Did the Euro Help Kill IE Railfreight?

ClovenHoof

Been thinking a lot about this mad little country and indeed until 2003 there really was a geniune economic boom between 1999 and 2004 that was very much based on sound and rational economic drive. We still had a healthy industrial base and so on.

I was also looking that around that time Irish Rail had a sudden huge increase in rail freight. Everyone seem excited that railfreight would grow massively in tandem with the economy. And why not!

There were plans for new wagons and locos, the works. Then we entered the Euro and money became very cheap. This allowed logistics companies to invest in huge fleet of new trucks and lots of independent guys who were driving white vans were now in the HGV business. When this was coupled with the credit explosion allowing developers to NAMAised the country then goodbye freight yards and so on.

I know IE management are equally guilty in the death of railfreight. But I think one aspect many people failed to notice was that railfreight was booming right before ILDA and the introduction of Euro and its cheap money possibilities.

The collapse of railfreight in Ireland was a very complicated affair and many people have a very simplistic approach to it. I think IE management could of saved and grown the industry if they wanted to - but they were part of the problem.

A lot of people said the Euro would be the answers to our prayers. For me this is just one more reason why we should of stayed with the punt. The Irish could not handle cheap and easy credit and along with NAMA, one-off houses, the insanity of Partnership it also put thousands of HGVs on the road which killed railfreight.

seamus

I think it's more complicated than that. We had a massive explosion in the quality of our roads network over the last ten years, including the period that you mention.

There wasn't the same explosion in rail infrastructure. So as demand grew, so too did the need for better logistics. And if a 2-hour journey by rail can be replaced with a 2.5 hour HGV trip (direct to the door), then rail is always going to lose out.

I think we just don't have a big enough country to justify any kind of major rail freight. In this country, it will almost always be quicker and cheaper to send your goods door-to-door via HGV/Van than use an intermediate like rail.

Cookie_Monster

seamus wrote: »

I think we just don't have a big enough country to justify any kind of major rail freight. In this country, it will almost always be quicker and cheaper to send your goods door-to-door via HGV/Van than use an intermediate like rail.

this is the main reason, followed by IE mgt refusing to run trains where what little demand there is wants it.

CIE

seamus wrote: »

I think it's more complicated than that. We had a massive explosion in the quality of our roads network over the last ten years, including the period that you mention.

There wasn't the same explosion in rail infrastructure. So as demand grew, so too did the need for better logistics. And if a 2-hour journey by rail can be replaced with a 2.5 hour HGV trip (direct to the door), then rail is always going to lose out.

I think we just don't have a big enough country to justify any kind of major rail freight. In this country, it will almost always be quicker and cheaper to send your goods door-to-door via HGV/Van than use an intermediate like rail.

Disagree. There could have been equal "explosions" in both road and rail infrastructure; certainly other countries within the eurozone have engaged in such investment. Road is not cheaper than rail, and the country just experienced the kind of weather where asphalt has a clear disadvantage and rail is relatively unaffected. HGVs do not deliver door to door; rather they deliver business to business, and rail can deliver business to business just as well as the HGV (meaning that they do not have to be an "intermediate") and with more tonnage with less cost per mile (in both fuel and manpower) than HGVs, not to mention have less useage of acreage and facility space when you compare truck bays versus rail siding footprints. Clear governmental bias that goes back much further than euro accession.

corktina

HOW can IE deliver "business to business" where the railway closed down in the 1960s? Talk sense


Seamus is spot on

Transportuser09

Of course as has been said time and time again future industrial developments should be sited near rail links. In fairness, they have catered for freight where there is a chance of profit, like the container trains on the Ballina line. They hung on to the Tara Mines traffic as well. NET closed which took that traffic out of their hands. Likewise the sugar beet. Demand for cement is down now for obvious reasons. Not really sure what the introduction of the euro had to do with any of it though, although the EU may have been a factor in the case of the sugar beet, but thats a different kettle of fish.

seamus

CIE wrote: »

HGVs do not deliver door to door; rather they deliver business to business,

That's what I mean by "door to door" - from the suppliers door to the customer's door.

and rail can deliver business to business just as well as the HGV (meaning that they do not have to be an "intermediate")

Rail will always be an intermediate. You can't build rail lines into every business park in the country. Even if the nearest freight depot is a mile down the road from every business in the country, the supplier still has to load a truck to get his goods to the depot, and the same thing repeated at the customer's end.

In a country where coast-to-coast travel in measured in hours as opposed to days, the time and cost of loading and unloading at each end cancels out any potential savings you make on time and fuel.

Losty Dublin

I'd agree with Seamus at well; there is neither the density of populations or heavy loadings, the long distances or volume of most goods in Ireland compared to other states to make most general freight loadings viable. Many companies who moved wares via rail either don't exist anymore or else they don't have the same product levels to move. Others (Diageo and Gymsum Ireland) simply went with a door to door option over time when it suited them.

There are other things that work against rail freight such as the implementation of mandatory rest periods of staff (This makes it harder to roster loco and rolling stock and gate keeper and driver given freights less rigid timings) versus the sole trader artic owner/driver who can drive illegally long hours, the seeming favouring of road haulage over rail by the State, the logistic of moving small amounts of freight to and from a local railhead, the move of Ireland's export economy in the last 30 years towards industry service/software economy means no physical produce to move and the freeing up of road freight all has played it's part.

Judgement Day

Losty_Dublin touches upon an interesting point above of which I have plenty of personal experience - much of the road haulage industry operates outside the law. Drivers working longer hours than they are allowed, tacographs being tampered with, and plenty of jobs done for cash and not put through the books. Throw in Govt. laissez faire attitude to transport policy, CIE ineptitude and corruption and we are where we are.

CIE

seamus wrote: »

That's what I mean by "door to door" - from the suppliers door to the customer's door

That's rail's job as well. Thanks to government policy, one mode's infrastructure is supported over another. You are aware that there is no private operation of the railways, yes?

seamus wrote: »

Rail will always be an intermediate. You can't build rail lines into every business park in the country

You certainly can. If you can build asphalt into their facility, rail lines can be built as well and are less of a physical impact, for far more goods. HGVs are an intermediate, not a final delivery mode.

seamus wrote: »

Even if the nearest freight depot is a mile down the road from every business in the country, the supplier still has to load a truck to get his goods to the depot, and the same thing repeated at the customer's end

Not a HGV. They don't have the dimensions that are friendly for local delivery, and it's time-consuming, fuel-consuming and wear-&-tear-expensive to do less-than-truckload.

seamus wrote: »

In a country where coast-to-coast travel in measured in hours as opposed to days, the time and cost of loading and unloading at each end cancels out any potential savings you make on time and fuel

That rhetorical view does not take the big picture into account. Road safety has greatly suffered due to government neglect of the rails, especially railfreight. Not to mention all the destruction upon infrastructure that these vehicles daily inflict, both on roads (due to weight) and rails (many of excess height, striking railway bridges that double-decker buses fit under comfortably). They make deliveries more expensive, and subsequently retail goods more expensive; it's a self-destructive cycle that has limited self-perpetuation.

Judgement_Day wrote: »

Losty_Dublin touches upon an interesting point above of which I have plenty of personal experience - much of the road haulage industry operates outside the law. Drivers working longer hours than they are allowed, tacographs being tampered with, and plenty of jobs done for cash and not put through the books. Throw in Govt. laissez faire attitude to transport policy, CIE ineptitude and corruption and we are where we are

If government transport policy were truly laissez-faire, then all government control of the rails would cease, and all roads and motorways would revert to private-sector administration. The government deliberately and actively influenced the current state of things. Not to mention looking the other way in regards to clearly illegal activities is not "laissez-faire", but abandonment of duty.

corktina

:pac::rolleyes:

Cookie_Monster

CIE wrote: »

That's rail's job as well. Thanks to government policy, one mode's infrastructure is supported over another. You are aware that there is no private operation of the railways, yes?You certainly can. If you can build asphalt into their facility, rail lines can be built as well and are less of a physical impact, for far more goods. HGVs are an intermediate, not a final delivery mode.

apart from the huge cost and disruption to bring rail from the railhead to all these varied locations, most of which are nowhere near established lines, the volume is still to low in general.

Not a HGV. They don't have the dimensions that are friendly for local delivery, and it's time-consuming, fuel-consuming and wear-&-tear-expensive to do less-than-truckload.

of course HGVs do local delivery, they are suitable for most of the road network FFS, Tesco for example can get their trucks into all their stores funnily enough. and not every supplier need this size vehicle either, many will have smaller ones as it suits their needs

That rhetorical view does not take the big picture into account. Road safety has greatly suffered due to government neglect of the rails, especially railfreight. Not to mention all the destruction upon infrastructure that these vehicles daily inflict, both on roads (due to weight) and rails (many of excess height, striking railway bridges that double-decker buses fit under comfortably). They make deliveries more expensive, and subsequently retail goods more expensive; it's a self-destructive cycle that has limited self-perpetuation.

How is Door-truck-door more expensive in transport costs and time than door-truck-railyard-unload-wait for train-train-unload-sit in yard until collected-truck-door?

If you haven't noticed road safety has improved hugely in the last number of years. As for damage to roads, not really, the roads are designed for them for the most part, bridge strikes do happen but mostly the bridges are ok and re-opened in short order.

If government transport policy were truly laissez-faire, then all government control of the rails would cease, and all roads and motorways would revert to private-sector administration. The government deliberately and actively influenced the current state of things. Not to mention looking the other way in regards to clearly illegal activities is not "laissez-faire", but abandonment of duty.

I don't even know where to start with this one

Run_to_da_hills

Not mentioning FastTrack, a useful form of small business freight and extra revenue for IE that was killed stone dead. .

Losty Dublin

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Not mentioning FastTrack, a useful form of small business freight and extra revenue for IE that was killed stone dead. .

Fasttrack hemorrhaged money in it's last few years, again due to private haulage being able to undercut it and offer a point to point service on goods.

Judgement Day

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Fasttrack hemorrhaged money in it's last few years, again due to private haulage being able to undercut it and offer a point to point service on goods.

Fastrack was run into the ground by IE. The concept of parcels by rail is as old as railways themselves and it's only because CIE/IE is a state run organisation that it failed. No point in going any further into it other than to quote the old proverb "everybody's business is nobody's business."

ClovenHoof

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Fasttrack hemorrhaged money in it's last few years, again due to private haulage being able to undercut it and offer a point to point service on goods.

100% Wrong.

Fast Wreck more like. CIE destroyed a once very profitable little earner for them. The ramped up the costs by transferring staff from other reduntant areas in IE into Fast Track to shoot up the costs and make it look like an unprofitable business.

Had nothing to do with white vans taking the business from them. Even when FastTrack was falling apart in the final months there were still plenty of customers lined up at the Hueston office as these were long time customers from when this product had a great name and was considered very reliable by businesses who used it.

With all the extra train services on most routes, FastTrack shuould of become and even more lucrative and useful service. But instead like catering they had something very sucessfull and let it die an unnatural death.

CIE/IE is the ultimate rail transport suicide machine.

corktina

fastrack in point of fact became slowtrack, because you had to deliver to the station by van (maybe) wait for train, offload at other end (extra risk of damage) pick up in van and deliver, whereas a courier such as TNT or DPD can do the same quicker to a far greater choice of places (ie anywhere in the world)

As for freight, the buzzwords are "just in time" nowadays with minimal stockholding. It stands to reason that an economic load for a train involves stockholding of a trainload (with all the loading delays and costs involved) whilst perhaps 20 wagons are loaded.
Even if a freight flow were identified the costs of rail connection (at both ends) are massive and an economic load would not be acheived until (lets say) 20 wagonloads were acheived, the logistics of loading and unloading this and the extra warehousing required to store goods whilst waiting for the empty train to return make it a nonstarter.
With 20 lorries moving this cargo they can arrive and depart in a steady stream as goods are produced giving clear advantages in terms of labour and storage at both ends.

Run_to_da_hills

corktina wrote: »

fastrack in point of fact became slowtrack, because you had to deliver to the station by van (maybe) wait for train, offload at other end (extra risk of damage) pick up in van and deliver, whereas a courier such as TNT or DPD can do the same quicker to a far greater choice of places (ie anywhere in the world)

Fast track was very useful for small business and could easily outpace any road courier.

For starters it was direct A to B in 3 to 4 hours max. no messing about going away off the beaten track (Pun ) serving other customers along the way.

At the far end motorcycle courier could be waiting to collect and drop off and could slice through rush hour city traffic. I sent a parcel by Fasttrack at Heuston 2 PM it was in my brothers office in Galway by closing time.

No white van could beat that.

ClovenHoof

corktina wrote: »

fastrack in point of fact became slowtrack, because you had to deliver to the station by van (maybe) wait for train, offload at other end (extra risk of damage) pick up in van and deliver, whereas a courier such as TNT or DPD can do the same quicker to a far greater choice of places (ie anywhere in the world)

As for freight, the buzzwords are "just in time" nowadays with minimal stockholding. It stands to reason that an economic load for a train involves stockholding of a trainload (with all the loading delays and costs involved) whilst perhaps 20 wagons are loaded.
Even if a freight flow were identified the costs of rail connection (at both ends) are massive and an economic load would not be acheived until (lets say) 20 wagonloads were acheived, the logistics of loading and unloading this and the extra warehousing required to store goods whilst waiting for the empty train to return make it a nonstarter.
With 20 lorries moving this cargo they can arrive and depart in a steady stream as goods are produced giving clear advantages in terms of labour and storage at both ends.

Wha! Do you even know what FastTrack was?

You are talking about a small package as if it was somekind of major cargo. What made Fasktrack so sucessfull was the simplicity. Most people collected the package at the station. Simple, beautiful and worked like a treat for decades.

There is no reason why FastTrack should of been shut down.

It was a no brainer and could of been an even better service. In fact when I first heard about all the new services coming to the routes the first thing I thought was "they'll make a killing on Fastrack now" - I was assuming that all these new sevices were to be utilised by CIE to make it the premier small package service in the country.

Instead they wrecked it. Because they wanted it dead and I am not sure why. But they did.

ClovenHoof

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Fast track was very useful for small business and could easily outpace any road courier.

For starters it was direct A to B in 3 to 4 hours max. no messing about going away off the beaten track (Pun ) serving other customers along the way.

At the far end motorcycle courier could be waiting to collect and drop off and could slice through rush hour city traffic. I sent a parcel by Fasttrack at Heuston 2 PM it was in my brothers office in Galway by closing time.

No white van could beat that.

and it should of got even better. There was a simplicty and flexibility about FT which made it very reliable. Two days before it closed there was a load of people in Heuston still dropping off packages. Right to the end the service was working great.

Run_to_da_hills

The only thing against this now would be post 9/11 security hype. Everything would have to have to be passed through X-ray scanners. I believe this is what killed off Bus Eireanns similar parcel service.

corktina

ClovenHoof wrote: »

Wha! Do you even know what FastTrack was?

I think I gave a quite good description of it....

It seems quite labour intensive to me , maybe it couldhave been improved

Judgement Day

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The only thing against this now would be post 9/11 security hype. Everything would have to have to be passed through X-ray scanners. I believe this is what killed off Bus Eireanns similar parcel service.

You're off on a red herring here. There are no added security checks carried out by all the hackers now running courier services countrywide and you can include all the big boys like DHL and Fastway in that as well as all the shy operators in their unmarked white vans.

Judgement Day

corktina wrote: »

ClovenHoof wrote: »

Wha! Do you even know what FastTrack was?

I think I gave a quite good description of it....

It seems quite labour intensive to me , maybe it couldhave been improved

Did you ever use it though? I think you just don't like trains because G601 doesn't operate to Kanturk anymore.

ClovenHoof

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The only thing against this now would be post 9/11 security hype. Everything would have to have to be passed through X-ray scanners. I believe this is what killed off Bus Eireanns similar parcel service.

That does happen with packages shipped internally in Ireland. Scanning only applies to exports and imports.

You are confusing Ireland with that crazy mental hospital the USA. We are not that bad yet.

interlocked

This notion that there are no profitable railfreight flows in the country is a complete chimera.

At least two major UK operators have looked at or are looking at developing operations on the network, one of which has been costing investment in major CAPITAl works in order to operate. Whether anything will come off this remains to be seen, there is a serious wall of inertia to overcome but we are in interesting times.

There appears to be serious internal dissension within Irish Rail management in respect of railfreight, this may change in the current economic climate where it is currently one of the only profitable sectors on the network, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

The Ballina liner flows were dragged out of them after intensive negotiations and several red herrings, in the end the logistics companies are bearing all of the risk as they have to hire the entire train whether full or not. Yet they still are anxious to expand the frequency of the service and this is in the pipeline. Incidentally Dublin port are extending their inrernal rail network to facilitate the loading and unloading of these liners,

Didi I mention the proposal by two logistics companies to reintroduce Dublin -Cork liner flows and the, er, operational reasons for failing to do so. That's another story as is the issue of rolling stock etc.

Profit in rail freight in Ireland?, You better believe it, unless you believe that commercial companies are looking to run trains for enthuisiasts to photograph. Oh wait, that was already propounded on this board before:rolleyes:

Losty Dublin

ClovenHoof wrote: »

100% Wrong.

Fast Wreck more like. CIE destroyed a once very profitable little earner for them. The ramped up the costs by transferring staff from other reduntant areas in IE into Fast Track to shoot up the costs and make it look like an unprofitable business.

It used to make money; quite a lot of money when it was the only show in town but as with heavy freight it's at the mercy of open market forces and I'm thinking of Man and Van operations, to say nothing of the DHL type operations who can and offer door to door for similar prices; something Fasttrack wasn't in a position to offer.

ClovenHoof wrote: »

Even when FastTrack was falling apart in the final months there were still plenty of customers lined up at the Hueston office as these were long time customers from when this product had a great name and was considered very reliable by businesses who used it.

I dropped off parcels to Heuston in the day and I never queued to receive anything while there was FA coming back the other way. I have spent many evenings on the platform in Heuston picking up family and I'd see the parcels come off trains from the country it's was never more than a handful and yes, these would still need a local pick up.

ClovenHoof wrote: »

With all the extra train services on most routes, FastTrack shuould of become and even more lucrative and useful service. But instead like catering they had something very sucessfull and let it die an unnatural death.

But as mentioned above, cheaper and more direct parcel delivery methods beat it to it.

Judgement Day

Losty_Dublin - as somebody who frequently has need to send and receive items across the country I can tell you that it was far simpler to send items by Fastrack than it presently is to go searching for a hacker, find a suitable one and then arrange collection or dropping off parcels to them. Sending a parcel from station to station was simplicity itself and using the timetable it was possible to give a reasonably accurate arrival time to the consignee - unlike the situation that now pertains. Properly run Fastrack could clean-up but that was never going to happen with the shambolic mess that is CIE.

Losty Dublin

Judgement Day wrote: »

Losty_Dublin - as somebody who frequently has need to send and receive items across the country I can tell you that it was far simpler to send items by Fastrack than it presently is to go searching for a hacker, find a suitable one and then arrange collection or dropping off parcels to them. Sending a parcel from station to station was simplicity itself and using the timetable it was possible to give a reasonably accurate arrival time to the consignee - unlike the situation that now pertains. Properly run Fastrack could clean-up but that was never going to happen with the shambolic mess that is CIE.

Parkie, I agree with you that it was a great service.... provided you and your consignee were content to arrange a pick up to and from the train. But don't tell me for a minute that if a van driver told you he'd pick up and drop for you for about the same price you'd not have taken him up on it.

Judgement Day

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Parkie, I agree with you that it was a great service.... provided you and your consignee were content to arrange a pick up to and from the train. But don't tell me for a minute that if a van driver told you he'd pick up and drop for you for about the same price you'd not have taken him up on it.

I like certainty when dispatching/receiving things and point to point (station to station) is ideal, plus you don't have to go searching for a hacker and establishing whether they serve the place you wish to send to and then, if they do, arranging to have them collect from you or deliver to them - in other words a perfectly good conveyor belt system has been replaced with a Third World free-for-all mess.

marienbad

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Fast track was very useful for small business and could easily outpace any road courier.

For starters it was direct A to B in 3 to 4 hours max. no messing about going away off the beaten track (Pun ) serving other customers along the way.

At the far end motorcycle courier could be waiting to collect and drop off and could slice through rush hour city traffic. I sent a parcel by Fasttrack at Heuston 2 PM it was in my brothers office in Galway by closing time.

No white van could beat that.

Fasttrack was an absolutely brilliant and unrivaled service for its core market, it was so good that transport companies competing with it eventually started using it in a subtract mode and billing the consignor 3 and 4 times the price. It was just an outstanding service similar to the airport bus to/from Heuston, simple, effective, competitive. What happened ? Well the University of How to FCUK things up that is Ireland happened .

DDigital

I cant possibly hold my silence any longer.

Fastrack?

A great service and no question about it. I can safely say and from experience that it was the transport lifeblood of many industries. From actual blood to reels of film to personal parcels. I used it for years and it was a turn up and send service city centre to city centre that no DHL or equivalent could match same day and for the price. While it was limited to rail heads, it did provide a same day Dublin to regions service Even the station to door service was great and affordable. Look at it this way. If I was in Dublin and decided that I needed to get a parcel to Galway city by 6pm or later the same day, all I had to do was check it in at Heuston and away it went to be picked up at the other end. The equivalent now is to send it with a direct courier service at a cost of €300!

I think many here are missing the same day and affordable elements of Fastrack and its relevance to businesses that needed a same day city to region service. Private courier companies offer same day or overnight. Overnight is rigidly structured and very inflexible in terms of drop off. (Many depots are based in the suburbs and lack the benefit of a city centre location.) Same day is mad expensive. So I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that Fastrack was a fantastic service. But it seems that the powers that be in Irish Rail ordered new trains that they knew couldn't carry parcels and were happy enough to create a passenger driven railway that ignored the beneficial by products such as Fastrack and bicycles etc.

Fastrack was driven into the ground and was a product/service that was successful if in the hands of a company that didn't have 60 odd years of complacency behind it. To understand and appreciate the fastrack service, you had to be a regular user and not a sideline commentator that thinks you know what it was about.

mickydoomsux

As an employee of IE i firmly agree wwith the posters here that say that Fastrack should still be up and running in some way. The trains are running anyway so why not carry some packages on them?

The new trains would present problems however with larger items because of limited space. Where i work we would routinely get truck parts such as windscreens and body panels arriving in to us which would easily fit in the old MK3 gaurds van but would have no chance of fitting anywhere on an ICR. We should still at least be running a medium to small sized package and document same day delivery service to generate additional revenue on services that are running anyway.

Businesses should contact IBEC, their TD etc. to pressure IE into at least considering some kind of courier service again. As ground level staff we never really saw the reasoning behind the closure of Fastrack and were pretty much told it wasn't profitable enough to keep running and pulled too many staff members off other duties. Neither of these arguments make much sense.

corktina

whats of more value? carrying a couple of parcels in a proper guards van or a few more seats for passengers?
How much would it cost to have a man employed at each Fastrack station to deal with a few parcels?
I can see why it had to go...handy though it was undoubtedly to a few people.

ClovenHoof

corktina wrote: »

whats of more value? carrying a couple of parcels in a proper guards van or a few more seats for passengers?
How much would it cost to have a man employed at each Fastrack station to deal with a few parcels?
I can see why it had to go...handy though it was undoubtedly to a few people.

THOUSANDS OF CUSTOMERS AND HUNDREDS OF COMPAINES USED IT DAILY AND NEVER WANTED IT TO GO OUT OF BUSINESS FFS!

Your comments about FastTack being poor business model and dying product was BS and been totally debunked by the many posters/customers on this thread who praised it.


You were wrong deal with it.

Judgement Day

corktina wrote: »

whats of more value? carrying a couple of parcels in a proper guards van or a few more seats for passengers?
How much would it cost to have a man employed at each Fastrack station to deal with a few parcels?
I can see why it had to go...handy though it was undoubtedly to a few people.

In its latter days the service had become so expensive that it was cheaper for me to accompany my packages to Dublin on the train rather than send them by Fastrack! On that basis they should have been removing bays of seats to make space for more packages. There was not a man employed at each station to deal with Fastrack and it was attended to by the signalman/depotman or whatever. It was only in places like Heuston/Connolly where there were dedicated staff. Money was squandered on space age Fastrack buildings - Connolly in particular - expensive advertising in certain current affairs publications to shut them up and on tiers of clerical and managerial staff. It's not rocket science, but it appears to be beyond many here, that the more revenue a train generates the less subsidy it requires. :rolleyes:

corktina

ClovenHoof wrote: »

THOUSANDS OF CUSTOMERS AND HUNDREDS OF COMPAINES USED IT DAILY AND NEVER WANTED IT TO GO OUT OF BUSINESS FFS!

Your comments about FastTack being poor business model and dying product was BS and been totally debunked by the many posters/customers on this thread who praised it.


You were wrong deal with it.

Thousands daily ? I doubt that...

Victor

seamus wrote: »

You can't build rail lines into every business park in the country.

But you could build business parks such that they are rail connected and not done on a "one for everyone in the audience" basis.

corktina

but with a new build, rail would not be economic until you had built up traffic of say 30 wagons.Meaning you'd lose money on the operating costs until (IF) you got to that sort of load.(thats without taking the Capital costs of track and signalling!)