On 25 Apr, 16:51, James Farrar wrote:
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 06:00:49 -0700 (PDT), MIG





wrote:
On 25 Apr, 12:06, Mizter T wrote:
On 24 Apr, 19:46, TBirdFrank wrote:

I don't claim any expertise on this specific operation - but is not
this a case of TfL being in the effective shoes of a Franchisee, and
Network Rail still being the freeholders? - a situation which has
destroyed the potential for less than stellar property transactions
due to there now being too many parties trying to extract both profit
and hypothecated gains within the life of a mere franchise.

I don't think that any time-limit has been placed on TfL's control of
the 'North London Railway' (i.e. all the old Silverlink Metro routes).
TfL's appointment of LOROL as the operator was for a set period of
something like seven years, but I think the plan is for this contract
to simply be renewed/extended if they do a good job - I don't think it
has to go out to competitive tender like a normal franchise does.

Regardless of what the situation is with the operator, TfL is in this
for the long run - therefore they can think long-term. As you say
Network Rail remains the freeholder, but the impression I get is that
they and TfL are establishing a good working relationship, not least
because Network Rail realises TfL aren't going anywhere soon!

Even if Boris wins next week?

Do you have any reason at all for asking that question?

Not in the sense of anyone knowing the answer for sure, but
questioning whether all kinds of certainties are so certain after
all. I was referring more the the "working relationship" part than
the "going anywhere" part, since the working relationships with new
chiefs, and very different attitutudes to how much should be spent on
publicly-run services, could be very different.