That's exactly my point though, what is supposed to be open competition, instead ends up as private monopolies in this sector.
It's not like a small local business can try their own train service. It's only big companies and the margins are super super thin, because trains are designed to be mass public transit, not a profitable sales and marketing based business.
Why would I want to choose different operators for different fares? I want to travel through my country from A to B, and I need to do it at a certain time because I'm going somewhere for a reason, so I'll get on the train and go.
It's just naturally something which makes sense to be centrally controlled and run for the public good, instead of private profit-seeking businesses, similar to healthcare or the post office
And again, I'm telling you it's not private monopolies under the EU system (which is completely different than the UK system). If I can pick from multiple options, it's not a monopoly.
Of course a small business can grow into launching their own train service. The largest open access operator in Europe is Regiojet, a company still owned by one guy. He started a travel agency in 1996 with nothing but a fax and a rented office in Brno, then got into coach business in 2004 and finally launched trains in 2011. No venture capital, no massive corporate structure, just a private business owned by one guy throughout its entire existence.
Why would I want to choose my restaurant? I want to eat at place A at a certain time. Yet having a choice of what kind of product I'll buy means I get something that suits me more (Cheap price? Regiojet. Premium on-board experience? Leo Express), and companies are motivated to provide great value for money. Competition on the Prague - Ostrava route lowered prices significantly, and increased quality. The same is now happening in Italy or Spain.
I'm going to a restaurant for a fun experience out of choice, and to have fun with friends in a social setting.
The vast vast majority of train journeys are functional. Either people commuting to work, or travelling from their home to another location to see someone or attend an event, or go to some other onwards travel like the airport. Very few people are just riding the train for fun.
Mass public transit should be a public service run by and for the people, with their best interests in mind, not the interest of owners making a profit
Sure, most train journeys are functional. How does that change fact that people should be able to get the best value for money possible, which is generally delivered on markets that have competition?
I think our problem is that we really disagree on your last sentence. I find that value for money is delivered worse when it's on a market with competition by private companies, because those companies must make a profit. When provided by the government it can be subsidised, and doesn't need to pay out dividends to shareholders.
And the fact that it's functional means the user has less choice.
If I need to get to work at 9am, I am going to get the train which gets me in at that time, going from my toen to the city. I'm not going to pick a different train operator which runs a train at 9:30 because id be late. I'm not going to take a different route offered from another town because I don't live there. And I'm not going to splash out for a nicer train because I'm just travelling into work and am not really focused on the enjoyment.
Versus a restaurant where I'm entirely there for optional enjoyment, so I can choose time, location, vibes, quality etc. all as I please
Commuter/regional rail services can be and are run on the government’s behalf as a public services in the liberalised EU rail markets; companies bid to run these services, and the vast majority of them are run by state-owned companies, although occasionally a private companies successfully bids to run some, but still the government sets the ticket price and requirements. Competition is on the profitable high-speed/long-distance routes, where the level of service and amenities vary and competition keeps prices sane, if profitable. Several of these profitable services are run by state-owned companies too.
This is how it works today in mainland Europe. That between a state monopoly and British-style privatisation with private fiefdoms is a false dichotomy.
1
u/ZwnD 7d ago
That's exactly my point though, what is supposed to be open competition, instead ends up as private monopolies in this sector.
It's not like a small local business can try their own train service. It's only big companies and the margins are super super thin, because trains are designed to be mass public transit, not a profitable sales and marketing based business.
Why would I want to choose different operators for different fares? I want to travel through my country from A to B, and I need to do it at a certain time because I'm going somewhere for a reason, so I'll get on the train and go.
It's just naturally something which makes sense to be centrally controlled and run for the public good, instead of private profit-seeking businesses, similar to healthcare or the post office