Member Info for Bigears1170

What questions are you expecting to have answered ? I expect our bod to concede the rug has been royally pulled —thus rendering our contract involuntarily mothballed till further notice )o:

In any case the argument regarding the usefulness our EU blocking statute is tantamount to two baldies fighting over a comb ; as the debate presupposes its implementation would make a difference to our plight - talk here seems to gloss over the fact that we don’t have a binding contract in place for the blocking statute to protect |o:

The ole EU Blocking Statute (o: that would be the one the Commission Vice President, Valdis Dombrovskis and the UK Foreign Secretary noted could be of limited effectiveness ; “ The Commission’s aim is to add the relevant US Iran sanctions laws to the Annex before August 6, 2018, when the first batch of US sanctions are re-imposed The companies should take the potential help from the EU Blocking Statute with a grain of salt. The Commission Vice President, Valdis Dombrovskis, noted that it could be of “limited effectiveness, given the international nature of [the] banking system and especially the exposure of large systemic banks to [the] US financial system and US dollar transactions. ‘ UK Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson, had earlier admitted that it would be very difficult to protect European business “due to the extra-territorial effect of US sanctions and the difficulty companies have when they touch the live wire of the American financial network and they find themselves almost immediately sanctioned.”

What’s this new law then ? Do you have a link ? A new EU law that will be imposing fines on companies who choose not to trade with Iran (o:

We have required a German bank to trade with Iran since day one , despite sanctions being lifted in 2016 the US denied Iran access to the dollar , as such no tier 1 European bank would process payments to or from Iran , they wouldn’t even open a bank account for an Iranian national - meaning the sole reason for the German subsidiary was to facilitate the opening of a bank account for payments to and from Iran would be processed through one of the small German cooperative banks - with zero ties to the US - That’s nothing new - however if sanctions return to pre Jan 2016 status ( secondary sanctions due November ) any payment channelled through one of these banks to or from Iran will have to be approved by the Bundesbank ( German Central Bank ) which suggests payments will only be accepted via the handful of companies who will be given waivers to operate as they did before Jan 2016 . In respect of supply companies shipping to Iran that’s too down the small German bank as they won’t facilitate the transaction of any product that exceeds 10% of its parts from the US ! For the avoidance of doubt I hope we do get a waiver to operate in Iran - it’s a slim possibility, but imo our only way in until such time as Iran & USA agree to agree - One thing for sure is that no EU law will circumnavigate the secondary sanctions threatened by the USA |o:

Why would we be waiting for EU protection law to be in place to protect us from sanctions to which our contract falls outside |o: ? I’m still waiting for an educated and grown up response to my 15.28 ?

Sorry Tariffs - Not Sanctions

So who is our UKEF through that Fowler has been banging on about for the past two years ? And you think Trump would stand by idle and watch any German bank circumnavigate his sanctions ? He's just itching to slap sanctions on their automotive industry as it is !!

Total rubbish ? Now that is the pot calling the kettle black ar$e I thought you had me on filter ?

The Commission’s aim is to add the relevant US Iran sanctions laws to the Annex before August 6, 2018, when the first batch of US sanctions are re-imposed. The Commission is expected to control the entire process with support of the European External Action Service (EEAS) and it is likely that additional guidance will follow. The companies should take the potential help from the EU Blocking Statute with a grain of salt. The Commission Vice President, Valdis Dombrovskis, noted that it could be of “limited effectiveness, given the international nature of [the] banking system and especially the exposure of large systemic banks to [the] US financial system and US dollar transactions.” UK Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson, had earlier admitted that it would be very difficult to protect European business “due to the extra-territorial effect of US sanctions and the difficulty companies have when they touch the live wire of the American financial network and they find themselves almost immediately sanctioned.”

It is pessimistic but by no means misleading - I agree it’s not a country by country thing – but it’s a matter of fact what I pointed out about China & Russia – Will Trump offer concessions ? He might – though I see no reason why he would . The US will choke any European business who attempts to trade with Iran under secondary sanctions , in the case of WSG how would we get on with our UKEF funding ? Barclays , HSBC , Lloyds ,RBS / Natwest & Santander . none of which will touch Iran with a shatty stick - The European Investment Bank rely upon the US bond markets so raise funds so their out of the question too ! How would we get on with our little contract at Lungi being paid out in us dollars ? or any other contract who’s government has a relationship with the USA ???? I’m no expert I hasten to add , however I read plenty and see no one commenting on ways for EU companies circumnavigating US sanctions /o:

The Europeans are ****ing in the wind when it comes to both Iran and trade tariffs - The Russians will do business with Iran as they have nowt to lose as they are already under US sanctions – China will be mopping up the business that the Europeans companies are leaving behind as they will circumnavigate the dollar /o: In the case of Europe it won’t make any difference which countries back the JCPOA agreement as Trump has Europe on a spit - put yourself in his shoes ; he has shown repeated contempt for Europe and its leaders , so if he hasn’t got what he wants by November why would he not press ahead with secondary sanctions ? When they kick in , coupled with trade Tariffs they will turn the screw nicely on Europe and Iran until such time as he gets what he wants ! It might take a while but he will get the trade concessions he wants and Iran will eventually do a deal with him ….AIMHO

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/global-opinions/wp/2018/06/13/heres-what-trump-should-do-next-on-iran/?utm_term=.b7281ccd9430

Indeed - and very encouraging to see the E.U. doing their bit - though unfortunately that blocking statute ain’t worth a to$$ against secondary sanctions )o: Let’s hope Fowler didn’t have all of our eggs in the Iranian basket |o:

Benefit of the doubt (o;

Indeed - what we are seeing is one of the downsides electing a narcissistic megalomaniac to the most powerful position in the world |o: Answers on a postcard as to what the US electorate thought the upside was /o:

" Senior Trump administration officials have threatened to impose �secondary sanctions� on European businesses if they refuse to cancel their contracts "

As unpalatable as it is to acknowledge Trump holds all of the cards � if he follows through with secondary sanctions the EU blocking statute is toast � and any idea that the EIB would support investment is a non-starter as the secondary's would freeze them out of the US bond markets where I understand they raise a large tranche of their funds , not to mention a third of their lending being dollar denominated )o; I�m hoping he defers his August deadline to allow a better deal to be thrashed for all concerned Io:

Couldn�t be ar$ed - I�m sure the money SL spent on those terminals and buses will provide an interesting backdrop to discussions when the Lungi break clause comes around |o:

To add further insult to that injury , when Fowler announced the end of the Ferry he advised that we�d be concentrating on operating and managing the terminals in accordance with our 21 year lease agreement ; taking a share of the revenues from passengers using our terminals � what he chose to keep to himself was that Sea Coach Express wouldn�t be using our white elephant terminals at Tagrin & Gov Wharf for Lungi traffic , all of the airport punters go�s from Mahera Beach to Aberdeen , thus rendering our 21 year lease agreement not worth a to$$ - might explain why the financial outlook went from the HY 2017 � the exit from ferry operations should bring us back to achieving a positive contribution from ferry ticket sales and passenger royalties from Q4 2017. � - The Finals - We will continue to operate and manage the ferry terminals in accordance with our 21-year agreement and will receive a share of revenues on ticket sales made through our own operations, together with a payment for all passengers travelling to and from our terminals although we do not expect these revenues to be material /o: