More weather companies

Archive of NZ Weather & Climate
Forum rules
These topics are a read-only archive and may be subject to out-of-date information.

For today's weather discussion head to: New Zealand Weather & Climate
cantygal
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat 19/12/2009 18:02
Location: Kirwee, Canterbury
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

More weather companies

Unread post by cantygal »

Just a question, Is the MetService the only forecasting outfit for all NZ and if it is, why is it basically a monopoly?

I would love to see some more competition and resources spread a little more evenly. Just my opinion but what do you guys think? I'm really keen to hear other peoples thoughts! :)
NZ Thunderstorm Soc
Posts: 18488
Joined: Wed 12/03/2003 22:08
Location: Raukapuka Geraldine
Has thanked: 1769 times
Been thanked: 1412 times

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by NZ Thunderstorm Soc »

There is Tony's, Blue Skies Weather and Climate Services, also there was an outfit called Weather Workshop but they closed down a few years ago.

JohnGaul
NZThS
JohnGaul
NZThS
User avatar
TonyT
Moderator
Posts: 2878
Joined: Thu 08/05/2003 11:09
Location: Amberley, North Canterbury
Has thanked: 352 times
Been thanked: 1146 times

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by TonyT »

cantygal wrote:Just a question, Is the MetService the only forecasting outfit for all NZ and if it is, why is it basically a monopoly?
One reason why it may appear to be "basically a monopoly" is that it receives a substantial payment from the government each year (somewhere around $15M has been rumoured) to provide a basic public weather forecasting and warning service. This naturally gives the organisation a head start in terms of resources and scale.
cantygal wrote:I would love to see some more competition and resources spread a little more evenly. Just my opinion but what do you guys think? I'm really keen to hear other peoples thoughts! :)
I agree, but being part of that competition I am totally and unashamedly biased... 8)
Philip Duncan
Posts: 519
Joined: Mon 27/08/2007 21:02
Location: Waitakere City
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by Philip Duncan »

The government strictly controls the rain radars in New Zealand which limits competition in my eyes.

Philip Duncan
AndyWX
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri 02/10/2009 21:31
Location: Ladbrooks, Canterbury.
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by AndyWX »

Hi everyone, here is my 2 cents worth.
The total costs associated with producing meteorological services to the best of our ability are very high and can normally only be paid for by governments and taxpayers. It would be impossible for a private company to afford supercomputers, highly trained staff, observing networks etc. This makes it a natural monopoly. People all around the world do set up private services of course but they have to utilise all the freely available data provided mainly by governments. Often the only new thing they offer is a different interpretation of the same data. Understanding the weather is such a huge undertaking that the more people we having working together on it the better the results will be, in my opinion. I often see people reinventing the wheel and think its a bit of a waste.
cantygal
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat 19/12/2009 18:02
Location: Kirwee, Canterbury
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by cantygal »

Thanks for your thoughts and I wondered if it would come down to dollars being available but the allocation of funds just seems lopsided.
I think more weather organisations would be an asset though as we all have our own 'take' on the weather and I believe there are more weather outfits abroad than here?

I just don't think it's healthy when one company dominates so much of the picture and well done Tony on having your own venture!
User avatar
NZstorm
Posts: 11333
Joined: Mon 10/03/2003 19:38
Location: Grey Lynn, Auckland
Has thanked: 342 times
Been thanked: 361 times

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by NZstorm »

I wondered if it would come down to dollars being available but the allocation of funds just seems lopsided.
I'm in favour of a fully funded meteorological service and thats what we should be striving for rather than trying to split the pie up. A fully funded met service would in turn likely make it easier for operators within the private sector.
User avatar
Nev
Moderator
Posts: 6216
Joined: Tue 07/03/2006 15:24
Location: Waiheke Island, Hauraki Gulf
Has thanked: 468 times
Been thanked: 1064 times

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by Nev »

Philip Duncan wrote:The government strictly controls the rain radars in New Zealand which limits competition in my eyes.
That's not strictly true - MetService does! And although MetService is solely owned by the govt, it's still a commercial operation and has been since 1992 (one of the first national weather services in the world to do so). The original intention being to take some of the cost-burden of running such an operation off the taxpayer and encourage the organisation to 'pay-its-own-way'. However, as Tony said, every nation needs (or should have) access to a free and basic weather-service, so the Crown, as one of MetService's clients, pays MetService a fee to make that basic service freely available to public.

In the year to March 2009 MetService's revenue was about $36.8m, with the Crown (or rather the Ministry of Transport) making up about half of that to provide ‘public good’ services. MetService also pays dividends and taxes to the Crown on any profits. Last financial year its net profit before tax was about $4.7m, with an interim dividend payment of $500,000 made during that year (note that the final dividend the previous year was waived to support their 'capital investment plan').

I'm not sure who actually technically owns the radars, but MetService's new radars were funded by the MoT as part of its contract with them. If MetService wants more radars (costing about $3m each), it has to apply to the MoT for more funding.
cantygal
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat 19/12/2009 18:02
Location: Kirwee, Canterbury
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by cantygal »

Thanks Nev and so MetService became an SOE in 1992? Was there a time when NIWA was looking at forecasting or do they solely focus on climate amongst other activities?

I'm not from these shores but am interested to hear the background. Thanks for your help.
jrj
Posts: 462
Joined: Tue 18/03/2003 18:00
Location: Havelock North, New Zealand
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by jrj »

cantygal
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat 19/12/2009 18:02
Location: Kirwee, Canterbury
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by cantygal »

Bless you James :)
User avatar
sthguy
Posts: 110
Joined: Sat 15/12/2007 22:37
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by sthguy »

I'm not sure who actually technically owns the radars, but MetService's new radars were funded by the MoT as part of its contract with them. If MetService wants more radars (costing about $3m each), it has to apply to the MoT for more funding.
We the public own the radars. They are funded from taxpayer's dollars through the MoT contract. Met are not in the right to limit information from these at all.
Compare BoM radar images with the puny, infrequent and delayed images we got and you'll see the difference.
Climate is what you expect. Weather is what you get.
Myself
Posts: 396
Joined: Wed 20/02/2008 21:55
Location: Welly
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by Myself »

sthguy wrote:
I'm not sure who actually technically owns the radars, but MetService's new radars were funded by the MoT as part of its contract with them. If MetService wants more radars (costing about $3m each), it has to apply to the MoT for more funding.
We the public own the radars. They are funded from taxpayer's dollars through the MoT contract. Met are not in the right to limit information from these at all.
Compare BoM radar images with the puny, infrequent and delayed images we got and you'll see the difference.
But have we seen the contract to confirm this? It's all too simple to just assume that we pay our taxes and hence own the radars. And who pays for the maintenance? Over the lifetime, the maintenance (including transport costs in choppers and wages for maintenance staff and project managers) probably racks up to cost more than the radar to begin with.
I think the benefits of free radar access do outweigh the downsides, from a POV of us in the public, but there are risks, for example with virga. However I don't see anything changing, no matter how much everyone asks for it. MS must make money....government wants them to make money.....so not likely to get free radar anytime soon.

I would not really describe the warning service as "basic", it's pretty comprehensive stuff (except of course when there's nothing happening!). Think of the staffing costs to maintain a roster that can cover both warnings and the thunderstorm stuff 24 hours a day, every day of the year. Also they are the top forecasters in the place, so must be getting paid a fair bit to begin with.

There is one other thing that may be seen as "scientific snobbery" but is really what I see as the plain truth.
The fact is that MetService, like all national weather services, employs only Meteorologists as forecasters.
Anyone can call themselves a Forecaster. But not just anyone can call themselves a Meteorologist, because it's determined by the WMO. The term is as protected as "Engineer".
In the old days, there were various classes of Meteorologist, I think from Class 1 to Class 4. I don't really recall the details, but there were also technical officers.
Now things have changed. But I would bet that even the old technical officers have more genuine meteorological knowledge and experience than the modern breed of internet "forecasters" who are often (but not always) little more than "model watchers".
There is a saying that many of the internet forecasters "could not plot a tephigram to save their lives", and yet they elevate themselves to a higher position of forecasting without the real basic knowledge to understand the atmosphere and its dynamics. Sit these people down and ask them to draw a MSL analysis chart, or to write a TAF for the next 12 hours and they could not. These are basic, crucial skills. Yet they push themselves into the eyes of the media, who often see them as "experts". I just think it is wrong and potentially dangerous!

The only way we really can understand and predict the atmosphere is through meteorology, even though it is not perfect! And meteorology is what? That's right....Physics.
I don't really want to read forecasts by people that do not have a good physics knowledge, because how can they add anything of value to what the models are saying?

There are also certain requirements (mainly on the aviation side of things) where it is required by law for class I meteorologists to perform the task. Now how many of those are there in New Zealand? And how many of those are employed by the MetService or NIWA? Probably most are.
So we are limited anyway in the number of Meteorologists.

Realistically there are niches out there that MS do not cover and that people fill. Frost forecasting and prevention being one of them. But when it comes to nationwide forecasting, unless another organisation starts up on a large scale and employs meteorologists then I don't think there would be much to gain.

Maybe the above seems harsh, but it's how I feel.
User avatar
sthguy
Posts: 110
Joined: Sat 15/12/2007 22:37
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by sthguy »

We can look to Australia to see what we are missing. BoM operates in an environment not disimilar to ours I beleive, are highly successful, and provide much wider access to data than Metservice does.
I think you'll find radars - as part of 'data collection' - are fully funded by public money.
Climate is what you expect. Weather is what you get.
cantygal
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat 19/12/2009 18:02
Location: Kirwee, Canterbury
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by cantygal »

Appreciate all your input everybody.

Myself you have some strong views and I love someone with some vigour and vitality.
I think meteorologists are really important and no doubt about that regarding credentials etc
One thing I cant often understand is the way that they talk. It might be just me but I get lost in all the technical jargon and I don't think I'm the only one. If only they'd dumb it down for some of us mere mortals.
It does seem like an exclusive club and as you say 'scientific snobbery' but can they talk to us in laymans terms with a bit of enthusiasm? It can come across so technical and dry as if they are robotic.I'm lost after the first sentence sometimes!
I think other weather enthusiasts do that really well without perhaps the appropriate lettering after their name.
AndyWX
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri 02/10/2009 21:31
Location: Ladbrooks, Canterbury.
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by AndyWX »

Myself, i think you have hit the nail on the head, totally agree with you. Like it or not meteorology is a rigorous scientific discipline and understanding and predicting atmospheric processes requires years of training and the support of leading edge technology. This makes it a natural monopoly that can only be held by governments. The appearence of the internet forecaster in fairly recent times has been made possible by the explosion of freely available information. There is of course nothing wrong with this as many are passionate people who are only doing what they love. However this activity does not produce any gain apart from satisfying the needs of those doing it, it is simply another interpretation of the same data by people less qualified to do it than experienced and trained government meteorologists. The only possible gain I can think of is if it is repackaged in a way that suits specific users.

The big danger though, as you have pointed out, is that many internet forecasters have been able to get themselves labelled as experts by the media when they are not, and the public now has no idea who is an expert and who is not. Internet forecasters need to realise that the data that magically turns up online for them to use has been made possible by larges numbers of talented people who have spent years training. If we don't clearly recognise who are the real experts and value them then we are in danger of eroding our contribution to the field of meteorology.
User avatar
Tornado Tim
Moderator
Posts: 4920
Joined: Sun 19/10/2008 17:17
Location: Raglan, Waikato / Hillcrest, Hamilton
Has thanked: 102 times
Been thanked: 202 times
Contact:

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by Tornado Tim »

Who would be classified as a Internet forecaster I wonder?
NZAPStrike.net - NZ Aus Pacific Strike Network
User avatar
NZstorm
Posts: 11333
Joined: Mon 10/03/2003 19:38
Location: Grey Lynn, Auckland
Has thanked: 342 times
Been thanked: 361 times

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by NZstorm »

I think experience (local knowledge) is a big thing with weather forecasting and all the scientific training or internet models in the world doesn't give you that.
User avatar
Tornado Tim
Moderator
Posts: 4920
Joined: Sun 19/10/2008 17:17
Location: Raglan, Waikato / Hillcrest, Hamilton
Has thanked: 102 times
Been thanked: 202 times
Contact:

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by Tornado Tim »

NZstorm wrote:I think experience is a big thing with weather forecasting and all the scientific training or internet models in the world doesn't give you that.
Couldn't agree more :)
NZAPStrike.net - NZ Aus Pacific Strike Network
Paul Mallinson
Meteorologist (Retired)
Posts: 406
Joined: Thu 27/10/2005 20:44
Location: Greytown
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by Paul Mallinson »

NZstorm wrote:I think experience (local knowledge) is a big thing with weather forecasting and all the scientific training or internet models in the world doesn't give you that.
In my view, you need both!

Paul
User avatar
Dale
Posts: 1070
Joined: Sun 27/07/2008 08:59
Location: Greymouth - Feral Coast.. NZ
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by Dale »

Agree with Paul. One or the other just does not work, but like forecasting itself they are just 2 variables among hundreds.
BoM is fully government funded & have the bandwidth, population, geographical areas & lots more to provide such frequent scans to the public. Even myself spoilt over there with such frequency for nearly 2 decades still wanted more, as do a few others. Average joe reading this also knows that a bit of wind blows somewhere the MS site just crashes, that in itself is an absolute atrocity, just imagine what would happen should 6 minute scans be freely available?
A few people here im sure know how to read a skew-t & plot a few variables to come up with a point of sale forecast but as "Myself" mentioned above in a lot... of detail, the new breed of 'internet forecasters' seems to be the catch phrase.

As a suggestion, lets have a few people put there balls or bizzos on the line & pick a day within a reasonable timeframe for the models etc at your disposal & plot your own FC..
It worked on the zone & nailed a few people in their places quick smart. Just an idea, although healthy debate like this is very cool :D
User avatar
Oldun
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue 02/02/2010 07:01
Location: Massey, Waitakere City, latitude 36° 50' 28.52"S, Longitude 174° 37' 31.57"E
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by Oldun »

Here is my two cents worth,
I have the greatest of respect for the Met Service and Niwa, their excellent scientists are forced to work under difficult conditions, they are underfunded under appreciated and their work not understood by the public and at times by people whom should know better.
I also believe that a fully and properly funded service could command even more respect.
Specific areas of potential improvement would be modern long range radar installations with better up times and internet update intervals in the order of minutes rather than the hourly intervals now operated.
A modern Doppler rain radar system similar to that now being installed by our Aussie mates located close to each major city.
Even though I have the utmost respect for our scientist in this field I do feel that a minority display an unfortunate disdain to all people whom they feel are lacking in an appropriate level of formal training but have an keen interest in meteorology, some of this same minority display a definite insecurity in their attitude to the public at large and obviously have yet to conclude their education.
They also work under the same petty management systems administered by laymen whom show their ignorance by petty attempts to muzzle their technical staff in order to bolster their own feelings of insecurity.
Finally! what happened to that old scientific maxim " Observe, deduce,verify, report".
Myself
Posts: 396
Joined: Wed 20/02/2008 21:55
Location: Welly
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by Myself »

All fair points above I think.
Of course, scientific thinking and local knowledge together are useful. But the formal training in met stands you in good stead across the world (despite the tropical/temperate differences).

Oldun, do you have inside knowledge about the management system at MS/NIWA? I would have thought they have scientists high up their ranks?
I don't agree with this "I do feel that a minority display an unfortunate disdain to all people whom they feel are lacking in an appropriate level of formal training but have an keen interest in meteorology, some of this same minority display a definite insecurity in their attitude to the public at large and obviously have yet to conclude their education" - if anything with the MS blog they are taking the reverse attitude. That is, trying to educate, and not showing disdain.
If the minority do show disdain, then hey, it's a minority. Elitism exists everywhere- especially science and the arts!

Maybe I am being too negative but I think the world is losing the respect for expert knowledge, and their view on meteorology is probably clouded by the excessively political climate change debate!
This is reflected in the media, and journalists who do not do much research before publishing a story, and lack appreciation for genuine credentials. As an example, can we really expect a journalist to know the difference between "Head weather analyst" and "meteorologist"? It probably doesn't help that whenever MS meteorologists are quoted they are called "forecasters", which is (as stated above) not a protected term.
I'm not having a go at weatherwatch here. I know Phil has always been very clear about stating that he is not a meteorologist, and yet in a fairly recent article he was quoted as being one. Perhaps this is because the media do not appreciate what "meteorologist" actually means? And so they bandy it about....

( http://www.3news.co.nz/Dry-start-to-the ... fault.aspx )

For 3 News, which is supposed to be quite reputable, to do this is simultaneously disappointing but unsurprising! It just seems to be the way thing are today.

Is this all symptomatic of the internet era? We have available a wealth of free information, which is good! But also a barrage of nonsense! We are just overwhelmed, and the truth is that almost anyone can claim to be a "forecaster" without any knowledge beyond how to navigate a webpage and which way the wind goes around highs and lows.

There is a quote I like -

If this is the information age, how come no one knows anything?
User avatar
Nev
Moderator
Posts: 6216
Joined: Tue 07/03/2006 15:24
Location: Waiheke Island, Hauraki Gulf
Has thanked: 468 times
Been thanked: 1064 times

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by Nev »

Myself (not moi), re TV3, I think you'll find that this has happened numerous times in the past. Stuff ran a similar story that day, which was originally based on an article supplied by the NZPA. TVNZ also made the same gaffe in a story last Sep, which I think was based on an AAP story doing the rounds in Australia at the time.

Oldun, from what I understand, MetService has operated long-range Dopplers long before Australia decided to install them. And they do complete a scan every 7 minutes, but are currently only made available to the general public every hour. I also think that elevation and unobstructed views would be far more effective than placing them close to the major cities, particularly given NZ's topography.

I also think that comparing the BoM to MetService is like comparing apples with oranges. The BoM is a true govt dept, whereas MetService is run as a commercial operation. Countries like Australia and the US also have far more extreme severe weather events than we do, so perhaps there is a greater emphasis on what info should be afforded to the general public. They also have far greater financial resources than we do and don't have the disadvantage of trying to predict weather for a couple of relatively small islands with a very complex terrain surrounded by a very big ocean.
jrj
Posts: 462
Joined: Tue 18/03/2003 18:00
Location: Havelock North, New Zealand
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: More weather companies

Unread post by jrj »

At the risk of becoming boring, I am just so pleased to have the Mahia radar up and running :wave:
Locked