"Roland Perry" wrote:
[snip]
It's a shame that people who think it was sold too cheap didn't join in
the "making a killing" at the time.

Some people actually have beliefs about public ownership - it's not all just
about trying to rake it in.

In message , at 10:27:59 on Fri, 19 Aug
2011, Mizter T remarked:
It's a shame that people who think it was sold too cheap didn't join
in the "making a killing" at the time.

Some people actually have beliefs about public ownership - it's not all
just about trying to rake it in.

It's interesting how the "too cheap" and "but public ownership is
better" viewpoints often co-incide in self selecting groups such as
this! Maybe they should have bought it and run as a CoOp, but it would
probably have been as successful as the Meriden Motorcycle works.
--
Roland Perry

In message , Roland Perry
writes

Maybe they should have bought it and run as a CoOp, but it would
probably have been as successful as the Meriden Motorcycle works.

The John Lewis partnership might be a better model.
--
Paul Terry

In message , at 16:06:20 on Fri, 19
Aug 2011, Paul Terry remarked:
Maybe they should have bought it and run as a CoOp, but it would
probably have been as successful as the Meriden Motorcycle works.

The John Lewis partnership might be a better model.

I wonder how "never knowingly undersold" would apply to split ticketing?
--
Roland Perry

On Aug 19, 3:24*am, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:27:59 on Fri, 19 Aug
2011, Mizter T remarked:

It's a shame that people who think it was sold too cheap didn't join
in *the "making a killing" at the time.

Some people actually have beliefs about public ownership - it's not all
just about trying to rake it in.

It's interesting how the "too cheap" and "but public ownership is
better" viewpoints often co-incide in self selecting groups such as
this! Maybe they should have bought it and run as a CoOp, but it would
probably have been as successful as the Meriden Motorcycle works.

Meriden Motorcycles, one of Viscount Stansgate's many failed
ventures. Somehow, a view prevails that only left wingers have
beliefs and a conscience. One can equally argue the morality of the
1948 acquisition of the big Four. Having nobly served the UK through
the ravages of WWII, they were relieved of their assets. Justice
would have been better served had they been given grants in order to
repair their battered networks. That done, negotiations could have
ensued with regard to what un-remunerative services should be return
with taxpayer support.

"1506" wrote

One can equally argue the morality of the
1948 acquisition of the big Four. Having nobly served the UK through
the ravages of WWII, they were relieved of their assets. Justice
would have been better served had they been given grants in order to
repair their battered networks. That done, negotiations could have
ensued with regard to what un-remunerative services should be return
with taxpayer support.

It was a matter of politics, not morality. You will have noticed that the
British electorate in 1945 chose a Labour Government which had a programme
of extensive nationalisation (just as, from 1979 to 1992 they chose
Conservative Governments with a programme of privatisation).

Peter

On 19/08/2011 10:27, Mizter T wrote:

"Roland Perry" wrote:
[snip]
It's a shame that people who think it was sold too cheap didn't join
in the "making a killing" at the time.

Some people actually have beliefs about public ownership - it's not all
just about trying to rake it in.

Do many people believe enough to be keen to turn down a chance to get
rich quick?

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK