Once, as we were ship spotting Pier 4, me and Vinz noticed that there seems to be a ceremony involving Cebu Ferry 1 and Cebu Ferry 3. Asking the guard who is his friend, Vinz learned it was despedida (farewell ceremonies) for the two Visayas-Mindanao ferries which will be transferred in Batangas. We learned later that the Batangas manager of 2GO said he can make the two ferries earn more there than in Cebu. That was already the era of the retreat of Cebu Ferries Corporation (CFC) when to think that in the late 1990’s they were bullying the Visayas-Mindanao ferry companies which led to the demise of some. This time around, Cebu Ferries Corporation can no longer keep with their competition. What a reversal of fortune!
The despidida for two Cebu Ferry ships
Vinz asked me how the two ferries will fare in Batangas. I told him it is a different ballgame there. What I meant was in Cebu it was a matter of attracting passengers and loose cargo, I told Vinz the game in the intermodal ports of Luzon (and Batangas is one) is in attracting the buses and the trucks and I told him discounting (called “rebates”) is the name of the game there (and that also includes freebies). That means whichever has the biggest discount will have the rolling cargo and for the regulars long-term agreements apply so it is not the decision of the drivers what ship to board. I told Vinz the new “Batangas Ferries” (my monicker) will have to learn the new game.
The new “Batangas Ferries” plied a direct Batangas to Caticlan route compared to their competitors which ply both the Batangas-Calapan route and the Roxas-Caticlan route and let the buses and trucks roll from Calapan to Roxas in Oriental Mindoro, a distance of about 120 kilometers or so or about 3 hours of rolling time. The “Batangas Ferries” can easily sail that route as an overnight ferry because they have the speed to do it in less than 12 hours (and as overnight ferries they are already equipped with bunks). In fact, early on they tried a round trip in a day for the Batangas-Caticlan route. Then they found out they don’t have enough load because many of the buses and trucks are already tied to their competitors and there is no load yet in the early morning in Caticlan as the buses and trucks are still rolling from many parts of Panay and will still arrive at noon or in the afternoon.
A “Batangas Ferry” sailing into the coming night by Nowell Alcancia
In reality, even the slower ferries of their competition can do a Batangas-Caticlan route should they want to do it. It will take more than 12 hours but they will still be able to sail the next night. Even at the usual 11 knots they can do that route in no more than 16 hours. Their faster ferries than can do 14 knots can do the route in about 14 hours. Their ferries will just have to become overnight ferries+ instead of being short-distance ferries.
That then was the first rub. The ferries of Batangas are not used to and are even loath to operate overnight ferries. For one, they will have to convert their ferries to have bunks. That means expenses, that means lessening the passenger capacity. Now for shipping companies that are even loath to adding scantlings and were just content to have the unofficial “Stairs Class”, that is a difficult sell. Good overnight ferries also must be able to provide a restaurant and hot food. Well, nothing beats the ease and profit margins of overpriced instant noodles where the only capital is hot water. Now what if MARINA obliges them to provide free meals if the voyage time is over 12 hours like what Administrator Pacienco Balbon required then of Viva Shipping Lines? That could be disaster.
Well, it seems nothing will beat requiring the rolling cargo and its passengers two ferry rides within the same night (for some that leave Manila late). They will earn twice and anyway the rolling cargo won’t go to “Batangas Ferries” because many are tied to them with discounting and rebates. And they won’t just transfer because the rates in the sea is high for the same distance and the distance of Batangas-Caticlan is high and so it is not cheap and Batangas Ferries is not used to discounting (actually, the reason they eventually lost in Visayas-Mindanao is they were the more expensive).
Passengers can’t be aboard the bus during the voyage and in loading and offloading
The buses won’t go along with “Batangas Ferries” too. If they ride on a Batangas-Caticlan ferry they would have to forego the fare for 120 kilometers or so and that is not peanuts. It has long been held by the LTFRB that a bus cannot charge for the distance traveled at sea (of course, secretly they will try to do it since anyway most passengers don’t know how to compute the fare nor do they know of the number of kilometers). And they will have to pay higher for the longer sea distance crossed. Does anyone need a nail to the head?
And so the buses will rather have their passengers ride two ferries at night. That connotes all the trouble of disembarking and boarding again plus the queues for the various tickets. And never mind if it is raining. In that route, that can be the definition of “passenger service”. Is there a difference between passengers and cattle?
And so until now it is still just 2GO, the renamed “Batangas Ferries” which do the direct Batangas-Caticlan route. Montenegro Shipping Lines, Starlite Ferries, Archipelago Ferries Philippines, Super Shuttle Ferry (Asian Marine Transport Corporation) and Besta Shipping Lines never did that direct route. Who said they will walk the extra mile for their clients?
“Batangas Ferry 3”
Anyway, passengers are appreciative of the superior accommodations of the 2GO ferries. They have never seen such ferries in Batangas before (and they haven’t been to Cebu either, the home of good overnight ferries). They never ever thought that their ropaxes are actually just cattle carriers. And they have never seen a true restaurant in a ship before which the 2GO ferries have. And oh, plus true, polite passenger service (they have been too used to masahista ng bakal in T-shirts before pretending as stewards).
Will Archipelago Ferries Philippines do a direct route since their catamaran ROROs are faster (theoretically they can do the route is just 10 hours but they will have to do it at daytime since they don’t have bunks)? Well, I don’t think so. I heard they are even happy with the farther Bulalacao-Caticlan route since their sister company bus rolls farther and thus earns more from fare.
A catamaran RORO of AFPC by Jon Erodias
And that is the situation of the Batangas-Caticlan route. Now I wonder when the Panay passengers will demand for something better.
Are they just content to get up at night and disembark even if it is raining and continue the trip with their heads hanging out from seats and their bodies contorted in search of sleep?
When the FastCats first arrived I did not know how to assess them properly. It was brand-new but truckers and buses which are charged disproportionately higher (because they say of the weight) decide on the price point and not on the newness and amenities of the ship. Actually, rebates in the form of complimentary passenger tickets (which is then sold), outright discounts and cash bonuses are stronger inducements to them. The superior speed of the FastCats might not also be decisive because that can be trumped by longer waiting hours in the ports if the departure gaps are significant. And by large on many buses and trucks it is not the decision of the drivers where to board as that is a company decision if there are company-to-company arrangements and accounts. It might only be in private cars and SUVs where the FastCats might have a better pull but then most drivers will not wait if the departure time is still two or more hours away.
The amortization weight of the FastCats also played into my mind. These medium-speed ships were all loaned from the DBP (Development Bank of the Philippines) from a JICA loan window meant to modernize our shipping. I do not know the loan terms and that part not on the top of the table but it could be in the vicinity of P3 million a month, a rough guesstimate. That would translate to about P80,000 a day (it could be less if the amortization terms are longer and it could be higher if shorter or if the if it is not a soft loan) on top of operational costs and other costs incremental to operating a ship (think fuel and parts) and a shipping company (think offices and office staff) plus the mandatory taxes, insurance and registration. Add to that the expenses and downtime of drydocking which will also be in the millions of pesos.
A Moderator of Philippine Ship Spotters Society (PSSS), our Math Professor induced me to Calapan to have a firsthand look. After observation and calculation, I immediately conceded that if the route is Batangas-Calapan with its high traffic the FastCats will be profitable since ferries sail there 24/7 except on rough weather and storms. But I had my doubts then on other routes where the traffic is not so strong. Weaning away patronage from competitors is not that easy because it is not really a free market since many trucks and buses are already locked in in contracts with some shipping companies especially those which are good in the rebate, discounting and hospitality (like free meals) game. These shipping companies generally have their ships fully or nearly-fully amortized hence their break-even point could be lower even if their fuel cost is higher .
The FastCats are catamaran ROROs but unlike what they say they were not the first to field this type of craft since the Starlite Ferry and Lite Ferry 23 came ahead of them. The FastCat are not High Speed Crafts (HSCs) because they only sail at 17 knots. Hence, their classification will fall to Medium Speed Craft or MSCs. It seems the choice of their name was meant to fool those who are not very knowledgeable of sea crafts.
The FastCats originated from a design of Sea Transport Solutions of Australia but all were built in China by different yards. These vessels feature aluminum alloy hulls for less weight which help in boost speed, lower fuel consumption and in resisting corrosion. A catamaran design means less drag but it can also be wicked in cross-swells. The FastCats do not carry their own ramp thus saving more weight and instead there is a hydraulically-activated ramp in the port which connects to the ship. The disadvantage however is they need a dedicated docking area because the ramp-in-the-port precludes the use of others of that space and so applying for a port are sometimes complicated by this requirement. The ramp can also be damaged by storm waves as shown by what happened in Calapan port.
The dimensions of the FastCat are 50.6 meters in length over-all, 47.2 meters in length between perpendiculars, 17.8 meters in breadth and 4.2 meters in depth. Originally the ship has 683 to 704 gross tons when these left China but with the added passenger deck for the Economy class on the bridge level (they call the bridge the “wheelhouse”) the gross tonnage rose and in the case of FastCat M6 it Is already 967 gross tons. The gross tonnage of the others would then not be far from that. The original net tonnage was 207 to 212 but definitely it is now far higher than that because of the additional Economy section. Generally, the declared DWT is 300 tons.
The passenger capacity of the vessel is between 275 to 290 divided into Tourist and Economy. The Tourist has cool airconditioning and airline-type seats with enough leg space and it is located on the deck below the Economy. The ship’s canteen which reminds one of a convenience store is also located there and its offerings are much better than the basic, short-distance ferry-ROROs around. The passenger service is much better too in all aspects. It seems the service personnel were recruited from Hotel and Restaurant Management course grads instead of the plain able-bodied seamen of competitions’. The passenger accommodations are located in only one side of the ship making for an unbalanced look. The bridge is located at the middle of the ship above the car deck.
The first FastCats are powered by 4 Cummins engines with a total of 2,600 horsepower while the latter ones are powered by Cummins clones built in China with the same power output. From a report I got the FastCats have 4 screws which means they are not using synchronizers. That means less weight, less complication, less power lost and there is no possibility of an unbalanced and difficult run if ever one engine loses power (as they will just shut down another engine on the opposite bank). The bridge of the FastCats are also modern like that of a High Speed Craft (not the ones from Malaysia) and for me the most notable feature is it produces its own power and is not dependent on the power supplied by the engine room (and that is a lot of safety margin).
The FastCats were built by different companies in different yards in China. They total ten but the owner of Archipelago Philippine Ferries Corporation recently announced they will order more and will apply for routes in our neighboring countries and on additional routes in the country. The ship series was originally intended to be named “FastCat M1” to “FastCat M10” but heeding the Chinese aversion to the number “4” there is no “FastCat M4” and instead there is a “FastCat M11”. The first one in the series of sister ships arrived in 2013 and the last one arrived in 2016.
Analyzing the FastCats and comparing it to other ROROs of the same length what I noticed is the 17.8 meters breadth of the FastCats means an extra RORO lane. At 2,600 horsepower the FastCats do not use a bigger engine than many ROROs of the same length. That means the extra speed comes not in overpowering these catamaran ROROs. It was instead coming from the less weight due to the aluminum alloy hull, the less drag of the catamaran design and the minimalist superstructure. The last one might be the key along with the use of aluminum. The old-style ROROs really have a lot of steel being carried around. That will tell on fuel consumption and it will weigh down the speed. That is the reason why most ROROs in the 50-meter class with about the same or a slightly higher power output runs at only 13-14 knots. And for sure with the higher vessel weight and conventional hull design plus the age they consume much more fuel than the FastCats.
And that is the reason why the FastCats can, at the start, match the fares and rolling rates of the competing ROROs although they are carrying a much higher amortization rate. Anyway they cannot charge significantly higher because the better amenities and passenger service will only primarily attract the private vehicle owners driving sedans and SUVs.
However, total revenues of any transport will primarily depend on the kilometers or nautical miles run. That is true for airplanes, that is true for the buses and that is also true for ships. That is one of the reasons why budget airplanes are successful now because they practically fly round-the clock with just a few hours of lay-over and to be able to do that they use double crewing. That is also the reason why Philtranco loves the Manila-Davao run because night and day the bus runs and the more kilometers and hours it run the more is its revenues.
And that brings to the tactic that Archipelago Philippine Ferries is and will be using to have enough revenue in routes not as strong as Batangas-Calapan — they will run the opposition to the ground by running the FastCats with as many trips as possible in a day like in the 44-nautical mile Dumaguete-Dapitan route where they now have 3 round trips in a day (there is no guarantee, however, that this will not change). Somehow, something has to give way and since they are running they will be able to gain load and passengers. There is really no reason for them to wait for the next ferry unless they are contracted to it as they are not faster. Everybody loves time saved as long as the rates are about the same.
FastCats can do that many trips a day because they are faster. That is the same line of reasoning why regional container ships normally sail now at 20 knots, the same speed as our SuperFerries that became saints of 2GO. With such speed they can make more voyages in a year and that means more revenues. Or put it another way the shipping operator can make the same revenue with less number of ships. Neat, huh?
Faster time is also a come-on on ferries that have close time departures. If there is a FastCat that is promising a 2.5hr sailing time in a route then dumb is the passenger of private car owner which will opt for a 4-hour sailing. Well maybe if he is related to the owner or the Captain then it is forgivable. That is the reason why then I do not take the slow Maharlika II in the Liloan-Lipata route since Super Shuttle Ferry 18 will overtake it even if it left later and I have the benefit of a ship with better accommodations. But in shorter routes the sailing time difference will be not that much great and the come-on of greater speed will be less. The time consumed waiting in the port will be the more decisive factor then.
That is why the FastCat is dangerous for the old-style ferries and even to new Starlite Ferries. Speed is their ace. I have heard that even in the Batangas-Calapan route some now opt for the FastCat rather than the SuperCat because at 17 knots versus 22 knots the travel time difference in the 24nm route is not that great and yet there is a significant difference in fare as in almost double while their facilities are just about the same. So even the High Speed Crafts which gulp a lot of fuel and do not carry any significant volume of cargo is threatened by them.
A view of some of the old-style ferries of the competition or possible competition, same size class and engine size:
King Frederick 56.8 m x 14.0m, 2400hp, 13.5 knots when new
Nelvin Jules 56.8 m x 14.0m, 2400hp, 13.5 knots when new
Maria Zenaida 54.0m x 11.4m, 2400hp, 12.5 knots when new
Reina Genoveva 59.9m x 11.0m, 2600hp, 14 knots when new
Reina Hosanna 59.9m x 11.0m, 2600hp, 14 knots when new
Super Shuttle Ferry 12 53.0m x 10.4m, 2700hp, 14 knots when new
Lite Ferry 15 60.3m x 11.4m, 2600hp, 14 knots when new
Starlite Navigator 57.3m x 13.5m, 2400hp, 14 knots when new
Lite Ferry 1 48.7m x 11.0m, 2000hp, 13.5 knots when new
Lite Ferry 7 50.8m x 10.8m, 2000hp, 14 knots when new
Maria Helena 49.0m x 12.2m, 2000hp, 14 knots when new
Maria Rebecca 49.9m x 13.2m, 2000hp, 13.5 knots when new
Hansel Jobett 51.1m x 14.0m, 2000hp, 13.5 knots when new
Star Ferry III 46.4m x 11.5m, 2000hp, 13.5 knots when new
Those ferries are already 1.5 knots down, on the average, from their speed when new. And those 2,000hp ferries will be using more fuel now per nautical mile than the 2600-horsepower FastCats. Even when new it is not sure they were consuming less fuel because of their higher weight and drag. Those 2,600-horsepower ferries will be definitely consuming much more fuel now than the FastCats.
Note also the difference in the breadth which translates to lane-meters of rolling cargo. Those ferry sampling have on the average a greater passenger capacity than the FastCats especially since all except one have two passenger decks. But on ROROs the rolling cargo earn a disproportionate share of the revenues compared to passengers and FastCats have one or two more lanes for vehicles compared to that sampling. And if the passenger capacity of the FastCats will prove lacking then another passenger compartment can be added to the vacant side of the vessel. So sometimes it is said that the FastCats are not full but their rolling cargo load might already “full” if compared to the load of that sampling which has a narrower and smaller vehicle deck than the FastCats.
There are short-distance ferry-ROROs that are in the 60-meter class that can run at 14-14.5 knots true speed if they want but on the average these feature engines that are on the average are bigger as in nearly 1,000 horsepower more. The fuel consumption difference compared to the FastCats will even be greater and actually they might be one truck longer than the FastCats but still the rolling cargo capacity of the FastCats are bigger. A sampling:
Maria Felisa 57.4m x 13.0m, 3600hp, 15.5 knots when new
Maria Vanessa 57.4m x 13.0m, 3600hp, 15.5 knots when new
Maria Oliva 64.3m x 13.5m, 3200hp, 16 knots when new
Maria Ursula 61.4m x 14.0m, 3400hp, 16 knots when new
Reina de los Angeles 60.9m x 12.8m, 3600hp, 16 knots when new
Anthon Raphael 61.4m x 14.0m, 3400hp, 15.5 knots when new
For sure this set consumes a lot more fuel than the FastCats and there is still a 2.5-3-knot disadvantage.
The only one in this size which will not be too a laggard compared to the FastCats is the Jack Daniel of the Sta. Clara Shipping Corporation. She is 65.0m x 14.0m and sailed at 17 knots when new but her engine has 4,300 horsepower already, well over the 2,600 horsepower of the FastCats. Maybe the aluminum hull and the catamaran design did a lot of magic to keep the FastCats separated from the pack.
Which brings us to the new Starlite ferries. These are 66.8-67m x 15.3m ferries and that means a car deck capacity nearly equal to the FastCats. These definitely has more passenger capacity at 750 persons but as I have said if a new passenger compartment will be built on the other side of the FastCats the current passenger capacity of 300 of the FastCats will nearly double to 600 which will not be much behind than the new Starlite ferries. These new Starlite ferries have a speed of 14.5 knots and 3,650 horsepower are needed to produce that speed. So for a possible equality in passenger and rolling cargo capacity the new Starlite ferries are using more fuel for even less speed. Now I begin to understand why there are a lot of catamaran ROROs in other countries with aluminum hulls. They are simply more efficient. And these are the aces of the FastCats.
If all can run 100 to 150 nautical miles average in a day (that is about the back-and-forth run of the Cebu ferries to Ormoc) then they might be able to amortize their fleet, my guess. In Batangas-Calapan they have no problem with that quota. In Cebu-Ormoc, the Oceanjets and SuperCats do over 200 nautical miles in a day, to think and they are profitable (with maybe a 2/3 load) even though they guzzle a lot of fuel. That will take a lot of wrestling customers away from other shipping companies. Well things do not happen in a vacuum. With amortized ships the others could choose to lower the fares and the rates (now that will be good for the the riding public and shippers; after all rolling and cargo rates in the Philippines is really high).
But then I don’t place too much emphasis on that now. If the amortization is only P80,000 a day, if a FastCat runs 8 trips in a day that will be only P10,000 per trip and if that is Batangas-Calapan that will just mean taking out the revenues from two trucks! And it might just be one truck in longer routes! Above and beyond the operational costs like fuel, labor, etc. Dangerous, dangerous! For the competition, that is. That also shows how high our rolling rates are (as I always asked since when did MARINA learn how to properly compute rolling and container rates?)
However, in the Liloan-Lipata route I heard a disquieting report. One FastCat has left and the remaining one also cheats now on the schedule as in they compact the schedules if there is not enough load (well, useless to run and run if the load cannot justify it). The reason is the Cargo RORO LCTs there are suctioning the trucks like vacuum. That is also a phenomenon noted in the various Cebu-Leyte routes and even in the various Cebu-Bohol routes. Cargo RORO LCTs can offer rates as low as half of the conventional ROROs and for trucks that is a decisive come-on. And that is the reason why and Cargo RORO LCTs seem to be also a new paradigm change.
And besides many commercial vehicles (trucks, buses and panel trucks like those of LBC, etc.) are already locked in through company-to-company arrangements and through the use of super special rates and special rates plus other inducements. As I said it it not really a free market and the only ones that actually pay the published rates are the newcomers and the seldom travelers. The published rates are actually artificially high so as to cover all the discounts that the RORO ferry companies are giving to their regulars. This is actually a sucker’s world but the newbies do not realize that.
Which of the two paradigm changes will prevail? And will the old RORO ferry companies hold on through the locking game? Well, only the future can tell (how can we guess all their moves, counter-moves, guts and instincts?). But I love paradigm changes. With those things begin to get interesting.
Photo Credits: Carl Jakosalem, Nowell Alcancia, Mike Baylo, PSSS
The people of Central Visayas know this fastcraft because for a number of years she was sailing from Dumaguete to Siquijor which was probably her most successful route locally. She would leave at early morning and people at the port and at the Dumaguete Boulevard would watch her powerful wakes and wash that only a High Speed Craft can make. She also have that striking livery which was unlike other fastcrafts.
When I first saw her in Dumaguete, I was deceived. It did not enter my mind that Delta III was a fastcraft I once probably knew and might have even ridden. But thanks to the PSSS collaboration with grosstonnage.com of Angelo Blasutta which was a very good database when it was still functional, I was able to trace who she was. I must admit though that there are still a few uncertainties in her career especially since one company that owned her in the past, the Viva Shipping group had name and ownership changes in the fastcrafts they owned.
Another faction in my deception is the livery made her seem bigger, I think, and the truth is I did not think she would have survived the downs of the shipping companies which once owned her. Add to add her age. Fastcrafts are not known to live very long unlike the conventional ferries. In most cases, when the engines go that is also the end of this kind of craft. High speed engines also do not last as long as low speed engines (in metallurgical engineering they it is the total number of revolutions made that determines when the engine will give way). Another angle is the engines might still be alive but the revenues might no longer be enough for the fuel consumption That is quite true in High Speed Crafts whose engines are no longer efficient. And that is the reason why so many High Speed Crafts built in the 1980’s and 1990’s are on the market today because they are no longer profitable to operate.
Delta III is one of the oldest fastcrafts still running locally. She was built by Sumidagawa Shipyard Company of Tokyo, Japan in 1979 and she was first known as Shiokaze and her ID was IMO 7913945. grosstonnage.com says she was once known too as Marine Star and that was probably when she was still in Japan.
This fastcraft is not big although she is bigger than the smallest fastcrafts around like the Santander Expresses or the FastCraft Aznars which sail near the seas where Delta III sail. She is 26.7 meters in length over-all and she measures 25.9 meters in length between perpendiculars. Her breadth is 5.8 meters and she has a depth of 2.6 meters. Her dimensional weights are 152 gross tons and 43 net tons and her deadweight tonnage is 14 tons. Two of her sister ships were the Sachikaze and Oikaze which both went to Sun Cruises of Manila as the Island Cruisers and which then went to Viva Shipping Lines in 1994 to battle the newly-arrived SuperCats then in the Batangas-Calapan route. She is also sister ship to the Sazanami which went to Viva Shipping Lines also.
The Delta III has an aluminum alloy hull and she has a raked stem and transom stern. She has a single mast and and one passenger deck in serrated arrangement. Her original powerplant were most likely Detroit Diesels of over 2,000 horsepower and the original speed will be about 25 or 26 knots.
In 1995, she came to the Philippines to Viva Shipping Lines as the Our Lady of Fatima II. She was one of the six fastcrafts that came into the fleet of Viva Shipping Lines combine. There are confusions though in the maritime databases because of the renamings and the situation that not all fastcrafts and even those from Japan have IMO Numbers.
When Viva Shipping Lines began spiralling down in 2002 because of overcompetition, internal troubles and loss of patronage, she went to the fleet of the Blue Magic Ferries which was a successor company to Viva Shipping Lines and owned by the scions of that company. This company is headquartered in Lucena City, Quezon and is using the old base there of Viva Shipping Lines. Blue Magic Ferries tried to continue sailing from Lucena in alliance with the rump of ACG Express Liner, a Cebu shipping company which tried its fate in Batangas but which also lost. In Blue Magic Ferries Shiokaze was known as the Blue Water Lady II. Along this way, the fastcraft was re-engined to twin Caterpillar engines of 2,200 horsepower which lengthened her life and she was again capable of 25 knots.
In 2007, the struggles of Blue Magic Ferries intensified when their RORO ferry Blue Water Princess which came from ACG Express Liner capsized off Bondoc Peninsula of the province of Quezon in foul weather while doing a Lucena-Masbate route. In 2008, Blue Magic Ferries stopped sailing because of a franchise problem supposedly emanating from a dispute between the scions of the founder of Viva Shipping Lines.
After a lay-up in Lucena, the Blue Water Lady II was sold to DIMC Shipping of Dumaguete where she became the Delta III. She plied a regular route between Dumaguete and Siquijor even though at times DIMC Shipping had problems with competition. This was exacerbated when the invading ROROs of Montenegro Shipping Lines Inc. came which was later followed by the ROROs of Aleson Shipping Lines. DIMC Shipping then earned bad repute by outright cancelling of trips when there are only a few tickets purchased for a trip and citing some weak reasons.
In 2014, DIMC Shipping quit and sold their last vessel, the Delta III to a Siquijor-based competitor, the GL Shipping Lines which was successful despite of “foreign” vessel entries to the island. She was renamed then as the GL Express 2. In a sense too, she is a replacement to the sunk GL Express of the company, the former Canoan Jet which in actuality was just a Medium Speed Craft already then.
Where is this long-careered fastcraft headed? Honestly, I don’t know. All I know is I want her to continue to survive and continue sailing. As things stands now, she might already be in better hands as GL Shipping, to which Siquijodnons seem to have parochial loyalty. This company is thriving especially since she has the shorter route to Siquijor, Siquijor compared to competition.
GL Express 2 is now one of the oldest fastcrafts still existing in the country, a longevity earned despite going through many ownership changes. May she sail more in the future.
We all know what GIGO or “Garbage In, Garbage Out” means. The paper of Myrna S. Austria on domestic shipping competition is one such example and I will show the GIGO of her paper in the port of Batangas. [I will also show how it applied later in her analyses on the routes from Cebu and other routes; to tackle all in one article will simply be too long.] Her paper:
In that paper the figures that were used were for 1998 and 1999 but the paper could have been published in 2003. So for consistency I will use data especially vessel data for 1998, primarily and for 1999, secondarily.
Batangas port in 1998-1999 was one of our busiest port in terms of passenger traffic. In those years Batangas port was behind Cebu port and Manila port (in total passengers but not in vessel departures) but it is well ahead of the other Philippine ports.
The number one route from Batangas is the Calapan route and that route will account for about 80% of the passenger departures from Batangas. Other routes then from Batangas were to the following ports : Abra de Ilog, Sablayan and San Jose (all in Occidental Mindoro); Puerto Galera (in Oriental Mindoro); Coron and Puerto Princesa (both in Palawan); Odiongan, Romblon, Banton and Simara (all in Romblon province) and Masbate.
Actually there might have been a few other routes from Batangas that I might have missed because the creation and deletion of routes was very fast in those days as competition in Batangas was really heated up. This was the era of the entry of many shipping companies which was the result of the deregulation policy and shipping incentives laid down by the Fidel V. Ramos administration. In fact, because of the dog-eat-dog competition in Batangas and the simple excess of bottoms, in a few years after 1998 a lot of shipping companies plying routes from Batangas routes will have collapsed including the biggest, the Viva Shipping Lines/Sto. Domingo Shipping/DR Shipping combine of the controversial Don Domingo Reyes.
If the paper of Myrna S. Austria is to be believed there were only three routes from Batangas served by sea vessels bigger than motor bancas in 1998 — the Batangas-Calapan route (and that is served only by SuperCat according to her paper), the Batangas-Puerto Galera route (according to her that is served only by Si-Kat, the small Cavite-built fiberglass-hulled catamaran) and the Batangas-Romblon route (which according to her is only served by Shipshape Ferry Inc.). Of course that is very, very far from the truth and actual situation and if you tell that to porters in Batangas port they will probably whistle in disbelief.
Now if her paper is correct (and it is definitely erroneous) then Batangas will only be a minor port as least as far as passenger shipping is concerned (it is another matter in cargo because Batangas hosts refineries and lot of tankers dock there).
If the paper of Myrna S. Austria is to be believed then there is only one RORO ship docking in Batangas in 1998 was the Princess Camille. And there were only three passenger shipping companies – SuperCat (or Philippine Fast Ferry Corp.), Si-Kat (which was misspelled to Sicat Ferries) and Shipshape Ferry (which owns the Princess Camille). And she says Si-Kat goes to Puerto Princesa, Palawan and not Puerto Galera, Oriental Mindoro which is wrong again. I just wonder how a small catamaran can reach Puerto Princesa from Batangas. Maybe tankers met her along the way?
So in Myrna S. Austria’s paper, Viva Shipping Lines and her legal-fiction companies Sto. Domingo Shipping and DR Shipping simply did not exist when actually it was the biggest in Southern Tagalog during that time with 33 passenger vessels from ROROs to fastcrafts and wooden motor boats (the batels). Most of its ships were based in Batangas with a few in Lucena.
In Myrna S. Austria’s paper, the Montenegro Shipping Lines Inc. (MSLI) also did not exist in 1998 together with its six ROROs and three motor boats. Starlite Ferries and its one RORO also did not exist like MSLI (Starlite added ships in 1999 like MSLI). In the paper, two Atienza clan ROROs also did not exist. That goes true for the motor boats and big motor bancas that go to Banton and Simara (when the paper of Myrna S. Austria lists motor boats and motor bancas in other places including those that just cross the narrow Davao
Why was this so? That happened because the shipping companies mentioned did not bother to report to the Philippine Ports Authority (PPA) and it seems she did not consult the MARINA Database and so she did not see the list of ferries in the Philippines and its routes). I just wonder about ivory tower researchers. All they know is go to government offices when government data has a lot of leaks. They won’t bother going to the ports and see with their own eyes and hear with their own ears.
In her paper I noticed a lot of ports missing and a lot of shipping companies not listed both in passenger and cargo shipping, nationally. Once, I read that the PPA themselves admitted that only about 55% of the companies report to them. I even wonder if that is not a rose-tinted estimate especially in cargo. One of the major reason for this is they are not the maritime regulatory agency (that is the MARINA or Maritime Industry Authority) and maybe the shipping companies felt that reporting to them is not mandatory. Another major reason is there are more private ports than PPA ports and a lot of ports that are under the local government units (LGUs). There are even ports that are not registered or authorized to operate (it is the PPA themselves that pointed that out).
The PPA will also not know the passenger and cargo ships existing since they don’t maintain a shipping database. There are even unregistered ships and there are motor bancas and fishing bancas taking passengers and cargo although they are not authorized by the maritime regulatory agency. So why would they report to the PPA? The so-many Moro boats of Zamboanga, Sulu and Tawi-tawi are in the main unregistered and they number over 200.
In Myrna S. Austria’s paper, the average age of passenger ferries in 1999 was 9.98 years and these were mainly the High Speed Crafts and Medium Speed Crafts. The average age for passenger-cargo ships in 1999 was just 9.27 years (gasp!). Who can believe that!? That only happened because she missed a lot of shipping companies in her research. The true average age of our passenger-cargo ships then was over 20 years. Otherwise Senator Richard Gordon and former MARIA Administrator Maria Elena Bautista won’t be railing against the age of our ships. And I have the database to prove that our ships are really much older than Myrna S. Austria’s data.
The centerpiece of the study of Myrna S. Austria is the use of the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index or HHI to measure shipping competition.
But what is the use of that measurement when a lot of companies do not bother to report? Almost all the computations will then be go awry and concentration will seem to be very high. There is no sense to that that index if the data is highly incomplete which was really the case.
In Myrna S. Austria’s paper, there were a lot of routes reported to be with “no competition” or only with “mild competition”. Because most shipping companies were not in the data. [I a future article I will list all the shipping companies and ships she was able to list and I will list all the shipping companies and ships she missed.]
In Batangas when Myrna S. Austria’s paper was published in 2003 a host of shipping companies there were already toppling including the biggest (the Viva-Sto. Domingo-DR combine). Others that toppled were Aquajet Maritime, Sto. Nino Maritime Services and Atienza Shipping (not the current one of Silverio Atienza). Some others left Batangas for thereafter for greener pastures(like the Atienza Shipping Lines of Silverio Atienza and ACG Express Liner) and some sold out (like the Shipshape and Safeship combine and Alexis Shipping). Except for one, all of these were not on the list of Myrna S. Austria.
The competition then in Batangas was “dog-eat-dog” or in Tagalog, “matira ang matibay”. There was rampant undercutting and underpricing and route schedules are not followed. I personally saw how that went on in Batangas when the rolling cargo rate for AUVs went down from P300 to P75 in 1995. When Viva Shipping Line implemented that nobody can follow suit to P75 because all will simply lose. P75 was just ¾ of the aircon bus fare then from Cubao to Batangas port! That was just like charging P120 in today’s (2016) money, less than a tenth of what they charge now. That was how fierce was competition in Batangas then.
Myrna S. Austria never knew that because maybe she never went to Batangas port (I believe in that otherwise she would have known the other shipping companies existing there) and for sure she is not a Batangas shipping passenger. Because of her was paper laden with great incompleteness in data, the conclusions can only be wrong — at least as far as Batangas, the coverage of this article.
The Shipping Companies in Batangas in 1998 and Its Passenger Ships Existing By That Year That Myrna S. Austria Missed In Her Paper:
Viva Shipping Lines:
Marian Queen (IMO 7534402)
Viva Sta. Maria (IMO 6814611)
St. Kristopher (IMO 7036292)
Viva Sto. Nino (IMO 6811528)
Viva Penafrancia (IMO 7331410)
Viva Penafrancia 2 (IMO 7908639)
Viva Penafrancia 3 (IMO 7126009)
Viva Penafrancia 4 (IMO 7104025)
Viva Penafrancia 5 (IMO 6908254)
Viva Penafrancia 8 (IMO 6829197)
Viva Penafrancia 9 (IMO 8426250)
Immaculate Conception (IMO 7607974)
Viva San Jose (IMO 7225398)
San Agustin Reyes (IMO 7020774)
Viva Sta. Ana (wooden motor boat; no IMO Number)
Viva Sta. Ana 2 (woodenmotor boat; no IMO Number)
Viva Maria Socorro (wooden motor boat; no IMO Number)
Our Lady of Lourdes (wooden motor boat; no IMO Number)
Socorro II (wooden motor boat; no IMO Number)
Our Lady of the Holy Rosary (fastcraft; IMO 7914731)
Viva Lady of Lourdes (fastcraft; IMO 8895149)
Sto. Domingo Shipping Lines:
Sto. Domingo (IMO 7314266)
San Lorenzo Ruiz (IMO 7119862)
San Fernando (IMO 7852634)
Sta. Penafrancia 6 (IMO 8426224)
Sta. Penafrancia 7 (IMO 7740099)
St. Lawrence (IMO 7405273)
Our Lady of Guadalupe-Reyes (fastcraft; no IMO Number)
Our Lady of Fatima 7828947 (fastcraft; IMO 7828947)
Penafrancia 10 (local-built fastcraft; no IMO Number)
Penafrancia 11 (local-built fastcraft; no IMO Number)
Penafrancia 12 (local-built fastcraft; no IMO Number)
Our Lady of Mt. Carmel (fastcraft; IMO 7828047)
Montenegro Shipping Lines Inc.:
Maria Angela (IMO 7852919)
Maria Gloria (IMO 6726668)
Maria Isabel (IMO 6720509)
Marie Kristina (IMO 6817962)
Maria Sophia (IMO 8948519)
Marie Teresa (IMO 8021969)
Don Vicente (wooden motor boat; no IMO Number)
Don Francisco (wooden motor boat; no IMO Number)
Dona Matilde (wooden motor boat; no IMO Number)
Starlite Ferries Inc.:
Starlite Ferry 5 (IMO 6829484)
Sto. Nino Maritime Services:
STO. 1 Ferry (IMO 9171709)
Source: Philippine Ship Spotters Society (PSSS) Database
Anybody can go to MarineTraffic or Vessel Finder and verify such ships with IMO Numbers existed.
Basic, short-distance ferry-ROROs are generally the smallest ROROs one can find. They generally average only 30 meters in length and their breadth are generally 10 meters or less. Being basic, they only have a single ramp for vehicles at the front and this is maneuvered by simply hoisting or lowering it through chains and so it cannot compensate for low tide situations. This bow ramp also doubles as the entry and exit of the passengers. The front of the ship has no scantling and so in rainy weather the rain goes direct to the car deck and making it slippery and wet. It is also a disadvantage for the drivers having their vehicle parked there if it is really raining hard.
This type of RORO has only one car deck and only one passenger deck and usually the bridge or pilot house is on the same level as the passenger deck. The basic, short-distance ferry-RORO as refitted here might have two accommodation classes as in an open-air Economy section in the rear and an airconditioned Tourist section at the front which is usually the former sole passenger accommodation in Japan. If that is the case, usually there are benches at the side of the side which is the outside passageway and that is done to increase the passenger accommodation. The Economy section will usually have plastic benches while the seats of the airconditioned Tourist section will usually be foam upholstered seats with no head support. Sometimes fiberglass bucket seats can be found.
Almost all basic short-distance ferry-ROROs have only one engine and it will be 1,000 horsepower at most but in general even less. A few will even have an engine of just 500 horsepower. The most common engine make will be Daihatsu and the usual speed will be 10 to 11 knots which is the common speed too of the common general-purpose cargo ships sailing the Philippine waters.
In Japan, these kind of ferries were classified as “bay and inland ferries” connecting islands/islets or peninsulas of short distance and were expected to be sailing protected waters which means those are waters shielded from the stronger swells of the open seas. That is also the reason why there is no housing at the front of the ship because no rogue waves are expected in their routes in Japan. Some of these ferries will even have windows or openings at the sides and that shows they were really just designed for calm waters.
In the Philippines these ferries will be used even on routes that take several hours. Some were even shoehorned into overnight ferries with bunks and with sailing distances of up to 60 nautical miles and 6 hours of sailing. Talking of make do, that is what we are and that is only a manifestation that we are still a poor country with passengers forgiving the shortcomings of the ferries.
The problem with this is these ferries designed for calm and protected waters are suddenly forced into routes in semi-open waters which we call as “seas”. In order to not get into contradiction because they were “bay and inland” ferries in Japan, our maritime regulatory agency, the MARINA simply renamed the seas where they are sailing into “bays” like the Camotes Sea, the Visayan Sea, the Samar Sea and the Sibuyan Sea were renamed into “Camotes Bay”, “Visayan Bay”, “ Samar Bay” and “Sibuyan Bay”.
The Verde Island Passage that separated Batangas and Mindoro is not really narrow. It is actually a strait where swells can be rough and winds high during the habagat (thesouthwest monsoon) and it hits the ships there broadside, the worst possible. In the troughs of the high swells it is as if these basic, short-distance ferry-ROROs has been “swallowed” if the observer is far and at sea level. Breaking of the waves really becomes “breaking” where the whole ship shudders and lots of spray are created. Even in bigger ferries this condition results in damages to the loaded vehicles when they scrape against each other or against the bulkhead. Sometimes the wooden stoppers used on the wheels of the vehicles prove not enough.
And yet, two shipping companies regularly use this type of ferry in the Batangas-Calapan route, the Starlite Ferries Inc. and the Besta Shipping Lines Inc. Sometimes, one will also notice this kind of ship bearing the livery of Montenegro Shipping Lines Inc. Normally, the Starlite Polaris and Starlite Nautica of the Starlite Ferries will be running this route. For Besta Shipping it will be their Baleno VII and Baleno Ocho.
Actually, with the fleet of the two mentioned shipping companies they don’t have much choice really unless they dispose of this kind of ship. Even if they bring their basic, short-distance ferry-ROROs to the Batangas-Abra de Ilog route it would be no better as the ferry will still be sailing the same waters, the route is even slightly longer and the seas not any milder. For Starlite Ferries bringing their basic, short-distance ferry-ROROs to their Roxas-Caticlan route would be even worse as a choice for that is a longer route with heavier swells and no island cover along the way unlike in the Batangas-Calapan route where Isla Verde is in the middle and even the “Mag-asawang Pulo” brings some protection. Besta Shipping meanwhile only has the Batangas-Calapan and Batangas-Abra de Ilog routes.
Among the 4 ships, actually Starlite Nautica, Starlite Polaris and Baleno Ocho are true sisters and all were built by Naikai Engineering and Shipbuilding Co. in Japan. The Starlite Nautica and the Starlite Polaris were built in the Taguma shipyard of the company while the Baleno Ocho was built in the Setoda shipyard. Meanwhile, Baleno VII was built by the Tokushima Zosen Sangyo in Fukuoka yard in Japan.
The particulars of the four:
Built in 1985 as the Omishima No.7 of the Omishima Ferry with the ID IMO 8505317. She came to the Philippines in 1999. Her measurements are 35.4 meters by 10.0 meters by 3.1 meters. Her dimensional weights are 284 gross tons and 174 net tons with 138 tons in DWT. She is equipped by a single Daihatsu marine engine of 950 horsepower and top speed is 11 knots.
Built in 1975 as the Ehime No.18 with the ID IMO 8895700. She came to the Philippines into the Safeship Marine Corp. as the Prince Kevin. When the company got defunct after the sinking of the Princess Camille in Romblon this ship was sold to Starlite Ferries. Her measurements are 35.4 meters by 9,9 meters by 3.0 meters. Her dimensional weights are 240 gross tons and 153 net tons. She is equipped by a single Daihatsu marine engine of 950 horsepower and top speed is 11 knots.
Built in 1982 as the New Takashima with the ID IMO 8217702. She came to the Philippines in 2010. Her measurements are 37.2 meters by 8.4 meters by 2.9 meters. Her dimensional weights are 248 gross tons and 143 net tons with 116 tons in DWT. She is equipped with a single Kubota marine diesel engine of 900 horsepower and top speed is 11 knots.
Built in 1984 as the Geiyo No.7 of the Merchant Marine Hub. Later she was known as the Kanon No.11 and Omishima No.5 of Omishima Ferry. She came to the Philippines in 2005. Her measurements are 39.8 meters by 10.0 meters by 3.1 meters. Her dimensional weights are 243 gross tons and 181 net tons with 155 tons in DWT. She is equipped by a single Daihatsu marine engine of 950 horsepower and top speed is 11 knots.
All four are still sailing reliably. All takes in big buses and big trucks and all four sail in both daytime and nighttime.
There are so many of their kind in the Philippines and their number run into the dozens. Some are even older that these four. Almost all are still alive but some have met accidents too and became maritime hull losses like the Sta. Penafrancia7, Baleno Nine and the Lady of Carmel.
SuperCat as a brand of Aboitiz Shipping Corporation started in the summer of 1994 in the Batangas-Calapan route with the fielding of the SuperCat 1. She was not the very first High Speed Craft in the route as Bullet Express 1 beat her by a day. However, SuperCat immediately made a very big splash and impact. It was super-fast compared to the local ferries and would only take 45 minutes for the 24-nautical mile route when other ferries in the route normally took 2.5 hours. And being a catamaran it made a lot of visual impression. She was also very comfortable considering there no airconditioning in any of the ferries in the route. There was also a smooth and true passenger service. I myself was there in Batangas port when the SuperCat 1 was formally launched and it was impressive.
Bullet Express 1 was also outclassed, overwhelmed and very soon it quit the route because they can’t match SuperCat and they went to the Visayas. Meanwhile, the old kingpin of the area, the Viva Shipping Lines immediately purchased two second-hand fastcrafts of Japan origins from the Sun Cruises of Manila to say they also have a fast one. It charged cheaper but they were not as fast as they took one hour for the route.
However, in about 4 months time, SuperCat 1 met a mishap and was wrecked on the western side of Verde Island soon after MARINA ruled she should take that route (before she took the route east of Verde Island and between the “Mag-asawang Pulo”). She hit an underwater obstacle and the superstructure completely deformed. There were suspicions of sabotage but the investigation ruled it was an accident. Whatever, Aboitiz had already sensed High Speed Crafts (HSCs) will be successful in the Philippines since SuperCat1 had good patronage and many were impressed. Well, it was peak season when she came (a summer when many are going home) and the Batangas-Calapan route really lacked bottoms then and no ferry there had airconditioned accommodations and good service.
Aboitiz immediately sought a replacement to the wrecked SuperCat 1 and within months a new one arrived in the route and this was named the SuperCat I. Many thought this was a repaired version of SuperCat 1 but actually this was a different ship. Since Aboitiz thought High Speed Crafts will be successful in the Philippines and wants to jump the gun on the others, so to say, it partnered with a Macau operator of High Speed Crafts and the company Universal Aboitiz Inc. was born. In a short time, catamarans started arriving for SuperCat and Aboitiz fielded them to different routes. Aside from the Iloilo-Bacolod route, it based catamarans in Cebu for different routes to the near islands like Leyte (Ormoc), Bohol (Tagbilaran), Negros (Dumaguete) and it even had far routes like Surigao (via Maasin) and it has an extension to Dapitan in Zamboanga del Norte.
With this move for partnership with the Macau concern, Aboitiz was the first in the Philippines to have many High Speed Crafts and in the process they overtook Bullet Express which was backed by combined Zamboanga-Malaysia concerns. In just the years 1995 and 1996, eight catamarans arrived for Universal Aboitiz and they practically swamped their competitors which were also new to High Speed Crafts. These were the Sea Angels of Negros Navigation Company and Waterjet Shipping Company. With Bullet Express, Viva Shipping Lines (and its legal fiction companies Sto. Domingo Shipping and DR Shipping), Royal Ferry, Florinda (RN High-Speed Ferries), Oceanjet (Ocean Fast Ferries), Sea Cat (ACG Express Liner) and a half-dozen other minor operators in the mix, very soon it became a veritable dogfight in the High Speed Craft world here as in matira ang matibay (only the strong will survive).
Not long after, the Sea Angels and Waterjet both gave up and merged with SuperCat. That will happen as there were just too many High Speed Crafts for the passengers willing to pay their higher fares which were double or so the regular ferries. With that suddenly SuperCat had 13 high-speed cats, the SuperCat I, SuperCat 2, SuperCat 3, SuperCat 5, Supercat 6, Supercat 7, SuperCat 8, SuperCat 9, SuperCat 10. The St. Raphael and St. Gabriel of the Sea Angels became the SuperCat 11 and SuperCat 12, respectively and the Waterjet 1 and Waterjet 2 became the SuperCat 17 and SuperCat 18, respectively. These were just too many for some 5 profitable routes (Batangas-Calapan, Cebu-Ormoc, Cebu-Tagbilaran, Cebu-Dumaguete and Iloilo-Bacolod (I am not sure if Cebu-Dapitan is really profitable) and to think the competition has even more High Speed Crafts than SuperCat (though admittedly not as good).
Except for SuperCat 6 and SuperCat 10 which were smaller and not that fast, all the other SuperCats had 2 x 2,600hp MTU engines with two waterjets as propulsion and all were capable of 38 knots, a speed not reachable by propeller-driven High Speed Crafts because of the phenomenon called “cavitation”. All of them were true sister ships and all were built in Singapore but by different manufacturers. All had aluminum alloy hulls for light weight. While the catamarans from Macau were not brand-new (but still very good), the former Sea Angels and Waterjets arrived here brand-new. All were built by Kvaerner Fjellstrand and were all true sister ships (together with the Stella Maris of Grand Seaways that also came here too). The rest that came from Macau were built by FBM Marineteknik.
In 1999 and 2002, the trimarans TriCat 50 and TriCat 2 also joined the SuperCat fleet. Later the tricats were renamed the SuperCat 2001 and SuperCat 2002. Both also had 2 x 2,600hp MTU engines with twin waterjets but being bigger their speed were a little lower at 36 knots. The two were true sister ships and they were the biggest ever High Speed Crafts that plied Philippine waters. Aboitiz, being a partner in FBM-Aboitiz (FBMA) which built them in Balamban, Cebu surely would have had to purchase one of their products even just for showcase purposes.
This was the time that SuperCat completely ruled the waves. They were the fastest, they were the most comfortable, they had the best passenger service and they have the best booking system. They even had the best, owned passenger terminal in Cebu port (which was shared with WG&A and Cebu Ferries Corporation ferries). In speed it was only the Weesam Express (1) and Weesam Express 5 of SRN Fastcrafts which can give any semblance of challenge but still the MTU-powered SuperCats were slightly faster. They dominated the High Speed Crafts routes and even bullied the opposition a bit (well, isn’t that what alpha dogs are supposed to do?).
But speed has its cost which is higher fuel consumption. And waterjets might give better speed especially at ranges where propellers begin to lose efficiently because of “cavitation” but waterjets also needs more maintenance. The dirty waters of our ports can easily clog them especially since many people just throw their trash in the water and the rivers that empty into the sea also contains garbage and these can be sucked by the waterjets. And one fouling costs money and moreover it throws a monkey wrench on the schedules, trips are lost and tempers and the patience of passengers are tested.
With the merger with Sea Angels and Water Jet, SuperCat actually found themselves with many excess catamarans especially since it was already found out then that the routes where one can field High Speed Crafts are limited since many others do not have enough patronage. The successor company to Universal Aboitiz, the Philippine Fast Ferry Corp. soon realized that. There was also the late realization that their catamarans were overpowered and that waterjets are actually not too well suited for local waters. Soon SuperCat began selling their MTU and waterjet-powered catamarans. And slowly they began buying High Speed Crafts that were not that powerful, not propelled by waterjets and some were actually not catamarans but fastcrafts which are monohulled vessels. Their first non-MTU, non-waterjet HSC, the Supercat 20 was actually a fastcraft.
Soon all their MTU and waterjet-powered catamarans and trimarans (which are triple-hulled vessels) were gone and sold abroad. One of the factors that forced them was the steady rise of the world oil prices starting in 2001. They then had a mix of catamarans and fastcrafts which were equipped with propellers. Their next favorite powerplant after MTU was the Caterpillar brand. With those changes, the SuperCats became just a fast as the competition and there were Weesam Express fastcrafts which invaded the Visayas that can already beat them in raw speed.
They were also not so as numerous as before as SuperCat slowly pruned down the number of units because of over-competition. Moreover, their parent company WG&A was split asunder and had to sell ferries to pay for the shares of the partners that were divesting. And the paring down of vessels included that of SuperCat too. With that situation the number of SuperCat HSCs shrank by a half and they no longer had showcase units which will show they have the best High Speed Crafts. Along this way the company’s name was changed to SuperCat Fast Ferry Corporation.
So, once at the apex of the High Speed Craft field, their rule of the waves slowly vanished in the new millennium. They then just became one of the few survivors of the High Speed Crafts wars here where most HSC companies sank. They initially still had a slight lead though but then their controlling stockholders, the Aboitiz family got more interested in the power generation industry and tried to sell the Aboitiz Transport System (ATS), the successor of WG&A. This was consummated later and SuperCat became a brand of 2GO under Negros Navigation Company.
With the number of units not growing and getting older, SuperCat slid further and the mistake of acquiring SuperCat 36 and SuperCat 38 did not help. Currently their best units are just the sister ships St. Jhudiel and St.Braquiel, the former SuperCat 30 and SuperCat 32, respectively. Though still using SuperCat as a brand since that is already an established brand, their High Speed Crafts have already been renamed to saints in the tradition of Negros Navigation Company. And yet this did not arrest the slide of SuperCat and they have HSCs whose engines that are already getting tired.
In this situation, Oceanjet began their challenge for the top of the High Speed Craft field. The company embarked on continuous addition of vessels to their fleet with their own-assembled fastcrafts and by acquisitions of the High Speed Crafts by the competition that quit the HSC field. And before the middle of this decade, Oceanjet or Ocean Fast Ferries already overtook SuperCat in sheer number. And then they were also overtaken in speed and newness by Oceanjet which aside from assembling their own fastcrafts also continuously changes the tired engines of HSCs in their fleet.
Most people including the tourists have no idea of these developments. Many think, wrongly, that SuperCat is still on top. They do not know that SuperCat is now just a shadow of its former self that once ruled the waves. However, Super has ordered two new HSCs in Austal Balamban recently but I doubt if it can overtake Oceanjet and rule the waves again.