Cost of borrowing a Boris bike to double

Unfortunately even doubling the cost (which will reduce takeup) will not
make them break even. Apparently the breakeven point at present is 5 times
the number of hirings.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9660...o-double.html#

On 09/11/2012 08:29, Mrcheerful wrote:
Unfortunately even doubling the cost (which will reduce takeup) will not
make them break even. Apparently the breakeven point at present is 5 times
the number of hirings.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9660...o-double.html#


In other words, another huge sum of money wasted on trying to encourage
cycling.

When will they realise that;
"Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a legitimate mode of
transport; it is either a toy for children or a vehicle fit only for the
poor and/or strange. For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail
to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their
lives, certainly on a regular basis."

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR
Bicycles Are For Children…Like Masturbation, and something you should
grow out of. There is something seriously sick and stunted about grown
men who want to ride a bike."

On Friday, November 9, 2012 8:40:19 AM UTC, Dave VOR wrote:

In other words, another huge sum of money wasted on trying to encourage
cycling.



When will they realise that;

"Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a legitimate mode of
transport; it is either a toy for children or a vehicle fit only for the
poor and/or strange. For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail
to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their
lives, certainly on a regular basis."

Exactly - that's why they are spending money trying to change that attitude.. Dave Horton's report (which you quoted above) reached that conclusion:

"The study concludes that even training the young to ride safely achieves little while road conditions remain unfriendly. The only way to bring in mass cycling, the researchers argue, would be a series of hugely costly – and seemingly unlikely – measures to reshape towns and cities. Chief among these would be to build well-made, continuous, segregated cycle routes on all major urban roads and encourage people out of cars by restricting traffic speeds and parking."

As long as people like you pretend to see no benefit to cycling, money will be spent trying to enlighten you.

PhilO wrote:
On Friday, November 9, 2012 8:40:19 AM UTC, Dave VOR wrote:

In other words, another huge sum of money wasted on trying to encourage
cycling.



When will they realise that;

"Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a legitimate mode of
transport; it is either a toy for children or a vehicle fit only for the
poor and/or strange. For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail
to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their
lives, certainly on a regular basis."

Exactly - that's why they are spending money trying to change that
attitude. Dave Horton's report (which you quoted above) reached that conclusion:

"The study concludes that even training the young to ride safely achieves
little while road conditions remain unfriendly. The only way to bring in
mass cycling, the researchers argue, would be a series of hugely costly 
and seemingly unlikely  measures to reshape towns and cities. Chief
among these would be to build well-made, continuous, segregated cycle
routes on all major urban roads and encourage people out of cars by
restricting traffic speeds and parking."

As long as people like you pretend to see no benefit to cycling, money
will be spent trying to enlighten you.

Where is the pretence? Fact is people don't like cycling, get over it and
stop wasting money trying to brainwash and coerce them into liking it.
--
ennemm

On Friday, November 9, 2012 12:02:22 PM UTC, nik. morgan wrote:

Where is the pretence? Fact is people don't like cycling, get over it and
stop wasting money trying to brainwash and coerce them into liking it.

--

ennemm

You appear to be unaware that many people do like cycling. I'm not wasting any money trying to brainwash or coerce anyone. Do you have trouble reading?

"PhilO" wrote in message
...
On Friday, November 9, 2012 12:02:22 PM UTC, nik. morgan wrote:

Where is the pretence? Fact is people don't like cycling, get over it and
stop wasting money trying to brainwash and coerce them into liking it.

--

ennemm

You appear to be unaware that many people do like cycling.

More people like driving.

On Friday, November 9, 2012 3:24:17 PM UTC, Mentalguy2k8 wrote:


Where is the pretence? Fact is people don't like cycling,

ennemm



You appear to be unaware that many people do like cycling.



More people like driving.

Which is irrelevant to ennemm's incorrect statement that people don't like cycling.

On Fri, 9 Nov 2012 08:29:23 -0000, "Mrcheerful"
wrote:

Unfortunately even doubling the cost (which will reduce takeup) will not
make them break even. Apparently the breakeven point at present is 5 times
the number of hirings.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9660...o-double.html#



So insufficient people are using it and they are going to increase the price
(which will deter people) and extend it so that even more insufficient people
can use it from new points.


Hmmmmm....

On 09/11/2012 15:38, PhilO wrote:

Mentalguy2k8 wrote:

Where is the pretence? Fact is people don't like cycling,
ennemm

You appear to be unaware that many people do like cycling.

More people like driving.

Which is irrelevant to ennemm's incorrect statement that people don't like cycling.

"People don't..." is an idiomatic way of making a statement of tendency about
people.

It needs to be read as though it were prefaced by a modifier phrase such as
"by and large", or "on the whole".

You *know* this already.

"PhilO" wrote in message
...
On Friday, November 9, 2012 3:24:17 PM UTC, Mentalguy2k8 wrote:


Where is the pretence? Fact is people don't like cycling,

ennemm



You appear to be unaware that many people do like cycling.



More people like driving.

Which is irrelevant to ennemm's incorrect statement that people don't like
cycling.

He didn't say *all* people, so he's not incorrect. People don't like cycling
and yet people *do* like cycling