Do Stena view Fishguard-Rosslare as a route in its own right which has to make a profit or do they view the Irish market as one - with them, as market leaders, covering every sector offering a complete suite of alternative routes and crossings for hauliers to choose from? If the latter, there could be very good strategic reasons to keep Fishguard open even if the profitability is low or non-existant (and with the age of the Stena Europe the capital cost involved in the route is minimal, albeit operational costs will be higher than using a newer ship). In Scandinavia the Grenaa-Varberg route is by repute kept open as a spoiler just so that no-one else ever again dares to come close to entering the market in competition on Stena's home turf.
Stena have been involved in quite a few joint ventures, not least P&O Stena Line but also as owners of the Swedish part of Scandlines until it all got absorbed into mainstream Stena Line. They even managed to go into a joint venture with themselves when HH Ferries and Scandlines, which had been operating in competition despite being owned by different branches of the Stena group, came together a couple of years back. Then there have been myriad one or two-ship operations, such as Stena Daea Line, Stena SeaLine and, a few years back, Stena Tor Line.
Stena have been involved in quite a few joint ventures, not least P&O Stena Line but also as owners of the Swedish part of Scandlines until it all got absorbed into mainstream Stena Line. They even managed to go into a joint venture with themselves when HH Ferries and Scandlines, which had been operating in competition despite being owned by different branches of the Stena group, came together a couple of years back. Then there have been myriad one or two-ship operations, such as Stena Daea Line, Stena SeaLine and, a few years back, Stena Tor Line.