On 23 Dec 2007, at 16:25, Will Chapman wrote: > Adrian Stott wrote: >> "STRUDWICK.FAMILY" >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> >>> Can I suggest that BW is therefore a monopoly so does anyone know >>> how to >>> get the commission to investigate the mooring situation? >> >> The MMC did investigate BW a few years ago. BW was exonerated. >> > > That was then. Also the arguments could well have been different. > >> The "mooring situation" is not a monopoly issue. It is a supply, >> demand, and pricing issue. >> > So you have said many times before. Personally I think it is > worth another shot. On what grounds do they justify increases > above inflation. The cost of running a mooring doesn't increase > beyond inflation each year. > > Have you thought about taking the case up with the ombudsman Andrew? > >> You won't get to where you want to go if you head for the wrong >> destination. >>
I resisted compiling any reasoned response to Adrian's deluded comments as I have concluded he is batting for the other side. I shall let my own opinions gather inertia, all in good time. I have been 100% occupied by business for the past 6 months and it was only on Friday when I began to unwind at the end of a successful tuboriun-related project that I could review the latest pile of indigestible twaddle from BW. Let matters take their course - it sure won't be pretty. Beeky nb dry powder makes a bigger bang
