Licence fees up 8.5%

[johnthebridge]

That's what I am saying.

 

One of the arguments for auctions was to high cost of administering the previous scheme!

So where does the money go? I would think most online mooring sites are already established, and have been for some time. They don't appear to either warrant, or have, much money spent on them.

Administration? C'm on!

[Allan(nb Albert)]

So where does the money go? I would think most online mooring sites are already established, and have been for some time. They don't appear to either warrant, or have, much money spent on them.

Administration? C'm on!

 

The figure you quote - £4.7m - is the income figure for 2006/7 figure for England only. The figures you should be quoting are £9.0m revenue (think of sales) against an income (think profit) of £5.4m. So BW spent 40% of that £9m on costs associated with operating its mooring business.

 

From the above it seems that Simon Salem was being asked save 3% of £3.6m operating costs. When you take into account that Business Unit costs were £26.2m and HQ costs were £29.3m (=£55.5m) it is quite easy to see that BW might have £3.6m a year cost associated with online moorings. We have to remember that IT costs associated with auctions, consultation (or avoiding it!), consultatants (we paid for the Oxera Report), complaints and the amount of time and effort put into raising prices above inflation by both HQ and business units all have cost associated with them.

 

Having said that, I can't believe it either! Perhaps Business Unit managers were getting back at HQ for imposing a system on them that they did not want :-)

 

....... or perhaps they are actually spending money in maintaing mooring sites.

Edited November 28, 2008 by Allan(nb Albert)

[Pretty Funked Up]

If you lobby to FORCE CCers into paying the same as your CHOSEN situtation...

I will lobby for fisherman to use your marina as and when they like and entrances to be used as winding holes.

And anything i can think of later that CCers have to cope with.

Then its 'closer' to being fair.

 

you really are in/on

 

 

 

But what we should be doing is working together to get the license fee increase down so its in line with current (excuse the pun) inflation.

[macc]

dave dont forget the vat you also have to pay extra for your mooring that is also a cost the marina owner pass on to you,mybe hmrc can ask cc,ers to pay them some more money.

[cotswoldsman]

One should also remember that with new marinas the 9% fee is phased in - 0% first year, 4.5% second year and 9% thereafter so it could be said that Marina owners should charge less in the first two years of operation as overheads are less.

 

Marinas charge based on market rate not on fixed costs and overheads, as I said before if they were not passing on the charges from BW the mooring fee would still be the same.

[cotswoldsman]

Last night when I was talking to my son about this debate he gave me an example similar maybe to this issue. He lives in an area where he can not get digital TV via Freeview (??) so he can only get BBC 1 and 2 yet he pays the same licence as a person who can also get BBC 3 and 4 so if he was to buy a satelite and receiver (Bit like connection fee) he would then be able to get all the BBC channels but he does not want to watch BBC 3 and 4 so no need for him to pay the connection fee for BBC 3 and 4

[Pretty Funked Up]

but mayalld chose to buy a satelitte reciever so surely that means you have to as well!!!

 

....doesn't it?

 

althought i think, unless i missed something, you wouldnt actually get the dish you would just have to pay for it - so would still only be watching BBC1 and 2 I'm afraid

Edited November 29, 2008 by Pretty Funked Up