At the proponent’s own scale, you’re looking at roughly US$470–750M of throughput over 10 years; with smart expansion, by-products, and tourism tie-ins, it can push toward a $-billion.

Whether that billion accrues to The Bahamas or leaks offshore is a policy choice, not fate.

Approve only a pilot now—and lock the value in. Make crustacean aquaculture a Bahamian-majority sector (≥51% beneficial ownership). Require domestic processing and packaging so the margin stays on-island, with a minimum local-value-add threshold written into the licence. Protect the “Bahamian Stone Crab” name via a national certification and traceability scheme. Tie any step-up to proven biology, neutral water quality outside the mixing zone, hurricane-resilience drills, and diversified offtake (no single buyer over 40%). Hard-wire technology transfer, a training ladder into management for Bahamians, and open books on volumes, grades, and realized prices to a public dashboard. Backstop it with performance bonds, decommissioning funds, environmental impairment insurance, and a clear right for the state to pause or scale back biomass if monitoring trends go the wrong way. Add a modest export levy or royalty per pound that steps down as local value-add steps up, plus a small premium local allocation to anchor the brand in Bahamian hospitality.

> When a Bahamian group applied: statute
> or regulation cited, protected zone.

Since the indictment was unsealed in late November 2024, the “high-ranking Bahamian politician” whom a defendant allegedly named as willing to authorize armed RBPF facilitation for a $2 million bribe has never been identified in any public filing or official statement. The charging documents and press release detail the claim (and even cite the September 2024 timeframe), yet stop short of naming that politician. As of today—October 23, 2025—court updates in New York show the case moving through status conferences toward a schedule for motions and possible trial, still with no public identification of that political figure. Going into a general election, Bahamians deserve clarity: either the United States (or Bahamian authorities via mutual legal assistance) should confirm that no evidence supports charging a minister, or—if evidence exists—proceed and name the official, so voters are not asked to choose in the dark.

Ferde was more than just a good guy; he was a truly loyal and cherished friend. It’s impossible to grasp this loss, but we trust in a divine plan.

Rest In Peace, My Friend.

My deepest and most heartfelt condolences go out to Ferde’s entire family during this incredibly difficult time.

"Inna lillahi wa inna ilayhi raji'un" (إِنَّا لِلّهِ وَإِنَّا إِلَيْهِ رَاجِعونَ), - "Indeed, we belong to Allah, and indeed, to Him we will return"

You brought up heritage, not me. I only reminded you that greatness isn’t confined by birthplace. And if quoting Jesus offends you, maybe it’s not politics that’s dirty—maybe it’s how you choose to see people.

And where were you born, exactly? Funny how birthplace only matters when it’s someone else’s.

A third of the people holding Bahamian passports today were born in Haiti. By your logic, they shouldn’t vote, work, or belong here either? You hear how absurd that sounds? Nationality isn’t inherited purity; it’s legal standing and contribution. If Robert’s a Bahamian by law, then he’s as Bahamian as anyone else carrying that passport.

…and Jesus was born in Bethlehem, yet you hold him as god—so spare us the birthplace argument. Lynden O. Pindling wasn’t born in The Bahamas either, and no one questioned his right to lead. Plenty of today’s politicians trace mixed or Haitian lineage. Let’s leave the petty racial gatekeeping behind. Under Bahamian law, Robert is a Bahamian. That’s the only qualification that matters.

***

> The FNM’s Missed Opportunity and the
> Carron Paradox

***

If The Tribune’s newfound warmth toward the PLP through Robert Dupuch-Carron reads as ideological betrayal, the inverse question is more strategic: what if Carron had gone the other way?

Within the fractured landscape of the Free National Movement (FNM), Carron’s entry could have functioned as both a symbolic and structural revival. The FNM, under Michael Pintard’s cautious stewardship, is perceived as morally intact yet electorally fatigued — an organization with a memory of reform but no present charisma. Carron, with his lineage in a paper historically aligned with “clean governance” and “watchdog journalism,” could have personified the very renewal the FNM requires: credible, educated, and nationally palatable.

Political observers note that the FNM’s decline is not ideological but emotional — a party drained of urgency and imagination. Carron’s crossover to the PLP thus feels doubly consequential: first, it signals The Tribune’s symbolic surrender of its traditional alignment; second, it deprives the FNM of what might have been its one bridge between legacy integrity and modern innovation.

Seen through that lens,

> Robert joining the FNM may have been
> the blessing the FNM needed

— not as a tactical move, but as an existential reset. His heritage carries moral capital that could have reignited public trust, especially among moderate voters disenchanted with both parties’ stale binaries. Instead, the move toward the PLP amplifies the FNM’s identity crisis, leaving it ideologically adrift while The Tribune, once its de facto amplifier, now flirts with the rival it was built to challenge.

Ahh, so Davis is going around taking the “chickens”—no wonder I don’t see them running around the neighbourhood. But that Pintard “confidence” joke? Look around; no one is laughing.

Michael Pintard and the FNM aren’t offering a clear plan. Their message doesn’t connect, and there’s no vision to win back old voters or attract new ones. Calling for a general election now looks like a shortcut, not a fix. A by-election costs less than a nationwide vote, and the law sets the timeline. The PLP can hold the by-election, keep governing, and serve its full five-year term.

"Voters need results, not stunts."

“The Progressive Liberal Party’s shortcomings are evident; however, the Free National Movement does not presently constitute a credible or attractive alternative.”