Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2018 13:52:53 GMT
It just goes to show how effective Crt have been at splitting boaters along already existing fault lines. I don't think CRT are attempting to split boaters I think they are attempting to split boaters from people who only have boats because it is cheap accommodation. People who actually like boating and living on the boat will be easily able to accept the price hikes. Those who are in it simply to minimise the costs to themselves will moan. Obviously there will be leisure boaters with wide boats who will suffer from it but there is always collateral damage when you get a group taking advantage - its just the way it works. I was in favour of charging by area when I had a narrow boat and I still am despite now owning 3 CRT registered boats over 7ft wide. There is trouble brewing and this is one (most likely completely ineffective) way to attempt to minimise the damage. Cue jenlyn - "fuck off and try harder - I thought you were educated"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2018 13:53:22 GMT
I would have expected to see a notice like that on a narrow boat but the boat in the photo is a Dutch barge.. I would imagine that a third party placed it there, rather than the boat owner. I think it's someone having a giggle.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2018 14:33:30 GMT
It just goes to show how effective Crt have been at splitting boaters along already existing fault lines. I don't think CRT are attempting to split boaters I think they are attempting to split boaters from people who only have boats because it is cheap accommodation. People who actually like boating and living on the boat will be easily able to accept the price hikes. Those who are in it simply to minimise the costs to themselves will moan. Obviously there will be leisure boaters with wide boats who will suffer from it but there is always collateral damage when you get a group taking advantage - its just the way it works. I was in favour of charging by area when I had a narrow boat and I still am despite now owning 3 CRT registered boats over 7ft wide. There is trouble brewing and this is one (most likely completely ineffective) way to attempt to minimise the damage. Cue jenlyn - "fuck off and try harder - I thought you were educated" Well, I'll say "feck off I thought you were educated" for the sheer audacity of you attempting to put words into my mouth. Given the fact i have never suggested crt are attempting to cause division with this particular issue, your talking crap. As I have stated previously, I have no issue with paying extra, as long as i get the same benefits as the small willy's. For instance, the ability to move north to south or vice versa, offside vegetation management, dredging to allow for widebeams, and ability to moor.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Mar 21, 2018 14:39:29 GMT
Seems to me the question was asked, the answer was "charge by area", a fair system used on the Thames. How is that "divide and rule", that's democracy? They haven't done that because Wide beam owners will cry! So widebeam owners have been ignored eh? It could be said that they have been pandered too. But fair enough an allowance has been made becuase they can't go everywhere. On that principle what discount do boats over 58ft get for not being able to go everywhere. Widebeam owners have had cheaper rent per sqm for donkeys years, compared to narrowboaters. You could always get an extension for your tiny dick if your unhappy. Now now lad, it was minus 4 at the time. Its a lot bigger now. Didn't realise you were peeping through the keyhole. Anyway, my boat is smaller than yours, I don't need to compensate. Insult rather than argue rationally as ever. I'm far from unhappy btw, I enjoy my little boat. That and baiting the argumentative on t'internet.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Mar 21, 2018 14:43:05 GMT
It just goes to show how effective Crt have been at splitting boaters along already existing fault lines. but there is always collateral damage when you get a group taking advantage - its just the way it works. [ You keep going on about "a group" taking advantage as if they doing something wrong, what exactlyare they doing wrong? To be fair your not exactly a good yard stick to judge wether the surcharge is going to effect boaters adversely as do you don't seem to have to worry about money.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2018 14:50:03 GMT
I'm glad you put "don't seem to" in there. You don't know my situation OK so I work for MI6 and come from a privileged background so that means I have money to burn? Wrong. Again.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2018 14:50:49 GMT
but there is always collateral damage when you get a group taking advantage - its just the way it works. [ You keep going on about "a group" taking advantage as if they doing something wrong, what exactlyare they doing wrong? To be fair your not exactly a good yard stick to judge wether the surcharge is going to effect boaters adversely as do you don't seem to have to worry about money. I didn't say anyone was doing anything wrong.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2018 14:55:04 GMT
I don't think CRT are attempting to split boaters I think they are attempting to split boaters from people who only have boats because it is cheap accommodation. People who actually like boating and living on the boat will be easily able to accept the price hikes. Those who are in it simply to minimise the costs to themselves will moan. Obviously there will be leisure boaters with wide boats who will suffer from it but there is always collateral damage when you get a group taking advantage - its just the way it works. I was in favour of charging by area when I had a narrow boat and I still am despite now owning 3 CRT registered boats over 7ft wide. There is trouble brewing and this is one (most likely completely ineffective) way to attempt to minimise the damage. Cue jenlyn - "fuck off and try harder - I thought you were educated" Well, I'll say "feck off I thought you were educated" for the sheer audacity of you attempting to put words into my mouth. Given the fact i have never suggested crt are attempting to cause division with this particular issue, your talking crap. As I have stated previously, I have no issue with paying extra, as long as i get the same benefits as the small willy's. For instance, the ability to move north to south or vice versa, offside vegetation management, dredging to allow for widebeams, and ability to moor. Sorry I slipped up. One should always argue about the topic and never comment directly on other people contributing and their attitude to it. That's good rule to stick to. Shall we try it ?
|
|
|
Post by kris on Mar 21, 2018 15:03:23 GMT
I'm glad you put "don't seem to" in there. You don't know my situation OK so I work for MI6 and come from a privileged background so that means I have money to burn? Wrong. Again. i did put "seem to" and I'm not presuming to know your situation. But you have mentioned things about it before. Anybdy who pays £9000 for a mooring has got more money than I have😄. ( maybe you need to bump another rich relative off) I think the thing I don't like most about the wide beam surcharge is it's going to result inore of the northern ex-commercial widebeams getting scraped. As they become less and less attractive to people.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2018 15:09:07 GMT
I hadn't thought of that. Would a few hundred pounds a year make the difference?
And yes I do need to bump off a relative. Fingers crossed about an old auntie but if she doesn't sort me out then I'm jumping off the cliffs at beachy head in the next few years.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Mar 21, 2018 15:16:48 GMT
I hadn't thought of that. Would a few hundred pounds a year make the difference? And yes I do need to bump off a relative. Fingers crossed about an old auntie but if she doesn't sort me out then I'm jumping off the cliffs at beachy head in the next few years. you could always sell a boat? It's a few hundred pounds a year now but it will soon be a lot more. A lot of the old commercial barges are longer than 70ft as well. It just makes them less attractive as a proposition to take on. You already need to be a bit mad to take them on, but the widebeam surcharge will definately decrease the amount of people who will buy them. I asked. Richard parry about it who passed it on to Mathew symonds who ignored it. I'm sure it's an un for seen consequence, but why don't they increase the historic boat discount for widebeams, it would offset it a bit.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Mar 21, 2018 15:31:03 GMT
Oh and magnetman if finaces get really tight, you could always get a job. Sorry to swear at you, but it's what most other people do 😄
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2018 15:33:34 GMT
I don't think CRT give a shit about historic boats to be honest. Not sure why as it seems to me to be good to encourage people to keep the old girls going.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2018 15:35:57 GMT
Oh and magnetman if finaces get really tight, you could always get a job. Sorry to swear at you, but it's what most other people do 😄 Sadly I've blotted my copy book with MI6 on that and would never get a reference. Unless I find someone who recognises my talent without requiring a referee.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Mar 21, 2018 15:37:02 GMT
I don't think CRT give a shit about historic boats to be honest. Not sure why as it seems to me to be good to encourage people to keep the old girls going. I'm sure cart don't give a shit about them, but once they are gone it will be another part of the heritage gone. We are already losing the wider context of the cut with them selling all the bits of land off they can.
|
|