due to lower prices. I think this is Malaysia's attempt to drive Singapore into a corner since they failed to get Thailand to build the Kra Canal across the Isthmus of Kra. -
However, big ships as big as MSC Pamela that carries 9,200 TEU have difficulty in passing through the narrow straitsOriginally posted by snow leopard:yes i agwee with you. our port business is one of our lifelines, so we're hanging on the water excuse to prevent them from taking more of our port businesses. water pipes can go undersea actually so if they have the will they might just pull it off. -
i wonder who is more crooked[/b]
-
!!!!! -
trust that pap would be using this as a rallying cry in the coming ge......it's fun to see them shit in their pants once a while. hopefully they'll realised not everyone is prepared to play by their rules...and begin to treat ordinary sg folks fairly...
-
Looks who is playing the game in the 1st place?Originally posted by countdracula:trust that pap would be using this as a rallying cry in the coming ge......it's fun to see them shit in their pants once a while. hopefully they'll realised not everyone is prepared to play by their rules...and begin to treat ordinary sg folks fairly...
Mahathir went on with the project on V day in 2002 just bef he retired by his own wish... Pak Lah just have to takeover all these sh!t -
Well, I didn't know that but now that you said it, it makes even more sense for them to want to dismantle the causeway. Now ships can pick up their container cargo at Tanjung Pelapas and then sail to Pasir Gudang to pick up their bulk cargo with the causway dismantled. Previously, ships had to sail past Jurong Port as well as PSA so they would pick up cargo from Singapore but now, they could just bypass Singapore. However, we might have some salvation if we can somehow develop Sembawang and make prices comparable to Malaysian ones.Originally posted by sbst275:Dun you know Tg Pelepas and Pasir Gudang handles diff cargo?
Pasir Gudang is like Jurong, handles bulk cargo more than containers -
Actually the route rounding the top of Singapore is longer than the route rounding the south (where the ports are)...
-
the routes are about similar, the important difference is costs, where ringgit costs only half as much as a singapore dollar ...Originally posted by redstone:Actually the route rounding the top of Singapore is longer than the route rounding the south (where the ports are)... -
Even so, bunkering services is still not solvedOriginally posted by JI^guy:Well, I didn't know that but now that you said it, it makes even more sense for them to want to dismantle the causeway. Now ships can pick up their container cargo at Tanjung Pelapas and then sail to Pasir Gudang to pick up their bulk cargo with the causway dismantled. Previously, ships had to sail past Jurong Port as well as PSA so they would pick up cargo from Singapore but now, they could just bypass Singapore. However, we might have some salvation if we can somehow develop Sembawang and make prices comparable to Malaysian ones.
What's the point of making haul svs bet Pelepas and Pasir Gudang if it is cheaper for point - point truck transfer?
Maersk do not use Pasir Gudang... It instead send its containers that are bound for East Malaysia and Brunei via PSA Terminal though services are provided at Pasir Gudang. -
Not similarOriginally posted by snow leopard:the routes are about similar, the important difference is costs, where ringgit costs only half as much as a singapore dollar ...
I have already pointed out new gen ships would not be able to clear easily esp near Lim Chu Kang. I am wondering abt the draft -
i don't know what volume of the seafaring traffic can pass through straits of johor but to the extent that these ships can, there would be that much more risk of containers going up north. so it's a potential problem for us and that's why our govt is busy narrowing the straits off pulau ubin and trying to buy port businesses elsewhere ...Originally posted by sbst275:However, big ships as big as MSC Pamela that carries 9,200 TEU have difficulty in passing through the narrow straits -
how many ships are of the new generation type?Originally posted by sbst275:Not similar
I have already pointed out new gen ships would not be able to clear easily esp near Lim Chu Kang. I am wondering abt the draft -
Not much.. Even so, why would 1 wanna risk using the narrow straits?Originally posted by snow leopard:i don't know what volume of the seafaring traffic can pass through straits of johor but to the extent that these ships can, there would be that much more risk of containers going up north. so it's a potential problem for us and that's why our govt is busy narrowing the straits off pulau ubin and trying to buy port businesses elsewhere ...
Pasir Gudang handled 800,000 TEU in 2005
Buying port biz elsewhere is not just because of the compeition, it is to make network connections from its flagship terminal -
Currently, OOCL, MSC, Cosco, CSCL, CMA CGM uses ships that are abv 8,000 TEU in capacityOriginally posted by snow leopard:how many ships are of the new generation type?
Even ships from Maersk, the largest so far capacity is 6,600 TEU except for 1, Arnold Maersk that is 7,200 TEU in cap
Of this, OOCL, MSC, Cosco calls SG terminal. CSCL and CMA CGM uses Klang -
Dear Chikopek.. may I say that your statement is not reflecting the opinions of most Malaysians ..your quote
I feel sad for Malaysians for having this kind of government.
Do you have a better Garmen here in Spore?
-
as long as most ships can use the straits of johor, then what risk is there?Originally posted by sbst275:Not much.. Even so, why would 1 wanna risk using the narrow straits?
Pasir Gudang handled 800,000 TEU in 2005
Buying port biz elsewhere is not just because of the compeition, it is to make network connections from its flagship terminal
yes, connectivity is one reason, amongst many, diversification away from competition is probably another ... -
So far, the draft of the straits have not been determined yet.. Once it is confirmed, then we can look at the possible impactOriginally posted by snow leopard:as long as most ships can use the straits of johor, then what risk is there?
yes, connectivity is one reason, amongst many, diversification away from competition is probably another ...
Already large ships, many ports cannot handle them -
As for the bridge, once Pelepas starts providing bunkering svs, Singapore will be at grave threat..
However, Johor have failed into getting bunkering svs aft many years. Even their MISC refused to open facilities at Pelepas years back -
whatever you say buddy, i'm not in the shipping industry so as long as the authorities are convinced that there is no threat and the shippers will not (or rather cannot) move up north because of the shallowness of its waters, then we can all sigh a deep breath of relieve. however, i'm just wondering, with the sand filling off ubin and the persistent objection to opening up the johor straits could there be a real concern on the part of our leadership?Originally posted by sbst275:Currently, OOCL, MSC, Cosco, CSCL, CMA CGM uses ships that are abv 8,000 TEU in capacity
Even ships from Maersk, the largest so far capacity is 6,600 TEU except for 1, Arnold Maersk that is 7,200 TEU in cap
Of this, OOCL, MSC, Cosco calls SG terminal. CSCL and CMA CGM uses Klang -
draft in a protected channel shouldn't be stronger than those running in open waters should it?Originally posted by sbst275:So far, the draft of the straits have not been determined yet.. Once it is confirmed, then we can look at the possible impact
Already large ships, many ports cannot handle them