Thank-you for your revised manuscript with thorough response to the detailed and expert reviews. Below are some suggested “technical corrections”, mainly for clarity of meaning or easier reading, for you to consider before final publication in Ocean Science. I am not asking to see your paper again but I anticipate that copy-editing may also change some of the use of English; you should check that your intended meaning is kept.

Thank-you for submitting to Ocean Science.

Yours sincerely
John Huthnance

Page 1
Line 4. “Vertical Land Motion (VLM)”; you already defined VLM. [However, do re-define it at the bottom of page 1].
Lines 5-6 Better “. . range between the methods is comparable with the formal uncertainties . .”
Line 15. Delete 2nd “into account”.
Line 17. “residual” (spelling).
Lines 16-20. “solution(s)” appears 4 times. One referee commented on use of “solutions”. Maybe “trend estimates”?

Page 2.
Line 12. “Satellite” (upper-case S).
Lines 16, 22. “solution” again.

Page 4.
Line 10. Delete “since”
Line 20. I prefer “proportion” (it tends to apply to the number of estimates rather than “fraction of trend”).
Lines 27-28. Better “. . detection, such as those computed with CATS . .”?
Lines 29-30. “In this study no screening, like performed by (Wöppelmann and Marcos, 2016), is applied to the time series or trends.” This is not clear about whether Wöppelmann and Marcos, 2016 applied screening. If “yes” then maybe “Unlike Wöppelmann and Marcos (2016), no screening is applied here to the time series or trends.” If “no” then maybe “As in Wöppelmann and Marcos (2016), no screening is applied here to the time series or trends.”

Page 5.
Line 13. “. . trends at neighbouring . .”
Lines 28-29. Better “. . quickly decrease with increasing distance, effectively reducing the number of GNSS trends involved in the estimate. In several studies . .”

Page 6.
Line 4. “threshold” (spelling). Also in several other places: page 14 line 30, page 21 lines 11 and 31,
Line 15. “observation” -> “data”?
Line 18. “is” -> “are”

Page 7.
Line 5 “corrections are used for all satellites, as given in Table 1. . .”
Line 10. “. . decreased number of trends that can be evaluated with statistical confidence.”?

Page 10 line 16. “, which” -> “and”

Page 12 line 5. “. . comparable in size with the VLM signal . .”

Page 13
Line 2. “were” -> “are”.
Line 6. “. . the RMS is 1.36 . .”
Line 17. Better “. . the number of estimated ALT-TG trends. Table 3 shows the reduced number of differenced VLM trends . .”?

Page 14
Lines 11-12. “. . Though reduced in magnitude, similar, patterns are observed . .” Better “. . Similar patterns of standard deviation decrease, albeit reduced in magnitude, are observed . .” This might begin a new paragraph.
Line 22. “trends” –> “trend estimates”? [Strictly speaking, the number of trends is the number of tide gauges. You are referring to the number that you calculate and use]. This is a question for several other places: page 14 line 23, page 14 line 30, Table 4 caption line 3, page 17 line 6, page 21 lines 30 and 31,
Line 25. “Compared with the GNSS trends, . .”

Figure 4 panel C. A-B corresponds with the text from page 14 line 34 to page 16 line 1. However, it would be more intuitive to show B-A with the same colours on the figure but reversing the colour bar (i.e. red positive and blue negative).

Page 16
Line 1. “United States . .” (upper-case S).
Line 10. “. . methods.”

Table 4 caption.
Line 1. “(approach 2)”?
Line 4. “correlation” (no “s”).

Page 18 line 2 of main text. “. . attributed to problematic . .”

Page 19.
Lines 16-17. Better “. . For these TGs (located at Galveston (US), Eureka (US) and the Cocos Islands (Australia)) we find . .”
Line 17. “lagunas” -> “lagoons”?
Lines 17-19. “Local VLM differences between the GNSS stations and the TG are therefore the likely cause for the largest discrepancies and not the ALT-TG trend.” Maybe re-order “Therefore the likely cause for the largest discrepancies is not the ALT-TG trend but local VLM differences between the GNSS stations and the TG.”?
Line 29. “Better “. . VLM, this affects not only the mean but also . .”
Line 30. “differences”

Page 21
Lines 6-7. Better “. . taking into account only the time series . .”
Line 16. Better “. . with no threshold the RMS of differences was 2.14 . .”
Line 26. “using” -> “use”.

Page 22
Line 1. “are” -> “is”.
Line 2. “practice”.

Table 6 caption line 3. Better “. . TOPEX/POSEIDON respectively using Eq. (4). J2 indicates . .”