Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
slinkydevil

TT 2019 - Megathread

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, John Wright said:

Have you any evidence, other than anecdotal, that people ( general, not individual ) are put off from coming.

Yes, I've seen posts on Facebook and elsewhere from qualified marshals from the UK have complained about pricing for the FOM and not come this year.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, GD4ELI said:

Yes, I've seen posts on Facebook and elsewhere from qualified marshals from the UK have complained about pricing for the FOM and not come this year.

 

That’s anecdotal. It happens every year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, John Wright said:

Have you any evidence, other than anecdotal, that people ( general, not individual ) are put off from coming.

I thought you understood what anecdotal means. The example I used was not anecdotal it was specifically related to a relative who chose to fly because the cost of the boat was outrageous. I have also spoken to a few visitors who thought fares were a rip off too and who said they wouldn’t be back though that is anecdotal. The fact is fares charged by our own government via our own national shipping line would appear to be actively disincentivising tourism. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MrPB said:

I thought you understood what anecdotal means. The example I used was not anecdotal it was specifically related to a relative who chose to fly because the cost of the boat was outrageous. I have also spoken to a few visitors who thought fares were a rip off too and who said they wouldn’t be back though that is anecdotal. The fact is fares charged by our own government via our own national shipping line would appear to be actively disincentivising tourism. 

that's the plan.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, GD4ELI said:

Yes, I've seen posts on Facebook and elsewhere from qualified marshals from the UK have complained about pricing for the FOM and not come this year.

 

There’s quite a bit out there on social media if you look as you have said. It was always the debt mountain that was blamed for high SPC prices. So we bought it to allegedly bring things under the control of government. But actually the prices seem to have gone up even though we now own it and it’s debt is our debt. It is also a stated role of government to grow our tourist industry (sorry “visitor economy” we don't want to refer to tourists as many visitors aren’t) but it seems the very same people are putting tourists off coming here by maintaining high fares on the SPC. Based on my non anecdotal experience this week the visitor would not have come if they hadn’t have had to due to the high costs involved. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, MrPB said:

I thought you understood what anecdotal means. The example I used was not anecdotal it was specifically related to a relative who chose to fly because the cost of the boat was outrageous. I have also spoken to a few visitors who thought fares were a rip off too and who said they wouldn’t be back though that is anecdotal. The fact is fares charged by our own government via our own national shipping line would appear to be actively disincentivising tourism. 

I do understand.

You don’t.

Do you understand the meaning of “arms length”?

What do you say is different about the 2019 fare pricing structure from previous years, given we are still using the old user agreement.

The new pricing structure, the freeze, ( foot passenger fares only - not with bikes, cars, vans or freight ) will make no meaningful difference. Neither will the extra special fares as the specials were a minimum and Steam Packet already offers that number, in off peak times.

The purchase deal was sold to Tynwald and the public on the basis that the debt payment was to be recovered from revenue profits over 7 years. So it was neutral.

You say it’s actively disincentivising  tourism. But the boats are full and passengers can fly.

Until it’s known how much the new boats will cost, and I’m betting on double the figures in the estimates at the time of the purchase, fares can’t be reduced at peak times, nor should they. That won’t increase tourism. It’s full then.

Cheaper fares at other times may incentivise tourism.

Im in the middle of a trip. Mid August to mid September. Car, to Dublin, back from Belfast,  £220 return. Paul did two motorbike day returns, 2 and 8 August, £79 and £89.

What appears on social media isn’t definitive. It’s what was in the official reports recommending purchase and the new user agreement.

The purchase was to guarantee our life line. That has a tourist component, but it’s small and we also need to take account the other 46 weeks of the year. ( I’ve added a week to each of TT and FoM to allow for getting people/bikes on and off before and after )

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, John Wright said:

I do understand.

You don’t.

Do you understand the meaning of “arms length”?

That’s quite a sweeping statement. At least I understand what anecdotal means whereas you seem to be confused. The boats are only full this week and TT Week where people are coming for specific events and will pretty much pay what they have to pay to attend those events. Outside of that they are not full and I’m sure pricing has a lot to do with that as our family experience this week shows as the boat fare simply could not be justified for a trip to the IOM. 

As for arms length we all know what that means with IOM government the biggest shadow controllers going with anything they are connected to. 

Edited by MrPB
Typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, MrPB said:

That’s quite a sweeping statement. At least I understand what anecdotal means whereas you seem to be confused. The boats are only full this week and TT Week where people are coming for specific events and will pretty much pay what they have to pay to attend those events. Outside of that they are not full and I’m sure pricing has a lot to do with that as our family experience this week shows as the boat fare simply could not be justified for a trip to the IOM. 

But you’re contradicting yourself. It’s FoM. That’s why fares are high. Your family member is travelling at FoM so will have to pay FoM prices.

You're right, half terms and Xmas/Easter apart,  they aren’t generally full. That with fares cheaper in real terms than 40 years ago. More sailings than 1977. You can book car, driver +1 for sub £200 most of the year.

Your family member may be specific and concrete for him/you ( although it’s confusing, if  he came  by pane anyway, it’s FoM but he doesn’t expect to pay FoM prices ) but it’s anecdotal as to disincentivising tourism generally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, John Wright said:

But you’re contradicting yourself. It’s FoM. That’s why fares are high. Your family member is travelling at FoM so will have to pay FoM prices.

You're right, half terms and Xmas/Easter apart,  they aren’t generally full. That with fares cheaper in real terms than 40 years ago. More sailings than 1977. You can book car, driver +1 for sub £200 most of the year.

Your family member may be specific and concrete for him/you ( although it’s confusing, if  he came  by pane anyway, it’s FoM but he doesn’t expect to pay FoM prices ) but it’s anecdotal as to disincentivising tourism generally.

I’m not contradicting myself at all. That seems to be another thing that is confusing you when I have been consistently clear. My original post was on the cost differential between the plane (owned by a private listed company with no vested interest in the IOM economy) and the boat (owned by the IOM government which has a vested interest in the success of the IOM) where the boat fair actively disincentivized a tourist from arriving in the IOM by boat. The other arguments were ones you added not me. Despite it being the FoM coming by air was cheaper so that’s what my relative had to do as they had to be here for a family event. If they didn’t have to be here they wouldn’t have come to be honest due to cost. Of course that is disincentivising tourists. Two to be specific in this non anecdotal situation.  

Edited by MrPB
Typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, MrPB said:

The example I used...was specifically related to a relative who chose to fly because the cost of the boat was outrageous.

I liked that anecdote!

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MrPB said:

I’m not contradicting myself at all. That seems to be another thing that is confusing you when I have been consistently clear. My original post was on the cost differential between the plane (owned by a private listed company with no vested interest in the IOM economy) and the boat (owned by the IOM government which has a vested interest in the success of the IOM) where the boat fair actively disincentivized a tourist from arriving in the IOM by boat. The other arguments were ones you added not me. Despite it being the FoM coming by air was considerably cheaper so that’s what my relative had to do as they had to be here for a family event. Of course that is disincentivising tourists. Two to be specific in this non anecdotal situation.  

They came anyway. They just chose the cheapest form of transport. It’s a market place. I think what it shows is that the Steam Packet pricing over FoM ensures maximum bikes, cars, vans, and foot passengers are voting with their feet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, John Wright said:

They came anyway. They just chose the cheapest form of transport.

Because they had to so no option to not travel to the IOM during the FOM. Yes the cheapest form of transport which wasn’t our state owned shipping company (which my taxes helped to buy) which was outrageously expensive. 

Edited by MrPB
Typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, MrPB said:

I’m not contradicting myself at all. That seems to be another thing that is confusing you when I have been consistently clear. My original post was on the cost differential between the plane (owned by a private listed company with no vested interest in the IOM economy) and the boat (owned by the IOM government which has a vested interest in the success of the IOM) where the boat fair actively disincentivized a tourist from arriving in the IOM by boat. The other arguments were ones you added not me. Despite it being the FoM coming by air was considerably cheaper so that’s what my relative had to do as they had to be here for a family event. If they didn’t have to be here they wouldn’t have come to be honest due to cost. Of course that is disincentivising tourists. Two to be specific in this non anecdotal situation.  

boat vs plane never stacked up long before IOMG got involved and started squeezing the pips

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, MrPB said:

Because they had to so no option to not travel to the IOM during the FOM. Yes the cheapest form of transport which wasn’t our state owned shipping company (which my taxes helped to buy) which was outrageously expensive. 

You’re changing ground. What has that to do with tourists being disincentivized

The boats were full, or almost full. In modern transport pricing that means highest fares, especially if booking late.

Can I ask you to clarify, for the rest of us tax payers, are you suggesting that IoMG should change policy about the loans it too over and not recover from profits over 7 years. That’s a change from tax payer neutral to tax payer burden.

Are you suggesting, that IoM government, aka the tax payer, should fork out 60% of the cost of every fare by subsidy, just like Caledonian McBrayne.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, John Wright said:

You’re changing ground.

No I’m not at all. You’re just making that up. 

Its almost a perfect example of tourists being disincentivized as they wouldn’t have come if they absolutely didn’t have to attend a wedding here. So I’m sure there may well be several tourists who didn’t strictly have to be here over bank holiday weekend who just elected not to come when they saw the boat fare. Cheaper to spend bank holiday in the Lakes rather than come from the UK on the boat so it’s hardly helping us attract tourists us it? 

Edited by MrPB
Typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...