BAR Technologies has told shipowners that the prevailing market now undermines a long‑standing objection to retrofitting older tankers. A report in reports on 27 October 2026 highlighted the company’s warning that a 15‑year‑old tanker can be worth more than a newbuild, making upgrades economically plausible where owners once declined.
The note, datelined Portsmouth, UK, 20 October 2026, drew attention to the supply timetable for new very large crude carriers. VLCCs ordered today are not expected to deliver until 2029, the report said, which leaves most of the tonnage that will move crude through the late 2020s already in service.
BAR Technologies framed the shift in values as removing the most convenient rationale owners have used against retrofits. Where a second‑hand vessel’s price approaches or exceeds that of a new ship, the cost justification for replacing rather than upgrading is weakened, the company argued in the account published by reports.
The timing mismatch between orders and deliveries is central to the argument. With new VLCCs arriving only after 2028, the existing fleet must continue to carry the bulk of demand for several years, creating an economic case for extending vessel life through modification rather than immediate renewal.
Delivery schedules and the near‑term fleet
The reported delivery profile for new VLCCs shifts responsibility for crude carriage onto ships already trading. That creates a practical imperative for owners and charterers to consider performance and regulatory upgrades for the existing fleet if fresh tonnage will not be available until 2029.
This is particularly relevant for tonnage where the market value of a middle‑aged ship has risen substantially. The reports item noted that a 15‑year‑old tanker is now priced higher than a newbuild, a development BAR Technologies cited as changing owners’ incentives.
Value changes alter retrofit calculus
Where owners have previously dismissed retrofits as uneconomic because a new ship would be preferable, the new pricing dynamic complicates that stance. If owners face a choice between paying for a modification or replacing the ship with scarce newbuild availability and elevated prices, the retrofit option becomes more competitive.
BAR Technologies’ observation does not, in the published summary, prescribe specific retrofit technologies or spell out technical pathways. Instead the point is framed as an economic one: market values have reduced the persuasive power of the ‘‘too old to upgrade’’ argument.
The reports piece serves as the record of the company’s position. It couples the timing of newbuild deliveries with second‑hand price shifts to explain why some owners should reassess previous decisions to forgo upgrades.
Owners, yards and charterers will likely weigh the relative costs of refit against operational demands as the late‑2020s delivery schedule unfolds. The reported shift in asset values is one factor among many, but BAR Technologies presents it as a decisive one in the debate over extending the working lives of tankers.
As reported on 27 October 2026 by reports, the combination of delayed VLCC deliveries and rising second‑hand prices has prompted BAR Technologies to challenge a habitual industry argument and to urge a reassessment of retrofit economics.