I hope we are sending them 2x4's and not raw logs!

"lumber" .... it is sawn timbers, to build primarily western platform framed construction.

Logs are something totally different.

And if I read this right, "WE" have to develope this sector of the Chinese housing?
figures that Bell would sell us out...

BCRacer

please explain how that is a sell out?

What they are trying to do is impliment a version of the Canadian building code, prove to the Chinese that it will work in there regions.

Its not a sell out, its selling our product.

Have you ever heard of developing a market?

I think you may have miss-read this BCRacer. This is not a sell out. It's great news for the BC forest industry which will create more jobs and hopefully re-open more mills. Time will tell.

I suspect it is going to be difficult to change traditional ways of doing things. Yes, there will be a market for more platform framed housing units in China as well as in other countries. But, unless government dictated, I suspect that traditional masonry and concrete construction will prevail for some time.

We must remember that the USA/Canadian method of constructing low rise buildings is not exactly the most commonly used in the world. You will not find it on any other continent, including south America, even though there is enough wood there, as there is in Russia.

"I hope we are sending them 2x4's and not raw logs!"

Here is a better idea: We send them BOTH, plus any other wood products that they wish to buy from us!

LOL .... now there is a true salesman talking.

Ar we just providing the technology or are we footing the bill for a six story building. There appears to be a lot of political talk I don’t understand. Just thought I would ask.
Cheers

Retired,

as I understand it we are building a showhouse (for lack of a better term) in a major Chinese city to show the people what the differances would be between the 2 methods of construction.

1st the Canadians had to convince the Chinese that softwood lumber would be strong enough, then show cost viability, finally build the show home.

Once again as I understand it these 6 story apartment buildings will be built with traditional bottom 2 floors with the top 4 floors built to Canadian standards with wood. All floor truss's and roof truss's will also be built with Canadian lumber.

Is Pat Bell Trustworthy? Shirley Bond isn`t trustworthy,Shirley Bond,your represetative Prince George...

Shirley Bond is a BOLD-FACED LIAR,she made the most ridiculous lies over and over again in the BC Legislature..Don`t edit anything out until you read the below link,it will prove without a shadow of a doubt about Shirley Bond`s lying in the people`s house.....


http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2010/03/29/GordonBCRail/

And you expect any BC Liberal to tell the truth about withheld toxic air reports.LOL...Why you votes for those creatures I don`t know!

Grant G

Sound like you have an axe to grind and will use any forum you can to do just that.

Not sure what your whinning has to do with this story or Pat Bell, but keep up the good work.

Grant G

Using a biased blog to support your opinion is kinda like using your dog as an alibi.

Are you saying the accountant and writer Will McMartin of the Tyee is lying?

Numbers don`t lie,Shirley Bond lies..

And my friend,that is why the public affairs bureau is all over Will McMartin`s financial truth story...

Do you really think Will McMartin could get away with calling Shirley Bond a liar on the most popular website in Canada?

Without legal ramifications? Ithink not..

Go ahead, if the story wasn`t true Ben Meisner would edit me gone!

cheers

Thank you Grant G for providing the website.

It is an interesting read. It reveals that the first time the BCR ever made a small profit was in the early seventies, after many decades of operating in the red.

It also had several debts *extinguished* amounting to hundreds of million of dollars, twice, it appears, and then one more time.

It had a debt of roughly 600 million when it was sold eventually, or so the story says.

The past history of the BCR is one of ups and downs, the NDP raided its coffers...if it had not done so, the huge debt couldn't have been used as an excuse to get rid of it.

Some of the past shenanigans are open to interpretation, the outcome depends on the political persuasion of the one who does the history.

As for the *lying* accusations, the story as written is not a shining example of non-partisanship either, in my opinion.

I am not happy that the BCR was sold, but like the fast ferries caper it is not posssible to wind the clock back and do it all over again, only this time better.

In the legislature all kinds of things are said or not said in question period. There are no saints. NONE. It's a political gong show.

If truth was the basic requirement for question period there would be only the sound of silence. Many questions are not based on truth and many answers are not.

It's politics, remember?

But even there, in the Legislature, a member is not allowed to accuse another member of lying, or bald-faced lying.

Here, on this site that is allowed.

I am not sure what kind of business you might operate Grant G. I do know that businesses must look at more than just their operating costs. The table on the site you refer to deals with operating income only. It is not a net income.

The BCR made some bad investments. Remember the Dease Lake line. That was started in 1973 and construction halted in 1977. By that time it had cost twice as much as predicted. A total of $168 million wasted in an investment that was not founded on good business planning in hid sight. Someone had to account for that loss. The issue became the subject of a Royal Commission.

Then came the Tumbler Ridge line which was opened in 1983. It started off profitable. The traffic never reached the level predicted. 10 years later there was less than one train a day using the line. The BCR built up lots of debt for the construction that could not be repaid by the operations on the branch line or the entire operations of the BCR, for that matter.

Whether a business is profitable or not has to be determined by much more than operations costs. One cannot simply use money from the tooth ferry. The cost of building infrastructure in order to have such phenomenal operating gains as the table referenced shows (in the 20% of income range over 18 years or so) has to be included on the books. The author of the referenced article conveniently avoids addressing that little fact of business reality.

Looking at the table, and including write downs of $80.6 million + $616.6 million + $13 million. The net operating income is a loss of $5.6 million over 18 years. That does not look like a good investment to me. They might not have been technically bankrupt, but if a loan is called, and one cannot repay it, that is generally a good indicator that bankruptcy will follow shortly.

Grant G wrote: "Numbers don't lie"

There are lots of numbers missing in the Tyee table. Not presenting all the numbers is not lying, it is surreptitious at best, but better described as covert.

On top of that, it assumes that the reader is rather gullible and stupid.

Grant G,

Im no accountant but I do have business experience.

I quickly found two very gray area's in his story, verging on very deceiving.

1st I quote:

"In 1989, the company wrote off the northern section of the moribund Dease Lake extension. A charge of $80.6 million transformed a record operating profit into a loss of $16.1 million.

(Readers should understand that a write-off is a non-cash transaction that occurs when an asset is reduced in value or entirely removed from a company's books. BC Rail did not actually lose $80.6 million on the Dease Lake line in 1989 -- after all, the monies invested in the road had been expended in the 1970s. Rather, the Dease Lake assets were taken off the books, and a commensurate non-cash charge was recorded in the operating statement.)"

The author explains that the railway showed a loss that year due to fictious loss. But that is far from the truth. The railway was showing an incorrect asset on its books, it shows the Dease Lake extension to be worth 80.6 million when infact it had zero value. Yes the money was spent year earlier and they did not spend that money that year, but infact they should have shown a much bigger loss in earlier years, the accounting in question in fact corrected a wrong, that debt should have already been on the books but it was not.

2nd I quote:

"Ten years later -- after the northeast coal mines had been closed and coal shipments stopped -- BC Rail wrote off $616.6 million for the Tumbler Ridge spur line. As in 1989, the charge meant that an operating profit was converted into a net loss, this one totaling $582.5 million. (To repeat, it was a non-cash transaction; all of the construction costs associated with Tumbler Ridge had been incurred two decades' earlier.)"

Once again the exact same thing, they had an asset on the books which showed a 616.6 million dollar value when infact its true value was almost nill at that point. That is a false asset and the debt was hidden, all they did was correct it. The author makes it seem as though its no big deal because no cash was spent that year, and he tries to dismiss the fact that the money was spent earlier, but the simple fact is, they money was spent, the asset now had little value, therefor it is a loss plain and simple.

Its all about opinion, and if my memory serves me correct, Will McMartin is a former politition from the Abbotsford area with an axe to grind against the current liberals.

Frankly in my mind he lack credibility because of his motivations.

Gus.

something is wrong in the world today, we are thinking along the same lines and posting on the same side.

Is it me that is sick today or is it you?

Grant G

I quote you:

"Do you really think Will McMartin could get away with calling Shirley Bond a liar on the most popular website in Canada?"

The most popular websiet in Canada?

I had to check that out, did a little search, didnt see them listed in the top 100 most popular in Canada, I quit looking after that.

Not doing much for your credability, do you use the same spin doctor as Will McMartin?

Grant G

I looked it up, here is their ranking:


"www.thetyee.ca is at 8041 place in Canada
Points: 3.915738 points"

Yup, it appears your using the same spin doctor.

Stompin Tom ..... it seems to me that today is not the only time we post similar notions ....

When people think objectively, the laws of probability will eventually converge the thoughts people have on some issues ....

One of the hazards of thinking objectively. :-)

CNN.COM = 59th in traffic ....
http://www.alexa.com/search?q=cnn.com&r=site_screener&p=bigtop

THETYEE.CA = 120,606th in traffic
http://www.alexa.com/search?q=thetyee.ca&r=site_screener&p=bigtop

YAHOO.COM = 4th in traffic
http://www.alexa.com/search?q=yahoo.com&r=site_screener&p=bigtop

GOOGLE.COM - 1st .... is that any wonder?

GOOGLE.CA = 57th (1st in Canada)

GOOGLE.DE = 16th (1st in Germany)

GOOGLE.CN = 15th (4th in China)

"Will McMartin is a political consultant who has been affiliated with the Conservative, Social Credit and BC Reform parties."

http://www.cbc.ca/canadavotes2004/analysiscommentary/wmcmartin.html

Stompin Tom and gus did you not realize this is a opinion forum, I think that means we are all posting our opinions not always trying to prove someone wrong or right. Some of us do not think Mr. Bell is the next best thing to sliced bread,that is just the way it goes.

dirtcheap

opinions are fine, just done expect me to agree. When people make statements that they try to pass off as fact, the should expect to be challenged.

Gus,

If I remember correct, Will McMartin has strong ties to the Prince George area, he may have been born here. Once again if my memory serves me correct his father owned a succesful used equipment dealership in the 70's and 80's, McMartin Machinery which was located in the BCR industrial site.

Sure its political... political business decisions made by politicians for BCRail to subsidize infrastructure build out and economic opportunities. One can't fault BC Rail for that. One can however fault the politicians for not seeing the opportunities through to fruition.

Clearly the politicians of all political strip sand bagged the BCR venture for political capital. The end result was like any true capitalist would say, 'the best way to make quick immediate profits is to buy a privatized government entity'. Clearly CN understood this especially when it relates to creating monopolies of essential infrastructure. Clearly towns like Mackenzie and Fort St James understand the implications of a CN monopoly.

I think when the courts are done with the BC Rail deal it will become null and void. At that time in the best interest of a free enterprise economy we would be best to make the BCR lines an open line to all rail operators with the line maintained by a crown agency... subsidized if need be... the rail corridor is no different than we subsidize highways to facilitate the movement of our goods to market by the trucking industry... competition in rail would make BC a more competitive place to invest and provide stability for the towns that rely on it. Holding industry hostage to a rail monopoly stifles any new industrial investments.

Good point Eagle...But Gus is missing the point..Shirley Bond boldly lied in the legislature..Shirley didn`t say little white lies,she offered up Whoppers,big whopping lies.

As for the Tyee,let me re-phrase.."They are one of the most popular in Canada...

And they don`t print anything that isn`t true,they wouldn`t want to be hit with a SLAAP law suit...Will McMartin is not NDP,he`s a former reformer/So-cred/accountant.

Your MLA Shirley Bond lied her face off...Those are the facts,I suggest you ask Shirley Bond to email those same assertions to you directly,or letter,or phone call.....Watch her waffle in the public domain!

If Shirley lied, she must have said that the BCR was the best business enterprise that the government ever had and that it allowed the government to stay afloat.

If she said the opposite, that the BCR was a failure and was costing the government money, she did not lie.

Simple.....

Please find the Hansard quotation for us.

http://www.leg.bc.ca/hansard/39th2nd/H00325y.htm

Okay ... so here is Hansard from March 25th 2010.

The whole thing was about compensation for executives and Board that still exists for the BCR, since the entity still exists and is about to be wound down and taken in as part of the Ministry of Transportation in order to save some money.

So, we have the typical bickering and posturing back and forth as is normal in the British origin parliamentary system. After all, that is what the members are all being paid for. To bicker in front of the cameras. And I say this of ALL parliamentarians. That is the systme. That is the game that is played.

As Gordon Wilson said during the 1991 leadership debate ... "This is a perfect example of why nothing ever gets done in Victoria."

No truer words were ever spoken. It is a pissing contest for territory. Just think waht would be able to get accomplished if we got rid of this kind of nonesense and worked together productively.

Grant G

Your quote:

"Will McMartin is not NDP,he`s a former reformer/So-cred/accountant."

Nobody said he was NDP, what he is is a former Socred who fought the Liberal Party when they were taking over and has had an agenda out for them ever since.

In the article you linked us to he wrote his piece as an OPINION. He did not write it as a news story, there is a much different view when it comes to the legal aspects and slander.

You and your friends arguments that she lies are based on shoddy research and down right mistruths on their own. Frankly I find the way the article is written is more of a lie and half truth than anything it tries to prove.

Go back over what gus and myself posted, a very good job was done disecting what Will McMartin tried to hide under the rug.

All in all you best remember just because it is written in the interned does not make it true. You have a very biased opinion on the matter, I can only guess your motivation.

Grant G

One thing you dont seem to understand. Debt aquired 20 years ago is no different than debt aquired last month. It is still debt.

If BC Rail was required to pay interest on the debt they hid, they would have been in worse shape, instead by using smoke and mirror accounting they hid the debt from their shareholders, you and me.