> > On 3, Jun 2007, at 14:32, Steve Wood wrote: > >> If the argument is actually that a proportion of what is currently the >> mooring fee should be part of the licence fee instead, so that everyone >> (including all those who pay nothing to BW for their mooring, which is >> a >> lot more than just the CCs) pays more towards the upkeep of the system >> as opposed to the upkeep of individual moorings then lets have that >> debate instead... > > I'm with you on this one Steve ! > > pay X to "exist" on BW water > > pay Y to cruise - the more you cruise the more you pay > > pay Z to moor - the more you moor the more you pay > > I would think X could be a small proportion of the total (X+Y+Z) and > for someone who hardly cruises Y would be small and Z large. For > something akin to a "continuous cruiser" (ie a continuous non-moorer) Z > would be nil except for whatever develops as the honeypot nightly rate > ! > > Time for another glass of sickly sweet german wine I think. > > Beeky
I will go for paying for x. Sue nb Nackered Navvy
