-
Tx, fair enough.
But they never seemed to have leased / organised any ferries. So bit of a risk that way maybe, they are unproven.
JWestland-
I think that's why the experience of the company directors is important, according to that post they tend to found a new company every time there is a specific new service to be run, again mostly to limit liabilities and risk. So you wouldn't expect this specific company to have done much.
At the same time, I have of course no idea how much experience those guys really have, whether the amount of money they are getting is realistic for the task, and most importantly whether there is a solid plan at all. I.e. while the lack of ferries and previous ventures might not be as suspicious as it first looks, this is not at all saying it couldn't still be a total catastrophe.
E.g. the question of where they're planning on getting ferries from sounds pretty legit...
@Howard Ah yeah, that's a good example too! There seems to be a trend of separating out the actual ownership of large vehicles, and the operational job of providing the passenger / goods service.
SwissChap
So I read a post on reddit from someone who sounded like they know their stuff, though of course that is no guarantee: basically it said that mostly for liability reasons, it is normal for such companies not to actually own any ferries. Apparently they tend to make new companies for most new ventures, and their success is mostly dependent on whether they have the amount of money needed for it, and whether the people leading the company have previous experience. Ferries are then chartered as needed, from another company that actually does own some, and that specialises in actually running ferries.
Again no guarantees that is all strictly true, but it did sound very plausible and it would go some way to explain why they don't own any ferries. If you look into train franchises, some companies also don't own everything you'd need to run a train service - e.g. the actual infrastructure.