I've spent a single day in NYC all my life so have no idea. I'm wondering if ferries are easier to run as there is less infrastructure. There are the equivalen

I've spent a single day in NYC all my life so have no idea. I'm wondering if ferries are easier to run as there is less infrastructure. There are the equivalent of stations and maintenance depots, but not rails. I don't know who owns the ferry infrastructure or if it is shared. If you privatised the trains, would the different operators share tracks and stations? If so who would own and maintain them? My guess is the operators would baulk at the idea of maintaining ANY infrastructure and just want to run trains leased from the govt, over a system maintained by the govt, who now has less revenue from the fares. In NSW our railway barely if never got to operational status under private ownership. The govt took it over immediately and it has been priceless for the state ever since. But of course bean counters have been complaining about it for decades now. I think there has been privatisation stuff going on for a while like the airport line. They were also trying to disentangle the various routes so they could sell them off, but that is hard because they didn't need to be planned that way when built. It seems to me like a city's metro system is too important to leave in the hands of private operators whose only reason to exist is to make a profit and that will bail out the second things are not worth its time and money. If the metro chokes, so does the city.