Public sector “economics”

[Thefella]

Here we have another example of David Brent’s finest civil service business people offering a private contractor the deal of a lifetime

https://www.iomtoday.co.im/news/talks-were-held-with-coach-tour-operator-to-run-loss-making-bus-service-718585

We pulled the bus route as the route had cost us £220 a day to put on and only made us £33 in revenue. So as an alternative they thought that if they covered the operating cost a private business would jump at the chance of making £33 a day by having an expensive resource tied up that could have been making better money almost anywhere else on the IOM.

[Tinpot]

Just now, Thefella said:

Here we have another example of David Brent’s finest civil service business people offering a private contractor the deal of a lifetime

https://www.iomtoday.co.im/news/talks-were-held-with-coach-tour-operator-to-run-loss-making-bus-service-718585

We pulled the bus route as the route had cost us £220 a day to put on and only made us £33 in revenue. So as an alternative they thought that if they covered the operating cost a private business would jump at the chance of making £33 a day by having an expensive resource tied up that could have been making better money almost anywhere else on the IOM.

It will have only been put out to placate the moaners who were moaning it had been pulled.

There are plenty of taxis if people desperately want to go and don’t have a car.

[A fool and his money.....]

29 minutes ago, Tinpot said:

It will have only been put out to placate the moaners who were moaning it had been pulled.

There are plenty of taxis if people desperately want to go and don’t have a car.

Perhaps they could pay for them with their travel insurance 😀.

It's a public service FFS, it doesn't need to make money. It just needs to provide a service, to the public.

[doc.fixit]

At reasonable cost to taxpayer?

[Tinpot]

2 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said:

Perhaps they could pay for them with their travel insurance 😀.

It's a public service FFS, it doesn't need to make money. It just needs to provide a service, to the public.

It did.  The public didn’t use it so now it’s been taken away

[A fool and his money.....]

Did they find the £33 a day down the back of the seats then?

Also, I wouldn't mind seeing their working out on the £220 a day cost.

[Mercenary]

31 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said:

Did they find the £33 a day down the back of the seats then?

Also, I wouldn't mind seeing their working out on the £220 a day cost.

Your lucky evening, it's all on FOI 3997489, knock yourself out 

[Tinpot]

56 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said:

Did they find the £33 a day down the back of the seats then?

Also, I wouldn't mind seeing their working out on the £220 a day cost.

Does this help?

 

Edited Wednesday at 07:18 PM by Tinpot

[A fool and his money.....]

17 minutes ago, Tinpot said:

Does this help?

 

Indeed it does, thanks. 

So we go from six return journeys a day to nothing. Why not reduce it to three?

Also, it reads as if 6 return journeys are taking 8 hours. Seems a bit strange. Where are they starting from and returning to?

Surely there's a fairly regular bus service to PSM or at the very least Port Erin. You'd think they could do the sound and back in half an hour from either given how few stops there would be.

Likewise the fuel looks to be overestimated.

Also, I seem to remember some creative accounting when it comes to passenger numbers, can't remember the details though.

I'm sure 3 return journeys from PSM could be achieved for a fraction of that cost. Might need a bit of logistical thinking, but I'm sure it could work.

[Tinpot]

3 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said:

Likewise the fuel looks to be overestimated

Really?  Based on what?

4 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said:

Also, I seem to remember some creative accounting when it comes to passenger numbers, can't remember the details though.

Knock yourself out

 

[A fool and his money.....]

1 minute ago, Tinpot said:

Really?  Based on what?

 

 

 

 

The length of the route and the mpg quoted.

So, about a third of the passenger in 2023 as there were in 2019. Begs the question why? What's changed?

[TheTeapot]

Should just run one of their minibuses on it, there's space in the timetable to run an extra PSM to PE leg too, new old peoples home up Bradda, could be useful a little shuttle in the South if they gave it some thought.

[Non-Believer]

A question might be, what's behind the huge drop in user/passenger numbers? Why don't people want to go to the Sound by bus in such numbers any more? The caff is still there and open, the seals are still there to photograph.

[Tinpot]

3 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said:

The length of the route and the mpg quoted.

So, about a third of the passenger in 2023 as there were in 2019. Begs the question why? What's changed?

The MPG quoted is probably the average for the vehicle, on a fairly flat route.

It looks reasonable to me.

Even if ot wasn’t what difference does it make.  Nobody was using the route so it was scrapped.  We moan when they don’t save money and now people are moaning when they do.

The low passenger figures should be all people need to see that this wasn’t an efficient or effective use of public funds or vehicles which could be put to better use elsewhere.

[Tinpot]

6 minutes ago, TheTeapot said:

Should just run one of their minibuses on it, there's space in the timetable to run an extra PSM to PE leg too, new old peoples home up Bradda, could be useful a little shuttle in the South if they gave it some thought.

A route to an old people’s home will make an even bigger loss as none of them pay.

It’s a private home isn’t it?  Let them put their own mini bus on.