I've proposed a model of subsidy specific to the route, as they do in America with the feeder lines and the essential air service program, but converted to a bus system. If there are routes that have to be built up, routes take time to build up. When you start a route, you may be losing money for eight or 10 months. You're not just failing to break even; you're not making enough money to pay the cost. There may be very few people on that bus initially, especially going to small communities. You need to be able to run that service long enough and reliably enough with the right-sized vehicle with the right frequency long enough for people to trust it. Once they start trusting it, people will start getting on board.
I think I'm the master of running low-volume routes. I have the lowest-volume routes in Canada, and I can make them work. It's a very simple formula. The cost of running has to be recovered in the ticket cost. If it can't be recovered through ticket cost, then it has to be subsidized on a pay-per-route basis. I think that's the quickest, easiest solution to solve this problem of some routes not generating enough revenue.