Yep, Liverpool to London trains are crammed and yet Liverpool is the one major city not been given a direct link to London under the governments HS2 plans. That's what is happening.

Awayo! Are you still there?

Well?

BTW. HS2. Does that include Birmingham and Leeds as well or is that soley aimed at Manchester? Feel free.

Yep, Liverpool to London trains are crammed and yet Liverpool is the one major city not been given a direct link to London under the governments HS2 plans. That's what is happening.

and the COMMERCIAL companies that are bidding for the WCML look like they want to maintain 3tph on the Manchester line and only 1tph on the Liverpool line.

Now, why when COMMERCIAL companies have the choice are they CHOSING to go with that service awayo :lol: ?

Some usual blinkered bull shit no doubt.

Yep, Liverpool to London trains are crammed and yet Liverpool is the one major city not been given a direct link to London under the governments HS2 plans. That's what is happening.

But is that Manchester's fault? Is it the fault or Birmingham or Leeds either?

Your argument is with Central Government. Take it to No10.

are you there awayo ?

Going to explain why the leaked WCML bids included 3tph to Manc and only 1tph to Liverpool?

Why would a commercial company do that?

The state that sets the timetables on the WCL, not the operators. The operators are bidding to provide the service the government wants them to.

But is that Manchester's fault? Is it the fault or Birmingham or Leeds either?

Your argument is with Central Government. Take it to No10.

or have a think about why that situation may occur.

There are clues out there. WCML bidders for example are not rushing to increase the Liverpool - Euston frequencies - far from it.

Look at the multiple statistics that are around relating to the local economies and what future growth is expected.

Put it all together and the answer is clear.

However, put your blinkers on, ignore reality and pretending there is some huge conspiracy is the norm for many of the scouers on here.

The state that sets the timetables on the WCL, not the operators.

not true.

The WCML bids have to maximise revnue and have the freedom to adjust frequncies.

Try again.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2011/05/27/liverpool-council-on-collision-course-with-virgins-trains-over-london-service-100252-28772929/

So then awayo - why on earth would Virgin - or whoever (as is rumoured all bids are the same) - what to operate 47 trains per day to Manchester and just 17 to Liverpool.

Commercial companies making commercial decisions :lol:

Has it just moved from the 2nd City Thread?

Perhaps I need to post another video?

come on awayo - why are COMMERCIAL companies chosing to put on three times as many trains to Manchester as Liverpool?

Is it not really obvious why a COMMERCIAL company would make such a choice?

Has it just moved from the 2nd City Thread?

Perhaps I need to post another video?

Awayo has done one.

His blinkered world has been shown up to be built on bull shit yet again so he'll do his usual disappearing act.

No doubt to return with the same chip on his shoulder at a later date.

People take about drivers.

How do people get from London (BBC) to Mediacity.

Drive. No.
Coach. No.
Plane. Possible.
Train. Yes.

Euston>Piccadilly>Metrolink>Mediacity.

Time for a cup of coffee and a piece of shortbread.

People take about drivers.

How do people get from London (BBC) to Mediacity.

Drive. No.
Coach. No.
Plane. Possible.
Train. Yes.

Euston>Piccadilly>Metrolink>Mediacity.

Time for a cup of coffee and a piece of shortbread.


Do you reckon at the back of awayo's mind he realises what he comes out with is a head of cr@p or is he really THAT blinkered?

come on awayo - why are COMMERCIAL companies chosing to put on three times as many trains to Manchester as Liverpool?

Is it not really obvious why a COMMERCIAL company would make such a choice?

They aren't. The power lies with Network Rail. And look where they have a massive, state-gifted office. Liverpool is lucky to have one an hour in these circumstances. Eventually they will attempt to get Liverpool cut off entirely, no matter the demand. Like most things it comes down to power. A gang of bigots in a nasty town have been given power, in transport, in the media, in government, etc., etc., by their patrons in Whitehall and the consequences are predictable. Celebrate it, don't deny it. It's all you have after all.

Arf - you have not even read the article that I provided a link to have you?

Have a read. Educate yourself.

Arf - you have not even read the article that I provided a link to have you?

Have a read. Educate yourself.

Oh, I read the article. I'll sum up, Liverpool trains are crammed, and crammed because of their low frequencies. Liverpool city council leader, Big Joe notices this and energetic politico as he is has a word with the operating company. However, as a clued up commentator notes in the comments below:

"Network Rail is the bogeyman here. It has effectively stripped Liverpool of national rail services and keeps saying that there isn't enough capacity on the WCML for an extra hourly service to Liverpool - even though capacity was found for an hourly service to Chester, and an hourly service to Preston that is often half empty.

Good on Joe for raising the issue but he needs to make sure that he has the right target in his sights. Working with Virgin to put pressure on Network Rail is certainly worth a shot."

Quite.

So why on earth are these COMMERCIAL companies not all over the media, all clamouring for 3tph to Liverpool then?

Where is this evdience that Liverpool trains are any busier than any of the other routes.

It doesn't exist, other in your very blinkered view of the world :lol:

Is the conspiracy picking on Liverpool again? ;)

oh - you have also not explained why the independent, COMMERCIAL, consultancy companies also alway include Manchester in HS2 but not Liverpool. :lol:
Funny how all these COMMERCIAL companies are more interested in putting down Liverpool than making a profit.

"LinnetLane" nails it pretty well commenting another on another article:

"Extra capacity doesn't address the lack of frequency.

Virgin should be putting pressure on Network Rail to allow it to run more trains to Liverpool.

Network Rail recently prevented London Midland running a stopping service from Euston that would go via Stoke (currently there aren't any trains from Liverpool to Stoke) but Network Rail refused.

Network Rail is the problem and Joe Anderson needs to be putting pressure on this organisation to restore the services it has removed from Liverpool.

Currently there aren't any direct rail services between Liverpool and anywhere in Wales, Scotland, the West Country or southern England apart from London.

Network Rail appears to be doing all it can to provide Manchester airport with direct links to the rest of the country - it's a pity that it doesn't afford Liverpool the same connectivity. Currently Manchester airport railway station handles a million fewer passengers a year than James Street! Recently £15 million was spent providing it with an extra platform. Meanwhile Liverpool Central despite handling almost 20 million passengers a year struggles to get any money spent on it."

With the routes being set by hate-filled mill town bigots in Network Rail's massive offices in Manchester, it is a joy that Liverpool has any services left to anywhere. They'll see to it eventually.

Locally however, because it is in local control Merseyrail goes from strength to strength. If the Manchester Labour northwest dream of regionalised transport had come to pass, the fuckers would have tried to kill that as well. It is what they do.

They aren't. The power lies with Network Rail. And look where they have a massive, state-gifted office. Liverpool is lucky to have one an hour in these circumstances. Eventually they will attempt to get Liverpool cut off entirely, no matter the demand. Like most things it comes down to power. A gang of bigots in a nasty town have been given power, in transport, in the media, in government, etc., etc., by their patrons in Whitehall and the consequences are predictable. Celebrate it, don't deny it. It's all you have after all.

Deary me.

gZFbyEKBYNY

You with the sad eyes
don't be discouraged
oh I realize
it's hard to take courage
in a world full of people
you can lose sight of it all
and the darkness inside you
can make you feel so small

Just goes to prove there are a load of blinkered scousers.

Is the conspiracy picking on Liverpool again? ;)Awayo's paranoia is a typical example of the Scouse using a "them-and-us" collective victim complex to build and affirm the Scouse identity. Awayo affirms his "Scousehood" to himself (an important aspect of his personal identity), and also signals his Scousehood to other members of the Scouse tribe.

Major fail in that I'm not a scouser.

From the tender documents...
http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/intercity-west-coast-franchise/draft-invitation-to-tender-attachment-g.pdf

when the later trains are rammed so an extra 18:57 service to Manchester had to be put on Page 38.

How odd.

One more interesting point.

We now have a Con/Lib Government. HS2 still hasn't been changed and (Gtr) Manchester still goes from strength to strength.

Let me take you back to 1996 and the IRA bomb, when the Labour city leaders of Manchester worked with Michael Heseltine and the Conservative party to rebuild the city centre.


It started long before 'New Labour'.(Awayo)

Get a grip fella.

Major fail in that I'm not a scouser.How come? Did you miss out on some boyhood initiation rite? Do you not have a season ticket at the Kop? Have you never stolen any wheels? Did you shave your moustache or Scousefro? Did you do the unthinkable... and get a job? Why do you not qualify as a true Scouse?? :dunno:

I tell you what. http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/intercity-west-coast-franchise/draft-invitation-to-tender-attachment-g.pdf is an excellent document for blowing awayo's blinkered view of the world out of the window.

Check out the responses from the interested parties half way through.

Soe are great, I will pick out page 46 and London Travel watch (no doubt scouser hating, Whitehall / Manc loving) saying that they want the 3tph to Manchester maintained. Nothing about wanting the Liverpool frequency increasing to 3tph. How very odd.

In fact awayo - I challenge you to find a SINGLE response by ANY interested party - be they state, private, commerical or whoever - they are ALL in there - calling for Liverpool to have the same frequency as Manchester on the WCML services.

You won't.

You don't even realise why.

In fact, as far as I can tell, even on page 49 - Merseytravels submission to the ITT does not talk about an increase in frequncies.

Awayo - take some time out. Have a read. Take your blinkered off, the world is much richer and more interesting when you don't have them on.

http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/intercity-west-coast-franchise/draft-invitation-to-tender-attachment-g.pdf

Right, back to work now.

Oh yes.

Strathclyde are wanting better connections to Manchester.

But not Liverpool.

Awayo - your arguement is lying battered on the floor.

Over 25% of Metrolink passengers came from car users - very high for any public transport - higher than Merseyrail.

It would be cheaper to close down Merseyrail and get every passenger in a tax funded taxi - that is the level of state subsidy that Merseyside gets above and beyond everywhere else - yet Awayo ignores this.

If Metrolink had never happened Salford Quays would never have happened - it is great for regeneration. I cannot think of anywhere on Merseyrail that has benefited through similar regeneration.

So not only does Metrolink get more people out of their care and stimulate the local economy but it also operates at a profit enabling it's future expansion.

Unlike Merseyrail which is totally dependant upon state funding.




Like you've ignored the cost of a taxi fare through the tunnels?

How come? Did you miss out on some boyhood initiation rite? Do you not have a season ticket at the Kop? Have you never stolen any wheels? Did you shave your moustache or Scousefro? Did you do the unthinkable... and get a job? Why do you not qualify as a true Scouse?? :dunno:

TBF, just like you he hates Manchester.

I did laugh though Monkey.(which is worrying)

Not me you came up with that stat.

What is it.

£100m / year subsidy.
£15m / year 'operating profit'

leaves £85m / loss.

Around 30m / year journeys works out at near a £3 subsidy per journey. Add on the original fare to that £3 (about £2) and you get the real cost per journey - about £5 is how much is costs Merseyrail to carry one person for one journey. £10 for a return journey.

The stat comes from...

http://www.lrta.org/ however they seem to have removed the link to Liverpools pages so I may struggle to find it.

I reckon they've removed it because it's a load of shite.

Compare the above figures to Metrolink which makes an operating profit of about £4m / year and recieved NO subsidy.

I tell you what. http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/intercity-west-coast-franchise/draft-invitation-to-tender-attachment-g.pdf is an excellent document for blowing awayo's blinkered view of the world out of the window.

Check out the responses from the interested parties half way through.

Soe are great, I will pick out page 46 and London Travel watch (no doubt scouser hating, Whitehall / Manc loving) saying that they want the 3tph to Manchester maintained. Nothing about wanting the Liverpool frequency increasing to 3tph. How very odd.

In fact awayo - I challenge you to find a SINGLE response by ANY interested party - be they state, private, commerical or whoever - they are ALL in there - calling for Liverpool to have the same frequency as Manchester on the WCML services.

You won't.

You don't even realise why.

It is obvious though, Manchester is this `small mill-town of 450,000' people to the folks on SSC. The reality is that it is massively dominant and expanding at a faster rate than ever before. Virtuous cycle.

We have a great airport, metrolink system and motorway network with a fantastic diversfield economy; media, banking, insurance, chemicals and pharma.

Only the nutters on here are unaware of the massive Astra Zeneca US style campus is Alderley Edge and the Barclays and RBS presence in Cheshire and town. Huge multi-nationals with huge numbers employed in high paying sectors.

It is all just bloody marvellous yet we have people on here bitching about their massively money draining transport scheme saying it is this and that compared with the profitable Metrolink.

The casino document should have been a real eye-opener...it stated that Manchester was far and away the 2nd most important economic centre in the UK.
I have even had scousers claiming that Liverpool has as many people within 60mins as Manchester. Freakin sensational thinking there when half the catchment is sea....half our catchment is Sheffield and the Potteries. Stoke is on the end of a Manchester commuter line-as it is with Brum.

Nah, let's just wait a few weeks for the new Metro line to open and then Oldham and then Ashton and then the airport and then Stockport. When Bolton joins and Leigh maybe then they will be quiet?

If not then BBC Sport, BBC 2 (For surely it is), Children's BBC brainwashing the UK and further afield (BBC America etc) will showcase Manchester.

That is if City and United winning the League every year does not help.

Happy, happy days.

I reckon they've removed it because it's a load of shite.

or because Merseytram ain't happening could be the more logical, non conspiracy theory.

LRTA, 38 Wolseley Road, SALE M33 7AU UK

Is that your house Kurt? :lol:

Nope. Not far at all from where i live though.

TBF, just like you he hates Manchester.

I did laugh though Monkey.(which is worrying)

No, Manchester is just an ugly Lancashire town. Like Preston. The UK state however, which gives London its dominant position, and hands a box to the Chirac-statured Manchester so it stands a little higher than other places that have been cut off at the knees, I'm not too keen on that.

Wow...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/2849849/Merseyrail-franchise-goes-Dutch.html

Ned Rail/Serco said the concession would generate revenues of £3.6 billion over the period, of which about 65pc is subsidy.

Talk about state subsidy - much more than I suggested. You are only paying one third of the price it costs to transport you around on Merseyrail.

and some of you think Manchester gets unfair help from government :lol:

or because Merseytram ain't happening could be the more logical, non conspiracy theory.


Who mentioned a conspiracy? It's a load of shite down to ignorance.

No, Manchester is just an ugly Lancashire town. Like Preston. The UK state however, which gives London its dominant position, and hands a box to the Chirac-statured Manchester so it stands a little higher than other places that have been cut off at the knees, I'm not too keen on that.

which is why the government pays 2 thirds of the fare for people to travel on Merseyrail yet NOTHING to subsidise those in Manchester on the Metrolink.

Odd how this conspiracy is working :lol:

How many other Train operators get a subsidy?

Who mentioned a conspiracy? It's a load of shite down to ignorance.

Thankfully, another scouser who realises Awayo talks a load of shite which is down to ignorance.

How many other Train operators get a subsidy?

Metrolink get NO subsidy.

it was Awayo going on about how great Merseyrail in in comparison to Metrolink.

I'm just pointing out his great rail system requires HUGE government subsidy - something he seems to think doesn't exist in Liverpool.

Put it like this.

If Merseyrail did not require the massive subsidy it does - in 15 years the subsidy money could have paid for a whole Manchester Metrolink and the subsidies would end.

After 16 years you would be making money.

That about sums it up. Liverpool continually taking more and more money, other places slowly becoming less and less dependent upon subsidy as they move to profitable systems.

Metrolink get NO subsidy.

it was Awayo going on about how great Merseyrail in in comparison to Metrolink.

I'm just pointing out his great rail system requires HUGE government subsidy - something he seems to think doesn't exist in Liverpool.



How many other train operators are subsidised ?

How many other train operators are subsidised ?

Why?

Awayo was specifically having a go at Metrolink.

Why are you suddenly interested in comparing Merseyrail to somewhere other than Manchester Metrolink now?

What, does Liverpool actually get more subsidy here than Manchester? Whatever next?

Likewise, you're moaning at Merseyrail, telling tall tales about taxis.

Let's put it into context. How many other train operators are subsidised ?

:lol:
Manchester enters the 21st century by building a 19th century transport system, and these fellas get more excited about that than anything else in their lives.

PS
I used to go to Hyde (knew a girl there.) It didn't feel like I was in Manchester what with the Pennines looming large and cobbled streets. Is that hospital still in Ashton, the one they called the slaughterhouse?

No.

I am comparing Metrolink to Merseyrail. Just like Awayo was.

Lets not change the subject because a fellow scouser has been shown to be blinkered as hell and cannot see the wood from the trees.

Fact is Metrolink receives ZERO subsidy. Merseyrail gets a fucking massive subsidy of £100m / year.

:lol:
Manchester enters the 21st century by building a 19th century transport system, and these fellas get more excited about that than anything else in their lives.

PS
I used to go to Hyde (knew a girl there.) It didn't feel like I was in Manchester what with the Pennines looming large and cobbled streets. Is that hospital still in Ashton, the one they called the slaughterhouse?

Yep, along with other backward looking cities like Dubai :lol:

http://flashydubai.com/al-sufouh-is-going-to-be-dubais-first-tram-project/

Children's BBC brainwashing the UK and further afield (BBC America etc) will showcase Manchester.Only for those who choose to subscribe to BBC America. All cable and satellite providers charge a fee for this specialty channel. Also, Most Americans find foreign TV news broadcasts as having a socialist agenda which is anti American. Same with sports channels, not all offer a soccer package.:)

Awayo - still looking for an example of any organisation from anywhere in the country calling for the Euston to Liverpool frequency to equal the Euston to Manchester frequency in the ITT consultation document?

Good luck. You'll need it.

Don't forget to explain why you failed to find any such reference though. There must be some reason as you cannot blame Network Rail or any state agency for that :lol:

No, Manchester is just an ugly Lancashire town. Like Preston. The UK state however, which gives London its dominant position, and hands a box to the Chirac-statured Manchester so it stands a little higher than other places that have been cut off at the knees, I'm not too keen on that.

Like I said, he just hates Manchester, regardless of how he puts it.

Isn't it amazing though, out of all the.........(I'll let Awayo fill that in) given to Manchester, he never mentions what they are.

Awayo.

Do you also hate Birmingham and Leeds for getting HSR as well?

Like I said, he just hates Manchester, regardless of how he puts it.

Isn't it amazing though, out of all the.........(I'll let Awayo fill that in) given to Manchester, he never mentions what they are.

Awayo.

Do you also hate Birmingham and Leeds for getting HSR as well?

He has VERY green eyes.

His way of rationalising the world and explaining away what has happened during his lifetime is to dream that somehow everything positive in Manchester was down to external forced yet everything negative is down to internal forces.

The EXACT opposite of all things Liverpool.

Likewise, you're moaning at Merseyrail, telling tall tales about taxis.

Let's put it into context. How many other train operators are subsidised ?

That is relevant. It would probably be only Metrolink out of all the UK regional transit systems making money..hence the huge expansion despite saying F'off to the congestion charge days earlier (Manchester forum members [but not me!!] hang your heads in shame for not believing).

UK Plc 2011. Structural failure at almost every level. Scary shit.

If we cannot even build decent mass transit, erm when we already had the lines and tarmaced over them, then God help us.

Bottom of the class.

Awayo - not letting you get away.

Still waiting for your examples of people in the ITT consultancy asking for the same service to Liverpool as to Manchester.

If you cannot find any examples and you won't be able to, then you need to explain why private and public sectors alike are BOTH calling for better rail links between London and Manchester than London and Liverpool.

Why on earth do you (and yoshef) think that could possibly be the case?

:lol:
Manchester enters the 21st century by building a 19th century transport system, and these fellas get more excited about that than anything else in their lives.

PS
I used to go to Hyde (knew a girl there.) It didn't feel like I was in Manchester what with the Pennines looming large and cobbled streets. Is that hospital still in Ashton, the one they called the slaughterhouse?

The Cavalry has arrived.

East.

Update on the (Gtr) Manchester campaign please? Have you liberated any boroughs yet? (the road to Tripoli is a long one)

One of the many benefits of a '19th century transport system'.http://www.placenorthwest.co.uk/news/archive/9277-tfgm-framework-could-reach-80m.html(one that Liverpool wanted as well) With many more to come up to 2016 and beyond.

BTW. Awayo has stolen your crown for 24 hours. You can have it back tomorrow though.

East - are you accepting now, having seen the TfGM accounts leaflet that we all got in GM, how the scheme is being funded or do you think the AGMA (laterly GM CA) and TfGM documents that are all online are just full of lies? :lol:

No matter how much evidence there is in front of some of them they'll insist black really is white.

He's off again. Cue the tirade. Lost it. :lol:

No Awayo, it isn't replacing bus journeys. It's integrating with bus journeys.(no need to boast)



Really?

So the bus network has been recast to feed into the rail network or provide for the journeys it doesn't has it?

Or is it still just a load of private companies doing their own thing, which by and large is to treat each route as a stand alone entity competing with other people's routes and rail lines alike?

Hmm.

The smartcard in itself does not make an integrated public transport system you know. In fact, with the competition commission investigation into the bus industry, its pretty much the least operators can get away with to join these schemes where they are proposed.

....

Really?

So the bus network has been recast to feed into the rail network or provide for the journeys it doesn't has it?

Or is it still just a load of private companies doing their own thing, which by and large is to treat each route as a stand alone entity competing with other people's routes and rail lines alike?

Hmm.

The smartcard in itself does not make an integrated public transport system you know. In fact, with the competition commission investigation into the bus industry, its pretty much the least operators can get away with to join these schemes where they are proposed.

The devil is in the detail. Don't worry old chap.

It isn't round the corner just yet. Discussions are on-going across the board and plans will be put in place as and when.

Just be patient and you will see. Either that or keep on following the Manchester Forum transport threads.

So the general consensus is that 7 of the 10 boroughs of (Gtr) Manchester are........

The other 3 are still (perceived as) seperate........

City of Manchester.
Oldham.
Stockport.
Tameside.
Trafford.
Salford.
Bury.


Bolton.
Rochdale.
Wigan.

?

:lol:

and in the real world, even ignoring the individual towns with their own identity, anything outside the m60 would be really pushing it to be considered manchester.

:lol:

and in the real world, even ignoring the individual towns with their own identity, anything outside the m60 would be really pushing it to be considered manchester.

Wiggs is back.

http://www.gifflix.com/files/f7c7ac72abbc.gif

How come you never returned to the Greater Manchester "crime capital of the north" ‎thread?

Quick there's loads of new crime stories on today's MEN website. You'll be like a pig in s***. Or is that like a sheep in the field?

Wiggs I would, but I can't be bothered. Not going through it all again. Keep up fella.

Cough! I could say the same about Lee.... SHUT UP JRB! Don't start Wiggs off again. God bless him.

Why do so many people use them then? Compared to the far superior Merseyrail?

because 1) they've tragically replaced fast rail routes into manchester from the seperate towns (with slower services incidently) so people have less choice now, and 2) they're better than buses in terms of pleasentness, even if they exactly replicate bus routes and so dont actually offer an additional layer of transport.

Merseyrail is great in my opinion, especially considering it manages to carry over 100,000 passengers a day as an additional differnt type of transport on top of the buses, whereas metrolink with 56,000 passengers a day is directly replacing train routes whilst merely offering a more pleasent mirroring of bus routes as opposed to a different type of transport.

East - are you accepting now, having seen the TfGM accounts leaflet that we all got in GM, how the scheme is being funded or do you think the AGMA (laterly GM CA) and TfGM documents that are all online are just full of lies? :lol:

No matter how much evidence there is in front of some of them they'll insist black really is white.

With Council Tax frozen where does the 2% increase in the transport levy come from, i.e. what area/s of expenditure is/are suffering a reduction in order to compensate?

By the way a "combined" authority isn't a "unified" authority.

Over 25% of Metrolink passengers came from car users - very high for any public transport -

so 75% came from the train or bus that metrolink 'replaced' lol

Or is that like a sheep in the field?I believe the saying is; "As happy as a Manc in a sheep".:rofl:

Karl Pilkington made me say it!:lol:

because 1) they've tragically replaced fast rail routes into manchester from the seperate towns (with slower services incidently) so people have less choice now, and 2) they're better than buses in terms of pleasentness, even if they exactly replicate bus routes and so dont actually offer an additional layer of transport.

Merseyrail is great in my opinion, especially considering it manages to carry over 100,000 passengers a day as an additional differnt type of transport on top of the buses, whereas metrolink with 56,000 passengers a day is directly replacing train routes whilst merely offering a more pleasent mirroring of bus routes as opposed to a different type of transport.

So according to your logic, Metrolink

is directly replacing train routes

If that's the case, thank God the Government pulled the funding for Leeds Supertram. What a waste of money that would have been.

Unless it would have been different in someway?

TBH you can all say what you want about Metrolink and the extension. If something similar was being built in your cities the post and view counts on those threads would be through the roof.

F***ing hypocrites.(sorry for swearing)

PS. In the meantime we'll just be happy with the economic benefits Metrolink is providing now and into the future.

Thanks. :) (I finally used it)

so 75% came from the train or bus that metrolink 'replaced' lol

It's obvious but.

And as the Metrolink network expands across the city, more and more people will........

I think Metrolinks great, don't know anything about the stats or figues, I just like trams.

Unless it would have been different in some way?



yes, the proposal didnt replace the 7 suburban rail routes going into leeds, which probably explains why it was more expensive comparatively, being all new line. The rail routes metrolink replace have actually reduced capacity and increased travel times due to the much much smaller carriages despite increased frequency.

yes, the proposal didnt replace the 7 suburban rail routes going into leeds, which probably explains why it was more expensive comparatively, being all new line. The rail routes metrolink replace have actually reduced capacity and increased travel times due to the much much smaller carriages despite increased frequency.

It depends how you look at it Wiggs.

Metrolink isn't there to replace, it's there to work alongside. It's an alternative. One that wasn't there before.

If people wish to use the existing and new Metrolink routes to the detriment of the old rail routes, so be it. The choice is there.

TBH I'm not an expert on the new routes. The other guys on the Metrolink threads are well clued up on it.

However, as far as I know, non of the new routes under constuction or planned go along or beside any rail routes. Most if not all are new Metrolink routes and are being constructed throughout the city and away from rail routes.(I stand corrected)


I'm sure the Fly or Metrolink will tell you.

:lol:

and in the real world, even ignoring the individual towns with their own identity, anything outside the m60 would be really pushing it to be considered manchester.

Really?

So you do not consider Sharston, Wythenshawe and Northern Moor to be in Manchester?

You do consider some of the houses immediately inside the M60 to be in Manchester, but their neighbours, about 50m away under a bridge to not be in Manchester? Why is that? Does that 50m really make that much of a difference to how those people live their lives? Really?

so 75% came from the train or bus that metrolink 'replaced' lol

Er, yes!

What is your point. This is mass transit and you are now officially an idiot to commute from Bury or Alty in Manchester by car and points inbetween.

I cannot wait for Metrolink into East Didsbury, I will be utilizing park and ride massively.

There will be an explosion of passenger numbers, especially on match days to OT and now Man City. In addition concert goers to the UK's favourite concert venue can park at a radial point and commute in and not pollute the city centre with traffic.

Once the 2nd city crossing is complete we can pedestrianise large areas of central Manchester.

This will have a massive environmental impact on Manchester and will leave us galloping far away from Leeds and other backstabbing, lazy, whining cities/councillors.

We look to Europe for our inspiration, God knows where Leeds is looking, Hull?

so 75% came from the train or bus that metrolink 'replaced' lol

Yep, the figure will be MUCH higher that 75% for any bus option that is chosen in Leeds.

I take it you are not able to provide any examples of any better modal shifts on any other UK system :lol:

yes, the proposal didnt replace the 7 suburban rail routes going into leeds, which probably explains why it was more expensive comparatively, being all new line. The rail routes metrolink replace have actually reduced capacity and increased travel times due to the much much smaller carriages despite increased frequency.

It explains why the Leeds system never got of the drawing board and now Metrolink is expanding all over the place.

Replacing old worn out tracks and going to new places.

The passenger numbers more than doubled on the Alty and Bury line with the advent of Metrolink.

So, along with the Alty, Bury and Rochdale line we are also getting the new lines to the airport (15km long), Ashton (10km long), Didsbury (6km long) and probably Salford Red stadium (about 10km long).

And you are not jealous at all are you wiggles :lol:

yes, the proposal didnt replace the 7 suburban rail routes going into leeds, which probably explains why it was more expensive comparatively, being all new line. The rail routes metrolink replace have actually reduced capacity and increased travel times due to the much much smaller carriages despite increased frequency.

Why do you think passenger numbers more than doubled?

Kurt, if cheaper, non-subsidised transport, is better

Why not use unemployed Mancs to ferry people around Greater Manchester on rickshaws? That would be even cheaper, and using Kurt-logic, a 'better' system.

Why continually ignore that rule when you're talking about HS2? Why not include a Metrolink line to London?

So, we are getting about 100 stops, about 100 trams and about 100km of track.

Wiggles - you are not jealous at all are you?

You don't think it would seriously improve Leeds to have such an extensive network do you?

http://i977.photobucket.com/albums/ae259/Nymanic/Metrolink%20-%20December%202009%20onwards/IMG_0867.jpg

Just think if you could more than double the passengers on the Leeds railway lines as well - look at the Leeds subforum about how giddy people get about a new entrance to a train station or the POSSIBILITY of a SINGLE new train station opening.

:lol:

Of course you would not love a Metrolink in Leeds. Of course not.

Kurt, if cheaper, non-subsidised transport, is better

Why not use unemployed Mancs to ferry people around Greater Manchester on rickshaws? That would be even cheaper, and using Kurt-logic, a 'better' system.

Why continually ignore that rule when you're talking about HS2? Why not include a Metrolink line to London?



I think you need to take them up with Awayo. He is the one that always goes on about Manchester getting unfair subsidy. Whenever this is challenged - as it is with Metrolink getting ZERO subsidy compared to the £100m for Merseytravel he disappears and has no answer. Maybe you want to talk to him about why he is so hung up on government spending more money in one place than another.

It is not me with the blinkers on that thinks one area is favoured over another - I simply provide evidence to the contary that Awayo cannot dispute.

I think Metrolinks great, don't know anything about the stats or figues, I just like trams.


I like the trams around the city centre, not sure they'd be suitable in the Mersey road tunnels at rush hour though?

With Council Tax frozen where does the 2% increase in the transport levy come from, i.e. what area/s of expenditure is/are suffering a reduction in order to compensate?

By the way a "combined" authority isn't a "unified" authority.

Do you have access to the interent?

If so, have a look at each of the councils web sites. They provide a lot of detail about how they spend there money there.

I'd suggest it's probably quite complex but I am sure someone with such an open mind as yourself with such intelligence will be able to work it out or are you going to pretent that the TfGM leaflet is incorrect and they are not getting the extra levy :lol:

I think you need to take them up with Awayo. He is the one that always goes on about Manchester getting unfair subsidy. Whenever this is challenged - as it is with Metrolink getting ZERO subsidy compared to the £100m for Merseytravel he disappears and has no answer. Maybe you want to talk to him about why he is so hung up on government spending more money in one place than another.

It is not me with the blinkers on that thinks one area is favoured over another - I simply provide evidence to the contary that Awayo cannot dispute.



I thought his claim was that Merseyrail was a better sytem?

I thought his claim was that Merseyrail was a better sytem?

His claim is Merseyrail is a better system and Manchester is always recieving massive unfair state subsidy.

If this were the case Merseyrail would receive no subsidy and the fares would treble and Metrolink would receive huge subsidy ala Merseyrail and fare would tumble.

Thing is, he cannot explain why that is not the case, just like you.

Like I said. If a similar light rail system was currently being built in Leeds, do you think Wiggs would questioning it?

Exactly.

Like I said. If a similar light rail system was currently being built in Leeds, do you think Wiggs would questioning it?

Exactly.

If it were being built in Liverpool, without the need for additional state funding (ala Phase 3b) then it would be a sign of the city moving forward not needing state help like London's love child of Manchester.

Thing is as it is the other way around they lash out with all sorts of crap.

Other than Metrolink, do the train operating companies serving Manchester receive subsidies ?

Other than Metrolink, do the train operating companies serving Manchester receive subsidies ?

Dunno.

The figures won't exist as they will be part of larger franchises.

Don't care anyway. Awayo's great transport system for Liverpool is totally dependant on state help. It cannot survive without it :lol:

Awayo the one that always bleats about how Liverpool gets NOTHING has a transport system that woul collapse without state funding.

Yet just up the road, the despised Manchester has a light rail system, that he thinks is shite - that takes NO subsidy whatsover.

P.S. I notice you are yet to explain why no one wants Liverpool to have the same WCML frequency as Manchester :lol: another dodge to a question you don't want to / cannot answer?

So Manc gets 100 new trams and shit loads of new stops and new track, while in Sheff we have been trying to extend our network for years. Yet every time we tried to obtain funding from the government we were turned down. Last time the council only asked for 4 new trams and we got turned down then too, and some people claim the government is not biased towards Manc, of course not.:bash:

tell me yoshef - if you looked at Merseyrail and Metrolink - which would you say was most dependant upon the state looking after it?

Which would you say the government proped up most?

However, as far as I know, non of the new routes under constuction or planned go along or beside any rail routes. .

the old ones did though, the bury line into manchester, altrincham line into manchester, and oldham line into manchester all kept the same tracks and stops and pretty much just swapped the carriages to tram carriages, directly replacing those services with a slower alternative with overall less capacity.

The new lines just mirror tried and tested bus routes.

So Manc gets 100 new trams and shit loads of new stops and new track, while in Sheff we have been trying to extend our network for years. Yet every time we tried to obtain funding from the government we were turned down. Last time the council only asked for 4 new trams and we got turned down then too, and some people claim the government is not biased towards Manc, of course not.:bash:

we're paying for it in our council taxes. The money ain't coming from London.

the old ones did though, the bury line into manchester, altrincham line into manchester, and oldham line into manchester all kept the same tracks and stops and pretty much just swapped the carriages to tram carriages, directly replacing those services with a slower alternative with overall less capacity.

The new lines just mirror tried and tested bus routes.

Yes, and in the process the passenger numbers doubled. Why do you think that is?

Could you please name a single rail based transport system anywhere in teh world that has not replaced a bus route? You cannot, because you don't know what you are talking about.

100+ stops wiggles :lol:
100+ trams wiggles :lol:
100+ km of track wiggles :lol:

you'd LOVE it to be in Leeds.

http://www.tfgm.com/corporate/facts_figures.cfm?submenuheader=3

Scroll down to Greater Manchester Transport Fund.

Loving it.

Yep, the figure will be MUCH higher that 75% for any bus option that is chosen in Leeds.

I take it you are not able to provide any examples of any better modal shifts on any other UK system :lol:

of course its massively high in modal SHIFT, as it directly replaces train routes, so those trains can no longer be used, whilst identicly mirroring bus routes stop for stop. The huge modal that is the highest of any new transport system preciesly proves my assertion - that vast swaithes of people 75% will be shifting from existing buses or replaced trains, rather than offering a new layer of additional transport. By and large, its just a switch.

P.S. I notice you are yet to explain why no one wants Liverpool to have the same WCML frequency as Manchester :lol: another dodge to a question you don't want to / cannot answer?



I don't know, I didn't even realise WCML was part of Merseyrail.

we're paying for it in our council taxes. The money ain't coming from London.

Fair enough.

of course its massively high in modal SHIFT, as it directly replaces train routes, so those trains can no longer be used, whilst identicly mirroring bus routes stop for stop. The huge modal that is the highest of any new transport system preciesly proves my assertion - that vast swaithes of people 75% will be shifting from existing buses or replaced trains, rather than offering a new layer of additional transport. By and large, its just a switch.

You don't seem to grasp that a 25% shift from cars is HUGE. Absolutely massive.

You won't find any higher in the UK.

You're talking back to front.

If you think 75% modal shift is low, have a look at other cities schemes.

I lie.

It is 35% modal shift on Metrolink.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmselect/cmtran/378/378ii.pdf

(q308).

Compared to a typical 5-6% on a new bus route.

So wiggles. If Metrolink simply replaced existing bus routes and train lines, why such a massive modal shift?

Going back.

Commonwealth Games. £120mill. Capped.

No other city was prepared to take the 2002 Commenwealth Games on due to the failure of the Edinbrugh Commomwealth Games and the Sheffield Student Games, which were financial disasters for both cities. (Glagow has learn't from Manchester. Their games will be a success, leaving a similar lasting legacy)

Metrolink. £520mill.

Originally withdrawn by New Labour and Darling, but reinstated after a city wide campaign.

(copied from you know where)

Expansion of the Metrolink network has been promoted since the 1980s, but proposals have had mixed fortunes. In 2000, a £500 million expansion of Metrolink was announced by the Government, promising extensions to Oldham, Rochdale, Ashton-under-Lyne, Wythenshawe and Manchester Airport.[27] These plans were later cancelled due to increasing costs.[28]

Phase 3 was eventually split into two more phases due to funding constraints, known as Phase 3a and Phase 3b. In December 2004 the government announced that £520 million would be authorised for Phase 3a. Phase 3a was given the go-ahead by the Department for Transport in July 2006, with a £300m funding gap expected to be met by a loan.[29] Funding for Phase 3b was tied in with the Greater Manchester Transport Innovation Fund; following the rejection of congestion charging in Manchester in a 2008 referendum, councils grouped together and agreed a way to raise the capital through loans, council tax rises and the government releasing future funding.[30] In May 2009, a revival of Phase 3 was announced, with plans to complete both phases of the "Big Bang" as part of one project, funded by national and local government

Mediacity. £200mill.

Take BBC North, our plan to move 2,300 posts into our new broadcast centre at MediaCityUK. This week I read that the project was going to cost the BBC £1bn. Shocking news indeed – if it were remotely true. The actual cost to the corporation of the project is £200m, which is the cost of relocating staff, fitting out the three buildings, and paying for the state-of-the-art digital technology we need.

The £877m you may have seen reported in the media (rounded up to that shocking but fictitious "billion") is the combined cost of the project and the running costs of the BBC's share of MediaCityUK over the next 20 years. Not only would these costs have been incurred wherever the departments were based, they would actually have been greater over the same 20-year period if the departments which are moving had stayed in London. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/feb/11/bbc-billion-pound-move-north

Super Casino. Nothing. Blocked by the unelected House of Lords. Thankfully something much bigger and more ambitious is planned by ADUG/MCC/NEM.

Any others?

So for roughly £850mill spread out over a decade, this is what Manchester has got. Value for money? Damned right it is!

wiggles -you were going to tell us about these other transport systems that have not replaced bus routes / train lines?

The ones with 35+ % modal shift?

Supertram - achieved 22% modal shift, less than a third of that of the much larger Metrolink.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199900/cmselect/cmenvtra/153/153ap32.htm

Item 13.

So come on Wiggles. Which systems have achieved higher modal shift or are you talking out of your arse like usual?

His claim is Merseyrail is a better system and Manchester is always recieving massive unfair state subsidy.Two claims there Liquid Natural Gas.:)

F****** airline strike and I now have to scramble for a seat and likely connect through ORD. Think i'll just go home.:mad2:

Bloody hansard...

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmselect/cmtran/378/37805.htm

MODAL SHIFT

11. Light rail is relatively quick; it is usually reliable and has a good ride quality. As is well documented, people will leave their cars to take the tram or metro.[11] While bus journeys in England have reduced by 14% since 1982 and, outside London, bus use has tended to fall, light rail journeys have more than tripled.[12] While this is a reflection of the fact that the number of light rail systems has increased, Transport Statistics Great Britain 2004 shows that patronage has risen on the Docklands Light Railway, the Manchester Metrolink, the Sheffield Supertram, and the Croydon Tramlink, even when the systems were not being extended.[13]

12. It is possible to use bus priority measures or bus guideways to encourage modal shift from cars. The Fastway guided bus link between Crawley and Gatwick has reportedly had passenger growth far higher than expectations.[14] New developments, such as the f-t-r, a bus which has been designed to have the tram's advantages of accessibility and capacity and which the manufacturers will only make available to authorities which implement priority measures, may increase that shift.[15] Nonetheless, they are as yet unproven. Currently, only light rail or tram can offer results like those documented in Croydon. Professor Richard Knowles, the leading researcher on the Metrolink Impact Study, told us that "The Metrolink Impact Study research identified a clear, substantial and unforecast modal shift from car to light rail of 2.6 million passengers per year."[16] Manchester Airport Group told us "Metrolink will bring the most significant step change in public transport accessibility to Manchester Airport since the opening of the heavy rail link in 1993" and that it would be hard to reduce the number of trips to the airport made by car without it.[17]

13. The pteg report suggested that "in a peak hour, a typical system operating at, say, six [trams per hour] would have resulted in c240 cars per hour removed from the road network" but that "at an overall level of service of, say, 30 [buses per hour] then c40 cars per hour would be removed from the road network."[18]


wiggles knows more about transport than professors who attend transport select committe meetings :lol:

Two claims there Liquid Natural Gas.:)

F****** airline strike and I now have to scramble for a seat and likely connect through ORD. Think i'll just go home.:mad2:

Go to Granada Studios Tour.

Sunny afternoon today. It should be great :lol:

tell me yoshef - if you looked at Merseyrail and Metrolink - which would you say was most dependant upon the state looking after it?

Which would you say the government proped up most?


Why?

Why?

because that is the discussion I was having with Awayo before you came into the discussion, trying to steer the discussion away from the obvious fact that awayo was losing out badly and being shown to be nothing more than a green eyed monster with blinkers on.

Can even Kurt comprehend Kurt's posts?

Sunny afternoon today. It should be great :lol:I know it "should be great" and it likely would be, anywhere but manchester. But what time did it stop raining this morning and what time will it start falling again this evening? You know it will, very soon. I will likely play a round of golf this afternoon. Golf is played on golf courses, you can play too, just ride the Manc trolley to Liverpool, they have lots of courses there, including race courses. :lol:

arf - he is back.

You were going to tell us why none of the contributors to the WCML ITT consultation process were asking for the Liverpool frequency to match that to Manchester.

You seemed not to have an answer and simply disappeared like you usually do when you are caught out.

I trust you have the answer now?

All those non governmant agencies and private sector representatives awayo.

not one of them requesting the same service pattern to Liverpool as to Manchester :lol:

Now why on earth would that be :lol: You cannot answer it can you?

Is there room for an open access operator to run trains to Liverpool? or is the WCML at full capacity?

What the fuck is an ITT? A quick google indicates that the bidding process is based on Network Rail (ie, the state's) Route Utilisation Strategy, which is proposing to increase the train frequency to Manchester to 4 ph. Just think, if they remove the single, crammed hourly service to Liverpool they can have five. Shouldn't have said that though. Don't want to give them ideas. The London and Manchester-based Network Rail strategy masters' dream will be for their to be no trains to Liverpool directly from London. And that won't be state favouritism either in Kurt's insane view. Remember Manchester's loopy 3 tph service from London is the result of massive state subsidy. They want even more favouritism and Network Rail Manchester team of bigots, working with their Government Office North West mates in Manchester and ex-Network Rail consultants from Manchester will surely have logic-warping excuses for that too.

10 tph, 50tph! If the state is paying, setting the agenda and serious justifications are not needed (like passenger demand for example!), why not?

I hope they bring back the Liverpool-Scotland line, which I believe they are talking of doing. The Liverpool-London lines have been ridiculously busy the times I've used them, whether they need the same amount of trains as Manchester is doubtful atm, but certainly an increase is necessary I think.

Back to Wiggles.

Some Aussies have done a study...

http://www.uitp.org/Public-Transport/organising-authorities/files/CaseStudy_OA_final1.pdf

Seem the 'best' modal shift is about 25-30% from the systems looked into.

Now, given we have a figure of 35% for Metrolink, care to explain how Metrolink is 'simply replacing bus routes?'

or were you talking out of your arse wiggles?

It explains why the Leeds system never got of the drawing board and now Metrolink is expanding all over the place.

Replacing old worn out tracks and going to new places.

exactly, its worked out cheaper than maintaining old heavy rail. It may be slower, and with less capacity, but at least its something.

The passenger numbers more than doubled on the Alty and Bury line with the advent of Metrolink.

passenger numbers have increased on existing heavy lines that haven't been converted too, largely because rail uses is increasing all over anyway, therefore it stands to reason that a rail route swapped to a tram route with the same stops will also see these similar increases.

And you are not jealous at all are you wiggles :lol:

not really..nothing to do with stuff on here really evokes feelings like "jealousy" to me like it does to a handful of Manchester forumers (the 4 or so who massively dominate the entire 500 pages of this thread). They are the ones who seem to get upset, or angered, or over joyed like one would be with a self-achievement, or whose pride gets hurt when something positive is posted about other cities like TheFly and the Glasgow debacle earlier, or the bizzare attempts at goading as LNGCats does, presumably like football teams do (i dont watch football).

Now, just Because you guys feel like that, don't assume others do. You'l find pretty much everyone else on these threads only pipe up to correct some of the laughable spew spouted by those same Manchester forumers. When someone like JRB incorrectly asserts delusional statements that bury and oldham ARE Manchester (whilst in the real world more or less anything outside the m60 is not considered Manchester, particularly so independent bustling towns like oldham and bury), its not inconceivable that some people will pipe up on here. That doesn't mean they are jealous or get upset that the greater Manchester urban area is almost as large as that of the Birmingham metro area (such a fact is hardly a revalation, and naturally greater infrastructure will exist), people are actually piping up because they are correcting people who spew utter tripe and so blindly believe themselves.

You'll find most discussions in the city talk thread strangely revolve around JRB, you, and TheFly, and Manchester - and strings of people pointing out that their delusions of grandeur are indeed delusions. Pointing out that, unlike Merseyrail, metrolink replaces rail routes in some instances, and in others identically mirrors bus stop routes, and that as such it isn't an additional layer of transport but rather a replacement (as modal shift patters show) is just about correcting your delusions. It doesn't mean one doesn't think metrolink is still good, as both I and awayo have suggested, it is indeed better than nothing, and it doesn't mean i dont think that a similar local system here would be good too (provided it didnt replace train routes with slow less-capacity trams as metrolink has done), The idea of being "jelous" of another city thats pretty similar in real life terms 38 miles up the road doesnt compute to me. If I liked somewhere else, i'd just move there, really. If i wanted faster paced living and bustle again, i'd move back to london - because all the regional cities are scarcely different in the wider scheme of things.

I know it "should be great" and anywhere but manchester it likely would be. But what time did it stop raining this morning and what time will it start falling again this evening? You know it will, very soon. I will likely play a round of golf this afternoon. Golf is played on golf courses, you can play too, just ride the Manc trolley to Liverpool, they have lots of courses there, including race courses. :lol:

What if you don't like golf or horse racing?

I can always take my umbrella to the Pool.

If I wasn't still out on my back I'd be out now enjoying the sunshine. :cool: While it lasts.

because that is the discussion I was having with Awayo before you came into the discussion, trying to steer the discussion away from the obvious fact that awayo was losing out badly and being shown to be nothing more than a green eyed monster with blinkers on.



This is the point I was addressing, before you started fudging two arguments into one.

The metro system that is much better than Manchester's trams?

ISTR it was backing up a point I made about Merseyrail, 'before I came into the discussion'. The subsidy discussion is a red herring.

Is there room for an open access operator to run trains to Liverpool? or is the WCML at full capacity?

Apparently if capacity becomes available the Network RUS states that another service will be added to Manchester. Although Manchester doesn't need its current 3 tph. Insane but that is the UK.

What the fuck is an ITT? A quick google indicates that the bidding process is based on Network Rail (ie, the state's) Route Utilisation Strategy, which is proposing to increase the train frequency to Manchester to 4 ph. Just think, if they remove the single, crammed hourly service to Liverpool they can have five. Shouldn't have said that though. Don't want to give them ideas. The London and Manchester-based Network Rail strategy masters' dream will be for their to be no trains to Liverpool directly from London. And that won't be state favouritism either in Kurt's insane view. Remember Manchester's loopy 3 tph service from London is the result of massive state subsidy. They want even more favouritism and Network Rail Manchester team of bigots, working with their Government Office North West mates in Manchester and ex-Network Rail consultants from Manchester will surely have logic-warping excuses for that too.

10 tph, 50tph! If the state is paying, setting the agenda and serious justifications are not needed (like passenger demand for example!), why not?

Arf.

Have a read.

http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/intercity-west-coast-franchise/draft-invitation-to-tender-attachment-g.pdf

The government put out for review a consultation.

Private and public agencies said what they wanted in the next Invitation to Tender for the West coast main line.

Both private and public sector agencies stated what services they wanted.

Have a read.

It is very interesting.

Not a single private (or public) agency said that Liverpool should have the same service frequency as Manchester. Not one. Nothing to do with Network Rail.

Now why would that be?

Also, several agencies wanted HSR trains to run from Manchester to Scotland, many more than wanted Liverpool to Scotland services.

Now why would that be?

You CANNOT blame state interference here.

These are the responses of interested parties from right across the UK. Both public and private.

So why do YOU think that NOT a single one of them asked for the same service to Liverpool as to Manchester?

You really probably don't know.

You are so blinkered you cannot see the obvious truth right in fron of you.

Come on then... This will be very funny.

Kurt's evidence usually boils down to

"here's a 67 page document, it's in there somewhere"

Sunny afternoon today.Take a peek at the ten (10) forecast for Manc, 60% of those days rain is forecast. So, the pundits are correct, it rains in Manchester more than it doesn't.:lol:

oh yes.

Page 26.

We may not be specifying first and last train arrivals at each individaul station, bidders are free to make proposals as to how they can best match demand with the resources available.

Odd.

Bidders, free to chose how to make use of the trains are chosing to put them on the Manchester line.

How very odd.

Apparently if capacity becomes available the Network RUS states that another service will be added to Manchester. Although Manchester doesn't need its current 3 tph. Insane but that is the UK.

It's very handy having a train every 20 minutes I have to say, especially if Euston is bursting, I just sit in Cafe Nero for half an hour and let a couple of trains go.

Kurt's evidence usually boils down to

"here's a 67 page document, it's in there somewhere"

No, it is all very easy.

awayo says that private companies, given the chance would move more of the trains over to Liverpool as opposed to Manchester.

if this was the case then this would have been brought up during the consultancy for the ITT.

It was not.

That document shows that loads of private agencies had the change to say what they wanted - not one wanted the same service to Liverpool as to Manchester.

How odd.

For some reason I cannot copy and paste from the document.

Check out what the Green Party say on Page 66. they want 3tph to Manchester. No mention of that for Liverpool though.

In fact, if you read through some of the summary (page 35) you see similar things. People wanting a Manchester to Scotland route. Maybe also a Liverpool route.

So, we are getting about 100 stops, about 100 trams and about 100km of track.

100 stops of which the majority are glorified bus stops, whilst loosing a fair lot of train stops.

You don't think it would seriously improve Leeds to have such an extensive network do you?

it would certainly give the image of a more public-transport effieicnt city, even if it made no affect at all on the 100s of thousands of people's journey times due to them just swapping from a bus to a tram ;)

It's very handy having a train every 20 minutes I have to say, especially if Euston is bursting, I just sit in Cafe Nero for half an hour and let a couple of trains go.

It's very nice I'm sure. The hourly Liverpool one means I have another pint of London Porter in the Doric Arch. Could do that in two 20 mins intervals however.


The justification for the 3 per hour is indeed that. Not for reasons of demand but that a 3 per hour service turns it into a turn up and go service. Four's even better for that. But only Manchester needs to have one.

On keg there as well, which is rare.

100 stops of which the majority are glorified bus stops, whilst loosing a fair lot of train stops.



it would certainly give the image of a more public-transport effieicnt city, even if it made no affect at all on the 100s of thousands of people's journey times due to them just swapping from a bus to a tram ;)

what, you mean like ALL rail based transport systems.

You were going to find a scheme, anywhere in the world, that achieved more than a 35% modal shift.

You seem to have failed. Again.

tell me yoshef - if you looked at Merseyrail and Metrolink - which would you say was most dependant upon the state looking after it?

Which would you say the government proped up most?

you're looking at two entirely different transport systems. The government props up all crumbling heavy rail networks across the UK, particularly in london with the tube. But the government doesnt prop up bus/tram networks

It's very nice I'm sure. The hourly Liverpool one means I have another pint of London Porter in the Doric Arch. Could do that in two 20 mins intervals however.


The justification for the 3 per hour is indeed that. Not for reasons of demand but that a 3 per hour service turns it into a turn up and go service. Four's even better for that. But only Manchester needs to have one.

Seems that no one responded to the DfT consultation agreeing with you.

The most anyone demanded was 2tph for Liverpool.

Some wanted 4tph for Manchester.

No one wanted the same for both cities.

Odd that. Why do you think that is?

not really..nothing to do with stuff on here really evokes feelings like "jealousy" to me like it does to a handful of Manchester forumers (the 4 or so who massively dominate the entire 500 pages of this thread). They are the ones who seem to get upset, or angered, or over joyed like one would be with a self-achievement, or whose pride gets hurt when something positive is posted about other cities like TheFly and the Glasgow debacle earlier, or the bizzare attempts at goading as LNGCats does, presumably like football teams do (i dont watch football).

Oh please Wiggs. Do us a favour. :ohno:

Upset?

Scroll back and you'll see why this thread expolded again today. I don't recall any Manchester forum member rubbishing the Pool. Since then all we've tried to do is ask why and to educate certain forum members about certain topics.

As for you. Why did you get involved in the first place?

You could have quite easily ignored it, yet you decided to get involved with your size 12's on. Admit it Wiggs, you f***ing love it, regardless if it's Manchester or Liverpool. Today it's Manchester's turn.

If it's not you, it's 10123, East, Sloyne, Awayo, etc. And now we have a new member of the gang.

golden66

You must be devastated to loose BBC North and ITV to Salford.It's amazing to think you had all this mass media and now you will have none. I cannot see how BBC Manc can continue to be called this when it dosen't even exist in the city. You have lost everything ,even Coronation Street. It's like having your heart ripped out.

You must be joking! I'm just saying how it is. You didn't give a dam about Salford until Salford Quays arrived and especially Media City UK. Not a mention of the place to outsiders because it was an embarassing dump with nothing to gloat about. But now it's suddenly become your new Manchester and left a stagnating black hole in Manchester city centre.
Furthermore I see that Peel are not including Manchester in its future developments. Everything will be happening to the west of Manchester along the Manchester Ship Canal, Wirral and L'pool Waters and the Port of L'pool.It seems to me that the shift in economic power in the North West is concentrating on Liverpool. Oh by the way as this happens please dont say that you always considered L'pool to be apart of Manchester. That would be seriously hypocritical.


That's right, he came on the 'Media in Manchester!(film, television, radio, newspapers, etc, etc!)' on the Manchester forum and posted, that. Trolling at it's best.

Imagine if I'd have done that on the Liverpool or Leeds forum.

Tell me one thing Wiggs. Why do the Manchester, Birmingham and Glasgow forums never have spats? You don't have to be a genius to work it out.

If and when the usual suspects stop their on-going war of attrition on everything (Gtr) Manchester, then certain Manchester forum members like myself will stop defending the city, which for some reason irks.

you're looking at two entirely different transport systems. The government props up all crumbling heavy rail networks across the UK, particularly in london with the tube. But the government doesnt prop up bus/tram networks

Indeed. But that is not the point.

Awayo likes to pretent Manchester gets huge state subsidy and Liverpool doesn't.

I just use this as an example to show that is not the case.

Anyway. Other systems that have achieved 35+ % modal shift? Or are you now ackowledging Metrolink is no worse than any other system at simply moving people out of the bus?

In addition to JRB in 14136 - if people did not make up crap - like you do wiggles about how Metrolink is somehow not as good as other new transport systems at getting people out of their cards - then maybe we would not have these stupid long innane discussions.

Why do you not make up such blatent lies about other cities? Why just always Manchester?

what, you mean like ALL rail based transport systems.

You were going to find a scheme, anywhere in the world, that achieved more than a 35% modal shift.

You seem to have failed. Again.

I wasnt going to find anything of the sort. More straw hats from you as usual lol.

a whopping 75% of metrolink users coming from the closed down rail lines the metrolink replaces, as well as the bus routes of which the other metrolink lines directly mirror stop-for-stop, proved my point that its not really an additional layer of transport like merseyrail, but rather just a replacement of an existing form of transport. The other 25% (or 35%) of metrolink users who have abonded their car is totally inline with the percentage increases of car-abondenment to public transport that is being witnessed across the UK anyway, particularly so with the rail network where passenger numbers have almost doubled on some routes over the recent years.

On keg there as well, which is rare.

I don't drink and train.

I wasnt going to find anything of the sort. More straw hats from you as usual lol.

a whopping 75% of metrolink users coming from the closed down rail lines the metrolink replaces, as well as the bus routes of which the other metrolink lines directly mirror stop-for-stop, proved my point that its not really an additional layer of transport like merseyrail,

But when Merseyrail opened it simply replaced 100% bus users. Back then no one had cars.

It is a sign of the age. Any new transport system is only going to have about 20% of it's passengers from cars, the rest are always going to be from buses etc.



but rather just a replacement of an existing form of transport. The other 25% of metrolink users who have abonded their car is totally inline with the continual increases of car-abondenment to public transport that is being witnessed across the UK anyway, particularly so with the rail network where passenger numbers have almost doubled on some routes over the recent years.


So why are 35% of Metrolink users from cars and yet only 20% on Midland Metro?

In fact, find another UK system that has the same modal shift.

The first link I provided showed that if a decent high quality bus route is added then you MAY get 5% modal shift - that includes your move away from cars etc.



Anyway, I think you miss the point of public transport.

Entirely.

It is NOT about emptying the roads of cars. Never going to be the case.

But you knew that already didn't you.

Wiggles - to prove you know what you are talking about.

Why would have been the primary reason that WYPTE were pursuing a tram system for Leeds?

Do you honestly think it was to get people out of their cars? Is that really how little you know about public transport?

I don't drink and train.

Before, not on, is okay I suppose.

That chap with a plastic bag of tinnies under his seat, who doesn't want to pay for the equally foul on-train options, cuts a sorry figure.

The old trains had a bar, didn't they? Horrid places.

Makes it go faster however.

If the fact that Leeds' scheme didn't involve converting existing worn-out railways, explain how Nottingham's got through. Line one runs alongside an existing railway for quite a way (and did involve single-tracking part of it) but did not replace any railway and still needed a lot of clearance, new bridges over the leen etc to create a tramway alongside. Line 2 will re-use sections of railway which have been closed for forty odd years but most of it is currrently embankments which will be demolished. Line 3 will not re-use any old railway.

wiggley has often raised this 'extra layer of transport' idea. Personally I have never seen the advantage in up to three modes being in direct competition when most likely only one will do the job particularly well, though it does happen a lot in this country due to our poor system. Trams are built because routes carry/are projected to carry a certain number of people and they carry them more efficiently. I'm not sure this whole 'layer' business is something generally considered in transport planning.

Also, I was under the impression that the majority of funding for Metrolink was coming from central government, with a significant minority from local authorities rather than all of it.

I wasnt going to find anything of the sort. More straw hats from you as usual lol.

a whopping 75% of metrolink users coming from the closed down rail lines the metrolink replaces, as well as the bus routes of which the other metrolink lines directly mirror stop-for-stop, proved my point that its not really an additional layer of transport like merseyrail, but rather just a replacement of an existing form of transport. The other 25% (or 35%) of metrolink users who have abonded their car is totally inline with the percentage increases of car-abondenment to public transport that is being witnessed across the UK anyway, particularly so with the rail network where passenger numbers have almost doubled on some routes over the recent years.

So which rail lines have closed down Wiggs. And which rail lines will close down when the rest of the Network is up and running. Feel free.

It doesn't take a genius to work out that previous bus users will use Metrolink if it's available.

Let me give you a future example.

Piccadilly to COMS.(MCFC) Metrolink due to start in August/September.

Buses and taxis currently take hundreds of fans to COMS. When Metrolink starts they will use that instead. Cheaper, less pollution, faster transit times.

And the problem is?

Being sarcastic. Stop it because it's taking people off the buses and taxis, that they would otherwise use. Wiggs is happy. :nuts:

Before, not on, is okay I suppose.

That chap with a plastic bag of tinnies under his seat, who doesn't want to pay for the equally foul on-train options, cuts a sorry figure.

The old trains had a bar, didn't they? Horrid places.

Makes it go faster however.

I'd be having to piss every five minutes. The Manchester train only takes 2 hours anyhow.

Google Greater Manchester Transport Fund for where the money comes from.

As wiggles will no doubt say in his own time, the biggest driver by far for Metrolink was to create additional, attractive capacity on routes into town that were had congestion issues that were / are constraining the local economy.

The primary route from Alty to Manchester for example is along the A56 - it is very busy all day, during the the morning rush hour it will take well in excess of 1hr to drive. The buses are even worse.

The old trains were not very popular due to infrequent slow travel.

Stick Metrolink in. Every 6mins, much higher capacity and hey presto. Doubled the number of passengers on the railways and increased massively the capacity along that route. So whilst not freeing up the A56 - it is just as bad as ever if not worse - the massive additional - attractive alternative capacity has allowed for much more economic growth along that corridor that otherwise would never have happened.

This is happening all over GM, from Didsbury, to Wythenshawe, to Ashton to where ever.

It matters not whether or not the passengers come from buses or where ever. The simple fact is Metrolink creates the capacity to move 3,000 people per hour in each direction (on each line - considerably more in the middle). That huge extra capacity allows for further economic growth that would not have happened otherwise.

The roads will still be busy. That is not the point.

The point is a system, that suited men and women are very happy to use, creates hige extra capacity to move people around - a way to ensure congestion does not strangle the economy.

http://www.manchester.gov.uk/egov_downloads/6__GMTF__merged_.pdf

is where the details of the money for GM TF comes from.

A mixture of borrowings, council tax levy and diverting the RFA that GM gets away from other schemes (one advantage of having devolved transport powers which no where else has outside of London).

So which rail lines have closed down Wiggs and which will. :

the bury line into manchester
altrincham line into manchester
oldham line into manchester

the manchester urban area will have significantly less trains serving it per capita then the west yorkshire urban area. It will have more bus/tram stops though.

anyway, do you like my new pic. nobody commented :(

If the fact that Leeds' scheme didn't involve converting existing worn-out railways, explain how Nottingham's got through. Line one runs alongside an existing railway for quite a way (and did involve single-tracking part of it) but did not replace any railway and still needed a lot of clearance, new bridges over the leen etc to create a tramway alongside. Line 2 will re-use sections of railway which have been closed for forty odd years but most of it is currrently embankments which will be demolished. Line 3 will not re-use any old railway.

wiggley has often raised this 'extra layer of transport' idea. Personally I have never seen the advantage in up to three modes being in direct competition when most likely only one will do the job particularly well, though it does happen a lot in this country due to our poor system. Trams are built because routes carry/are projected to carry a certain number of people and they carry them more efficiently. I'm not sure this whole 'layer' business is something generally considered in transport planning.

Also, I was under the impression that the majority of funding for Metrolink was coming from central government, with a significant minority from local authorities rather than all of it.

So according to you buses, etc, should be sufficient.(for Gtr Manchester)

Any other form of transport that increases journey times, takes 'cars off the roads', and decreases pollution shouldn't be encouraged .

The fact that numerous other European cities are 'still' investing in their tram systems speaks volumes.

How come? Did you miss out on some boyhood initiation rite? Do you not have a season ticket at the Kop? Have you never stolen any wheels? Did you shave your moustache or Scousefro? Did you do the unthinkable... and get a job? Why do you not qualify as a true Scouse?? :dunno:None of the above! Awayo doesn't qualify as a true Scouse because he's insufficiently inbred.... :bowtie:

the bury line into manchester
altrincham line into manchester
oldham line into manchester

the manchester urban area will have significantly less trains serving it per capita then the west yorkshire urban area. It will have more bus/tram stops though.

So?

Read my post. it's not about anything other than creating additional capacity to allow the economy to grow.

Do you think that the number of passengers will increase, decrease or stay the same on the Oldham line?

I'll give you a clue. Just like the Alty and Bury line the numbers will increase. The roads will stay just as busy as anyone who moves onto the tram will be replaced by someone new on the road.

It is all about allowing more people to travel to all the economy to continue to grow.

Nothing more. Nothing less.

Metrolink does this incredibly well. much better than you could possibly ever recognise. That si why Salford Quays is doing so well and authorities across GM want a slice of it.

you clearly have very little understanding of why transport provision os provided.

The fact that numerous other European cities are 'still' investing in their tram systems speaks volumes.

It is not just European cities.

Since Obahma came in the yanks have got into the game, the arabs love trams, look at Dubai and the Aussies cannot get enough of them.

The world, outside of the UK is going tram mad.

the bury line into manchester
altrincham line into manchester
oldham line into manchester

the manchester urban area will have significantly less trains serving it per capita then the west yorkshire urban area. It will have more bus/tram stops though.

And? So? What?

People in (Gtr) Manchester have a choice of 4 modes of transport.

People in Leeds have a choice 3 modes of transport.

What about the Metrolink lines that don't follow train lines Wiggs? I've just given you a prime example. COMS/East Manchester. Which will take bus and taxi journeys off the road.

(whilst in the real world more or less anything outside the m60 is not considered Manchester, particularly so independent bustling towns like oldham and bury).

just wanted to add that i think you can safely include most of tameside into manchester..for those of us that do live here, when people ask us where we live/come form, we say manchester because we dont have a dominate town..hence why the borough is tameside, named after the river..the largest town is ashton and many of us consider it a dump - we just go into town(manchester)...

anyway back to you guys talking about trams/trains - sorry for the interruption!

btw - Metrolink already carries more passengers than all the other heavy rail in GM.

Metrolink is about to go from about 20m / year to 70m / year passengers.

Now, anyone complaining about Metrolink show me another transport system in the UK that carries that many passengers. A system that the boss on a huge wage is happy to travel to work on.

Outside of London it doesn't exist although I am loving the idea of some high flyer in Leeds waiting for a bus to get to work. I doubt it happens that often.

The plan defines how Transport for Greater Manchester is going to improve travel locally over the next few years and beyond, and how it will provide a viable, sustainable and accessible transport network capable of supporting the region's long-term economic growth.

Among the key proposals included in the plan for the next few years is the expansion of the Metrolink network to reach Manchester Airport, Ashton-under-Lyne, East Didsbury and Oldham and Rochdale town centres. Plans to expand the network further will also be developed.

Transport for Greater Manchester will also deliver new transport interchanges at Altrincham, Bolton, Wythenshawe and Rochdale.

Plans to introduce a series of measures that will improve bus travel into and across Manchester city centre, from Wigan, Leigh, Salford, Middleton and South Manchester will also be progressed.

In seeking to deliver a series of challenging objectives, the Local Transport Plan sets out how it will reduce the impact that transport has on the environment and help to improve health by reducing accidents and encouraging 'active travel'. This will be achieved by: http://www.tfgm.com/2009_news.cfm?news_id=9006590?submenuheader=3
But let's not get in the way of rail lines. :nuts:

anyway, do you like my new pic. nobody commented :(

I noticed, Lover ;)

Coming up to the big 10 as well

wiggles really thinks that one of these...

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Fw4BZ6O1Rrw/SyZdTpCSLVI/AAAAAAAAEzo/TsJfBPylpqA/s800/leeds+bus.JPG

is just as likely to get people travelling on it as one of these...

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/46660000/jpg/_46660985_newtram_226.jpg

:lol:

I tell you what. First thing in the mornign Metrolink is rammed with office workers, many clearly quite wealthy.

Wiggles, tell me. Do you find the wealthy, the bosses of organisations, travelling into Leeds in vast numbers by bus every day? :lol:

None of the above! Awayo doesn't qualify as a true Scouse because he's insufficiently inbred.... :bowtie:

Liverpool must the the most outbred place on these islands. Unlike Surrey.

just wanted to add that i think you can safely include most of tameside into manchester..for those of us that do live here, when people ask us where we live/come form, we say manchester because we dont have a dominate town..hence why the borough is tameside, named after the river..the largest town is ashton and many of us consider it a dump - we just go into town(manchester)...

anyway back to you guys talking about trams/trains - sorry for the interruption!

Deluded.

:lol:

Deluded.

:lol:

He lives there.

You're from Leeds.

And you call him deluded.

Good one.

Right, night night all.

No explaination from awayo why none of the respondents to teh DfT consultation wnted the same service to Liverpool as to Manchester. Quelle surprise.

No understanding from wiggles in the slightest about why we provide decent public transport in the UK. None whatsoever.

I'll leave those Metrolink doubters with this thought.

If Metrolink had not been built through Salford Quays 12years ago and a bus service was left as all there was, would all that office development has happened since have occured? Would the BBC really have moved to MediaCity if the transport linking it to the city centre was a bus?

You know the answer. In know the answer and the rest of GM knows the answer which is why everyone wants some of the action.

Yu probably know the answer to, in your heart of hearts. You just want to pretend it is not so.

Night all.

Deluded.

:lol:

ah greggo.

The fool who thinks that because one city has a tram network all other cities should also have one has joined.

Tell you what greggo - even if you think Ashton is not in Manchester - it still has a tram line that Leeds will never get :lol:

how is it deluded though? have you ever heard of haughton green or woodley? would you even know where these places were if i told you i lived there and you didnt have to google it? no you wouldnt - whereas everyone has heard of manchester....though you do get the occasional snobs that say they live in woodley, cheshire...

tell me how can you call me deluded when you dont live here?

I tell you what. First thing in the mornign Metrolink is rammed with office workers, many clearly quite wealthy.

Wiggles, tell me. Do you find the wealthy, the bosses of organisations, travelling into Leeds in vast numbers by bus every day? :lol:

Would you be arguing for trams so vehemently if manchester had been denied the funding it got from Whitehall and the Leeds Supertram went ahead?

Leeds would love an alternative transport system it's just that it can't afford it. Manchester can and has one because it gets help from Whitehall, a lot of help, and to be honest that's not really anything to brag about.

ah greggo.

The fool who thinks that because one city has a tram network all other cities should also have one has joined.

Tell you what greggo - even if you think Ashton is not in Manchester - it still has a tram line that Leeds will never get :lol:

Leeds doesn't have a tram line because it was denied funding by Whitehall.

And? So? What?

People in (Gtr) Manchester have a choice of 4 modes of transport.

People in Leeds have a choice 3 modes of transport.



erm, peope in oldham, alty,and bury and all the stops leading to manchester ave a choice of 3 modes of transport too - they dont have the train anymore, they have something with less capacity (despite greater frequency) , and longer journey times

Why do the Manchester, Birmingham and Glasgow forums never have spats? You don't have to be a genius to work it out.Likely because Birmingham is secure in it's knowledge that it is the 2nd city of the UK and has little need to boast. By the same token, isn't Glasgow home to a number of BBC Scottish departments and is the 1st city of Scotland? Seems simple to me.:)

Would you be arguing for trams so vehemently if manchester had been denied the funding it got from Whitehall and the Leeds Supertram went ahead?

Leeds would love an alternative transport system it's just that it can't afford it. Manchester can and has one because it gets help from Whitehall, a lot of help, and to be honest that's not really anything to brag about.

Here we go.

It's like a merry-go-round.

If you can't handle the fact that Manchester has secured £850mill in funding, that's your problem.

Why don't you speak to your city leaders and ask them why they failed to secure funding for the Supertram. I'm sure they'll tell you.

how is it deluded though? have you ever heard of haughton green or woodley? would you even know where these places were if i told you i lived there and you didnt have to google it? no you wouldnt - whereas everyone has heard of manchester....though you do get the occasional snobs that say they live in woodley, cheshire...

tell me how can you call me deluded when you dont live here?

I lived and worked in Manchester for three years. This myth mainly generated by the media that manchester is one big happy family is just plain untrue. The vast majority of the people I met from GM were proud of where they came from and never alluded to that they came from 'Manchester' they would always say where they came from and some were quite hostile at the thought of being classed as a mancunian.

Would you be arguing for trams so vehemently if manchester had been denied the funding it got from Whitehall and the Leeds Supertram went ahead?

I'd be arguing for what is best for my area. Irrespective of what happens elsewhere.


Leeds would love an alternative transport system

wiggles disagrees with you. I don't.


it's just that it can't afford it.

Manchester can and has one because it gets help from Whitehall, a lot of help, and to be honest that's not really anything to brag about.[/QUOTE]

Manchester got one because those in charge in the early 90s were very ahead of their time and developed a foundation that everything grew from.

Unfortunately (from a Leeds point of view) Leeds City council canned the Leeds plans in about 1994 meaning Leeds never had a foundation for future development.

As tram development has got harder and harder only those that are fortunate to have a tram network already can justify that extra expense as they have a track record and economies of scale.

Not really bragging about it. Just pointing out it is a dam good system and provides a great service to the local economy. Wiggles seems to disagree.

I think your arguement lies with wiggles rather than me. Maybe you should take up how valued a tram network in Leeds would be with him. I agree with you, he doesn't.

Likely because Birmingham is secure in it's knowledge that it is the 2nd city of the UK and has little need to boast. By the same token, isn't Glasgow home to a number of BBC Scottish departments and is the 1st city of Scotland? Seems simple to me.:)

Digby Jones. Keep up Sloyne. The sun is getting to you again. Factor 50.

I lived and worked in Manchester for three years. This myth mainly generated by the media that manchester is one big happy family is just plain untrue. The vast majority of the people I met from GM were proud of where they came from and never alluded to that they came from 'Manchester' they would always say where they came from and some were quite hostile at the thought of being classed as a mancunian.

Does it occur to you that different people have different views? A city does not hold an opinion in itself?

Does it surprise you that many in Morley (where my mother used to live) do not consider themselves to be from Leeds as they consider Morley to be seperate?

He lives there.

You're from Leeds.

And you call him deluded.

Good one.

It wasn't a specific response to him or his home town to be fair. It was to what he wrote, this myth that everyone from GM says they are from manchester. Anyone who suggests that is deluded.

I lived and worked in Manchester for three years. This myth mainly generated by the media that manchester is one big happy family is just plain untrue. The vast majority of the people I met from GM were proud of where they came from and never alluded to that they came from 'Manchester' they would always say where they came from and some were quite hostile at the thought of being classed as a mancunian.

you obviously havent spoken to enough people then...and three years isnt a long time - what would i call myself then if i wasnt mancunian? or the people who live here a mancunian? i would say im from lancashire or cheshire even if that is the historic boundary, alot of us firmly associate ourselves as mancunians - and i think i can speak for most people who live here than you can as ive lived here for 21 years....

It wasn't a specific response to him or his home town to be fair. It was to what he wrote, this myth that everyone from GM says they are from manchester. Anyone who suggests that is deluded.

of course not everyone from GM says they are from Manchester.

Likewise in Leeds the same applies.

But MANY from outside of the local authority boundary DO consider themselves to be from Manchester. They are not mutually exclusive you know!

Gregg - I wonder. Do you accept that some people from say Old Trafford may say they are from Manchester?

First the weather and now the classic, my mother/brother/mate says, has come back too. It's been a good week.

this thread has died not so long ago.


Noticably it is always people stirring up shit against Manchester. Always.

Manchester got one because those in charge in the early 90s were very ahead of their time and developed a foundation that everything grew from.

Unfortunately (from a Leeds point of view) Leeds City council canned the Leeds plans in about 1994 meaning Leeds never had a foundation for future development.

As tram development has got harder and harder only those that are fortunate to have a tram network already can justify that extra expense as they have a track record and economies of scale.

Not really bragging about it. Just pointing out it is a dam good system and provides a great service to the local economy. Wiggles seems to disagree.

I think your arguement lies with wiggles rather than me. Maybe you should take up how valued a tram network in Leeds would be with him. I agree with you, he doesn't.

That's just tired spin.

That's just tired spin.

What is spin?

Which bit do you disagree with?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/16/Media_city_metrolink_station.jpg/800px-Media_city_metrolink_station.jpg

Mediacity doesn't have a direct rail link.

Please tell me how many car, bus, and taxi journeys will be taken off the roads because of a direct Metrolink line to Mediacity, considering up to 3000 people will be working there.

Thankfully the new Mediacity spur doesn't run alongside existing rail lines. How short-sighted of Peel, the BBC and SCC.

First the weather and now the classic, my mother/brother/mate says, has come back too. It's been a good week.

But you're normally neutral Boards.

Saying that, you have been leaning of late.

Axe to grind?

PS. It has been a good week. Especially these last few days.

this thread has died not so long ago.


Noticably it is always people stirring up shit against Manchester. Always.

I don't have a problem with manchester, I have a problem with favouritism. I am only here because yet again I get another e.mail notification with some manc gloating about the extensions.

Lol. Fuck off, jrb ;) You can accuse me of many things but I'm not a Manchester basher. Never have been. Axe to grind? With £2bn+ of infrastructure currently u/c in Glasgow? Nah, happy days.

I don't have a problem with manchester, I have a problem with favouritism. I am only here because yet again I get another e.mail notification with some manc gloating about the extensions.

Yet as was shown with the comparison between Merseyrail subsidy and Metrolink - Manchester gets no more and no less than anywhere else.

The Regional Funding Allocation is doled out the the PTEs to spend as they want.

An interesting point that none of the Leeds forumers ever respond to is the transport levy in WY is very low. The lowest of the PTE areas (Merseyside being the highest).

Do you not think that has anything to do with the lack of transport spend in your area?

P.S. Greggo -you didn't answer. Do you think someone in Old Trafford may describe themselves as being from Manchester?

Lol. Fuck off, jrb ;) You can accuse me of many things but I'm not a Manchester basher. Never have been.

I saw a ripple Boards.

Casted my line, but whatever it was it didn't bite. :wink2:

wiggles really thinks that one of these...

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Fw4BZ6O1Rrw/SyZdTpCSLVI/AAAAAAAAEzo/TsJfBPylpqA/s800/leeds+bus.JPG

is just as likely to get people travelling on it as one of these...

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/46660000/jpg/_46660985_newtram_226.jpg

:lol:

I tell you what. First thing in the mornign Metrolink is rammed with office workers, many clearly quite wealthy.

Wiggles, tell me. Do you find the wealthy, the bosses of organisations, travelling into Leeds in vast numbers by bus every day? :lol:

no, they use the train from the subrburbs or wider urban area (something they cant do in oldham, bury, or alty now)

http://www.yourlocalweb.co.uk/images/pictures/17/01/east-platform-burley-park-station-headingley-167662.jpg

http://s0.geograph.org.uk/photos/17/01/170197_d3edb890.jpg

And if its not the train, they use the FTR buses, which incidently have raised platforms, segregated lanes, and priority traffic

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4059/4577890743_610d17c1b5_z.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4008/4546388006_b8029b3564_z.jpg

http://www.goftr.com/leeds/images/view/view3.jpg

But i appreciate that in Manchester, many citygents will be queing up to ride this..

Metrolink tram No. 1022 Piccadilly station to Bury service arriving at the Market street stop on 8th April 2011:-

http://www.railwayherald.co.uk/images/photos/750/750191088.jpg

of course not everyone from GM says they are from Manchester.

Likewise in Leeds the same applies.

But MANY from outside of the local authority boundary DO consider themselves to be from Manchester. They are not mutually exclusive you know!

If people are from Leeds they say so!

you obviously havent spoken to enough people then...and three years isnt a long time - what would i call myself then if i wasnt mancunian? or the people who live here a mancunian? i would say im from lancashire or cheshire even if that is the historic boundary, alot of us firmly associate ourselves as mancunians - and i think i can speak for most people who live here than you can as ive lived here for 21 years....

You're way off the mark. You might have lived there 21 years but you certainly haven't lived. Lancastrian's like Yorkshire folk are a proud people and they would never sell out their home town for the sake of belonging to a bigger city. Nearly all I spoke to over the years had a definitive enmity towards the suggestion if one asked if they were from manchester. It seems you like maybe a few others are happy to buy into the media myth, fair play I couldn't lie to myself like that.

Gregg - I wonder. Do you accept that some people from say Old Trafford may say they are from Manchester?

I know the media would suggest that but OT is in Salford is it not? Why would salfordians say they are from manchester?

I don't have a problem with manchester, I have a problem with favouritism. I am only here because yet again I get another e.mail notification with some manc gloating about the extensions.

You got an email? :uh:

Then you decided to up arms and come to the frontline.

In all my years on SSC, that's a first.

The Leeds reservists. Ready and willing to go to the frontline via email.

So wiggles.

Do many bosses, do the wealthy travel by bus into Leeds?

They do on Metrolink, whether it is a phase 1, 2 or 3 tram.

I suspect not, certainly not in the quantities that you see on Metrolink anyhow.

Buses can't compete with Trams IMO.

Even Virgo says he's from Salford and he supports manu!

I saw a ripple Boards.

Casted my line, but whatever it was it didn't bite. :wink2:

Lol. Nutter. I'm off for a standing tan and a Starbucks. Look after your back, me old mukka ;)

You got an email? :uh:

Then you decided to up arms and come to the frontline.

In all my years on SSC, that's a first.

The Leeds reservists. Ready and willing to go to the frontline via email.

:lol:

It wasn't like that you nutter :lol:

I haven't taken up arms against you GM lot, perish the thought. I am simply sick of the gloating, it gets a bit old especially after ones own city was denied funding.

Even Virgo says he's from Salford and he supports manu!

So. Are you going to answer whether anyone from Old Trafford may say they are from Manchester or have you been caught out (again).

Far too easy.

Every time. :lol:

:lol:

It wasn't like that you nutter :lol:

I haven't taken up arms against you GM lot, perish the thought. I am simply sick of the gloating, it gets a bit old especially after ones own city was denied funding.

Well why did you not take this up with whoever sent you the email instead of us lot on here?

Anyway, still not able to say if people from Old Trafford may say they are from Manchester :lol ?

Liverpool must the the most outbred place on these islands. Unlike Surrey.Nah. Surrey gets the overspill from London, which is probably the most diverse place on earth. This has been happening for decades. By contrast no one's migrated to Liverpool these last few decades. People have been leaving in droves rather than arriving. The Scouse victim complex/identity probably never existed when it was a thriving port and immigration destination. It has become that way since its decline, after which only the undynamic inbred types remained. That's your typical "loyal" Scouser... ;)

no, they use the train from the subrburbs or wider urban area (something they cant do in oldham, bury, or alty now)

http://www.yourlocalweb.co.uk/images/pictures/17/01/east-platform-burley-park-station-headingley-167662.jpg

http://s0.geograph.org.uk/photos/17/01/170197_d3edb890.jpg

And if its not the train, they use the FTR buses, which incidently have raised platforms, segregated lanes, and priority traffic

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4059/4577890743_610d17c1b5_z.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4008/4546388006_b8029b3564_z.jpg

http://www.goftr.com/leeds/images/view/view3.jpg

But i appreciate that in Manchester, many citygents will be queing up to ride this..

Metrolink tram No. 1022 Piccadilly station to Bury service arriving at the Market street stop on 8th April 2011:-

http://www.railwayherald.co.uk/images/photos/750/750191088.jpg

And all the older trams will be resprayed, refitted and rewired.

http://manchestertransport.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/piccadilly-gardens-hybrid-bus.jpg?w=260&h=195

Electric hybrid double-deckers enter service on Wilmslow Road

http://manchestertransport.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/electric-hybrid-double-deckers-enter-service-on-wilmslow-road/

Give it up Wiggs. You're floundering. You must be getting bored now? (as he moves quickly on to something else just as irrelevant)

No one's migrated to Liverpool for decades.

I would like you to introduce this notion to the Somali community in Toxteth. Try around Lodge Lane, Liverpool 8, at dusk.

Lol. Nutter. I'm off for a standing tan and a Starbucks. Look after your back, me old mukka ;)

Make sure you don't end up with a Starbucks cup outline on your body.

Cheers. :)

Even if the older trams are left as they are - their primary purpose is to provide a shed load of extra capacity along routes that have capacity problems thereby creating / allowing more economic growth than otherwise would be the case.

All of wiggles examples are very good, but the train lines have been there for years and tend to be empty outside of the rush hour and have terrible capcity issues during the rush hour (that trams would fix) and the buses are generally very unpopular with anyone who has a choice about using them or not.

Get over this vanity crap - they fulfil a function - a very important one - very very well.

Even greggo can see that.

So. Are you going to answer whether anyone from Old Trafford may say they are from Manchester or have you been caught out (again).

Far too easy.

Every time. :lol:

Well to be fair the question is a bit vague I can't answer for 'anyone' and why concentrate on OT? Why not the City of Salford or Bolton or need I go on?

Buses can't compete with Trams IMO.

Well done yoshef, you'll go a long way...more than likely by tram.

Because you had a go at someone for saying they thought they were a Manc, when they lived in Tameside.

I'm interested why someone in Tameside cannot be a Manc, yet someone in Old Trafford presumably can be?

Why the difference?

I'm wondering why someone from Ashton who thinks that they are a Manc is 'deluded' yet someone from Old Trafford is not.

It's what you posted, not anyone else.

Well why did you not take this up with whoever sent you the email instead of us lot on here?

Anyway, still not able to say if people from Old Trafford may say they are from Manchester :lol ?


It's an automated service, I get e.mail updates for all the threads I've subscribed to.

It's an automated service, I get e.mail updates for all the threads I've subscribed to.

Unsubscribe.

Which thread out of interest?

More interestingly, which post?

I'm wondering why someone from Ashton who thinks that they are a Manc is 'deluded' yet someone from Old Trafford is not.

It's what you posted, not anyone else.

If I posted that quote me.

Unsubscribe.

Which thread out of interest?

More interestingly, which post?

If I unsubscribe I lose all the updates, not just the gloating. I agree it would be fine if I could cull the manc gloating and I would.

Deluded.

:lol:

Is where you said someone from Ashton who considers themselves to be a Manc is deluded.

Why the difference between Old Trafford and Ashton?

Is someone from Droylsden who thinks that they are a Manc also deluded?

Because you had a go at someone for saying they thought they were a Manc, when they lived in Tameside.

I'm interested why someone in Tameside cannot be a Manc, yet someone in Old Trafford presumably can be?

Why the difference?

I didn't have a go at anyone. I just pointed out he was deluded. Not only that he the poor kid has no identity he has sold out to the media myth and it is a shame.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=79621838&postcount=14162 is where you acuse someone of being deluded for saying that they thought themselves to be a Manc.

Is where you said someone from Ashton who considers themselves to be a Manc is deluded.

Why the difference between Old Trafford and Ashton?

Is someone from Droylsden who thinks that they are a Manc also deluded?

Where did I say there was a difference?

Electric hybrid double-deckers enter service on Wilmslow Road

http://manchestertransport.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/electric-hybrid-double-deckers-enter-service-on-wilmslow-road/

very similar to the leeds hybrid buses (which although hideous looking too, are not as hideous lol

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5265/5580863494_326be133d6.jpg

I didn't have a go at anyone. I just pointed out he was deluded. Not only that he the poor kid has no identity he has sold out to the media myth and it is a shame.

So why is he deluded but someone in Old Trafford who thinks that they are a Manc not deluded?

I honestly don't get it?

Would somene from Clayton who thought they were a Manc be deluded? What about Droylsden?

Can you please tell me at what point, heading east, people are deluded if they consider themselves to be Manchester? Make use of Google Maps if that you help.

Is where you said someone from Ashton who considers themselves to be a Manc is deluded.

Why the difference between Old Trafford and Ashton?

Is someone from Droylsden who thinks that they are a Manc also deluded?

Not only deluded but he is selling his identity down the river.

Where did I say there was a difference?

So why won't you answer the question repeatedly put to you then?

Because you've been caught out. Your position has collapsed.

otherwise you could answer whether or not someone in Old Trafford would be deluded if they said they were a Manc. :lol:

So why is he deluded but someone in Old Trafford who thinks that they are a Manc not deluded?

I honestly don't get it?

Would somene from Clayton who thought they were a Manc be deluded? What about Droylsden?

Can you please tell me at what point, heading east, people are deluded if they consider themselves to be Manchester? Make use of Google Maps if that you help.


No, now come on. You need to provide evidence that I said that. The recent convo' is short it shouldn't be hard to find. Show the readers where I said that.

very similar to the leeds hybrid buses (which although hideous looking too, are not as hideous lol

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-VWoGEARVvFY/TXauI5M3--I/AAAAAAAAAdY/cxOHufpTYqI/s320/SANY0087.JPG

Does it really matter? Lol. (n/t)

Not only deluded but he is selling his identity down the river.

So, just to clarify.

Some from Old Trafford is deluded if they consider themselves to be a Manc in you world?

Simple question.

Are you able to answer it?

No, now come on. You need to provide evidence that I said that. The recent convo' is short it shouldn't be hard to find. Show the readers where I said that.

No, that is the thing.

I cannot find an answer to the often repeated question because you cannot answer it.

You've been caught out.

Not only deluded but he is selling his identity down the river.

If true, why is that any concern of yours?

ah ha.

Still no answer to the very very very simple question.

You're done here greggo.

Hook line and sinker.

Without a paddle.

Not even able to say whether or not you think someone in Old Trafford is deluded if they consider themselves a Manc :lol:

Men v boys.

is there a :byebye: animation to wave greggo off into the distance as he disappears, tail between legs?

So why won't you answer the question repeatedly put to you then?

Because you've been caught out. Your position has collapsed.

otherwise you could answer whether or not someone in Old Trafford would be deluded if they said they were a Manc. :lol:

It's obvious now to me that you are not a manc. :lol:

Are you a manc LNGCats?

Anyway this is the second time you said I have been caught out! What is this position you are talking about?

It's simple I thought, but maybe not so I will spell it out for you. If people who are not from manchester claim they are from manchester they are deluded. They have no genuine identity, they are not mancs, simple correct?

A manc is a person from manchester, no? How can a person from say Bolton or Wigan say they are mancs?

They might love the city of manchester they might support a team from manchester but they cannot be mancs! No matter how hard they try :lol:

ah ha.

Still no answer to the very very very simple question.

You're done here greggo.

Hook line and sinker.

Without a paddle.

Not even able to say whether or not you think someone in Old Trafford is deluded if they consider themselves a Manc :lol:

Men v boys.

Hardly :ohno:

I would like you to introduce this notion to the Somali community in Toxteth. Try around Lodge Lane, Liverpool 8, at dusk.Yeah but cummon they're not true Scousers.... ;)

I also bet the Somalis don't have a victim complex, even though they might reasonably be expected to have one given the place they've come from. (Unlike spoilt and ungrateful Scousers, whose benefits are paid for by taxpayers in the rest of the UK, yet who do nothing but bite the hand that feeds.)

If true, why is that any concern of yours?

'Cause it's a shame, it really is.

If true, why is that any concern of yours?

Well?

I'll help you Grego. If you're honest, you would have replied.

It's of no concern to me.

The end.

'Cause it's a shame, it really is.

What's a shame?

It's obvious now to me that you are not a manc. :lol:

Are you a manc LNGCats?

Anyway this is the second time you said I have been caught out! What is this position you are talking about?

It's simple I thought, but maybe not so I will spell it out for you. If people who are not from manchester claim they are from manchester they are deluded. They have no genuine identity, they are not mancs, simple correct?

A manc is a person from manchester, no? How can a person from say Bolton or Wigan say they are mancs?

They might love the city of manchester they might support a team from manchester but they cannot be mancs! No matter how hard they try :lol:

So, in your opinion, someone from Old Trafford, home to MANCHESTER United, who considers themselves to be a Manc is deluded then?

:lol:

I think it is fair to say that the vast vast majority of people in OT will definately consider themselves to be Mancs.

So either they are all deluded or your view of what delusion is doesn't meet with the normal.

P.S. Trafford Council - in Old Trafford, is in Manchester. Are Trafford Council deluded?

So according to you buses, etc, should be sufficient.(for Gtr Manchester)

Any other form of transport that increases journey times, takes 'cars off the roads', and decreases pollution shouldn't be encouraged .

The fact that numerous other European cities are 'still' investing in their tram systems speaks volumes.

I don't see as I said any of those things in my post. Try reading it.

An obvious point.

Gregg thinks that those people in OT are deluded for thinking that they are Mancs and it is a shame because they have lost their identity.

Think about that for one second.

Now what probably the most famous identity in Manchester (sorry jrb). Now where does that most famous thing - some woudl say the identity - of Manchester find itself?

That's right.

The people of Old Trafford, who have a fucking massive Manchester United identity all around them have lost their identity by calling themsleves Mancs.

That's right. Amazing logic.
:lol:

And he'll keep coming for more and more of a beating.

What's a shame?

But you still didn't explain why it's any concern of yours Greggo?


It's a concern of mine because...........(and so on)

What's a shame?


That people can easily and freely give up their identity just for the feeling of belonging to a bigger city or town. There was a lot of pride in Lancashire especially when it came to ones home town and now that is slowly being lost and I think it is sad.

I am delighted to say we don't have that in Yorkshire. Even the thousands of Leeds United fans from Bradford are proud they are Bradfordians and the same can genuinely be said for all the other cities and towns that surround Leeds. It's good.

It's obvious now to me that you are not a manc. :lol:

Are you a manc LNGCats?

Anyway this is the second time you said I have been caught out! What is this position you are talking about?

It's simple I thought, but maybe not so I will spell it out for you. If people who are not from manchester claim they are from manchester they are deluded. They have no genuine identity, they are not mancs, simple correct?

A manc is a person from manchester, no? How can a person from say Bolton or Wigan say they are mancs?

They might love the city of manchester they might support a team from manchester but they cannot be mancs! No matter how hard they try :lol:

Identity is a lot more complicated than lines on a map, especially in complex Metropolitan areas. You might not like it, but it isn't your business.

What you're forgetting Gregg is that people's identities are formed by their personal and familial history. In bigger cities (London, Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow, not sure about Birmingham) that story is one of people moving from inner city districts into suburbs, many of which are outside the core city. So if you're from a Manc (or scouse or whatever) family moving into a neighbouring area you don't adopt the identity of that area, but take your own with you. Since the number of people moving from larger cities will typically dwarf the population of the rural areas that the suburbs were built in, then the identities of these new districts became dominated by that of the core city. Hence large swathes of Merseyside, Greater Manchester, Greater London, Strathclyde etc. are home to people who identify most strongly with that city.

Out of interest.

I presume all those others who travel to Old Trafford, to watch the football and cricket are also deluded in your world Gregg?

Do you ever question whether maybe, just maybe, everyone else is NOT actually deluded and maybe it is you that may be the oddity?

The hilarity of Greggs point...

http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/1870/20110612132920.jpg


shows the boarder of Sale (Trafford) and Northern Moor (Manchester).

Sale is closer to the city centre than Northern Moor, you would pass through Sale to get to the city centre from Northern Moor.

The road immediately (that goes off to the left) in front in the picture is in Northern Moor.

The house you can see through the trees is in Sale.

Those living on Kerscott Rd (Northern Moor) are NOT deluded for considering themselves Manchester.

Those living on Boundary Rd (Sale) immediately behind ARE deluded for considering themselves to be Mancs :lol:

That 10m really makes all the difference to whether or not you actually feel a Manc or not don't they. That invisible line makes so much differnce :lol:

Keep them coming Gregg, this is great fun.

An obvious point.

Gregg thinks that those people in OT are deluded for thinking that they are Mancs and it is a shame because they have lost their identity.

Think about that for one second.

Now what probably the most famous identity in Manchester (sorry jrb). Now where does that most famous thing - some woudl say the identity - of Manchester find itself?

That's right.

The people of Old Trafford, who have a fucking massive Manchester United identity all around them have lost their identity by calling themsleves Mancs.

That's right. Amazing logic.
:lol:

And he'll keep coming for more and more of a beating.

Ok now I know you are definitely not a manc. Now that is sad.

Why are you obsessing about OT, Are you from OT? :lol: Do you really want me to list all the towns in GM? Towns which are filled with people who are actually proud of where they come from and consider the ones who sell themselves out to manchester, into the media myth, as deluded and that includes the people of OT as well.

Leeds forumers = fucking idiots.

I'm sorry, but what do they know about people who live in Greater Manchester?

Just like Leeds is the commercial centre of farmer-ville, Manchester is the centre of Greater Manchester (funnily enough).

Bunch of winnets, don't you have crops to farm?

Out of interest.

I presume all those others who travel to Old Trafford, to watch the football and cricket are also deluded in your world Gregg?

Do you ever question whether maybe, just maybe, everyone else is NOT actually deluded and maybe it is you that may be the oddity?

Absolutely not. Leeds United has thousands of supporters from all over the world and every single one of them Love Leeds United and also Love the place from where they come from. That's the difference.

I would say the vast majority who follow the team from OT are Glory Supporters but as long as they Love the place they are from then fair enough. No excuse for glory hunting but that's another topic. The ones that cling to the mancunian myth when they are not from manchester are the ones who are deluded.

No. I use OT as it is the example that most shows up you position as being incredibly deluded :lol:

So, you think that it is a shame that those in Old Trafford associate themselves with Manchester. Despite being the home to Manchester most famous brand. Hillarious.

You think people are deluded because they do not naturally assocaiate themselves with artifical, invisibel lines and make up there own minds.

and you think THEY are deluded :lol:

You are probably the best entertainment we've had on here for ages. You don't even see it yourself. :lol:

That people can easily and freely give up their identity just for the feeling of belonging to a bigger city or town. There was a lot of pride in Lancashire especially when it came to ones home town and now that is slowly being lost and I think it is sad.

I am delighted to say we don't have that in Yorkshire. Even the thousands of Leeds United fans from Bradford are proud they are Bradfordians and the same can genuinely be said for all the other cities and towns that surround Leeds. It's good.

Lancashire/Yorkshire. (Grego is a proper Yorkshire lad)

FFS! Move on. Get over it.

I'm glad you're happy with your Leeds/Yorkshire roots. I'm sure he's just as happy with his Manchester roots. Yet he doesn't feel the need to question you about your roots and loyalties. He probably doesn't give a shit TBH. Who can blame him. He's got better things to do in his life.

And no doubt you only drink Yorkshire Tea. (I bet you don't) Only proper Yorkshire lads drink Yorkshire Tea.

PS. I live in Stockport. I come from Manchester. You might just have to add a few more to your make believe identity crisis list. :weird:

Proper Yorkshire lad.

Absolutely not. Leeds United has thousands of supporters from all over the world and every single one of them Love Leeds United and also Love the place from where they come from. That's the difference.

I would say the vast majority who follow the team from OT are Glory Supporters but as long as they Love the place they are from then fair enough. No excuse for glory hunting but that's another topic. The ones that cling to the mancunian myth when they are not from manchester are the ones who are deluded.

I was talking about the away fans.

Those Leeds fans who travel to Old Trafford to watch football, or Yorkshire fans who travel to Old Trafford to watch cricket.

Are they deluded if they think they are going to Manchester?

I think Gregg wants us all to live in a soviet style state whereby we all think what the we are told to think.

We all associate in a manner determined by some invisible lines drawn by the state.

Leeds forumers = fucking idiots.

I'm sorry, but what do they know about people who live in Greater Manchester?

Just like Leeds is the commercial centre of farmer-ville, Manchester is the centre of Greater Manchester (funnily enough).

Bunch of winnets, don't you have crops to farm?

You are becoming a thoroughly unpleasant little man. Suggesting that people are somehow inferior, especially intellectually, because they come from a smaller place. And then hugely exaggerating the size difference just to exaggerate the point.

I would love to know what farms and markets did to you as a child.