Promenade - Megathread

[Derek Flint]

This might sound like a daft question, but I will ask it anyway

why do we need 67 minibuses?

 

[TheTeapot]

To put the taxi trade out of business.

[Non-Believer]

11 minutes ago, Derek Flint said:

This might sound like a daft question, but I will ask it anyway

why do we need 67 minibuses?

 

That was the number needed to qualify for a free Merc saloon?  

[Derek Flint]

38 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

That was the number needed to qualify for a free Merc saloon?  

Blimey. Even accession to the top of the Ferrari tree doesn’t have you buying that many you don’t want or need. 

[Max Power]

1 hour ago, Derek Flint said:

This might sound like a daft question, but I will ask it anyway

why do we need 67 minibuses?

 

In case one breaks down?

They do make sense at certain times of the day when very few people are on some routes, and I can imagine that they are much more flexible in some areas. Sometimes you see double deckers with hardly anyone on them at all.

[thesultanofsheight]

2 hours ago, Non-Believer said:

I think the covering article in the Indy (not to hand at the mo) cites mid-sixties in number, bought in a number of tranches.

ETA. It's now on iomtoday, 67 in total including 20 bought over the last three years in two batches at a total cost of over £1M for the two batches.

Whatever the number it’s disgraceful when at the same time we’re questioning the hospital budgets. As has been pointed out above they’re dumped in various school yards around the Island (there’s even one constantly outside Dhoon School) and all over places like Williston. I’m not surprised to here there’s half a dozen are at Ramsey Cottage Hospital either. They clearly have very limited work for all these vehicles despite inventing and perpetuating the unpopular dial a ride bullshit plan to occupy a few of what they’d bought. The reality seem to be that they do have close to 70 of these minibuses bought at enormous cost to the taxpayer which seem to be pretty much doing fuck all sat in school playgrounds most of the time. 

Edited January 5, 2020 by thesultanofsheight

[Non-Believer]

4 minutes ago, Max Power said:

Sometimes you see double deckers with hardly anyone on them at all.

Precisely. But those double deckers are still being used on the routes (with hardly anyone on them at times). But now we've got 67 minibuses too.

They should be phasing the minibuses onto the double decker routes at known quiet times and parking the 6mpg double deckers up?

[TheTeapot]

Best thing about getting the bus is sitting upstairs and looking out. Maybe we should get some of these?

[Max Power]

It just occurred to me, I think that they have also got contracts for moving outpatients around amongst other things? I may be wrong mind you. 

[TheTeapot]

Just now, Max Power said:

It just occurred to me, I think that they have also got contracts for moving outpatients around amongst other things? I may be wrong mind you. 

They do. Took it off the Red Cross, there were threads on here about it. They bought the minibuses before they went for the contract. Well dodgy.

[thesultanofsheight]

18 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

Precisely. But those double deckers are still being used on the routes (with hardly anyone on them at times). But now we've got 67 minibuses too.

They should be phasing the minibuses onto the double decker routes at known quiet times and parking the 6mpg double deckers up?

Those heavy Merc minibuses aren’t that much more fuel efficient on our roads either I hear. The fact is they fucked up buying new buses that were too big for demand. They drove them round empty outside of school hours. Then they bought another 60 of so minibuses to counter this which seem to equally have limited work available to them despite them deliberately putting places like the Red Cross out of business and bankrupting some taxi drivers up North. So now we have both competing for limited interest or demand across the board. It’s like communist Russia. Here’s an idea! Maybe we should ask the public what they want as a service from Bus Vannin rather than buying a load of totally unsuitable vehicles that you wanted to buy anyway for several million pounds and then trying to find practical and commercial applications for them?

The sooner we go into one centralized and allocated priority based budget process the more we’ll be able to stop all this totally wasteful shite 

Edited January 5, 2020 by thesultanofsheight

[The Dog's Dangly Bits]

13 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

Those heavy Merc minibuses aren’t that much more fuel efficient on our roads either I hear. The fact is they fucked up buying new buses that were too big for demand. They drove them round empty outside of school hours. Then they bought another 60 of so minibuses to counter this which seem to equally have limited work available to them despite them deliberately putting places like the Red Cross out of business and bankrupting some taxi drivers up North. So now we have both competing for limited interest or demand across the board. It’s like communist Russia. Here’s an idea! Maybe we should ask the public what they want as a service from Bus Vannin rather than buying a load of totally unsuitable vehicles that you wanted to buy anyway for several million pounds and then trying to find practical and commercial applications for them? 

The Red Cross is a charity.  It seems to make sense that Outpatient transfer costs would go back into government (via Bus Vannin) if they have the resources rather than pay a third party?

How many taxi drivers who do it full time have been bankrupted by the dial a ride initiative?   If taxi costs were not so outrageously expensive that service would have zero impact on them.

 

[Max Power]

Come on now, you know how it works, either you spend your budget or it gets reduced the following year!

[thesultanofsheight]

11 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

The Red Cross is a charity.  It seems to make sense that Outpatient transfer costs would go back into government (via Bus Vannin) if they have the resources rather than pay a third party?

How many taxi drivers who do it full time have been bankrupted by the dial a ride initiative?   If taxi costs were not so outrageously expensive that service would have zero impact on them.

 

You seem to misunderstand economics. How can it possibly be cheaper to provide a service with minibuses which cost about £80K each which have been bought by the taxpayer to provide services to another government department funded by the same taxpayer rather than a charity do it with their own vehicles and voluntary drivers? You clearly work for government if those figures stack up. The capital outlay alone must have been at least 5 vehicles (£400k) plus running costs, maintenance, diesel, insurance plus the wages and other benefits of the staff employed. To replace a service provided by a charity with their own vehicles?

Theres been several taxi drivers on social media saying it’s affecting their livelihoods. Governments role should be to encourage private enterprises and tax receipts by facilitating a free market economy. Not using taxpayers money to steal business off tax paying businesses so they can perpetuate loss making over employment and unneeded capital spend in the public sector. 

Edited January 5, 2020 by thesultanofsheight

[The Dog's Dangly Bits]

I wasn't aware Red Cross did it for free.  Apologies if that is the case.  Perhaps there are other factors at play here if, as you say, on first inspection it doesn't make much sense financially?

I don't have that much sympathy for taxi drivers.  Too many of them work barely part time because they can make enough at the weekend then let some one else drive for them and take half.    Perhaps up North it is slightly different but it is rife in Douglas.    Too many drivers not doing enough full time hours.