Of course the rail needs large subsidies

At what price and on what bases belonging to RFF railway routes should they be leased to the SNCF (or tomorrow to Trenitalia), which uses It is a question to several billion euros. It is all the more important that the policy displayed in France is to significantly increase the stock of tracks in the ten or twenty years.

A first point is clear: currently paid tolls are far less than the cost of the service rendered by RFF to SNCF. They amounted to EUR 3 billion per year, which is quite exactly the cost of maintenance of the tracks, which is notoriously inadequate maintenance. In other words, SNCF does not at all support the cost of capital of the lines it uses. It is like a tenant who would only pay expenses of co-ownership of his apartment. Is such a benefit justified

Probably not. Of course, the rail needs large subsidies. Users payments cover approximately half of production costs. If the railway was to pay all of its internal costs, most of the lines would close. Recognize, which is not itself in the current situation of public finances, the taxpayer must continue to pay some 10 billion euros per year for rail - much more in the future because the new lines will be less profitable still than existing lines. For reasons of clarity and incentives, namely democracy and efficiency, closer to the truth of costs is desirable, and involves a strong increase in tolls.

RFF is therefore correct to seek such an increase (that SNCF combat course vigorously). But RFF is wrong to him sit on what she calls the "ability to pay" different lines. According to this theory, a train that carries 1,000 passengers should pay almost 10 times as more than a train carrying 100 passengers. The train of the Friday leading in their villas of the Drôme rich Bobo high contributory capacity should pay more than the train that takes work poor commuters to low contributory capacity. RFF would therefore extend to the tolls "yield management" practiced by the airlines and the SNCF with talent, and who is selling the same service to those who are willing to pay much and good market to those who do not have this capability.

Why the "yield management" would be legitimate for the SNCF, and not for RFF Because the SNCF customers are final consumers of RFF are producers. The application of rail Groove - like electricity or labor - demand emanating from the SNCF is an application of factors of production. Can one imagine EDF seek to sell more expensive per kilowatt hour that is walking a 1000 passenger train that walk a 100 passenger train

Not, of course. Such pricing would have the disadvantage of blurring the cost information. The unit cost, i.e. per passenger, in a 1,000 passenger train is much less to the community than the unit cost in a 100-passenger train. Do not hide the reality. Price system to the contrary the reflect to orient the choice to the collective cost-minimization.