Scoping study published - insufficient funds for Navan

[Navan Junction]

Originally Posted by Mark Gleeson

There is a difference between financially and economically viable

Financially relates to the costs at company level, as in not viable need more subsidy.

Yes. But the line is being paid for by central government through Transport 21and MCC levies. When the line is built, only then will the day to day running costs and depreciation be costed to IÉ.

The report says that over a 30 period revenue will cover the lines running costs, though possibly not depreciation.

Assuming that IÉ aren't footing the bill for the line's construction (which they won't anyway and never were going to) then their cost base relates to running and depreciation.

The question is then is it fair to say that all lines around the country meet their annualised running costs and depreciation costs?

Because if they don't, then is the Navan line really that different to them?

Slightly different question - how many lines in the country actually even meet their annualised running costs, never mind depreciation costs?

[Mark Gleeson]

If you ignore depreciation the Dublin Suburban devision is 5 million in the black, given the young age profile of the trains depreciation hurts badly.

For several years in the early 90's the DART was fully profitable even accounting for depreciation

Dublin Cork is said to be profitable