Adrian Stott wrote: > Nick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> The comparison I was making was between end-of-garden mooring and >> continuously cruising. Whether both or neither should pay something >> can be debated, but the idea that the person who keeps his boat out >> of the way tied up to their own land should pay more than someone >> who moors on BW visitor moorings every night cannot be justified. > > If you are suggesting that CCs should pay a charge reflecting their > heavy use of public moorings, then I agree. > > However, my point was that the price of a mooring is set by the > market, not by the provider's costs, so changing BW's cut of the > revenue will make little difference to what boaters pay.
I think if BW added a "basic mooring charge" and reduced the marina connection fee, then there would be... A. A lot of happy marina owners B. A lot of unhappy boaters I can't see any way of BW being able to force any marina owner to drop his mooring fees just by reducing his connection fee - unless BW own the marina - which mine does BTW :-) Ron Jones Process Safety & Development Specialist Don't repeat history, unreported chemical lab/plant near misses at http://www.crhf.org.uk Only two things are certain: The universe and human stupidity; and I'm not certain about the universe. ~ Albert Einstein
