Tbh I feel like the framing is pretty misleading. It’s more like, Rotterdam Bridge to be dismantled for new shipyard (which happens to be building a boat for Bezos at some point in the future)....
Tbh I feel like the framing is pretty misleading. It’s more like, Rotterdam Bridge to be dismantled for new shipyard (which happens to be building a boat for Bezos at some point in the future).
It’s pretty clear the Bezos name is being used as outrage bait. You can certainly make the argument both ways between historic bridge and new shipyard, but Bezos has little to do with it in the end.
The Rotterdam Bridge is being dismantled for ~2 weeks and then restored explicitly to allow Bezos' yacht through: A similar removal may be done in the future, but it isn't like there's some...
The three-masted ship will be so large that it cannot pass under De Heff, despite the bridge's 40 meters clearance.
He added that the city wouldn't change anything about the bridge. The middle part will be restored after the ship passes. According to Walravens, the municipality's promise not to mess with De Hef again is also a bit more nuanced. "Never say never. I see it as using the resources you have as efficiently as possible."
A similar removal may be done in the future, but it isn't like there's some permanent change or other clientele wanting 40+ meter yachts mentioned.
but Bezos has little to do with it in the end.
They could price in what temporarily removing part of a landmark would cost Bezos and he was comfortable paying for that imposition.
That's definitely a choice for the locals to make (and I'm not a huge landmark person, myself), but this story would not exist without Bezos. He could have:
Not wanted a 40+ meter yacht in the first place.
Chosen a shipyard capable of handling his request without changes.
Changed plans if there was pushback (e.g., from the historical society over what they felt was an agreement to not change it in 2017)
In remembrance of all the ridiculous stuff cities did to try to bid for the Amazon HQ, saying it's outrage bait may be deflecting from it just being more of an established pattern of behavior.
I disagree In the end, it’s basically the city’s decision whether or not to allow their shipyard to support larger clients. They decided yes, reading economic advantages from not just Bezos, but...
I disagree
Project leader Marcel Walravens said the decision is a pragmatic one. ‘It is about a ship with high masts which cannot pass through the bridge. The only alternative is to take out the middle section,’ he said.
In the end, it’s basically the city’s decision whether or not to allow their shipyard to support larger clients. They decided yes, reading economic advantages from not just Bezos, but all clientele that would order larger boats from their shipyard, outweigh the cultural heritage of that bridge.
Whether that’s worth it can be debated but it’s fundamentally that, it’s not a story about Bezos bulldozing his way through.
It's about Bezos having a yacht built that is so large that it requires dismantling a bridge while at the same time having full time workers pissing in bottles and living on food stamps. If this...
Now Oceano and Bezos have approached the council about temporarily dismantling the bridge at their cost.
It's about Bezos having a yacht built that is so large that it requires dismantling a bridge while at the same time having full time workers pissing in bottles and living on food stamps. If this was Jim Sinegal, co-founder of Costco, or Mark Cuban it would be a non-story. It becomes a story when one rich fuck gets his way by writing a check with one hand while beating down everyone else with the other.
Tbh I feel like the framing is pretty misleading. It’s more like, Rotterdam Bridge to be dismantled for new shipyard (which happens to be building a boat for Bezos at some point in the future).
It’s pretty clear the Bezos name is being used as outrage bait. You can certainly make the argument both ways between historic bridge and new shipyard, but Bezos has little to do with it in the end.
The Rotterdam Bridge is being dismantled for ~2 weeks and then restored explicitly to allow Bezos' yacht through:
A similar removal may be done in the future, but it isn't like there's some permanent change or other clientele wanting 40+ meter yachts mentioned.
They could price in what temporarily removing part of a landmark would cost Bezos and he was comfortable paying for that imposition.
That's definitely a choice for the locals to make (and I'm not a huge landmark person, myself), but this story would not exist without Bezos. He could have:
In remembrance of all the ridiculous stuff cities did to try to bid for the Amazon HQ, saying it's outrage bait may be deflecting from it just being more of an established pattern of behavior.
Disagree.
I disagree
In the end, it’s basically the city’s decision whether or not to allow their shipyard to support larger clients. They decided yes, reading economic advantages from not just Bezos, but all clientele that would order larger boats from their shipyard, outweigh the cultural heritage of that bridge.
Whether that’s worth it can be debated but it’s fundamentally that, it’s not a story about Bezos bulldozing his way through.
Please don't repeat the clickbait... The story is not about Jeff Bezos' yacht at all, it's about ship manufacturing.
It's about Bezos having a yacht built that is so large that it requires dismantling a bridge while at the same time having full time workers pissing in bottles and living on food stamps. If this was Jim Sinegal, co-founder of Costco, or Mark Cuban it would be a non-story. It becomes a story when one rich fuck gets his way by writing a check with one hand while beating down everyone else with the other.