Selling of the post office
- 19 October 2013 15:38248976Yes, quite so Tom, in fact it wouldn't look out of place in Pseud's Corner.I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
- Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
19 October 2013 19:10248994The Royal mail as it was known before our leaders split it up
was well thought of
and very much looked upon as a sought after service and a pride to be part of the set up
sadly over the years it has declinedALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS - 23 October 2013 21:06249612Closed at £2 above the issue price tonight and still going north. Should reach £6 before long, that's a profit of £600 for each private investor.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson - 24 October 2013 07:31249631Keith - yes they kept reducing service while putting up prices for decades. It had to change as service can only drop so far while prices can only increase so far. The next step is what - a delivery every two days late in the afternoon and £1 for a 1st class stamp? It has to change and privatisation gives it a chance to do that.
- Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
24 October 2013 08:53249633no barry,the stamp redused to 50p first class and delivery by 0900,as it used to be. - Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,894
24 October 2013 09:09249635Are you hoping for a miracle Brian, I think Barry's prophecy is very likely in the future especially with privatisation.
Privatisation does not always mean cheaper or more efficient, trains, water and fuel being good examples.-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
------------------------------------------------------------------- - Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
24 October 2013 09:13249636Jan
this is becoming a habit
but i agreeALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS - 24 October 2013 12:08249677Jan Higgins wrote:Are you hoping for a miracle Brian, I think Barry's prophecy is very likely in the future especially with privatisation.
Privatisation does not always mean cheaper or more efficient, trains, water and fuel being good examples.
Actually Jan, it does mean cheaper and better service. A government monopoly results in higher costs and inefficiencies. You have to look at what you quote above and look at what has actually been happening. Price rises, where they have happened, have direct causal links that would still be there if still state owned. In fact you can be absolutely certain that without private competition your costs in each of those would be a lot higher now.
Was old British Rail a monument to low fares and good service - no, we all moaned about it then as we do now. But now, the new services carry far more passengers than ever. The trains are cleaner and service is, overall, a lot better.
Fuel! How is that an example? World energy prices have increased and the government green levies have further pushed up prices.
Then take water, what about all the old dilapidated Victorian sewers inherited by the privatised companies that have needed massive investment, the leaky pipes inherited too?
Whatever higher costs we may have now it would have been a lot worse if left in state hands.
The real question to ask in each case though is whether competition is working efficiently, whether there are enough providers and whether it is easy enough to change suppliers. Getting better competition in these markets is the way ahead. - Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,894
24 October 2013 13:09249688Regarding cheaper I will concede you might have a case but we will never know how the prices would have risen under the old system.
Water is still a monopoly there is no alternative supplier, the trains are similar. Fuel is almost the same with the suppliers all putting their prices up within days or weeks of each other making it pointless to swap.
As we are stuck with the present system I agree with your last paragraph but will not hold my breathe waiting for any improvement.-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
------------------------------------------------------------------- - 24 October 2013 14:15249691Jan - this is where my comments come in regarding the market and the need to improve competition. That should be the main role of government in this respect, to ensure there is competition and a working market.
Trains - well there is competition in two respects, against the car, with coaches and also at the point of tendering for routes. The contracts do not just go to the best price, or should not do, it should also be based on proposed service delivery, capital investment and enhancements along with fare proposals. In other words the whole package. This, along with contract monitoring to ensure contract delivery, is where the government has a role to get the best possible service at the best possible price.
As for water. I did read somewhere that it could be opened up to competition with different providers in the same way electricity and gas get sent down the same tubes and wires from different providers. This really would help in this.
As in all cases it is essential no cartel develops, that there is competition and a free market. It should be easy and quick to change providers and good information needs to be made available to inform the consumer.
That said so much of the price rises, particularly in power, are driven by government legislation and the same wholesale markets so it is true that all companies are faced with the same pressures to increase prices. British Gas though have got complacent and depend on consumer complacency far too much and deserve a kicking as a result. My main concern here would be to get more entrants and competition while seeing how the wholesale market can be made more efficient without compromising supply.
At the end of the day Jan - having choice is what we need, not a monopoly. - Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
24 October 2013 15:38249694jan,i used to get mail well before 0900 when I first moved up here. - Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,894
24 October 2013 16:11249699Brian, since we moved here our mail has arrived as early as 8.30 and as late as 2.30 and we live literally a couple of minutes away from the sorting office. When we lived in Tilmanstone we used to get it at about 11.30 but that was a rural round.-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
------------------------------------------------------------------- - Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
24 October 2013 17:58249722just sticking to the original thread(as i dont agree with barryw on railways but will come back later on that
mail here used to arrive at 8am now we are lucky if we get it before 4pm
doesnt bother me as its only bills usually lol
but thats because the post office go broken up, offices closed etc)ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS