What I especially like is the low volume Thursday and Friday after they flew past the pivot last Monday/Tuesday(on incredibly high volume). All the nervous investors are dumping this one leaving those of us that stayed to benefit. Watch for heavy purchasing by fund managers this week looking for a safe haven.
$35/shr. is a safe bet...
I've heard it said that that 40' to 43' conversion was a disaster - huge investment that was supposed to yield a return in lower trn cost, but supposedly didn't - possibly even costing more as the system wasn't ready for the 43s. I don't know if that's true, just what I've heard.
I don't think those costs are public information. I am not even sure exactly what those costs are. I just remember seeing an article somewhere that was discussing a snafu by Chiquita a few years back about their conversion from 40 foot containers to 43 foot containers and it was discussing costs associated with.
The cost of operating a containerized vessel is much higher due to the equipment. For each container on the ship, you must have at least 4 other containers in the system. I can't remember the cost of a container but it is pretty high. On/off time is offset by properly managed inventory with break bulk.
Container vs. bulk? I'm no expert (obviously), but that doesn't sound right. I thought the advantage of the container was in onload/offload time, a big factor in perishables, no? And isn't a ship a ship? I.e., operating costs for the same capacity aren't that much different - but I guess without the weight of the containers they could carry more bananas.
But I would think the onload/offload issue would be much, much bigger?