SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - View Single Post

Oberon · 10-03-12, 06:49 PM

I'm of two minds on this, the original tender was over the top by first...and it is debatable if they could have kept it up. However, Branson calling foul just smacked of him throwing his toys out of his pram because Virgin didn't get the route.
First had a rocky start on the GWML, but they seem to have levelled off, likewise Virgin have done well on the WCML, despite the problems with insufficient coaches on the 390 units.
The problem, I think, lies somewhere in the middle, I wouldn't be surprised if gentlemen from first had a 'Murdoch' moment with gentlemen in the government, and notes were exchanged.

Privatisation, isn't it a grand old thing?

@Tribesman - It's possible, but I doubt that renationalisation will happen any time soon. A lot of people have fond memories of BR, but truth be told the service was no better or worse than it is today, in fact it was probably slightly worse. BR was also a massive money pit which was one of the reasons it was sold off. However, some level of control does need to be taken by the government in regards to the price of rail tickets if it wants to encourage people to use public transport, and I wouldn't completely count out some form of limited 'Grouping' in the near future.
History is repeating itself, when railways first came about there was a railway company for just about every town, and several railway companies that didn't exist and were just used to con people out of money, it was like the Dot.com bubble but in the 1840s-1850s. Then eventually the companies that did well brought out those who didn't, and a thousand odd railway companies and schemes narrowed down to about 120, then they in turn were narrowed down to four companies in the Railways Act of 1921 which hoped to reduce some of the losses made by the 120 odd companies, which in turn were nationalised in 1947 in order to aid the rebuilding of the country following the Second World War which had seen the railways run into the ground.
Now, in this recycling of history I'd say we're nearing a repeat of the Railways Act of 1921, we already have some dominant groups, Virgin, First, Southern (again) and it would make sense to split the country regionally and turn it over to them, on the provision that they meet certain requirements, including cheaper fares, or face nationalisation.

10-03-12, 06:49 PM	#4
Oberon Lucky Jack Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 25,976 Downloads: 61 Uploads: 20	I'm of two minds on this, the original tender was over the top by first...and it is debatable if they could have kept it up. However, Branson calling foul just smacked of him throwing his toys out of his pram because Virgin didn't get the route. First had a rocky start on the GWML, but they seem to have levelled off, likewise Virgin have done well on the WCML, despite the problems with insufficient coaches on the 390 units. The problem, I think, lies somewhere in the middle, I wouldn't be surprised if gentlemen from first had a 'Murdoch' moment with gentlemen in the government, and notes were exchanged. Privatisation, isn't it a grand old thing? @Tribesman - It's possible, but I doubt that renationalisation will happen any time soon. A lot of people have fond memories of BR, but truth be told the service was no better or worse than it is today, in fact it was probably slightly worse. BR was also a massive money pit which was one of the reasons it was sold off. However, some level of control does need to be taken by the government in regards to the price of rail tickets if it wants to encourage people to use public transport, and I wouldn't completely count out some form of limited 'Grouping' in the near future. History is repeating itself, when railways first came about there was a railway company for just about every town, and several railway companies that didn't exist and were just used to con people out of money, it was like the Dot.com bubble but in the 1840s-1850s. Then eventually the companies that did well brought out those who didn't, and a thousand odd railway companies and schemes narrowed down to about 120, then they in turn were narrowed down to four companies in the Railways Act of 1921 which hoped to reduce some of the losses made by the 120 odd companies, which in turn were nationalised in 1947 in order to aid the rebuilding of the country following the Second World War which had seen the railways run into the ground. Now, in this recycling of history I'd say we're nearing a repeat of the Railways Act of 1921, we already have some dominant groups, Virgin, First, Southern (again) and it would make sense to split the country regionally and turn it over to them, on the provision that they meet certain requirements, including cheaper fares, or face nationalisation.