Re: GNER in court monday 10 july 2006
- From: "Meld" <d9003@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 11 Jul 2006 06:55:15 -0700
Tim Fenton wrote:
"Meld" <d9003@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1152569091.446754.249380@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
This is like Tesco complaining about someone opening a small grocery
store just down the road.
Rubbish. A store competing with Tesco is not automatically going to
abstract
part of Tesco's revenue merely by being there.
Rubbish? Hardly the comparison is valid.
What does this mean? Is the statement "Hardly - the comparison is valid",
or, perhaps, the meaning is "the comparison is hardly valid"?
I'll assume the first of the two. In which case, you are still spouting
rubbish.
A small shop is hardly going
to dent a Tesco store's trade, and the same applies here.
I'll say it again, as you are either missing or avoiding the point. A store
competing with Tesco is not automatically going to abstract part of Tesco's
revenue merely by being there.
4 services a
day against 60 services a day out of York. GNER ignored this section of
the market so cannot complain if others see a niche.
If there are 60 services a day already from York, then GNER are hardly
ignoring it.
Sunderland
deserves better.
Avoiding the point again. You argue the point for York, then try moving the
goalposts. Let GC serve Sunderland.
The pathing question is sorted, which is
precisely what was predicted by the Vossloh system GC used and the dent
in revenues at York made by these services will be tiny when all the
GNER services are considered.
The abstraction is the only way that GC will stay afloat.
They say different and looking at their level of expertise compared
with your postings I'm with them.
If this were you on the other end of the argument, you would by now be
screaming for the facts to be posted. But you won't be backing up your
personal attack with any figures. Again, let GC serve Sunderland.
By offering a simpler and cheaper
fare structure they will attract new traffic. Some abstraction no
doubt, but all GNER has to do is compete. If they can't then let
someone who can take over. They seem happy to spend a few million
trying to retain a monopolistic position despite the extra paths
becoming available just to save face over 4 services a day compared to
their 60. Ridiculous.
This from the FirstGroup apologist who called Cotswold Rail - who are
unlikely to operate regular scheduled services this side of hell freezing
over - "Open Access competition for FGW", and that it was what they had
"feared". What colour is the pot, kettle?
I happen to be a fan of GNER services,
Some of my best friends are also Jewish.
Healthy
competition grows the market.
I'm sure your pals at First will be chanting this mantra eagerly as their
bus operation bullies local authorities for subsidies and tries to run
upstart independents off the road.
--
Tim
FirstGroup - deeply lacking in moral tone
Tim Fenton let me educate you,
1. I am not a First Group apologist
2. Open Access competition frm Cotswold Rail, bring it on, I wish they
would it's needed.
3. Fenton deeply lacking in moral tone, I happen to be Jewish.
4. Oh I can't be bothered with this half witted obsessive, maybe a
First Group bus ran over his head when he was a baby, but I'll do as
everyone else does and ignore the little twat.
5. GNER messed up, the other bidders allowed for GC they didn't. Tough.
Let GC run.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: GNER in court monday 10 july 2006
- From: Cod Roe
- Re: GNER in court monday 10 july 2006
- From: Tim Fenton
- Re: GNER in court monday 10 july 2006
- References:
- Re: GNER in court monday 10 july 2006
- From: tshanazt
- Re: GNER in court monday 10 july 2006
- From: Meld
- Re: GNER in court monday 10 july 2006
- From: Tim Fenton
- Re: GNER in court monday 10 july 2006
- From: Meld
- Re: GNER in court monday 10 july 2006
- From: Tim Fenton
- Re: GNER in court monday 10 july 2006
- Prev by Date: Re: "New Deal Photo Card"
- Next by Date: Re: Square Wheels
- Previous by thread: Re: GNER in court monday 10 july 2006
- Next by thread: Re: GNER in court monday 10 july 2006
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading