Belfast Bikes

mark206000

I actually emailed them about if they were going to be expanded further out from the city centre:

The scheme is currently in phase one, there may be plans for phase two that will expand the scheme further away from the city centre, that is currently on hold to see how the scheme progresses from the launch date.

almillar

guiriman - I don't know the numbers, and presumably neither do you. Coca-Cola are sponsoring it, so I don't know how much it actually costs the Council, and you. It's not designed to serve a population as such, but the 'city centre'. I could argue that it will help keep shops open, they'll pay their rates, and that would go towards paying for the bikes, instead of you paying.
I'll bet having moved councils you're taking on far bigger things to subsidise, like the Zoo for example!
Expansion - yes they've said from the start it's day one. Hard to believe they don't go out as far as Queens for example.

guiriman

almillar wrote: »

guiriman - I don't know the numbers, and presumably neither do you.

Not well enough in my head to be confident to quote them, but you can find them here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-32251982

"A sponsorship deal will provide £300,000 over three years, while the council will cover the operating costs of £400,000 per year."

So £400k annually cost to the ratepayers. You can make the argument about the shops, but personally I think it's hard one to make given how far out the bikes go. Ok, the Zoo costs £1.5m to run annually but that's not an additional, new expense now whereas the Belfast Bikes are. £20 a year seems ridiculously cheap, I can't see them having much less take up if the cost were, say, £50.

almillar

I wouldn't have paid £50 per year, but I did pay £20. So that's one less they would have had!
So they get £300,000 over 3 years, say £100K per year. And put out £400,000 per year. That means they're putting out £300,000 per year rather than £400,000, at least for the 1st 3 years.
And I assume the payments go against this, reducing it.
£20 is a good deal, but the short term stuff isn't as good value, and 'more per use', so they'll get more out of that.
I'll maybe go a bit far here, but let's look at the big picture. More transport options will allow people to move more freely around the city centre - they might spend more - more tax money. Those people might not be in their car, reducing traffic, or might free up a seat on a train or bus. For the same reasons pollution will go down. People will be healthier and cost the Health Service less. I assume that some people are being employed by this scheme.
Those are purely financial arguments. I'm sure you've got Council facilities near you that everyone else subsidises, and of course, you can use away at the bikes when you're in the city centre, just like everyone else...

guiriman

All very valid points, I genuinely hope that this is how it works out. I've no idea how much this specific scheme will really cost me, but I'm sure it's no more than £1 a year so it's not something I'll be losing sleep over