France’s new high-speed trains

Post by matthewdgreen » Thu, Feb 28, 2019, 4:55 PM UTC

devcpp wrote: post #68

nerpderp82 wrote: post #55

Quote: That doesn’t necessarily mean an end to SNCF’s dominance of high-speed rail. As things stand, most TGV lines don’t turn a profit but are made feasible by subsidies, paid by a state that clearly sees the economic advantages of an extensive high-speed network. Competitors would either need to make substantial savings on operational costs, or limit themselves to the most lucrative connections, such as the profit-…

That's why it's a monopoly. The region can tell companies "who can make these lines (some profitable, some less) for the lowest subsidies, while fulfilling these other requirements?" Then the private companies compete, one wins and has to serve cake routes as well as empty ones, because the contract with the region makes them do it. Everyone wants your region? Great, you can lower the subsidies, or even tax the compa…

Post by nickik » Thu, Feb 28, 2019, 5:04 PM UTC

elcomet wrote: post #132

ownagefool wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Err UK rail was famously terrible before "privatisation". Not that privatisation is the answer, nor that being public was at fault, but I'm not sure rewriting history is helpful. Looking at UK water companies being privatised so their owners can stuff them full of debt to get around the profit caps is probably a better case study. Profit percentage caps are silly because the obvious way to make more money is to make…

I read in a lot of articles that it is actually more terrible for a lot of tracks after privatisation in the UK. What happens is that companies focus on the most profitable tracks, so the other ones are not well maintained. An example: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/05/the-gu...

Post by magduf » Thu, Feb 28, 2019, 5:13 PM UTC

ambicapter wrote: post #42

titanix2 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It doesn't need to open up the network to competition. I think this is mandated by the EU. And it could be a good thing. I'm personally fed up to be treated like a thief when I forgot composting my ticket (which happen because there is not gate to access the rails) or when I could not buy it in the first place (some station doesn't have have vending machines). Also the price lottery for TGV tickets is infuriating (…

For english speakers, "composting" here means punching a ticket. I never understood where the word came from, and I'm a native French speaker.

Post by NeedMoreTea » Thu, Feb 28, 2019, 5:19 PM UTC

kmlx wrote: post #161

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether by accident, or design, The Netherlands seem much more able to have transport options that join up. Buses that terminate at the train station, tram routes that serve both, park and ride that serves all. With compatible timetables and ticketing. After reading the piece about Delft cycle routes yesterday, I suspect a reasonable part was by design. I'm sure someone native can point out some major holes, but stil…

> The Netherlands seem much more able to have transport options that join up. The Netherlands is a very small country, almost half the size of Panama, with a mostly dead flat geography. It is also one of the most densely populated countries in the world.

Post by distances » Thu, Feb 28, 2019, 7:41 PM UTC

mcv wrote: post #118

distances wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think all land within city limits should be publicly acquired with eminent domain before zoning and building of utilities. No reason to let the land value increase fall to private landowners when it's all due to build-up of public services. Better use the profits for maintaining the services.

That's roughly the case in Amsterdam. All land is technically owned by the city, and homeowners lease it for 50 years. When the lease will run out is always a detail to pay attention to when buying a home.