Chat Forum
It is currently Mon Jul 06, 2020 1:11 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 168 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Mar 06, 2020 2:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21421
camroc1 wrote:
backrow wrote:
camroc1 wrote:
backrow wrote:
um - I did link to the stats ?

a comparison to another European country is more valid, our transport network is old, expensive and crap by and large comparatively.

Primarily because after the second world war the UK governments of the time, both Tory and Laboiur) made the decision to keep defence spending at a level around 12% of GDP, whereas Germany, Holland, Japan etc. invested their money in infrastructure.


12 seems high, but yes. Also, not having all of our infrastructure bombed to feck meant we couldn't start so much with a blank canvas.

remember though that defence spending is still quite a small slice of the pie, and that some roads, houses schools etc were built as part of this defence spending, the guns or butter thing is a bit of a myth to GDP growth / retardant. France spent even more as a % iirc (primarily because they were not in nato post 1960's and wanted their own planes etc) but put way more into rail and roads.

More to the point, UK defence spending exceeded 5% of GDP until 1987.


don't get too bogged down on spending percentages, US & Turkey spent >10% forever on guns and had growth rates on par with Japan that had neglible defence spending.
alternatively, look at UK growth rates over the years and how it varies even though the slice of pie going onto guns was around the 5% say.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 06, 2020 3:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3830
Torquemada 1420 wrote:
backrow wrote:
Torquemada 1420 wrote:
backrow wrote:
actually I think its archaic planning permisssions and Nimby-ism that is the real problem, not the 'UK is tiny and congested' stuff - less than 6% of the Uk is built over, half that of say Netherlands or Belgium and less than a percent more 'developed land' than France.

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistic ... ber_States

I am extremely pro-Uk but by god, the UK planning waffle is useless and has such a knock on effect on other social-economic activity. a third runway at heathrow has been wanking on about since I was at school ! (i'm now 45)

even flying over London you can see how Green and open it is compared to any other major city of importance

But that stat is meaningless. By definition, the connections are not being made between Stornoway and Eigg but between the highest conurbations.


ah that stat isn't meaningless at all, other far more 'crowded' countries seem to build their infrastructure with far greater ease, and much more foresight and planning. Uk as a whole really isn't that crowded, just our stupid skinny 3 lane max road networks and ancient trains.


Not sure where you are getting your nos from but ENGLAND is ranked as the 32nd most densely populated country (and dependency) in the world. Looks like the 2nd worst in the "1st world" (after Japan) and of other countries of any meaningful land mass, only India, Bangas and Philippines are denser.

So interested in these far more crowded countries with better rail infrastructure other than Japan (which was pointed out earlier but a sample size of one is.... well, one).

Hong Kong, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Netherlands. The east of China is incredibly densely populated.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 07, 2020 9:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 7886
Location: London
For clarity on Blue Islands picking up the routes, they used to run a lot of the Channel Islands routes then worked out it was more profitable to ask flybe to do it for them and collect their subsidy from the States of Jersey. CI routes being picked up by them Aurigny and others demonstrates one thing they have that most regional airports don’t - an active economy with tourists and business travellers regularly flying. All comes down again to our regional economies being average to poor


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 09, 2020 10:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 302
Exeter Chiefs have not come out of this with any glory, having refused entry to, now redundant, Flybe employees who turned up for Saturdays match with tickets that had been issued before the airline went bust.

The Exeter management have not commented and are being lambasted by their own supporters on various websites.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 09, 2020 10:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 37162
Location: Pigdogistan
That's pretty tone deaf. :uhoh:
Perfect opportunity to generate more goodwill towards what's already a fairly well-liked club.

Were the tickets to be paid for by Flybe, but now won't be covered?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 09, 2020 11:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5778
Location: 'ertfordshire
Phredd wrote:
Exeter Chiefs have not come out of this with any glory, having refused entry to, now redundant, Flybe employees who turned up for Saturdays match with tickets that had been issued before the airline went bust.

The Exeter management have not commented and are being lambasted by their own supporters on various websites.

............but, but, they are the good guys and everyone loves them :roll:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 09, 2020 11:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 302
Nolanator wrote:
That's pretty tone deaf. :uhoh:
Perfect opportunity to generate more goodwill towards what's already a fairly well-liked club.

Were the tickets to be paid for by Flybe, but now won't be covered?


As a friend has just pointed out on another forum, every team gives away freebies, and hopes to generate income from other sales (food/drink). If the tickets were for the high cost hospitality they could have just said "Sorry hospitality hasn't been paid, but you can still use the seats but without the hospitality"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 09, 2020 9:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15651
Location: South Oxfordshire
Saint wrote:
OhNo wrote:
backrow wrote:
Sandstorm wrote:
Plato'sCave wrote:

Why would I want one step further? Just let it fail. Or shall we just bail out every business that’s feeling the pinch?


No, we shouldn't. However Flybe do provide flights on routes to regional airports in areas that aren't well-served by anyone else. These areas eg. Channel Islands, NE, SW and Wales need the visitors (both business and leisure) and it also cuts down on over-crowding on trains or motorways.

There's a case for sensible government take-overs and this is one IMO.


Alternatively let them go pop and offer inducements to BA to run the loss making routes.

I suspect the previous bailout was less to do with helping a regional airline , and more to do with keeping their valuable Heathrow landing slots away from the competition ! Some LHR slots are actually worth more than the aircraft themselves.


I suspect most of Flybe’s Heathrow slots are linked to PSO routes so not available if you don’t fly that route. Also BA got out of the regional game when they sold BA Connect to Flybe. I also doubt BA have the right aircraft or even inclination to fly Southampton Glasgow or Exeter Newcastle.

Unlike other airlines that went bust like Monarch or Thomas Cooke, Flybe are vital for regional connectivity within the UK. I think the government are right to offer some support. Also scrapping APD on routes between regional airports sounds a good idea, maybe just leave it on those connecting to Heathrow.


Apparently most of FlyBe's Heathrow slots are actually BA slots on long term lease to Flybe, and are NOT restricted should they revert to BA.



As of this morning, FlyBe's LHR slots have returned to BA. BA will be measured on use it or lose it starting early May.

Just what BA want right now - global pandemic, flights being cancelled/consolidated left, right, and centre and slot usage already a problem, and they now need to fill another 12 slots daily. Long term they want them desperately, but it's going to cost them a bucketload of empty flights to keep them in the short term. There could be a lot of LHR-LGW flights being scheduled in the short term


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 168 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: A5D5E5, bimboman, Blackrock Bullet, Boxcar Ira, CarrotGawks, clydecloggie, Derwyn, de_Selby, Google Adsense [Bot], MrBunhead, rabble, Slim 293, Ted., Ulsters Red Hand and 57 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group