|
|
Post by yorkstk on Oct 21, 2017 19:53:19 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by deerfold on Oct 21, 2017 22:03:03 GMT 1
Hmm, about right - except Pennine didn't go to the wall - they chose to wind down and cease their services (I don't believe anyone went unpaid).
|
|
|
|
Post by dwarfer1979 on Oct 22, 2017 10:07:30 GMT 1
Hmm, about right - except Pennine didn't go to the wall - they chose to wind down and cease their services (I don't believe anyone went unpaid). Only because the owners had been subsidising the bus business from their property portfolio, Pennine had been losing money for a few years and they clearly decided they could no longer cover the loss so as responsible businessmen closed the business down in an orderly manner so everyone could get properly compensated before it all fell apart. The article pretty much perfectly describes the problem fairly succinctly, though 50% is still well below where it should be (to meet the 'no better, no worse' requirements is somewhere between 65-75% depending on your view of generation), most schemes I know of sit in the 20-50% range. The bit it does miss is that actually most urban authorities pay more than the rural ones, they are less 'cash-strapped' in general (the cost of provision of services in general, not just buses but education, social services etc, is lower in high density urban areas than rural ones), the bus fares are generally lower (though volumes are higher) and as many of the big city authorities were already offering free travel before the scheme was introduced there was money in the budgets and they received extra money for something they were already doing. |
|
|
|
Post by deerfold on Oct 23, 2017 16:11:27 GMT 1
I realise the history of Pennine (the choice was between finishing in an orderly or disorderly way - although I think they could have helped themselves with better advertising, network tickets etc.), but having factual errors in an article doesn't help the argument.
|
|
|
|
Post by dwarfer1979 on Oct 24, 2017 8:34:47 GMT 1
I realise the history of Pennine (the choice was between finishing in an orderly or disorderly way - although I think they could have helped themselves with better advertising, network tickets etc.), but having factual errors in an article doesn't help the argument. It depends on your definition of 'going to the wall', I don't think it has to mean collapsing suddenly without warning. The position of Pennine with the business ceasing to exist due to mounting losses would seem to fit the bill equally well, it was a fairly sudden end (particularly to someone from outside the industry) and just because they did so in a professional manner with redundancies paid doesn't change that aspect. This wasn't a retirement closure or sale of business it was a company ceasing to exist due to increasing losses being built up that could no longer be sustained, less factual error than difference in interpretation of a single phrase. |
|
|
|
Post by gooderson1 on Oct 29, 2017 17:25:56 GMT 1
The Scottish Government are consulting on whether to stop issuing free bus passes to able bodied pensioners and those who continue to work after their 60th birthday. Current holders of a free pass would not be affected. The terms and conditions of use of a bus pass in Scotland are different to those in England(age being one criteria) but I wonder if it is implemented north of the border could the same happen in England and/or Wales
|
|
