“Outa confuses the unit of measurement,” Sanral said.\u00a0“It incorrectly extracts construction costs in Europe and bases its calculations on these values in ‘millions’ of Euros instead of the ‘billions’ stated in this study. This constitutes an almost 100,000% error,” Sanral said.<\/p>\n
“Based on Outa\u2019s own calculation, but with the correct values inserted (billions not<\/u> millions), the GFIP freeways are in fact 99,7% cheaper than the comparable European costs.”<\/p>\n
BusinessTech checked the original CE Delft report<\/a>, and found that Sanral’s reading of the text is correct – the figure cited by CE Delft is billions<\/strong> of euros, not millions<\/strong>, as quoted by Outa.<\/p>\n Outa report<\/p><\/div>\n CE Delft report<\/p><\/div>\n However, in the table following the text, the same report cites the exact same costs in millions of euros, not billions\u00a0–\u00a0indicating that there may have been a typo in the original numbers.<\/p>\n Notably, France’s total road infrastructure\u00a0costs are listed at just over\u00a0\u20ac32.8 billion, making the ‘billion’ reading of the numbers seem off.<\/p>\n World Bank estimates for the average cost of constructing a\u00a0kilometer of paved road in the early 2000s was at US$1.8 million.<\/p>\n Speaking to BusinessTech,\u00a0Outa head Wayne Duvenage said that Sanral is trying to dismiss an entire report it disagrees with, on a few select inconsistencies.<\/p>\n He added\u00a0that Outa\u00a0would respond to Sanral’s\u00a0claims soon.<\/p>\n He said that Sanral\u00a0was trying to distract from the real issue: “The real question – and the whole point of the cost exercise – is whether or not South Africa was getting fair value for its road construction, and we maintain that it is not,” he told BusinessTech.<\/p>\n Regarding the million\/billion discrepancy, Duvenage said that paying R18.4 billion<\/strong> (\u20ac1.1 billion) for a kilometre of road is unheard of anywhere in the world, and is something which would have been flagged and corrected in the group’s research.<\/p>\n Sanral issued a statement on Tuesday calling Outa’s cost estimation report “inherently defective”, saying that the opposition group was working of old data and estimates and comparisons that are not compatible.<\/p>\n \u201cOuta reached its conclusion before doing its research and millions of commuters are making their decision to pay e-tolls based on false findings,\u201d Spokesperson Vusi Mona said.<\/p>\n Why we are coming after you: Sanral<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n Not paying e-tolls? Sanral is coming for you<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n Sanral threatening motorists via SMS over e-toll fees \u2013 Outa<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n![\"Outa](\"http:\/\/businesstech.co.za\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/04\/OUTA-REPORT.png\")
<\/a>![\"CE](\"http:\/\/businesstech.co.za\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/04\/CE-DELFT-REPORT-640x92.png\")
<\/a>![\"Graphy\"](\"http:\/\/businesstech.co.za\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/04\/Graphy-640x388.png\")
<\/a>Indeed, elsewhere in the same report, CE Delft uses figures far smaller than the ‘billions’ quoted – referring to road construction in hundreds of thousands of euros per kilometre.<\/p>\nSanral distracting from the point: Outa<\/h3>\n
More on Sanral<\/h3>\n