On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 10:32:43 +0100, "Phil Cook"
<phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:

>Yeah, no it was a fairly wooshable statement. As everything's privatised  
>now a train service with few passengers is most likely unprofitable  
>therefore the company running it has three options - 1) Charge more. This  
>covers the cost of running the train at the price of losing customers to  
>whom the service is non-essential, therefore requiring you to charge more  
>to the remaining customers until you're only left with those who *have* to  
>use it being charged a small fortune. 2) Drop the service. Best option in  
>that you now have a free train and driver to put on a more profitable  
>route. 3) Get a subsidy from the government. Better option, you can still  
>charge a near-exorbitant fee and 'make-up' your losses from the taxpayers.
>

What is the world comming to now-a-days? In my youth ... :)


>> On your own head be it :)
>
>Assuming I keep it afterwards.
>
I'm sure someone will give it back to you ;)

>> But then you are from the Home Counties so keep up the stereotype :)
>
>Alrought chuck oil stop me Saff Landan talk na.
>

That is why I've kept my accent :)
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message