Metro North

Re: Metro North

Postby Frank Taylor » Mon Sep 13, 2010 5:02 pm

PVC King wrote:The issue on MN is the relationship between cost and benefit;
Indeed it is.

The problem is that we don't know the benefits or the costs, so the discussion is pointless. Describing an alternative route for which we also know neither costs nor benefits doesn't help much.

The metro costs won't be known to anyone until the final bid is made.

The studies predicting the benefits have only been partially released and although the RPA has been updating their estimates regularly to compensate for the changing economy, these updated studies are also unpublished.

Even if we had full disclosure of the benefits and costs in advance it has to be remembered that the predictions are just that and that the calculation of benefits depends on a list of predictions about the long term future of inflation, the future prices of fuel, economic growth curves, European climate change policy.

The benefits study must place a EURO value on improved public health and other intangible benefits that don't fit easily into a sum.

One good thing about these cost benefit studies is that if they're all done consistently it does give you a rough yardstick to compare a set of projects in the same sector. Presumably on this basis, the weaker projects have been discarded: Lucan & Rathfarnham Luas, Metro west, Cherrywood-Bray Luas, WRC...

Underground lines in Dublin including an airport metro were first proposed 35 years ago by the Dublin Rapid Rail Transit Study. We've had plenty of time to consider and refine this proposal and we have many oversight bodies to ensure that it's worthwhile: Dept of finance, C&AG, ABP, Even the EIB has cast its rule over the project and agreed to invest.

The project promoters haven't done a great job given that Transport 21 has generous pr/ branding and advertising budgets. Hence these inane & repetitive discussions that have now leaked from the internet into the public mind.

On the elephant it says "15 Billion"
Image
Frank Taylor
Senior Member
 
Posts: 530
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:38 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: Metro North

Postby PVC King » Mon Sep 13, 2010 7:08 pm

Frank Taylor wrote: Indeed it is.

The problem is that we don't know the benefits or the costs, so the discussion is pointless. Describing an alternative route for which we also know neither costs nor benefits doesn't help much.

The metro costs won't be known to anyone until the final bid is made.


The key point in this is that the Luas option was not properly assessed; the solution proposed above provides the same 'catchment' routing in a segregated route to a point where two or three on street lines provide sufficient capacity for the long term while it is clear that a single Luas line is more than adequate for the present. Given that MN is a 100 year investment according to its supporters why can't a 100 year approach to capacity building be implemented?

Frank Taylor wrote: The studies predicting the benefits have only been partially released and although the RPA has been updating their estimates regularly to compensate for the changing economy, these updated studies are also unpublished.

Even if we had full disclosure of the benefits and costs in advance it has to be remembered that the predictions are just that and that the calculation of benefits depends on a list of predictions about the long term future of inflation, the future prices of fuel, economic growth curves, European climate change policy.

The benefits study must place a EURO value on improved public health and other intangible benefits that don't fit easily into a sum.


Externalities both positive and negative are considered in every project; however equally opportunity cost must be considered if MN were sanctioned it will lead to far deeper cost cuts elsewhere i.e. healthcare, education, alternative transport projects. Under huge pressure to green light this project in 2004 when money was abundant Dept Finance said no....

Frank Taylor wrote: One good thing about these cost benefit studies is that if they're all done consistently it does give you a rough yardstick to compare a set of projects in the same sector. Presumably on this basis, the weaker projects have been discarded: Lucan & Rathfarnham Luas, Metro west, Cherrywood-Bray Luas, WRC...
Underground lines in Dublin including an airport metro were first proposed 35 years ago by the Dublin Rapid Rail Transit Study. We've had plenty of time to consider and refine this proposal and we have many oversight bodies to ensure that it's worthwhile: Dept of finance, C&AG, ABP, Even the EIB has cast its rule over the project and agreed to invest.


I would draw your attention to the link you posted below and the Goodbody report which found the WRC was actually viable. When the clear truth is that it was a politically motivated unviable mess on delivery

Frank Taylor wrote: The project promoters haven't done a great job given that Transport 21 has generous pr/ branding and advertising budgets. Hence these inane & repetitive discussions that have now leaked from the internet into the public mind.


With only one bidder left the RPA do their case a lot more harm than good in concealing the true costs. The number of editorials against the project including Sunday Business Post are starting to mount; if the project is saved it will be as a Luas; they should stop wasting ABP's time and taxpayers money and get the project into a form that represents value for money.

Greg Ip of the Economistis of the opinion that raising money on the bond markets is a non-runner. Clearly as 1987-1990 displayed the country has the ability to deliver credible rectitude and deliver critcal infrastructure simultaneously; but this project is not critical, it has its advantages and on that basis is only viable at the right price i.e one with an acceptable opportunity cost.
PVC King
 

Re: Metro North

Postby Frank Taylor » Mon Sep 13, 2010 8:37 pm

PVC King wrote:The key point in this is that the Luas option was not properly assessed;
How do you know that? You may be right but it is impossible to tell without seeing the studies carried out by the RPA. There is some mention of the street tram alternative in the EIS but it is not discussed in detail.

Street level luas has different characteristics from segregated metro. Segregated increases the max capacity, the train length, the frequency, the speed, the reliability. All of these are key characteristics in attracting passengers. Now you may be right that street tram is a better option but without seeing rthe studies or even knowing if they exist, I can see how you might also be wrong. This is angels on a pinhead stuff.

Externalities both positive and negative are considered in every project; however equally opportunity cost must be considered if MN were sanctioned it will lead to far deeper cost cuts elsewhere i.e. healthcare, education, alternative transport projects.
Yes, you're right. The opportunity costs have to be considered for every public infrastructure investment. We don't know how well they have been considered. Maybe they should just pour the money into the health service instead. Maybe not.

I would draw your attention to the link you posted below and the Goodbody report which found the WRC was actually viable. When the clear truth is that it was a politically motivated unviable mess on delivery
The Goodbody report I read stated that the WRC phase 1 (the least crazy bit) was unviable even under optimistic passenger assumptions. Yes the decision was made for political reasons.

The number of editorials against the project including Sunday Business Post are starting to mount;
Journalists that I know regard reading each others' articles as research. There is also a sort of premature buyers' remorse expressed nationally before every large purchase. Sunday Business Post was very anti-luas prior to opening. Often it is just expressing the views of business owners who fear some temporary traffic disruption during the construction of a project that will ultimately benefit them.

Greg Ip of the Economistis of the opinion that raising money on the bond markets is a non-runner.
I've just listened to that interview and I heard him saying that Ireland is a small country in comparison with the size of the european stability fund and that we should be OK. We easily borrowed what we needed for the year in 2010 even with all the NAMA bonds issued and still due to issue. The ECB is keeping us afloat and will presumably decide with the EIB whether to allow us to proceed with the metro project.

I think PVC that you have said everything that you want to say on the Metro.
  • You think it costs too much
  • You think the passenger projections are overblown
  • You think a cheaper street luas would be better suited
  • You think the finance won't be there for the project on the markets.


You can't just keep typing it in again and again without starting to spam the site. What are your insights on some other topic? Any other topic!
Frank Taylor
Senior Member
 
Posts: 530
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:38 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: Metro North

Postby PVC King » Mon Sep 13, 2010 8:54 pm

Frank Taylor wrote: How do you know that? You may be right but it is impossible to tell without seeing the studies carried out by the RPA. There is some mention of the street tram alternative in the EIS but it is not discussed in detail.

Street level luas has different characteristics from segregated metro. Segregated increases the max capacity, the train length, the frequency, the speed, the reliability. All of these are key characteristics in attracting passengers. Now you may be right that street tram is a better option but without seeing rthe studies or even knowing if they exist, I can see how you might also be wrong. This is angels on a pinhead stuff.


The report clearly listed three options; however all listed a substantial underground section; as you well know the future demographic landscape of North Dublin used in all predictive outcomes now bears no relation to the contemporary probable outcome; put simply the limited economic growth scenario and a solution appropriate to such an outcome was never considered.

Frank Taylor wrote: Yes, you're right. The opportunity costs have to be considered for every public infrastructure investment. We don't know how well they have been considered. Maybe they should just pour the money into the health service instead. Maybe not.


They should simply not commit to c€3bn or anything approaching that sum until the financial picture becomes clear.

Frank Taylor wrote: The Goodbody report I read stated that the WRC phase 1 (the least crazy bit) was unviable even under optimistic passenger assumptions. Yes the decision was made for political reasons.


In the current economic climate MN is crazier as c€150m was pocket change 5 years ago; c€3bn is far from that.

Frank Taylor wrote: Journalists that I know regard reading each others' articles as research. There is also a sort of premature buyers' remorse expressed nationally before every large purchase. Sunday Business Post was very anti-luas prior to opening. Often it is just expressing the views of business owners who fear some temporary traffic disruption during the construction of a project that will ultimately benefit them.


That argument would have some credence if they were the only newspaper holding that view or were a tabloid; however the SBP is the most credible financial newspaper and it shares that view with many other broadsheet commentators.


Frank Taylor wrote: I've just listened to that interview and I heard him saying that Ireland is a small country in comparison with the size of the european stability fund and that we should be OK. We easily borrowed what we needed for the year in 2010 even with all the NAMA bonds issued and still due to issue. The ECB is keeping us afloat and will presumably decide with the EIB whether to allow us to proceed with the metro project.


Most of the fundraising was done in the first half of the year when bond yields were sub 5%; I strongly hope that the actions that are necessary to convince fixed income markets that such costs are acheivable again happen. But if money is spent on projects like this such an outcome is a lot less likely.

Frank Taylor wrote: I think PVC that you have said everything that you want to say on the Metro.
  • You think it costs too much
  • You think the passenger projections are overblown
  • You think a cheaper street luas would be better suited
  • You think the finance won't be there for the project on the markets.

You can't just keep typing it in again and again without starting to spam the site. What are your insights on some other topic? Any other topic!


That is such a lazy response; come up with credible argument and I will agree with you; however to date you have failed to do so.
PVC King
 

Re: Metro North

Postby Frank Taylor » Thu Sep 16, 2010 12:47 pm

PVC King wrote:The report clearly listed three options; however all listed a substantial underground section;
I don't mean the underground route options, there is a separate sections for alternatives such as street level Luas.

PVC King wrote:as you well know the future demographic landscape of North Dublin used in all predictive outcomes now bears no relation to the contemporary probable outcome; put simply the limited economic growth scenario and a solution appropriate to such an outcome was never considered.
I think you're making the mistake of assuming a straight line crash trajectory for the irish economy, the same mistake made in reverse during the bubble years.

Metro North's original assumptions about population, jobs and economic growth were based on 2002 data before the height of the boom.

Despite the bust, population levels and projections in 2010 are ahead of projections from 2002
Despite the bust, more people are employed in Ireland in 2010 than were in 2002
Despite the bust, real GNP and GDP is higher in 2010 than in 2002.

So all of these assumptions have strengthened since the case was first made.

Yes we have a large deficit now and higher unemployment but we also have an all-party approach to curing the deficit by 2014 and a supportive EU backing us.

Raising the money is not going to be a problem. Yes PPPs over 1bn are hard to fund on the markets these days but this will only be part funded by PPP and look at the govt''s record in raising debt:
20bn in deficit for the year funded well ahead of schedule
12bn in NAMA bonds issued and another 13bn due to issue this year
23 bn in bank recap costs in 2010
and still there's 17bn cash sitting in the NTMA coffers

----------------------------
Sources:
Population data and projections from the Regional Planning Guidelines

rpg 2010 gda pop projections
http://www.rpg.ie/documents/RPGPrintA4-SinglePages.pdf

2010 1,256,900 + 540,000
2016 1,361,200 + 594,600

rpg 2002 pop projections
http://www.rpg.ie/guidelines/SPGGDA-Web-Review&Update2002.pdf

2011 1.7-1.8m


Employment data from cso.ie
ILO Participation, Employment and Unemployment Characteristics by
Statistic, Sex, Age Group and Quarter

GDP/GNP data from cso.ie
Gross Domestic Product and Gross National Product at 2008 Prices by
Quarter and Statistic

NAMA securities issued:
http://www.nama.ie/Publications/2010/NamaDebtSecuritiesIssued.pdf

Economist projections for Irish national accounts in 2010-2015
Image
Frank Taylor
Senior Member
 
Posts: 530
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:38 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: Metro North

Postby PVC King » Thu Sep 16, 2010 6:57 pm

It is clear to any observer of the process that MN was conceived as a transport corridor to extend development growth into North Dublin City and a narrow belt of Fingal. Its existing route had a density that could just about support a Luas route when the Airport was included. When assessing population growth the best place to start are housing completions as public transport is primarily about moving people from home to work to night out etc.

Housing completions in the Greater Dublin Area increased by 6% over 2000.
Completions totalled 16,498 housing units. Within this statistic there was an
increase in the Dublin Region of 2% and in the Mid-East Region of 12% over the
2000 completions. Construction has commenced on a number of large schemes in
the Metropolitan Area.


So we take the 2001 figures used in the 2002 RPG

Table 6 House Completions by County and Regions GDA (1996 - 2001)
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
Dublin City 4,125 3,427 3,777 2,804 2,362 3,091
DL-Rathdown 1,053 712 549 886 860 1,166
Fingal 2,024 2,707 2,618 4,296 4,044 3,602
South Dublin 2,244 2,479 2,013 2,049 2,139 1,746
Dublin Region 9,446 9,325 8,957 10,035 9,405 9,605
Kildare 1,900 2,095 2,509 2,419 2,366 2,426
Meath 1,154 1,318 1,422 1,480 2,303 2,553
Wicklow 1,168 1,147 1,335 1,294 1,484 1,914
Mid-East Region 4,222 4,560 5,266 5,193 6,153 6,893
TOTAL 13,668 13,885 14,223 15,228 15,558 16,498


This displays a total of 6,693 homes across all of Dublin City and all of Fingal; which should be fairly representative of the upper end of medium term trends given the regional figure is 16,498; however it must be said that MN traverses a small section of Dublin City much of which would be served by the existing Drumcoundra Rail Station. Fingal's largest town is Blanchardstown and the coastal towns would have at least equal weight to Swords. You might therefore estimate the route provides a 1,000 homes a year.

Clearly the figures used to support MN are flawed as the above simply would not justify a €3bn single route.

I don't mean the underground route options, there is a separate sections for alternatives such as street level Luas.


I don't believe it was adequately assessed; there was a presumption from the macro side that growth rates would be much higher than they have turned out to be. If the project were looked at again on the basis on the current estimates of declining population and once the long painful deleveraging process completes far lower population growth figures are assessed then clearly a Luas line is what would be decided upon.

I think you're making the mistake of assuming a straight line crash trajectory for the irish economy, the same mistake made in reverse during the bubble years.


A negative outlook would be that todays 6% ten year debt rate would continue for a prolonged period and that no public transport investment were possible.

What I advocate is that the Interconnector be built and that future population growth be accomodated over the next 20 years along its superior development corridors

1. Hazelhatch
2. Maynooth
3. South Meath
4. Coastal Fingal
5. Greystones


I also fully support a Luas route on the proposed MN route as it could be delivered for about a third of the cost if that much; that is adjusting to the end of the boom and ensuring the fiscal situation is in a robust enough state to put money into areas such as education. To advocate that €3bn be borrowed 6% with repayments of €180m a year for this is simply not realistic.
PVC King
 

Re: Metro North

Postby Cathal Dunne » Fri Sep 17, 2010 1:39 am

Frank Taylor wrote:
Street level luas has different characteristics from segregated metro. Segregated increases the max capacity, the train length, the frequency, the speed, the reliability. All of these are key characteristics in attracting passengers. Now you may be right that street tram is a better option but without seeing rthe studies or even knowing if they exist, I can see how you might also be wrong. This is angels on a pinhead stuff.


Street-level Luas is not an option because there isn't enough space on the northside to build one. The Luas Red and Green Line could only be built because the space was already there - the old Harcourt St route for the Green, CIÉ lands for the Red. No such precedent exists for the northside.

Luas is also not an option because, as you say, it doesn't have anything like the capacity, frequency, speed and reliability of a metro line. We are building a transport system to serve Dublin into the 22nd century and a Luas line just doesn't cut it. It will be crush-loaded with passengers all along the line and once that happens the complaints about why we didn't build a metro line in the first place will grow.

Luas also causes more traffic problems than it solves. A whole lane has to be dedicated to it on roads/streets which already increases the likelihood of gridlock and traffic jams. Priority traffic light signalling also means that Luas creates tail-backs regularly at intersections. I saw this myself just the other day waiting for a bus at Parkgate St. - in just 10 minutes the Luas had stopped other traffic a dozen times.

Metro North avoids all these deficiencies and limitations and provides us with something which has been lacking - a high-capacity, reliable and efficient public transit corridor for the Northside.
Cathal Dunne
Member
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 10:33 pm

Re: Metro North

Postby PVC King » Fri Sep 17, 2010 7:51 am

Luas also causes more traffic problems than it solves.


Are you saying the existing on street sections should be removed and all future Luas projects cancelled?
PVC King
 

Re: Metro North

Postby Cathal Dunne » Fri Sep 17, 2010 6:04 pm

PVC King wrote:Are you saying the existing on street sections should be removed and all future Luas projects cancelled?


I would have preferred a full implementation of the Dublin Rapid Transit Scheme as it was proposed in 1975. It would have given us 3 lines of heavy rail which would have served huge swathes of the city. We wouldn't have needed to build the Luas in the 90s/00s then as we would have the rail capacity to accommodate the boom we had. It would have just been a matter of adding spurs to growth areas like Grand Canal Dock. Unfortunately short-sighted people successfully watered down the proposal until all we had left was the coastal line which we now call the DART - and even this could have simply been a new road. Barcelona and Rome would be examples to us in this regard. Both have compact city centre cores like Dublin which are greatly enhanced by the existence of the Metro. It enables quick A to B journeys which save on the shoe-leather and make the city work much better. Dublin should have followed this example in the 70s but we didn't to our eternal shame

Therefore we planned for Luas as the boom increased pressure on our roads and we got it. I don't think it's viable now to wind back the clock as it would cost too much and cause a lot of disruption. It would also be a breach of our PPP contract and that wouldn't be good for Ireland as we went to tender future PPPs. I'd be happy if the Luas BXD was the last Luas line to be built as a link-up between the two lines would make them work a lot better. A Luas out to Lucan would be nice as I live along the planned route but I wouldn't lose too much sleep if it was cancelled. I think projects like DART Underground, Metro North/West and a putative Metro South would have a much greater benefit to public transport than a Luas line to Lucan.
Cathal Dunne
Member
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 10:33 pm

Re: Metro North

Postby PVC King » Fri Sep 17, 2010 6:25 pm

PPPs are dead just look at the NCC debacle where the state has a forward commitment figure of c€400m for a single building. PPPs deliver very poor value for money. A lot of the negative view in the credit markets on Ireland is based on the reality that the country will be burdened for years paying for some of these costly politically motivated projects that deliver little in the way of benefit.

There is no contract in MN as the current status is 'tenders being assessed' except that only one bidder remains and a wave of consolidation in the sector means that no new entrants will be forthcoming.

For €3bn on Interconnector you get to ramp up significant additional capacity on 5 transport corridors

1. Hazelhatch
2. Maynooth
3. South Meath
4. Coastal Fingal
5. Greystones

For c€750m - €950m you get a Luas line that adequately serves the Airport, Ballymun and Swords. Luas works ask the passengers that use it; if you want to cut 10 mins off airport journey times then employ 5 extra Gardai at immigration and 5 extra security personnel at departures at peak times the cost per year would be less than €3m p.a. and it would benefit all passengers not just those who take light rail.
PVC King
 

Re: Metro North

Postby Cathal Dunne » Fri Sep 17, 2010 11:27 pm

PVC King wrote:PPPs are dead just look at the NCC debacle where the state has a forward commitment figure of c€400m for a single building. PPPs deliver very poor value for money. A lot of the negative view in the credit markets on Ireland is based on the reality that the country will be burdened for years paying for some of these costly politically motivated projects that deliver little in the way of benefit.


Total rubbish. PPPs are not the reason Ireland's bond spreads are so high, it's the banks which are causing that. Market uncertainty at the cost of the Anglo and INBS bailouts are driving up interest rates and if we don't put together a convincing and viable plan to sort out these two banks, Ireland will be paying 5.5% interest on bonds Metro North or no Metro North. At least with the €416 million spent on the Convention Centre Dublin you will get a billion euro in business tourism for Ireland. €416 million to Anglo just gets you more angry taxpayers. It's money down the drain.


For c€750m - €950m you get a Luas line that adequately serves the Airport, Ballymun and Swords. Luas works ask the passengers that use it; if you want to cut 10 mins off airport journey times then employ 5 extra Gardai at immigration and 5 extra security personnel at departures at peak times the cost per year would be less than €3m p.a. and it would benefit all passengers not just those who take light rail.


I don't need to ask the passengers - I am one of them and I can tell you that a system of underground rail tunnels would be a lot better than Luas. A Luas line to the airport would just hold up the traffic on the northside and negate any benefit it would bring. Furthermore, I've been on the Red Line as it goes through the Heuston and Conolly stops and the amount of people who get on fills the trams up to full capacity regularly. Given that the Airport is a much bigger station than these places you would have to employ Japanese-style crushers at the airport to fit everyone into the trams. A 90m-long Metro train is much better in these circumstances. This is because Metro has the capacity to take the surges in passengers which will occur at the Airport. Luas simply does not.
Cathal Dunne
Member
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 10:33 pm

Re: Metro North

Postby PVC King » Sat Sep 18, 2010 9:25 am

Cathal Dunne wrote: Total rubbish. PPPs are not the reason Ireland's bond spreads are so high, it's the banks which are causing that. Market uncertainty at the cost of the Anglo and INBS bailouts are driving up interest rates and if we don't put together a convincing and viable plan to sort out these two banks, Ireland will be paying 5.5% interest on bonds Metro North or no Metro North. At least with the €416 million spent on the Convention Centre Dublin you will get a billion euro in business tourism for Ireland. €416 million to Anglo just gets you more angry taxpayers. It's money down the drain.


For a start 5.50% is no longer available its now well north of 6%; secondly the overall tourism business is worth €1bn a year; the conference centre if it were a €1bn euro business wouldn't need any subvention. This is not about dealing with the governments abject failure to deal with the banking sector when the bubble was inflating it is about ensuring the same attitude of 'a sure the figures will look after themselves in time' attitude is banished from power for decades. Something is viable or it isn't and at a time like this everything must be viable day 1.




Cathal Dunne wrote: I don't need to ask the passengers - I am one of them and I can tell you that a system of underground rail tunnels would be a lot better than Luas. A Luas line to the airport would just hold up the traffic on the northside and negate any benefit it would bring.


A TGV to Cork would be a lot better than the existing but because it isn't viable it won't be built. The traffic impact of a conversion from segregated Luas to semi-segregated Luas would be the minimal extension of Luas from the top of OCS to not even Broadstone and St Mobhi Rd.



Cathal Dunne wrote:Furthermore, I've been on the Red Line as it goes through the Heuston and Conolly stops and the amount of people who get on fills the trams up to full capacity regularly.


But I thought the red line was a failure? Outside peak times when Hueston filters an entire commuter rail hub onto shortened trams Luas is far from capacity.


Cathal Dunne wrote:Given that the Airport is a much bigger station than these places you would have to employ Japanese-style crushers at the airport to fit everyone into the trams.


Kings Cross 60m tube journeys a year (rail hub) Heathrow roughly 8m tube journeys were made in 2008 or a mode split of roughly 12% of total air passengers.


Cathal Dunne wrote:A 90m-long Metro train is much better in these circumstances. This is because Metro has the capacity to take the surges in passengers which will occur at the Airport. Luas simply does not.


Surges in air passengers occur much later than the morning commuter peak; therefore the passsenger load imposed is a bonus to a network and not a significant supply consideration.
PVC King
 

Re: Metro North

Postby missarchi » Sat Sep 18, 2010 10:29 am

missarchi
Old Master
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:53 pm

Re: Metro North

Postby missarchi » Mon Sep 20, 2010 4:02 am

Regrettably, it seems that any attempt at innovation in public transport in our city centre inevitably faces an immediate challenge – for example, opposition from business groups to the College Green bus corridor, the current objections to the RPA’s Luas proposals, and ongoing debate about tunnelling.

innovation?

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2010/0916/1224278992648.html
missarchi
Old Master
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:53 pm

Re: Metro North

Postby missarchi » Mon Sep 27, 2010 4:10 am

missarchi
Old Master
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:53 pm

Re: Metro North

Postby aj » Mon Sep 27, 2010 12:40 pm

Carrolls would have to close because of construction let get the spades out
aj
Member
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Metro North

Postby wearnicehats » Mon Sep 27, 2010 4:32 pm

The Irish Times - Saturday, September 25, 2010

A challenge to Ryanair

Madam, – As a significant retailer in the tourism market, I would like to respond to Michael O’Leary’s challenge to the Government to dramatically increase tourist numbers into Ireland if it would abolish the €10 passenger tax by issuing my own challenge.

Two major problems face our industry: 1. Dwindling numbers visiting Ireland, 2. Decreasing spend from each tourist.

I totally agree with Mr O’Leary that the Government was short- sighted in introducing this stupid tax and its abolition will drive substantial extra numbers of tourists into the country.

However, short-sightedness is not reserved to the Government, as Ryanair’s equally stupid baggage policy has resulted in the tourist being unable to make purchases here to bring home.

The challenge to Mr O’Leary is to immediately increase the hand baggage allowance to 15kg.

Imagine the benefits to everyone if both sides compromised – not words but action – more tourists into the country, more income for Ryanair, more employment, a massive increase in revenue for businessess throughout Ireland and to the State exchequer! It should be a no-brainer for Mr O’Leary. – Yours, etc,

RAY O CONNELL,

Managing Director,
Carroll’s Gifts Souvenirs,
Head Office,
Lower Gardiner Street,
Dublin 1


incidentally Michael O’Leary is opposed to MN too
wearnicehats
Senior Member
 
Posts: 823
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 2:38 pm

Re: Metro North

Postby PVC King » Mon Sep 27, 2010 6:56 pm

Shit goods should just be outlawed full stop; ask two questions, how many of these goods are made in Ireland and how likely is it that the appearance of this tat in peoples homes is likely to attract the purchasers mates to Ireland for a visit.

I had the misfortune of flying Easyjet a few weeks back and using their bagdrop system; an utter farce almost one hour to drop a bag which is ridiculous considering the check in was online; looking at the Ryanair bagdrop at the same airport made me want to cry; there was no waiting and they only recently pulled off the route. O'Leary is shrewd man; whilst he is opposed to white elephants like Metro North; he has also realised that punctuality and not price alone will drive profit growth going forward to create the Worlds second most profitable carrier within 2-3 years.

To get the tourist business moving I would allow hoteliers to be allowed enter a level of debt for equity swaps with the banks that enables them a two year interest payment holiday and thus the ability to cut room costs and get beds filled; as much as I am depressed by the abject absence of reality in government the people and many of the venues are top drawer,
PVC King
 


Re: Metro North

Postby PVC King » Mon Oct 04, 2010 10:44 am

The drop in the price of the pint to €4 in upscale bars will do a lot to assist with the attaction of tourists; for the first time in a number of years I pay more in sterling in my local in London £4.25 than in Euros €4 in Dublin.

Once the bond markets are on side a very bright light will appear.
PVC King
 

Re: Metro North

Postby DjangoD » Sat Oct 09, 2010 11:55 pm

DjangoD
Member
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:34 pm
Location: Dubberlin

Re: Metro North

Postby missarchi » Sun Oct 10, 2010 5:08 am

Fair play to them...
But they have not got there planning conditions yet... or have they?
That image does not look like a Dublin metro it could be in Porto or any other place for that matter.

I'm still not convinced that is based on the way other planning applications are treated.
missarchi
Old Master
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:53 pm

Re: Metro North

Postby PVC King » Sun Oct 10, 2010 5:37 pm



Fact: These numbers are quite simply ridiculous and Metro North will cost far less than €5bn to build. The exact number is confidential because we are not going to tell the companies bidding to build Metro North how much money we have in the budget.


Incorrect - only one consortium is left - no competitive concerns.

Fact: Metro North will deliver a net benefit to the Irish economy of more than €1 billion. This has been verified by independent auditors


Did these auditors also do Anglo and or Quinn group?

Fact: While Metro North may have been planned in more prosperous times the economic necessity of building Metro North remains. If even modest population and employment growth occurs, as predicted by the Central Statistics Office, then Metro North will carry over 36 million passengers each year. This is based on trips to destinations such as Dublin City University, the Mater and Rotunda Hospitals, Ballymun, Swords, Dublin Airport as well as commuting by north Dublin and Fingal residents to the heart of the city


I'd love to see the figures on this; 40% of the morning paek ridership was reckoned to come from park and ride; which could as we all know be built on the existing Northern line and if done via sale and lease backs could see the income stream subsidise the much more important interconnector.


Fact: The journey times from the airport to city centre will be under 20 minutes with a train leaving the airport every 5 minutes – this fast, frequent, reliable and economic service will be attractive to all including business travellers and tourists.


The Aircoach currently takes 25 minutes to make it from Dublin 4 to the airport; i.e. there is no time saving.


All premature until Brian has terms laid out to him in Washington today
PVC King
 

Re: Metro North

Postby neutral » Sun Oct 10, 2010 7:05 pm

I think with all the jobs and pay back through Tax and VAT both Metro North and the Dart IC should go ahead as planned providing the tender prices are right for both project,lets not forget construction tender are approx 33% down from their peak a couple of years ago.Neither project will carry anywhere near their capacity when they are completed but both projects are long term investments.

Quote
The Aircoach currently takes 25 minutes to make it from Dublin 4 to the airport; i.e. there is no time saving.


I work in Dublin 4 and can just about do Dublin 4 to Glasnevin in 20-25 minutes on a scooter so for the Aircoach to do the Airport in 25 minutes its not stopping to pick up a lot of passengers even allowing for the port tunnel!!
neutral
Member
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 1:49 pm

Re: Metro North

Postby PVC King » Sun Oct 10, 2010 7:20 pm

I agree on Dart Underground but not on Metro North; the cost is unclear despite a failed tender process leaving only 1 consortium left; that doesn't imply any saving it implies a charge what they like price on the part of the last consortium standing; the RPA will not even give a +/- 10% figure.

Trips on Aircoach from the airport to Leeson St are about 25 mins these days; traffic is no longer the same problem since the bus gate and port tunnel combined with a slower economy.

There is a savage series of cuts en route and it really is a case of either Dart Underground which is a mode of transport that must be segregated or Luas underground a mode that has been proven to segregate effectively at a fraction of the cost.
PVC King
 

PreviousNext

Return to Ireland



cron