Odyssey Marine Article...

[hmmm]

on Vancouver island there is a lost tunnel that was made by the Spanish, the leach town tunnel is supposed to be filled with Spanish gold bricks. if the tunnel is found who owns the bricks , Spain or Canada. did they test the silver the coins where made from and compare it to the silver from Peru . actually i am not even sure if they even found the lost Spanish mine in south America yet. do we even know that was where the coins where minted?
match the silver with a silver mine and you will get the point of origin .

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[hmmm]

THE replica coins are from 1779 .

here is one of the real coins, minted 1804.
http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1167436&site_id=1#import

 

[diverlynn]

Although I am partial to Peru, they are wonderful people and many poor people live with very little. If anyone gets a cut, even a small cut, I hope Peru gets a piece of the pie.

diverlynn

 

[hmmm]

Although I am partial to Peru, they are wonderful people and many poor people live with very little. If anyone gets a cut, even a small cut, I hope Peru gets a piece of the pie.

diverlynn

I would have to agree, the story of the spanish mine on vancover island was acquired by rape pillage and slaughter, the decedents should have some, unless they to acquired their mines through slaughter ect.



there is a thing called statute of limitations, things get foggy after time. i also agree the true finder should be rewarded the finders fee.

 

[MORE AND BEYOND OSSY]

Although I am partial to Peru, they are wonderful people and many poor people live with very little. If anyone gets a cut, even a small cut, I hope Peru gets a piece of the pie.

diverlynn

Well said Lynn If any coins get sold, which I doubt, Peru should get all the proceeds. Hope you are feeling
great Lynn. Cheers, Sam

 

[jeff k]

FOX News Interview...

http://www.foxnews.com/video/index.html?playerId=videolandingpage&streamingFormat=FLASH&referralObject=5750217&referralPlaylistId=search|stemm

 

[mariner]

http://www.abc.es/gestordocumental/uploads/Cultura/ody_report_and_recomm.pdf

Ossy posted this link to the magistrate's findings earlier. Anybody with a real interest in this case should read these findings. I have only just got round to reading it. Very interesting and complicated document. It acknowledges that some of the cargo belonged to private merchants and that the ship was therefore not on strictly noncommercial duties (and therefore not a Sovereign Vessel according to the laws of the Sea) but then goes through considerable contortions to claim that the US Court did not have jurisdiction because the Mercedes was a State-owned Warship.

It strikes me that the Court is determined not to get stuck in the middle of a political controversy, and even though I personally don't think that it should have Sovereign Immunity, I doubt that Odyssey will get the court to change its mind. This will make it difficult to get a US court to hear a case involving a State-owned ship in the future, unless an agreement is already in place between the salvor and the owner. I think that Odyssey brought this on itself by scooping up all of the coins, instead of just a few samples, but the repercussions will go far beyond Odyssey.

The thinness of Peru's case is covered briefly. Personally, I understand some of the emotion, but Peru never had a real claim. Neither would Bolivia, which is where the silver probably came from in the first place, if the source was the Potosi mine.

What an interesting case.

Mariner

 

[4theMoney]

What a shame. Double standards about what is right and wrong. Obviously politics will play a huge role in this outcome and not common sense. While I personally could care less about who keeps the treasure I am very dissapointed by hipocrisy. I understand that interpretation of ownership is subjective, but I still believe that the original owners should be the recipients.

 

[mariner]

4themoney,

So whom do you consider the original owners in this case?

Mariner

 

[signumops]

Greg at Fox pretty much nailed it. Constructive Abandonment. That's the fulcrum of traditional salvage wherein a party decides to spend the time and money to challenge the elements and their own luck to reclaim something of value. As it stands now, the issue seems to be one of sovereignty and the trend toward globalization, or the maintainance of a man's life by a collective group. So we're really no longer talking about TH'ing, but about socialism and it's intrusion upon the sovereignty of the individual.

Unlike Spain, Australia and so many other places where the individual citizen has been relegated to a single, managable collective identity that can be more easily handled by predatory politicians, free enterprise (which I am aware is under serious attack here in the U.S.) still provides Americans with the ideal to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and make something of themselves. This will always fly in the face of the socialists. There is no room to squat on top of the fence where this ideal is manifest.

In so many ways, we have permitted, through our own ignorance and laziness, government to intrude upon the labor and love of the common man for the benefit of what is now a "ruling class". As you can see, there are many "useful idiots" (to borrow an appropriate phrase from Uncle Joe) that are the grease used to propel these ascinine decisions by the courts.

As an American, I applaud Stemm for doing what could be done. Face it: what should have been done is not the issue... the issue, really, is that NOTHING had been done.

 

[wreckdiver1715]

Well said Signumops, I can't agree with you more with this trend we see developing. However, I still have some faith that the system will work as advertised in the long run.

But then again, I did leave the country a week after the presidential election, and told the wife I would be back in about four years.

Tom

 

[mariner]

As an American, I applaud Stemm for doing what could be done. Face it: what should have been done is not the issue... the issue, really, is that NOTHING had been done.

Signumups,

I don't want to be confrontational, but I cannot understand your post.

I think it is ludicrous that the US Government has effectively nationalised a large part of the car industry, and donated billions to banks who have absorbed our money with not so much as a "thank you", but we now know that the previous free enterprize system here in the USA was full of holes. We current taxpayers, and our children, will be paying the price for many years. As far as I can see, Odyssey is no different from the GMs of this world, doing its own thing, and reaping a good living for its executives while doing little or nothing for its shareholders over the years. I have never bought any of their shares, and the risk page on their website, plus their history, provides several good reasons for not doing so. Their share prices have gone up from time to time, but that seems to have been mainly fuelled by speculation about potential finds. The analysis page I looked at suggests that they have never even paid a dividend. Perhaps a shareholder could tell me if that is not the case.

What I cannot understand is why they have not salvaged the cargo from the Sussex, supposedly worth billions, and for which they have had an agreement with the British Government for a couple of years. What's the corporate strategy there, and where are the benefits for those shareholders who bought in when that news was announced?

You applaud Greg Stemm for what he did in gathering up all 500,000 coins from the wreck, an action certain to put Spain's back up, and one that is entirely inconsistent with the established procedure for obtaining legal authorization to salvage a wreck. I am afraid that Odyssey are well on the way to reaping what they sowed, and in the process have made life more difficult for the rest of the legitimate salvage community, not to mention their own shareholders. I think that Stemm handles the media well, but that's not the acid test for the CEO of a public corporation. He seems to have improved his operational style more recently, but will Odyssey survive the current disaster, and is the Sussex really the asset it was represented to be? Time will tell.

Incidentally, I can't understand your comments about Spain and Australia, which seem to be unnecessary, irrelevant and inaccurate.

Mariner

 

[signumops]

Mariner:
Perhaps you would outline for us what exactly is the established procedure for obtaining legal authorization to salvage a wreck on the high sea. That would lend a great deal of objectivity to my remarks, which did not draw any parallel between the giants of American industry and the Odyssey group. I don't own any Odyssey stock either, and I would not give a pound of salt for a single share. If you want to berate Odyssey, don't do it at my expense.

But, you have driven straight to my point, inadvertently. I don't own any Odyssey stock because I know that any American firm with the moxie to pull off a recovery like that of the Mercedes (or whatever its name may be) will only suffer the consequences of an unsupportive legal system that is in the pocket of global financiers and fearful of criticism from the intelligentsia. Ergo, I would estimate that Odyssey understands it can not rely on its stock sales to survive. The company has re-capitalized itself by doing exactly what it intended to do. Found treasure: recovered same.

Earlier in this thread I believe that it became clear that the Sussex was an issue to be decided between Spain and England with Odyssey standing idle at the dock. No doubt this standoff fortified Stemm’s impression of what he could expect at the hands of the international community where his company’s interests were concerned. In fact, now, in retrospect, I would say that the acid test of his stewardship was the decision to recover first and argue later. His action was founded in fact, not in fancy. I was not even there but it is pretty plain to anyone who actually works for a living. And, by the way, the rest of the legitimate salvage community is already having enough trouble without any interference from Spain. Incidentally, just what is the “legitimate salvage community” from your perspective?

As for Spain and Australia: I was being polite. I am not one to suffer the sophomoric, snide criticisms of good-faith contributors to this board who are subjected to the para-phrasing of the socialist media. I don’t like it. Did you understand that part?

 

[mariner]

As for Spain and Australia: I was being polite. I am not one to suffer the sophomoric, snide criticisms of good-faith contributors to this board who are subjected to the para-phrasing of the socialist media. I don’t like it. Did you understand that part?

signumops,

I have spoken English for over sixty years and American for about twenty five of those (Churchill, who had an American mother, said that we were two nations separated by a common language) but I have absolutely no idea what this means.

To deal with the Sussex, the ball is in Odyssey's court. They have the British Government's permission to salvage the wreck, which ironically is almost identical to the Mercedes in terms of ownership, and it is up to Odyssey to apply for possession of the wreck in the appropriate court. I know that Andalucia have stirred up some muddy waters, but Odyssey would undoubtedly have got the verdict had they proceeded at the time, and probably would now if they applied to the Spanish courts for permission to salvage the wreck. Of course, they may have decreased their chances as a result of their behaviour in the case of the Mercedes, but Spain now has a vested interest in protecting the principal of Sovereign Vessels. Because Odyssey and Britain reached a salvage agreement, the status of the Sussex was never subject to scrutiny. My personal view is that Odyssey have not salvaged the Sussex because there is doubt about how valuable it is.

Back to the Mercedes, for that is what the ship surely was, Stemm's responsibility was to recover treasure that would accrue to Odyssey and its shareholders. I don't agree with you that he met that responsibility, and I believe that he jeopardized that objective when he scooped up all the coins, and not just a sample that he could use to have discussions with an appropriate court and the potential owner of the wreck (as he did in the case of the Sussex, and subsequently did in the case of the British Victory).

As for the established process for getting a salvage award, I believe that it is to provide sufficient evidence of having found and identified the wreck to establish salvage rights to it. The preferred route is to then reach a salvage agreement with the owner, if that can be established, and then to approach a suitable court for permission to proceed with the recovery. This is exactly the way Odyssey proceeded with the Sussex and the Victory, and what they failed to do with the Mercedes. If it really is the case that the wreck cannot be identified, then the salvor can proceed to claim an "unidentified wreck", but this did not work in the case of SeaHunt, and seems unlikely to work in the case of the Mercedes. I think that Odyssey would have been far better off to have had the discussions with Spain before retrieving anything more than a sample of the cargo, perhaps some coins and one of the cannons. I also think that Spain hads been demonized far beyond what is reasonable, and would have been reasonably receptive to Odyssey if they had taken the right approach in the first place.

I happened to be with the British Government department that authorised the deal on the Sussex on the day that it was announced that Odyssey had flown the 500,000 coins to America. Their disappointment at Odyssey's action was very clear.

Mariner

 

[MORE AND BEYOND OSSY]

mariner, it is great to read constructive arguments both for and against, you are an intelligent person
that calls it as it is.
signumops was having a dig at me I Know I'm in the Lion's den in this forum, because I back
Spain, So if you have something say "signumops" say it, If you have a problem with your government, that's your problem. I live in the best country in the World ( Australia )

Judge Pizzo has made his recommendations after two years looking at all the evidence, read his report.
In the next two months Judge Merryday will rubber stamp it. Pack them and ship'em, it's over!!
Sovereign Spanish Navel War Ship, Did you understand that part, signumops ?
Ossy

 

[jeff k]

Mariner... Your assessment of the Sussex is way off base. The Brits control the project, not Odyssey. Maybe if the wimps in England got off their butts and claimed the 12 mile limit off Gibraltar as the UN says they are entitled, then Odyssey could continue the project. They might even have to send out a naval vessel to protect Odyssey's ship, because Spain would surely arrest the ship otherwise.

"My personal view is that Odyssey have not salvaged the Sussex because there is doubt about how valuable it is."

That surprises me, because you should know that the Admiral's ship always carried money for the fleet. It's also known that "a very considerable summe of money" was put on the Sussex in Gibraltar, by an agent of the Levant Company.

 

[mariner]

Well, Jeff, a couple of questions.

On the Sussex, hasn't Odyssey signed an agreement with the British Government allowing them to salvage the wreck that they say is the Sussex? If so, what is the next step? Is it not up to the salvage company to go to an appropriate court and ask it to arrest the wreck and to award them salvor rights? After all, there is still the issue of establishing the identity of the wreck and offering the opportunity for other potential claimants to come forward? I think Odyssey know the procedure. Of course, in this case, I think it is only a Spanish court that would have jurisdiction. It is so long ago that I forget whether Odyssey even started the process. No doubt you will remind me if they did. And I don't think that Spain would arrest somebody who had authorization from a Spanish court, and permission from the wreck's owner, to recover a foreign Sovereign vessel in its waters.

And as for knowing that all that gold is there, how can you be sure that it ever was loaded, that it is the right wreck, and that some unscrupulous recovery company hasn't already come along and removed it all? That has happened before, hasn't it?

Lastly, in the case of the tip of a land mass belonging to one country while the rest of it belongs to another, who has control over the adjacent sea, especially the bits that are within 3 miles/12 miles/24 miles of both bits of land? How far is the Sussex from the nearest point on the Spanish coast?

I guess that Brits have to join the ranks of other second rate, whimpish countries like Spain and Australia now ... move over Ossy: I'm having to join you on that particular bench !

Best wishes,

Mariner

 

[jeff k]

Mariner... I posted that Q&A last Thursday on this thread. You're not paying attention.

The opposition party in Gibraltar has been saying for months that they should declare the 12 mi. limit. Unfortunately, they're not in power. The Sussex site would be in that area about 10 mi. SE of Gibraltar. Spain is saying that Gibraltar does not even have 3 mi. of territorial water, although UNCLOS says otherwise.

http://www.gibnet.com/fish/waters.htm

Why would Odyssey go to a Spanish court to get permission to salvage a British warship in international water? They tried to work with the Spanish, and look what it got them. Nothing but grief. If you think you can do better, then be my guest.

 

[MORE AND BEYOND OSSY]

Mariner... Your assessment of the Sussex is way off base. The Brits control the project, not Odyssey. Maybe if the wimps in England got off their butts and claimed the 12 mile limit off Gibraltar as the UN says they are entitled, then Odyssey could continue the project. They might even have to send out a naval vessel to protect Odyssey's ship, because Spain would surely arrest the ship otherwise.

"My personal view is that Odyssey have not salvaged the Sussex because there is doubt about how valuable it is."

That surprises me, because you should know that the Admiral's ship always carried money for the fleet. It's also known that "a very considerable summe of money" was put on the Sussex in Gibraltar, by an agent of the Levant Company.

The Treaty of Utrecht did not specify Territorial waters !
" Maritime space of Gibraltar is not included in article 10 of the treaty of Utrecht of 13th of July 1713 "

Jeff you are showing the out right greed of Odyssey, willing to cause and International incident for the sake of their pockets
Spain and England enjoy both mutual trade and respect for each other. The British are Spain's number one tourist and currently
British air ways and Iberia airlines are looking at becoming partners.
I also agree with Mariner about the Sussex and the amount Odyssey claim she carried, As Claudio once said, pure speculation !
PS Mariner, plenty of room on the bench.
Ossy

 

[mariner]

Jeff,

You're quite right. I can't have been paying attention. Another senior moment.

Thanks for posting that note about the territorial waters around Spain and Gibraltar. As far as I can tell from the map contained within it, however, a point 10 miles SW of Gibraltar would be in the yellow area marked as Spain's territorial waters, it being beyond the three miles that Gibraltar claims. Did you mean 10 miles SW? My vaugue memory is that the Sussex had passed Gibraltar when it went down. Did you mean 10 miles SE?

Also, I wonder what effect the extension of Spain's (and Morrocco's) waters to include its contiguous zone has on the area to the east of Gibraltar?

Mariner