So much for the cockamamie scheme that was the Rochester fast ferry – first called "The Spirit of Ontario", then "The Breeze" and finally "The Cat" – as the city’s new Mayor Bob Duffy rejected an $11.5 million loan to keep the luxurious vessel afloat. But it’s not sailing away without one lingering insult to taxpayers across the lake – the discovery of a stealth contract that promised a $250K annual payment to Toronto Port Authority for the next 14 years, in order to dock a ghost ship. The ferry cost $42.5 million new in 2003, it was salvaged by the city for $32 million a year ago, and whatever price they can unload it for – combined with the operating losses of the past year – won’t pay off the full debt. Despite initial turbulence, recently retired Mayor William Johnson insisted any further financial influx was a safe investment, combined with improved pricing and scheduling, a plan to ship the 774-passenger boat off to warmer climes during winter months, and marketing slogans for the catamaran better than "Treat someone to a purrrrfect travel experience." Rochester can now stop waiting for GTA tourists to arrive at their sparkling new terminal, The Native Canadian website can wrap his unhealthy obsession with the ferry’s journey to oblivion, and we can return to columns in The Buffalo News that struggle to assert America’s moral superiority over the other side of the lake.
Plan overboard
January 11, 2006 · 5 Comments
Categories: fouronesix
5 responses so far ↓
Jason Paris // January 11, 2006 at 5:42 pm |
We all knew this day was coming. Still, in all the bad luck/management that has afflicted this operation, it’s easy to forget that it’s first few months of operation in the summer of 2004 were actually quite successful.
I’m all for alternate forms of transportation and this one seemed like a good idea at least…on paper. We tend to forget about that “big lake” in Toronto and it’s potential as a corridor of many things. I for one wished it well as an alternative to the QEW-NYS Thruway, but I’m not the least bit surprised by it’s demise either.
Walt // January 12, 2006 at 12:20 am |
It’s easy to be “successful” in the first few months of a new venture. This thing did not have what it takes for long-run success, after the novelty wore off. There just wasn’t enough business. I feel badly for people in Rochester who apparently have paid a significant chunk of money which undoubtedly could have been used for other worthwhile purposes.
Don O'Neill // January 12, 2006 at 9:39 am |
I’m saddened to see it go, although I felt it was just a matter of time before it did. I rode on it and enjoyed it, as I have several other ferries including the Yarmouth – Bar Harbour Cat. I recommended to our Senior citizens at home to enjoy it and several of them did. The main problems as I see it were :
1. The huge amount of fuel it used, of course :
2 It ran too often during the non-peak days :
3 Rochester does not have the public transit in place to encourage day travellers to come and enjoy what it has to offer and to be honest and frank about it, there is only so much one can do or see in Rochester, entertainment-wise, and one trip there is usually enough to take in the sights and scenes.
Nice try Rochester – you gave it your best shot and I thank you all for the fun experience I think we all had .
Richard Graesser // January 12, 2006 at 11:17 am |
It is a shame to see such a wonderful concept founder almost solely on the basis of extremely management decisions on the part of the owners. What has been repeatedly stated is that there was a lack of ridership from Toronto to Rochester, but no one has looked at WHY. All it takes is one to look at the schedule from last year for their answer. First of all, there were 2 northbound trips per day, scheduled conveniently at approxiamtely 9 and 3 if I remember correctly (They have since removed the schedule so I cannot verify the exact times). That makes sense and would definately been a draw to American customers who wanted to com to Toronto. However, there was only 1 southbound trip scheduled at 11:00 am. This choice to provide a single trip meant that;
a) Anyone coming south from Toronto was forced to spend a night in or around Rochester to catch the ferry the next morning back OR have approximately 1 hour to see everything and then turn around and come back…both a large turn off to ridership.
b) The ferry had to make at least one trip every day going back to Rochester EMPTY. Since another issue that has been raised in the “death” of the ferry has been fuel costs, how did management justify that?
If BOTH Toronto and Rochester really want a ferry service between the two great cities to work, then they should look at the business model that BC Ferries has been built on. Convenient scheduling for travel in BOTH directions allow more riders freedom to choose when they want to go and come back with more frequent trips between ports (Although, this would have to come later as it would require one or more additional ships to achieve), and more importantly, lower prices for consumers which again, attracts more ridership.
A 45 minute trip between the mainland and the island costs a little less than $11 CAD per person and approximately $35 CAD for a vehicle, a total of approximately $57 for a couple and their car. The trip from Toronto to Rochester for the same couple and their car cost in excess of $100 USD. This gave the impression that the management of the ferry wanted this to be a “luxury” service, and not one that all would consider as a choice in their travel plans. Yes, having a theatre and a fine dining restaurant on board were nice, and made the trip more pleasant, but a more basic ship (like the BC Ferries) with lounges, a simpler restaurant, and other, less expensive, entertainment options would have allowed for a drastic reduction of costs by allowing a smaller ship(s)to be used, thereby reducing fuel comsumption as well.
I still believe in the idea of a ferry service, and I think that both cities need direct involvement in the operation of the service (not handing it off to another company where the chances of mishandling decisions like those stated above are increased exponentially) and are committed to making it work for citizens on both sides of the border and prosperity to both regions.
matt // January 15, 2006 at 4:36 am |
Well… all that story with ferry that goes on and on for years seems like a big joke.
What else to say?
Is it really so hard for ‘first-nation-in-the-universe’ to set a functional modern ferry link to the largest city of ‘other neighbouring’ nation?
Is it so hard to make a viable plan for a fast ferry that would cut time and money – considering that it connects 2 points on a very (heavily) used transportation highway?
Really stunning….
You must be logged in to post a comment.