ore ▁business . ▁Due ▁to ▁conflic ting ▁design ▁requirements ▁of ▁ice bre aking ▁and ▁off sh ore ▁work , ▁the ▁Finn ish ▁multip ur pose ▁ice break ers ▁were ▁not ▁compet itive ▁against ▁purpose - built ▁off sh ore ▁vessels . ▁As ▁a ▁result , ▁the ▁ships ▁have ▁been ▁left ▁without ▁contract s ▁and ▁have ▁spent ▁long ▁periods ▁of ▁time ▁in ▁foreign ▁ports ▁even ▁during ▁the ▁Finn ish ▁winter ▁navigation ▁season , ▁forcing ▁the ▁Finn ish ▁Government ▁to ▁h ire ▁ice break ers ▁from ▁the ▁commercial ▁market ▁to ▁keep ▁the ▁ports ▁open . ▁However , ▁according ▁to ▁an ▁internal ▁memor and um ▁of ▁the ▁Finn ish ▁Mar itime ▁Administration , ▁the ▁off sh ore ▁business , ▁while ▁not ▁prof itable , ▁has ▁covered ▁at ▁least ▁some ▁of ▁the ▁exp enses ▁from ▁ice bre aking ▁during ▁the ▁winter ▁seasons ▁in ▁the ▁late ▁ 1 9 9 0 s , ▁resulting ▁in ▁lower ▁overall ▁operating ▁costs ▁for ▁the ▁multip ur pose ▁ice break ers ▁than ▁for ▁traditional ▁ice break ers . ▁ ▁The ▁Finn ish ▁multip ur pose ▁ice break ers ▁have ▁also ▁been ▁critic ized ▁for ▁their ▁( al leg ed ) ▁lower ▁ice bre aking ▁cap ability ▁when ▁compared ▁to ▁traditional , ▁purpose - built ▁ice break ers ▁such ▁as ▁those ▁built ▁in ▁the ▁ 1 9 7 0 s ▁and ▁ 1 9 8 0 s ▁particularly ▁in ▁the ▁Both n ian ▁Bay ▁ice ▁conditions . ▁Design ed ▁primarily ▁for ▁ice bre aking ▁operations ▁in ▁the ▁G ulf ▁of ▁Finland , ▁Bot