Where will the next accident occur with more than 100 fatalities?

what if it is not a natural disaster, and is not accidental? Like, a firing squad in Myanmar or Detroit that shoots and kills over 100 people?

Would have liked a separation of North and South America as choices...

An accident is an accident, not a deliberate action taken like firing squads or out-of -control murderous people...not suicide bombings and misdirected missiles in a war zone...

@bayoubear

I agree - the United States and Canada have some of the best building codes in the world, very well defined traffic laws, safety regulations on almost everything, great statistics on airline safety, and so forth.

It makes these two countries a much different market from much of the rest of the Americas.

This settled too soon.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080611/ap_on_re_af/sudan_plane_crash

"Sudan plane crash death toll at 30; officials seek cause"
....Around 170 managed to escape and about 14 others remain unaccounted for, Mahmoud said. Officials have said some survivors likely left the airport without reporting to authorities or going through customs amid the confusion."

Seems like the 214 passengers are accounted for. Far less than the 100+ required for closing.

market has been reopened

Is the ferry accident in the Phillippines enough to close this question? If so, needs to be suspended, looks like a lot of people are jumping on board since the news broke....

I wouldn't think so..the sinking was due to a typhoon - (no natural catastrophe)

Amazing...suspended and settlements requested. I have no dog in this fight, however;
Doesn't the market specify "no natural catastrophe"?
Isn't a typhoon a "natural catastrophe?"
Doesn't the headline in the story cited for settlement state "...typhoon sinks ferry"?
This should get interesting-

If a bad weather cause an airplane crash is it this natural catastrophe?
Don't misinterpret the question.
Natural catastrophe is the typhoon disaster in Burma and the earthquake in China. Here is just what the questions asked. Correctly suspended and should be settled as 'Asia'.

Sorry, orlin- I don't understand how you're attempting to distinguish this typhoon, and the resulting deaths, from "the typhoon disaster in Burma and the earthquake in China." Now, if the ferry had run into another ship and sunk, or run aground due to navigational error, etc., I'd concur. However, the market clearly states: no natural catastrophe.

And yes, if a plane crashed due to weather, not mechanical problems or pilot error, that would be a natural catastrophe.

This one may qualify. We'll have to await the news on the final death toll.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/06/22/philippines.ferry/index.html

Oh. Now I see. This was caused by a Typhoon.

This was caused by several factors including engine failure, poor judgment and a typhoon.

Nothing about poor judgement as a cause in the article cited. Engine failure does not cause a ship to sink. "ferry capsized in the Philippines during Typhoon Fengshen"

ignoring cyclone warnings and taking a ferry out for a scheduled run is an accident waiting to happen. the first warning was posted over 2 days ago

The President of the Philippines is blaming the Coast Guard for allowing the departure.
Survivors describe the ship suddenly lurching onto it's side. and now it rests upside down with the end exposed, and a hole in it's hull.
It seems to me that the vessel bottomed out and capsized. Engine failure would have disabled any ability to control it's course and cannot be disregarded as a contributing factor. Neither can the fact that human negligence is being reported as a contributing factor.
Tragedies of this scale are often attributed to a failure of more than one system.

@ Erik
If this is as 'black and white' as you would like to make it out to be you would not have people disagreeing with you.

"The Princess of the Stars began to sink several kilometres from shore near Sibuyan island due to engine failure early on Saturday afternoon."
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/latest/200806221910/30bcc14b

The M/V Princess of the Star, carrying 626 passengers and 121 crew members capsized off Sibuyan Island in the central province of Romblon at 6 p.m. Saturday, hours after it went dead at sea due to engine failure.

a "big" hole was seen on the exposed part of the ship's hull.

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/nation/view/20080622-144136/Frank-leaves-at-least-229-dead-700-missing

Radio contact with the 23,824-tonne ferry was lost on Saturday after its engines failed and it ran aground on a sandbank
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jun/23/philippines.naturaldisasters

The ferry initially ran aground a few miles off central Sibuyan island Saturday, then capsized, said Mayor Nanette Tansingco of Sibuyan’s San Fernando.

The nearly 24,000-ton ferry — with 626 passengers and 121 crew members on board — was “dead in the water” after its engine failed around noon Saturday, coast guard chief Vice Adm. Wilfredo Tamayo said.

http://www.japantoday.com/category/world/view/over-700-feared-dead-after-ferry-sinks-in-philippines

IMHO this ship would not have sunk if it had not lost power.

The main point is if the ship ran aground, had a hole in it, lost all its power would more than 100 people have died, if there was no typhoon. I think it is easy to conclude that the typhoon was a major contributing factor to this disaster.

No doubt
Here's some pics
http://www.wakanatsu.com/philippine/photo/princessofthestars.html
http://www.wakanatsu.com/philippine/photo/princessofthestars-2.html
http://www.wakanatsu.com/philippine/photo/princessofthestars-3.html

Transportation Sec. Leandro Mendoza tapped the Board of Marine Inquiry (BMI) to start an investigation into the sinking and ordered the grounding of all Sulpicio Lines vessels, pending the conduct an audit of the ships' seaworthiness.
http://www.gmanews.tv/story/102695/Sulpicio-Lines-to-compensate-families-of-mishap-victims

after: http://1-apple.com.tw/dsp_Image.cfm?Path=http://img.1-apple.com.tw/1-www/060328/twapple/640pix/20080623/LN14/LN14_001.jpg

Looking at the graph it appears to me that hubdub users think this question settled when the ferry sank.

chuckles to mork "If this is as 'black and white' as you would like to make it out to be you would not have people disagreeing with you."
Looks like you're the only one.
Please note comment #23 (in the midst of your flurry of posts to cover your wager)
"I think it is easy to conclude that the typhoon was a major contributing factor to this disaster."
My point, exactly.
IMHO this ship would not have sunk if it had not lost power.
ignoring cyclone warnings and taking a ferry out for a scheduled run is an accident waiting to happen.
So...........which is it?
Are we to think all would have been fine out in the midst of a cyclone if only the motor hadn't failed?
OMG...When was the last time you were at sea?

@Erik
I think you should read the comments again.
I am not alone in not agreeing with you.
It was meandering searcher who made the comment that you attribute to me "ignoring cyclone warnings and taking a ferry out for a scheduled run is an accident waiting to happen."
You correctly point out that I have $20 on this question, which I had forgotten about and in no way influenced my comments.
You're attempts to disregard any contributing factor other than the Typhoon and your absurd comment "Ships don't sink from engine failure" lead to me think your money is not on Asia. I won't know because you have chosen to keep all your bets private.
Your sea going experience must be quite vast if you prepared to take shots at mine.
Would you be willing to kill all power and allow yourself to be at the mercies of the sea during a storm?

@Erik
For the record I never suggested this question settle and believe it should be re-opened.
I was contesting your disregard for contributing factors other than the Typhoon.

and yes, I do believe the ship would not have run aground had it not lost engine power.

mork> a few things here--
You ask if I would be willing to kill all power and allow myself to be at the mercies of the sea during a storm? Of course not. This just underlines the fact that this tragic accident was greatly influenced by nature. Therefore this market should not settle
You may think my $ is on Asia, in fact you may think anything your lil heart desires. As I stated earlier, I have no dog or $$ in this fight. Yes, my wagers are not open to view, you'll have to take my word or think I'm a liar. I'm an honest man.
You state that you never suggested this question settle and believe it should be re-opened.
Hmmmm, let's have a look at the "Info" tab, shall we?

Settlement requested Yesterday 8:23am CDT by mork: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h_3yhnZvsE90p8kvwkFoSW99kjIgD91F46FG0 (market suspended)

Settlement requested Yesterday 10:33pm CDT by mork: "The Princess of the Stars began to sink several kilometres from shore near Sibuyan island due to engine failure early on Saturday afternoon."
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/latest/200806221910/30bcc14b

Imagine that....

I have been known to drift, purposely without power, in calm seas...no power ever caused me to sink.

Personally I do not think this question should settle but according to the existing guidelines of hubdub it could settle.

I believe the articles I provided in settlement requests are grounds for settlement as they are from 'major mainstream media' and they state that the ship ran aground and capsized due to engine failure.

My requests for settlement were made to help this question move beyond suspension.

@ Erik - I am thankful you acknowledge that this disaster was "greatly influenced by nature" and not entirely due to it, as you have been arguing in the previous posts.

"influenced by" is not the same as "caused by" nature

mork, you spin it pretty good:
"@Erik
For the record I never suggested this question settle and believe it should be re-opened."

"I believe the articles I provided in settlement requests are grounds for settlement as they are from 'major mainstream media' and they state that the ship ran aground and capsized due to engine failure. My requests for settlement were made to help this question move beyond suspension."
You should be in politics...Which is it, what are we to believe? Did you or didn't you request settlement?
And yes, this accident was greatly influenced by nature. Note the market, please. It clearly states: "no natural catastrophe"

Since Pepe made a point of adding "no natural disaster" to this question I believe this question should be re-opened because it was likely the most contributing factor to this tragedy.

meandering> nowhere in the market does it ask, "influenced by" or "caused by."

If an amateur tight rope walker falls to his death during an earthquake will his death be attributed to the earthquake or the fact that he was walking a rope?

lol....that reminds me of a joke concerning twins, one was a tight-rope walker, the other a truck driver. Some of you might have heard it. Certainly no repeatable here, but the punch line is: Don't look down. ;)

But, to answer your question: I dunno...maybe cuz he was an amateur?

should be settled as it was not caused by a natural castatrophe

The track record of the ferry line combined with their negligence in allowing this ferry's departure by no means reflect professionalism.

I am not sure the ferry out and about in a tropical cyclone.. is that not classified as natural disaster?

Because if poor professionalism is the primary factor then the earthquake deaths in China should have been attributed to poor construction more than seismic activities?

The fact that there was a naturally occuring event involved means that it is a disaster related to a naturally occuring event.. hence a natural disaster?

Just my $H2