I must admit, I hadn't thought of that. I suppose a subsidy for a couple of commuter trains might be less than a dinner package, but on the plus side, might be a more stable income.
But a "stable" "subsidy" (your admission) is a bigger loss over the whole year! If the passenger revenue doesn't cover the operating costs then by definition it is likely to sink you eventually.
It's only when cash-starved (local and National) government with a wider perspective and deeper pockets will directly "subsidise" such services that they can be viable.
I think that these services
should run, but the problem is that no-one will recompense the provider for the benefits in reduced traffic (fuel consumption, air pollution), kids fitness & health (walking or cycling to the station at each end) their lifestyle expectations (i.e. using public transport.)
Running a service or two
every weekday morning and evening is way beyond most preserved lines' resources, and if you think about the time commitments with the split shifts it would be beyond what most people's lifestyle and family commitments could allow.
Give me good public transport please, but properly resourced, not subsidised by those expected to deliver it.