There are several things that bother me about this strange/bizarre situation
1. In their open letter the RM claim they can’t work with BBP. Can’t? or Won’t? In a professional capacity there are many people we work alongside that we merely tolerate, may have crossed words with or arguments, or just don’t like in order to get the job done. The bottom line is it is about professionalism, putting aside personal issues and working for the greater good and common aim. The RM and their spokesperson do not seem to do this. If it has indeed got personal, then perhaps it is time to step back and let people who can remain professional and negotiate take control.
2. If they were sole owners of the boat, why do they have to ‘ask’ for it to be returned. Get a court order and it would be theirs, a slam dunk. This brings me onto something else they keep on about the DoG yet that is between the CFHT and the RM not the BBP. No amount of shouting this as ‘the agreement’ will change that. However, it has been said if you say something enough you can start to believe that or maybe it is as simple as they do not understand the legalities, in which case they need to speak to their lawyers.
3. The RM said they offered the BBP a deal which they rejected. So that is it is it? In business, deals are rejected, rehashed, changed etc all the time and it can take many months before a final draft is reached. It seems the BBP rejected the deal as it stood and so the RM didn’t offer to negotiate any further, and that was that. There it is again unprofessionalism. This then comes back to my original ‘theory’ of who exactly is pulling the strings here.
I think overall the sad fact of the situation is if the museum gets it bits of wreckage back, they’ll need a vast pot of money to restore it and if they are relying on public donations then I think they will fall well short of their mark. A glance at the BBP own accounts does not even touch the amount that they’ll require. Relying on the public to give what they have already is an unsound business plan. Then of course industry has donated once and are unlikely to do so again and based on the professionalism of the RM I’m not holding out much hope. Likewise, if Mr Eastham is involved judging by his infantile comments on this forum, they really are fighting a losing battle.
Mind you in all of this, the entertaining hypocrisy Gina provides in her TV interviews regarding dignity and respect is quite something. Remember she was playing golf in Florida (East coast of USA) when her father’s boat was lifted, and his body was discovered. At least Tonia made it from California (West coast of USA) a far greater distance. Gina needs to think very carefully about her actions and what she has said and done in the past both privately and publicly before she opens her mouth… she is digging a very deep hole for herself.