Great Western Coffee Shop

'Aggressive Virgin advertisements target ^Chiltern Snailways^ over journey times.

Virgin^s advertising campaign is regarded as one of the most aggressive ever mounted against a fellow TOC.

Virgin Trains has placed a series of large posters denigrating Chiltern Railways^s service right outside a number of its key stations including Moor Street in Birmingham and Leamington Spa.

The posters include one headlined Chiltern Snailways in reference to the company^s London-Birmingham journey time. Chiltern^s quickest journey on the route is 2hrs 10mins which is 50 minutes slower than Virgin^s 1hr 20mins.

Another poster includes the statement ^Time is money, Chiltern Railways haven^t quite grasped this^.

Chiltern said it had interpreted the advertising as a sign that Virgin is concerned by the competition it provides on the London-Birmingham route. Cheaper fares, considerably better punctuality than Virgin and consistent marketing have enabled Chiltern to build up a 30% market share of the London-Birmingham rail market from a very low base.

Virgin^s tactics are regarded in the industry as one of the most aggressive campaigns ever mounted against a fellow TOC. They follow advertising from Chiltern pointing out the price difference between the two companies^ fares and come at a time when the difference between their punctuality is at record levels.

^We have been advertising that we are ^50 cheaper than them in the peak and this is their response,^ Kirsteen Robertson, Chiltern^s head of marketing, told Transit. ^We haven^t complained though. There is a recession on and we are all after passengers. When I have seen Virgin at ATOC meetings it has all been very good humoured.^

She added that Chiltern^s success in building market share had been down to its superior punctuality as well as price. In March, the company achieved the record performance by any train operator in a four week period.

^We have just achieved 97.51% in period 13 and we think they are on course for 97%,^ Robertson said. ^We don^t have their linespeed, but we do get people there when we say we will.^

The previous record for punctuality in a four-week period was 97.3% achieved by c2c two years ago.'

Made me laugh when I read it the other day...!

Well, in a recession - instead of putting up nasty posters, why not lower your WALKUP fares?

My estimations of VT have gone down - with the W&S debacle, and now this.

Chiltern introduced the paperless ticket using mobiles a few years ago.

Chiltern are quicker than LM (less stops!), and you have 2+2 seating in Clubmans, not 2+3 seating in Desiros.

I thought that LM WCML services were to be operated with the new 2+3 units, with the B'ham - Liverpool using the older 2+2 Desiros. I suspect it's a mix up though... Do they have the same facilities as the Clubmans? (sockets etc.)

Chiltern are about 25 mins faster than LM on average.

Their cheapest advance fare is the same as LM ^5. Ditto for their Super-Off-Peak fare at ^14.90.

However, Chiltern's Off-Peak single is four pounds cheaper than LM's (^31 and ^35). This is excellent value on Chiltern's part considering that the LM service take forever! (probably quicker to drive!) A lesser company would charge for the speed.

And at least you're not stopping and starting all the time with Chiltern! You can maintain some speed. (some LMs stop twice as much as Chiltern!)

So I would rather travel with Chiltern. ;) Obviously if you want speed - use Virgin and pay.

Agree. The competition is good - however, I think Chiltern vs. VT is greater than CH vs. LM.

What privatisation is all about!

I would not be surprised if Chiltern speak to their lawyers about being called "Chiltern Snailways"

Chiltern ... reached the 95% mark.

Virgin's punctuality figure slipped from 86.2% in 2007/08 to 80.0% in 2008/09 ...

I'd also venture to suggest that it's rather unwise for Virgin to choose to criticise Chiltern, bearing in mind the most recent performance figures.

It hasn't shown Virgin in a good light sadly. They should know better following them being bullyed by BA over transatlantic routes in the nineties. The funny thing about all this is whenever the WCML goes down, the first thing Virgin do is tell passengers travelling London-Birmingham to travel on Chiltern's services!

Can't see a problem with it myself - it is increasing competition on this busy route and hopefully helping to reduce prices. 

I got this today by email.

You may wish to remove your email address from that URI. Or a moderator may wish to do it for you. Or of course you may not care...

Sanitising the link will break it, so here is one with no email address in: http://ebm.email.chilternrailways.co.uk/c/tag/hBRFdfVB8ulmjB8wtfyAABTHx4E/

  People are unnecessarily bothered about email addresses.

FGW have no reason to shorten journey times as they hold a monopoly (the SWT service is much slower)

I'm sure the Dft, daft as they are, wouldn't prevent FGW removing the 20 minutes of padding that there is on Cotswold services!

Did the Dft set Chiltern's timetable?

I'm sure the Dft, daft as they are, wouldn't prevent FGW removing the 20 minutes of padding that there is on Cotswold services!

Yes and they got fined c.^500k for amending it in 2011 [to allow WS&MR paths].

Did the Dft set Chiltern's timetable?

Ad
Two ads for Chiltern Trains:

a. A press ad that wrapped around the front and back pages of a newspaper stated "Don't be held to Branson. Anytime Return to London - Virgin: ^158, Chiltern: ^95" and "Travel to London for 40% less. Book today" on the front page. Further text included "Try Mainline today ^ spacious carriages and more tables" and "Chiltern Mainline is more punctual than Virgin Trains".

b. A leaflet distributed at an airport included text that stated "YOUR BETTER WAY TO LONDON. BUT DON'T JUST TAKE OUR WORD FOR IT" and pictured speech bubbles below that featured text including "Chiltern Mainline is more punctual than Virgin Trains". Further text stated "WARWICK PARKWAY TO LONDON MARYLEBONE FROM ^6 ONE WAY ^ spacious carriages and more tables ^ Virgin Anytime ^158, Chiltern Anytime ^95**". Small print stated "**^95 'Anytime Return' fare applies on Chiltern Mainline trains from Warwick Parkway to London Marylebone, ^158 fare applies on Virgin Trains from Birmingham New Street and Birmingham International to London Euston".

Issue
Virgin Trains challenged whether:

1. the claim "Chiltern Mainline is more punctual than Virgin Trains" in ads (a) and (b) was misleading, because it compared their overall punctuality statistics rather than the specific journey being promoted in the ad; and

2. the claim "spacious carriages and more tables" in ads (a) and (b) was misleading, because they believed Chiltern Trains has fewer tables in its longest train than Virgin has in its Pendolino train.

CAP Code (Edition 12)
3.13.33.333.73.9
Response
1. Chiltern Railways Company Ltd t/a Chiltern Trains said they had based the claim on the most accurate punctuality statistics available; the right-time punctuality statistics published by Network Rail, which were publically available. They provided a copy of the statistics. They said this was the most reliable data as it showed the exact 'right-time' punctuality. They said the only other data set available was the Public Performance Measure, which was used by the government and involved different definitions of punctuality being applied to different operators. In the case of Chiltern Trains 'punctual' was defined as no more than five minutes late, whereas for Virgin Trains 'punctual' was defined as no more than ten minutes late. They said the right-time data was therefore a better comparator as it was based on the exact time a train was due to arrive and was therefore comparing the same thing for both operators. They said that the right-time data was only published for operators overall, and was not broken down into individual routes. Neither Network Rail nor Virgin Trains published right-time performance data by route and so they were only able to make an overall comparison. They said the claim did not state that it was route specific and they did not believe it implied that was the case. The right-time statistics for 12 October 2013 showed Chiltern Trains had 87.9% punctuality over the past 12 months and Virgin Trains had 48% punctuality. They said they used the right-time data as it was the most accurate, but that Public Performance Measure statistics were available on a route-level basis and also supported their claim. They provided the data for the routes in question. They said that even though the definition of punctuality applied to them was stricter than Virgin Trains', they had higher percentage punctuality than Virgin over the past 12 months.

2. Chiltern Trains said the claim was based on the fact that passengers on their trains had a higher chance of getting a table than those travelling on a Virgin train. They said they used two types of trains on their Chiltern Mainline services. In standard class on their 'silver' train there were tables at 80% of seats, and their 'clubman' trains had tables at 52% of seats. They said that Virgin trains had tables at 35% of seats in standard class. They supplied seating diagrams of the three train types in question. They said they believed that consumers were only interested in the chances of their own seat having a table, and the fact that Virgin Trains had more seats overall, because they had more carriages, was not relevant.

Assessment
1. Not upheld

The ASA considered that because the claim "Chiltern Mainline is more punctual than Virgin Trains" specifically referred to the Chiltern Mainline route, rather than Chiltern railways in general, consumers would expect the claim to be based on punctuality statistics for their Mainline route. Although we understood that Chiltern Trains had intended the claim to be based on the right-time punctuality statistics published by Network Rail, which were not broken down by route, route specific Public Performance Measure punctuality data was available. This data showed that over the past 12 months Chiltern Trains' Mainline route had punctuality of 95.5%, compared to 84.9% punctuality of Virgin Trains' London to West Midlands route. We noted that the measure of 'punctuality' in this data was not identical, but that the criterion of punctuality for Chiltern Trains was more stringent than that for Virgin Trains. We therefore concluded that the claim "Chiltern Mainline is more punctual than Virgin Trains" had been substantiated and was not misleading.

On this point we investigated ads (a) and (b) under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 and 3.3 (Misleading advertising), 3.7 (Substantiation), 3.9 (Qualification) and 3.33 (Comparisons with identifiable competitors) but did not find them in breach.

2. Not upheld

We acknowledged that Virgin's trains had a greater number of tables overall, because of their greater number of carriages. However, we considered that consumers would understand the claim as a reference to the percentage of seats that had tables, as it was this that would determine their individual chance of obtaining a seat with a table rather than the overall number of tables. Chiltern Trains had demonstrated that a greater percentage of seats on their trains had tables than on Virgin's trains. We therefore concluded that the claim "spacious carriages and more tables" had been substantiated and was not misleading.

On this point we investigated ads (a) and (b) under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 and 3.3 (Misleading advertising), 3.7 (Substantiation), 3.9 (Qualification) and 3.33 (Comparisons with identifiable competitors), but did not find them in breach.

Action
No further action necessary.

1. Chiltern Railways Company Ltd t/a Chiltern Trains

And these guys are the arbiters of accuracy...?