• France faces up to 3bn euro in bills for Mistral delay to Russia, French shipbuilders express outrag
    65 replies, posted
[IMG]http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/77358000/jpg/_77358188_023732737-1.jpg[/IMG] [QUOTE]The decision to suspend delivery of a Mistral naval assault ship to Russia risks costing France at least 1bn euros (£800m), officials say. French President Francois Hollande said Russia's actions in eastern Ukraine meant conditions were not right for delivery of the helicopter-carrier. He later said "a ceasefire and a political settlement" should be in place before the deal could go ahead. Russia was expecting two Mistral ships - the first one in October. A French diplomat earlier said the contract was suspended until November, and the delay "could cost us 1bn euros". The deal is worth 1.2bn euros - and Russia is reported to have paid most of it, so breach of contract would mean France having to reimburse that money. In addition, France would be liable for an extra 251m-euro penalty payment, French news website LCI reports. The first ship is called the Vladivostok. About 400 Russian sailors are training at the shipyard in Saint-Nazaire, western France, to be ready for the eventual handover of the Vladivostok. International criticism France had until now resisted pressure to halt the delivery, saying it had to respect an existing contract. US President Barack Obama and UK Prime Minister David Cameron both criticised the deal, at a time when Russia has been widely condemned for arming pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine and allowing volunteers across the border to help them. Russia denies Western allegations of direct interference in the conflict. A Russian military expert quoted by the Russian Kommersant news website said the final bill for France could go as high as 3bn euros. The second ship, the Sevastopol, was to have been sent next year. Mr Hollande made no mention of it in his statement on Wednesday but said in July that delivery would depend on "Russia's attitude". A union representative at STX, the French construction firm building the Mistral ships, said STX workers expressed "amazement and outrage" after the contract was suspended. Jean-Marc Perez, quoted by AFP news agency, said that if the contract were cancelled it could threaten hundreds of French jobs.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-29060398[/url]
France is damned if they go with the plan and damned if they hold back.
Should have never agreed to give a ship to Russia in the first place.
[quote]The deal is worth 1.2bn euros - and Russia is reported to have paid most of it, so breach of contract would mean France having to reimburse that money.[/quote] How about plan B: Don't give them the ship ANNNND don't pay them back. For bonus points, offer to sell the carrier for a massive discount to Ukraine on account of the Russian government so graciously subsidizing its creation.
[QUOTE=GunFox;45896049]How about plan B: Don't give them the ship ANNNND don't pay them back. For bonus points, offer to sell the carrier for a massive discount to Ukraine on account of the Russian government so graciously subsidizing its creation.[/QUOTE] Yeah nah I don't think France wants to destroy their credibility in doing business with other nations. A contract is a contract, and agreed obligations must be met no matter whoever is the other party on the contract.
[QUOTE=GunFox;45896049]How about plan B: Don't give them the ship ANNNND don't pay them back. For bonus points, offer to sell the carrier for a massive discount to Ukraine on account of the Russian government so graciously subsidizing its creation.[/QUOTE] I think that's more than enough for Putin to start firing missiles, another country breaching contract, "stealing" hundreds of millions and giving them to country that Russia is attacking. They should go through with the deal, 2 helicopter carriers isn't the end of the world.
Should have added a clause to suspend shipbuilding if party to the deal is undertaking unauthorised military actions.
[QUOTE=Antdawg;45896060]Yeah nah I don't think France wants to destroy their credibility in doing business with other nations. A contract is a contract, and agreed obligations must be met no matter whoever is the other party on the contract.[/QUOTE] Surely failing to deliver a pair of ships wouldn't harm France's credibility as much as, say, Russia's failing to deliver the entire eastern half of Germany on top of an illegal occupation?
[QUOTE=Antdawg;45896060]Yeah nah I don't think France wants to destroy their credibility in doing business with other nations. A contract is a contract, and agreed obligations must be met no matter whoever is the other party on the contract.[/QUOTE] The unwritten "oh god the client turned out to be batshit crazy and inavded a country with no warning" clause is probably sufficient to keep any reasonable customer from being concerned.
[QUOTE=Antdawg;45896060]Yeah nah I don't think France wants to destroy their credibility in doing business with other nations. A contract is a contract, and agreed obligations must be met no matter whoever is the other party on the contract.[/QUOTE] just poke some holes in the hull or remove some lugnuts and bolts.
[QUOTE=codemaster85;45896182]just poke some holes in the hull or remove some lugnuts and bolts.[/QUOTE] Replace the fire insulation with asbestos.
[QUOTE=GunFox;45896169]The unwritten "oh god the client turned out to be batshit crazy and inavded a country with no warning" clause is probably sufficient to keep any reasonable customer from being concerned.[/QUOTE] You know, I am just surprised the clause was not actually written somewhere. One would expect that for a contract worth as much as a small city, they would think of all possibilities in advance.
Imagine Russia going like "it costs 3bn euros to fire this ship for 12 seconds".
[QUOTE=certified;45896143]Surely failing to deliver a pair of ships wouldn't harm France's credibility as much as, say, Russia's failing to deliver the entire eastern half of Germany on top of an illegal occupation?[/QUOTE] Germany?
[QUOTE=codemaster85;45896182]just poke some holes in the hull or remove some lugnuts and bolts.[/QUOTE] I don't think the deaths of those Russian sailors would make a good look on France, especially for future buyers let alone Russia's anger toward them.
[QUOTE=GunFox;45896049]How about plan B: Don't give them the ship ANNNND don't pay them back. For bonus points, offer to sell the carrier for a massive discount to Ukraine on account of the Russian government so graciously subsidizing its creation.[/QUOTE] Great way to make sure that nobody will take you seriously ever again! I can just imagine how many of you would be outraged and butthurt and blame Putin/Russia some more if this was the other way around. You guys are proving to be a massive hypocrites over and over again.
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;45896190]I don't think any reputable nation would fault france for not delivering these ships.[/QUOTE] Russia is an emerging power looking to modernize it's armed forces and have the finances to do so, that's why this deal was made in first place. Selling cutting-edge hardware to nations looking to upgrade their military capabilities is a very lucrative industry for countries like France. France has to show that once the goods have been paid for they will be able to deliver, Russia has paid for the first Mistral, so France is required to deliver it. Unfortunately for the French, this delay has probably already damaged their credibility with other potential buyers like India and China, neither of whom have taken any issue with Russia's actions in Ukraine.
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;45897694]China has it's own defense industry, it doesn't rely on other nations, except for spying on them. The only reason russia has this deal is because their ship building industries are in absolute shambles after the fall of the ussr. India is also rapidly expanding it's home grown defense industries in a bid to become more independent; in short; no, france isn't damaging their reputation to anyone but russia.[/QUOTE] You can believe that. But I think India at least is a long way behind building a ship to the quality France can produce. India buys stuff in despite "home grown defence industries" eg the Apache/Mi28 contract. I would also say China also but that is definitely debatable.
[QUOTE=WhollyRufus;45897487]Russia is an emerging power looking to modernize it's armed forces and have the finances to do so, that's why this deal was made in first place. Selling cutting-edge hardware to nations looking to upgrade their military capabilities is a very lucrative industry for countries like France. France has to show that once the goods have been paid for they will be able to deliver, Russia has paid for the first Mistral, so France is required to deliver it. Unfortunately for the French, this delay has probably already damaged their credibility with other potential buyers like India and China, neither of whom have taken any issue with Russia's actions in Ukraine.[/QUOTE] China can take care of themselves, they've got, if not the biggest, one of the top economies in the world. Why would India make a deal with France? You're just cherrypicking unlikely nations that will make a military deal with the French. Why would it hurt France's credibility when the US, Canada, Australia and the entirety of Europe is going against Russia with France? This isn't hurting their credibility, especially when this deal has been criticized and asked to be stopped, which is why France has done this.
[QUOTE=Gwoodman;45897868]China can take care of themselves, they've got, if not the biggest, one of the top economies in the world. Why would India make a deal with France? You're just cherrypicking unlikely nations that will make a military deal with the French. Why would it hurt France's credibility when the US, Canada, Australia and the entirety of Europe is going against Russia with France? This isn't hurting their credibility, especially when this deal has been criticized and asked to be stopped, which France has done.[/QUOTE] It's got nothing to do with money. China could probably build 100 ships relatively quickly but none of them would match up to 1 that France could build.
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;45896762]Germany?[/QUOTE] Do you remember that little socialist shithole we once called the DDR? Do you think that came into existence because The People willed it to be? No. That was because the Russkis failed to vacate Deutschland despite it being agreed upon in the peace terms.
[QUOTE=certified;45898201]Do you remember that little socialist shithole we once called the DDR? Do you think that came into existence because The People willed it to be? No. That was because the Russkis failed to vacate Deutschland despite it being agreed upon in the peace terms.[/QUOTE] But this happened decades before the deal with France was even made, how is it relevant now?
[QUOTE=Gwoodman;45897868]China can take care of themselves, they've got, if not the biggest, one of the top economies in the world. Why would India make a deal with France? You're just cherrypicking unlikely nations that will make a military deal with the French. Why would it hurt France's credibility when the US, Canada, Australia and the entirety of Europe is going against Russia with France? This isn't hurting their credibility, especially when this deal has been criticized and asked to be stopped, which is why France has done this.[/QUOTE] No he is not; What WhollyRufus is saying - and he is right - is that India is a potential buyer of the Rafale ( and the Rafale is really, really hard to sell but it's another debate; anyway exporting the Rafale is very, very important and didn't happened yet ). And India has been on the side of Russia during the Crimean crisis. From there I think you can see the [U]potential[/U] problem. [QUOTE=Explosions;45896048]Should have never agreed to give a ship to Russia in the first place.[/QUOTE] The contract isn't from yesterday. When it got signed the cold war was over since 20 years, Russia weren't doing all the shit they are doing now, and it was an great economical opportunity for the industrial sectors in question. There was like 0 reasons not to accept it.
[QUOTE=GunFox;45896049]How about plan B: Don't give them the ship ANNNND don't pay them back. For bonus points, offer to sell the carrier for a massive discount to Ukraine on account of the Russian government so graciously subsidizing its creation.[/QUOTE] Quite literally one of the dumbest things I've ever read in SH. Russia would probably launch a lawsuit against France for the failure to deliver the ships in a recognized international arbitration court, for example the court in Geneva. Just as Iran threatened to do when Russia refused to deliver S-300's... and history repeats itself.. I don't think France wants to isolate itself considering arms exports are a major part of their economy.
Hardly anyone supports Russia's actions. Hence, hardly anyone would give a shit if France folded on its contractual obligations. [editline]5th September 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=laserguided;45898373]Quite literally one of the dumbest things I've ever read in SH. Russia would probably launch a lawsuit against France for the failure to deliver the ships and would win. Just as Iran threatened to do when Russia refused to deliver S-300's... and history repeats itself..[/QUOTE] I don't think Russia is in any position to try and use international law.
[QUOTE=ijyt;45898376]Hardly anyone supports Russia's actions. Hence, hardly anyone would give a shit if France folded on its contractual obligations. [editline]5th September 2014[/editline] I don't think Russia is in any position to try and use international law.[/QUOTE] Doesn't matter. They'll still win. A contract is a contract.
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;45897887]Actually their ship building capabilities have improved significantly over the past decade; the era of "lol cheap chinese shit" is far over.[/QUOTE] It's funny how people forget about all advanced electronics they manufacture, high speed bullet trains and that they even sent a man into space 10 years ago.
[QUOTE=ijyt;45898376] I don't think Russia is in any position to try and use international law.[/QUOTE] Trading laws are independent. Right?
[QUOTE=AntonioR;45898394]It's funny how people forget about all advanced electronics they manufacture, high speed bullet trains and that they even sent a man into space 10 years ago.[/QUOTE] Those are very specialised. Being able to build a bullet train doesn't mean you can build a super modern high tech carrier with the radar, tracking, ECM etc. Likewise just because france can build super carriers doesn't meant they can take someone to space yet. Specialised facilities, specialised tech, specialised experience.
[QUOTE=laserguided;45898373]I don't think France wants to isolate itself considering arms exports are a major part of their economy.[/QUOTE] You're talking about isolation when most countries support their decision? [QUOTE=426_Hemi;45898334]No he is not; What WhollyRufus is saying - and he is right - is that India is a potential buyer of the Rafale ( and the Rafale is really, really hard to sell but it's another debate; anyway exporting the Rafale is very, very important and didn't happened yet ). And India has been on the side of Russia during the Crimean crisis. From there I think you can see the [U]potential[/U] problem.[/QUOTE] If India is supporting Russia in this, neither France nor the Allies will care if they don't want to trade equipment anymore and it'll only deteriorate relations for the worse(and I doubt the Allies have anything to lose with India).
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.