- Collecting what’s due
The Baltic’s Dispute Resolution Service has seen a busy first half of the year with 15 cases for Mike Dunwell, who heads up the service, to consider. Designed to allow Baltic members to recover both small and large amounts, two-thirds of this year’s cases have already been concluded. That’s $375,000 collected for free on behalf of Baltic Exchange members for relatively small amounts of money that might otherwise remain outstanding.
Last year, the Baltic assisted in the recovery of US$3.5m, up from US$1.1m in 2017. While this increase is due in part to wider take-up in the number of cases being reported by P&I clubs and members looking to the Baltic for help, the increase in resources made available by the Baltic to resolve cases and help to manage the increasing demand is also a significant factor.
For those who haven’t used it or are unaware of its existence, the Dispute Resolution Service is a complimentary resource run by the Baltic Exchange for its members. It is designed to recoup money owed to members, mainly relating to commission in the case of brokers and hire/freight where owners are concerned. However, it can also be used to ensure that an arbitration award is honoured, or to highlight any form of malpractice according to the Baltic Code.
When a breach in the Baltic Code of Conduct has occurred, and appropriate reparations have not been made, the party is faced with the possibility of being posted by the Baltic Exchange. The threat of being published as an unfit counterparty in front of the global membership, represents a final, highly undesirable, penalty for those unwilling, or unable, to make good on the losses caused. This action is recognized both within the shipping community and by the wider financial and commodity markets, as well as due diligence agencies operating across other related sectors.
The Dispute Resolution Service is free of charge to members and in the past, we have extended this offering on the same basis to non-members via P&I clubs and legal firms acting for clients. To provide further resources for the service, non-member companies using the facility will be charged 15% of the total recovered, capped at a maximum of £15,000 per case. The Baltic’s goal is to increase the benefits of being a member, and this fee to non-members will enable the Baltic to pursue more cases and give better support to members seeking help, while still providing a much relied on service to the industry at large.
“It’s a great service because it means that if we are successful, the member doesn’t need to seek legal advice which can be costly and time consuming.” – Mike Dunwell, Head of Dispute Resolution Service.
We would like to express our appreciation for the Baltic’s hard work, patience and persistence in getting our commission settled which, in spite of all our efforts, remained outstanding for nearly one and a half years.
We realise that this was not an easy task but thanks to your efforts the matter was finally resolved.
It was the first time in our history that we had occasion to use this service which the Baltic provides to its members and it was a good reminder of the importance of being a Member of a historical institution such as the Baltic Exchange. – Prominent Greek Dry Cargo broker.
We highly recommend the Baltic Resolution Service. It is exceptionally user-friendly and responsive and, most importantly, it delivers results. Recently, it helped us resolve a long-standing dispute and recover a large sum of money. – Leading bulk and tanker operator.
As a major Futures broker, we requested the assistance of The Baltic Exchange Dispute service with five clients who had failed to pay for some time. Within 15 days of initial contact four out the five parties have paid very promptly and the fifth is still pending.
In our view having membership with the Baltic Exchange is very good value for money.
The Baltic Exchange and SGX contacts were also very influential as any Shipping company would not want to be posted on the Baltic Exchange or have this kind of publicity.
Mike Dunwell is very easy to talk to and we trust him and his team with his style and powers of persuasion chasing clients for payment. – Major worldwide Broker.
Globally, Baltic Exchange membership numbers over 600 companies, continuing to grow this number so that the Baltic remains truly representative of maritime markets is a key ambition. The Dispute Resolution Service offering will benefit the wider industry by encouraging non-members to join, saving them time and money individually as well as helping to reduce the number of outstanding debtors on the books across the industry.
If you are interested in finding out more about membership or the disputes service please contact:
Mike Dunwell for the Dispute Resolution Service on +44 (0) 20 7369 1631 / M +44 7860 902547 / firstname.lastname@example.org
Crispin Eccleston for membership details on +44 (0)20 7369 1654 / email@example.com
- Baltic supports Nautical Institute event
The Baltic Exchange supported and attended the Nautical Institute’s recently held conference in Singapore. Looking at the challenges facing the maritime industry over the next couple of years, the conference focused on regulatory requirements, practicality, legal implications, and the impact to both shipowners and seafarers.
The conference also celebrated women in maritime, in line with IMO’s World Maritime Day theme for 2019: ‘Empowering Women in the Maritime Community.’
See below to download the presentations:
Disruptive Technologies (Frank J Coles, Chief Executive, Wallem Group)
New Requirements & Legislation (Bob Spearing, Senior Manager, HFW)
Cargo Issues – Who Bears Risk? (Chris Metcalf, Partner, Clyde & Co)
Empowering Women in the Maritime Community (Monica Kyongok, Park Port Chaplain Busan, Mission to Seafarers)
Introduction to WISTA (Michelle Yong, Committee Member, WISTA Singapore, Partner, Stephenson Harwood)
- Member update: 29 May
The following individuals have applied for membership of an existing member company:
Company Individual BACA – The Baltic Air Charter Association
Mr E Cousins Mr R Dobre Mr J Parnell Mr M Ryan Mr J Short Mr E Wandall Mr G Winterman Braemar ACM Shipbroking Ltd Mr B O C Johnson Rio Tinto Shipping (Asia) Pte Ltd Mr A Hand Ms Y X Wu
Any comments should be passed to Karen Karanicholas by 5 June 2019.
- Space for rent at the Baltic Exchange
The Baltic Exchange wishes to inform members that room RLG10A (546 sq ft) on the lower ground floor of the Baltic Exchange is now available for rent.
For more details, please contact Mark Read. Pictures of the space can be found below:
- Job opportunity: Marketing Executive
An exciting opportunity has arisen for an experienced marketing professional to join the team at the Baltic Exchange.
Reporting to the Chief Commercial Officer and working closely with our London and overseas-based teams, the successful applicant will be charged with developing and implementing a marketing strategy to promote and raise market awareness of the range of services to potential members and users of the Baltic data.
- Baltic Exchange Training Courses return to London
Details of the Shipping Economics and Investment training course taking place in London this June.
Shipping Economics and Investment – 10-11 June
With access to more traditional finance limited, shipping companies are increasingly considering private equity and debt markets as a way to help them make key capital investments, whether meeting new emissions legislation or ballast water management controls or expanding their fleet to meet new opportunities. Likewise, many investment banks and bond traders are becoming alert to the significant opportunities in the sector.
Aimed at mid-level executives working for ship owning, operating and managing companies in the bulk and container sectors. It will also be of interest to investment banks involved in ship finance, trading companies as well as investors in the shipping market.
The Baltic Exchange runs a series of professional training courses in key shipping centres designed to help shipping, finance and commodity executives build on their knowledge of maritime markets. The courses are led by academics from CASS Business School’s world-renowned Centre for Shipping, Trade and Finance and deliver a high-level education, combining theory with real-life practical examples. By attending these courses participants will learn skills which they can use in their day to day business.
Launched in 2005, the courses are held over an intensive two day period. Each course involves a mixture of classroom teaching, practical exercises, group discussion and case study analysis. Comprehensive study notes are provided together with a certificate of attendance.
- Baltic training in Singapore this June and July
The Baltic Exchange is running a series of shipping courses this June and July in Singapore.
Counterparty Risk Management for Shipping
Thursday 13 June 2019 | SGX Centre 1, Singapore
Indexation and the creative use of the Baltic Indices in Risk Management for Shipping
Friday 14 June | SGX Centre 1, Singapore
Freight Derivatives & Shipping Risk Management
1-2 July | SGX Centre 1, Singapore
Advanced Freight Modelling and Trading
3-4 July | SGX Centre 1, Singapore
Counterparty Risk Management for Shipping
This course is ideal for executives dealing with counterparty evaluations, treasury, operations, chartering, company finance and those responsible for managing counterparty credit risk.
On the day, you will learn :
- Where does credit risk come from, the origination of risk, credit assessment and how to measure the value of your exposures.
- Understand and measure the real-time value of credit risk including how to work with Probabilities of Default, Loss Given Default, Potential Future Exposures and how to use Baltic Indices to apply Credit Variance Assessments.
- How to build an actual credit risk portfolio and how to monitor ongoing credit risk. This puts risk in perspective and helps you apply Baltic forward data to your risk exposures.
- How to mitigate risk exposures: simple and effective methods for minimizing, mitigating and dealing with credit risk in today’s challenging markets.
Indexation and the creative use of the Baltic Indices in Risk Management for Shipping
This course is suited to shipping executives and shipbrokers working with timecharters, COAs, period charters, cargo programmes and fleet employment.
- How the Baltic Indices are created, what they represent and what they can be used for.
- How to creatively benchmark different vessel designs and types against Baltic Indices and adjust the Baltic Indices using time charter and voyage charter metrics, across capesize, panamax, supramax and handysize sectors.
- How to build new and creative forward curves for specific routes and how to create ‘hybrid’ routes using Baltic Indices
- How to use benchmark-adjusted Baltic Indices, new forward curves and hybrid routes to create opportunities in FFA hedging and trading as well as the development of index-linked business.
For more information, or to register, email firstname.lastname@example.org or call Mark Ma on +65 8575 1588
Freight Derivatives & Shipping Risk Management
Delivered over two days by Professor Nikos Nomikos and Professor Amir Alizadeh, the Shipping Risk Management course aims to raise market awareness of risks involved in shipping businesses and how various physical and derivatives instruments can be used to control such risks efficiently and effectively. Participants will learn how to analyse and measure the impact of financial risks involved in shipping investment and operations, and how to select and execute effective strategies to minimise or eliminate such risks, stabilise their cash flow and maximise the return on investment more efficiently.
Advanced Freight Modelling and Trading
Led by Professor Nikos Nomikos and Professor Amir Alizadeh, lecturers at the Centre for Shipping, Trade & Finance at London’s Cass Business School, this advanced two day module focuses on modelling freight rate dynamics and pricing options on freight. It discusses issues which are relevant to shipping market practitioners such as constructing forward curves on freight, modelling freight rate volatility as well as hedging and trading strategies using freight options. The course aims to provide delegates with both a theoretical foundation as well as practical hands-on experience.
- Pirate ship hijackings: who pays for the delay?
In an important decision, which will be of interest across the maritime sector, the English High Court has clarified the scope of a typical time charterparty capture/seizure/arrest clause in the context of ship piracy and of a specific rider clause addressing this scenario.
The Eleni P , a Panamax bulk carrier vessel, was on time charter and was ordered to load a cargo of iron ore in the Ukraine and to discharge it in China, requiring the vessel to sail through the Suez Canal and the Gulf of Aden (GoA).
The vessel sailed through the GoA and into the Arabian Sea. When it was some 230 nautical miles outside of the ‘Gulf of Aden transit area’ designated by the Joint War Committee (JWC) for war risk purposes, it was captured by pirates and remained captured for some seven months before its release.
The parties disagreed about whether the vessel was on or off-hire under the time charterparty.
A contrary decision could have opened the floodgates to vessels being placed off-hire for surprising events such as bad weather or port congestion detaining them in port, which cannot be right
Two of the three arbitrators held that the vessel was off-hire:
1. Under clause 49 (Capture, Seizure and Arrest), which provided that “Should the vessel be captures [it was accepted that this should read “captured”] or seized or detained or arrested by any authority or by any legal process during the currency of this charterparty, the payment of hire shall be suspended for the actual time lost unless such capture or seizure or detention or arrest is occasioned by any personal act or omission or default of the Charterers or their agents…”. In the tribunal’s view, the word “captured” was not qualified by the subsequent words “by any authority or by any legal process” (as the Owners had submitted). They considered these words only applied to an ‘arrest’; and
2. Under clause 101 (Piracy Clause), which provided that: “ Charterers are allowed to transit GoA any time, all extra war risk premium and/or kidnap and ransom as quoted by vessel’s Underwriters, if any, will be reimbursed by Charterers.  Also any additional crew war bonus, if applicable will be reimbursed by Charterers to Owners against relevant bona fide vouchers.  In case vessel should be threatened/kidnapped by reason of piracy, payment of hire shall be suspended.  It’s remain understood [sic] that during transit of Gulf of Aden the vessel will follow all procedures as required for such transit including but not limited the instructions as received by the patrolling squad in the area for safe participating to the convoy west or east bound…”. In their view, the off-hire sentence  was not limited to a piracy kidnapping within the GoA (as the Owners had submitted, arguing that sentences ,  and  informed the meaning of sentence  in this regard), but included a kidnapping by reason of piracy as an immediate consequence of her transiting or being about to transit the GoA.
The Owners appealed to the High Court.
High Court decision
The judge (Popplewell J) held in favour of the Owners on clause 49 — all of the preceding events, including the vessel’s ‘capture’, were limited by the words “by any authority or by any legal process” (which was not the case here as the capture was by pirates). If all of these events were not limited by these words (as the Charterers had argued and the majority arbitrators had held), then:
1. This would be contradicted by the fact that the words “during the currency of this charterparty” which follow straight afterwards do apply to all of those events;
2. The words “by any authority or by any legal process” would be superfluous given that it was difficult to see how there could be an ‘arrest’ other than in this way;
3. The word “detention” would be a standalone event placing the vessel off-hire for, say, bad weather or port congestion. This could not be right and would be inconsistent with clause 15’s limitation of off-hire for ‘detention’ to where this was caused by “average accidents to ship or cargo”; and
4. Finally, the majority arbitrators’ conclusion that a ‘capture’ cannot be by an ‘authority’ other than by way of ‘prize’ (i.e., confiscation) was incorrect. As a matter of ordinary language, a vessel could be captured by an authority without force, such as in the case of unoccupied land or undefended goods (or the judge’s wife capturing his heart, as he put it). This is also consistent with clause 28 of the Shelltime 4 form and with the decision in The Captain Stefanos.
However, the judge held that the vessel was off-hire under clause 101, which he considered had the meaning given by the majority arbitrators:
5. The judge read the award as providing that the GoA had no geographical meaning in the context of such a time charterparty. He considered this to be binding on him and conclusive, despite the Owners’ argument that the vessel had been kidnapped outside of either of the two potentially applicable GoA areas (i.e., the JWC’s definition or the International Hydrographic Organisation’s definition);
6. He also considered that the purpose of clause 101 was to enable the Charterers to trade through the Suez Canal, which the Conwartime 2004 clause might otherwise have permitted the Owners to refuse to do on account of the risk of piracy associated with the consequent GoA transit, making her less commercially attractive. In his view, clause 101 allocated the risk for a GoA transit such that the Charterers pay the additional insurance premium and crew war bonus and the Owners bear the risk of delay from piracy as an immediate consequence of the GoA transit (rather than by reference to a particular geographical area). In this regard, he found no evidence in the award of the insurance premium or crew war bonus being tied to such an area and read the award as showing that the parties would have regarded the risk of piracy as extending beyond what the GoA might be understood to mean; and
7. Finally, the judge was not swayed by the fact that this answer would involve the vessel going off-hire or remaining on-hire for the same piracy kidnapping at the very same geographical point depending on whether it happened to have transited (or was about to transit) the GoA or whether it had come from (or was headed) elsewhere.
The judge’s decision on clause 49, on which the Owners were successful, will be welcomed by the shipping community: a contrary decision could have opened the floodgates to vessels being placed off-hire for surprising events such as bad weather or port congestion detaining them in port, which cannot be right.
The decision on clause 101, on the other hand, illustrates two points. First, that a charterparty clause may, as with any contract clause, be given a particular meaning depending on the other charterparty provisions and the factual circumstances that would have been known to people in the parties’ shoes at the date of the charterparty. And secondly, that in an appeal from an arbitration award on a point of law, the court will be limited by (and its decision may well be affected by) the evidence of such factual circumstances as is set out in the award.
Evangelos Catsambas is a Partner at Watson Farley & Williams, an international law firm based in UK capital London. Contact Mr Catsambas on +30 210 4557307 or by emailing email@example.com.
The Baltic Exchange will hold its next Freight Derivatives & Shipping Risk Management course on 1 and 2 July in Singapore. More information can be found here.
- Trade now more fluid in North America
On 17 May 2019, the US announced that it had reached agreements with Canada and Mexico to remove the US tariffs imposed on steel and aluminium products from those countries pursuant to Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as well as the retaliatory tariffs that Canada and Mexico have imposed on US goods.
The US now has published the final text of the two bilateral agreements, and all three countries have taken the actions required thereunder to terminate the Section 232 tariffs and retaliatory measures as of 20 May 2019. We provide an overview of the latest developments below.
On 18 May, the Office of the US Trade Representative published the full text of the bilateral agreements reached with Canada and Mexico to eliminate the Section 232 tariffs and retaliation. As shown below, the terms of the two agreements (which took the form of “joint statements” between the respective governments) are nearly identical:
1. The parties agreed that all Section 232 tariffs on Canadian and Mexican steel and aluminium products, as well as all tariffs Canada and Mexico imposed in retaliation for the Section 232 action, would be eliminated “no later than two days from the issuance” of the joint statements;
The specific actions that the parties will take under the new agreements, including to counteract transhipment and the importation of dumped and unfairly-subsidised goods, have not yet been determined
2. The parties will terminate all pending World Trade Organization litigation between them regarding the Section 232 action;
3. The parties will “implement [as-yet-determined] effective measures” to (1) “[p]revent the importation of aluminium and steel that is unfairly subsidized and/or sold at dumped prices”; and (2) “[p]revent the transhipment of aluminium and steel made outside of [Canada/Mexico] or the US to the other country”;
4. The US and Canada will establish an agreed-upon process for monitoring aluminium and steel trade between them, as will the US and Mexico. In monitoring for surges, “either country may treat products made with steel that is melted and poured in North America separately from products that are not”; and
5. In the event that imports of aluminium or steel products “surge meaningfully beyond historic volumes of trade over a period of time, with consideration of market share,” the importing country may request consultations with the exporting country. After such consultations, the importing party “may impose duties of 25% for steel and 10% for aluminium in respect to the individual product(s) where the surge took place”. If the importing party takes such action, the exporting country agrees to retaliate only in the affected sector (i.e., aluminium and aluminium-containing products or steel), thus ruling out “cross-retaliation” targeting other sectors. The agreement does not define the period of review or what would constitute a “meaningful” surge.
The agreement between the US and Mexico contains additional language providing that, in assessing whether there has been a surge in steel imports, each country will take into account certain quantities of imports needed for new investments. Specifically, “the US will consider that new investment in the US may require an additional 225,000 metric tons of billet from Mexico”, and “Mexico will consider that new investment in Mexico may require an additional 200,000 metric tons of cold-rolled steel from the US”, in assessing whether there has been a surge in steel imports.
In accordance with the bilateral agreements, President Trump on 19 March issued Proclamations providing that imports of steel and aluminium products from Canada and Mexico will no longer be subject to the Section 232 tariffs, effective with respect to goods entered for consumption or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on 20 May 2019. Any imports of steel or aluminium articles from Canada and Mexico that were admitted into a US foreign trade zone under “privileged foreign status” prior to 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on 20 May 2019 shall not be subject, upon entry for consumption made after 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on 20 May 2019, to the Section 232 tariffs.
The Proclamation states that the President has determined to terminate the Section 232 tariffs because the measures set forth in the new agreements with Canada and Mexico “will provide effective, long-term alternative means to address the contribution of these countries’ imports to the threatened impairment of the national security”. In light of this decision, the President also considered whether it is necessary to adjust (i.e., increase) the Section 232 tariffs as they apply to other countries, and determined that the appropriate course of action is to maintain the current tariff levels of 25 and 10% for steel and aluminium respectively.
Termination of retaliatory tariffs
In accordance with the bilateral agreements, Canada and Mexico have taken the following actions terminating their respective retaliatory tariffs on US goods:
Canada — on 19 May, Canada’s Border Services Agency issued Customs Notice 19-09, which states that “[e]ffective May 19, 2019, the United States Surtax Order (Steel and Aluminum): SOR/2018-152 and the United States Surtax Order (Other Goods): SOR/2018-153 imposing surtax on certain products originating in the US are repealed. Please note that importers will no longer be required to pay surtax pursuant to the above-referenced orders”. The two surtax orders were introduced by Canada in June 2018 in response to the US’ Section 232 action, and applied to certain steel, aluminium, and other products of the US with an annual import value of approximately $12.8bn.
Canadian Customs Notice 19-09 is available here; and
Mexico — on 20 May, Mexico’s Ministry of Economy published a Decree repealing the provisions of its 5 June 2018 Decree that imposed retaliatory tariffs on approximately $3.6bn in US exports, including steel products, pork, apples, potatoes and cheese, among other items. The Decree repealing Mexico’s retaliatory tariffs took effect on the date of its publication in Mexico’s Official Gazette (i.e., 20 May 2019).
The Decree repealing Mexico’s retaliatory tariffs is available here.
US business groups and Members of Congress of both parties have welcomed the new agreements to eliminate the Section 232 tariffs and retaliatory measures between the US, Canada, and Mexico. However, and as noted above, the specific actions that the parties will take under the new agreements, including to counteract transhipment and the importation of dumped and unfairly-subsidised goods, have not yet been determined. Moreover, the agreements contemplate the potential re-imposition of duties and retaliatory measures in response to import “surges” based on unspecified criteria. The US presidential proclamations terminating the Section 232 duties similarly contemplate the potential re-imposition of duties, stating that “[t]he US will monitor the implementation and effectiveness of these measures in addressing our national security needs, and [the President] may revisit this determination as appropriate”. Thus, despite the recent agreements, tensions related to steel and aluminium trade between the three countries could re-emerge in the future. Moreover, while some US business groups and Members of Congress have expressed hope that the agreements will provide new momentum towards US congressional approval of the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), influential congressional Democrats have reiterated in recent days that their primary concerns about the agreement (e.g., regarding labour, environment and enforcement provisions) remain unaddressed. Thus, despite the removal of the Section 232 tariffs and retaliation among the USMCA parties, it appears that the Agreement still faces an uphill battle in the US Congress.
Scott S. Lincicome, Brian Picone and Matt Solomon are Counsel, International Trade Analyst and Senior Trade Analyst respectively at White & Case, an international law firm based in New York City in the US. Contact the organisation here.
The Baltic Exchange will hold its next Advanced Freight Modelling & Trading course on 3 and 4 July in Singapore. More information can be found here.
- Fehr Cup: 26 June
This year’s Fehr Cup will be held on Wednesday 26 June at Surbiton Rackets and Fitness Club.
Tennis, Pimms, summer lunch with strawberries and cream, this fantastic networking opportunity for tennis players of all levels is a must in the shipping social calendar. Taking place on the grass courts of Surbiton and including lunch and tea in the clubhouse. The tournament is split into two parts, after an initial stage, more social players can enjoy an afternoon of relaxed open competition in the American Tournament, while the pros peel off to dual for the ‘Fehr Cup’ prize.
Any firm represented on the Baltic Exchange is eligible to enter one or more pairs. However, both players must be from the same member company, but the people do not have to be Baltic members themselves. Any player may be substituted but still needs to work for the same company.
Both male and female players are welcome, and the pairs can be in any combination. The matches will be the best of three sets in the main draw with a tie break at six-all in each set.
The games will be on grass (weather permitting) with play commencing at 10am sharp. The Club asks that players do not wear trainers or running shoes in order to protect the grass for the season.
The entry fee is £75 per pair, payable in advance. This fee includes the courts, coffee, lunch and afternoon tea for all players, as well as prizes for the placed teams in both tournaments. Catering for non-players is priced at £15 per head, but this also needs to be booked in advance.
The Tournament will be refereed by Perry Perera, with the American format arranged by Costas Mamarides, who will umpire the main final.
The points gained in this Tournament will go towards the David Bradley Cup. Pictures from last year’s event can be found here.
Useful information for those taking part
Address: Berrylands, Surbiton KT5 8JT tel 020 8399 1594
If you are coming by car, the parking is only on the Club side of the road in Berrylands or on the adjacent roads.
If you are coming by train, Surbiton Station has a faster, more frequent, service from Waterloo and is slightly nearer than Berrylands. It is a five-minute taxi ride or a 10-minute walk.
Further contact details
Tel: 07563 790273 or 020 8399 0398
Tel: 020 8391 0351
- Baltic Exchange CC fixtures this summer
The Baltic Exchange Cricket Club will be taking part in a number of 20 and 40 over fixtures this summer, these include:
Friday 7 June, 2pm start, 40 overs vs. Lloyds of London CC at Walton on Thames CC, KT12 1ET
Wed 12 June, 5.30pm start, 20 overs vs. SSY at Battersea Ironsides CC, SW17 0AW
Wed 26 June, 5.30pm start, 20 overs vs. Clarksons at Battersea Ironsides CC, SW17 0AW
Tues 2 July, 5.30pm start, 20 overs vs. Howe Robinson at Barnes CC, SW13 9QL
Thur 5 September, 10am start, City T20 tournament vs Lloyds & R.I.C.S. at Malden Wanderers CC, KT3 4LE
Those interested in taking part or interested in finding out more about Baltic CC are invited to get in touch with Will Halliday.
- YBA Golf Day 2019
The Young Baltic Association (YBA) met on 10 May for the annual YBA Golf Day. Paul Farren reports on the day’s play for Baltic Briefing.
It was another epic clash of brokers versus principals at Tyrrells Wood Golf Club. The principals most definitely wanted revenge after a narrow defeat in 2018. With Nick Perry at the helm once again he rounded an impressive squad which was always going to be a challenge for our band of brokers. Irrespective of the task that lay ahead the weather couldn’t have been better and the golf course was in tremendous condition. Although not a particularly long course, the setting within a valley meant there wasn’t a flat lie in sight and it always proves to be tricky track.
The morning session began with nine holes of stableford, with mixed principal and broker. The best three scores of the four-ball counting. The scores were all very respectable, however, the team of Nick Marns, David Evans, Ben Walker & Ed Preston won with relative ease (Mr Marns making an eagle and birdie which was extremely impressive). This was the sort of form that did not bode well for the broker team as we rolled into the afternoon. After a generous lunch the squads were raring to go and we expected a close contest. But as nine holes had passed it was clear to see the brokers were chasing their matches. To witness 20 handicappers, such Harry Wrey, hit the ball consistently over 300 yards was understandably demoralizing and the task was getting harder by the hole for the brokers. Unfortunately, the principals could not be stopped and they convincingly won the match 3 ½ to 1 ½
Hats off to the principals for putting on an impressive show, although I would like to slash the handicaps for next year!
It was once again a highly successful match and extremely well organised by Guy Bartleet. We had 24 players but would like more to partake next year as it’s becoming an ever more popular event. Thanks to all those that participated. Happy fairways to all golfers playing this season and we look forward to the summer meeting at Thorpeness.