Re: WW2 trade-in tonnage

From: bILL
Location: ~25n77w
Email:
Remote Name: 206.48.0.4
Date: 07/28/04
Time: 04:37:44 PM

Comments

Demand for tonnage was very great. Thus even old marginal ships were asssured cargo and full employment at rates that were profitable; but still more and better ships were needed to support the war effort. Government proceeded to order (13, I think)new vessels of a modern design the US Maritime Commission had on paper. As these new ships delivered at shipyards existing Lakes fleet operators entered into General Agency Agreements with the USMC to take on these ships,crew them, store them,provision them, repair them and I think insure them.I don't think the agreements were demise charters, but the net effect was not unlike a demise charter. These operators received a fee for their services.I am not sure now about the exact path of the freight moniey, but the operators made a reasonable profit, and the needed iron ore moved. Those new ships had cost about $1.5 million (~$115 per DWT) to build in the early 1940's. After the war operators were given a chance to purchase the ships. I believe, but am not certain,that operators were able to trade-in old crocks for scrapping at very good allowances toward the purchase of the new ships. By late 1950, only 5 years after WWII, the next wave of 647 X 70 Korean boats were ordered by private operators for delivery about 1953, but the price of these new 18,000 tonners had increased to $7 million (~$389/DWT) As I recall, Government again encouraged the newbuildings by taking old trade-in tonnage at attractive prices.This modernized the fleet, got rid of marginal ships, and kept overall tonnage demand and supply in reasonable balance.