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

foggy_lad

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.

the only risk to pattons company is his refusal to accept a licence to operate a route and subsequent starting of his unlicenced route.

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.

At the risk of repeating myself, I'm just interested what your opinion would be if it turned out that a majority or a significant proportion of the shares in First Group plc were held by Irish investors? Which they could well be as the shares are open for purchase by all. If a company is a plc with it's shares available for purchase by anyone does nationality actually come into it at all?

Would you stop drinking O'Hara's (a fine brew) if you found out that a significant proportion of their shareholders were British?

Zynks

A few points:
- There are MANY service opportunities not covered by any operators. I find it suspicious that they had to go for one that was being covered - 'legally' or not, they applied for the license also
- Small businesses are extremely important to our economy, and becoming rarer by the day
- There seems to be an implicit assumption here that licenses are flawless and fair by definition. Looking at other sectors in the news recently, I would avoid using enforcement of regulations as a basis for argumentation...

dub_commuter

Latest from the Patton Facebook page:

In response to saying why not use Aircoach:

They colluded with the Dept. of Transport to shaft a local business that identified and created the route. Symptomatic of this corrupt State eh?

In relation to Noel Demspey

WANTED
FOR TRANSPORT TREASON
NOEL "THE DUNCE" DEMPSEY TD
SOMETIMES MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT
MORE OFTEN LACKEY FOR MULTINATIONALS

And about legal action

The Patton Flyer will vigourously defend any Legal action by Aircoach/FirstGroup in their attempts to use Bullying tactics to remove our Service. Are you listening Noel "Mr Incompetence" Dempsey and "Sly" Allen Parker?

Ham'nd'egger

Zynks wrote: »

A few points:
- There are MANY service opportunities not covered by any operators. I find it suspicious that they had to go for one that was being covered - 'legally' or not, they applied for the license also
- Small businesses are extremely important to our economy, and becoming rarer by the day
- There seems to be an implicit assumption here that licenses are flawless and fair by definition. Looking at other sectors in the news recently, I would avoid using enforcement of regulations as a basis for argumentation...

The point relating to a market opportunity is a good one but in this case we must again revert to due process and the applicable Laws, something that isn't adhered to by all of the parties in this case.

The undisputed facts here are that Patton ran an illegal and unlicenced bus service; Patton was offered a licence having operated illegally prior to the offer; Patton continues to operate his bus service illegally after refusing said licence. Other operators are bound to and are willing to follow said rules be they flawed or not but Patton is immune to doing as such. If the Law is flawed or unfair or unconstitutional then Patton or indeed any other bus operator is more welcome to challenge same within our court system, either through a civil case or in defence of a prosecution.

Patton is more than welcome to apply for and to run a service in other areas under this and to run his business anywhere within Dublin or Ireland as indeed are Aircoach or Morton or GoBus etc but the overall source of his woes is ultimately of his own doing and thinking.

JHMEG

Zynks wrote: »

- There are MANY service opportunities not covered by any operators. I find it suspicious that they had to go for one that was being covered - 'legally' or not, they applied for the license also

Excellent point, and one worth exploring further.

dub_commuter

I find it suspicious that they had to go for one that was being covered - 'legally' or not, they applied for the license also

Don't be so stupid, despite some people accuse me for being very much pro Patton it is clear that some of his supporters have a hidden agenda

Patton offered to start a route, the department negotiated with Patton and made him an offer which he rejected and someone else came in and offered similar.

That is called BUSINESS. It is not called charity which Patton seems to want.

It's not just in the transport trade this happens, it happens all over in the business world, you make an offer for something, the selling party negotiates it and makes a proposal, you reject it and someone else takes up that offer - at the end of the day it's your own fault for not taking the offer in the first place and whilst you have a chance.

Fact is Patton was an idiot to reject the license he got offered, and if he had ANY business sense at all, which he clearly does not, he wouldn't have been in this situation.

Patton should put this one down to experience and learn from it and come up with another route, and not make the same mistakes again, by carrying on the way he is, he is only going to harm his future business prospects.

devnull

The latest quotes from that Facebook page look very childish, and completely unprofessional, name calling and such things are not going to help Patton in his case and just make him look like he is throwing his toys out of the pram.

Also despite Patton suggesting otherwise, Allen Parker is infact Irish and was the previous managing director of Irish Citylink and Aerdart in it's day

Rock Steady Edy

If Aircoach is leaving its engines running in Dalkey, particularly at night-time, that is unacceptable.

However, that aside, they have 29 daily services against Pattons 15, so that's 14 with no competition. I doubt any passenger who gets one of these services are complaining.

I was one of the 1002 that voted for Patton at the last election, but wouldn't do so again.

Run_to_da_hills

devnull wrote: »

The latest quotes from that Facebook page look very childish, and completely unprofessional, name calling and such things are not going to help Patton in his case and just make him look like he is throwing his toys out of the pram.

Also despite Patton suggesting otherwise, Allen Parker is infact Irish and was the previous managing director of Irish Citylink and Aerdart in it's day

Slander and name calling could land him in serious trouble.

Recent test case: http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/warning-over-email-libels-as-lecturer-settles-historic-case-2181240.html

JHMEG

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Slander and name calling could land him in serious trouble.

No proof. This is facebook. Could be any tool.

The quoted case was internal staff, authenticated and verified, using an internal system.

Run_to_da_hills

JHMEG wrote: »

No proof. This is facebook. Could be any tool.

The quoted case was internal staff, authenticated and verified, using an internal system.

In serious cases they can opt for IP tracking.

Victor

OK, I'd like people to not copy quotes from that Facebook page or similar comments.

Stick to the core of the argument and avoid the nastiness.

JHMEG

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

In serious cases they can opt for IP tracking.

That only proves the IP address it came from, not the identity of the person that wrote it.

devnull

From the Indy today - I trust we are still able to post links to news items?

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/david-vs-goliath-bus-war-breaks-out-2186638.html

Patton says he has no problem with Aircoach, is he changing tactics again, as other comments in the past and what www.thepattonflyer.ie says state differently.

Victor

devnull wrote: »

From the Indy today - I trust we are still able to post links to news items?

Link all you want, I just don't want the outlandish "the bus ate my baby"-type stuff here.

AlekSmart

Patton says he has no problem with Aircoach,

...and neither apparently do some of Mr Pattons former staff.

It appears the good citizens of Dalkey and environs will have a recognizable link with their former Airport Service provider when their Big Blue British Owned ( :rolleyes: sorry....) Aircoach rolls to a halt at their stop.

It seems that certain of the Patton Flyer`s former staff may have secured employment with Aircoach....talk about the plot thickening !

Am I mistaken or is Mr P subtly altering course and navigating away from all that oul Big Bad Brit stuff that was spewing forth like an Icelandic Lava flow running down along Killiney Hill..?

Rock Steady Edy

AlekSmart wrote: »

Am I mistaken or is Mr P subtly altering course and navigating away from all that oul Big Bad Brit stuff that was spewing forth like an Icelandic Lava flow running down along Killiney Hill..?

Are you suggesting that the PF may stop by some kind of "mutual agreement"?

Cookie_Monster

Wass in DL today, PF went by. Was one of those Merc minibusses (1998) that looked like its seen better days. So much for standards, why on earth would you pick an old heap like that over a cleaner, safer, quieter, cheaper, more comfortable Aircoach bus?

Like this one:

devnull

I thought they just used those two Esker Minibuses they were using right from the start?

oisindoyle

Allegedly ,an AC bus drove down to dublin port at the time of the first volcanic ash disruption which closed the airport.
This AC had no licence allegedly to operate there and was moved on after complaints ..
Apparently AC applied for a licence from the Dept of Trans and within 3 hrs got one to work dublin port ...
Very strange indeed how a company can get a licence in a matter of hours,whatever happened to tenders??

Cookie_Monster

temporary amendment?

Vic_08

oisindoyle wrote: »

Allegedly ,an AC bus drove down to dublin port at the time of the first volcanic ash disruption which closed the airport.
This AC had no licence allegedly to operate there and was moved on after complaints ..
Apparently AC applied for a licence from the Dept of Trans and within 3 hrs got one to work dublin port ...
Very strange indeed how a company can get a licence in a matter of hours,whatever happened to tenders??

No such thing as tenders as far as DOT licencing is concerned.

Two different types of licence are available; continuous and temporary, presumably Aircoach got the latter for that service.

As to the whys and hows best direct that question towards those in Kildare Street, not that you wou;ld get a straight answer.

There have been a number of incidents that show when they (or someone with a big stick) wants to licences can be lubricated through the departmental processes in a matter of hours that otherwise can take months or years.

The Dublin Bus 142 that magically appeared days before the last General Election serving an area with a FF incumbent whose seat was under threat comes to mind.

Cookie_Monster

I would assume it was done under the same principal as the DB/BE buses running festival routes

crushproof

Took the Aircoach for the first time over the weekend, much better service then the Patton. Dropped off right outside the terminal building rather the coach park and the journey itself was great, very comfortable coach.
Although how they can afford to run coaches along the route is beyond me, there was only 3 others on the coach.
I'd say they'll only start making a profit on the route once the Pattons ceases to operate.

dowlingm

oisindoyle wrote: »

Allegedly ,an AC bus drove down to dublin port at the time of the first volcanic ash disruption which closed the airport.
This AC had no licence allegedly to operate there and was moved on after complaints ..
Apparently AC applied for a licence from the Dept of Trans and within 3 hrs got one to work dublin port ...
Very strange indeed how a company can get a licence in a matter of hours,whatever happened to tenders??

Issuing an emergency licence was the right response but if AC had operated illegally beforehand they should not have been the ones who were issued said licence after the fact. Smacks of how Irish planning "permission" works.

Victor

crushproof wrote: »

Although how they can afford to run coaches along the route is beyond me, there was only 3 others on the coach. I'd say they'll only start making a profit on the route once the Pattons ceases to operate.

Its about critical mass and maximising loadings. those coaches probably carry a fair number when leaving the airport to relieve pressure from other Aircoach services.

penexpers

oisindoyle wrote: »

Allegedly ,an AC bus drove down to dublin port at the time of the first volcanic ash disruption which closed the airport.
This AC had no licence allegedly to operate there and was moved on after complaints ..
Apparently AC applied for a licence from the Dept of Trans and within 3 hrs got one to work dublin port ...
Very strange indeed how a company can get a licence in a matter of hours,whatever happened to tenders??

Wexford Bus (I think that's what they are called) got a license in a matter of house as well to operate between Rosslare Harbour and Wexford when the volcanic ash cloud hit.

Rock Steady Edy

Was interesting to see Aircoach advertise its Dalkey service in the Dun Laoghaire Gazette this week, pointing out all its advantages highlighted in this thread. However, not even listed as a service on the front page of its own website!

I'd say the break even point for Aircoach must be pretty low. The well establised Greystones service rarely seems to have more than a handful on board.

This time next year there won't be 2 providers on this route, that's for certain.

J_Dublin15

Do we have a copy of the ad?