
www.Usenet.com
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |
On 27 Nov 2003 23:32:43 GMT, David Eerdmans wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, seen in misc.transport.rail.europe: [...] >So you're turning away customers who are even willing to accept a bad >service? Sounds like a weird practice to me... Experience in the UK shows that people will choose to stand (sometimes even when seats are available) - and then complain that they were "forced" to stand. If they boarded without a ticket and were not checked (because the conductor physically couldn't get through the train), they'll then complain that not only were they "forced" to stand, but that no-one came to collect their fare. I've never understood the logic, but I think I'd prefer the bad publicity generated by word of mouth from people saying "They wouldn't let me on the train because it was full and I'd have had to stand" to "They let me on even though the train was full and I had to stand all the way...". A matter of degree, maybe, but the former is (to me) the least bad publicity. -- Ross Hamilton, in Lincoln (UK) >From address *will* bounce
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |