How Container Ships Are Causing A Frenzy At American Ports - Cheddar Explainers 

Right? We were working on this for a few weeks prior.

@@cheddar I had to double check when the suez incident occurred, having thought my brain just missed a few weeks knowing how much effort you guys put into these videos!

@@cheddar Maybe you were the ones that grounded that ship then?

For reference: 2021 Suez Canal obstruction (MV Ever Given).

The suez canal is deep enough at the center to handle huge cargo ships, the accident sadly happened because the captain of the ship drifted to one side.

Widen your input

Not enough people got this joke

Step ship your blocking up the Suez Canal, I guess I’ve got to clear the blockage

lol

Old joke. Next.

I wouldn't be surprised if the problems meant that 5 ships capacity was now being squeezed into 4. They gotta rush that. Meaning they were going too fast in a sandstorm. Boom, accident time.

Bogdanoff moment

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-nPKwRGq9IlQ.html

Shampoo in my eye; this is murica.

lmaaaooooooo i saw it on the news

Okay so is suez canal container ship a glitch in the matrix to exposes a mainstream media psyop to cover up Evergreen as a CIA front: www.sandiegoreader.com/news/1996/jun/13/straight-spruce-goose-evergreen-international/

@@raystiles9506 holy shit how do you even look at this stuff? what the difference between this and saying that hurricanes are caused by some dude who farted on a boat?

@@PeachyTech I dont read that stuff.. but what you can easily find out is that the ship literally drew a picture of a d**k or a key (if you are a crazy q follower) before ramming up the canal. Crazy crap is going on here

Fault of Egyptian government. Cannot always relay on Suez canal need new alternative.

Also taking way longer to solve than it should therefore slowing down global trade increasing costs and what not

Thats no us thats every where

@@marekhlavackovi3677 do shipping companies want us to pay so they don't have to????

Egypt: our canal is too narrow

What is the problem our rising sea levels should sort this out in a few years right?

@@relentlessmadman They go where the facilities are. Airlines don't build airports

Lol I was just think the same thing 🤣

Algorithm tricked us

Bye the way, Evergreen in 5:24

The Suez Canal problem is not the Suez being deep it was a crash (either from wind/pilot error/Mechanical error/Who know).

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-nPKwRGq9IlQ.html

Width is also the problem at that section of Suez

@@Fortzon it’s basically a 1 lane passage huh. Not saying you’d ever see large cargo ships passing each other lol. But seems very narrow compared to the Panama canel

@@JusNoBS420 narrow? Suez is the widest manmade canal.

Was it accidental or was it pre planned?

Aight, let the dutch fix it again. Geez, its like we reeallly know how to work with and around water

We should automate the boats!

@@calvinhoward3808 Wouldn't have to worry so much about the winds of November then. Fully sealed, pressurized, ships made without need for crew quarters, only maintenance tunnels.

@@calvinhoward3808 skynet?

meow

When it comes to the world of investing,most people don't know where to start.fortunately,great investors of the past and present can provide us with guidance.

People will be kicking themselves in few weeks if they miss the opportunity to buy and invest in bitcoin .

Investing in cryptocurrency is one of the best chance of making money 💸.

@@Kelly-nz5iq Stocks are good crypto is better .

@@emilyamber6266 I wanted to trade crypto but got confused by the fluctuations in price .

Me too lol

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 me too

Vicious click bait jawn

@@timmygallagher6688 its not clickbait cuz it never mentions the suez canal in the thumbnail or title. making a video about container ships when container ships are in the news isn't clickbait, its smart profit making

I believe it is the other way around. Since Tuesday when it got stuck, they got inspired to make a video of containerships

Some shorelines and lowlands would sink though.

Oh that’s happening regardless

😆 😭

This guy has 200 IQ

@Mylo Kurtz I know, Mylo. It was supposed to bea joke.

And they scrape the bottom of the barrel with that bunker fuel.

​@@uss_04 Indeed practices and fuel types need to be regulated. But even as of today, the carbon footprint is more than acceptable

@@arnaudsm Plastic makes carbon pollution yet Democrats pretend that it does not for more votes

It's almost as if you made the comment without watching the bit at the end where Miami's dredging destroyed their coral reef ecosystem. The language is important - it's not environmentally "friendly" - it is environmentally "efficient". Any change in infrastructure for logistics harms the environment, the question is "by how much" and "what will it cost"?

@@richardperez6945 I watched the entire video. Biodiversity destruction and water pollution are an issue, but in the short-term carbon should be our absolute priority since we have less than 10 years before the tipping point. I agree that's a tough sacrifice, friendly was not the right word.

It was already popular

I was searching this comment, so I don't need to also write it. Thx Actually the timestamp could be better: 5:25

@@daniel_2 split the difference, 5:26

"Lined" canals make way more problems enviormental wise. Stop encouraging evil.

@@insectbite1714 op did not directly encourage lined canals

@@insectbite1714 You're right, of course! No encouraging evil here, just talking about the engineering of the canal, many people assume they are lined and have concrete walls

@@insectbite1714 The biggest problem here is that my aliexpress package is stuck in a canal

@@insectbite1714 OP didn't say that... They just pointed out why it's taking longer to unstick Ever Given than people assume it should take. It's not as simple as digging up the sides, as the ship is also stuck under water due to how the canal was dredged

The Port of LA/LB and the railroad's land bridge ops took a hit after the canal's expansion opened.

Well what do you expect from a news organization that calls its self cheddar?😄

I don't see how this contradicts what is said in the video

@@shyft09 basically they're saying 50ft depth is one of the global limited due to the PAN canal. So 50 ft deep ports are still useful and relevant

@@shyft09 See the part where they say there's no natural limit to the upper end size of container ships. Previously, the Panama Canal imposed an upper limit on how big ships could be and still get through it both in draft and length to fit the locks. Those were called Panamax ships for obvious reasons. Opening the new locks on the Panama Canal allowed for a new category of NeoPanamax, which is substantially larger in all dimensions and are too large for ports previously built for Panamax ships. Other waterways impose their own limitations, and the ships and ports using them are built to reflect that. Seawaymax ships are much smaller than Panamax ships, as they're designed around the limitations of using the St. Lawrence Seaway to access the Great Lakes from the Atlantic Ocean. Suezmax are the biggest ships capable of using that canal, and ships going from Europe to Asia have to follow that size restriction. Bigger yet is Malaccamax, the ships capable of passing the Strait of Malacca by Singapore. The largest ships are called Capesize, because to get from the Atlantic to the Indian or Pacific they have to go around Africa or South America past Cape Horn or the Cape of Good Hope. Other than the very biggest oil tankers and iron ore freighters, very few ships are this large because only purpose-built ports in specific locations can handle them.

A ship HALF the length of the Ever Given could jam the canal just as easily.

LOL

Damn it would really suck if that happened in a place where 12% of global trade passed through

it shows that corporations have greater power then citizens.

@@speedy01247 while paying less taxes

What about taxes form the companies, thousand of jobs in ports and overall infrastructure, and affordable goods for you and your family? Do you like that by any chance?

The shipping companies wouldn't be able to strong-arm ports if the ports banded together to all say "No" together. Harder said than done, though.

@@JDWonders the problem is ports are in competition with other ports not just nationaly but internationaly. A country that cannot accept these ships will be at a disadvantage. Beside larger ship are in a sense good for environment. They are much more efficient and have less carbon footprint per ton of cargo delivered. These large ship have made shipping the most environtmentally friendly way of transporting cargo. Much better than airplane, truck or even train.

@@JDWonders yes specially when these are almost totally special Port Authorities or municipality or County. The map they showed is technically not right I know Port Canaveral in Florida technically has a shipping container Port. But no one uses it. The real problem is the fungibility of money. Where municipalities property tax and sale tax and income tax can prop this stuff up. It's no different than all the Conference Centers and sports stadiums these Municipal do also.

@@simplyafederalist Ports charge shipping companies to dock the ship and unload the cargo. Addtionally, ships purchase fuel, oil, supplies from local companies. Ships hire local Pilots to guide them in at huge expense. They hire local tugboats for maneuvering. They hire local machine shops to make repairs and supply replacement parts. Sailors spend money ashore at local business. Ports and local cities are NOT subsidizing ships at a loss. In this rare case the business is a 'Zero sum game". If you don't have the port facilities, the entire business of a shipping line goes to another city/port.

My problem is the tax involvement. It does seem like it would pay for itself in short order, but why do taxpayers need to foot the bill? It seems like the same argument as with stadiums and every other industry: "If we don't subsidize them they're going to go somewhere else!"

I imagine they have a pipeline of videos and this was either ready to be published and bumped up or editing rushed out so it could be timely

No chance this could be made that quickly. Very lucky timing.

People they are plenty of videos on shipping. Not everything is a conspiracy. Ships have been getting too large. Large objects in windy conditions act like a sail.

@@Tampa0123456789 noone implied a conspiracy in the comment thread you're replying to.

​@@BozothcowThen again, here we are three years later, and a big cargo ship just took out a bridge near Baltimore and killed a bunch of people. (The death toll is still being determined. It is at least at 8 right now.) So I am getting the feeling these ships are going to start causing more problems like this.

Was your dad a captain? Domer

@@josephpadula2283 no, I'm the first in my family to have any interest in the stuff

@@averagejoey2000 same here 😇

I'm a train hopping hobo, this means the rides will be flowing. I'm fascinated with the intermodal system. But the environmental issues are really concerning, once an ecosystem is destroyed you can't bring it back.

What happened to yer eyeball.

I hope tomorrow we won’t be hearing climate change and then they blame it on overpopulation or look for country to blame or continent....just the same way plastic started .....everything is done to make more money 💰....cause a problem,solve it,cause another why solving the one u cause ....everyone’s doing it doesn’t make it right tho

Well, lets be honest, in the case of Hamburg it is also partially the fault of whoever decided to build a seaport 100km inland.

That just sounds worse

@@Taladar2003 The port of Hamburg is almost 1000 years old. Rumor has it there where not many container ships or supertankers around back then :-) And the one that got stuck (Indian Ocean) left the channel. That's not the port's fault.

That is obviously implied but also, who cares?

I enjoyed the voice too. Made the video more enjoyable. Also like the humor.

Agreed, but unfortunately, volume was not balanced across the whole video, meaning I had to keep adjusting my own volume. Annoying.

those containers are empty...that's why it drifted. it has no weight. They are smuggling people in there. those containers are designed for human trafficking...especially children...put the puzzle together. children are being allowed to come into the USA without their parents...

​@@abajoloscastros1181 LOL you poor brainwashed victim. Just operating on Pure GREED. MONEY and profit is way important that human trafficking which is a risky buisness. Evergreen just moves cheap import good for decent margin profits. These ships are also very slow and not suitable for Live Stock let alone human travel. This is how REALITY works. Your idioitic political agenda overrides the basic functions of our harsh reality.

@@abajoloscastros1181 So, all those kids ran away from home to join the circus?

@Richard Gilley LOL FAIL! Shipping Cheap Goods has a much larger market and just spamming way more profit. It's a simple comparison of SCALE! You are soo brainwashed you have no grasp on reality.

I’m replying to the other comments, and y’all gotta stop insulting eachother, this conversation is a serious one and needs to be held with respect to audiences. You’re ignorant if you deny that human trafficking and sex trafficking is rampant worldwide, but thinking that every single ship only does that and that trade is bad you’re wrong on both accounts. Solutions to this are increased inspections and higher pay for those that do inspections enforcing port security. Same could be said for the boarder, but the boarder is a whole other conversation due to the massive amount of child trafficking.

Haha, you should look at 2de Maasvlakte Rotterdam, they are doing something similar

@randomguy8196 That would be a local politics issue, where people stay in office for decades because everyone forgot that your mayor has more sway over your day-to-day life than your president does.

Exactly what I was thinking... More strategic planning... Would also poss handle multiple generations of larger ships. However I would also imagine strategic planning would be almost impossible in the American political culture. In the end, that's an Am problem.

That would not be the first time they moved the ports to a new location. When shipping moved from bulk break cargo to containers, the ports in many cities moved to other areas with large spaces of land needed for this new shipping method; container yards, container cranes, intermodal rail terminals, highway connections, and larger & deeper harbours. The shipping industry at San Francisco's Embarcadero waterfront moved to Oakland, and today that place is now tourist piers, cruise ship docks, and malls.

One problem with this would be you would have to move the workforce for the port to the new site which would remove business from existing neighborhoods to entire cities so places facilities are already in place will block the threat to their own income. You could only accomplish something like this in a highly centralized state like China where the higher ups can just ignore status quo and cost.

It isn't waiting. It _is_ an ecological disaster, at least locally

I wouldn't say so, it's limited to port areas. And most of our coastlines aren't ports. So yeah you will screw up nature in that specific area, but I'd say that's a fair trade to keep the economy going.

@@kalebbruwer it’s an eco-system, you can’t sacrifice one part without it cascading outwards. To even insinuate that’s a fair trade is insane

@@Ms.gnomer If it were that fragile nature would've ended centuries ago. Look at how much of nature we already paved over to build cities, and yet untouched areas like nature reserves are still doing fine

You environmentalists are so damn paranoid JFC. its just a port, who the fuck goes scuba diving in a PORT?? Probably nothing but dirt there. Dimwits

Interesting idea

A bit like the mulberry harbours at D day. They would have to be enormous though, and what would a serious typhoon or tsunami do to them I wonder. Good idea in principal though. Do we have any civil engineers here?

@@snaplash or go back to how it used to be except for containers. Lighters and barges unloading ships and transporting them further up river

Already exist. Those are the deep water ports, like Yangshan Port in Shanghai, China. The problem is not if you are able to do it, but if you are willing to pay for it and have enough cargo to justify the cost.

It's absolutely possible, it's also possible to just make them from solid concrete with rail tracks on them more expensive but less expensive than constant dredging, a couple hundred meters long where the seabed falls away considerably. This has the added benefit of reducing erosion in places such as Venice where large ships like cruise ships cause enormous wash as they Dock close by.

Where is your 'island' on GoogleMaps ?

Sunny CyclingSailing Maasvlakte 2

@@Milky1944 Maasvlakte 2 is not an island.

@@zonzeven so a semi-island. Does it matter that much? His point was it is all artificial to fight that problems.

@@zonzeven there is no island. It is reclaimed land out to sea for big ships

Mainly the fact that the exponential increase in volume of what each can hold with a relatively minor increase in engine size (that is probably more efficient due to it being newer) means that you need less ships to haul more stuff so overall reduction in air pollution. I'm surprised they haven't gone the navy route and implement nuclear power for unlimited range and 0 air pollution, but it could obviously cause concerns with potential cargo contamination and a massive global security threat. You wouldn't trust some private entities with a fleet of what is essentially converted nuclear bombs?

It's kinda like why you want a bigger rocket, or you always order a large pizza, it's the best value.

I'm from Calumet city

@@ikillacommunistforfun320 You can buy a t shirt that says “Kill a commie for mommy”.

Daniel DeVernay, Yeah, that's some wind! Why did the wind build up all this power now? ...there's more than wind involved here ;)

@@pennycaldwell8141 The ship lost power and then it was blown by the wind.

@@jdd1777 thanks 😊

@@pennycaldwell8141 yup never underestimate the power of wind and water currents, when I ship loses power or steering then it will end up beached or sunk

Oh yea cause you know everything right Daniel, stop trying to outsmart everyone doofus

Don't we all?

Do you ever feel, like a container ship, stuck is the Suez Canal.

I wish I owned a shipping line

I wish I was an attack helicopter.

Interesting. But does only number of containers lost increase, or proportion of total number carried?

these are just future loot crates for people to find but it will be a lucky dip, dangerous chemicals or 65 inch tvs or bodies the choice is endless lol

Some of the containers float, some sink, depends what they contain. They're waterproof enough to keep out the rain. But if they fall overboard their contents will soak in saltwater.

@@pwnmeisterage Many containers have drain holes to let out water, which makes them easier to sink.

What does that have to do with the size of the ship? I would assume that more containers are lost if you fill up the ship too much. So a larger ship would fix the problem.

those containers are empty...that's why it drifted. it has no weight. They are smuggling people in there. those containers are designed for human trafficking...especially children...put the puzzle together. children are being allowed to come into the USA without their parents...

@@abajoloscastros1181 slow down there with all these conspiracies. Make sure to take meds before bed or else your brain will numb the next time u comment. Saying things without evidence backing it up is the reason why this country will never recover its glory again.

It absolutely is. That's what they did in Shanghai. They built an artificial island with a deep water port connected to land by railway and they just send containers in and out on trains.

They also did this in Mexico with the world's longest pier.

Exactly what I thought too. Just... make a pier? Dredging seems so silly on so many levels.

I'm guessing that dredging is cheaper and faster and politicians can brag about their accomplishments in time for election day.

that's been done. Our city used to be a port, but now the Port of Glasgow is miles down river, closer to the ocean.

The problem is if one or two ports won't do it, another port will. And the shipping companies will go to the one that does. Unless if the ports team up together...

@@jonathantan2469 Exactly. It's time cities, states and even the federal government stood tall and said "No thank you, send smaller ships" and let that be that. None of this dredging and creation of huge ships are actually creating more jobs. It's the opposite. More automation and less people working equals larger windfalls for the shareholder class, not the working man. This shit is one big boondoggle. Somehow half a billion in tax money to dredge a shipping channel is benefiting the citizens of any particular city? Of course not. It only helps Maersk, MSC, COSCO and the "globalized" businesses who ship with them line their pockets. And for what exactly? So the Amazons and Wal-Marts of the world can keep workers pissing in bottles because they don't get breaks or applying for food stamps because they make $9 an hour. Maybe it's time more products were actually made in the countries where they are to be sold...just an idea :D

The bigger the ship, the lower the cost of transport per TEU. Since consumers like things to be cheap they favor goods that are transport for as little cost as possible, if you want the shipping companies to build smaller ships you'll have to make consumers demand to pay more for their stuff. Plus you also have to make them demand the transportation of goods cause more pollution, since part of the reason the big ships work is the use less fuel per TEU = less pollution per TEU. The real solution the pollution caused by dredging is for it to be done right, that takes more regulation by the government and states.

As a Logistics student Just in Time is really good for business as warehousing is a cost which doesn't add value to a product, however certain industries *cough* Healthcare *cough* should not be run for profit for obvious reasons

@@benharrison3569 oh, don't you know? the next quarter profits are what matters, it's the *only* thing that matters, to Wall street

@randomguy8196 HAHAHA, oh wow, you think that they pass on the savings on to the customer!? good joke somehow in the 60's a plumber could have a stay-at-home wife, 2 kids, a car, and no mortgage, yet there was no "just in time delivery" in sight stuff costs how much the market will bare to pay for it, not how much the things actually cost to make, distribute and recoup R&D costs don't believe me? look at medicine costs

@randomguy8196 look up "cartel"

Yes, and already that is good for the environment. But they are so large that that efficient fuel usage still emitts a large amount of exhaust and they burn large amounts of oil. The next thing to ta is to start running then more and more on biofuel. It is possible. Electric ships or hydrogen powered ships will probably never come around or not at least in the near future, but biofuel is fully possible. You could run them on natural gas which is a fissile fuel but it emitts far less, and also you could make diesel like fuel from biowaste and other similar stuff. Gas can also be made from biowaste. It is highly likely that new regulations will come around and more ships will turn away from the fuel they use today.

@@linusstrand2468 some of the ships have already started “recycling” their exhaust back to massive engines that use the exhaust as fuel. Pretty cool stuff but I’m not entirely sure how much it helps but it has to help a decent bit.

Shipping Industry: Make the Suez Canal bigger or we will go around Africa!

Gift: a small child

Wimp

@@hihihihihello lmao

How are you going to move the containers to land if it's offshore?

@@SpaghettiToaster I was thinking in like a train cart just to move containers from this offshore facility to land

@@GEG266 Okay but then you need a huge bridge or an artificial peninsula. They did this in Shanghai but it's really, really expensive.

@@SpaghettiToaster Wow I didn't know I'll look up for it. However, I think it is still cheapear than having a ship blocking the only canal in 5000km lol

That would be a huge dredging project in an of itself.

Actually the bigger ships are more efficient which decreases carbon emissions. You can please everyone 🤡

TEU = 20 feet equivalent unit. It's an agreed upon standard of measurement, doesn't matter what the origin was. A person's foot is not one foot long. Not all yards are a yard long.

@@blusafe1 think you replied to the wrong person

It doesn't matter what type they show. 1x 40ft unit = 2 teu.. And u can see the single bay on the nose of the ship with only 20ft units....

@Hello Jimmy how are you doing?

The issue there might be that the US will be avoided for routes.

@@patrick_test123 Exactly. They will just unload everything in mexico and send containers up by truck. And costs are going to double

@@patrick_test123 and lose the biggest market? Nah

@@alex9621 Maybe more likely reroute the feeders via Mexico, yes.

How are you doing bill fargo ?

The crime! The no-English The foreigners

@@stuartmovieshow8352 crime.

@@bbt305 Nobody speaks English in Miami! You have to drive up to Broward County.

@@stuartmovieshow8352 thats a fact!

Lol, then the shipping companies will just bypass your country and bye-bye economy or load it off somewhere else. Easier said than done.

How are you doing Randen?

@@cin806 spaceships?

@@cin806 Yes! Some people don’t understand the concept of category versus subcategory.

You're teaching history to Americans... Good luck.

@@alexc1926 I'm American, and it's not like we have a monopoly on arrogant provincialism.

Do the math!

@@music-jn3wn I can have a converter open for few values no problem, but that does bother the flow of watching the video quite a lot (I'll forget where a sentence was going when pausing and unpausing for number crunching), so I'm just requesting a big content maker could simply include both measures in the graphics like I've seen many science channels doing 😊

Mostly cuz that stuff is from China or similar markets that can produce goods cheap.

Well, no. Channels and ports must be regularly dredged for maintenance due to siltation, anyhow. Dredge barges are completely mobile and don't require shore infrastructure or expense to operate. Nothing was lost or wasted by additional dredging. Ask a sailor!

Governments do it because the public is constantly pestering them for more cheap plastic crap from China, for cheaper.

How are you doing Paul

Truth!

@Carter Bohrer tariffs

That's not feasible due to economics. Parts for products are made in numerous countries, a smart phone is a prime example of this. Manufacturing still exists in the US, and by a fair margin, but it just isn't feasible to product certain items here due to costs. Low priced products are especially hard to produce here.

If all the ports got together (or the government 'told' them to get together) and said, 'No, we're not going to do as you tell us and dredge port channels to make them bigger to suit 'you.' You make do with the ports just as they are... Oh, and any further environmental damage done to the seabed will result in some pretty spectacular fines btw' - then shipping companies would have to have to desist from building ever greater ships and do what 'they' are told, because it's the trade they 'need' in order to survive. However, it's because ports are competing with each other that is letting shipping companies call the shots, resulting in this catastrophic damage to port channels in the USA and everywhere else in the world. It's said that the 'Evergiven' could be stuck in the Suez Canal for weeks, which is going to have a detrimental effect on trade in Europe for some time to come. Huge queues of ships are lining up to either side of the Suez, which magically sent up oil prices, and I dare say product prices will magically go up too. If this isn't yet 'another sign' that the western world should be more self-reliant, I don't know what is.

Did America need to export all of their industry to Asia?

Areas of dredged channels are relatively small. Also larger ships are more eco-friendly than smaller ones exhaust-wise. And ships are the cleanest type of transport anyways with miniscule exhaust compared to planes and land vehicles and much (I mean MUCH) stricter regulations with regard to fuel quality and oil polution prevention.

@@bobafruti People wants to know why Trump got elected in 2016 smdh

stephen heath because he got the most votes like the last election but they didn't cheat the first time.

It's a necessity to keep the global economy running. Cheddar is trying to create controversy where non exists

Oh really?) You think those container vessels didn’t affect you, providing you with more products at more affordable prices?) How cute)

If they do the business cheaper, you get your orders cheaper too

@Mor MacFey good. So is the device you've writing this commnet with locally produced?

@Mor MacFey and you've decided with what I'm happy and with what - not, by?... Cool. And what's the device? I'm very interested. Can you, please, name the company and the device model?

@Mor MacFey no-no, that's enough, thanks. Very cool. I know there are also some relatively small manufaturers of laptops and PCs. Are there any for the smartphones?

.. like human trafficking... btw. Whers Henry Kissinger..

Hoje many guys to gave up of the no expensive foreing merchandising

"And we can also pass our costs onto taxpayers"

What do you mean pick one? Being environmentally friendly means having fuel-efficient ships and also not destroying coral reefs. You do need both to preserve biodiversity and mitigate global warming. But how many ports are built near coral reefs anyway? Not so many I would assume.

How are you doing tank’s dad

Yes, we are.