The Chinese husband of the owner of ‘Phoenix’ speaks to Chinese media

By Kritsada Mueanhawong

 

 

Zhang Wenhao, the husband of the owner of ‘Phoenix’ – T.C. Blue Company – has revealed to Chinese media that his wife manages the company. He says he is one of the employees. All employees in the company, except captains and boat crews, are all Chinese.

 

The ‘Phoenix’ is owned by 26 year old Woraluck Rueakchaiyakan, who has a Chinese husband. Since the incident occurred Mr Zhang has not been seen. Khun Woraluck has already met with police and officials.

 

In the past few days, Mr Zhang has revealed to Chinese newspaper ‘Xin Jing Bao’ that his wife is a committee member of the T.C. Blue Company. The ‘Phoenix’ was constructed in 2016. It has been used as a tour boat since September last year. Mr Zhang says that he is a dive instructor.

 

Full story: https://thethaiger.com/news/phuket/the-chinese-husband-of-the-owner-of-phoenix-speaks-to-chinese-media

 

-- © Copyright The Thaiger 2018-07-10

Didn't they propose to stamp out nominee companies, this is a Chinese company operating in Thailand... profits straight back to China

3 minutes ago, poohy said:

Didn't they propose to stamp out nominee companies, this is a Chinese company operating in Thailand... profits straight back to China

Quote

However the T.C Blue Company was found to have the required majority Thais shareholders in its company structure.

So no different than every single farang owned company then, according to you half the bars we drink in are sending their profits to Europe and America, which is just nonsense.

8 minutes ago, webfact said:

Zhang Wenhao, the husband of the owner of ‘Phoenix’ – T.C. Blue Company – has revealed to Chinese media that his wife manages the company. He says he is one of the employees.

 

Passing the buck......

 

the problem probably is that were 104 people on board in that boat, looking right now at the proportions of the men standing on the bridge IMHO were far too much people...

27 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

So no different than every single farang owned company then, according to you half the bars we drink in are sending their profits to Europe and America, which is just nonsense.

But bars dont get their mates to ship in  100s of  customers who have paid in advance every day do they

11 minutes ago, MekkOne said:

the problem probably is that were 104 people on board in that boat, looking right now at the proportions of the men standing on the bridge IMHO were far too much people...

Since the boat was licensed for more people that were on board that is not the problem.

 

The problem is that no matter what, he is toast. Legal or not, nominee or not, licensed or not, is all doesn't matter anymore for him.

2 minutes ago, poohy said:

But bars dont get their mates to ship in  100s of  customers who have paid in advance every day do they

 

They would if they could and there is no reason why they shouldn't.

1 minute ago, stevenl said:

Since the boat was licensed for more people that were on board that is not the problem.

 

The problem is that no matter what, he is toast. Legal or not, nominee or not, licensed or not, is all doesn't matter anymore for him.

 

That would depend on where he is now.

23 minutes ago, MekkOne said:

the problem probably is that were 104 people on board in that boat, looking right now at the proportions of the men standing on the bridge IMHO were far too much people...

Certainly not, it would means around 7 tons 7000 kg, so for such a boat believe me it is for sure not too much!

thing is, is the thai govt going to have the balls to charge the owners of the vessel and shut them down for this violation of safety or will they allow them to use the captain who was following their orders be the scapegoat. This is obviously a chinese company so they should be investigated and closed

Hard as it is for me to say this, it seems that Prawit may have known what he was talking about when he said blame the Chinese tour company.

1 hour ago, webfact said:

Since the incident occurred Mr Zhang has not been seen.

Is he also an abbot?

1 hour ago, MekkOne said:

the problem probably is that were 104 people on board in that boat, looking right now at the proportions of the men standing on the bridge IMHO were far too much people...

I was thinking the same thing.  Given Western safety standards, what was the maximum number of passenger that boat could ferry - safely - in all weather conditions.  104 people?

1 hour ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

That would depend on where he is now.

He is married here and had a business here, he can say goodbye to that.

I am wondering how long the company has been trading and where the capital to buy the boat (or is it leased?) came from.

No mention of the Chinese husbands age or background as a "dive instructor"...... 

21 minutes ago, stevenl said:

He is married here and had a business here, he can say goodbye to that.

 

His business is at the bottom of the sea, it probably already said goodbye to it.

1 hour ago, MekkOne said:

the problem probably is that were 104 people on board in that boat, looking right now at the proportions of the men standing on the bridge IMHO were far too much people...

Agreed, 104 people on that boat would be seriously crowded.

Just now, Cereal said:

Agreed, 104 people on that boat would be seriously crowded.

 

The why is it licenced for more?

1 hour ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

That would depend on where he is now.

 

well, He is not one of them in the morgue.. that's for sure

 

 

but then, if he'd had the foresight for self preservation, he could be feigned 'disappearing overboard' 

 and fled...

Very easy to get 104 on that boat. Likely to be seating for more than that inside. The issue here isn't overcrowding, it's that the boat(s) sailed in 5m waves.

If that boat was really constructed in 2016, then the state of it i that picture probably give a pretty good indication of the level of maintenance they performed on it.

What a mess for a 2-year old vessel!

The company seems to be legal, its a freak accident and it could happen anywhere. Just because it has chinese shareholders doesn't make them bad or illegal. The bigger question would be if boat is up to spec. Folks shouldn't jump on the bandwagon too quick on bashing the chinese, which is what the thais want to do now. Did the authorities give them the stamp to operate turning a blind eye on a boat that is not sea worthy?

8 minutes ago, mike324 said:

The company seems to be legal, its a freak accident and it could happen anywhere. Just because it has chinese shareholders doesn't make them bad or illegal. The bigger question would be if boat is up to spec. Folks shouldn't jump on the bandwagon too quick on bashing the chinese, which is what the thais want to do now. Did the authorities give them the stamp to operate turning a blind eye on a boat that is not sea worthy?

The Thai authorities would not turn a blind eye, they'd actually use the opportunity to focus on extracting a fatter envelope!

The Thai authorities would not turn a blind eye, they'd actually use the opportunity to focus on extracting a fatter envelope!

Bigger envelope to turn a blind eye.
Blind eye is final result.

25 minutes ago, mike324 said:

The company seems to be legal, its a freak accident and it could happen anywhere. Just because it has chinese shareholders doesn't make them bad or illegal. The bigger question would be if boat is up to spec. Folks shouldn't jump on the bandwagon too quick on bashing the chinese, which is what the thais want to do now. Did the authorities give them the stamp to operate turning a blind eye on a boat that is not sea worthy?

I know a few other boats in the area, built at about the same time and same size. These boats however are lower, one floor less, and don't use rain cover while sailing because it makes the boat too wind sensitive.

 

Also today a few of the local captains talking said the same, the boat was no good, too high and narrow.

Just now, stevenl said:

I know a few other boats in the area, built at about the same time and same size. These boats however are lower, one floor less, and don't use rain cover while sailing because it makes the boat too wind sensitive.

 

Also today a few of the local captains talking said the same, the boat was no good, too high and narrow.

Chinese construction?

They didn't used to call them "junks" for no reason!

The boat has 4 decks. Its righting moment or its stability is obviously to blame. Huge windage acts like sails  Also ,The builder, the marine department,The thai official in charge of lisences. 

The owners.

The captain was given a faulty boat. Some blame is his but the real blame is the builder. The designer.

The owner.

they should all be held accountable.

 

 

 

3 hours ago, flyingtlger said:

 

In the current circumstances I think that Teacher misspelled “berth”....

32 minutes ago, quadperfect said:

The boat has 4 decks. Its righting moment or its stability is obviously to blame. Huge windage acts like sails  Also ,The builder, the marine department,The thai official in charge of lisences. 

The owners.

The captain was given a faulty boat. Some blame is his but the real blame is the builder. The designer.

The owner.

they should all be held accountable.

 

 

 

You may be right but, despite the repeated reports of it "capsizing", the boat (from the photos) looked as though it went down by the stern.  Again, from photos and some video clips, this may have been because the "captain" turned the boat "stern to" the sea to facilitate a rescue?  

I am sure it will all come out in the post mortem.  Nothing seems clear enough to apportion blame for the actual sinking, but the actions of the crew and "captain" were, at the very least, cowardly (IMHO).

There is no excuse for jumping into a liferaft before ensuring that all your charges are safely off the vessel.