Great Western Coffee Shop

Reading my copy of this week's Cotswold Journal, I came across a full-page advert headed "Putting 'reliable' and 'trains to London' in the same sentence".

Needless to say, it wasn't published on behalf of FGW. Chiltern are offering season ticket holders from Evesham, Honeybourne, Moreton and Kingham a free return ticket to London to sample their service. Judging by the web page, similar ads must be running around Maidenhead. See http://www.chilternrailways.co.uk/better (http://www.chilternrailways.co.uk/better)

Unfortunately, they seem to have had problems with spelling Moreton-in-Marsh correctly. The newspaper ad calls it Morton-in-Marsh and the website has Moreton-in-the-Marsh.

And the newspaper ad is a bit naughty, as it doesn't make clear the offer only applies to season ticket holders.

I wonder why they don't include Pershore in the offer?

A very good offer though, and well timed - before the WCML mod/Cotswold doubling benefits have fully kicked in.

But can Warwick Parkway take more cars?

I expect during the Cotswold Line works they'll make even more of a push to pinch FGW's passengers. You can't blame them! I've never seen Warwick Parkway car park more than about 80% full since they added more spaces about 5 years ago.

There is a massive car park at the new Aylesbury Vale Parkway to fill - might be that it's also aimed at Leighton and Cheddington users, or possibly people who drive to Tring rather than into the middle of Aylesbury?

Paul

We have had the advert in the Maidenhead advertiser for the last couple of weeks. I have just looked at it, and definitely no mention of only applying to season ticket holders (although obvious as soon as you get into their web site).. Apparently Beaconsfield is our option, although it would take a fair amount of time to get there!

The 'Tizer' has a very wide coverage, across to Stoke Poges etc not to mention Marlow which lets face it the journey time from there to Paddington to not as good as FGW could make it.  I live in Maidenhead and I must admit up until the Dec 2007 FGW timetable change I was looking at Chiltern as a viable option even adding on car parking and traveling to Beaconsfield it was starting to look better all the time, I will review it again post the Dec 2008 FGW timetable change as the combining of the 07:02 and 07:04 is madness of the first order and there general service that connect with the Marlow branch during the day and weekends is poor and as for the late afternoon / early evening service to Maidenhead  :'(

Loohs like FGW need to lift their game for the mid Thames and upper Thames parts of their area

Givern the Wolmar question, "What are TOCs?" for Chiltern is probably the least worse TOC. At least they seem to like running trains reasonably briskly, but are still pretty high up the punctuality table. They've redoubled Risborough to Anhyo and have ambitous plans to run from Oxford. They also work well with Wrexham and Shrewsbury.

As Electric train says the Tizer has quite a wide circulation in South Bucks where Beconsfield is a viable alternative to the Marlow branch, Maidenhead or Taplow. I knew someone in Bourne End who gave up on FGW and drove to Beconsfield. Until they gave her a parking place in London when she drove!

I say good for them, especialy if it gets FGW to put its socks up. Wasn't competition why the railways were privatised? However, as above the real competiton comes from road.

 

It's a shame Chiltern didn't replace Thames keeping the Paddington Oxford Worcester route with two TOCs. Competition would benefit the line.

What competition? There was never any competition in the two-company era. Pre-2004, FGW operated a handful of services on this corridor, which were complementary to Thames, in the shape of the peak Hereford-London services, and not forgetting the comedy off-peak out and back working from London which was officially operated by FGW, but was actually a hired-in Turbo!

Why did FGW run it then?

"What competition? There was never any competition in the two-company era. Pre-2004, FGW operated a handful of services on this corridor, which were complementary to Thames, in the shape of the peak Hereford-London services, and not forgetting the comedy off-peak out and back working from London which was officially operated by FGW, but was actually a hired-in Turbo!"

You can't have competition without a multiple choice. I would not claim that in the Thames days there was real competition however get a good TOC who understands pricing, service etc. and FGW would have to raise their game without the need for pressure groups such as the CLPG. For example tried to get an advanced purchase ticket on this line recently?

I personally don't agree with privatisation but as it stands we get the worst of all worlds, a private company running the line as a monopoly.

There is multiple choice, it's called cars, coaches, planes...

On-rail competition for passengers on the same set of rails is nonsense and even the most ardent Tory advocates of privatisation in the 1990s couldn't come up with a way to make it work. Only parallel routes can provide that and they usually aren't operating on a level playing field to start with, eg Reading-London. Even runnning non-stop to Waterloo, SWT could never match the time on the GW route.

If Chiltern do get to Oxford, I expect FGW might up their game, but with Reading rebuilding looming, there may not be that much they can do for a few years anyway.

Cheap advance purchase tickets are used to fill seats that would otherwise run empty. There's no point FGW offering them from the Cotswold Line into London until after lunchtime because the trains are already busy. And after lunchtime coming out of London, the same applies. Not forgetting that if you have a Network Card, you can get 1/3 off fares outside the peaks as well, which doesn't apply to the likes of Swindon or Chippenham. Plus for local journeys there is the Cotswold Railcard, so there are ways to get discounts.

THE FGW Turbo ran because before privatisation BR InterCity operated an off-peak HST out to Malvern and back - Cotswold and Malverns Express - so Great Western Trains had it written into the service requirement that they provided a train at this time of day. As far as I know, a combination of rising demand elsewhere and stock shortages after incidents like the Southall crash meant the HST was used on better-loaded duties and the Turbo hire deal was arranged.

How long does a typical journey on a Chiltern 165 Unit take from Warwick to Marylebone then?

It would be interesting to see which is quicker, a FGW HST or a Chiltern 165 unit?

Im sure I know which is cheaper?  :D ;)

Why don't FGW offer advance fares on off peak services, which are normally empty?

A quick look at National Rail Enquiries gives 1:41 for the 11:21 off Warwick Parkway to Marylebone
^5 Advanced Single.

Putting via Reading gives 2:06 for 11:21. 2 changes. Actual running time 1:40. with 168, Voyager, HST so would be rough running time for through train.

^28 Advaced single. Although ^16.90 at 12:21.

So time would be roughly the same but considerably cheaper to Marylebone.

Your guess was correct.

"There is multiple choice, it's called cars, coaches, planes..."

There are some interesting responses from time to time but this takes the biscuit.

When was the last time the choice on the Cotswold line was a plane?

Multiple TOCs run from Oxford to Reading without issue - there is no reason why a line should have a single TOC. If airports were run like railways you'd have one runway per airline.

I'm sure Will was making a general comment when he was saying that air is one of the transport choices you have, and not being specific about the Cotswold Line.

A choice of TOC's does exist on certain routes - Oxford to Reading is one - but to say Cross County and FGW are actively competing for passengers on this flow is nonsense. Between the two operators they provide roughly four express trains an hour which are spaced quite sensibly to give a roughly 15-minute frequency which means they complement each other, not compete with.

How would having more than one TOC on the Cotswold Line benefit it? The maximum frequency of service is realistically every hour - with a slightly enhanced peak service being offered which really stretches the line to breaking point and will continue to do so even after the redoubling because of issues further down the line.

I would dispute the conntention that the multiple TOCs run between Oxford and Reading without issue.  There was contention even in BR days between Inter City, Cross Country, NSE, Freightliner, Aggregates, Oil etc. freight  sectors. But at least they were basically worked by BR and the signalmen were also BR and their was a Fat Controller (General Manager) in Paddington to bang heads together when things got out of hand.

As one of the staion supervisors at Slough said to me soon after privatisation that there was now no way  he could  bag a loco from Langley oil terminal to push a failed train out of the way as he could in BR days. He couldn't even issue a special stop order without express permission from Thames control at Reading.

I would suggest that it's even worse now because of the late penalty system that, as we've seen from many posts on this board, sensible train regulation has gone by the board. No TOC is going say you can hold my stopper for 5 minutes and let buggins late running fast in front. No the stopper will run on time whilst the fast gets later. Also the signalmen are Networkrail now just signal the trains as they turn up they are no longer allowed to make regulating decisions without consulting all the controls involved. Which takes too long. An aphoracal story suggests that on Sunday at a large junction staion a train from one operator running on time but with a booked stop of 15 minutes was allowed to occupy the platform whilst another late running booked in front of the train ocuppying the station was held outside waiting for the platform to clear.

Having observed and reported on train regulation  in several boxes on the Southern, I know in that real time  just how quickly regulating decisions have to made if you are not to delay a whole sequences of trains.

That's why rail on rail competiton is not the same as many airlines using the same runway. If planes are late off the terminal other planes can have taken off in front off them and they can take their turn. Although they might technically delay a following flight, if you look at airport depature boards you often see several flights  with the same depature time, which of course is impossible. Once airbourne they are usually free to fly to their destination without much disruption, as they are not flying in the same part of the sky as the plane in front. Whereas, trains have to follow on the same line so if the train in friont stops at a station the following train has to stop behind it.

Also air timetiables are subject to even more padding than train times.

So by and large Rail on Rail competition is extremely hard to achieve, although as Hull and Wrexham Shrewsbury have shown they can provide a better services than the major TOCs on their routes. However, to make the railways work to their very best overall there has to be a Fat Controller in overall charge and thinner controllers in charge of specific smaller parts of the system,  who have absolute control over everything that goes on  between the boundary fences on their length of line. Oh dear I've seem to reinvented BR or at least GWR for our lines.

"A choice of TOC's does exist on certain routes - Oxford to Reading is one - but to say Cross County and FGW are actively competing for passengers on this flow is nonsense"

There was no mention of them competing, but they could if they wanted to.

"How would having more than one TOC on the Cotswold Line benefit it?"

If alternate trains were run by different TOCs to could generate competition in pricing, quality of service, quality of rolling stock etc. The lousy timetabling in the afternoon may also be addressed. Multiple TOCs would not fix the infrastructure but the customer could get a better deal.

"So by and large Rail on Rail competition is extremely hard to achieve, although as Hull and Wrexham Shrewsbury have shown they can provide a better services than the major TOCs"

There can be real advantages from competition.

8F I actually believe the way forward is back to BR but if we're stuck with privatisation then we need some ways of ensuring the TOCs deliver. Competition is one of the best without forcing people off the railways, which is the alternative Will accurately outlines.

I hope it didn't appear I was advocating forcing people off trains at any point, merely pointed out there are alternatives, depending on where you are in the country and the journey you are making. For most journeys from the communities on the Cotswold Line, it's the train or the car, as buses only run parallel to parts of the line and National Express needs a change of coaches at Birmingham to get between Worcester and London. As discussed elsewhere, there are parts of the FGW area where air is a real rival to the train.

How on earth would alternate trains run by different firms be competition? If you want to get to work in Oxford for 8am, or London for 9am, you catch the trains that fit in with those requirements, not wait for the next one run by cheap advance fares railway that gets there half-an-hour too late for you.

FGW does go in for a little competition on the South Wales main line, offering fares only valid on its own trains between the handful of stations it serves, which undercut the all-operator tickets priced by Arriva, but given that the stations and ticket offices are all managed by Arriva and most people just want to be able to get on the first train that turns up that's going to their destination so will probably opt for a common-user ticket, you've got to wonder how many FGW tickets are actually being sold. And this line is obviously a different kettle of fish from the Cotswold Line, with a lot more trains running on a route with far greater capacity.

CrossCountry have no desire whatever to encourage more local traffic on their already very busy services between Reading, Oxford and Banbury, indeed, if they could get the pesky local passengers off their ridiculously small and crowded long-distance trains, they probably would, but they get a very healthy slice of the revenue from local ticket sales, so tolerate them.

In the case of both Hull Trains and Wrexham & Shropshire, they are providing services that none of the major franchised operators has shown any interest in and W&S are actually restricted by anti-competition rules, protecting Virgin, over stops at Wolverhampton and Banbury.

There was nothing stopping GNER operating more services to Humberside, they just didn't want to do it, and Virgin could have chosen to carry on serving Telford and Shrewsbury, as they did in the early days of their operations after reinstating the old BR through trains. Even with extra SuperVoyagers available from the start of the new timetable, they have opted to use all these to Chester and North Wales - including, notoriously, one London train a day from and back to Wrexham, an idea they seem to dreamed up only after W&S started operating. Is that the kind of competition you have in mind Andy?

And this lone spoiler service isn't needed to keep W&S on their toes, because they already know full well that they have to be at the top of their game to take on Virgin for custom from Shropshire in particular, given the WCML's speed advantage, even with a change at Birmingham or Wolverhampton. Their fares are already more than competitive with Virgin and customer service is second to none, from my own experience.

And surely that sums it up! On a much more suitable flow for competition, between Oxford and Reading, neither TOC is particularly interested in taking advantage of it. I have to side with Willc on this one Andy - there are SO many reasons why competition on a low capacity line like the Cotswold Line are a bad idea.

The FGW offer Willc quotes on the South Wales is an interesting one. That's an area where FGW are in a position to offer reduce fares, there's a frequent service and their full length HST sets have plenty of spare seats to fill on off-peak between Swansea and Cardiff, so local journeys at a reduced rate achieves that aim nicely - even if the take up isn't that great. There are precious few other areas where that is the case though.

And back to topic..Seen in Charlbury last night.....a flatbed truck carrying advertising hoarding promoting Chiltern railways service into London.

FGW also offered FGW-only tickets in Devon - I believe the success of this was the reason for the South Wales 'offer'. The Welsh version didn't last long because ATW quickly reduced the all-TOC fares to undercut the FGW fares, so the FGW-only tickets ended up being the most expensive! Just checked on qjump, and the FGW-only fares seem to have gone.

I read somewhere that ATW's price reduction led to a 25% increase in passenger numbers. I forget how much the fares were reduced, but I'm not sure that a 25% increase in revenue would have been enough to cover the reduced fares. Had ATW not responded, of course, FGW would have made more money by increased demand and having 100% of the ORCATS revenue, and ATW would have lost passengers -  and I don't think the powers that be would have been happy with the subsidised TOC (ATW) having its income poached by FGW.

Congratulations Hafren you've just succinctly  summarised the absurdity  of the current mess. I was going to say system but I can can't make out any systematic features. Didn't someone post on Coffee Shop that there are thousands (4000?) exceptions in the fare manuals.

However, back to the topic as I understand it Chiltern have some very competitive fares even for walk on passengers. I would certainly drive to Beaconsfield for a day trip to Birmingham.

No they did not.  The TOC which sets the fare is not allowed to set TOC only fares over the same route.  So FGW could not have set any FGW only fares in Devon. What they did do was reduce the price of off peak tickets in Devon and Cornwall so it was cheaper for everybody on XC as well.  However by reducing these fares they could put some other fares up by a higher amount but still keep the overall increase within the limits allowed.

Before the new franchise FGW sold tickets from Plymouth to Exeter St Davids for ^5 and it was a cheap day return, only valid on FGW services, as I used this offer. I believe at this time Wessex trains were responsible for setting fares in Devon.