Moose Rail (National Capital Region)

[kEiThZ]

Have you ever taken commercial buildings into consideration for your rough calculations?

An excellent point that's been discussed elsewhere. I just don't see the business case altering substantially. At most of MOOSE's outlying stations, there's not enough people to justify paying what is effectively a tax to MOOSE. You're asking businesses to pay the equivalent costs of operating in Ottawa, while relying on a customer base in Arnprior. That's a stretch. And there's no way, anybody is setting major offices at any of those outlying stations. The only businesses around any MOOSE station out there will service businesses for the locals.

Next, there's the issue of stations in Ottawa. How the heck, would they impose the fees on existing homes and businesses near the station? If they use existing stations along the Trillium Line, this gets even worse. Why would you pay fees to support MOOSE running 1-3x per hour when OC Transpo is going to run at frequencies under 10 mins? Now you get a glimpse of why I think they need to displace OC Transpo to make their business model work.

 

[micheal_can]

An excellent point that's been discussed elsewhere. I just don't see the business case altering substantially. At most of MOOSE's outlying stations, there's not enough people to justify paying what is effectively a tax to MOOSE. You're asking businesses to pay the equivalent costs of operating in Ottawa, while relying on a customer base in Arnprior. That's a stretch. And there's no way, anybody is setting major offices at any of those outlying stations. The only businesses around any MOOSE station out there will service businesses for the locals.

Next, there's the issue of stations in Ottawa. How the heck, would they impose the fees on existing homes and businesses near the station? If they use existing stations along the Trillium Line, this gets even worse. Why would you pay fees to support MOOSE running 1-3x per hour when OC Transpo is going to run at frequencies under 10 mins? Now you get a glimpse of why I think they need to displace OC Transpo to make their business model work.

Clearly there is more to it that you do not understand.

 

[kEiThZ]

Clearly there is more to it that you do not understand.

Feel free to enlighten me.

 

[Charles]

I have to agree with KEiThZ on this one.

The MOOSE financial plan focuses on the creation of residential real estate. In the smaller rural towns in which they focus on, the majority of commercial entities around train stations will be small service businesses such as coffee shops, convenience stores, etc. Most of these rent their retail space and would be similar in nature to residential tenants and can be grouped with them in doing any analysis. Most of them operate on fairly small profit margins and a 25% increase in their rents would have a devastating effect.

Inside the Ottawa city limits there may be some larger commercial or institutional facilities near proposed stations. However, these large entities understand full well the concept of value for money, and they are in a significant position of power when it comes to negotiating. They already receive decent transit and would in my opinion see limited increases in revenues simply as a result of MOOSE. In my mind it would be highly unlikely that they would 'voluntarily' hand over Millions of dollars annually in station stopping fees.

I'll use Carleton University as an example. They would be pretty much the sole entity around a MOOSE station at the campus. I can't imagine any significant increase in students or revenue for the University that would result from having a MOOSE train stopping there in lieu of (or in addition to) the O-Train and so the thought that the University would be willing to hand over $10 Million or more every year in station stopping fees is almost laughable in my mind. In fact, I think the opposite would be true, that the University would be in a good position to charge MOOSE various fees for any infrastructure that MOOSE wished to create on campus property. The University would be in the position of power on this one rather than MOOSE. A MOOSE network which doesn't stop at Carleton loses its value significantly, while the University can do quite well without MOOSE.

 

[micheal_can]

I do not have the answerss, but if someone has come up with a business plan that does not get a subsidy from the government to run a rail system, why are we balking at it?

I think it is great that a private entity wants to take on a challenge like this.

 

[Charles]

if someone has come up with a business plan that does not get a subsidy from the government to run a rail system, why are we balking at it?

Because it is disruptive, consumes resources that could be better allocated elsewhere, and has absolutely no chance of success.

Imagine I came up with a 'business plan' that I would do sewer replacements in the City, all in exchange for a 'voluntary' service fee from those who live along the road. You know that I have no experience or certification in construction, no money or investor support. Would you even contemplate letting me go and dig up the road in front of your house and disconnect you from the sewer lines. Would you consider the fact that maybe I couldn't finish what I started, might go bankrupt and leave you with a gaping big hole in front of your house.

Once again, this isn't about the concept of privatization or P3 agreements, it's about MOOSE and their credibility, combined with the realities of the scenario they propose.

 

[micheal_can]

Because it is disruptive, consumes resources that could be better allocated elsewhere, and has absolutely no chance of success.

Imagine I came up with a 'business plan' that I would do sewer replacements in the City, all in exchange for a 'voluntary' service fee from those who live along the road. You know that I have no experience or certification in construction, no money or investor support. Would you even contemplate letting me go and dig up the road in front of your house and disconnect you from the sewer lines. Would you consider the fact that maybe I couldn't finish what I started, might go bankrupt and leave you with a gaping big hole in front of your house.

Once again, this isn't about the concept of privatization or P3 agreements, it's about MOOSE and their credibility, combined with the realities of the scenario they propose.

Well, before Moose is given the go ahead, they will need to prove that they are viable. If you believe otherwise....

 

[kEiThZ]

I do not have the answers

Yet, you said I don't get it. That assertion presumes you have answers. Please proceed.

 

[Joseph Potvin]

Readers of this forum are welcome to read the draft formal plans and proposals of MOOSE, and our informal responses within this and other fora and media. A few very persistent critics with a lot of time on their hands have made clear their commitment to challenge any notion whatsoever that a whole-region passenger railway in the Greater NCR can have any coherence at all, and they promptly dismiss any answer which explains our rationale for attempting this on a commercial basis. Hopefully those with a genuine interest in metropolitan rail for this region will not be dissuaded from asking questions and sharing your ideas for how this can be moved forward. It's particularly useful, for example, to compare and contrast the MOOSE plan with that of former Minister of Transport David Collennette, produced when he later chaired the former Mayor of Ottawa's Task Force on Transportation (2007).

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]

Once again, this isn't about the concept of privatization or P3 agreements, it's about MOOSE and their credibility, combined with the realities of the scenario they propose.

Exactly. If it was say the Teachers, CPPIB or Macquarie Finance proposing this (or just about any major infrastructure investor), I'd take it a hell of a lot more seriously than a few guys working out of their kitchen.

Says a lot when they can't even get anyone to finance a feasibility study for the better part of a decade. Forget about actually finance the hundreds of millions to launch. In that time, several potential investors have literally judged Mr. Potvin and his team (if he has any real full time staff) as not even worth a second look.

It's a nice strawman too that Mr. Potvin and his sycophants pull: "You don't like MOOSE? You must hate the private sector." Uhhh no. We just think Mr. Potvin is full of it. Let me know when a serious player wants to come to the table with money. I'll happily cheer them on.

But serious players don't come up with fanciful nonsense like free daycare at the stations and cafe bars on commuter trains, and they don't propose ridiculous business models that rely on "voluntary payments".

 

[kEiThZ]

It's particularly useful, for example, to compare and contrast the MOOSE plan with that of former Minister of Transport David Collennette, produced when he later chaired the former Mayor of Ottawa's Task Force on Transportation (2007).

I remember when that report. I was in Ottawa at the time. Attended presentations and consultations on it. Did you read the steady state operations expected?

Long-term recommendations to 2037 and beyond
• Provide rush hour LRT service from Carleton Place and Arnprior in the west.
• Provide rush hour LRT service from Wakefield and Masson (with the cooperation of Gatineau
Council and transit officials).
• Seek new LRT alignment to Rockcliffe airbase development from downtown.
• Implement service on a branch from the Southern Line across the Rideau River to Cedarview.
• Complete conversion of existing BRT to LRT.
• Construct new LRT lines as demand requires.
• Open LRT service across the Alexandra Bridge and ultimately link Union Station to Gatineau.
• Consider building a ring road as outlined in the Transportation Master Plan but ensure that it
incorporates a good public transit component to provide suburb-to-suburb transit.
• Build an LRT link to Scotiabank Place as it develops into a commercial centre.
• Provide rush hour service to Navan

That does not sound close to MOOSE at all. Even Collenette thought anything beyond rush hour service was too much, to those outlying communities. And that's on a time frame, 30 years from when the report was written. He certainly never envisioned hourly bilevels to Arnprior. And he insisted that some of those outlying communities be served by VIA.

Interestingly enough most of that network is coming true in 2023 with Stage 2. And with frequencies much higher imagined in the report, with a combination of BRT and LRT. The only parts missing are the most distant rural stations, which you now insist should be given the same priority as the urban centre which has densities and ridership generation that's an order of magnitude higher.

 

[Joseph Potvin]

It's a nice strawman too that Mr. Potvin and his sycophants pull: "You don't like MOOSE? You must hate the private sector."

@kEiThZ, You've got quotation marks around that. Please identify the source of the quote. Or are you putting forward your parody paraphrase as a quote?

~Potvin

 

[Joseph Potvin]

and they don't propose ridiculous business models that rely on "voluntary payments".

It's just nuts!
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...-trial-free-public-transport-to-cut-pollution
https://www.theguardian.com/environ...lic-transport-free-on-high-air-pollution-days
http://bigthink.com/think-tank/should-all-public-transit-be-free
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_free_public_transport_routes
https://freepublictransport.info/city/

Well, for our part, we reckon it's better to invite passengers to pay what they want, and to cycle those revenues into services that enhance passenger experience. A simple phone app for loyal community-minded riders will suffice.

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]

It's just nuts!
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...-trial-free-public-transport-to-cut-pollution
https://www.theguardian.com/environ...lic-transport-free-on-high-air-pollution-days
http://bigthink.com/think-tank/should-all-public-transit-be-free
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_free_public_transport_routes
https://freepublictransport.info/city/

Public transport authorities have subsidies they can deploy to offer free transport in pursuit of other (usually non-financial) goals.

Show me a private sector transport entity that offers free transport entirely, and does so as a core function of its business model. Not some promo day. Has there been a single example anywhere in the world of your model being implemented at the scale you propose?

 

[kEiThZ]

@kEiThZ, You've got quotation marks around that. Please identify the source of the quote. Or are you putting forward your parody paraphrase as a quote?

~Potvin

I would suggest instead of nitpicking grammar on a forum, you put that time towards your pitch to investors, so you don't lose another decade.

Stage 2 is coming. Tick tock. And after that, any potential mark will be far more skeptical.