[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: New trams

Subject: Re: New trams
From: David McLoughlin <davemcl*PISSOFFSPAMMERS*@iprolink.co.nzzzzz>
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 19:19:31 +1200
Newsgroups: aus.rail
Organization: Not really
References: <6PwF6.403$c01.14589@ozemail.com.au> <9c65vl$2gk$1@merrick.home> <oVFF6.11528$482.54765@newsfeeds.bigpond.com> <3ae7dc74$0$25479$7f31c96c@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au> <slrn9ek4ic.ji.spammers-will-die@amalthea.dark.net> <ndpG6.22997$BU4.37903@news1.blktn1.nsw.optushome.com.au> <9cf9lo$545$1@merrick.home> <3aeb5a03$0$25469$7f31c96c@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au> <slrn9emv18.jv.spammers-will-die@amalthea.dark.net> <B711E35E.79BA%boffa@NOSPAMaltavista.net>
Xref: news1.unite.net.au aus.rail:36056

Daniel Borowski wrote:
> 

> It should be straightforward, if they don't offer a good enough service,
> they don't get paid the subsidy.  When $80 million goes in one quarter, then
> they'll pay attention and run a proper service.

No they wouldn't. There would be no further refurbishment of existing
vehicles and track, no new trams/trains or extensions and the operators
would walk away to cut their losses leaving no services at all rather
than the high-class ones they are attempting to introduce.

References:
- New trams
  - From: "Michael Doyle" <doyles05@ozemail.com.au>
- Re: New trams
  - From: Paul Dwerryhouse <paul+usenet@dwerryhouse.com.au>
- Re: New trams
  - From: "DL" <D_Lindstrom@Bigpond.com>
- Re: New trams
  - From: spammers-will-die@austux.net (Jeremy Lunn)
- Re: New trams
  - From: "Glenn J-B" <grjb@optushome.com.au>
- Re: New trams
  - From: spammers-will-die@austux.net (Jeremy Lunn)
- Re: New trams
  - From: Daniel Borowski <boffa@NOSPAMaltavista.net>

Prev by Date: Re: 3801&3830
Next by Date: Re: (SYD) A few questions
Prev by thread: Re: New trams
Next by thread: Re: New trams
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread