Gregory's Server@cstross @SteveJonesnono1 @quixoticgeek Prepared for privatisation along the British model? In the UK, Wikipedia tells me that “Provision of passenger services was split up into twenty-five passenger train operating units (TOUs),[40] known as shadow franchises, split by geographical area and service type.” Is such what has been planned for Germany? Any source for that?
|
28 comments
 @SteveJonesnono1 @tml @cstross @quixoticgeek Privatization of DB failed many years ago, probably because they were too slow off the blocks to get the deal done before the markets went south and the brief German privatization craze died. Unfortunately Deutsche Telekom, Deutsche Post and Lufthansa were flogged off. Financial investors poison everything. @tml @cstross @SteveJonesnono1 @quixoticgeek The Bahn is now an anomaly. It’s no longer a state entity, as its corporate form was changed, in what they thought was the run-up to their flotation, to that of a plain old AG (plc, basically). But the state owns all the shares. @marcas @cstross @SteveJonesnono1 @quixoticgeek An incumbent rail operator that is a limited company where the state owns all the shares is not really an anomaly. That is the case also in Sweden and Finland. Probably many other countries, too. @marcas @cstross @SteveJonesnono1 @quixoticgeek But note that even if a part or all of the shares would be sold openly to investors, that would still not be the “British model”. @cstross @tml @SteveJonesnono1 @quixoticgeek If the British model means saddling the business with crushing debt, massive value leakage to the new shareholders, vastly worse service, vastly higher fees, and raw excrement pumped into rivers and lakes, I’m wholly confident a successfully privatized Deutsche Bahn would have lived up to it. @marcas @cstross @tml @SteveJonesnono1 @quixoticgeek The partial privatization here in The Netherlands didn't turn out too well. Where has privatization actually worked? @quixoticgeek @julf @marcas @cstross @tml @SteveJonesnono1 Before my time there was even a 3rd class with wooden benches for the workers. And smoking everywhere until just a few years back. 1st class helps if you need extra quietness for those with ADHD (and the rich) and contributes overproportional to financing the railway. Also good for advertising to switch away from car commuting. No first class in busses or other city traffic anyway.  @quixoticgeek @http @julf @marcas @tml @SteveJonesnono1 Quiet coaches aren't quiet. Last time I booked a seat in one I ended up sharing it with a hen night. And folks watching music videos on their phones at full volume without headphones. Someone spoke to me and complained in an Edinburgh-London quiet coach once, because I was explaining Gödel's theorem and the Church-Turing thesis too loudly @forestpines @cstross @http @julf @marcas @tml @SteveJonesnono1 Also if you run trains more frequently. Then they won't be as packed. And if the train your on sucks. You can get off at the next station. Wait a few minutes and get on the next one. This is also the flexibility of not having to book tickets on trains. You can move about. @quixoticgeek @forestpines @http @julf @marcas @tml @SteveJonesnono1 Bear in mind that tracks have a hard capacity limit—more than one train can't run within the same signal block (it's a safety thing) so they need to be spaced apart. Fast trains also take further to stop, so you can have fewer of them per unit track length. So "run trains more frequently" actually implies "build more tracks". And 5% of your track network needs replacing every year. So this drives up fixed costs. Going with Edinburgh to London as an example: there's plenty of capacity to run more trains between Edinburgh and Newcastle...except that Newcastle Central Station itself is pretty close to capacity Further south the main line basically gets more and more traffic the further south you go, until it's also at full capacity south of Hitchin (where the Cambridge & King's Lynn trains join the main line) @forestpines @cstross @http @julf @marcas @tml @SteveJonesnono1 excellent! A job creation scheme to build more tracks! Why do you threaten us with a good time ? @cstross @forestpines @http @julf @marcas @tml @SteveJonesnono1 With modern signalling systems, you can run a train about every 3 minutes or so. Assuming you already have a double track line. Bringing the signals into the 21st century is a damn good start. I'm not (yet) calling for every 90 seconds for a train. Every 15 mins is my minimum start point. @cstross @quixoticgeek @forestpines @http @julf @marcas @SteveJonesnono1 But try telling that to the "we don't need new high-speed lines for the elite, we just need more reliable trains" gang. @quixoticgeek @cstross @http @marcas @tml @SteveJonesnono1 The Dutch are not very good at enforcement...  @marcas the rail privatisation in poland was a bloody disaster. @cstross @tml @SteveJonesnono1 @quixoticgeek @cstross @mawhrin @tml @SteveJonesnono1 @quixoticgeek Do you know what? I am beginning to suspect that privatization might not be the magical solution to all life’s problems after all. @marcas @cstross @mawhrin @SteveJonesnono1 @quixoticgeek Of course, “privatisation” can mean so much. Mastodon is hardly an ideal medium to explain in detail what one means. Some people no doubt would claim that even allowing open access to private train operators that have their own rolling stock is “privatisation” even if no state-owned property has been sold to private companies… @tml on the regional networks there are providers others than DB. Though u can buy tickets from one provider and it is also valid with another one. @yuribackinthehood Yes, but these regional trains surely are heavily subsidised? And it is the regional public transport organisation that decides on fares. Even if the operator is private. |
@tml @cstross @SteveJonesnono1 @quixoticgeek at least you have railways. Here in the US we don't have any except a couple along the east coast. If we want to travel somewhere we have to either drive or fly.