Dunedin rides

**oldrider** · 9th October 2009, 22:25

Originally Posted by Ruralman

This might be worth starting a thread on because theres a few remote gas stations (Clinton will be another one shortly) that will have 24hr card pumps but will only have 91 and diesel. Could be useful to have small bottle of octane booster stored on the bike for emergency fills at places like this. I'll start a thread

There already is one! Do a search!

**fatzx10r** · 10th October 2009, 05:57

i've herd that octane boosters do nothing, if not very little to boost the octane in fuel. i had to gas up on 91 at middlemarch a couple of times and didnt seem to be a problem. but i'd top up on 98 next chance i could tho.

**hayd3n** · 23rd October 2009, 05:25

Read in the paper there is a protest ride in Timaru 10am October 31st, meeting in Caroline Bay Loop parking area.
so whos goin

**MDR2** · 23rd October 2009, 15:31

Could be keen on a ride

**hayd3n** · 24th October 2009, 19:13

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/ca...-31&e=2199&c=1

**hayd3n** · 29th October 2009, 21:32

right so im heading to timaru leaving 7am on saturday from the southern tavern car park feel free to join in on the ride

**hayd3n** · 6th November 2009, 22:34

BRONZ are organising a flash Protest ride in Dunedin
When: Saturday 14th
Where: Leaving Mosgiel Railway Satation 10am
Going: motorway, onto oneway, to dentist school then down George Street to the Octagon

be there

**Ruralman** · 7th November 2009, 22:22

I hope to be burning up some 2 stroke smoke around the Danseys pass trail ride that day so probably won't be there.
I'm going to try to attach a couple of word documents from ACC - the figures are different to those being printed and circulated by BRONZ. Now don't get me wrong - I'm as pissed off as anyone about these proposed changes - BUT - when you read this stuff you can see why they are trying to make the changes.

I have put in a submission and I wrote my own one rather than just using the BRONZ template - if I'd had this stuff beforehand rather than just the BRONZ info then I would probably have done the submission differently. The thing that worries me is that when you look at this information, assuming it is correct, ACC may well just put a line through all the BRONZ info based submissions because they are based on false figures.

**NighthawkNZ:Me** · 8th November 2009, 10:22

Originally Posted by Ruralman

f I'd had this stuff beforehand rather than just the BRONZ info then I would probably have done the submission differently.

sorry but thats the same crop of BS ACC have been saying all along nothing new... every vehicle subsidising $77 = 199million dollars. which 149 million more than required.

First thing we have to realsie ACC was designed to cross subsidise, it was not ever designed to have the so called seperate accounts and should go back to having the one large fund pool. It was designed that we use ALL the resourses to cover the costs, and that is why ACC is classed as cheap. But it isn't an Insurance never has been and never should be, if the keep these seperate accounts it simply means higher levy's so they can privitise it

12.3million dollars does not count the estimated 9 million in fuel levy from bikers, it does not count the fact that 99% of bikers also own other vehicles some own 2 or 3 as well as 2 or 3 bikes and can only drive on ride one at time, plus the fuel they use in those vehicles. Simple math shows that there are more vehicles on the road than there are licensed drivers and riders.

Simple business 101. Put the levy up, 12.m is going to be a good year. Less people will register, and will have the same number of accidents, and less money and since they pay ACC in fuel, and PAYE (if working) then ACC can not turn them down...

Your PAYE ACC levy covers anything (and I mean anything) you do as a citizen including riding your motorcycle or driving a car, and the levy you pay on your rego and fuel is technically is only a top up. And that is the way ACC should be run drawing on the full resourses, not the sub accounts.

The simple fact is ACC did not loose any money despite what the those idiots say it has 11billion in the bank and banked 1 billion last year, fuck its the only government dept making money...

They predicating too many unknowns, inflation for costs for the next 10 years and how many are going to require those costs just so we can be fully funded by 2014, based on the previous year when the accident rate is been falling since 1987 and data from the Mot which not entirey acurrant in it self. the bike accidents in 2008 in Auckland and Canterbury 43% of them didn't eveny put the cc rating... if they can't get this right then ALL other data becomes questionable. And the remaing info showed that most accidents went 250cc which shows our arguemnet that its learners which is to be expected.

**Ruralman** · 8th November 2009, 16:25

Yes nighthawk I agree with everything you say - my point is that when going in to do battle you need a clear idea of how the enemy thinks. These documents outline how they think and in order to change their thinking it is often better to come in from the side and change their direction rather than hitting them head on and make yourself a target to simply give them an opportunity to reject your argument because your figures don't line up with their data.

Its more about the way you argue with them. Anyway there should have been heaps of submissions and many lines of attack made so hopefully they will see the sense and make changes