Dear Editor,
It is a fact that joint efforts should be made by the government and private sector to rebuild St. Maarten and bring the tourist economy back up to par. But I fully agree with the contents of the article of Steven Johnson entitled “Insanity and Fairness” in your paper of Monday, April 9. His analysis is perfect and on the button.
Yes, we need to get all businesses, hotels included, quickly up and running again and government surely has a role to play in offering support, but at what cost. One can’t put all the burden on government as these companies are demanding. Doing business can be profitable but also brings risks. What have these companies done e.g. to limit their risks, like having proper insurances and constructing hurricane-proof buildings? In this context I wonder if we shouldn’t review the construction laws for the Maho/Cupecoy area allowing investors to build high-rise buildings like the two towers that is now on the table for the area close to Starz Casino.
In his article Mr. Steven Johnson just ran short of simply labelling the outrageous demands by the Spadaro and Sunwing group as blackmail. They should be ashamed of themselves.
I expect government and parliament to protect the interests of our island and its people and not simply give in to the demands of a multinational like Sunwing/TUI.
Henri Brookson
Dear Editor,
The breakdown in communication inside government is nothing new to me. On many occasions when this occurred in the past the reaction was a shrug of the shoulder, which was made popular by a member of government who is labeled arrogant. The majority of vehicles owners have become attached to the number plate of their vehicles and cherish these, whereas the number plate is part of the identification of the vehicle.
It was published in the papers that no number plates will be held over for the original owners after March 30. At the same time government extends the deadline to be able to use the plates from 2017 ’til the end of May.
I am reacting to this, most probably because of second nature on two occasions I noticed two different motor vehicles with the same 2017 and 2018 number. I would think that this sort of disrupts the administration of the insurance companies and the motor vehicle inspection office.
Now this. On page seven of The Daily Herald of April 9, 2018, there is a picture of a solar-powered bus stop (hut). A great gesture, but I am skeptical. I do not recall reading any publication of bus stops and where they will be placed. I might be deemed unreasonable in this case but by now we should know the amount of years that I have been suggesting to government to regulate public transportation in the correct way and nothing has been done.
Bus stop huts, not bus stop signs, with solar-energy-boosted chargers for mobile devices. How long are these devices going to be around before they are destroyed or become obsolete? Was advice solicited on this matter? When was this approved and by whom? This again sounds like a deal, making money off the people while the people are not being properly served. I hope the APS will not have to bail out anyone again?
I would assume that if 60 bus stop huts are going to be built that from the side of government the so-very-necessary new bus routes have already been determined and both bus stop signs along with those bus stop huts will be placed along those routes at reasonable accessible areas for the public. For instance The Keys and Nazareth road just to name a couple.
If not, again we will be having a breakdown in communication and we will be having stand alone bus stop-huts in one place and bus stops signs in another place. That's if government decides to do something about the public transportation. This time it is 60 bus stop huts being built and erected along the road, with or without the proper authorization. What can we expect next, dog toilets along the road? When is it going to stop.
Russell A. Simmons
Dear Editor,
I just read the letter to you regarding Carnival and its true meaning. I am expecting what I think is logical – responses from government, talk show hosts and their invitees as well as service clubs and of course the St. Maarten Carnival Development Foundation. I have to side with the Christian Council, although I think it is a few years too late, but better late than never.
Russell A. Simmons
Dear Editor,
Back to this Sunwing/Maho thing and in response to the unsigned letter from Tuesday, there has to be some hard analytical thinking done for a change. Mr. Anonymous suggests that everybody should get the same terms of any deal offered to the “big guys.” As I said on Monday, absolutely correct. No matter what happens, that needs to be the absolute standard so that’s a given right away. But beyond that, the thinking gets more emotional than analytical and this is the time for cold hard logic.
First and in regard to the Sunwing/Maho deal, understand something quite clearly. All the planning for the demolition and all the financing for the rebuilding was all in place before the storm. Absolutely nothing has changed in that regard because the storm did damage. Great Bay was going to get torn down and built anew. Done deal. All the storm did was do ½ of the demolition for them. If they had the money to do it in August then they still do. If Maho had insufficient insurance for their damage then what does that tell you about the decision makers there? And why would you think they are any smarter today so as to lend them millions now? Stupid is as stupid does.
If Pelican, Oyster and Belair are able to pull themselves up by the bootstraps then why reward those not smart enough or under capitalized who can’t do that. Too big to fail? No such thing. That’s a concept promoted by those not smart enough to succeed on merit.
The same guys on TV at 3:00am telling you that by being in debt up to your eyeballs is such a great deal because you can always go bankrupt and no one remembers. Mullet Bay is your prime example. They took the money and ran. What makes you think that won’t happen again? If the storm washed away weak and badly run businesses, why would you spend money propping them up when that money can actually be used better by those who actually need and deserve it. Hard choices. But necessary.
Second, the whole timeshare argument. Nonsense on its face. First of all, the “Market” defines what works and what doesn’t. If all the resorts have gone “Time Share” then it’s because that’s the business model that allows them to be successful. Being successful means that everybody gets to keep their jobs ... a good thing by all accounts. Timeshare also guarantees occupancy ... something a hotel doesn’t do.
Beyond that, it is disingenuous to say that these resorts aren’t hotels. Every one has rooms to rent all the time. They are as much hotels as anywhere else. And notice ... They are up and running. Why? Because they have the heart, the will, the drive and leadership not to mention concrete obligations to meet to their clients.
The fact that Sunwing is still sitting on Great Bay and doing nothing tells you everything you need to know about that operation. You think they need an incentive? Nonsense. They have a lot of millions tied up in a non-producing property and they are doing nothing. Why? One of two reasons. Either they didn’t have the money to start with which means they are REALLY bad businessmen to start a project without all their ducks in a row or (far more likely) they see an opportunity to put forth the argument that you support i.e. a sort of legalized extortion where they say to Government “ help us or we’ll leave the place abandoned and see how you like THAT!” To which I would like to think Government would say “Oh really ... remember that nice piece of Long Lease Beachfront you USED to have? ...”
In the end, it comes down to survival of the fittest. Government should first be looking to invest in people and companies that have proven their bona fides. There are a lot of resorts on this island that have already done that. Sunwing hasn’t. Their plans are “Pie in the Sky” and were that way BEFORE the storm.
Let them get started with all that cash they had budgeted BEFORE the storm. Demonstrate a genuine need backed up by a guarantee of performance and a schedule carved in stone. But FIRST help every other resort and business that has exhausted their resources to get where they are and could use a little fast track help. Spend the money where it is needed. Not on some guys who want it just to make life easy. Support the “do’ers” not the “talkers.” That’s what’s needed now.
Steven Johnson
Dear Editor,
The Maho group and Sunwing are not asking for free money. Rebuilding the two hotels will take far more than the insurance proceeds. They are asking for help from the government and a loan with favorable terms of repayment, using their properties as collateral.
Those same terms of tax incentives are available to be negotiated by any new investor, so what is the difference? It would be easy for them to do a Mullet Bay and just collect the insurance and close, then where would we be? As for Sunwing, if I was the CEO I would certainly be saying, “let’s just hang back a few years,” so you have to incentivize them to begin now. Building a new 500-room Great Bay Hotel and linking the boardwalk is exactly what Philipsburg needs.
Apart from being the single largest employer of what, 1200-1500 people? the Maho group represents 90 per cent of the Dutch-side hotel inventory. That’s right, 90 per cent, because every other large resort has converted their inventory to timeshares. Westin, Oyster Pond, Sapphire, Royal Palm, Pelican, Port de Plaisance, Sea Palace, The Towers, Flamingo, Divi Divi, Belair, Atrium – all timeshares. Without the Maho group, Sint Maarten doesn’t have a hotel industry!
We should be putting a moratorium on timeshare resorts and offering every tax incentive to bring hotels back to our island before it’s too late. What about Caravanseri/Alegria? I say to also lend them money from the fund, provided they only build hotel inventory – even better if they can bring a brand name.
Mike Ferrier has the difficult job to get the best return on investing the recovery funds. Loans to the biggest companies/employers that can (a) get the bulk of employees back to work (b) increase tourism to benefit all other local business, and (c) guarantee the loan repayments – has to be the first and safest option.
I am in total agreement with Mr. Ferrier that loans be established for small entrepreneurs, but ONLY as long as they can provide collateral for repayment; and I would go one step further, offer small loans to everybody that needs a new roof on their house – provided their house is put up as collateral. What I don’t want to see is “free” roofs given to anybody and everybody, especially landlords that are collecting rents. Otherwise let’s just buy everybody a free roof.
That’s fair play.
Name withheld at author's request.
