3 ms·

State owned - the planned privatization was abandoned.

4ggr0 2y ago
In 1994 it was transformed from a state-owned thing into a profit-oriented, private Corp with state-ownership. Half of the employees were fired, "non-profitable" lines were canceled, ever since the focus is oriented towards profit instead of public interest. the motivation and goals have shifted, that's what i meant with privatization. it's now a company with stocks, belonging to the state. public transport and capitalist profit-oriented mentalities never go well together. not saying the state itself would handle DB way better. but in my opinion, it does not help that it was turned into an AG[0] [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint-stock_company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint-stock_company excuse the half-baked business/corpo terms, it's a bit hard for me to translate german business terms into english, and i wasn't sure where you're from.
- RandomLensman 2y ago
  State owned and controlled - the legal form doesn't really matter (the owner could also change the form if so desired. Might need a supermajority in both houses if going beyond art. 87e GG). Hence it is all about what the owner does/want/etc. - so I don't see the state "off the hook" here on its ownership and control. But, yes, the initial plan to actually privatize did some damage, but that has been abandoned now for a couple of decades.
  - 4ggr0 2y ago
    i'm a big fan of 'Die Anstalt', here's 45 minutes of them satirically talking about DB: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVxaxKEpIj8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVxaxKEpIj8 > the legal form doesn't really matter i disagree. but let's not waste time on kleinigkeiten, i'm pretty sure our disagreement stems from our respective political viewpoints and not DB specifically. another comment which explains what i mean - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40864811 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40864811 i think quite a couple of things change when you start focusing on share-prices etc.
    - RandomLensman 2y ago
      There is no market in those shares hence no observable price and the Bund is controlling DB (including changes to its legal form - subject to art 87e GG or a need to change that one, but even that isn't impossible). I don't see a political angle here. It is a state-owned and controlled entity - wanting to turn a profit or not is ultimately a decision by the owners, not by someone else. I am not letting the owner off the hook here.
  - hnbad 2y ago
    It's semi-privatized in effect. It's run as a profit-oriented business while at the same time being publicly controlled and funded. It's the worst of both worlds in that sense. In fact, in addition to DB there's DB Regio as well as its various subsidiaries including DB RegioNetz with its own various subsidiaries. Other direct subsidiaries of DB are DB Fernverkehr for long distance trains, DB Cargo and DB InfraGO which was created as a merger of DB Netz (not to be confused with DB RegioNetz) and DB Station&Service. Most of these subsidiaries are intended to operate in such a way as to be independently profitable. There's also DB Energie because of course a corporation of this size needs vertical integration. Just now the coalition government decided to move funds intended for rail infrastructure into road infrastructure and build/extend another stupid highway. At the same time existing highway bridges are falling apart and the rail infrastructure is in desperate needs of improvements. German railway is at the same time kneecapped by its need to operate as a profit-driven business as well as being controlled by the policy-driven government.
    - RandomLensman 2y ago
      It is not privatized - it is the owners (the state) giving it certain objectives. The state has control as well as ownership and is making choices. If the owners wanted to do something different, they could do so (as you pointed out with the redirection of funds). The choices that were put into art 87e GG, for example, are still choices.

In 1994 it was transformed from a state-owned thing into a profit-oriented, private Corp with state-ownership. Half of the employees were fired, "non-profitable" lines were canceled, ever since the focus is oriented towards profit instead of public interest. the motivation and goals have shifted, that's what i meant with privatization. it's now a company with stocks, belonging to the state. public transport and capitalist profit-oriented mentalities never go well together. not saying the state itself would handle DB way better. but in my opinion, it does not help that it was turned into an AG[0] [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint-stock_company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint-stock_company excuse the half-baked business/corpo terms, it's a bit hard for me to translate german business terms into english, and i wasn't sure where you're from.

RandomLensman 2y ago
State owned and controlled - the legal form doesn't really matter (the owner could also change the form if so desired. Might need a supermajority in both houses if going beyond art. 87e GG). Hence it is all about what the owner does/want/etc. - so I don't see the state "off the hook" here on its ownership and control. But, yes, the initial plan to actually privatize did some damage, but that has been abandoned now for a couple of decades.
- 4ggr0 2y ago
  i'm a big fan of 'Die Anstalt', here's 45 minutes of them satirically talking about DB: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVxaxKEpIj8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVxaxKEpIj8 > the legal form doesn't really matter i disagree. but let's not waste time on kleinigkeiten, i'm pretty sure our disagreement stems from our respective political viewpoints and not DB specifically. another comment which explains what i mean - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40864811 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40864811 i think quite a couple of things change when you start focusing on share-prices etc.
  - RandomLensman 2y ago
    There is no market in those shares hence no observable price and the Bund is controlling DB (including changes to its legal form - subject to art 87e GG or a need to change that one, but even that isn't impossible). I don't see a political angle here. It is a state-owned and controlled entity - wanting to turn a profit or not is ultimately a decision by the owners, not by someone else. I am not letting the owner off the hook here.
- hnbad 2y ago
  It's semi-privatized in effect. It's run as a profit-oriented business while at the same time being publicly controlled and funded. It's the worst of both worlds in that sense. In fact, in addition to DB there's DB Regio as well as its various subsidiaries including DB RegioNetz with its own various subsidiaries. Other direct subsidiaries of DB are DB Fernverkehr for long distance trains, DB Cargo and DB InfraGO which was created as a merger of DB Netz (not to be confused with DB RegioNetz) and DB Station&Service. Most of these subsidiaries are intended to operate in such a way as to be independently profitable. There's also DB Energie because of course a corporation of this size needs vertical integration. Just now the coalition government decided to move funds intended for rail infrastructure into road infrastructure and build/extend another stupid highway. At the same time existing highway bridges are falling apart and the rail infrastructure is in desperate needs of improvements. German railway is at the same time kneecapped by its need to operate as a profit-driven business as well as being controlled by the policy-driven government.
  - RandomLensman 2y ago
    It is not privatized - it is the owners (the state) giving it certain objectives. The state has control as well as ownership and is making choices. If the owners wanted to do something different, they could do so (as you pointed out with the redirection of funds). The choices that were put into art 87e GG, for example, are still choices.