Is OceanGate in trouble for not using a good submarine to see the Titanic?
Well, “our CEO just died on our submarine” would tend to be a problem for a company…
This is the correct answer.
The CEO is definitely going down for this.
I think that ship has sailed… wait, sank.
Not only is the CEO dead, I think that people are going to be a lot more hesitant going on anything the company makes from now on. That’s not even mentioning the possibility of them being sued.
That’s not even mentioning the possibility of them being sued.
Hadn’t even thought of this tbh but yeah a bunch of wealthy people died, their families are going to milk the company for every penny
oh wait, the CEO is literally dead, like, he was on the submarine. I thought at first you meant, “The CEO is most definitely out of the company after this” but, you meant that literally.
Pretty sure after this they are done, I’m not sure you would be able to find someone on this planet moronic enough to go with them again.
A lot of people mention the waiver, which…sure, there’s some assumption of the risk for diving to the bottom of the ocean. But a waiver won’t exclude you from gross incompetence and negligence.
If I ran an indoor trampoline park, I may have you sign a waiver before you can use it. This makes sense, as jumping on trampolines carries with it some inherit risk of physical injury. That’s a risk you have to acknowledge before you can come in. However, if you got injured because the building caught on fire, and due to my negligence I’ve blocked all the fire exits with flammable material, that’s a bit beyond the assumption of risk covered by the waiver. I would totally be liable for any damages that result.
Did the Titan implode due to the inherit risk of deep sea exploration? Or did it implode due to a dereliction of safety precautions? (It’s that one)
“…We’re going to make another submersible just like this one. Except we’ll use an XBox controller and the trips are going to cost $500,000 (so we can offset some of our expenses). Will that be check or credit card?…”
Probably. They got people to sign a waiver so they’re probably partially covered, but there will no doubt be some law suits occuring and a lot of money going from both sides to pay for them.
I’m thinking the company is done for.
Even without law suits, their credibility as a company will be destroyed. Can’t imagine anyone paying to go into one of their subs again.
even without credibility… I doubt very much that OceanGate has the liability insurance to cover the millions of dollars blown on the recovery effort. Not for a submarine that was never certified by a 3rd party, was never not-experimental (and was experimental to get around safety regulations…)
In fact, I would be very surprised that OceanGate had liability insurance, considering the risks involved. and that the only assurance the sub was in fact in good order is a giant “trust me, bro”.
was never not-experimental
Is that why it had “five crew” and not “a pilot and four passengers?” 'Cause “passengers” would imply commercial use but this is crosses fingers a totally legit prototype with a “crew” of “mission specialists” simply “testing” it or some such?
probably
but like if you’ve got people renting a submersible for science… Like the Triton sub… those are crew and not passengers.
you know… if I paid $250k for a ride… I’d expect seats. and maybe something other than a bottle to piss in. possibly more than a curtain so my shits don’t get smelled by… everyone…
I would insist everyone poo before we leave
You can insist…
But I’m definitely going to shit myself when the giant squid tries to grab some submersible tail…
IANAL, but I imagine that being in the middle of the ocean would provide some immunity because the “crime” was jurisdictionless.
Maritime law!!!
Courts aren’t limited to prosecuting crimes that happen in their jurisdiction. For example, German courts are prosecuting sex crimes committed by tourists in Thailand. So just because there is no court nearby doesn’t mean you can do whatever you want.
when you sue someone, its in civil court. its not about legality. the company is in the US. the family memebers will take them down and they no longer ha e their ceo.
