The English Channel tunnel and the Alaska pipeline were both privately financed at costs in the “tens of billions”. The difference between private and public financing is that a private project has to make economic sense, while a public one does not.
[The English Channel tunnel and the Alaska pipeline were both privately financed at costs in the “tens of billions”. The difference between private and public financing is that a private project has to make economic sense, while a public one does not.]
The English Channel Tunnel had a substantial cost overrun. It was financed by public offerings in the equity markets, as well as a debt financing by the authority set up (European consortium with no British government money. But the French did put up some money).
And don’t forget that in many of these large projects the governments will give at least a partial guarantee to the debt market borrowers.
Major corporations did not put up the money. It was almost as if a publicly traded hedge fund built the chunnel, not corporations. If it had failed, a lot of small investors would have lost their investment.
The Pipeline was mostly financed by NON-American companies. ARCO was the only domestic investor. And Japanese steel companies were the only suppliers of the pipe, since they had the only steel that passed muster.
Not exactly a ringing endorsement of American private capital being the reason these were built.