Posted on 03/10/2006 6:43:14 AM PST by teddyballgame
The Dubai-owned company that pledged to surrender its $700 million worth of U.S. port businesses amid a furor on Capitol Hill wants to guarantee it doesn't lose money on the deal. But now that DP World is out of the political frying pan, it could find itself confronting a fire sale of its American assets.
Faced with unrelenting pressure from Congress, Dubai's ruler said DP World will transfer to an unspecified American company all U.S. port operations it acquired when it paid $6.8 billion for London-based Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co.
In its statement, DP World said its decision was based on the understanding that it will have time to coordinate the complex transfer and that "DP World will not suffer economic loss."
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Well, yes dp has been given tremendous leeway. For example, is there a time limit on consumating this sale? No, there is not. Therefor they do not have to take the first bid that shows up. Obviously, dp did not do its due diligence either, when you purchase something you need to know if it is was you think it is. In this case, dp purchased something without doing its homework. Again, the free market will rule in this matter, like it or not.
Whoa! You're trying to claim DPW didn't do due diligence or its homework? How in the world did you arrive at that conclusion? DPW went through the process of getting approval through the appropriate government entities in order to operate the facilities they purchased. We gave them approval and then after the sale was consumated, we withdrew approval. Please enlighten me as to how the free market will rule when we are forcing a sale of assets which with strict conditions as to who can purchase those assets?
Regretfully I don't think you know what you're talking about.
Oh yea, of course I dont know what Im talking about. Of course you sit on dps board of directors and you also are a consultant to the world wide shipping industry, not to mention you are probably a business atty specializing in port transactions. Give me a break, no one knows the entire story here, nor will they ever. Fyi, dp never got the certificate for operating standards, ie, they are not legally able to manage that port. Obviously, in this case the denial was political, however, dp did not secure the certificate prior to completing this transaction. Get it now? I bet you dont.
And then, we can end outsourcing.
That's called communism, but then you knew that, didn't you?
Really? Somebody should tell Israel because they supported the UAE deal, but what the heck do they know about security anyway?
Mitt doesn't stand a chance but it's not because he's Mormon, it's because he comes from MA and all the rest of the country thinks of when they think of MA is a virulantly liberal state that allowed the courts to impose same sex marriage under his watch. THAT is the plain and simple truth of the matter.
Wrong. It's called economic patriotism.
One must decide which one values more; the health and well-being of ones country, or lower prices to consumers.
So, then; if you treasure lower prices for imported Chinese crap above your country, what label shall we apply to you?
So when the founders of the United States maintained tariffs to protect our domestic industry, they were communists?
I begin to wonder whether you're quite serious, or simply doing a send-up of the typical free-traitor attitudes!
Oh please. The damage to overseas investment in America from Arab countries may just approach incalculable.
Not to mention the additional $$$ we will probably have to pony up big time, in order to keep our intel flow going.
I can't believe how narrow visioned people are on this entire debacle. We're going to be paying for this for a looooong time, hope it's just out of the pocketbook and not with American military or civilian lives.
Thank you, congressional republicans. Feh!
You want the American taxpayer to suppliment some company because they weren't able to compete against a foreign company unless they get "special privilages" (that reads US taxpayer welfare for them)
It's not in the national interest to reduce our people to earning the same slave wages as workers in China. It's also not in our national interest to denude ourselves of industrial infrastructure.
Speaking of corporate welfare, please note that tax benefits accrue to companies that send American jobs to other countries.
I also note with surprise that an American president has been seen in India, reassuring them that the flow of American jobs to India would not be reduced. I was under the impression that an American president was supposed to promote the best interests of Americans.
Economic patriotism - is that really too much to ask?
You know, after reading your posts I understand why you are frightened. You can't compete and the only way you think you can keep your job is if I and all other US taxpayers sacrifice for you. You want me to pay more for things so you can continue to make a living because you are not willing to get more competitive or learn new ways. For you, socialism is the only hope. They do that in france you know, and the result is year after year with fewer and fewer jobs, an economy that is falling apart, a lower standard of living, and smothering taxes. Guess that's what you want for here. Wouldn't it be easier on you if you moved to a country where what you want is already their way of doing business instead of trying to remake America?
I shall quote from your profile:
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
- Samuel Adams
If ye love wealth greater than liberty.
Sounds as if he wouldn't have cared for free traitors any more than I do.
Sounds good!
I am speechless. I never thought we would have to convince people that international trade is a good thing.
is that kinda like a stork bocker?
Sounds to me like YOU are the one worried about wealth, because you're not good enough to win in fair competion. The only way you can make it is if they lock out your competitors.
I'm sorry, I missed that headline on 9/11. I expect you would have run it then too, eh?
Just guessing, how about Crowley Maritime Corporation
http://www.crowley.com/aboutus/company-overview.asp
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.