Neil Arlidge wrote: > TREVOR BURRIDGE wrote: >> >> Come on someone find that loophole and expose it and see if BW don't >> tweak the trial ! >>
> > > Sally Ash's latest press release, I think she should post here instead of > getting Eugene to do her dirty work: > http://www.tuesdaynightclub.co.uk/Stuff/Pricing%20of%20BW%20mooring%20vacancies.doc > > So people without internet access are already at a £10-£15 per year > disadvantage. > (so for the three year contract 3 times this amount???) Thanks for that Neil. I'm intrigued by the last statement of that document: > "We have a duty to set market rates for our moorings. With this trial, >boaters will directly influence the price, and the process is more open and transparent. >It will also open up the opportunity of securing a BW mooring to many more >people than currently." I would say the first sentence would be more accurately worded if it read 'a duty to match market rates' rather than 'set market rates'. My mooring rates have just gone up because, to quote the landlord ' I read that BW have increased their mooring rates so I have increased ours'. To me, that amounts to BW setting higher market rates, not matching them. As for the second sentence, how is a closed auction more open and transparent than there being a fixed price that everyone knows? And for the third sentence, could someone explain to me how this will open up the opportunity for more people to get a BW mooring? Surely there are a finite number of moorings wihch are currently being disposed of by a waiting list. Seems to me that all that will happen with an auction is that those who have been on a waiting list for years will now be likely to be gazumped by someone willing to pay more. Or am I missing something? Cheers Will -- Will Chapman Save Our Waterways www.SaveOurWaterways.org.uk
