@ #32 i highly doubt the supposed increase in revenues generated as a result of the improved “experience” will offset monies lost from reservation fees unless, of course, the fares go up across the board; anyone currently reserving a spot under the current system is doing so out of necessity. under the new proposal, they will not have to pay this fee but maybe a convenience or processing fee instead (like bc hydro). i believe the idea that a new system could generate more revenue from “impulse” type buyers is far fetched esp if you can’t change or cancel the reservation without being penalized. vacationing to the island is way more involved than just making a ferry reservation. i also think that that ratcheting up the fares during peak times (which they never said they would do) would generate all… Read more »

@28:

I don’t think you can take such a simplistic view of the situation. First off, if the LNG infrastructure is put in place then most likely natural gas for current BC residents will become more expensive due to higher demand. This will be money leaving the province. Secondly, once the natural gas is extracted, it is gone and any future BC residents will not be able collect any benefits from it. Thirdly, the province is still on the hook for providing roads, governmental services and other infrastructure for these industries.

“how will offering discounted fares and eliminating reservation fees necessarily generate more revenue or traffic for that matter?” Because more people will use the ferries with a better system. It works like the airlines do. You book a ticket online and are guaranteed a spot. No waiting in lines, no uncertainty of getting on a ferry. The fares increase and decrease depending on popularity just the like an airfare. If you want to take the ferry on a Friday afternoon of a summer long weekend you can just book it online and are guaranteed to get on without arriving early. Like the airlines you will pay a premium for that peak time and fares fluctuate with supply/demand. On non peak times fares are cheaper so they can try to sell more fares. Sounds like a good system to me and… Read more »

“the taxpayers of BC will wind up assuming all the risk” With the current LNG plan there is zero risk to the tax payer. Right now we get zero revenue from LNG and the current plan has the private sector taking all the risk by providing the capital to build the plants and infrastructure. All the government does is collect royalties and taxes from all the spin offs. Even if the royalty is low we still win. If it blows up then sure the government gets no royalties or taxes but they don’t lose anything either. These are the kind of projects government should be working on rather than pumping the housing industry. If the NDP were in power the tax payer would assume all the risk for such projects as the government would fund them. Remember the fast ferries?… Read more »

@ #18

the worst case scenario is that Christy bends over backwards (or forwards), cuts all sorts of corners and makes petronas (or whoever wants to step up to the plate) a deal they can’t refuse just so she can appear to be making good on her election promise. in such a scenario, the taxpayers of BC will wind up assuming all the risk if the market remains uncertain and reap none of the benefits if the stars somehow realign themselves.

We have manipulated oil prices to targetted levels in order to build hydro carbon infrastructure, that will then be turned over to moving water. LNG pipeline to the West Coast is the last piece of the puzzle, and has hit Capex critical mass. We can now rip the rug from under the Hydro Carbon edifice. Petronas has done its job admirably.

@bullwhip29

how can it end “badly”? the worst case scenario is the status quo. that’s not “bad”, it’s “no change”.