3 ms·
> especially since open access operators seem to focus mostly on faster long-distance trains Only long distance trains are mandated to be self-financing. Compe
by ant6n 5y ago
> especially since open access operators seem to focus mostly on faster long-distance trains
Only long distance trains are mandated to be self-financing. Competing with local trains means competing with subsidized trains, which doesn't make any economic sense -- if you have a private operating company and want to run local trains, then compete in the bidding processes to get the subsidy to the run them. And they do -- in Germany, about 1/3 of local trains are privately operated. (Btw, for freight its 40%, for intercity trains its below 1%)
- iggldiggl 5y ago> Only long distance trains are mandated to be self-financing. Competing with local trains means competing with subsidized trains, which doesn't make any economic sense Hmm yes, you're right of course. I guess my main beef is how parts of the political word are always saying "Open access competition is great and everything will be super with rainbows and unicorns" and mostly ignoring the fact that most corridors where open-access might be sort of viable are also already mostly full and any serious increase in the number of open access operators would wreak havoc on the schedules of the currently existing services, especially those of regional trains.