Re: West Coast Mainline Deal Ditched : Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:04 pm  

I can here the goalposts being shifted from up here...

Re: West Coast Mainline Deal Ditched : Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:07 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

Perhaps you could provide examples of where the state has run things more cost effectively and more efficiently than private enterprise?

The NHS

Perhaps you could come up with the name of the most efficient car plant in the UK that has no Union representation?
Oh no sorry you've left that thread well alone haven't you. Along with the ones on the Leeds board where you kept repeating that Leeds were poorly managed by Hetherington and needed to get rid of Webb, Burrow, Peacock etc 2 years ago.

Re: West Coast Mainline Deal Ditched : Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:08 pm  

Him wrote:

No most people who use public transport dont have a choice between a train or a bus, they have to use one or the other depending on their circumstances.
Has anybody said that the railways are a monopoly on transport provision? I think what people have said is that there is no choice as to which train company you can go with. Which is true when most people use trains as a method to go to a specific destination for a specific time. If there were 3/4 trains all leaving the same station at the same time going to the same destinations then people would have a choice of those different train companies, in the same way that I can choose to go to Tescos, Asda, Sainsburys or my local shop, because they're all open for the vast majority of the day. The situation with the trains is like saying that I still have a choice between going to Tescos, Asda, Sainsburys or my local shop even though Asda, Sainsburys & my local shop are only open from 3am-4am each day. Yes they're their but not a realistic choice.

Simply not true - there are numerous options you take on the rail network to get from one destination to another especially longer journeys. If I want to get from Leeds to Manchester I can use Northern Rail or Transpennine express/first so to say there are no options is not factually correct.

Re: West Coast Mainline Deal Ditched : Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:14 pm  

Richie wrote:

You've got very specific now in your criteria for choice, and if you narrow down any scenario enough, you will get to the point where only one option is available.

But what you are telling me now, is that the train service is so brilliant, it causes you to dismiss the alternatives. That being the case, why are you complaining about the monopoly of train provision?

I'm not, but you asked why be specific about trains and I gave you the answer.

I have considered all of the alternatives, there is no scheduled air service between Leeds and Birmingham, there is a bus service if you have all day to complete your trip, there is the car and there is the train, I've got a bike but its just a bit too far to be able to do a days work at the end of my journey.

Of all of the options that I've considered its the train that is the quickest and most economical, but it still has a monopoly on the route, an absolute monopoly too, so privatisation of the rail services has not brought about a wonderful freedon of choice in using the railway, for all I know the rail journey may actually be achievable by Cross Country at half the price that they are charging me but as an absolute monopoly provider they have no need to be competitive with other operators.

Re: West Coast Mainline Deal Ditched : Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:15 pm  

Him wrote:

The NHS

Perhaps you could come up with the name of the most efficient car plant in the UK that has no Union representation?
Oh no sorry you've left that thread well alone haven't you. Along with the ones on the Leeds board where you kept repeating that Leeds were poorly managed by Hetherington and needed to get rid of Webb, Burrow, Peacock etc 2 years ago.

What are comparing the NHS with? Are there any business out there that you can compere, no so a complete red herring - try again. Would you say BT is a better or worse business since privatisation, would you say performance on the railways is better since privatisation than before?

On Leeds it depends how you judge well managed - turnover profitability or performance on the field? Turnover will be down, crowds are down, they couldn't afford to rebuild the Southstand etc, yes the did win the GF - depends on how you measure success.

Keep digging

Re: West Coast Mainline Deal Ditched : Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:16 pm  

Richie wrote:

But again, why are you limiting yourself to the train and worrying that you can only use one train service provider?
To use your analogy, it's like going to a building occupied by Tesco to shop and complaining that Tesco have a monopoly on the provision of your shopping, and ignoring all other outlets.

My circumstances have limited my option to the train. If taking the example of Leeds to Manchester say just for simplicity. I have no available car to use. There is no realistic bus service. A taxi is prohibitively expensive. I don't own a bike, and if I did I reckon it's well outside my cycling range. It's also a tad far to walk.
So, train it is.
I also don't think it unreasonable to talk about train travel on a thread talking about trains and the issues surrounding when people HAVE to use a train.
I don't think anyone is suggesting they have to use the train for every single journey they make or that trains are a monopoly on transport. But that train operating companies have a monopoly on the lines that they run and in many many cases there is no effective choice for train passengers. I think people's objections are to not having a choice of train companies (choice is the driver of the private sector) whilst also paying for a private company to make a profit, both through taxation and ticket prices. If the best driver of the private sector isn't available then is the private sector the best way to go in this case?

Re: West Coast Mainline Deal Ditched : Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:20 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

That wasn't the point, Mintball suggest the only way to travel between London and Manchester was by Virgin - that is simply not the case.

But if you haven't got hours to spare to see lots of different countryside, and want to go on a train, it is. Jerry C has just shown that getting from Leeds to Birmingham is quicker by train than by car.

Being pedantic, you're right, it isn't the only way to make that journey by train. But who in their right mind, living/working in London and needing to be in Manchester would go via Leeds?

I travel from Sheffield to London fairly regularly. I get the quickest train because the less time I spend travelling the better, so I am forced to use the only available direct route. Perhaps I should get the Cross Country service to Penzance and then travel in from there, just to prove East Mids trains don't provide the "only" service from Sheffield to London?

Re: West Coast Mainline Deal Ditched : Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:24 pm  

JerryChicken wrote:

I'm not, but you asked why be specific about trains and I gave you the answer.

I have considered all of the alternatives, there is no scheduled air service between Leeds and Birmingham, there is a bus service if you have all day to complete your trip, there is the car and there is the train, I've got a bike but its just a bit too far to be able to do a days work at the end of my journey.

Of all of the options that I've considered its the train that is the quickest and most economical, but it still has a monopoly on the route, an absolute monopoly too, so privatisation of the rail services has not brought about a wonderful freedon of choice in using the railway, for all I know the rail journey may actually be achievable by Cross Country at half the price that they are charging me but as an absolute monopoly provider they have no need to be competitive with other operators.

You gave me your reasons for choosing the train service from amongst the options of how to travel. The fact that from those options you chose the train doesn't make it a monopoly any more than the local Costcutter has a monopoly on grocery shopping because I have reasons to choose them ahead of the alternatives.

Nobody has disputed that Crosscountry trains have a monopoly on the direct train service between Birmingham and Leeds. What has been pointed out is that there are other options to travel other than by train, and for that reason that rail service provider is not a monopoly.

Put it this way: if Crosscountry believed they had a monopoly and started charging £1000 for a return fare and changed the carriages to cattle trucks, would commuters faced with a monopolised transport service continue to use it? Or would they choose alternative options, and indeed further alternative options such as express coach services (for example) appear also?

Re: West Coast Mainline Deal Ditched : Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:32 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

What are comparing the NHS with?

The rest of the world. It's 2nd only to Ireland in terms of efficiency including the private sector run national healthcare systems.

Sal Paradise wrote:

Are there any business out there that you can compere, no so a complete red herring - try again.

Yes, the US healthcare system. That came 17th out of 19 systems examined.

Sal Paradise wrote:

Would you say BT is a better or worse business since privatisation, would you say performance on the railways is better since privatisation than before?

I would say BT are roughly the same as they were before privatisation. Fine while everything works, a pain in the backside otherwise. But yet that is a completely different argument anyway, since there is competition and choice in telephone/broadband provision. You talk about red herrings and then bring up a great big fat juicy red one.
The railways are better since having billions of pounds of public money pumped into the infrastructure. Whichever company just changes the logos on the rolling stock and TUPE's the employees every few years appears to be largely irrelevant.

Sal Paradise wrote:

On Leeds it depends how you judge well managed - turnover profitability or performance on the field? Turnover will be down, crowds are down, they couldn't afford to rebuild the Southstand etc, yes the did win the GF - depends on how you measure success.

Keep digging

Well Leeds have consistently run at a profit, and consistently won on the pitch. Yes they could afford the South Stand, they couldn't get the planning permission for the stand they wanted.
You have consistently criticised the most profitable and most successful rugby league club in the northern hemisphere for both on and off-field failings for many years now. Maybe, as they keep making a profit, keep investing in facilities, and keep winning trophies, just maybe you've got this one wrong.
You know, like the most efficient car plant not having union representation.

Re: West Coast Mainline Deal Ditched : Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:32 pm  

Him wrote:

My circumstances have limited my option to the train. If taking the example of Leeds to Manchester say just for simplicity. I have no available car to use. There is no realistic bus service. A taxi is prohibitively expensive. I don't own a bike, and if I did I reckon it's well outside my cycling range. It's also a tad far to walk.
So, train it is.
I also don't think it unreasonable to talk about train travel on a thread talking about trains and the issues surrounding when people HAVE to use a train.
I don't think anyone is suggesting they have to use the train for every single journey they make or that trains are a monopoly on transport. But that train operating companies have a monopoly on the lines that they run and in many many cases there is no effective choice for train passengers. I think people's objections are to not having a choice of train companies (choice is the driver of the private sector) whilst also paying for a private company to make a profit, both through taxation and ticket prices. If the best driver of the private sector isn't available then is the private sector the best way to go in this case?

Again, a very specific set of circumstances that lead you to choose the train but do not make the train a monopoly.
You have quite deliberately chosen not to own a car or motorbike - a choice you made. The facilities are there for you to travel by those methods, you have just chosen not to us them.

By the way, a taxi is £82 one way, £147 return, I agree that's quite expensive.
The coach service between Leeds and Manchester takes 65 minutes. Why do you regard that as unrealistic?

Are there really circumstances where the only way to travel is by train? We still haven't come up with any. We have come up with reasons why rail travel might be preferable, but no cases where someone has to travel by train and it's their only method of travel.