Patton Flyer (mod warning post #404) SEE POST #659 ALSO

JHMEG

KC61 wrote: »

I don't have a particular "love-in" with Aircoach, but what I do have a problem with is that we seem to constantly hear only one side of the story here - that of Mr Patton and his supporters.

I agree. Totally unbalanced. For every one pro-Patton post there are 5 anti-Patton posts.

Objective posts, like that Aircoach's owners are 100% British seem to provoke anti-Patton posts along the lines of "they employ more Irish people than Patton does". That's not even an objective response because for all we know Aircoach might exclusively employ East Europeans. Their ownership has nothing to do with Patton, or anyone else.

KC61

JHMEG wrote: »

I agree. Totally unbalanced. For every one pro-Patton post there are 5 anti-Patton posts.

Objective posts, like that Aircoach's owners are 100% British seem to provoke anti-Patton posts along the lines of "they employ more Irish people than Patton does". That's not even an objective response because for all we know Aircoach might exclusively employ East Europeans. Their ownership has nothing to do with Patton, or anyone else.

I am not going down that road - I'm more interested in knowing how both of the services are doing in terms of loadings with some objective reports, rather than making one sided comments that one single Aircoach service left Dalkey with no people on board, while not reporting on all the other departures during the day which may well have had plenty of people on them getting on along the route for all we know.

It's very easy to make general statements about one service, without then giving the wider picture.

As far as ownership of either operator is concerned, we are in an open market as part of the EU so that is irrelevant. Whether or not people want to kick up a storm over it, the reality is that under EU law it is not the real issue here.

The basic issue regarding Patton is the legality of the operation. He claims it is legal as a "travel club" rather than a bus service, while others claim it is not legal. Whether it is or it isn't may well end up in the courts, but the fact remains that Aircoach holds a route license for their service while Patton does not.

The only good thing that has come out of this is the complete inadequacy of the old legislation under which these licence applications were processed has come to the fore. The new legislation has far more robust procedures included in it, including obligations on operators to start services within set periods instead of sitting on licences.

foggy_lad

ok afaik pattons service is totally illegal and unlicenced and operating outside of any license terms.

aircoach is totally legal and operating within the terms of its license.

aircoach is cheaper and offers child fares and return fares.

patton does not offer child fares or return fares.

aircoach is backed by a large british company.

patton is operating on his own afaik.

lools good so far for aircoach

schemingbohemia

dub_commuter wrote: »

I am just keeping people informed - no crime in that surely?

At the end of the day Dalkey is an Affluent area and they don't need the bus for the vast majority of people using the area.

This is part of the fallacy that public transport is for 'poor' people, public transport is for everyone and the sooner the mindset changes the better.

JHMEG

KC61 wrote: »

As far as ownership of either operator is concerned, we are in an open market as part of the EU so that is irrelevant.

That is a matter of opinion. Others are entitled to hold a different view.

I would not see buying an Aircoach ticket as buying Irish, in the same that buying a pint of Guinness isn't. I prefer to buy O'Hara's.

patrickbrophy18

schemingbohemia wrote: »

This is part of the fallacy that public transport is for 'poor' people, public transport is for everyone and the sooner the mindset changes the better.

On behalf of my fellow Dalkey-ite, I would like to apologize for this snobby comment made by dub_commuter. Just because Dalkey may be an affluent area, there is no need to look down on anyone using bus services of any kind. After all, it is quite ironic that you (dub_commuter) come out with that statement when the slogan Aircoach use is "Travel in Luxury". Another point I will make is that a lot of Dalkey people really need to get over themselves in relation to multinational companies in the area. It does my head in when people insist on upholding this "local trade for local business" philosophy. On this note, I have often been dealt with by shop-keepers in an extremely rude manner due to a pure lack of induction initiatives (something that many multinational companies implement to maximize customer satisfaction). This is further exacerbated by the fact that some of them are from families who have spoilt them rotten leaving them ungrateful for being employed. Another newsflash, a lot of people out there would love to have a job.

KC61

JHMEG wrote: »

That is a matter of opinion. Others are entitled to hold a different view.

I would not see buying an Aircoach ticket as buying Irish, in the same that buying a pint of Guinness isn't. I prefer to buy O'Hara's.

From a legal perspective, under EU law a foreign owned company based in the EU has as much right to operate a service as an Irish one.

What you are saying is down to personal preference. I'm not talking about personal preference, and never mentioned it.

In the post above I just asked for some objective reports on loadings - I don't see either service on a daily basis and was wondering how they are doing.

JHMEG

KC61 wrote: »

What you are saying is down to personal preference. I'm not talking about personal preference, and never mentioned it.

No, but you did dismiss it:

KC61 wrote: »

As far as ownership of either operator is concerned, we are in an open market as part of the EU so that is irrelevant.

The fact that a company is British-owned is relevant to a lot of people.

KC61

JHMEG wrote: »

No, but you did dismiss it:

Please stop trying to twist what I am saying.

My comment was made on the basis of it being irrelevant from a legal perspective. I think that is fairly clear, and if it wasn't I apologise.

I am not getting into a debate over personal preferences - we could go on ad nauseum with that and I have no wish to get into that. I am just looking for an intelligent debate based on the facts rather than heresay - as in how are both operators actually doing?

Can we leave your analysis of my posts at that please - I don't really care what you drink or not. I am just asking for some factual information on the two services' performance.

Ham'nd'egger

I was around Dalkey Village on Saurday night/Sunday Morning around 3ish dropping some of the masses and I happened to meet a few of the Setras of Aircoach.

At about 3:40AM one of the buses was parked up outside the terminus; this is located beside a soccer clubs grounds and has a large area of parking that allows buses to safely park off road; indeed several buses could pull in here if need be. Given that the driver was outside of his bus, I assume that the engine was turned off. There was 5-6 people waiting with bags to get on and along the route into town I did see a few people waiting at most of the other stops in their ones and twos. Given that a Sunday morning is not the peak time for flying out of Dublin, I'd be interested to see how they would fare on a Monday or Saturday morning from 3AM-7AM, if we allowed 2 passengers an mile to board from here to the airport, it would give a loading of about 30ish; not half bad at all for a new service that hasn't had much PR on it's side.

Interestingly enough, I also saw a few patrons waiting for services out of town which shows that they have a certain local patronage going for them as well.

AlekSmart

No-one else's buses have anything to do with the emissions from Aircoach buses.

And,one presumes, vice-versa....?

That's fine, as long as you stick to the truth:
1. Emissions from Aircoach buses are nothing to do with Patton, Bus Eireann, Sean Quinn or Ryanair, or the thread topic

And that`s pure true.

Emissions,schmissions..... all for a different forum,what this thread concerns is the very public refusal of one individual to obey the law and the equally public inability of the Law to respond to that challenge.

There are so many other side-issues involved when one decides to elevate oneself to a higher,obligation free,status .

One such item would be the requirement for an Operator to possess an Operators Certificate of Professional Competency (CPC).
A core element of this is that the applicant for that document must be of good repute.

From the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport website:

Key Point

In order to apply for an operators licence the candidate must meet the requirements of good repute, appropriate financial standing and professional competence.

This is an element of Law which was specifically devised in order to deal with situations throughout Europe where certain operators felt confident enough to disregard the rules by which the industry operated.

It may well be that the Patton Flyers management team could fly their craft directly into a rather expensive legal ash-cloud if they fail to accept that the Law,bad as they think it is,actually does apply to their operation.

As I would see it the company`s principals have now given the Authorities very good grounds to call their professional repute into question.

It`s time for some saner counsel to prevail,unless PF management really do believe in Superhero status :rolleyes:

AlekSmart

As in how are both operators actually doing?

KC61,I understand from purely unofficial and chance contact that the Aircoach Dalkey service has been performing above expectations especially when the low-key launch is taken into account.

The greatest concern now for ALL Airport related Public Transport is the ongoing effect of Airspace Closures on forward bookings.

So First Group have certainly been propelled into a cauldron in taking up this licence,lets just see how they meet that challenge ?

KD345

JHMEG wrote: »

The fact that a company is British-owned is relevant to a lot of people.

I honestly don't think it is. Aircoach has been operating in Dublin for years. If people were seriously concerned they would not be in business.

Just for clarity JHMEG, if the licence had been awarded to an Irish operator, eg. Mortons or Swords express, would you still be against the service?

Is your gripe with the fact that there is a new bus service in Dalkey? Or is it about the fact that the company is British?

We have no problem with Ryanair being the largest airline in Europe, but should a European bus company want to legally obtain a licence to operate a route, there is uproar in Dalkey. It beggars belief.

JHMEG

KD345 wrote: »

Just for clarity JHMEG, if the licence had been awarded to an Irish operator, eg. Mortons or Swords express, would you still be against the service?

Is your gripe with the fact that there is a new bus service in Dalkey? Or is it about the fact that the company is British?

Neither company mean anything to me, as I don't use either, never have done, and probably never will.

I am not against Aircoach or anyone else.

All things being equal I prefer to use Irish companies where possible as our economy is in a hole right now, and keeping the money in the country does make a difference. I can't believe this position would require any defence on an Irish forum.

Zynks

KD345 wrote: »

I honestly don't think it is. Aircoach has been operating in Dublin for years. If people were seriously concerned they would not be in business.

I think you may be missing the point. Yes, Aircoach has been around for a few years and that is great. They created a very welcome new market.

Where this becomes an issue is where there is a local service that could be going out of business due to competition of this very large foreign company.

Ham'nd'egger

Zynks wrote: »

I think you may be missing the point. Yes, Aircoach has been around for a few years and that is great. They created a very welcome new market.

Where this becomes an issue is where there is a local service that could be going out of business due to competition of this very large foreign company.

Operating the licence local service turned down in the first place.

KD345

Zynks wrote: »

I think you may be missing the point. Yes, Aircoach has been around for a few years and that is great. They created a very welcome new market.

Where this becomes an issue is where there is a local service that could be going out of business due to competition of this very large foreign company.

But that local service has no licence to operate. Where do we draw the line? There is a procedure in place for the issuing of bus licenses. Aircoach got their licence fairly, Patton Flyer is operating without one.

JHMEG wrote: »

All things being equal I prefer to use Irish companies where possible as our economy is in a hole right now, and keeping the money in the country does make a difference. I can't believe this position would require any defence on an Irish forum.

And that is your choice. Personally, I find it hard to believe that in a climate where we are trying to attract as many international companies to Ireland, some people are complaining about a large international bus company legally getting a licence to operate a service and create jobs.

JHMEG

KD345 wrote: »

Personally, I find it hard to believe that in a climate where we are trying to attract as many international companies to Ireland, some people are complaining about a large international bus company legally getting a licence to operate a service and create jobs.

People are entitled to view that from another angle: that Irish companies are being put at risk for the benefit of British shareholders. Whether you agree with it or not is irrelvant, it's a valid viewpoint.

schemingbohemia

JHMEG wrote: »

People are entitled to view that from another angle: that Irish companies are being put at risk for the benefit of British shareholders. Whether you agree with it or not is irrelvant, it's a valid viewpoint.

Is there a nationality test on buying First Group shares? Is it not a plc?

KD345

JHMEG wrote: »

People are entitled to view that from another angle: that Irish companies are being put at risk for the benefit of British shareholders. Whether you agree with it or not is irrelvant, it's a valid viewpoint.

Which Irish company is at risk from the Aircoach service to Dalkey?

JHMEG

KD345 wrote: »

Which Irish company is at risk from the Aircoach service to Dalkey?

Are you saying it doesn't affect any Irish company?

KD345

JHMEG wrote: »

Are you saying it doesn't affect any Irish company?

Do you always answer a question with a question?

I haven't suggested anything. I'm simply asking what Irish company has been affected by Aircoach operating the Dalkey route? You claimed it was a "valid viewpoint" that Irish companies were being put at risk. I'm asking which company?

Ham'nd'egger

JHMEG wrote: »

I would not see buying an Aircoach ticket as buying Irish, in the same that buying a pint of Guinness isn't. I prefer to buy O'Hara's.

And my friend, would you willingly buy your pint of O'Hara's (Which is a tremendous stout, let me add) in a pub or shop which traded without it's liquor licence?

JHMEG

Hamndegger wrote: »

And my friend, would you willingly buy your pint of O'Hara's (Which is a tremendous stout, let me add) in a pub or shop which traded without it's liquor licence?

LOL! All I can say is, that depends!

JHMEG

KD345 wrote: »

Do you always answer a question with a question?

I haven't suggested anything. I'm simply asking what Irish company has been affected by Aircoach operating the Dalkey route? You claimed it was a "valid viewpoint" that Irish companies were being put at risk. I'm asking which company?

You are implying no company is at risk. Do you know that for a fact?

dowlingm

JHMEG - the choice is not between Irish and non-Irish, just licenced and unlicenced. If Aircoach was undermining Patton as a licenced operator, I'd be on Patton's side.

Unlicenced transport operators drag down standards in industries generally since they promote a view that standards and laws are optional. While this may not be the case in Patton's case, we know only too well that if Patton succeeds, he won't be the last. That will cause pressure on drivers wages, driver qualifications, maintenance, safety, taxes etc. while fares race below sustainable levels and law abiding companies go bankrupt.

Now, you may believe that bus routes should run like airline routes - essentially all routes are open to all comers with shared infrastructure so long as you behave safely enough to have the bus equivalent of an AOC. Which is fine, but that's not how the law is NOW because the bus business model tends to run at a loss and over provision of service can cause congestion at choke points and at stops. The law is that the Dept of Transport solicits interest in routes and franchises them on a basis which may include exclusivity.

Unlike your bar with foreign beer and Irish beer, this is a bar where only one beer may be legally sold at a time. You're griping at Aircoach and your fellow boardsies when your argument is with Dail Eireann for legislating this way, and for your countrymen who signed up to treaty after treaty allowing for equal and fair treatment for companies irrespective of ultimate ownership when bidding for public contracts. They took away your choice to be chauvinistic in favour of Irish companies but what's the alternative - a bus system where BE, like the VHI, can crush people like Patton without the deep pockets a multinational has? Jesus BUPA were run out of town and they ARE a multinational!

JHMEG

dowlingm wrote: »

You're griping at Aircoach and your fellow boardsies w

Ya see that's the crux. I'm looking for objectivity rather than people insisting Aircoach's shíte somehow smells better than Patton's. People are mistaking this for having a go at Aircoach.

Ham'nd'egger

JHMEG wrote: »

Ya see that's the crux. I'm looking for objectivity rather than people insisting Aircoach's shíte somehow smells better than Patton's. People are mistaking this for having a go at Aircoach.

No, we are not mistaking anything here. You are however turing this debate time and time again from the core fact here which is that Patton's service do not have a licence to operate whereas Aircoach does. It does not and must not boil down to who has better or worse service but about basic legality and lawful process which Patton knows he is not following.

Victor

Folks, can we stop the handbags?

KD345 wrote: »

We have no problem with Ryanair being the largest airline in Europe, but should a European bus company want to legally obtain a licence to operate a route, there is uproar in Dalkey.

As I understand it, the core Ryanair company is British and the biggest block of shareholders are American.

And when was the last time a bus was made a bus was made in Ireland or diesel came out of the ground here?

For that matter, what is the balance of trade through Dublin Airport. I imagine the drugs and computer parts going out are worth a lot more than those coming in.

Its swings and roundabout, overall we do better through specialising in doing a few things, not trying to do everything ourselves. The common market has been good for Ireland.

I don't see the business ownership as the core means of deciding on a product. Using it as the predominant factor can just lead to a distortion and encouragement of inefficient businesses.

JHMEG

Victor wrote: »

I don't see the business ownership as the core means of deciding on a product.

And it's ok to dismiss those who do?