Quite!Outside of the South East, it is almost always quicker and cheaper to fly than use Eurostar. That in itself is a strong reason not to bail it out.
if it truly is considered a profitable enterprise long term, then it will save millions of pounds of public money to just let it go into liquidation and leave someone to buy the assets.
Why does evereyone hate Eurostar so much? I don't get it. Plenty of airlines have been bailed out already. This is no different.
Suspect it is the usual "chips on shoulders" from those who don't use it. As I posted before, it's a dangerous road to go down. Plenty of people living in the South East don't use Northern rail services, so why do they subsidise them? Should pay their own way...Why does evereyone hate Eurostar so much? I don't get it. Plenty of airlines have been bailed out already. This is no different.
But if less public money would be needed by letting it go bust and someone buying the assets, why not use that route?Suspect it is the usual "chips on shoulders" from those who don't use it. As I posted before, it's a dangerous road to go down. Plenty of people living in the South East don't use Northern rail services, so why do they subsidise them? Should pay their own way...
Could just apply the same logic to every part of the economy. Just let the railways go bust and buy up what remains.But if less public money would be needed by letting it go bust and someone buying the assets, why not use that route?
Different model. Aside from open access operators, all of the TOC are vehicles for contracts, not an owner of the right to operate.Could just apply the same logic to every part of the economy. Just let the railways go bust and buy up what remains.
Different model. Aside from open access operators, all of the TOC are vehicles for contracts, not an owner of the right to operate.
You have ‘government’ and ‘moral responsibility’ in the same sentence: these are strange bedfellows. Governments only use the phrase ‘moral responsibility’ when they want to justify something that is in their interests.I thin there are two principles to consider:
1. The lockdown and travel restrictions were mandated by Government and they really have a moral responsibility to avoid bankruptcy.
2. Do unto others as you would have done to yourself. If you owned Eurostar, would you want Government to, in these extraordinary circumstances not of the Company's making. take advantage and rob you of your business? No.
What happened in the good years? Did Eurostar give a share of the profits to the UK Government when the UK Government did not own any of it (I'm not including any taxes which are taken before profits are calculated)?
You can't have it both ways. If the UK Government, for example, introduced more bank holidays which encouraged more people to use Eurostar, would the UK Government expect to receive a share of the extra profits? Of course not, so why should any UK Government action lead to financial support to Eurostar?
Good years taken with bad years. Terrible years (like this unprecedented pandemic) is not in the same league, and shouldn't be treated as such.What happened in the good years? Did Eurostar give a share of the profits to the UK Government when the UK Government did not own any of it (I'm not including any taxes which are taken before profits are calculated)?
You can't have it both ways. If the UK Government, for example, introduced more bank holidays which encouraged more people to use Eurostar, would the UK Government expect to receive a share of the extra profits? Of course not, so why should any UK Government action lead to financial support to Eurostar?
As I said before, ownership is utterly irrelevant here. Eurostar is even only 55% French. 30% of it is owned by Canadian Pensioners.
Does that mean the bailout should come from Canda? Of course not. This has nothing to do with whether a busines "deserves" to be bailed out, or who will benefit financially from it. It's about maintaining a necessary transport link.
It just makes no sense at all. If the Harwich - Hook of Holland ferry route was in danger of being suspended, would you say that the UK government should just do nothing, because it is run by a Swedish company?
Isn't Eurostar a UK registered company? So is presumably paying tax to the UK government?As with benefits, to benefit from the UK taxpayer's money you need to be paying UK tax.
Maybe we should do that to the rest of the UK rail network then, where it's usually faster and cheaper by car/air?Outside of the South East, it is almost always quicker and cheaper to fly than use Eurostar. That in itself is a strong reason not to bail it out.
if it truly is considered a profitable enterprise long term, then it will save millions of pounds of public money to just let it go into liquidation and leave someone to buy the assets.
Are you saying the Belgians aren't french-like?! Id say 90%. The important statistic is its 100% outside Yorkshire, I can't see why anyone would even want to visit any of the destinations they serve. They wouldn't be in this mess if they served proper destinations, like Leeds, Bradford and Barnsley, the real three capitals!Quebecer pensioners to be exact, which makes them French-like, which means that Eurostar is 85% French.
Indeed, although I've seen it reported elsewhere that their trains are now all spoken for as collateral on borrowing. Some were owned by SNCF.I like Mark Smith of Seat61s idea...lend money against the 373s...either the French will flinch, or there's a train fleet for a competitor to start services available.
Aside the joke, I'm totally confused as to how being francophone is relevant here.Are you saying the Belgians aren't french-like?! Id say 90%. The important statistic is its 100% outside Yorkshire, I can't see why anyone would even want to visit any of the destinations they serve. They wouldn't be in this mess if they served proper destinations, like Leeds, Bradford and Barnsley, the real three capitals!
Eurostar International Limited is indeed registered with Companies House.Isn't Eurostar a UK registered company? So is presumably paying tax to the UK government?
The current legal arrangement allows for a shortfall of up to £10m to be transferred to operator Southeastern every six months between now and 2025. This means the Exchequer could be on the hook for £80m of costs if a rescue deal cannot be agreed.
In a passenger rsther than frieght sense (given that the comparison is with Eurostar as a passenger operstor), no, why would the government want to support Harwich-Hook of Holland? In the same way as Eurostar, there's plenty of other ways to get to the Netherlands than one ferry route in one corner of England.As I said before, ownership is utterly irrelevant here. Eurostar is even only 55% French. 30% of it is owned by Canadian Pensioners.
Does that mean the bailout should come from Canda? Of course not. This has nothing to do with whether a busines "deserves" to be bailed out, or who will benefit financially from it. It's about maintaining a necessary transport link. It's not some kind of insurance policy that only pays out if you paid enough in.
It just makes no sense at all. If the Harwich - Hook of Holland ferry route was in danger of being suspended, would you say that the UK government should just do nothing, because it is run by a Swedish company?
Ah, but you cant put aside the joke, as it is entirely the point! Its not relevant amd that is what we were joking about!Aside the joke, I'm totally confused as to how being francophone is relevant here.