Samsun rail system line not available

Samsun rail system line is not profitable: CHP Samsun Metropolitan Mayor candidate Tarık Cengiz met with members of the press at Derya Wedding Hall to promote their projects.
Firstly, Tarık Cengiz, who distributed brochures with projects involving the city center and 14 districts, said that the citizens coming from the districts had to change 3 vehicles due to the rail system and that they would end this persecution if they took office. Cengiz noted that a lot of money was spent on public transportation in Samsun but people were tortured by having to change 3 vehicles again and said: “It is a system that was rejected by the State Planning Organization during the rail system built in Samsun. The reason is very simple. For a rail system to be profitable, that is, the city center population must be 1 million. But Samsun city center population is 550 thousand. The rail system should carry 70 thousand passengers a day. But the current figure is around 30-32 thousand. So, by making these people have to change a few vehicles, their aim is to carry more passengers in the rail system. For now, the cost of the rail system to the city population in 2013 is 300 million lira. When you add exchange difference and recently purchased wagons, there is a total cost of 500 million liras. The municipality's annual income is 200 million liras. In other words, the municipality has tied 2.5 years of income to the rail system without any investment and without paying wages to the staff. We are not against the rail system, but we are against timeless work. It is more logical to build a private bus route to be built from Taflan to Tekkeköy and the airport. Here, business is done with the logic of 'I did it'. ”
 

Armin

sohbet

2 Comments

  1. I do not know whether Samsun TRAM Project is profitable or not. Hearing reliability is something I never want to interrupt with suspicious information. BUT, it is quite difficult to find cities with a million-to-one million in our country in old Europe… You can see that almost all of the cities with a population between 100 and 500 thousand have excellent Rail-Public-Transport. It is certain that these systems are operated profitably.
    THE MAIN QUESTION is: according to which criteria do you define the word RANTABEL?
    If 100% economical Operation-Expenses…! If you put forward the vbg arguments, you can start by deactivating the available rubber-wheeled public transportation vehicles, despite all their flexibility. Because theoretically, NO ONE of the public transport systems is profitable! (To the so-called experts who claim otherwise: Challenge!)
    BUT, public transportation is a strategy issue, which is within the scope of AMMENIN DUTIES, considering the ENVIRONMENT in the national and social + -modern process. AND this is true.
    Almost all of the YHT lines, which are made with the statistical data available at hand, are controversial and ambiguous in theory, but the numbers / occupancy rates based on the pretic were exceeded and the targets were prevented.
    TRANSPORT (communication, education…) is the driving engine of this work, one of the main principles and factors of progress and speed.
    Which criterion is valid, and according to what you want to do depreciation ???
    Respects
    MB Shenkok

  2. A final addition:
    If we put our water flowing from our faucets into an account of rantability according to the economic operating criteria, we can see that no water is flowing from any tap after one hour in practice.
    However, if our water is cut for an hour in practice, it is recommended that everyone ask themselves how we behave first. It is such a professional of unconsciousness; Even when our holy four rubber-wheeled cow in front of our house is bathing with 1 ton of water, we will not be upset ...
    BUT basically, the suitability of public transportation alternatives MUST be discussed in society and every battle should be heard. But even those who are not experts in this work, even if they are politicians, they should think more than once about the way in which their arguments are conveyed, and they should weigh up.

Comments