Nordhavn has a well cultivated image that has come to define the brand. That brand image has worked so well for so long that, in my opinion, it has come to imply a superior degree of seaworthiness. This incident has highlighted a bit of a disconnect between the cultivated image and the reality. Maybe to some people it is like finding out Rock Hudson was gay (not that there is anything wrong with that) or that John Wayne was afraid of horses. I mean it is supposed to be a macho go anywhere world cruiser that turns out not to handle a real crisis any better than a Bayliner. It is marketed as a small ship. It sells for more than many small ships. It is advertised as meeting the "highest international standards and extensively outfitted with the finest equipment" but it turns out the emergency equipment was woefully inadequate for even a much lower rate of flooding. It barely exceeded the minimum equipment standards, and it's questionable whether all the installed equipment could have handled the flooding which was not all that bad if compared to what might happen if the hull was breached in some minor fashion during an ocean crossing. No one is saying that the boat sunk because of something PAE did wrong, but the sinking showed that nothing PAE installed would have done much to prevent it from sinking either. I think it is just one of those "Tell me it ain't so, Joe!" moments for a lot of us who always thought PAE was just a little bit better than that.