This Megaproject Could END Singapore's Maritime Dominance

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 22 ส.ค. 2024
  • Click here for more videos about Singapore: • Slice of Singapore
    Singapore has long reigned as the undisputed global hub port. Yet, the winds of change whisper of Thailand's audacious land bridge megaproject, a potential game-changer that could alter the tides for Singapore. As this colossal endeavour charts a new trade route, bypassing Singapore's port, the age-old maritime giant faces an uncertain future. Will the land bridge script a new era, relegating Singapore to history, or will the city-state's maritime legacy stand resilient?
    Buy us a cup of coffee (or 2 so we don't have to share): bmc.link/world...
    TRAVEL INSURANCE
    ► FWD Travel Insurance (Free Airalo eSIM - 3GB data): bit.ly/FWD_Travel
    CREDIT CARDS
    ► OCBC 365 Credit Card Promo (free $320): bit.ly/OCBC-365
    ► OCBC Titanium Rewards Credit Card Promo (free $250): bit.ly/OCBC_CC
    ONLINE STOCK BROKERAGE
    ► WeBull Promotion (Free $80): bit.ly/webull_sg
    ► Tiger Brokers Promotion (Free $80): bit.ly/TigerBr...
    VPN
    ► NordVPN: go.nordvpn.net...
    If your business is keen to do a brand sponsorship, please contact worldknowmore@gmail.com.
    DISCLAIMER:
    Some of the links in this video/description may be affiliate links. That means, if you click on one of the links and make a purchase, I may receive a commission (at no extra charge to you).

ความคิดเห็น • 464

  • @andyng8579
    @andyng8579 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +46

    Just stop talking about it and do it already. My Singaporean ears are falling off from decades of hearing about one project or other and how we are doomed. We were supposed to be doomed from the day we became a country.

    • @user-vq3yx1tr1r
      @user-vq3yx1tr1r 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      There are too many "doomsday" theorists out there. Overestimating oneself and underestimating small nations.

    • @kongakau5058
      @kongakau5058 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Dont be arrogant. Previouslt, indo wasnt moving. Now, it is.
      - not an indonesian-

    • @eesiankoh4681
      @eesiankoh4681 11 วันที่ผ่านมา

      ...and yet we survived! 😊

  • @user-br9eg8nj7l
    @user-br9eg8nj7l 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +42

    You have forgotten Oil Tankers, makes no sense as unloading takes 24 hours and loading takes 24 hours ..... might as well go via Singapore ...
    Also having bunkering, ship repair facilities in Singapore is a big plus ..... crew changes in Singapore as well ..... the fees that Thailand would need charge would make it not viable ...

    • @ssrae-2229
      @ssrae-2229 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      the COUNTRY doing this is only CHINA and Malaysia - both doing Trade among themselves .. the Chinese ships .tankers will do U-turn and returns to the Wests with Chinese goods loaded at this M'sian ports :

    • @danielc2701
      @danielc2701 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      @@ssrae-2229 Efficiency also matters. Indonesia also has a similar port called Tunjong Pirok, it's the alternative port to Singapore for vessels past Malaccamax but ships that can help it prefer Singapore because it takes 6 days to unload a ship compared to 1 day in Singapore. This matters a lot to shipowners because one day sitting in port is one day they are not moving goods for their pay.

  • @johnmaris1582
    @johnmaris1582 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +42

    Port industry is one of many business Singapore developed. Singapore are competitive in other aspect like finance.

    • @vennsim71
      @vennsim71 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

      Finance, which Singapore has a firm stake on it. Relatively corruption free, bridge of east and west, has a huge number of foreign entities to service upon, good enforcement of law and AML, makes it a good finance hub. Now shipping and finance are pretty interwined and integrated

    • @RUHappyATM
      @RUHappyATM 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Yes, like taking taxes that should have been paid in the home countries.
      Ireland and Holland have the Double Irish with a Dutch sandwich.
      What is SIN's called?

    • @vennsim71
      @vennsim71 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@RUHappyATM like which home country in your opinion?

    • @RUHappyATM
      @RUHappyATM 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@vennsim71
      IMHO, if a company makes a sale in a country, it must pay taxes on the profit generated in that country, not shift the profit to a low taxation country.
      Back in my uni days, the first thing I learnt in year 1 was transfer pricing.
      Fancy that.

    • @lzh4950
      @lzh4950 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@RUHappyATM Recently there was an editorial in Singapore's newspapers that suggested that perhaps Western countries should have more political courage to pare back on welfare spending, then they wouldn't worry so much that their taxes are higher than offshore countries that their companies would want to offshore to

  • @allentoh7032
    @allentoh7032 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +21

    Good luck in trying to recoup the initial investment and on top of this, Thailand still need to build power and industrial infrastructure

  • @ganboonmeng5370
    @ganboonmeng5370 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +35

    1) SINGAPORE IS S TRANSHIPMENT HUB...2) MANY SHIPS COME FOR BUNKER AND SUPPLYING..

    • @awjames1121
      @awjames1121 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Agrees

  • @lausze8628
    @lausze8628 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +14

    PLEASE DO YR RESEARCH BEFORE POSTING YR VIDEOS...
    NO.1---- COST AND TIME ONLY ONLY REDUCE SOOOO LITTLE... AND WASTE OF MONEY AND TIME

    • @worldknowmore
      @worldknowmore  9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Hi there, thank you for the comment. You may have missed it but we actually highlighted that the actual time and cost savings from the project could in reality be overestimated (12:59). Do watch the video till the end if you did not have the chance to do so. Hopefully, we would be able to change your mind about our research efforts. Cheers!

    • @lausze8628
      @lausze8628 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      @@worldknowmore i dont even want to see the video after u put my pm face look so sad

  • @louiselai6289
    @louiselai6289 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +33

    I am just imagining 100s of containers being lifted and put on trucks and sending them across to the other side of the the peninsular, is it sustainable? how about cost efficiency?

    • @worldknowmore
      @worldknowmore  9 หลายเดือนก่อน +14

      Agreed! So the perceived time and cost savings would be negated eventually, which was something that we highlighted in the video. Cheers!

    • @mic5391
      @mic5391 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      That’s why I proposed a flying bridge! Lol😂! Upfront investment cost is 500million usd!

    • @katong1953
      @katong1953 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      @louiselai. You are right. Loading up and unloading cargo is inefficient, and a waste of time.

    • @hockchweeong9883
      @hockchweeong9883 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      @katong1953
      It Is Not Only The Loading And Unloading Of Cargo, Will It Involved 2 Charges ???

    • @seequincy5254
      @seequincy5254 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Knowing it is NOT for costs and efficiency purposes, so WHAT is the motive of China investing a BIG STAKE in such a project? Obviously - ankling a control point in Malacca Strait.

  • @ymwanfk
    @ymwanfk 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +33

    Logistics is more than just physical passage. It also includes associated infrastructure, processing, custom clearance - quick, secure n non corrupt practices - not hv to make 'special payments' to expedite.

  • @user-br9eg8nj7l
    @user-br9eg8nj7l 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +25

    You will also need ships available on both sides of Thailand which will reduce per ton carried and will require more ships ...

    • @danielc2701
      @danielc2701 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      And container trucks. A single ship carries on average 6,400 TEUs (Twenty Foot Equivalent Units, those "containers" you see on trucks/ships). So to ship ONE shipload of containers across land, you need 6,400 trailer trucks. "Traffic Jam" isn't even going to come close to what is going to happen when you start servicing tens or hundreds of ships at once.

  • @vicmigo
    @vicmigo 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +61

    Singapore's leaders have this in their calculation when they decided to move everything to one state of the art mega port in Tuas. So, Singapore will still be the port of choice in the distance future regardless of what happening up north

    • @ViolentCabbage-ym7ko
      @ViolentCabbage-ym7ko 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

      Singapore's ports are at peak efficiency. I doubt a mega project will attract more ships when there's a shortcut that saves 15% of the journey via Malacca straits

    • @chriswong9158
      @chriswong9158 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      @@ViolentCabbage-ym7ko Keep on dreaming for as soon as the Mega Project is completed in Thailand, 60% of Straits of Malacca traffic will stop, not due to S'pore port but S'pore relationship with U.S.A. For not at issue USA.

    • @chriswong9158
      @chriswong9158 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      You think... Underlining of all business done by Chinese is "relationship", even in S'pore. At issue S'pore relation USA

    • @yellowbird1170
      @yellowbird1170 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      As long as Singapore is an ally aka puppet of USA, China will divert traffic to Malaysia and Thailand. China also has shares in both these projects in Thailand and Malaysia, therefore it makes even more sense

    • @lzh4950
      @lzh4950 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@ViolentCabbage-ym7ko A megaport would merge together Singapore's 3-4 existing ports & save on the time needed to get container trucks to transport containers between ports, for containers that need to be transshipped between ships docked at different ports. Imagine though if the container truck operators had lobbied against the megaport for fear of losing business!

  • @Tringapore-Singapore
    @Tringapore-Singapore 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +46

    I’m sure Singapore’s smart leaders will finger a way on how to solve this problem

    • @Tringapore-Singapore
      @Tringapore-Singapore 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +15

      Singapore has very smart leaders if you don’t know

    • @worldknowmore
      @worldknowmore  9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      Thank you for the comment. We are certainly impressed with Singapore’s governance and we’ve no doubt that the government of the day would address the problem if the project does eventually pose a threat, which at this stage is still uncertain. Cheers!

    • @aaabbb-ff1sp
      @aaabbb-ff1sp 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      😂😂😂

    • @beakermeepmeep
      @beakermeepmeep 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Already has. Singapore opined that it can't stop others from investing on infrastructure, & a ITM roadmap (blueprints to strategize 23 local industries for the future) was launched in 2018 for the maritime sector. The outcome is the futuristic Tuas Megaport, which will make it an even more attractive one-stop global hub in the 2040s. Construction is past halfway done, all existing terminals will relocate to the western end in the coming years, & the entire coastline will transform into urban living (Greater Southern Waterfront).
      As for the landbridge proposal, it's notably aimed at competing only on transshipment, without elaborating on other necessities (bunkering, repairs, financing/insurance/legal services, etc.) at efficiency & accessibility levels that can not only match Singapore's, but also 14th-ranked Port Klang & 16th-ranked Tanjung Pelepas. Thailand's current best is 19th-ranked Laem Chabang, yet their conceit is to turn Chumphon & Ranong immediately into Top 6 ports in handling capacity, something that will take decades to bear fruit after completion.
      The Kra Canal proposal is even more unsubstantial, not only due to costs, environmental & security concerns, but also the likelihood of it ultimately ending up as a foreign concession given what happened historically to the Suez & Panama Canals. Thailand will immediately lose its cherished neutrality, for starters. The failed Nicaragua Canal plan last decade is also a timely reminder, after China declined to bail them out partly because it is regionally in the USA's backyard.

    • @Tringapore-Singapore
      @Tringapore-Singapore 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@worldknowmore Cheers !

  • @gabrielgoh375
    @gabrielgoh375 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Clickbait video. A lot of the shipments are oil shipments from the Middle East to China, Japan, and Korea. So if this land bridge is suppose to service these tankers, Ranong will need to have storage or oil, and there will need to be pipelines from Ranong to Chumphon. Otherwise, oil tankers/supertankers cannot be served by this land bridge. Singapore is not just a transshipment port. There is also bunkering services. For Ranong and Chumphon to truly replace Singapore, those ports will need to build up their bunkering facilities to cope with the increase shipping. Then there is the logistics of "loadmastering". When container ships have hundreds if not thousands of containers, it is not just a simple matter of loading the containers onto the ship. When Johor opened their Port of Tanjong Pelapas to compete with Singapore, they did managed to take away some of our shipping lines. How are they doing now? The anecdotes from those ships was that the loadmaster at the port were inexperienced, and inefficient. When a ship leaves Singapore port to the next destination, when they get there, the containers to be offloaded is easily accessible. When a ship leaves PTP to the next destination, the container to be offloaded is under many other containers, necessitating the extraneous offloading of other containers to gain access to the containers to be offloaded. This is implied in the video.
    So after spending billions to build this land bridge, Thailand will find that they must also build bunkering facilities, and if they want to serve the super-tankers and the Very Large Crude Carriers, they will need to have oil storage and pipelines at their ports. And their loadmasters will need to learn how to offload and load ships in the most efficient manner. And all the extra facilities will add billions to the costs.
    And when it is all ready, they will have to worry about the separatist rebels in the South who will view all these expensive new facilities as potential ransom or terrorist targets.

  • @tanchye1720
    @tanchye1720 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +36

    ‘Land Bridge’
    Whose silly idea?
    1. You got to construct 2 container ports, one on each sides of the peninsula.
    2. You have to unload on one side of the port and reload on the other side.
    3. Containers ports have many, many facets, distributions, world connections. efficiencies, etc. NOT just loading & unloading.
    4. When the highway got flooded, which is very common in these part of Thailand, the whole operation will comes to a jam & standstill.
    5. Singapore ports are fully Al operated and super efficient and it will be silly to spent billions of dollars to compete with the well established Singapore ports.
    It’s liken to cutting its own throat.

    • @vennsim71
      @vennsim71 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      One would need a matured finance industry to back the shipping industry these days. Also, it would massively help to have a big population of international language literate folks to facilitate the industries. Massive corruption on the ground in Thailand may work against them too. If everyone wants a cut, down to the cargo truck drivers, the project is best not even considered from the onset

    • @tanchye1720
      @tanchye1720 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@vennsim71
      Yeah. That’s another reasons.

    • @user-ct1mt6gk1k
      @user-ct1mt6gk1k 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ขอบคุณสำหรับความกังวลในปัญหาต่างๆ
      แต่..มันก็เป็นความท้าทายให้ประเทศไทย ในการแก้ไขปัญหาเพื่อก้าวข้ามอุปสรรคต่างๆ ไปสู่ความสำเร็จ
      เราไม่คิดแข่งขันกับสิงคโปร์ หรือชาติต่างๆ
      แต่เราขอเป็นอีกหนึ่งทางเลือกในการขนส่งสินค้าระหว่างประเทศเท่านั้นเอง

    • @ctanky
      @ctanky 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Also, not to mention needs two different ships at each end. What about damage, missing, stolen cargo during transfer and management efficiency, etc, etc.

    • @vennsim71
      @vennsim71 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      The costs and logistics to operate one loading ship and another unloading ship, warehousing on both ports either side, land freight from point to point, twice the insurance… etc. doesn’t make sense at all.
      And the average Thai guy can’t write or read international languages such as English, or regional main language such as Mandarin, the red tape bound to happen is just going to be insane. And good luck for missing cargo. Ain’t going to find.

  • @seequincy5254
    @seequincy5254 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    Whatever comments here, by portraying PM Lee with the title: GAME OVER, ones can easily read the minds of the host of this video.

  • @maxjek2374
    @maxjek2374 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +61

    Singapore’s port is a free port. Meaning that cargo ships can berth there for free. Singapore’s economy is also well diversified.

    • @seanlee9377
      @seanlee9377 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      Bulk of Singapore wealth come from China

    • @user-vq3yx1tr1r
      @user-vq3yx1tr1r 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

      @seanlee9377 How so? Would you like to elaborate? It's amusing to see people take credit for the success of others.

    • @richardho8283
      @richardho8283 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      Your idea of “Freeport” not seems accurate ...

    • @Hs5687
      @Hs5687 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

      Since When “ Free Port “ means “ Berth for Free “ … Hilarious 😂

    • @drphilipk
      @drphilipk 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +12

      They do not berth for free! And that is not the definition of a free port of which none really truly exist any more. In fact the PSA makes a billion dollars a day charging tolls and services to ships berthing as well as passing through. It's only free in that the order and freedom of navigation was first underwritten by the British and now American Order. And no it is not diversified. Vast sums come from excessive land sale prices, truly high "enforced" savings in the form of high CPF, COE and multiple tariffs and stamp duties. Many of the HQs and industries are all there for the free or no tax, government free money schemes. In other words they are expensive government job creation schemes. A case in point is the money losing semiconductor industry in Singapore. In other words except tremendous foreign inflows of capital, much of the economy is really a fake highest in the world GDP/capita like that of a height of a leprechaun.

  • @NC000C
    @NC000C 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +22

    Singapore should be concerned but not be overly bothered or distracted bythe landbridge. Good luck to the Thais!

    • @t.x.r.m.1577
      @t.x.r.m.1577 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +12

      Understand from other netizens that you are a Taiwanese, regardless of the possibility of building a canal or a landbridge is of minimal concern to Singapore, no one bothers about this at all. What Singaporeans or even the whole world is concerned with is the highly possible war along the Taiwan Strait between PRC and ROC, let's hope that that will never ever happen.

  • @mkang666
    @mkang666 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    This is not the first time similar threat surfaced but until 2023 Singapore Port still is surviving. So don't open your champagne too early.

  • @kokkiongang5965
    @kokkiongang5965 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +13

    Biggest issue is real ROI

  • @lascavel
    @lascavel 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    😆
    Assuming unloading and reloading containers takes the same amount of time, and the train travels at a constant speed of 50 km/h, it would take approximately 1501.8 hours to unload 15000 containers onto a train, traverse 90 km, and reload the containers back into a ship.
    Here's the breakdown:
    * Unloading time: 15000 containers / 20 containers/hour = 750 hours
    * Travel time: 90 km / 50 km/h = 1.8 hours
    * Reloading time: 750 hours
    * Total time: 750 hours + 1.8 hours + 750 hours = 1501.8 hours
    Since there are 24 hours in a day, 1501.8 hours.
    Since there are 15,000 containers to be transported, the number of trips required would be 15,000 containers / 2,000 containers/trip = 7.5 round trips to complete the transportation of 15,000 containers
    Since there are 24 hours in a day, 1501.8 hours is equal to 62.575 days.

  • @mimigaga2426
    @mimigaga2426 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    Save 4 days....enroute e land bridge takes much longer days...manhours etc...

    • @user-vq3yx1tr1r
      @user-vq3yx1tr1r 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Money is derived from time and manpower, which ultimately leads to a higher cost.

  • @jqwoo
    @jqwoo 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    SG is not solely depending on seaport only, there are other industries to support SG economics. Value added services are the keys to sustain economics. Moreover, the saving of a few hundred nautical miles vs the cost of usage may prevail.

    • @peterchin6165
      @peterchin6165 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Once the port dominance goes everything else follows!😢

  • @ctwpoco-oy6wu
    @ctwpoco-oy6wu 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +17

    I don't think it's a bad thing. More competition means that shipping companies will have more choices. The land bridge may force Singapore to become more innovative and come up creative solutions. The land bridge will also affect Malaysia.

    • @kishaniramsey5913
      @kishaniramsey5913 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Malaysia had built FTZ up north for sometime already. Hopefully it will help the poorer northern states.

    • @charleschin6497
      @charleschin6497 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      the advantage for thailand is too significant, the percentage of contribution from shipping have to be further reduced for countries affected and they have to move to other fields

    • @bennysamuelkoh9463
      @bennysamuelkoh9463 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@charleschin6497
      The 14 SG Billion Tuas Mega Port construction is in progress and have taken into consideration of such a competition into the next 2O yrs. SG is not worried and the answer is " bring it on " !!
      Phase I already completed

    • @danielc2701
      @danielc2701 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@kishaniramsey5913 Doubtful. Federal taxes for Malaysia take up 94% of the income to the states so even if they did earn money, Putrajaya would just take most of it away.

    • @justintay4044
      @justintay4044 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      if thailand can magically transport all the containers on a container vessel via train in a shorter time then yes, but it is just logistically and physically impossible

  • @ifuknjk
    @ifuknjk 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

    if it proceeds it will take 10 years 2 construct n 4/5 yrs 2 operate...u cannot build sg's location ....johor tried n failed miserably....middle east also tried.....sg is safe..... the new is not always better....just another pipe dream...like SIA or airport...no matter how much money they poured into copying sg they can't

  • @kadirmuhaideenmohamedhussa3679
    @kadirmuhaideenmohamedhussa3679 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +40

    Singapore port operations and transshipment capability has grown tremendously and knowing how meticulously it works its sum, it would have been all accounted for. Not to sound or be complacent, Singapore still has at least 2-year advantage over any rival port capacity. So Singapore will not rest on its laurels but be fully prepared to overcome all challenges.

    • @kadirmuhaideenmohamedhussa3679
      @kadirmuhaideenmohamedhussa3679 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +16

      Sorry it should have been a 25-year advantage and not 2-year advantage, sorry for the typo error.

    • @besottedbelovedlovely2560
      @besottedbelovedlovely2560 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Yup we Had gone thru alots..there's no hardships tht we can't endure...
      As we r used to Expensive living n adapted e cost..

    • @user-vq3yx1tr1r
      @user-vq3yx1tr1r 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      @besottedbelovedlovely2560 Exactly! Failure won't stop us, we will come back stronger and better. The country was built without a lot of resources by our forefathers and I am confident that the Singaporeans who are now more educated and knowledgeable will be able to do just as well and even better.

    • @chriswong9158
      @chriswong9158 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      That sound good, but this story (above) fail to mention the Thailand partnership in the Mega Project: China PRC.
      As soon as the project is finish, guess how Thailand will attract client, it will not, for China PRC will direct once to S'pore port to Thailand thru their relationship in BRICS+6, US Sanction partners, OEM supply chain partners, etc...
      Underlining issue, avoid USA via S'pore asset.

    • @chriswong9158
      @chriswong9158 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@kadirmuhaideenmohamedhussa3679 with partner China PRC, that was also said of China's space program, chip manufacturing, electric delivery system, rail system, BRI and etc... With right partner, the sky is the limit

  • @user-jd4tn7yo5f
    @user-jd4tn7yo5f 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    Whoever decide on this route must be crazy. Administration and transfer is crazy, I wouldn’t wan to lose my shipment along the way and pay compensation besides Thailand isn’t the most efficient Govt and who is gonna compensate me for the delay?

    • @vennsim71
      @vennsim71 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Even the dockers and truckers will ask for bribes to get you your shipments makes it even crazier. Pay or you don’t get your stuffs 😂

  • @lepinearbres5299
    @lepinearbres5299 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +22

    This Thailand route project isn't a replacement but rather a relief route in the event of political castration pressure from the US. Obviously, this route will definitely be preferred by time-sensitive goods.

    • @mic5391
      @mic5391 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Time-sensitive products can use my fly bridge!

    • @meganfoxbf
      @meganfoxbf 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thailand quickly take loan from China , don't delay before Thailand government change again. take the money first

    • @user-vq3yx1tr1r
      @user-vq3yx1tr1r 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      @meganfoxbf Take the money and be overburdened with crippling debt?

  • @keniiwonga12345
    @keniiwonga12345 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    Making a mountain out of a molehill to earn TH-cam money.

  • @p.b.p.9095
    @p.b.p.9095 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +24

    As far as I can remember, many years back before the pre-Covid days, CN and MY have already cooperated in 2 major projects that is of similar purpose to that of the TH landbridge. The Melaka Gateway megaport built on several reclaimed land and the ECRL railway link between Port Klang in the west coast to Kota Baru in the east coast. Not sure whether the project is still ongoing or how is the progress, not much news nowadays.

    • @skwong3686
      @skwong3686 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Ecrl on going 2027 jan operational

    • @p.b.p.9095
      @p.b.p.9095 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@skwong3686 Yes just checked, ECRL initial phase projected to be operational in Jan27.

    • @mic5391
      @mic5391 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      ECRL vs thailand land bridge! Fight!

    • @seequincy5254
      @seequincy5254 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@skwong3686wait and see.

    • @danielc2701
      @danielc2701 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Railway is still on but the Melaka one was cancelled.

  • @cedricho5937
    @cedricho5937 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    Every SEA countries wanted to try/built somethings to batter/better us. Be it airport, sea port whatever, they will fail no matter what. People will still come to SG because of our governance, integrity etc etc.

    • @user-vq3yx1tr1r
      @user-vq3yx1tr1r 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      Fierce competitions only help us break barriers and improve.

  • @yippohonn1644
    @yippohonn1644 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    Sincerely wish this project a success as this is not a zero sum venture. The project will upgrade Thailand with more jobs and improve their standard of living with ASEAN.

    • @vennsim71
      @vennsim71 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      The standard of living for their King probably… he needs to upkeep his glamorous lifestyle

  • @lirenzeng592
    @lirenzeng592 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

    I think the real challenge is to the inflation of product mainly to Singapore and Malaysia, and parts of Indonesia. These countries have benefitted from the large flow of vessels across their sea, and hence they have great access to goods from the World at very affordable prices, due to fixed sea trade routes that save a lot of cost in the supply chain.
    However, I do not believe that the Kra Canal will ever be built, unless there is a drastic political and population change within Thailand. The Kra Canal has been proposed for 400+ years. It is not about economic, environmental or other concern, but largely a geopolitical concern. South Thailand is Muslim majority in contrast to the Buddhist majority of the rest of Thailand, and this has not change for hundreds of years, and not likely to change. If Kra Canal is really created, it will be geographic separation of South Thailand and all political leadership has to risk losing that territory in future.

    • @madmaxtthunder967
      @madmaxtthunder967 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Next 20 years will see major geopolitical shift everywhere so will be interesting to see how this will pan out. Like what you said, only drastic changes will make this Kra canal a possibility. otherwise, it will just be another interesting topic that gets stirred up now and then.

  • @BlackForesterSUV
    @BlackForesterSUV 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +34

    Let's see. Based on the historical incidences, I'm sure Singapore has already got this calculated. They are even in the Artic Council as a participating member, as shipping lines may route via the Northern Artic in maybe 15 to 30 years time. They will somewhat find a niche space to place.

    • @54living
      @54living 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      LOL! PRC's first choice is passing through western Burma's Arakan area to western China Kunming with railway route. Even passing through Thai can't reach to western China of Kunming but to southern China. From south to west, have to shift all goods with land route again. See the world map.

    • @chriswong9158
      @chriswong9158 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      How much once said by Tangier before but after the Suez Canal was build, guess their calculation did not see that.

  • @henrylau116
    @henrylau116 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

    Just put some numbers into perspective, you will know whether this is viable or not....... Take a container ship with 100 TEUs, how long to take to unload this 100TEUs to 100 trucks, and then, how long it takes to transfer from East port to the West port by road via trucks, and how long it takes to load this 100TEUs at West port. This is just one container ship. I guess in SG, there will be a few of this container ships unloading or loading at the same time, with more than 100 TEUs per ship. Just think, it is really cost and time effective ???

    • @d.c.347
      @d.c.347 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      👌👍👌👍

  • @rogerlim6065
    @rogerlim6065 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +28

    This topic has been debated and review over the past 100years. Kra Canal was initially proposed since 1677. This is not just creating the canal, its more on geopolitical impact on Thailand and countries around this canal. We can't stop others from making this canal but what singapore can do it to make our port more efficient and cost effective vs the canal route.

    • @chrislee528
      @chrislee528 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Without a canal how can ships travel across Thailand ? If a canal is also built why still call it a land bridge project and not a CANAL project.How is land bridge project different from Kra Canal project apart from obvious length of route ? Why must ships unload cargo at one end only to reload cargo at the other end before continuing their journey ? More questions than answers given in video.

    • @kohyangchi4307
      @kohyangchi4307 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      No Matter What Singapore Has Up Its Sleeves ,
      They CANNOT Mitigate The Advantages That The Kra Canal Offers and The Joint China Thai Development Of A Brand New Seaport In Thailand . Can Singapore Still Remain The Richest Country In The World After This ? 😬
      Your Answer Is As G👀D As Mine 😭💦💦☔

    • @ViolentCabbage-ym7ko
      @ViolentCabbage-ym7ko 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      We are talking about land bridge here, not kra canal. They are probably building a highway or a railway to connect the western and eastern ports of Thailand

    • @dtang3288
      @dtang3288 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@kohyangchi4307Corruption free, efficient and effective workers, top notch facilities etc... No worries mate, Singapore will survive and continue to soar.

    • @chriswong9158
      @chriswong9158 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Yes, but two key that did not exist that will make the project go thru. (1) No intern War and (2) China PRC (BRI)
      When finish, all members of BRICS+ and US Sanction Nations will surely use this new route as standard, that's 70% of Worldwide.

  • @laicheetian4737
    @laicheetian4737 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +12

    Not only affects singapore but malaysia ports such as port klang, penang, pasir gudang will also be affected tremendously.

    • @razifandri8000
      @razifandri8000 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      I don't think Malaysian ports will be affected tremendously due to this or that. Instead it will be business as usual at our ports,
      Whether a canal or a land bridge, the fact remains that we have to export our products and import our needs through our ports. That being the case, I simply wonder how our ports will be affected tremendously.

    • @mic5391
      @mic5391 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@razifandri8000 Those shipping companies only wanted to do biz with prc! hahahahahahahahahaha!

    • @razifandri8000
      @razifandri8000 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@mic5391 You're right, bro. Now is the dawn of PRC. 🙏

    • @seequincy5254
      @seequincy5254 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      ​@@razifandri8000game is over.

  • @amadishah
    @amadishah 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

    Doubt it can materialized... building two new mega ports

    • @allwinyay6085
      @allwinyay6085 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Why is India involved suddenly. If current proposal is approved China will be the main contractor and would presumably help in smooth flow of traffic etc because China has experience in Port management.

  • @lunazero433
    @lunazero433 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +11

    Even if everything works perfectly for Thailand and they do increase their GDP by 5%... that will only last until putin is able to start the artic route and Thailand will immediately lose most of the profits... to the point where what little money they make may not even be enough to cover the cost of maintaining the landbridge. and Thailand may not have even fully paid their debt by the time that happens.

  • @hoti3960
    @hoti3960 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +14

    Life is never a smooth ride. Any kind of challenges can only be welcome by Singaproe and Singapore can only continue to work even harder to find out a way to survive or continue to prosper. May the mega project brings prosperity and peace to the region.

    • @wongnick9283
      @wongnick9283 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      How do singapore survive and do well for so many years despite a lack of natural resources? It is the people, the leaders, the education, the adaptability, the willingness to strive/work hard, etc. WE will turn a disadvantage into motivation and see every crisis as an opportunity.😊

  • @HighMojo
    @HighMojo 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    The Kra Canal will be paid passage, while the Malacca strait is free passage.
    You can't beat free.

  • @neutraluser4019
    @neutraluser4019 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    😅 this topic has been discussed like more than 2 decades and it would keep going for next 2 decades😅

  • @MrDebmey
    @MrDebmey 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    If this road does take off which I think it would not, all Singapore needs to do is lower bunkering cost by 20% n the project will turn into a white elephant in no time

  • @gopalklumpurgopal4060
    @gopalklumpurgopal4060 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    A pipe dream for more than 150 years! The first hurdle is land aquisation. If the preliminary planning, approvals, EIA, routing etc are in place. Can that take place without massive under table money. Then the financing: who, what, when & from where? Expect big fight from locals all along the route. Its already an insurrection prone area. Far from Bangkok they're not known to toe the line. If at all its built can't handle bulk cargoes like ores & grains! O&G cargoes can't be handled either! Other details stated by many other commenters here! One not stated is Singapore port allows easy diversion of cargoes in case goods cannot be delivered. Like when China decided to ban Australia iron ore. Cargo was diverted at S'pore. Plus ships can anchor for months around the port. It happened when oil prices were fluctuating. Oil tankers were moored all around the island in a floating storage. Crews were still able to be rotated. Maintenance was available. Security was good. These are some of the hidden advantages no Isthmus of Kra route can provide!

  • @user-tl1vx8yg8l
    @user-tl1vx8yg8l 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    Very old idea ... Not feasible... before, now and in future

  • @JIANGTG
    @JIANGTG 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    Singapore is preparing to overcome all kinds of internal and external challenges , with its effective and clean government leadership and the strong support of its people ....

    • @54living
      @54living 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Really??? Get water first.

    • @chriswong9158
      @chriswong9158 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Really? Try this, easy come, easy go. gone is the transshipment point to Thailand, reason S'pore relation with USA. ask!

  • @ctanky
    @ctanky 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Load/unload & load/unload just imagine the trouble/time/manpower involved, not to mention the potential damages to the cargos. If Thailand is so good, then they would not need to depend on tourism so much. Let's see how this project would pan out.

  • @Pegasus8964
    @Pegasus8964 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    the land bridge to over take Singapore is easier said than done. If you're a businessman who needs to ship your goods from country A to country B , You have to consider the costs, time taken, efficiency of the port, and ultimately your goods being safety shipped to your customers. A land bridge involved two additional loading and unloading plus almost perfect timing and scheduling of moving the goods from port x to port y in Thailand. Does Thailand Port authority have the proven skill and efficiency to get this done ????

  • @user-br9eg8nj7l
    @user-br9eg8nj7l 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    In addition how would you transport the oil across ? Via pipe lines ? ..... crude and fuel oil is dirty (black) and Gasoil, Diesel oil is Clean .... Jet Fuel needs stainless steel pipes or it will be contaminated ..... if you exclude Oil Tankers that from the land bridge .... the whole project makes no sense at all if its only for container ships and general cargo ..... keep on dreaming Thailand ......

  • @yirenvivianwang7978
    @yirenvivianwang7978 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Singapore government already
    forseen their future for 50 years.
    I had confidence in our government.

  • @MG-rh4zo
    @MG-rh4zo 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Just a whispers imho. This is a vintage ambition of a new statesman for as long as I can remember.

  • @bobt2113
    @bobt2113 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    SG is ready to face any challenges ahead. Healthy competition is encouraged

  • @maxp670
    @maxp670 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    The efficiency of unloading and transporting 90km and loading up has logistics night mare cost , insurance does not save the few days costs unlike the Panama canal that save 2 weeks

  • @davidlfm777
    @davidlfm777 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +13

    This proposal has been around for many decades. Given Thailand economic and political instability. It will be a very difficult project for Thailand to undertake. The canal to be dig will have to be wide and only one vessel can move in a single lane. May result in a very long queue and the saving time is only 4 days of journey, not much if compare with Suez Canal or Panama Canal.

    • @jjsamuelgunn1136
      @jjsamuelgunn1136 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      it's a land bridge, not a canal, meaning it's either by road or rail. it will have problems of its own as well.

  • @midnight-choochoo
    @midnight-choochoo 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    It is not impossible to build this mega project if Thailand finds funding. Depending on the source of funding, some countries would not use it and few would use it extensively due to geopolitics in the region. It will probably take away some traffic away from Singapore but not everything considering the efficiency, cost and risk of getting stuck on land vs sailing through the normal route.
    Sure they can make a new "wheel", but it is going to be costly new "wheel". Alternatively, Singapore can also reduce cost or shift focus to new ventures to remain competitive in the region.

    • @danielc2701
      @danielc2701 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      That and fuel. Singapore is ironically an oil "producing" country. It does not have crude but Brunei and Sabah/Sarawak all ship crude to it to be refined, so Singapore is actually a very important key source of fuel. Any new Thai port is going to have to ship fuel up to it to refuel its ships and the tankers will end up going back to Singapore empty and that jacks up the price. More economical to just simply sail a bit further and tank up from the source itself.

    • @bell-xk5dd
      @bell-xk5dd 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@danielc2701
      Singapore owns one of the biggest oil refineries in the world. All shipping companies have oil stored in Singapore, so even if they were to use the land road in Thailand to load and reload their goods, their ships still need to come by Singapore port to refuel for oil. So does it make any sense to stop at Thailand for loading and reloading their goods….when they have to stop at Singapore again for their fuel?

    • @danielc2701
      @danielc2701 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@bell-xk5dd It's not just the size of the refinery, Thailand has refineries too, about 70% of Singapore's capacity, but they are scattered all over the country so there is no one large source of fuel. Singapore has the refineries and not only that, all of them are concentrated in 1 spot/city so ships have 100% access to all the fuel and not be in one province while the refinery is in a different province.

  • @Will.i.am55555
    @Will.i.am55555 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

    😂😂😂😂😂
    Good lucks😮
    This had been on development since the last century 😂😂

  • @lawrencetangs.s.7203
    @lawrencetangs.s.7203 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    Have respect to Singapore, prime minister in picture and in statements I'm Singaporeans

  • @yvvonelee5026
    @yvvonelee5026 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Actually Thailand proposed land bridge is to challenge ECRL, but again it have to depend on whether the current government survive long enough to start the project.

  • @seanlee9377
    @seanlee9377 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    China is wise to avoid the large US military base in Singapore by helping Thailand build a crucial land bridge/canal.

    • @mic5391
      @mic5391 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      USA has direct access to Thailand!

    • @user-vq3yx1tr1r
      @user-vq3yx1tr1r 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @seanlee9377 Intimidated?

    • @danielc2701
      @danielc2701 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ..... Thailand is a US ally, which is even closer than Singapore's "Partner". I know that Thais also take part in the US's BUD/S course. And there is no US military base in Singapore, they're just renting docking space.

  • @josephyeo6966
    @josephyeo6966 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    Not necessarily so. Competition is not about being able to cut corners and take the shorter route. You may save the mileage, but if service is poor and turnaround time much longer, you end up not saving any money. No different from why people would travel much further away to have the same Char Kway Teow.

    • @worldknowmore
      @worldknowmore  9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thank you for the comment. We only have one question for you: What is Char Kway Teow?

    • @josephyeo6966
      @josephyeo6966 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

      @@worldknowmore Caught you out. I suspected for a while that you are not Singaporeans putting out these information. My suspicion is you are not Singaporeans and there were some subtle messages in some of your videos that are not supportive of the Singapore government. Sure I am not answering your question which I think is AI generated otherwise you could have easily googled it to find out.

    • @kwekstanley3030
      @kwekstanley3030 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@worldknowmore Come to Singapore to have a taste of it. Then u will know why ppl prefers longer but more efficient route like coming to Singapore for Char Kway Teow

    • @user-vq3yx1tr1r
      @user-vq3yx1tr1r 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      @worldknowmore Char kway Teow is a stir-fried rice noodle dish that originated from China which the green-eyed monsters on the other side of the causeway claim that their country is where the dish along with dishes like Bak Kut Teh, Chicken Rice, Laksa, and Chendol, etc. originated from. LOL!

  • @hockchweeong9883
    @hockchweeong9883 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Singapore Is Not USA. Malaysia Has 3 Ports Built Built To Divert Malaysia Import But Has It Succeed??

  • @kmich7660
    @kmich7660 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    No worries, mate. Sleep well. Don't overthink. Singapore will prosper.

  • @poopermoodieisgay2131
    @poopermoodieisgay2131 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    This idea was mooted more than 100 years ago. Until now, it’s still all talk but no action. In fact, as a Singaporean, I hope that all these ships by pass Singaporean. It will cause less pollution to our waters.

  • @blose4793
    @blose4793 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Spore has very wide connectivity with many ports. She turnaround ships with serious efficiency. Thailand South need 2 ports in Gulf of Thailand and Andaman Sea, and road connection. Thailand thinks that 4-5 days savings is adequate. Invest into 2 ports is a big joke. Thailand can’t find suckers to invest - China refused to build this as part of their BRI plan.

  • @207history2011
    @207history2011 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    efficiency and peace of mind is very important to business

  • @weerakornongsakul2942
    @weerakornongsakul2942 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    This is not land bridge project but is two interconnected deep sea ports bridging two oceans which is under utilized by Thailand. The cargo could go directly to Kunming via rails which is a part of BRI.

  • @ironboy3245
    @ironboy3245 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    the question there is throughput. I doubt that it can handle the massive tonnage of goods that flow through the strait of malacca. It'll hit us, sure, but i doubt it'll ever replace us. I'd be worried if it was a canal like the Panama canal though
    Another reason why i'm not too worried is Corruption. Good luck getting that built without a state organisation like the CPIB that ruthlessly cracks down on corruption in the country

    • @vennsim71
      @vennsim71 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Even Panama Canal is hit by massive congestions at both ends these days. It would take many times the Panama Canal size to make it efficient and congestion free. But without a matured finance industry and corruption free environment, it’s bound to be under utilised

  • @chayyeemeng
    @chayyeemeng 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    As the video correctly that Singapore is a global hub, and is depending on the trading port and hub to move cargos from larger ships to smaller ones, and vice versa. 85% of the ships passing thru singapore do not stop and therefore do not use the port facillities. In fact these passing thru ships are increasingly jamming the Malaka Straits and Singapore water. Singapore would welcome the megaproject to divert away these passing-thru ships.

    • @chriswong9158
      @chriswong9158 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      How one do not understand "gatekeeper" of Straits of Malacca. S'pore is the service station for all traffic thru from port service to ship service to crew service in matter of water/food supply. Loose 60% of today traffic, port of Singapore will operate in the Red for the future. China PRC is Thailand partner in the Mega Project.

  • @ivangim1
    @ivangim1 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Fyi WKM, Singapore has had the good fortune of several decades ahead to prepare for this eventuality. In the event that the Kra Project finally gets into motion, the maritime business generated will only complement that of Singapore. That is a good development for Thailand, the Indo-Pacific region and ASEAN too. The Kra Project of whatever nature and scale will not be a threat to Singapore.
    The key lies in growing the maritime pie. That is exactly the energized focus and emphasis of the astute forward-looking high quality thinking Singaporean Government.

  • @wumao6797
    @wumao6797 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Been hearing that canal since the 1970s during my school days lets hope I get to see it start in this life time.

  • @JIANGTG
    @JIANGTG 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Actions always speak much louder than empty words ...

  • @aoffer6219
    @aoffer6219 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    As a Thai,we have a landbridge to main purpose for domestic more than transhipment fight for Singapore.We want many factories or free trade zone such as EEC and SEC to use Thailand to be a hub to contribute product that made in Thailand or oil from Saudiarabia between two penisula. And may be for support over supply of Malacca strait.

    • @danielc2701
      @danielc2701 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Problem with a port in Thailand is that it is too open to the weather from the Indian ocean. One of the key reasons for Singapore as a port is that it is surrounded by landmasses, which, while causing a horrible traffic situation, also provides a lot of protection from bad weather. Sure, it's not critical, lots of other ports are open to the ocean, but all the damage adds up little by little. The only good spot I can find for a harbour is Krabi, but that would also kill tourism.

  • @Bigsmallcountry
    @Bigsmallcountry 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    They can try harder and they will never beat Singapore...with all the corruptions. 😂

  • @raymondtan2602
    @raymondtan2602 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +17

    The Kra project was suggested as early as 1677. It has been proposed many times since. Will it come to fruition?

    • @douglasstanley5209
      @douglasstanley5209 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      In 1677? Not possible. In 2024? China already proved time and again that it is doable.

    • @raymondtan2602
      @raymondtan2602 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@douglasstanley5209 en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thai_Canal

    • @danielc2701
      @danielc2701 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@douglasstanley5209 Doable, cost effective and useful are all different concepts.

    • @RUHappyATM
      @RUHappyATM 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      This is not about the Kra Canal.
      This is about the land bridge...LAND.

    • @danielc2701
      @danielc2701 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@RUHappyATM Both are similar attempts to cut ship traffic through the Straits of Malacca and both are also equally useless white elephants. Thailand is just basically cargo culting. You know what a cargo cult is? It's people who think that if they just follow the same actions that other people do, they'll get the same results. They see "Singapore has a port = $$$" therefore "if Thailand has a port = $$$". The problem is that Thailand is not Singapore and Singapore is not just a port but has a lot of other services connected to it, like finance, ship repair, refueling etc, not to mention the proposals all have serious problems that make them unworkable.

  • @seequincy5254
    @seequincy5254 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Audiences from the same countries cheer LOUDLY, while others beware: this site's operator has ulterior motives where one can read from its videos' titles alone, more so from the contents' rhetoric - never mind it deliberately read in other than its own language.

  • @MV-bj1yk
    @MV-bj1yk 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    To support the transport of these shiping containers, petroleum fuel needs to be made available at both ports.

  • @lesterksi4521
    @lesterksi4521 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Not an easy project in actual fact; cost, ROI, pollution, environment, etc. otherwise would have been operational for decades by now

  • @user-jc6fi6yg8r
    @user-jc6fi6yg8r 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Need two Megaports (East and West) and one Mega Land bridge connect the 2 ports. Two ships at each port to support one shipment......alot of resources and planning involved.

  • @laicheetian4737
    @laicheetian4737 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Land bridge will cost more in terms of logistic, better to cut the kraal canal like suez canal more cost effective for ships travelling from west to east.

    • @vennsim71
      @vennsim71 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      However cutting through poses a huge risk of the Muslim predominantly populated Southern Thailand. Lost of control would be highly disastrous to national interests.

    • @danielc2701
      @danielc2701 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@vennsim71 And even without that, Suez canal handles like 150 ships a day. Singapore Straits does about 2000+. The scales are so widely different that saying one can "take over" the other is like saying that a human being can eat as much as a whale. Singapore won't even notice the very slight drop in traffic.

  • @albertharris7980
    @albertharris7980 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Had been talking for a very long time, will this happen ?

  • @MilesKiyaAnny
    @MilesKiyaAnny 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Here to say that the thai prime minister have success in negotiation to fund this land bridge with forgiener. The local there have little concern but unlikely to stop this project

  • @ThaiVancouverite
    @ThaiVancouverite 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    It’s an option, but won’t replace Sg port. The port is already congested, and will be even more so in the future. It’s probably win-win for SEA

  • @Thereshallbelight
    @Thereshallbelight 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Singapore is so far ahead in wealth and talent that it need not have to worry about any projects to enhance shipping along the Malacca Straits.

  • @peterchin6165
    @peterchin6165 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Currently, the Thai-China relationship is evolving towards a structure reminiscent of "one country, two systems," ensuring effective collaboration in managing this significant project.

  • @mrtan1309
    @mrtan1309 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    The project sounds like a dream for Thailand because it had been brought up in the past multiple times but never realized.
    I wouldn't say its completely impossible but the obstacles are just too significant.. Than again, if both nations signed the contract it's great news to them but i can't stop having this thought.. If China were to insist it's expedition in Taiwan while having multiple cross nation mega projects, it's gonna be detrimental to them. Firstly, there had already been lots of news citing internal economic troubles within China, so if coupled with a costly war, I would say China's economy would suffer a huge blow. This is not even considering the possibility of US and allies implementing their sanctions on China, I think Thailand would be in trouble as well.

  • @mic5391
    @mic5391 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    I propose a flying bridge, estimated cost lower at 500 million usd only. Full upfront payment is required!

  • @davidlim5
    @davidlim5 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    You need customers to keep the canal alive. China already committed in both Singapore &
    Malaysia.

  • @lokechanmun8587
    @lokechanmun8587 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    If the Kra Canal is built, psychologically and geographically, Thailand will be divided into 2 big parts. In time, the portion of Thailand south of the Kra Canal will be taken over by the Thai Muslims who mostly live in the South, consisting of 3.5 million of the entire population of Thailand.

    • @user-ct1mt6gk1k
      @user-ct1mt6gk1k 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ชาวมุสลิมส่วนมากจะอยู่ในจังหวัดติดชายแดนมาเลเซียครับ เมื่อขึ้นจากจังหวัดสงขลาไปแล้ว 90% ของคนในพื้นที่นับถือศาสนาพุทธ

  • @udz5480
    @udz5480 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    i read that the British were the ones who discovered Singapore and bought it yet they gave it independence. From history books the Thais wanted to build this canal in the 1800s but Britain did not allow them and threatened war because they would lose earnings from their colony of Singapore.

  • @happypanda7003
    @happypanda7003 25 วันที่ผ่านมา

    Every country has its right to build her infrastructure to push for her economic growth.
    This is no exception for Thailand.
    However, Thailand with its frequent change of govt, and rather unstable south and enormous project cost, will face huge challenges to see this vision to fruition.
    Expect huge debt in the years ahead once the go-ahead is given.

  • @PassingBy1118
    @PassingBy1118 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    This land bridge project is too complicated and has too many moving parts. It assumes clockwork efficiency in sea to land and land to sea transfers, reliability of the land bridge, security and safety, and cost efficiencies. I personally don't think that it can happen, and even if it does, it will not lead to much cost savings, if any.

  • @cayuminagamura7827
    @cayuminagamura7827 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Borrowing heavily from China may lead to unsustainable debt levels, economic dependence, and exploitation of resources. It can also create a "debt-trap diplomacy" situation, leading to loss of sovereignty and corruption. Furthermore, infrastructure projects financed by Chinese loans may cause displacement, environmental degradation, and labor exploitation.
    Example:
    Sri Lanka: Handed over a strategic port to China due to inability to repay debt.
    Zambia: Defaulted on debt to China and is currently negotiating a restructuring plan.
    Pakistan: Heavily indebted to China, with the IMF warning of unsustainable debt levels.

  • @LonganLee
    @LonganLee 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Idea is Engineering-wise 100% possible.
    But Reality is Extremely Unlikely to succeed as follows (Thai agents pls forward this message to your king)
    1. Thailand has regular power change. Just wait for the next election for this project to be scrapped.🤣
    2. Democracies cannot make this project a success. *Only China can.*
    3. Thailand is Poor.
    4. Too much Corruption. This point alone guarantees no success is possible.
    So while technically Thailand can be prosperous with Kra Land Bridge, Reality is Thailand itself Guarantees Failure❤

  • @chinkit7
    @chinkit7 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +12

    Thailand, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka and Malaysia are trying to overtake SG with mega port projects but end up as white elephants. 😅

    • @silentwatcher1455
      @silentwatcher1455 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      You are too early for your conclusion. Just wait till everything is in place.

    • @douglasstanley5209
      @douglasstanley5209 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      @@silentwatcher1455 Silently watching since 1455, and still watching ...

    • @vennsim71
      @vennsim71 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      One would need a matured finance industry to back shipping industry these days. And a huge population of international language literacy helps to facilitate. Strong enforcement of law and corruption free is necessary too, lest you find yourself paying your way from the dockers to the truck drivers to get your goods from one end to the other. And not the full amount of goods reaches the other end… 😂

    • @shamshulanuar7718
      @shamshulanuar7718 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      I am not sure about Sri Lanka Dan Bangladesh ports.
      As for Malaysia, it's premier port,Port Klang is the 12th busiest port in the world( TEU)

    • @DaBiggBosz
      @DaBiggBosz 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @chinkit7 .... provide the name of the white elephant Malaysian mega port. Where is it? In your lil' wet dream?

  • @merlinf2869
    @merlinf2869 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    i don't think there would ever arise a situation of an "end" to anything pre-existing. It would however create a complematery alternative to a 'percieved' bottle-neck that's all. It probably can't 'take over' because the very concept of it implies the creation of a new bottle-neck which negates its existence.

  • @proud4373
    @proud4373 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Compared to Singapore's Malacca strait, Thailand's bridge is not quite viable. Just look at the Panama Canal! The canal has so many problems lately as a result of the extreme weather. According to AP reported in the last August, "More than 200 ships are in a traffic jam outside the Panama Canal". Malacca strait is actually an ideal natural canal. It's just a waste of money and time to build Thailand's bridge. Also, the bridge would divide Thailand, physically, economically and politically forever because the unstable region of the South of Thailand. Building something that forever divides a nation is not what its people want.

  • @doovalacky
    @doovalacky 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Do you want to compete with Singapore, and disrupt their vast "economic moat", or "monopoly"? You're welcome to try. 😂 (Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake - Napoleon)

  • @xmen2130
    @xmen2130 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Nothing is permanent. Remember Timbuktu then and now. For a land route to work seamlessly, it’s not impossible. It’s just a conveying belt system. There’s a port in China that’s all AI and G5 controlled and running well smoothly. With technology, dreams are possible.

  • @eddyng6067
    @eddyng6067 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I think Thai government is reluctantly to build that Kra Canal, because southern part of Thailand has a vast population of Muslims. The Thai worried they could independent after cutting Thailand into two. Its penny wise pound foolish to the Thai government

  • @HINCHOIWONG
    @HINCHOIWONG 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    This is a pipe dream easier said than done, even if China steps in, I love your narrative 😅

  • @lychan2366
    @lychan2366 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    It may interest some viewers that the Kra Isthmus canal potentially threatens Singapore's role as a maritime transshipment hub as early as 1856; or 167 years ago.
    "The economic and strategic importance of the Kra Isthmus to Malaya was not lost on the British officials. The recurring worry since 1856 was that the Thais would cut a canal across the Isthmus, thereby relegating Singapore to economic oblivion."
    Source: British Foreign Office memorandum on “The Kra Canal Project”, 23 February 1914, WO 106/5697. This is a comprehensive survey of the Kra canal issue from 1856 to 1914.

    • @lychan2366
      @lychan2366 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@NewmaticKe Wrong target audience.
      Tell it to the producers of the video; not me.
      I've earlier done my sums even before your post.
      My focus was just a historical fact of interest;
      not about today.

  • @robinng166
    @robinng166 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Visionary project when completed will not n will never be a competitor to the Singapore Maritime Industry.
    From this project my vision is it will benefit Thailand mainly in Complementing the silk belt of China.
    Thailand n China will eventually benefit from tourist n travel related industries as well as economic GDO growth.
    Any opinions along this line of vision gladly welconed😊