Rocna Anchors acquired by Canada Metal Pacific

[JayBee]

I believe I read earlier that you can tell a NZ produced Rocna because it has a fabricated blade, rather than cast (i.e. it won't have the word "ROCNA" cast into it).

I don't believe there is any questionmark about the NZ produced Rocnas.....
Andy

Thanks Andy. Good news for me, at least, if this is the case.

I suppose I now need to worry about getting mine nicked -last seen on a pallet under my hauled out boat, about 600 miles from where I am now.

 

[Neeves]

Misterg,

If you check the typical tensile strengths of Q420, my 'typical' is the average from a 33t batch of 16mm Q420 steel plate delivered in 2009 (each sheet is tested) and compare it with the typical for Bis80, from the Bisalloy data sheet, then Q420 is 53% of the strength of Bis80. I agree not 50% but certainly no-where near 60%. I might also accept that a 33t batch of plates might not actually be typical - but its as good as I could find. I will not round so easily in the future. Good to see people are checking and correcting (keeps us all on our toes). I have borrowed the hair shirt for the weekend.

Jonathan

 

[misterg]

Whatever keeps you happy!

FWIW I was referring to 420MPa vs 690MPa as the quoted minimum yield strengths of the materials respectively. If you're working on 'typicals' that's fine by me.

Andy

 

[Neeves]

Regarding Direct shipments to the UK:

One would assume that Holdfast invoiced Boyds at their offices in Ireland. According to a document issued by the HK offices of the Shanghai factory fabricating the Rocna anchors a shipment of 300 anchors was sent, freight collect, from Shanghai to the UK (not Ireland) by container. The shipment could have been split and the crates then 'on shipped' to Ireland prior to being sent back to chandlers in the UK. This looks bureaucratically illogical and expensive. My guess is that shipments came direct to the UK and the few needed for the Irish market were sent from stock in the UK.

 

[vyv_cox]

I assume that the key factor would be the date upon which Pipler's became Rocna agents. In 2007 and 2008, and probably at least up to early 2009, Boyd Boats were distributing to UK.

This dated early 2009:

'Paddy Boyd set up Boyd Boats in 2006, selling new and used yachts and marine leisure products from its HQ at Carlisle Pier in Dun Laoghaire.

Like many businessmen Paddy is facing challenges because of the credit crunch and the weakness of sterling which has hit margins for exporters.

"I sell new and second- hand boats and I also have another business selling high quality New Zealand designed anchors both here and in the UK so an element of my business is in the sterling area. That's where my main concern lies now.

"I have a container load of these anchors coming in in the next few weeks and now I must go........'

 

[Neeves]

There was a shipment of Rocna anchors to Boyds in May 2010, presumably arrived June 2010, consisting of 46 x 620 shanked anchors and 55 x 420 shanked anchors. It was referenced 'Boyds UK' (not Ireland). It looks to be the last shipment to the UK with the 420 shanks but this should be confirmed. This might also be the last shipment to Boyds, there were a number previously. It might be that Pipplers had no shipments of 420 shanked anchors, maybe Grant can confirm, and that they will escape financial fallout. However the chandlers to whom Boyds supplied, will be liable for any refunds to customers returning their anchors.

I recall (and my memory might be wrong) that Grant has made mention of anchors shanked with a steel he describes as '400'. This has not raised any mention/response nor has Grant quantified how many anchors used this material.

Jonathan

 

[Rigger Mortice]

I recall (and my memory might be wrong) that Grant has made mention of anchors shanked with a steel he describes as '400'. This has not raised any mention/response nor has Grant quantified how many anchors used this material.

Jonathan

You're right. He did mention "400" in #1032.

 

[GrantKing]

You're right. He did mention "400" in #1032.

Yes 400 and 420 were used at the beginning of chinese production in 2008 through to the early part of 2009.

The shipment that contained the venice anchor had 10 of the same size in it and they were mixed 400 and 420 shanks thats why they were all recalled from the distributor and replaced before any more were sold. They were then destroyed under instructions from Bambury before I could one sent back to me in NZ for testing.

The rest of the can of worms leaked slowly from that point on.

 

[Storyline]

Yes 400 and 420 were used at the beginning of chinese production in 2008 through to the early part of 2009.

The shipment that contained the venice anchor had 10 of the same size in it and they were mixed 400 and 420 shanks thats why they were all recalled from the distributor and replaced before any more were sold. They were then destroyed under instructions from Bambury before I could one sent back to me in NZ for testing.

The rest of the can of worms leaked slowly from that point on.

That is an interesting post. You say that the anchors that had mixed 400 and 420 shanks were recalled and destroyed. Did this happen with all the 400's and 420's that had been sent to all distributors or just the distributor who handled the Venice anchor ?

 

[Rigger Mortice]

That is an interesting post. You say that the anchors that had mixed 400 and 420 shanks were recalled and destroyed. Did this happen with all the 400's and 420's that had been sent to all distributors or just the distributor who handled the Venice anchor ?

It was just those that the Venice anchor distributor had handled. In the parlance...it was an attempt at a cover up.

 

[Neeves]

Grant is a bit vague as to how many 400 shanked anchors were made, how widespread was its usage, only the Italian anchors of a certain size or was it used on other anchors of the same size to different destinations. Might 400 have been used on other anchors of different size, but same shank thickness?

What were these Italian anchors replaced with, Bis80, 620, 420?

 

[Storyline]

It would be interesting to know who the distributor was and what they were told was the reason for the recall. It HF admitted to the distributor that the wrong metal grade was used it is a bit strange that nothing leaked out. The marine wholesale market is quite a small world in Europe and with everyone knowing production had (only just) been moved to China this could have easily led to some tongues wagging.

If only HF was as good at building anchors as they were at managing cover ups then there would be a lot less boat owners worried about using their Rocna next season.

 

[Neeves]

I think the Italian distributor was probably told the one failure was isolated, extreme misuse by the owner of the anchor, but to show good faith and to demonstrate that Holdfast were an honest and reliable company they would replace all the anchors of the same size.

Everyone is happy, The owner of the anchor gets a new anchor, the distributor thinks Holdfast the best supplier he has ever had and Holdfast look good.

But I think Grant will know who the importer or distributor or chandler is (or was) and he would be able to verify my thoughts, above.

Jonathan

 

[GrantKing]

I think the Italian distributor was probably told the one failure was isolated, extreme misuse by the owner of the anchor, but to show good faith and to demonstrate that Holdfast were an honest and reliable company they would replace all the anchors of the same size.

Everyone is happy, The owner of the anchor gets a new anchor, the distributor thinks Holdfast the best supplier he has ever had and Holdfast look good.

But I think Grant will know who the importer or distributor or chandler is (or was) and he would be able to verify my thoughts, above.

Jonathan

The distributor in Italy was told that some of the shanks had been heated by gas torch in the factory to straighten them as they had a slight curve in them caused by rolling out the sheet prior to cutting. They were led to believe that the heating softened the metal and reduced the tensile strength leaving the shank open to unusal bending.
They accepted that explanation and were more than happy to have the whole 10 replaced as a precaution from the same batch.
They were replaced at a later date with 620 shanks.

 

[GrantKing]

Grant is a bit vague as to how many 400 shanked anchors were made, how widespread was its usage, only the Italian anchors of a certain size or was it used on other anchors of the same size to different destinations. Might 400 have been used on other anchors of different size, but same shank thickness?

What were these Italian anchors replaced with, Bis80, 620, 420?

400 was used on a whole range of sizes mixed with the 420's from 2008- 2009.
It was never established how many were 400 during those early days as by the time I discovered the extent of use of the 420 they (400's) had already all been used up.

 

[Storyline]

The distributor in Italy was told that some of the shanks had been heated by gas torch in the factory to straighten them as they had a slight curve in them caused by rolling out the sheet prior to cutting. They were led to believe that the heating softened the metal and reduced the tensile strength leaving the shank open to unusal bending .....

The Lies and deceit are almost breathtaking - you would have thought that even the most devious supplier would have thought at that point that the game was nearly up and that the highest priority was to get rid of all the 400 & 420 shanks pdq and take the hit. They must have known surely that other 400's would bend in the future and the truth would come out.

If they had gone into damage limitation mode at that point and destroyed all the 400 & 420's then they might have got away with the deception (how they could have slept at night knowing that dozens of boats round the world were relying on a safety critical item that might not be fit for purpose is another matter).

As it stands now, once all the owners that bought in 2009 and 2010 know that there is a significant chance their anchor may be made of 400 or 420, then I cannot see any way out of this mess without a total product recall. In my marina alone there are more than 15 boats with Rocnas purchased during that time. Not all will have followed this thread but one will have done and as soon as the season starts next year the word will be out. Without a reliable (or more importantly, believable) way to trace the anchor from id marks engraved on it, I suspect most if not all of them will be returned.

 

[Neeves]

Saumur,

Do not wonder how they could have slept at night, then (in the past), why not wonder how they have slept at night ever since.

They know the anchors are still out there, they know the anchors are suspect (why else replace 10 without question). They know to which distributors the anchors were shipped (and when). Presumably the chandlers have records. Its not rocket science. Its not a refund issue - its a simple safety issue.

And at the current rate of moral sensitivity we might still be wondering this time next year how they still manage to sleep at night

 

[Ex-SolentBoy]

Moral and product reputation issues aside, can anyone explain the legal situation.

1. Did CMP simply take over the right to build Rocna anchors? in this case the stuff made and sold by others would not be their problem.

2. If CMP actually bought the company that sold the duff products, is there an indemnity clause insulating them from claims?

Every time I have sold a business I have always had a clause like the one above. Without it you would be nuts to buy a company.

 

[Bosun Higgs]

Moral and product reputation issues aside, can anyone explain the legal situation.

1. Did CMP simply take over the right to build Rocna anchors? in this case the stuff made and sold by others would not be their problem.

As I understand it, this is the case. I believe its also far from clear that the licence holder ( ie Rocna themselves) knew about the quality shortcut so the problem of duff anchors is down to Holdfast who I believe have gone bust.

The CMP recall is a good will / PR thing.

 

[misterg]

1. Did CMP simply take over the right to build Rocna anchors? in this case the stuff made and sold by others would not be their problem.

From the link in post #1 of this thread:

"The licence to manufacture Rocna anchors has been re-assigned to Canada Metal Pacific, it was announced today."

2. If CMP actually bought the company that sold the duff products, is there an indemnity clause insulating them from claims?

The company that sold duff products is in liquidation:

http://www.business.govt.nz/companies/app/ui/pages/companies/960729

At least on director of that company is retained by CMP.

Stinks, doesn't it?

I'm surprised there isn't a wikipedia article on all this!

Andy