|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Jun 4, 2007 11:39:54 GMT -8
According to the Sun story, Deb Marshall has known about it since "she discovered the web page about a month ago."
Presumably this is from Dane's email to BCFS, which he mentions earlier in this thread.
So, how did Sun reporter Gerry Bellett know about this matter? I'm guessing that he reads this forum, or that Susan Lazaruk (who has written ferry-stories for "The Province") saw it and mentioned it to him.
I guess this is confirmation to us, the forum-members, that this forum does in fact get noticed by the news media.
Gerry & Susan: You're welcome !
|
|
Kam
Voyager 
Posts: 926
|
Post by Kam on Jun 4, 2007 13:17:25 GMT -8
We all know typing “Ferry” into Google returns BC Ferries website in the number one location. So it’s not difficult for anyone in the world to find the site, particularly if they know they want to do a project involving ferries. Keep in mind that google customers search results based on the location of the IP address. That is to say a google search in the US will turn up different results targeted to Americans. Same goes if you did a search from the UK. |
|
D'Elete BC in NJ
Voyager
Dispensing gallons of useless information daily...
Posts: 1,671
|
Post by D'Elete BC in NJ on Jun 4, 2007 13:24:44 GMT -8
Ya, I just tried it and got Washington State ferries as the top pick. That I find interesting; I would have expected the Cape May - Lewes ferries, or the Staten Island ferries given my home base.
|
|
|
|
Post by PCL Driver on Jun 4, 2007 14:51:56 GMT -8
Well, I for one am very relieved! I looked under Bus and Coach Services, and fortunately, PCL is not offering bus service there! I would hate to get transferred there!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by BreannaF on Jun 4, 2007 15:54:05 GMT -8
Keep in mind that google customers search results based on the location of the IP address. That is to say a google search in the US will turn up different results targeted to Americans. Same goes if you did a search from the UK. From my office in Portland, WSF was the first site that came up in Google under "ferry", with the Coho on page 3, Alaska SF on page 4, and BC Ferries on page 6. Might be interesting to see how it comes up for someone in eastern Canada. |
|
|
|
Post by Ferry Rider 42 on Jun 4, 2007 16:24:51 GMT -8
We all know typing “Ferry” into Google returns BC Ferries website in the number one location. So it’s not difficult for anyone in the world to find the site, particularly if they know they want to do a project involving ferries. Keep in mind that google customers search results based on the location of the IP address. That is to say a google search in the US will turn up different results targeted to Americans. Same goes if you did a search from the UK. Oh neat, I never knew that. Though, now I’m not surprised it's done. |
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Jun 4, 2007 16:43:40 GMT -8
You can also purchase words from google so your site comes up first. The cost varies according to the site and who you are. There are also packages you can purchase that combines a certain volume of clicks with a certain number of words. You can purchase mis-spelled words and competitors names even so your website comes up not theirs. Many people purchase websites just to save them and hope that someone will buy them out. For example someone could purchase www.bcferries.net (I haven't tried that one) and hope that BCFC will buy it from you. Forward thinking companies bought the rights to all versions of their names early on. Then they have automatic redirects to the correct site. |
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,309
|
Post by Neil on Jun 4, 2007 16:52:37 GMT -8
It would be nice if Ms. Marshall said, "And our thanks to Scott from the Ferries of BC Forum for bringing this to our attention." (Or maybe Scott was tipped off by Ms Marshall herself. We know he has connections.  ) Sounds like it was indeed a case of a small company lifting a ready made website. Good thing they're not still around for BC Ferries to nail them, although I'm not sure what kind of action could have been taken against some website proprietor in Kosovo. |
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Jun 4, 2007 17:28:35 GMT -8
Would have been funny if the Vancouver Sun article actually had all its facts right too:) The island isn't Mayne Island, it's Galiano Island! Just past Bluffs Park.
|
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Jun 4, 2007 17:47:12 GMT -8
A couple questions for Sun reporter Gerry Bellett:
1) Why is this story all of a sudden "News", especially when there are more important ferry stories out there, such as the stuck-stern-door on the Northern Adventure, that kept passengers cooped-up on the ship for 5 extra hours last week?
2) Why did you fail to mention the source of this story? The story mentioned that this copycat website was "posted". By that, I presume you meant that it was mentioned on this here forum.
3) What event triggered this to be News? Did Deb Marshall phone you up and say "Hey, here's something for you to print, so that you don't print anything about our fleet safety issues?
Just curious, as this seems to be an out-of-place lighthearted story, at a time when there are some more cutting-edge stories of the ferries to be told....
|
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Jun 4, 2007 18:55:42 GMT -8
Perhaps The Van Sun could do a story on how it looks as though BCFS's is generating more clientele for their reservation service (at a nominal fee) by artificially creating shortages. This is done by operating fewer sailings then has been the case in previous years. I stand to be corrected with actual data, but it looks to me as if this is indeed the case.
Take today, for instance. Route 1 is being served by 8 Spirit sailings plus 2 by the Q of Saanich, for a total of 10 sailings each way. This on a Monday in early June. Someone please get hold of a schedule from say 2002 and check the service level for early June. I am virtually certain that they would have been running at least 12 and perhaps 14 sailings. Has the demand decreased? If so, why? Are the ferries bigger? No!
Perhaps the folks at CanWest media could follow up on these story ideas.
|
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Jun 4, 2007 18:59:58 GMT -8
Perhaps The Van Sun could do a story on how it looks as though BCFS's is generating more clientele for their reservation service (at a nominal fee) by artificially creating shortages. This is done by operating fewer sailings then has been the case in previous years. I stand to be corrected with actual data, but it looks to me as if this is indeed the case. Take today, for instance. Route 1 is being served by 8 Spirit sailings plus 2 by the Q of Saanich, for a total of 10 sailings each way. This on a Monday in early June. Someone please get hold of a schedule from say 2002 and check the service level for early June. I am virtually certain that they would have been running at least 12 and perhaps 14 sailings. Has the demand decreased? If so, why? Are the ferries bigger? No! Perhaps the folks at CanWest media could follow up on these story ideas. Hear, hear! |
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Jun 4, 2007 19:55:33 GMT -8
I just looked at schedules from 1995, 2002, 2005, and 2007 and they are virtually the same. The only difference I can tell is that in 1995 and 2002, there were three round trips made by a third vessel every day from May 18th (or thereabout) until the full summer schedule. In 2005 and 2007, there are the same extra sailings but only from Friday to Monday until the full summer schedule.
Putting it another way, the 2007 schedule from June 6 to June 26 is virtually identical to the 1995 schedule from May 18 to June 21.
It is, admittedly a small difference, but you are correct in saying there are fewer sailings today than there were 12 years ago - with the same ferries with the same capacity. The population of Vancouver Island has grown by at least 100,000 (about 16%) in that timeframe.
But really, why would BC Ferries care whether the population is being well served with proper ferry service. Their mandate is to make a profit. The best scenario for them is to have packed boats and lower costs (fewer sailings). Profit comes before accessibility, affordability, and serving the public.
I know in the past, if there was extra traffic after the last sailing of the day, they would do an extra round trip. Do they still do that? I get the impression (although I'm not sure) that once the last sailing is sold out now, they stop selling tickets. What do you guys think is better? They'd obviously lose a lot of money on that extra sailing - but is it the right thing to do?
|
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Jun 4, 2007 20:05:48 GMT -8
I just looked at schedules from 1995, 2002, 2005, and 2007 and they are virtually the same. The only difference I can tell is that in 1995 and 2002, there were three round trips made by a third vessel every day from May 18th (or thereabout) until the full summer schedule. In 2005 and 2007, there are the same extra sailings but only from Friday to Monday until the full summer schedule. I think that one key difference between now and then, however, is number of manger-discrection sailings added, making those schedules quite an inaccurate way of gauging actual capacity levels from the past. Also, David Hahn specifically mentioned at the last BCFS annual general meeting that they would be stepping away from MD sailings more often in the future with scheduled sailings being used instead to help more easily control volume. |
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Jun 4, 2007 20:18:08 GMT -8
Graham, could you please elaborate a little on what you're saying. Are you saying there were more Manager Discretion sailings in the earlier years and fewer now? You would think that if David Hahn wanted to step away from these MD sailings, they would add more scheduled sailings.
|
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Jun 4, 2007 20:24:11 GMT -8
Graham, could you please elaborate a little on what you're saying. Are you saying there were more Manager Discretion sailings in the earlier years and fewer now? You would think that if David Hahn wanted to step away from these MD sailings, they would add more scheduled sailings. I guess I'm trying to say that there were likely, based on the way Hahn spoke of it, more MD sailings in the past. Though it should be pointed out that Hahn's statement on this was more of a general outlook than a mention of specific upcoming changes. You would think that if David Hahn wanted to step away from these MD sailings, they would add more scheduled sailings. Really? Who among us would honestly expect that to actually play out and not just be lip service?  |
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,309
|
Post by Neil on Jun 4, 2007 20:47:27 GMT -8
According to Transport Canada figures, BC Ferries traffic, be it passengers or vehicles, has not increased since 1995. And service levels are about the same, at least for a Monday in June. The last annual period for which there are figures, route 1 had 176 extra round trips, on top of scheduled ones.
|
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Jun 4, 2007 21:16:24 GMT -8
According to Transport Canada figures, BC Ferries traffic, be it passengers or vehicles, has not increased since 1995. No increase in 12 years? I find that logistically hard to comprehend, especially considering the growth of the island in that time. |
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,309
|
Post by Neil on Jun 4, 2007 21:56:34 GMT -8
Well, this thread started out fun, anyway...   According to the most recent figures, the counts still haven't really changed. To go back to a point Flugel Horn raised, I don't think you can accuse the media, Canwest in particular, of avoiding BC Ferries operational or safety issues. It seemed to be a favorite topic for a good part of last year and well into this one, but the media knows that the public has a finite attention span for any one story, and tales of stuck doors don't sell a lot of papers. We're ferry fans here, remember. We're interested in such things. |
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Jun 4, 2007 22:06:32 GMT -8
Interesting stough, Hornbyguy. Can you produce a graph for Route 1 only? I suspect it would be similar. Any speculation as to why the stagnation in spite of population growth? Is affordability an issue leading people to use ferries less often?
I remember summer service on Route 1 back in the mid 90's being provided by 5 vessels (2 Spirits plus 3 lifted V's) with up to 20 sailings daily. The capacity on this route today is down a fair bit. Perhaps it was overkill then.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,309
|
Post by Neil on Jun 4, 2007 22:23:19 GMT -8
BC Ferries has learned from the oil companies.
The last thing you want to do is put more product out, if you can instead milk more revenue out of existing capacity. So, you jack up the prices (which controls demand, which means you don't need to expand and do terrible things like increasing your labour costs), charge 40% of your auto customers reservation fees, and put in pay-extra lounges for folks to escape the din of the cattle boat. Sounds like a plan to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Jun 4, 2007 23:03:48 GMT -8
BC Ferries has learned from the oil companies. The last thing you want to do is put more product out, if you can instead milk more revenue out of existing capacity. So, you jack up the prices (which controls demand, which means you don't need to expand and do terrible things like increasing your labour costs), charge 40% of your auto customers reservation fees, and put in pay-extra lounges for folks to escape the din of the cattle boat. Sounds like a plan to me. Sounds like a plan allowed by a government that knows they aren't dealing with a captive market. Aside from the argument made for such a ferry system, like transit, etc., needing to be treated as social transportation, it can still even more easily be argued that no government has the right to expect a profit from such a captive market for essential transportation services, arm's length or not. Last time I checked not only does a significant portion of our province's population reside on the island, but our capital is separated by the same body of water that makes that portion of our population require the ferry as an essential service. |
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Jun 5, 2007 5:56:07 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Curtis on Jun 5, 2007 7:04:15 GMT -8
Looks like somebody's going to be in hot water now.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,309
|
Post by Neil on Jun 5, 2007 14:10:52 GMT -8
[]]Sounds like a plan allowed by a government that knows they aren't dealing with a captive market. Aside from the argument made for such a ferry system, like transit, etc., needing to be treated as social transportation, it can still even more easily be argued that no government has the right to expect a profit from such a captive market for essential transportation services, arm's length or not. Last time I checked not only does a significant portion of our province's population reside on the island, but our capital is separated by the same body of water that makes that portion of our population require the ferry as an essential service. I thought of making a new thread for this, but I think I'll just stick it here... A lot of us, including me, have ventured a lot of thoughts on the public vs. private thing, on just what is the true nature of BC Ferries, and the question of what constitutes "profit', and where does it go. There's a lot of misunderstanding of this. This excerpt might clarify a bit of the profit question. BACKGROUND TO THE BC FERRY COMMISSION’S
PRELIMINARY DECISION ON PRICE CAPS
FOR PERFORMANCE TERM TWO8. BC Ferries has to earn a profit now. Isn’t that the real reason for the fare
increases?It is part of the reason for the increases: making earnings allows BC Ferries to borrow to finance its fleet and terminal renewal program independently from government. Being allowed to earn a “reasonable” return is a pivotal feature of the financial arrangement under which BC Ferries operates. In order for lenders to be willing to extend loans to BC Ferries on reasonable terms, which BC Ferries needs to renew its fleet and terminals, they must be confident that BC Ferries will be able to repay the debt principal and interest. Part of that confidence derives from the existence of equity in BC Ferries. The profit, or surplus, that BC Ferries earns, builds up that equity. Unlike most companies, BC Ferries does not have owners, other than the Province, who receive dividend payments from its earnings, so that all the earnings (except for the small dividend paid to the Province on the preferred shares) are retained to build up equity and, therefore, creditworthiness. The company is able to raise its own debt outside government, so taxpayers are not “on the hook” by having to guarantee BC Ferries’ debt. The Commission sets the rates at which BC Ferries is allowed to earn a surplus for this purpose, under rules in the Coastal Ferry Act. Other things being equal, a one percentage point change in the allowed pre-tax return on equity (currently approximately 13 %) would mean fares would be lower by less than one per cent, but could also mean that lenders demand a higher return on BC Ferries’ bonds, which could raise BC Ferries’ financing costs. In a technical sense, the need to earn a surplus does mean higher fares than if there was no such need. But if there were no earnings, BC Ferries would lose its ability to raise capital and it would move towards financial unsustainability. More questions and answers from the BC Ferry Commission on fares, and other financial questions, at: www.bcferrycommission.com/PrelimPcapQandA.pdf |
|
) 
