No not really.
My father works for a company that builds large yachts company in the UK. He has built yachts for F1 drivers and team owners for the last 20 odd years. These yachts while large aren't on this size and it is true that the number of places where this work can be done is limited (there are literally only a few places left in the UK itself).
With something of this size there is probably only a few places where it can be done in the whole of Europe if not the entire world.
You are assuming the worst intentions here.
> And Rotterdam will probably do what they say. Because they're right- the corporations do control them this way.
The number of jobs that were provided by building this large yacht probably has enriched everyone in the city. Working people understand the trade-off.
EDIT: Other people have noted that the bridge itself doesn't carry traffic.
If Rotterdam's government went all "sure we'll hack the bridge for you, but it's going to cost €15 million, and we need to know 3 months in advance" or whatever [1], I wouldn't expect Oceanco to go "no way, we're moving out, you can say bye-bye to N jobs and some high-profile on-brand industry presence" because then the actual customer paying Oceanco €450M or whatever will be like "cough cough excuse us, but where is our yacht?". I imagine the contract-breaching fines on not delivering a yacht in this price range are in the "hefty+" range. Right?
(Edited for brevity believe it or not.)
[1] Numbers taken straight from the air, I know nothing. I've been to Rotterdam vacationing for one day, built zero luxury yachts.
The bridge is a monument and does not carry traffic.
If it did carry traffic they would almost certainly have said no or required it be an overnight job. Overnight temporary removal of infrastructure like that is common in the world of hauling very bulky industrial things.
Oceano and Bezos will reimburse the costs: https://nltimes.nl/2022/02/02/rotterdam-bridge-taken-apart-l...
This is much ado about nothing.
They knew the height of the bridge. They knew the planned height of the yacht. The started building anyway without first asking. They simply presumed they could get what they wanted. How? Well the article explains how very well.
> He added: "From an economic perspective and maintaining employment, the municipality considers this a very important project."
The veiled threat being "Oh, you like having jobs here? Would be a shame if something happened to that."
And of course they could just not put the mast on here, and do it elsewhere, but:
> it was "not practical" to partially finish the vessel and complete the build elsewhere. "If you carry out a big job somewhere, you want all your tools in that place. Otherwise you have to go back and forth constantly. In addition, this is such a large project that there are hardly any locations where this work is finished."
IE: We do have other places we could do this work, but just not as cheaply as we can do it here, by inconveniencing the local population for days by removing their bridge.
And Rotterdam will probably do what they say. Because they're right- the corporations do control them this way.