I understand that because ARS is a very busy place during peak hour and Admet would get significant revenue from advertisements that are shown on the TVs. This "profit" made can go towards running and improving the network.
It will be almost pure profit for PTS. All they would have had to do before the media company came and installed the screens would have been to make sure the electrical supply was adequate and print off a couple of site passes for the technicians.
Do we really think that the cost of 3 or 4 large TV screens would be better spent on closing a level crossing, or a grade separation?One suspects that the prices of different things (TVs - really cheap, grade separation - really expensive) are not always fully appreciated.
Indeed. Unless the media company has previously been commissioned to produce ads spruiking the government's infrastructure projects, I doubt that the cost of a grade separation will ever come to their attention.
In addition, those screens will almost certainly be leased rather than bought. Businesses in the media field don't like tying up capital in technical assets if they can avoid it.
How about installing seat back TVs in every railcar for passenger comfort?
Bad idea, even if we were talking about longer distance services. First Great Western tried that on a handful of HST sets used on the London-Wales and London-Devon/Cornwall routes, but they have now all been deactivated and will be removed when that stock is refurbished for its transfer to Abellio Scotrail.
The reason is simple - almost everyone has their own device with their own content these days. Wifi access points would attract much higher demand than seat-back screens.