Hmm. The charitable way of looking at things is that by subsidising a service used mostly by tourists, the government(s) are aiding Scottish tourism, possibly to quite a good return on their investment.
The cynical view is that the sleeper is the favoured way for many Scottish MPs to get to and from their constituencies... and so it will always get the subsidy that it needs to run, but it doesn't matter how much the tickets cost as they go on expenses anyway.
Either way I find it absurd that we subsidise a service and yet it's still too expensive for most local people to use.
Good summary of the subsidy rationale...!
In terms of the final point, the other way of looking at it is even with a multi-million pound annual subsidy, the prices are still high and Serco still make a loss - which gives an indication of how costly (or cost inefficient) a Sleeper train is to run - and quite how much the tickets would be without the subsidy.
A logical progression maybe that the subsidy should be even bigger to make the fares affordable...?? Can’t see that happening though, nor anyone suggesting it...!
With all the specialised stock, crew, locos, drivers, shunters, track access, cleaning/prep etc etc for trains which can only work once every 24 hours and can carry comparatively few passengers the Sleeper inherently has a high cost per passenger.
It’d be interestring to know what that
real cost was and compare that to what people think they should pay for it, as there appears to be a big disconnect between the two.