TfL property arm - anyone think this is odd?

[MummyPiglet]

Sits a bit uncomfortably with me - why can’t one arm of the business help fund the other? Seems wrong somehow

amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/aug/18/how-transport-for-london-plans-to-build-20000-new-homes

But it is helping to fund TFL - look, it says here in the article you linked to that ‘The property arm is wholly owned by TfL, which collects all its profits.’ That suggests to me that the transport side of TFL is benefiting from the property side of the business.

That’s what I thought but it’s contradicted by this… www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-61821987.amp

Hmm I don’t see how the BBC article is contradicting it. I think all the BBC is saying is that TFL isn’t meeting its savings targets and that most of its funding comes from passenger fares rather than other funding sources (but it doesn’t make clear what those other funding sources are - they could include the property side?)

The BBC article doesn’t contradict it either.

TfL needs revenue funding now, the property game is long-term.

That’s a fair point, clearly have misunderstood!

just feel like if they sold off some of their property portfolio (they are the third biggest landowner in London!) the deficit would be easily rectified. Appreciate that is not a long term solution though.

In theory, TfL could sell its land to the highest bidding developer and turn a blind eye while yet more luxury flats are built for investors benefit. If we had a Tory mayor, that may well have been the preferred approach.

Or TfL can try to maintain some degree of control over the development to try to secure affordable homes. This will likely secure less revenue for TfL but you can see why there is a desire to take that approach when safe, secure homes are so unaffordable for so many.