The Disproportionality of the Ferry Losses in the Philippines

Many times the question of if our ferries are safe is asked. This is especially true when a ferry has an accident or is lost especially when the casualty count is high. Rather than answering the question straight, if I am asked, I might answer it “it depends” because that is probably the most exact answer to the question anyway but then many will be puzzled by that answer (pilosopo ba?). Read on and you will be enlightened further and maybe your views about the safety our ferries might change.


Even if a car is new it doesn’t mean it won’t take a dip into the water. Same principle applies with ships. Photo by Zed Garett (happened just today — what a timely photo for my article). Thanks a lot to the photo owner.

But first a clarification. I am purposely limiting this topic to ferries because tackling all the ship types at once will be very heavy and tedious as we have more freighters than ferries and add to that the other types like the tugs, tankers, etc. The ferry losses is the segment that actually raises the hackles of the people of the country who are mainly uneducated on the topic of maritime losses. This relative ignorance is further fanned by our also-uneducated media whose writers and editors cannot even seem to get the ferries’ names right (it seems they are too lazy to verify with MARINA, the maritime authority). Of course, it is well-known that our media is on the sensationalistic side and so oftentimes accuracy, objectivity and balance are lost with that (do these sell anyway?).

Another limitation I also pose here is I won’t include our wooden-hulled passenger crafts in the discussion. Those crafts are really flimsy especially those equipped with outriggers, the motor bancas. This ship type (those are ships because any sea craft having a passenger capacity of 12 is not a boat) lacks the basic safety equipment that even without a storm they can sink like when an outrigger breaks or when the hull develops a leak big enough that water can’t be bailed fast enough. But I would rather not comment on their seamanship or lack of formal maritime education because in my decades of traveling at sea I found that many of them are actually very good in reading the wind and the waves, a nautical skill that is not taught in maritime schools anymore. Also excluded in the discussion are the wooden-hulled lanchas and batels which were formerly called as motor boats which are not called as motor launches.

My topic here is about the disproportionality (or lack of proportionality) of our maritime losses to clarify that our ferry losses are not proportional with regards to the area and to the ship type (the implication is not all sink). Like what I just mentioned earlier, our wooden-hulled crafts especially the motor bancas are prone to losses especially in areas notorious for its dangerous waves like in Surigao. But these sea crafts continue to exist because in many cases these are the most practical crafts for certain routes like the routes to our small islands and islets or the coastal barrios that have no roads (or if taking the roundabout road will take too long). Motor bancas can land even on bare shores which the other crafts can’t do and moreover these can operate profitably on the barest minimum of passengers and cargo something which is impossible in steel-hulled vessels which have engines that are much, much bigger and are heavier.

The liners, our multi-day ships, among our class of ferries are also very vulnerable to losses (a surprise?) and much more than others classes pro rata to their small number. Relative to their small number, we have lost a lot of liners in the past for a variety of reasons – capsizing, foundering, beaching, wrecking, collision, fire, bombing and explosion. And this might come as a surprise to many because in the main it is our liners that are the biggest, these hold the highest of the certificates (and in insurance many have the comprehensive P & I or “Protection and Indemnity”), these have our most experienced and best crewmen supposedly (unlike in smaller ferries where a Second Mate can serve as Captain of the ship) and much pride of its shipping company is riding on them (well, not all, as we had liners that were no more than the average overnight ferry).

But this vulnerability is actually completely true. We lost the SuperFerry 3 (fire in a shipyard in 2000), SuperFerry 6 (fire while sailing in 2000 too), the SuperFerry 7 (fire in port in 1997), SuperFerry 9 (capsizing in 2009), the SuperFerry 14 (firebombing in 2000 but the official report says otherwise). A total of five SuperFerries when only a total of 20 ships ever carried the name “SuperFerry” (it seems it is not a good name?). The St. Thomas Aquinas, the former SuperFerry 2 was lost in a collision in 2013 and the St. Gregory The Great, the former SuperFerry 20 was also lost (taking a shortcut and hitting the reefs and she was no longer repaired and just sold after equipment was taken out). These two ferries were already under 2GO when they were lost. Not included here were the groundings of the Dona Virginia and the Our Lady of Banneux (technically under Cebu Ferries Corporation then but an actual liner) from which they were never repaired and ending their sailing careers).

Sulpicio Lines is much-lambasted and derided by most of our people but actually they have less losses from their “Princess” and “Don/Dona” series of ships in the comparative period as the existence of the “SuperFerries” of WG&A (William, Gothong & Aboitiz and its successor company Aboitiz Transport System (ATS). However, it is true that in passenger casualties the total of Sulpicio Lines is much, much higher because they have the tendency to sail straight into storms like the revered Compania Maritima before them (in terms of ship losses and not in casualties) and that historical company took a lot of losses from those risk-takings too (and more than even Sulpicio Lines).

From 1996 when the WG&A was formed, Sulpicio Lines only lost the Philippine Princess (fire while under refitting in 1997), the Princess of the Orient (capsizing in a storm in 1998), the Iloilo Princess (fire and capsizing while under refitting in 2003), the Princess of the World (fire while sailing in 2005) and the Princess of the Stars (capsizing in a storm in 2008) and the Princess of the Pacific (serious grounding incident resulting in complete total loss in 2004). That is until they were suspended in 2008 when only one liner was left sailing for them, the Princess of the South which did not sink.

In the comparative period, WG&A and ATS employed a total of 24 liners (the overnight ferries of Cebu Ferries Corporation was obviously not included here are they are not multiday liners). Sulpicio Lines had a total of 22 liners in the parallel period so their numbers are about even. But the ship loss total of WG&A, ATS and 2GO is clearly higher and the public was never made aware of this. Maybe some good PR works while it seems Sulpicio Lines never took care of that and all they knew was feeding their passengers well (unli rice or smorgasbord, anyone?). But then however those liner losses are scandalous in number, by whatever measure. Imagine losing more than one liner per year on the average.

Some of the liners of WG&A and ATS were not SuperFerries in name but but the Our Ladies, the two Cities and a Dona from William Lines had perfect safety records as none of them was ever lost. Now, does the choice of name matter in safety? Or the “lesser” ferries do try harder and are more careful? That discrepancy certainly made me think and it might be worth a study.

Negros Navigation was far safer than the WG&A and Sulpicio Lines losing only the St. Francis Xavier in 1999. Do naming of liners after saints enhance their safety? Conversely, do naming of liners with the qualifier “Super” means the ship will sink faster? Questions, questions. But the lightly-regarded and revived Carlos A. Gothong Lines Incorporated (CAGLI) tops them all with absolutely no losses. Now for a company that sometimes have difficulty painting their ships that is something (while the spic-and-span WG&A and ATS which repaints their liners while sailing tops the losses department). Does it mean it is better not to repaint liners well? I observed in the eastern seaboard that the ships that are not painted well have no losses (until the dumb Archipelago Ferries let its stalled Maharlika II sank into the waves in 2014 without rescuing it and thereby breaking the record – that ship was newly painted when it went under so the repainting might have doomed her?). Well, in my earlier thesis and later in this article I find it funny that the ships which are more rusty does not sink as long as it is not a Batangas ship (ah, the disproportionality again). While those that can always afford new paint like WG&A and successor ATS sink. Is a new coat of paint a sign of danger for the ship? Or is it the P & I insurance that did them in? Funny, funny. Negros Navigation when it was already in trouble and lacks the money already did not have one ship sinking. So the illiquidity which Negros Navigation suffered means more safety? Har, har! Whatever, I want to commend them and top honcho Sulficio Tagud for taking the high road and not just let the ships sink just to collect insurance. And last note, in multi-day liner operations before, Aleson Shipping Lines never lost a ship.

Liners sink at a faster rate pro rata compared to overnight ferries (if the wooden-hulled ferries of the past are not counted) and that is a big puzzle to me. And of course nobody will know for sure because nobody studied that as we don’t have the equivalent of the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) of the USA which call in true experts and go in depth why the transportation accidents happened. Is it because while on a voyage the liners are practically running 24 hours a days and systems, equipment and personnel are stressed more? Is it because the ships reach their reliability/cycles earlier in terms of hours of usage like the electrical lines which is a cause of fire? Or are their crew simply more tired and believes that their ships with high certifications are less vulnerable to sinking (as if those certificates will keep the ship afloat)?

In the earlier decades and even recently it is known that liners take more chances with storms and maybe because they think they can battle the waves better because they are bigger. There are shipping companies who were known to be more brave (or foolhardy?) in sailing ships when there are storms about and among them the old Compania Maritima and Sulpicio Lines almost surely top the list. Now, however, the field is more level as all Philippine ships are barred from sailing when the center wind of the storm reaches 60kph. And for the smaller ships less than 250gt they are not permitted to sail when the center wind is already 45kph or when the local weather agency PAGASA declares a “gale warning” even though there is no a gale. When the suspensions are in effect better just watch the foreign ships still continue sailing for they are not covered by the suspension and most actually use INMARSAT or equivalent which is just a curiosity in the local maritime world until now when that is already well-established outside of the Philippines (the lousy PAGASA which can’t do localized forecasts seems to be already good for them since it is free while they have to pay for INMARSAT).

Liners also sink faster than short-distance ferries whose sailing durations are all short and whose crews probably know their particular seas and routes more. When to think most short-distance ferries which are always small are captained in the main by Second or Third Mates and whose engine department are headed by Second or sometimes by just Marine Diesel Mechanics who have not even finished college but passed an exam just the same (well, competence in running and maintaining a machine well is not necessarily dictated by diplomas, trust me). Even though liners might be using ECDIS don’t be too sure they will reach their destination better than the lowly short-distance ferry using just what is called as dead reckoning. In truth, ECDIS or whatever better bridge equipment does not guarantee better seamanship or navigation. After all it will not show the wind and wave which only something like INMARSAT can.

So in liners disproportionality already exist. And their international certifications don’t even save them from disasters. So, I advise those who take liners, don’t be very sure and make the necessary precautions like memorizing the different alarms and making sure where your life vests are. And don’t jump to the water too early. Liners are tall and that plunge could hurt you. And when in the water at night tie yourselves together so as not to drift (a whistle is a big help in calling attention if you are drifting). Note the water can be cold at night and hypothermia can set in. Take a selfie too before jumping and upload it. Who knows if it will be your last photo. Your loved ones will sure prize it. Ah, don’t take all I said in this paragraph too seriously.

In overnight ferries there seems to be disproportionality with regards to companies and not to home port (if analyzed pro rata to the size of the fleet which means the size of the fleets are taken into consideration) and to the routes. Well, for practical purposes there are only a few home ports for overnight ferries – Cebu, Zamboanga, Batangas, Manila, Lucena and Iloilo, in that order maybe in terms of sailings (a clarification, there are overnight ships originating from say northern Mindanao but all of those ferries are actually based in Cebu). Analyzing, some overnight ferry companies deserve the Gold Award while some should be suspended from service, maybe.

It must be noted that one of the biggest overnight ferries two decades ago and which dominated the Visayas-Mindanao waters for nearly a decade, the Cebu Ferries Corporation (CFC), a subsidiary of WG&A and successor Aboitiz Transport System (ATS) did not lose a single ship ever until it they left Cebu for Batangas and became the “Batangas Ferries” and even there their perfect streak continued. Maybe some of their people need to be recruited by other companies or sent there by MARINA to share the experience. They can lecture on the topic, “On How Not To Sink”. Maybe it is not just with the choice of name that they were safe? Or was it in the livery? The only problem it seems is they did not send their Captains to their liners like the St. Thomas Aquinas who made a dumb mistake trying to test the hardness of the ice-classed bow of the Sulpicio Express Siete.

In the Cebu-based regional shipping companies which are operators of overnight ferries it is probably Lite Ferries who is the Valedictorian having lost no ships even though their fleet is already big. Maybe that will come as a surprise to many but whatever they deserve a big round of applause. Another company whose Captains might need to be recruited by other shipping companies or pry open their secret if there is any. Are they better readers of SOLAS? One thing I am sure though is its owner does not belong to the same fraternity as one former Batangas shipping company owner who threatens mayhem if his ship sinks.

There are other overnight ferry companies in Cebu that could have shared First Honors with Lite Ferries but in a tie-breaker Lite Ferries wins because they have the most ships and not by a small margin at that. Others with perfect records are the defunct Palacio Lines (well, some might argue that that is a Samar shipping company but I digress). Now I can’t understand why an overnight ferry company with a perfect safety record will go under as a company. Seems something is not right. Aside from Palacio Lines there are a lot of there Cebu-based overnight ferry companies that have perfect safety records in terms of having no ship losses. Some of these are still extant and sailing and some have already quit the business (it’s a waste, isn’t it, for them to just go away like that).

Among these is the legendary Gabisan Shipping Lines, VG Shipping, Kinswell Shipping, Roly Shipping, Jadestar Shipping, South Pacific Transport and many other smaller shipping lines with just one or two ships (most of these are already gone now but still their perfect records remain). I just don’t know why they can’t catch a break from MARINA as in they are not given special citations and handed more privileges in sailing because after all they have proven they know their stuff in shipping. But no, when MARINA goes headhunting in safety they are lambasted in the same vein as those which had sunk ships as if they are just as guilty. Actually, to set the record straight about half of the overnight ferry companies in the whole Philippines never had any ship losses. This is true even in Zamboanga where Magnolia Shipping Lines, Ever Lines and a lot of other operators with just one or two steel-hulled ferries have perfect safety records. Now, can’t MARINA even for once credit them properly and publish their names because the way I feel at times with media reports and with MARINA statements it is as if all our shipping companies already had sunk ships which is simply not the case. In the liner sector that is true but in the overnight ferry and short-distance sector, combined, most shipping companies never had any ship losses. Don’t they deserve credit and more respect and recognition? But no, they are sunk not beneath the waves but in obscurity and that is one of the purpose of this article, to set the record straight.

In Manila, the old MBRS Lines and its successor Romblon Shipping Line never lost a ship (but the company is dead now anyway, sunk by the intermodal). In Lucena, Kalayaan Shipping Lines might have a perfect safety record too at least in steel-hulled ferries. In Batangas, there are operators of just one or two ferries which have not lost a ship (do they take care not to lose one because that will mean the shutdown of operations?). In Iloilo, did Milagrosa Shipping Lines already lost a ship? In number half of the overnight ferry operators never lost a ship although in the number of ships owned theirs comprise just the minority, to clarify.

It is in short-distance ferries that I noticed a lot more of disproportionalities especially in the recent decades when maritime databases were able to keep track with them (the wooden-hulled short-distance ferries generally doesn’t have IMO Numbers so keeping track of them is difficult but these lanchas or batels were our early short-distance ferries aside from the motor bancas). For this sector or segment I would rather stick to steel-hulled ferries like what I mentioned early on especially since there is no way to track the hundreds and hundreds of motor bancas and their losses which are not even properly reported at times.

There are areas, routes and short-distance companies that have perfect safety records (again, wooden hulled ferries are not included here and that also mean the earlier years). In the eastern seaboard where the typhoons first strike and where it is fiercest the routes and shipping companies there have a perfect safety record ever since the steel-hulled ships first appeared in 1979. This was only broken in 2013 due to the dumbness of a stranger which invaded the Masbate waters (is that part of the eastern seaboard anyway? but Masbate is in Bicol). They withdrew from Bicol after that incident to just sail the more benign Camotes Sea waters. And that is one of the reasons why I was furious at Archipelago Ferries for not coming to the aid of their stalled ship for 6 hours when their good ship was just just two hours sailing away and so the stricken ship slid off the waves (shouldn’t someone be hanged for that?). Because of that the perfect record of the local shipping companies based in the eastern seaboard was broken. I just hope the crewmen of Maharlika Cuatro which failed to respond to an SOS then are not employed in the FastCats now.

Short-distance ferries also does not sink in the Tablas Sea crossings or in the routes to Marinduque from Lucena. However, I do not know what is the curse of the Verde Island Passage that many ships have been already lost there when to think practically the same shipping companies ply the three routes mentioned. To think the Tablas Sea wind and waves could be rougher than that in Verde Island Passage. Did they assign their lousier crews there? Just asking. As they say the proof is in the pudding (and the pudding tastes bad).

I just wonder too about the luck of the Mindanao Sea crossings. The waves there could also be rough and the crossing is longer but none was ever lost among the short-distance ferries running the Dumaguete-Dapitan, Samboan-Dapitan and Jagna-Balingoan routes. Like in Tablas Strait, do the longer route makes the crews more careful? Are the crews there better trained and has better seamanship?

The many routes connecting Cebu island and Negros island and Negros island and Panay island are also safe. Hard to find there a short-distance steel-hulled ferry that sank. That is also true for the steel-hulled ferries connecting Masbate island to Cebu island when the distance there is also long for a short-distance ferry and the wind and waves are no less dangerous. What is their secret there? Is it just that Camotes Sea navigators are lousier? With exceptions, of course because Gabisan Shipping surely will not agree.

I could go to the less obscure, short-distance routes. Just the same I will tell you these are also safe. Never heard of a steel ferry going to Alabat that sank. Or to Dinagat and Siargao islands (sure their motor bancas sink). Or the routes to Basilan from Zamboanga. Not even a RORO to Guimaras have sunk or a RORO to Bantayan island. That is also true for the short-distance connections within Romblon island served by steel-hulled ships (the Princess Camille that capsized in Romblon port in 2003 was an overnight ferry from Batangas). No steel-hulled ferry connecting Leyte and Bohol was ever lost too. And that is also true for the route connecting Siquijor to Dumaguete.

So a lot of our short-distance routes and the ferries plying them are actually safe. Who can argue against a perfect safety record? A little rust will not sink ships nor would a non-functioning firefighting pump (and the ship is not in the middle of an ocean anyway). Those are just a little margins that are not that critical. Does not look good to the eye but to a passenger like me it is more important if MARINA enforces their Memorandum Circular that ferries should feed its passengers if the arrival of the ship exceeds 7am. And I am more concerned if the ship is clean especially the rest rooms and if there is clean drinking water. Besides, trust me, our mariners are not that negligent or dumb that they will leave the ramps unclosed and then sail like what some Europeans did.

So are our ferries safe? Yes, it is except for the liners, some shipping companies and some routes and areas. Never mind if they are old. It is not necessarily the factor that will sink ships (a ship if it loses motive power still has the flotation of a barge). It is actually the lack of seamanship that sinks ships (old ship, new ship can both collide or fail to heed the weather). And trust the short-distance ferries on the fringes and don’t underestimate them. The crew won’t let their ships sink if their families, relatives, friends, schoolmates, etc. are aboard. Well, not all. Be a little wary in Verde Island Passage and in Camotes Sea.

Let us be more objective. Our ferries and mariners are not really that bad, contrary to what hecklers say.


The Weird Classification of Dr. Myrna S. Austria of Primary, Secondary and Tertiary Passenger Routes From Manila and Cebu

In 2003, Dr. Myrna S. Austria published a paper on domestic shipping competition in the Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS) with a base data in the year 1998. I find her paper very erroneous starting from the data which misses a lot of shipping companies because simply put some shipping companies never bother to report to government agencies. Aside from that her classification of shipping routes, both passenger and cargo is also far from reality.

Dr. Myrna S. Austria’s paper:

In that paper, Dr. Myrna S. Austria have the following classification of passenger routes from Manila:

Primary routes: Batangas, Cagayan de Oro, Cebu, Dadiangas, Davao, Dipolog, Dumaguete, Estancia, General Santos, Iligan, Iloilo, Masbate, Nasipit, Palawan/Puerto Princesa, San Carlos, Tagbilaran, Zambales and Zamboanga.

Secondary routes: Bacolod, Coron, Cotabato, Leyte, Mindoro, Ormoc, Ozamis, Palompon, Roxas, Surigao and Tacloban.

Tertiary routes: Butuan, Calubian, Corregidor, Dumaguit, El Nido-Liminangcong and Zambales.


  1. She did not know Dadiangas and General Santos are just one port. Sulpicio Lines use the old name Dadiangas while the rest use the name General Santos. She also did not know there are no more ships to Butuan from Manila but some shipping companies like WG&A still use the name Butuan instead of Nasipit, the port where they actually dock. And there were no more ships then to Dipolog then and all use Dapitan port already. Hence, the separate entries which affected the port classification.

  2. Since there are many shipping companies not reporting, she completely missed some ports that have ships from Manila. a) In her list there are no ships to Romblon from Manila because MBRS Lines have no report. That company even tried a to San Jose (or Caraingan) in Northern Samar during that time and this is not reflected in her paper. b) There is a “port” named Mindoro but we will not know if that is San Jose in Occ. Mindoro or Lubang (Tilik port) which were both served then by Moreta Shipping Lines. That clearly shows lack of shipping knowledge. c) There is a port named “Leyte”. That could be Baybay and Maasin served with one ship of Sulpicio Lines. But then how about Palompon and Isabel served by WG&A? Did she just lump up all the figures of the four ports? There is a town named Leyte in Leyte province but it does not have a port with ships calling from Manila d) And how about Cuyo which was served by batels then? If the batels of El Nido and Liminangcong are counted then why not Cuyo? Anyone familiar with Isla Puting Bato or the ports by the Pasig River know that there are ships there to Cuyo. e) El Nido and Liminangcong ports are lumped together when those are two different ports in two different towns in Palawan. f) Catbalogan was also missing when this was both served by WG&A and Sulpicio Lines then.

  3. I wonder how Zambales and Batangas were listed. Those two are not regular calls of ships from Manila. If she were counting trucks then those two deserve to be primary ports. And why two listings for Zambales both in the primary and tertiary. Which two ports are that? Again, a glaring lack of shipping knowledge.

  4. Now, I wonder how come Estancia, San Carlos and Masbate can be classified as primary ports when Bacolod, Cotabato, Ozamis, Roxas and Surigao were just considered as secondary ports. There is no way a shipping company will assign their liners to the five secondary ports to those three classified as primary ports. And the size and quality of the liners assigned are clear evidences on how the shipping companies themselves rate the ports. But it seems Myrna S. Austria is not familiar with our liners and their port assignments.

  5. San Carlos is just a sometimes route which happened to have liners again after a short time in the 1980’s when Negros Navigation had no more routes for their old cruisers. They attached Estancia to that so there will be more passengers and cargo and so the rank of Estancia increased because Sulpicio Lines also calls on that.

  6. No way Dumaguit will be that low and lower than Estancia and San Carlos as before the intermodal it will always have a liner since that is the primary port of entry of Aklan.

  7. Corregidor is a special case since it is a plain tourist destination with daily sailings and even more than once. The listed secondary ports of Myrna S. Austria can’t even claim daily departures.

And Dr. Myrna S. Austria has the following classification of passenger routes from Cebu:

Primary routes: Bohol, Dadiangas, Davao, Dumaguete, Estancia, General Santos, Iloilo, Jagna, Masbate, Nasipit, Palawan/Puerto Princesa, Tagbilaran, Tubigon and Zamboanga.

Secondary routes: Bacolod, Butuan, Calbayog, Catanduanes, Dapitan, Dipolog, Leyte, Ormoc, Ozamis, Palompon, Surigao, Tacloban and Talibon.

Tertiary routes: Camiguin, Camotes, Dawahon, Hiligaynon, Iligan, Jetafe, Lapu-lapu, Larena, Lazi, Naval and Sta. Fe.

  1. The lump sum Bohol, Leyte and Camotes betrays ignorance of ports and routes. What ports are those? Probably those are not just one route but she simply can’t parse the data. Hiligaynon is a language and not a port. Is she talking of Hilongos in Leyte?

  2. Davao, Dadiangas/General Santos are not a primary routes from Cebu. Those are just extensions of the routes from Manila where the ship pass by Cebu. Neither is Palawan/Puerto Princesa and Estancia. The two routes from cannot even be sustained over time and historically the two don’t have a route from Cebu.

  3. Butuan is classified low because it was wrongly separated from Nasipit. Dipolog and Dapitan sank to secondary route because they were also wrong separated when every Cebuano knows Nasipit and Dapitan, the true ports are strong routes from Cebu.

  4. I wonder how Ormoc, Ozamis, Surigao and Talibon fell to secondary routes. Ormoc? She must be joking. There are day and night departures to Ormoc multiple times and even by High Speed Crafts (HSCs). Ditto for Talibon which became the primary port of entry of Bohol. The Cebuanos will be falling from their seats laughing when they read that.

  5. Ozamis and Surigao are very strong routes from Cebu and stronger than Estancia, Jagna, Masbate and Zamboanga. And Iligan is almost as strong as Ozamis. Why didn’t Myrna S. Austria just made an interview in Cebu port so she can get her classifications right? Even the lowly porter of Cebu port can make a better classification than what she did.

  6. There is no regular Cebu-Catanduanes route except by tankers.

  7. If she will will count the motor bancas then she will find that there are many trips to Jetafe in a day. And if she will count motor bancas she will also find that there is a Cebu-Pitogo route. That town is now known as Pres. Carlos P. Garcia. Is this her “Bohol port”? Or is that the motor bancas from Pasil and Carbon to the islets and other destinations in Bohol?

  8. Is what she listed as “Camotes” Poro?

  9. Lapu-lapu should not be counted there as that is a special route and a substitute and alternative for jeeps with a very high passenger volume. Unless she is counting the motor bancas to the Hilutungan Channel destinations.

  10.  There are missing routes from Cebu in her paper and these are many and I will group it by direction: a) Plaridel in Misamis Occidental, b) Sogod, Liloan and Cabalian, all in Leyte and San Jose in Dinagat island, c) Cataingan in Masbate (I just wonder if there was still a ship to Placer, Masbate and Bulan, Sorsogon in the year 1998), d) Baybay and Bato which are strong routes and Hindang maybe if Socor Shipping is counted, d) Sindangan or Liloy, too in Zamboanga del Norte.

It seems the paper missed about a third of the routes from Cebu and that is a blatant mistake.

The ignorance of Dr. Myrna S. Austria of ports, routes and shipping companies simply amazes me (if she knew all the shipping companies then she will not miss the routes). Since her paper is on the net it is only a disservice to shipping as it misleads a lot of people including the government. I will discuss that in greater detail when I discuss what shipping companies she missed. Did she think we are like the USA, Europe, the British Commonwealth and other Highly Industrialized Countries where records are complete? We cannot even sanction here companies that does not submit reports nor of companies who do not pay taxes or remit the SSS contributions of their employees.

I wonder why did she not consult people that are really knowledgeable in shipping like the senior mariners or even executives of shipping companies. Well, even simply interviewing the stevedores in Manila and Cebu would have improved her paper a lot. They cannot miss the shipping companies and the routes. The way I analyze her paper she simply depended on what MARINA (Maritime Industry Authority) and the PPA (Philippine Ports Authority) can serve her. And the two government agencies her that the reports and figures are not complete.

The unknowing public might have been treating her paper as “expert analysis”. The truth is it is full of holes and wrong conclusions. And this is the problem in the Philippines where researchers and scholars do paper on fields that they have no knowledge of. If her paper is analyzed by those who really know shipping it will simply be laughed at.