The Problems Facing Motor-coach-Owners.
Page 1
Page 2
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE difficulty that must bo faced when the motorcoach owners from all parts of the country meet to-day (Tuesday) at Nottingham, at the instance' of the Commercial Motor Users Association, willbe to secure unanimity. Opinions differ -on almost every one of the issues which will be raised, and it has been with the hope of clearing the air and of saving the time of the meeting that, we have gathered the opinions of some of the leading coach owners upon certain pertinent questions and have given publicity to them in the columns of this issue.
Even on the suggestions for licensing reform, which have emanated from the C.M.U.A., there is divergence, but, reading between the lines of the communications which have reached us, we imagine that those who raise objections to-the reforms are mainly disturbed over matters of detail, foreseeing very Clearly that, unless each reform be carefully worked 'out, one evil may simply give Place to another.
• For instance, it is contended that the door would be opened to, abuse by the possibility of transferring a licence from any vehicle laid up to any unlicensed substitute vehicle. Of course, it would be necessary to provide the most Complete safeguards and to realize that the private car owner will ask for the same kind of concession. Many a private owner, insures the whole of his cars with the proviso that there shall be no more than a certain number in use at.any one time. This, as 'a basis of taxation, was mentioned when the present scale was being drawn up for inclusion in the Finance Bill of 1920, but it was never strongly supported nor advanced. It could now form a basis for discussion. • . Even the proposal that one-day licences should be issued does not receive general approval amongst our correspondents,. the argument being advanced that one-day licensing would open the way for the " pirate," who would come in on, busy days. But the concession, if given, should be subjectto very severe limitations, although even then it would be difficult for a licensing authority to exclude the vehicle Proprietor who .merely came on the roads during peak periods. It might he contended that his services were then really needed by the public.
Educate the Inexperienced Coach Owner.
IF UNANIMITY on any one subject can be secured amongst proprietors of motor coaches, it will be upon the need for the formulation of a scheme for the stabilization of se,ales of minimum rates, suitable for each and every district, with the creation of
guarantees and tile enforcement of penalties for any breach.
That such a scheme can be made to apply generally throughout the country would not be possible, and it would be foolish to attempt it. Conditions differ materially according to locality, climate, and class of inhabitant or visitor. In the south-west coaches can be run virtually all the year round and overhead charges can be spread over the greater part of the year. In the north these charges must be spread over three months' trade.
Admitting, therefore, the need for agreement amongst coach owners grouped into districts upon the matter of rates operating in those districts, the question arises as to the means of making such agreements effective and for keeping the rate cutter out of the market. It is not as if it were a ease of an endof-the-season cut in fares by a coach proprietor who wishes to energize flagging business and is content to work at a small profit rather than to put his vehicle away for the winter and to dismiss his staff. The same conditions would apply to one and all, and the adoption of such a policy should not, necessarily, entail a loss. The difficulty arises, out of the fact that coach owners, in many instances, do not know what it costs to run a vehicle, all too little regard being paid to the need for providing for depreciation, interest on capital, insurance, remuneration to principals, and other overhead charges. On running costs' alone, a 40-mile trip at a fare of 2s. 6d. seems fairly satisfactory, and the unversed coach proprietor thinks he is clever in undercutting his competitors by announcing such a trip and filling hie coach at such a fare. But a qualified accountant would know better and would be able to show that the day of reckoning was only being deferred. This rather serves to suggest a remedy. Let every coach owner be brought into the fold and then be instructed upon costs and costing at regular and frequent gatherings of the members. Let them be made to realize that something out of every hiring contract must be set aside to provide for maintenance and ultimate replacement. Only sound commonsense and the survival of the fittest will serve to stabilize rates and to set the coach industry upon firm foundations. _