Kopek Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 Ashford also refers to the 'Agreement'. Difficult to know what is best, total independence for the board or a little interference from the Govt but we all know what that would be? Lower fares and perhaps non economical routes! Ashford hinted that having given them some assistance to buy the new boat they have some leverage? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Blonde Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 5 minutes ago, Kopek said: Ashford also refers to the 'Agreement'. Difficult to know what is best, total independence for the board or a little interference from the Govt but we all know what that would be? Lower fares and perhaps non economical routes! Ashford hinted that having given them some assistance to buy the new boat they have some leverage? Whichever is the worst most catastrophic option will be found by DOI/Ashford. The Steam Packet was a very profitable company before nationalisation. I'm sure they're doing all they can to change that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Login Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 14 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: I'm just reading an article in this weekend's Indy (P3) that's covering a response to a Tynwald question by Stu Peters to David Ashford re. Steam Packet fares and the setting. Stu suggested that there might be an economic benefit in lowering fares. David Ashford responded (q/unq) that, "The IoMSPCo operates at arms length from Govt and it's the responsibility of the Board to set ticket prices" All well and good. However, a few months ago when that nice Mr Thomson joined the Board of the Steamie, he said this... When the user agreement was originally introduced I think it included restriction with regard to price increases and required a certain percentage of discounted fares. Outside that it was down to the SP re pricing. If there is something similar in place now then the two statements are not necessarily incompatible as effectively the Govt sets certain boundaries and minimum criteria but outside that the SP are left to their own devices. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopek Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 ..but will the Govt keep their interference low? Especially with our 100mil spend in Liverpool? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightening McQueen Posted December 27, 2021 Share Posted December 27, 2021 Heysham is a silthole Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passing Time Posted December 28, 2021 Share Posted December 28, 2021 4 hours ago, Lightening McQueen said: Heysham is a silthole Seventy million cheaper than Liverpool that’s for sure. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monasqueen Posted December 28, 2021 Share Posted December 28, 2021 Probably needs about £70m in dredging fees 🙃 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doc.fixit Posted December 29, 2021 Share Posted December 29, 2021 Strange that Heysham's difficulties seem worse just when the white elephant in Liverpool needs promoting. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopek Posted December 29, 2021 Share Posted December 29, 2021 On 12/28/2021 at 5:14 PM, monasqueen said: Probably needs about £70m in dredging fees 🙃 ....but only if 'our' contract requires 'us' to dredge Peel Holdings harbour??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted December 29, 2021 Share Posted December 29, 2021 "How much can we give you this time, Peel Holdings?" 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Johnson Posted December 29, 2021 Share Posted December 29, 2021 12 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: "How much can we give you this time, Peel Holdings?" ffs Alf at least wipe your mouth after talking so much cr....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asitis Posted December 29, 2021 Share Posted December 29, 2021 On 12/28/2021 at 5:14 PM, monasqueen said: Probably needs about £70m in dredging fees 🙃 I understand our site on the mersey could be potentially worse ! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passing Time Posted December 29, 2021 Share Posted December 29, 2021 52 minutes ago, asitis said: I understand our site on the mersey could be potentially worse ! Given the clowns who thrashed out this amazing deal, I would imagine that’s a given. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monasqueen Posted December 30, 2021 Share Posted December 30, 2021 Both ports are owned by Peel Holdings. What more is there to be said? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2112 Posted December 30, 2021 Share Posted December 30, 2021 1 hour ago, monasqueen said: Both ports are owned by Peel Holdings. What more is there to be said? Before anyone pipes up about Birkenhead port, that too I believe is owned by Peel Ports. They seem to have us over a proverbial barrel. I don’t know how long the silt situation and tidal issues can carry on for, but the SPC may as well have the Arrow on permanent standby. Could the SPC have used the Mannanan? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.