Moose Rail (National Capital Region)

[Joseph Potvin]

@kEiThZ, Sorry, then in reply, I'll choose to be "evasive" as you call it.

I'll reply to others who are interested in conversation without ad hominen attacks and angry sarcasm.

Joseph Potvin
Director General | Directeur général
Moose Consortium (Mobility Ottawa-Outaouais: Systems & Enterprises) | www.letsgomoose.com
Consortium Moose (Mobilité Outaouais-Ottawa: Systèmes & Enterprises) | www.onyvamoose.com

 

[kEiThZ]

@kEiThZ, Sorry, then in reply, I'll choose to be "evasive" as you call it.

I'll reply to others who are interested in conversation without ad hominen attacks and angry sarcasm.

Joseph Potvin
Director General | Directeur général
Moose Consortium (Mobility Ottawa-Outaouais: Systems & Enterprises) | www.letsgomoose.com
Consortium Moose (Mobilité Outaouais-Ottawa: Systèmes & Enterprises) | www.onyvamoose.com

Thanks for proving my point. You're interested in selling. Not providing facts. Those were pretty damn easy questions to answer.

 

[jys]

Seriously @kEiThZ, Relax, you attack Potvin a lot more than he does to you. There is absolutely no reason why he would be marketing on Urban Toronto. If you think about it, how many people would he reach on here and how many of those people will actually be of help to his venture? He is simply trying to obtain some feedback and provide whatever information he can. He can't 'sell' us anything we would ever want to buy so there's really no point in calling him a salesmen on here. I am simply speaking from common sense, so please feel free to correct me.

 

[kEiThZ]

Seriously @kEiThZ, Relax, you attack Potvin a lot more than he does to you. There is absolutely no reason why he would be marketing on Urban Toronto. If you think about it, how many people would he reach on here and how many of those people will actually be of help to his venture? He is simply trying to obtain some feedback and provide whatever information he can. He can't 'sell' us anything we would ever want to buy so there's really no point in calling him a salesmen on here. I am simply speaking from common sense, so please feel free to correct me.

Since when is demanding answers for basic questions about a company's proposal an "attack"? Also, it's quite a stretch to suggest that somebody who is the Director General of a private consortium that wants to completely upend the current transit framework in a city, is not selling something on a transit forum and just engaging in innocent banter.

None of the questions I've asked him here are the least bit challenging. And if he were to ever appear in front of city council or any provincial or federal commission or tribunal or parliamentary forum, they'd ask him far more challenging questions. I am fed up with his evasiveness, when he knows the answers that he has to provide will demonstrate how inappropriate his proposal is for existing residents and for regional planning.

As for telling me to relax. How would you react if someone proposed to eliminate several stations on an existing line, not to service another part of your city, but villages of a few thousand, 50 km away? And if you think I'm offering up challenging questions, just see the ones he's getting on more Ottawa-centric forums. UT is actually his safe space where he can practice his sales pitch without too much resistance from people who actually live in Ottawa and understand what he's proposing.

I asked four very easy questions. If he is sincere about engaging in discussion, he can answer them anytime he likes. He behaved exactly as I predicted and exactly as he has with tough questions from other posters before.

 

[jys]

By attack I mean using vulgar language. You have done that plenty on this thread.

 

[jys]

Also, it's quite a stretch to suggest that somebody who is the Director General of a private consortium that wants to completely upend the current transit framework in a city, is not selling something on a transit forum and just engaging in innocent banter.

How would he and/or his company benefit from 'selling' to people on this forum?

 

[jcam]

Am currently at the Toronto Region Board of Trade’s Transporation Summit, and Canadian Infrastructure Bank chair Janice Fukakusa just emphasized that the Bank will be keen to to take in non-government unsolicited proposals for major infrastructure projects.

 

[steveintoronto]

Am currently at the Toronto Region Board of Trade’s Transporation Summit, and Canadian Infrastructure Bank chair Janice Fukakusa just emphasized that the Bank will be keen to to take in non-government unsolicited proposals for major infrastructure projects.

There's been very little press of late about the Infrastructure Bank....at least in part due to the pall Morneau's 'misfortunes' has cast over it. Any more news on this most appreciated.

 

[Allandale25]

Am currently at the Toronto Region Board of Trade’s Transporation Summit, and Canadian Infrastructure Bank chair Janice Fukakusa just emphasized that the Bank will be keen to to take in non-government unsolicited proposals for major infrastructure projects.

Hopefully they can get through the CTA process if it's rail-related. Good reminder that MOOSE has decided, as confirmed in this thread, it doesn't want to use a third-party operator that already has its Certificate of Fitness.

 

[Charles]

Good reminder that MOOSE has decided, as confirmed in this thread, it doesn't want to use a third-party operator that already has its Certificate of Fitness.

I agree that MOOSE (ie: Joseph Potvin) has indeed said that they don't want to use a third-party operator. However, I've noticed several times where they seem to contradict that statement. One for example is in their own business concept The Property-Powered Rail Open Market Development Model which states:

"The consortium is not itself the operator of rail services, and it need not own the corridors or tracks. Instead, apportionment conditions in the consortium agreement assemble the funds to pay one or more train operators, and to lease running rights on tracks." (pg 10)
https://www.letsgomoose.ca/wp-content/uploads/AnnexM_MoosePropertyPoweredRailModel_2017-03-05PDF.pdf

I've seen other official correspondence (can't find it at the moment) where they state that they would be interested in having OC Transpo operate one of their lines, STO operate a second, and a First Nations group operate the third.

Now if MOOSE has no intention of actually operating the rail lines, I'm not sure why they have to be an operator in their own right.

I'm sure that Joseph Potvin will find some sort of explanation as to why it is different to use an established operator to operate their services after they've obtained their own Certificate of Fitness, but won't use one in lieu of getting their own Certificate of Fitness, but I can't honestly see a big difference.

 

[Allandale25]

^ Thanks Charles. I'm even more confused then by what Potvin has been saying in the other forum where this is being debated.

So let me get this straight. They will not "operate" the rail services but there'll be an agreement to pay "one or more train operators". Yet, on the other forum, Potvin said:

Moose rejects the notion of a market in which any start-up is required to find an incumbent business to shepherd their entry. That idea's like the old failing taxi medallion system. We have approached no incumbent operators for (in effect) 'permission' to develop our business. We'll locate investors, stick-handle authorizations, and we'll stand up a railway.

Here's what I had posted:

I get that Moose wants to be a railroad. But why wouldn't they go to an existing short line or yard operator, like CANDO Rail Services, who I assume has a certificate of fitness, and ask them to be the operator for a fee? Moose would then take care of all the financials. CANDO operates OBRY and BCRY in Ontario on behalf of the Town of Orangeville and the City of Barrie. Barrie and Orangeville don't need to have certificates. That's what they rely on CANDO to have.

Or, maybe Moose has and ever short line operator has turned them down because of the lack of financial certainty to back up their claims.

And:

I had a further thought on this, given the reality of the situation. Given how long it's taking you to start operating, what's the down side of working with a company like CANDO? Why not just pay them a few to provide the operations, just like municipalities and CP/CN do for certain switching activities? Given the requirements for the Certificate of Fitness, wouldn't it get you up and running faster?

If you've got a deal with a quarry, wouldn't using a contractor who has the approvals already to operation help convince elected officials on the routes you want to use to support you? I'm particularly thinking of Cheaslea. If the local municipal leaders are fine with the line being abandoned that goes to the quarry, wouldn't you have a better chance of convincing them to not abandon the route if you could say that the developer will pay for the tracks to be rebuilt and a company like CANDO will operate it?

If you haven't even met with companies like CANDO, how would you know that it wouldn't fit into your financial model. Can't a company like CANDO provide a quote? Or have you already looked at the Orangeville and Barrie numbers and extrapolated that you couldn't afford their fees (or in your analogy, taxi cab fares)?

So, documents say not operate, pay operators. Potvin says they haven't approached incumbent operators. Are the documents outdated? Is there division in Moose on how to proceed? I don't get why this is such a complicated and hard issue to address.

 

[kEiThZ]

By attack I mean using vulgar language. You have done that plenty on this thread.

If "bullshit" is too vulgar for you, I suggest you avoid TV after 8pm and satellite radio completely. There's also other safe spaces beyond UT for your delicate sensitivities.

How would he and/or his company benefit from 'selling' to people on this forum?

You should ask yourself why he's on a Toronto-centric forum pitching his proposal instead of an Ottawa-centric forum where most of his prospective customers live.

I suspect it's because he's hoping there's potential investors lurking here. So yes, he's selling. And again, I don't begrudge him that. But I do think it's my purview as a citizen and taxpayer to call him out if and where I don't think his proposal is in the public interest.

Let's be clear. MOOSE is not here to improve public transport. Their focus is to boost the value of real estate by using rail. Mr. Potvin is in the real estate business. Not the rail business. By extension that means his interests and those of the public are not aligned.

 

[kEiThZ]

Am currently at the Toronto Region Board of Trade’s Transporation Summit, and Canadian Infrastructure Bank chair Janice Fukakusa just emphasized that the Bank will be keen to to take in non-government unsolicited proposals for major infrastructure projects.

I hope they are. But I suspect a realtor trying to use a constitutional loophole to use rail to boost land value, with no real benefit to the public, is not going to be under consideration.

When they say non-government proposals, think REM.

 

[kEiThZ]

Now if MOOSE has no intention of actually operating the rail lines, I'm not sure why they have to be an operator in their own right.

Because $$$.

If MOOSE uses a current operator, you have to wonder how long before the real estate partners cut out Mr. Potvin and deal with the rail operator itself.

If you want to understand MOOSE and Mr. Potvin, stop looking at it as a transit proposal and start looking at it as a real estate development scheme.

 

[Allandale25]

I hope they are. But I suspect a realtor trying to use a constitutional loophole to use rail to boost land value, with no real benefit to the public, is not going to be under consideration.

When they say non-government proposals, think REM.

^ To add to that, guess what Mayor Watson would say to Ottawa federal MPs who would then inform the Board about the notion of making changes to the Council endorsed and prov/fed funded Ottawa regional transit plan.