If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

80078

Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by Steve1015, Oct 25, 2012.

  1. tobes3803

    tobes3803 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    793
    Likes Received:
    2
    I think its also the fact SR are a major share holder on SLL but were seemingly powerlous to stop this or even fully informed! So in that resepct SLL arent looking after their share holders!
     
  2. Spamcan81

    Spamcan81 Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Messages:
    34,012
    Likes Received:
    19,126
    Occupation:
    Training moles
    Location:
    The back of beyond
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Is the SR a majority shareholder in SLL? There can be world of difference between being a major shareholder and a majority one. All this is supposition of course as I doubt many of us on here know the true situation regarding the SR/SLL relationship.
     
  3. swanrail

    swanrail Guest

    I believe SR owns in the region of 500 shares in SLL, again I don't know how accurate that is but it's my understanding of it.

    The relationship has been historically love hate. Swanage expected SLL wanted to do 78 next but chose 72. SR is quite rightly in no position to oppose this.
    They restore what they want and that's fine. However basic business tells you that you should be doing things the customer actually wants.
    Who's to say 72 will even be wanted when its done?
    The railways bread and butter were the 4s, it was interesting to read someone writing that the WC/BB were SLLs bread and butter.
    That's not true because how many railways really can afford to run a West Country day in day out? You can count the number on one hand, therefore SLL have fundamentally got their product wrong and sold their most marketable hire fee loco.
    Therefore sure this a short term solution but people with not too long memories will recall just how quickly the 35027 money disappeared into Eddystone and Manston and a reasonably large paid staff.
     
  4. Victor

    Victor Nat Pres stalwart Friend

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2006
    Messages:
    13,312
    Likes Received:
    7,088
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    DEWSBURY West Yorkshire
    Oh, is it??? I didn't know that.
    It always amazes me when 2 parties conclude a business deal THAT THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO DO, others, who have no rights, start jumping up and down with bluster and indignation.
    I only know what I have read here about this matter but it seems as though a LEGAL AND LEGITIMATE deal has been done.
    It's done, can't be undone, complain and protest to the parties involved, I don't think you'll get much joy...........so move on.
    I'm not getting into a full scale argument about this, I've just stated my opinion.
     
  5. swanrail

    swanrail Guest

    They do indeed have a right to do so, but morally you would have thought that something might of clicked wouldn't you?
    Like you said, it's history now. But the only reason why it's still a talking point is because this situation was emerging for years
     
  6. cct man

    cct man Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    3,220
    Likes Received:
    49
    Occupation:
    CONSTRUCTION
    Location:
    LONDON
    Draconian?, explain if you please?

    Regards
    Chris:
     
  7. 61624

    61624 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    4,739
    Likes Received:
    2,902
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    You don't think tieing all the locos up under an agreement then almost immediately after bannning their owner from the premises and falsely (as it turned out)accusing him of fraud was a tad draconian? I'm only an outsider but it seemed to me that draconian is not an unreasonable term! It's all water under the bridge now, though, so I don't see there's any need for an argument over semantics. I only used it as an example where drastic measures were used to resolve an unhealthy situation.
     
  8. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    24,173
    Likes Received:
    49,469
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Where exactly are these lines of "right junk pieces" being left to rot at the Bluebell? The Bluebell has about 31 steam engines, and there is only one (80100) that is still in Barry condition (though for all most people know, there could be work going on to assemble the myriad small bits needed for its eventual restoration). Meanwhile, over the last 30 years or so, the Bluebell, or closely allied groups, have restored from scrapyard condition 34059, 1638, 1618, 847, 73082, 80151, 80064, 541, 92240, 65, with work currently in hand to restore 78059/84030 - maybe some others I have missed. And at the same time, it has restored a fleet of getting on for 40 heritage carriages (mostly pre-Mark 1), twenty or so more heritage goods wagons and NPCS, 3 stations and built and run a railway that has grown from 5 to 9 and soon 11 miles long.

    Yes, we could do more, particularly getting more undercover storage to protect our rolling stock - show me a railway that couldn't make that statement. But your characterisation of "junk" being left to "rot" is simply untrue. I'm sure the hardworking volunteers and staff at the SVR would equally object.

    Tom
     
  9. Andy2857

    Andy2857 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2011
    Messages:
    564
    Likes Received:
    165
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Wolverhampton/Sheffield
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Since the advent of the engine house and Kidderminster carriage shed I don't think it's accurate to say that anything has been "left to rot" at the SVR. Comparing a loco ownership group to two railway operating companies is hardly a fair comparison.
     
  10. Sheff

    Sheff Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2006
    Messages:
    7,421
    Likes Received:
    2,171
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired Engineer & Heritage Volunteer
    Location:
    N Warks
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Thanks for saving me a job there Victor! :thumb: Yon lad needs to get over it, man-up and move on.
     
  11. cct man

    cct man Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    3,220
    Likes Received:
    49
    Occupation:
    CONSTRUCTION
    Location:
    LONDON
    Thanks for the clarification Roger:

    Regards
    Chris
     
  12. cct man

    cct man Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    3,220
    Likes Received:
    49
    Occupation:
    CONSTRUCTION
    Location:
    LONDON
    If my memory serves me correctly,the idea at the time was to tie ALL owners up with a running agreement, there was not any at the time. IMHO Phil Marsh did a damn good job doing this and got the best possible deal for all sides.

    Best regards
    Chris:
     
  13. 61624

    61624 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    4,739
    Likes Received:
    2,902
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Think you might be missing the point - it was the banning of JB from the sight followed by the fraud investigation that I would say was the draconian part! (A ban incidentally that exists to this day, as far as I know, despite him being cleared of wrongdoing by a police investigation and then a civil action - I have no axe to grind, I know the man only from photos, I've never spoken or corresponded with him. But if one takes Draconian as being severe action with no substantive evidence to justify it I think this case is a clear example of it).
     
  14. david1984

    david1984 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,910
    Likes Received:
    1,387
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Birmingham
    The point I was making is many don't have a choice in what motive power they use, think back to the early days when pretty much there was only 34072 running to Harmans Cross as it was then, you used 34072 because there wasn't any real choice, Standard Tanks might be what Swanage need, but Bulleids is what SLL is mostly about and this is an area where both camps differ, but there will always be a Railway willing to take on SLL Locomotives even if not ideal, so not to leave them short of motive power (34053 landing at Bridgnorth being a recent example).

    SLL have assets that Railways are interested in paying to use and Swanage is one of a number of interested parties is what is boils down to, SLL have the option to go elsewhere if they wish, Swanage also have the option to seek Locomotives from other sources, but it would take time to source 4/5 Locomotives, as opposed to a quick hire of 1 or 2.
     
  15. david1984

    david1984 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,910
    Likes Received:
    1,387
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Birmingham
    As for shareholdings etc, as Spamcan says, it's all about the number and percentage of shares, say for example you support a Football Club, and as part of your loyalty, you decide to buy a number of shares in it, would you expect that to give you a say over the Managers transfer policies unless you were the majority shareholder with the power to replace him ?.

    I do understand where your coming from though and it sort of highlights why Im not a fan of Railways and Groups dabbling in shares and the stockmarket, as the problem is, someone with a lot of cash but with ideas the many oppose, can gain a lot of clout and power through buying up a ton of shares to become a majority shareholder and force his large unpopular ideas through, I seem the recall the Paignton & Dartmouth had an issue a while back with someone attempting to buy up a ton of their shares with something less than the Railways best interests at heart.
     
  16. 61624

    61624 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    4,739
    Likes Received:
    2,902
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    For the most part, railways and the like that have had share issues are certainly not "dabbling in shares and the stock market"

    Most railways that have had share issues are usually subsidiaries of the charitable body that owns the track, land, buildings and some of the rolling stock and the charity has control over the company so it can never be a vehicle for a takeover bid, however many shares an indiviidual might acquire. Shares in these companies are really misnamed in conventional terms because what is being solicited is a donation with benefits, that do not normally include a return on capaital in other than kind. Generally speaking the company in which shares are available runs the trading activities of the line concerned and covenants its profits to the Charity for beneficial tax treatment

    There are odd exceptions, the only significant one I can think of being the company behind the Torbay and Dartmouth Railway, which effectively runs its trains and ferries as a tourist attraction and does pay a dividend
     
  17. david1984

    david1984 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,910
    Likes Received:
    1,387
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Birmingham
    That's good to know that most can't come to grief that way 61264, but still having shares doesn't necessarily mean you get a big say.
     
  18. 61624

    61624 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    4,739
    Likes Received:
    2,902
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    ................ which is why I think that, for the most part, so called "shares" are effectively "donations with benefits"
     
  19. 73129

    73129 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2007
    Messages:
    4,463
    Likes Received:
    1,018
    Location:
    Winchester
    Maybe with 80078 moving to another home. This may prompt the Swanage Railway management to start looking for new groups/owners to run their locos on Swanage metals. They seem to be able to attract diesel groups. So there is no reason why they can't attract groups to bring their steam locos. I think Swanage Railway members and volunteers need to look past what is happening now and look to the future. Like we did at the MHR. There could be a good case for a loco group not having control of all the motive power on a particular railway.
     
  20. jurassic

    jurassic New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2006
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Dorset
    I have to agree with that. The ideal opportunity. It's time for a change!
     

Share This Page