Tuesday, November 25, 2008

Read Exurban Nation Then Run The Story

The backlog of autos at the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles have been making the news. Readers here have heard the same is happening at Port of Hueneme (why-knee-me). Obviously the local fishwrap has been scouring the blogs because they've finally gotten around to reporting. Ventura County Star:
The Port of Hueneme has built a substantial business as a West Coast destination for several auto manufacturers, with about 254,000 vehicles rolled off ships every year.

However, the port has suffered along with the auto industry. Imports fell 26 percent in the first quarter of the new fiscal year that began July 1, declining to 39,106 from 53,120 for the same quarter the previous year.

The vehicles Global Auto processes include Hyundai, Kia, GM and Saab.

Wait until ships are turned away and things get real interesting.


w said...

Turned away? Are the crew carrying plague? That is the first I've heard of it.

Rob Dawg said...

Worse than plague, products. The credit collapse will turn some ships as producers insist on letters of credit that cannot be shown. Others like autos in Long Beach because there's just no room to store. Beside, look at the baltic dry index. The ships have nothing better to do anyway.

Property Flopper said...

Oh Rob, it's already happening. American President Lines (APL) is closing the headquarters here in Oaktown, reducing a lot of the positions and relocating the remaining to cheaper areas.

Main reason cited: Major downturn in tonnage shipped. Apparently they're down 8% from last year on the Pacific routes right now and expecting it to drop more. Most of the decline in recent months.

w said...

The story does not mention the other big import coming through Hueneme. Fruit from Central America. This non-union facility run by an old farming family should do well.

Captain Nemo said...

Stupidity not limited to the USA!

This person signed a contract to buy a multi-million pound house, based on money he did not have.
Now he has lost UK pounds 500,000 (approx US$750k) and may be sued for more
because he did not receive the anticipated bonus that he had relied upon to be able to complete the purchase.

And these people are paid vast amounts because they are so smart?

s said...

Sure he claims he didn't get an expected bonus. Chances are the house would now sell for a million pounds less than he'd signed for and hence losing the deposit is the best option.

It's London, where the housing bubble makes the US one actually look like froth...

Rob Dawg said...

Walking away from a deposit is often the best course. The other even better idea is when you can get the deposit back on a technicality. There's a lot of that around here as "w" can attest.

Hey, "w" when do you close?

Captain Nemo said...

Walking away from a deposit is often the best course.

Not necessarily -- parhaps this is a difference between US and UK law. I am not a lawyer, but I believe that the "buyer" can be sued for:
1. The seller's cost to remarket the house
2. Any difference between what the house sells for and what the original buyer contracted to pay for the house.
3. Probably other costs.

So, if the seller really goes through his stated plan to sue the original "buyer" for everything he has, the buyer would have been better off to actually buy the house.

Rob Dawg said...

You are probably right about the differences. In the US forfeiting a deposit is usually considered a cure for nonperformance. The reason being the high cost of litigation.

anonymous said...

Well, if there's nothing going on in the ports that's one less place for China to bomb when they come to collect on those t-bills.