March of the Widebeams

[Drayke]

Coming in to this debate a bit late but, I think CRT should base the licence fees on the same principle as the EA do on the Thames and that is by the square area of the boat.

I have a wide beam, 11ft wide and my licence is the same as anything wider, so is the fair?

Not that I have read every reply on this post but I haven’t seen anything about increasing  the fees for fishing or canoeing or these boards that you stand up on.

As for the survey, CRT will do what ever they want or have already decided upon. 

[IanD]

17 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

That rather goes against your own argument used in the electric vehicle / emissions thread.

Where you repeatedly state (something to the effect) that "the big changes are unlikely to happen quickly, but if everyone does a little bit it all adds up to a 'lot'"

 

If they can cut the expenditure of non-navigation spend (blue signs, executive bonusses,  improve efficiencies, and other loss making departments, and reduce the size of the empire that has been built (more Chiefs than Indians these days) to suit the business then all these little changes will add up to a worthwhile saving that can be spent where it is needed.

 

Reduce expenditure an improve income (over the last year income from Utilities has increased by £1m, Investement and property income by £3.5m and boating activities by £4m)

Unfortunately all the good stuff has been eroded by the £7.7m LOSS in the last 12 months in getting charitable giving and donations.

 

And this year they spend even more building the 'charitable giving empire more staff and a new (highly paid) Director. so the costs will be even higher for 2023/24.

 

You're taking my comments out of context -- the "little things add up" is only true if they're each significant and likely to grow in future, which is the case with EVs (which we know you don't like). It's why people unplugging their phone charges "to save energy" is utterly pointless, unless you think that 0.0001% saving is worthwhile -- one less bath *per year* would save far more energy.

 

Please look at the accounts and tell us how much you think is being "wasted" on fripperies like blue signs. Don't forget that the purpose of these is to get more involvement from the general public (who outnumber boaters 1000:1) and persuade the government that the DEFRA grant should be maintained, or at least not cut -- saving (for example) £1M on blue signs but getting a grant cut of (say) £5M as a result (10%?) is not a good bargain, is it?

 

BTW your figure for loss on charitable giving doesn't agree with what other people have quoted -- where did it come from? Do you think CART should stop trying to raise money this way?

 

AFAIK the numbers involved for things like signs and executive bonuses are down in the £1M range, as I'm sure you're perfectly well aware this is *nothing* compared to the annual CART budget -- but it does give CART-haters like you something to vent their spleen on. They really need at least another £100M a year, and a big license fee increase (maybe 50% on average? -- more for CCers and wideboats, less for moorers and narrowboats) will at least make a difference.

Edited April 14, 2023 by IanD

[magnetman]

1 minute ago, Drayke said:

Coming in to this debate a bit late but, I think CRT should base the licence fees on the same principle as the EA do on the Thames and that is by the square area of the boat.

I have a wide beam, 11ft wide and my licence is the same as anything wider, so is the fair?

Not that I have read every reply on this post but I haven’t seen anything about increasing  the fees for fishing or canoeing or these boards that you stand up on.

As for the survey, CRT will do what ever they want or have already decided upon. 

It would incredibly difficult to enforce against sup and canoes. Light torpedoes would be worth considering as a deterrent but collecting licence fees seems quite arduous. 

39 minutes ago, dogless said:

I understand your housing point @magnetman and accept in some areas (predominantly London) this is an issue that has been left to 'fester'.

 

But if the point of the licensing system is to regulate those on the water, and to finance maintenance and repairs then shouldn't rises in fees be applied equitably to ALL using the water ?

 

Rog

 

OK. Everyone to pay the same. Add up the total in to the CRT from boat owners for licences and moorings. divide by the number of boat owners and charge everyone a flat rate including everything. If it is too much then don't have a boat. 

 

It is impossible for anything to ever be equitable. 

 

 

[MtB]

3 minutes ago, magnetman said:

Of course my assumption from the start was that the CRT was simply a stepping stone between public and private ownership. A vessel designed to founder followed by breaking it up and redistributing the valuable parts among the vultures. 

 

Then it WILL get expensive !! 

 

I see it the same way. The final objective is to sell each of the canals into private ownership.

 

Once that is done, the investors will ensure the company directors maximise their income and if licence fee income from rich boaters exceeds the profit available from filling them in and building say houses, then that particular canal will survive. 

 

In the meantime the proliferating liveaboard widebeams are ripping the arse out of the cheapest possible way of getting accommodation in the UK. Narrowboat liveaboards are doing the same to a lesser degree. The case for massive licence fee increases is almost unanswerable. 

 

 

 

 

[Alan de Enfield]

4 minutes ago, IanD said:

BTW your figure for loss on charitable giving doesn't agree with what other people have quoted -- where did it come from? Do you think CART should stop trying to raise money this way?

 

 

Their Charitable giving reduced (lost income) over the last 12 months by £7.7m. (Having looked at the detailed accounts it was actually £6.1m not £7.7m)

 

Source : the 2021 Accounts filed a Companies House.

 

2020/21 Income from Donations and Charitable activities = £33.7m

2021/22 Income from Donations and Charitable activities = £27.6m

[IanD]

17 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

I see it the same way. The final objective is to sell each of the canals into private ownership.

 

Once that is done, the investors will ensure the company directors maximise their income and if licence fee income from rich boaters exceeds the profit available from filling them in and building say houses, then that particular canal will survive. 

 

In the meantime the proliferating liveaboard widebeams are ripping the arse out of the cheapest possible way of getting accommodation in the UK. Narrowboat liveaboards are doing the same to a lesser degree. The case for massive licence fee increases is almost unanswerable. 

 

 

Since rich boaters (like me?) are (I believe) a very small minority, focusing just on them would be idiotic from the point of view of maximising revenue. It's far more likely we'd end up with a situation more like airlines carefully designed to extract as much money as possible from as many people as possible, all the way from economy class to first class -- for which I'd pay an arm and probably several legs.

 

(though I've never flown first class so I'm guessing here...)

 

But there's no doubt that splitting up and privatising the canals would put the overall costs up just like it has for other infrastructure projects (e.g. water) -- not just because of higher admin costs (and executive salaries -- look at the water companies if you think that CART is bad) but also creaming off money to shareholders and profits. It would be bad for the canals and boaters, but good for executives and shareholders. Hmm, I wonder which would win?... 😞

Edited April 14, 2023 by IanD

[magnetman]

9 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

 

In the meantime the proliferating liveaboard widebeams are ripping the arse out of the cheapest possible way of getting accommodation in the UK. Narrowboat liveaboards are doing the same to a lesser degree. 

 

9 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Deliberately allowing slums to develop would be an extra argument for breaking up and tidying the whole thing. 

 

How convenient ?

 

 

Elaborate plan and probably just fantasy but we will find out. lockquote widget

Edited April 14, 2023 by magnetman
don't know how to delete second quote

[IanD]

7 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Their Charitable giving reduced (lost income) over the last 12 months by £7.7m. (Having looked at the detailed accounts it was actually £6.1m not £7.7m)

 

Source : the 2021 Accounts filed a Companies House.

 

2020/21 Income from Donations and Charitable activities = £33.7m

2021/22 Income from Donations and Charitable activities = £27.6m

 

Your post wasn't clear, it read as if they LOST (your capitals) £7.7M (as opposed to profit), when you meant they collected £6.1M less which is an 18% reduction.

 

Given what was happening with COVID and incomes in the years you quoted, do you really think CART can be blamed for this? I believe that most charities saw similar or bigger falls in income...

Edited April 14, 2023 by IanD

[MtB]

3 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

Since rich boaters are (I believe) a small minority, focusing just on them would be idiotic from the point of view of maximising revenue. It's far more likely we'd end up with a situation more like airlines carefully designed to extract as much money as possible from as many people as possible, all the way from economy class to first class.

 

But there's no doubt that splitting up and privatising the canals would put the overall costs up just like it has for other infrastructure projects (e.g. water) -- not just because of higher admin costs (and executive salaries -- look at the water companies of you think that CART is bad) but also creaming off money to shareholders. It would be bad for the canals and boaters, but good for executives and shareholders. Hmm, I wonder which would win?... 😞

 

We have a model for this already I think. The Bridgewater canal is in private commercial ownership by Peel Holdings, I believe.

 

Look at this to see the future...

 

 

[matty40s]

The last 2 years charitable in one was skewed artificially by the furlough salary support payments. This was missing this year.

[magnetman]

The river Wey is interesting. National trust so not exactly private but it is a completely different ball game. No cc ing allowed, it was about £100 for a week on my 40ft boat a few yars ago. They have lengthsmen (and women) and it is really tidy.

 

You won't get away with living on a boat there yar round unless on a proper mooring. It just won't happen. 

 

 

Edited April 14, 2023 by magnetman

[MtB]

How much is a Bridgewater license?

 

Do they charge more for widebeams? I bet they do but I don't know. 

 

Do they allow CCers? I doubt it. 

 

 

[IanD]

3 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

We have a model for this already I think. The Bridgewater canal is in private commercial ownership by Peel Holdings, I believe.

 

Look at this to see the future...

 

 

Maybe Labour will renationalise the water companies and bring the Bridgewater back under CART control, their privatisation has certainly turned out to be a complete disaster... 😞 

[magnetman]

Just now, MtB said:

How much is a Bridgewater license?

 

Do they charge more for widebeams? I bet they do but I don't know. 

 

Do they allow CCers? I doubt it. 

 

 

The river Wey is by length and no cc ing. 

 

Don't know about the Bridgewater as never been there and never want to. 

 

I'd be in favour of pay as you go but IanD thinks it can't happen. 

 

It can happen with a manned lock at each end and lengthsmen. 

[Alan de Enfield]

2 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

Your post wasn't clear, it read as if they LOST (your capitals) £7.7M (as opposed to profit), when you meant they collected £6.1M less which is an 18% reduction.

 

Given what was happening with COVID and incomes in the years you quoted, do you really think CART can be blamed for this? I believe that most charities saw similar or bigger falls in income...

 

So you are saying that it is quite normal that more money would be donated when we were in 'lockdown' (2020 / 21) than was donated when we had 'free movement' in 2021/22 ?

 

I forecast that charitable giving will continue to decline in 2022/23 and 2023/24 dut to the lack of disposable income and cost of living problems we currently have.

 

No that is not C&RTs fault, but they need to tailor their business costs to their income.

[magnetman]

K&A would be a good start. Blakes lock is capable of being a controlled structure. Not sure about the other end but it would be doable. 

 

Pay per hour or day that you are on the waterway. 

[Alan de Enfield]

9 minutes ago, matty40s said:

The last 2 years charitable in one was skewed artificially by the furlough salary support payments. This was missing this year.

 

I have excluded that from the figures' It was a one-off payment in 2020/21.

 

The comparative figures I quoted are for only Charitable giving and donations.

If you wanted to include the Covid payments that would show a further (additional) income loss of £3.8m.

Edited April 14, 2023 by Alan de Enfield

[IanD]

8 minutes ago, magnetman said:

The river Wey is by length and no cc ing. 

 

Don't know about the Bridgewater as never been there and never want to. 

 

I'd be in favour of pay as you go but IanD thinks it can't happen. 

 

It can happen with a manned lock at each end and lengthsmen. 

 

I didn't say it *can't* happen, I said it *won't* happen because it makes no financial sense, the costs or running it nowadays would be astronomical and these have to be paid for.

 

It's not like the old days when lengthmen and lockkeepers could be paid a pittance, maybe because they also got a lockside cottage to live in, and commercial boating revenues were much larger. Those day are long gone and not coming back... 😞

 

6 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

So you are saying that it is quite normal that more money would be donated when we were in 'lockdown' (2020 / 21) than was donated when we had 'free movement' in 2021/22 ?

 

I forecast that charitable giving will continue to decline in 2022/23 and 2023/24 dut to the lack of disposable income and cost of living problems we currently have.

 

No that is not C&RTs fault, but they need to tailor their business costs to their income.

 

No, I'm saying that if you're going to slag off CART for LOSING money (lower income from donations) you need to compare them to other charities in the same years -- many people gave more to charities in lockdown because of -- well, generosity towards people in trouble.

 

Have you done this comparison?

Edited April 14, 2023 by IanD

[Alan de Enfield]

5 minutes ago, IanD said:

I'm saying that if you're going to slag off CART for LOSING money (lower income from donations) you need to compare them to other charities in the same years. Have you done this?

 

That is not what you said at all.

 

Admit you read the figures (years) incorrectly.

 

 

 

 

Edit to add :

 

From the National Trust "2021/2022 marked a year of recovery for the National Trust"

 

Following one of the most challenging years on record (2020/21), in which income fell to £213m below target, 2021/2022 marked a year of recovery for the National Trust.

 

Edited April 14, 2023 by Alan de Enfield

[IanD]

6 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

That is not what you said at all.

 

Admit you read the figures (years) incorrectly.

 

 

<sigh> I didn't look at the figures (and never claimed I had), I looked at your post which said that CART had made a LOSS (your capitals) of £7.7M. Looks to me like you're the one wriggling... 😉

 

And now I'm saying -- have you compared CART's 18% reduction in donations (now you've admitted that's what you meant, albeit with the wrong number) with other charities in the same years?

 

You have plenty of form for quoting things selectively, out of context, or slanted, especially negative posts where CART (and EVs) are concerned, and your last few posts have done exactly that.

Edited April 14, 2023 by IanD

[Alan de Enfield]

4 minutes ago, IanD said:

<sigh> I didn't look at the figures (and never claimed I had), I looked at your post which said that CART had made a LOSS (your capitals) of £7.7M.

 

 

 

You actually stated :

 

22 minutes ago, IanD said:

Given what was happening with COVID and incomes in the years you quoted, do you really think CART can be blamed for this? I believe that most charities saw similar or bigger falls in income...

 

Which is why I don't think you even bothered to take note of the years in question.

 

4 minutes ago, IanD said:

And now I'm saying -- have you compared CART's 18% reduction in donations with other charities in the same years?

 

Yes.

They rose in 2021/22 at the time when C&RTs income fell.

 

 

Edited April 14, 2023 by Alan de Enfield

[IanD]

6 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

You actually stated :

 

Which is why I don't think you even bothered to take not of the years in question.

 

Yes.

They rose in 2021/22 at the time when C&RTs income fell.

 

 

Please provide the figures then, for comparable charities not cherry-picked ones. It should be obvious that the CART 2021 report can't include figures for 2021-2022, so make sure the years are actually the same.

 

The NT (which you chose) recorded a 50% increase in paying visitors (which CART doesn't have) and an increase in fundraising from donations -- and many people leave money to the NT in their will (unlike CART) and a lot of people died then, in case you'd forgotten. None of which applies to CART, so you're cherrypicking...

 

You've often claimed things in the past which when challenged turned out not to be true (like CART LOSING £7.7M), so excuse me if I doubt you this time... 😉

Edited April 14, 2023 by IanD

[Alan de Enfield]

1 minute ago, IanD said:

 

Please provide the figures then, for comparable charities not cherry-picked ones.

 

You've often claimed things in the past which when challenged turned out not to be true (like CART LOSING £7.7M), so excuse me if I doubt you this time... 😉

 

Just admit you are wrong - folks will think more of you.

 

Chesterfied Canal Trust (same 'market')

 

2021 Income £226,690

2022 Income £514,952

 

The same period that C&RT saw falling income.

 

I've proved the point so I'm done with arguing with you. Folks can make up their own minds.

[MtB]

22 minutes ago, magnetman said:

Don't know about the Bridgewater as never been there and never want to. 

 

 

The canal looks really nice from their website!  (The site itself is HORRID though. The webmaster obviously loves WordPress and all the irritating 'parallax' effects available with WP.)

 

They have a special higher priced "Platinum" licence for people using their boat "seven days a week", and some very reasonable CCing rules. Including CCers must still have a home mooring somewhere on the Bridgewater canal.

 

Prices are carefully concealed though. Probably WAY higher than CRT prices. 

 

Conditions of the Platinum license here. CRT should be having a careful read:

https://bridgewatercanal.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Platinum-User-Conditions-September-22_final_PDF.pdf

 

 

 

[IanD]

9 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Just admit you are wrong - folks will think more of you.

 

Chesterfied Canal Trust (same 'market')

 

2021 Income £226,690

2022 Income £514,952

 

The same period that C&RT saw falling income.

 

I've proved the point so I'm done with arguing with you. Folks can make up their own minds.

You didn't "prove your point" with the NT, for the reasons I noted above -- but I'm sure you'll ignore.

 

The Chesterfield Canal Trust is -- again, as you know -- *very* different financially and in size and structure to CART, and AFAIK that increase was almost entirely due to a few large legacies. Yet again, you're cherrypicking to try and make your point.

 

If you provide genuinely comparable data which shows that CART did worse than other comparable charities, then I'll agree with you that they could have done better.

 

That's not being "wrong" because I never said that they'd done a brilliant job (maybe they did, maybe they didn't), just that your post didn't prove anything -- and still doesn't... 😉

Edited April 14, 2023 by IanD