You need to enable JavaScript to run this app.

Skip to main content

RE: GNER (Alliance Rail)
(06 Mar 2015, 8:36 am)eezypeazy wrote Surely it's because VT have to be able to pay the Treasury their promised premium on the line? Competition, while being good for the customer, could drive down prices, reduce ridership on VT and cause them to fail to pay the premium - it would be a case of the government shooting itself in the foot!

That's why open access operators have to prove that their proposals don't just abstract traffic from the existing operator.

But surely the government shouldn't be preventing competition, on the basis that it may result in a private operator being unable to meet their contractual commitments? We have to ask ourselves what is this all about, I feel. Are we trying to offer the best quality and value for the customer, or are we trying to ensure maximum profit for a private company? 

You know yourself that there would be hell on if Arriva and Go North East agreed not to compete on the Durham Road corridor and East Durham coast road, because it financially impacted each other in doing so. The competition commission would be all over it like a rash, and quite rightly.
Forum Moderator | Find NEB on facebook

GNER (Alliance Rail)
RE: GNER (Alliance Rail)
RE: GNER (Alliance Rail)
RE: GNER (Alliance Rail)
RE: GNER (Alliance Rail)
RE: GNER (Alliance Rail)
RE: GNER (Alliance Rail)
RE: GNER (Alliance Rail)
RE: GNER (Alliance Rail)
RE: GNER (Alliance Rail)
RE: GNER (Alliance Rail)
RE: GNER (Alliance Rail)
RE: GNER (Alliance Rail)