Oysters on Overground ...
 

On 13 May, 17:20, James Farrar wrote:
Yes, the newspaper market is the way it is in that the Standard has a
monopoly in London.

That used to be true in the evening.

The Guardian, of course, isn't a London newspaper.

Really? Remind me where Farringdon Road is.

Hmm. I'd question whether the Economist was a "London magazine", or
the IHT a "Paris newspaper"...

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

Oysters on Overground ...
 

On Tue, 13 May 2008, James Farrar wrote:

On Tue, 13 May 2008 01:33:14 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

Yes, the newspaper market is the way it is in that the Standard has a
monopoly in London.

That used to be true in the evening.

The Guardian, of course, isn't a London newspaper.

Really? Remind me where Farringdon Road is.

Judging by the columns of theirs i've read in the last couple of years, in
orbit round planet almost, but not quite, exactly unlike ours.

tom

--
When you mentioned INSERT-MIND-INPUT ... did they look at you like this?

Oysters on Overground ...
 

On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 11:32:33AM +0100, Paul Scott wrote:

Going back to TfL's contribution - is it not just validators?

If the system is going to work, then they also need to be able to sell
tickets and all the baggage that comes along with that - that is, issue
new cards, load Travelcards onto 'em, load cash onto 'em, tell people
their current pre-pay balance, answer all the questions that people will
ask, and deal with refunds.

To do all that needs a fair bit of booking office upgrades and staff
training.

--
David Cantrell | Official London Perl Mongers Bad Influence

If I could read only one thing it would be the future, in the
entrails of the ******* denying me access to anything else.

Oysters on Overground ...
 

On 13 May, 11:17, Paul Terry wrote:
In message
,
Chris writes

No other TOC had signed up to Ken's proposals as he refused to pay the
entire cost of barrier & software installation.

All of the TOCs had agreed in principle well over a year ago, and
several were totally "signed up" by February 2007. FCC released a press
statement on 30th January 2007 announcing a roll-out starting in 2009,
FGW made a similar announcement the next day, SWT was already obliged by
its franchise to do so, and all of the remainder confirmed their
intention to go ahead with Oyster PAYG within a matter of weeks.
Southern had made the commitment back in 2005 and at one time were
talking of a roll out in 2007 or soon after, although that seems to have
been delayed.
--
Paul Terry

'signed up' in my book means 'contractually entered into'....and that
includes a 'go live' date.
THis obviously isn't the case. 'Agreed in principle' doesn't equal
'signed up'. There is obviously a sticking point in getting those
without a go-live date to contract-in, and cost is what I'm being told
is the reason.

Oysters on Overground ...
 

Oysters on Overground ...
 

On May 14, 6:59*pm, "Tim Roll-Pickering" T.C.Roll-
wrote:
wrote:
You seem like a bright enough chap. I don't honestly believe you can't
see the difference in scale there.

As I said the site was crashing my browser (and has a dire search engine) so
I grabbed the first stable links I could get. I remember more substantial
pieces in the Standard but it's always been one of the worst of online
papets.

Yes, the newspaper market is the way it is in that the Standard has a
monopoly in London.

Only because the other evening paids have died out. The Standard is, of
course, under much pressure from the freesheets but has managed to carve out
a niche for itself. But it's not as if the Standard has a guaranteed
monopoly - there's nothing but market forces stopping a rival paper from
trying to offer an alternative.

That's offensive at the best of times, before they
start swinging an election based on their own personal prejudices.
The Guardian, of course, isn't a London newspaper.

It hasn't really been the "Manchester Guardian" in decades. It is part of
the national-based-in-London press and so in one sense *is* a London paper,
albeit not a local focused one. Do you think any of the national papers
would have given anything like even proporional coverage to a hypothetical
Mayoral election in, say, Birmingham, Manchester or Liverpool?

One thing the Standard does seem to have a monopoly on, and which I
have been very aware of as someone who doesn't buy newspapers, is
those fake handwritten boards on every street corner proclaiming
"Boris Does a Thing" every single day.

I'm sure that must have an effect.