Train Graphic
Great Western Passengers' Forum Great Western Coffee Shop - [home] and [about]
Read about the forum [here].
Register and contribute [here] - it's free.
 tomorrow - Acton Depot open weekend
tomorrow - Somersts Festival of Transport
23/09/2018 - Somerset Consultation closes
24/09/2018 - Bus consultation closes
24/09/2018 - RCTS / Windsor & Maidenhead
28/09/2018 - Ask a stupid question day
Random Image
Train Running @GWR Twitter Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail News GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4 Chat on off
September 21, 2018, 12:48:00 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most liked recent subjects
[125] Walking Britain's Lost Railways
[68] Great Western Railway: on-board catering, buffets, Travelling ...
[49] Somerset & Dorset - heritage line - the remains and possib...
[46] Ask those questions!
[44] Another Bristol Parkway Closure - for three weeks
[41] Princes Risborough to Chinnor
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6
  Print  
Author Topic: East Coast rail franchise - ongoing discussion  (Read 3474 times)
didcotdean
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 929


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: May 16, 2018, 06:02:30 pm »

This is an interesting read, the assessment of the forward short term options:.

Puts the growth blame partially on external factors such as fuel prices being lower so people choosing to drive, but also on VTEC 'business intiatives' not delivering.

LNER also will be 'A new, publically-owned brand that will become the long-term face of the railway for those who work on it and use it'.

Logged
martyjon
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1083


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: May 16, 2018, 06:25:23 pm »


Puts the growth blame partially on external factors such as fuel prices being lower so people choosing to drive ....



Wouldn't be the high walk-on fares, reservations not being honoured, overcrowding and cheaper by air by any chance for the reasons why people choose to drive.

I know its not East Coast but I can fly to Glasgow and back from Bristol (including city to airports bus services) cheaper than travelling by rail so I expect the same applies between London and Edinburgh.

Logged
CyclingSid
Transport Scholar
Sr. Member
******
Posts: 188


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: May 16, 2018, 06:39:46 pm »

"Fuel prices being lower" presumably having nothing to do with the fact that government hasn't implemented the road fuel escalator for how long?
Logged
didcotdean
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 929


View Profile
« Reply #48 on: May 16, 2018, 06:43:41 pm »

To some extent there seems to be a veil being drawn over the whole modelling of the passenger growth figures assumptions which were built as much into the DfT tender as the bidders' responses.

If you think the DfT is being too bullish you won't win a bidding round with lower assumptions.

Never been clear to me why there has been so much great expectations of revenue out of the East Coast line over the years as none of the franchises have come off too well (and DOR was a no-investment period). Even come to think of it back to the original LNER, which never seemed to make any money, certainly out of passengers. It seems a route very susecptable to the mood of the economy.
Logged
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2093



View Profile
« Reply #49 on: May 16, 2018, 06:58:53 pm »

Can't help wondering how much worse GWR has to get, before Graying considers it a prime candidate for DoR

I cant see this happening.
Remember that the various East coast franchises have not been ended due to poor performance, customers were generally happier than on FGW, Connex, Thameslink, and others.
The franchises ended because the operators were loosing money and have gone bust had they continued.

The FGW/GWR failings would have to get a lot worse before they get kicked out for poor performance. And SOME of the problems are due to network rail who are a government department in all but name.
Logged

"When customers say that they want a seat, they dont mean they want to sit with their knees behind their ears so that 4 more can sit down. They mean that they want an extra coach so that 74 more can sit down"
"Capacity on intercity routes should be about number of vehicles, not compressing people"
devonexpress
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 294


View Profile
« Reply #50 on: May 16, 2018, 08:47:18 pm »

My main issue is will they paint the trains LNER green Tongue   I doubt the HST/91 Sets will but hopefully the 800s will as LNER will become the standard brand no matter who runs it by the sound of it. My own little take on it: https://www.flickr.com/photos/138348092@N04/27284384227/in/datetaken-public/

It starting to sound more like the government want to put the railways back to pre 1948, still owned by the public, but managed by a board, hopefully the stupid franchise model will end so we get a long term plan.

VTEC's main issue was at the start of the franchise, is went flashing the cash everywhere to show off and then along with other factors ran out of money pretty soon. I do think that Great Northern services should merge back into LNER and Arriva Rail North should be broke up and the York & Newcastle services transferred to LNER.   Scotrail won't be able to as it is controlled by the Scottish Parliament of course.
Logged
didcotdean
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 929


View Profile
« Reply #51 on: May 16, 2018, 08:56:08 pm »

My main issue is will they paint the trains LNER green Tongue   
With the carriages wrapped in teak-coloured vinyls ...
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 21798



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #52 on: May 16, 2018, 10:22:52 pm »

If we have an LNER and a GWR ... how long before we have a Southern and a London Midland Scottish?   Perhaps it would be an idea to have just four big franchises to run from 1st January 2023?

Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Member of Melksham Rail User Group, on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest and some more things besides
chopper1944
Full Member
***
Posts: 30


View Profile
« Reply #53 on: May 16, 2018, 10:33:43 pm »

I agree that privatisation should have been based upon the "big 4" of 1923. There are far too many franchises. How about Chiltern becoming enlarged to GWR?
Logged
bignosemac
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 15929


Question everything.


View Profile
« Reply #54 on: May 16, 2018, 11:04:00 pm »

If we have an LNER and a GWR ... how long before we have a Southern and a London Midland Scottish?   Perhaps it would be an idea to have just four big franchises to run from 1st January 2023?

We already have a Southern.
Logged

Former FGW/GWR regular passenger. No more. Despicable company.
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 21798



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #55 on: May 16, 2018, 11:08:38 pm »

If we have an LNER and a GWR ... how long before we have a Southern and a London Midland Scottish?   Perhaps it would be an idea to have just four big franchises to run from 1st January 2023?

We already have a Southern.

Yes   Grin Grin Grin
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Member of Melksham Rail User Group, on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest and some more things besides
Timmer
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4732


View Profile
« Reply #56 on: May 17, 2018, 06:29:35 am »

The Times reporting this morning that four other franchises could be in trouble, the same four that have been mentioned before:

SWR
Transpennine
Northern
Greater Anglia
Logged
TaplowGreen
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3898


View Profile
« Reply #57 on: May 17, 2018, 09:13:06 am »

The Times reporting this morning that four other franchises could be in trouble, the same four that have been mentioned before:

SWR
Transpennine
Northern
Greater Anglia

When one considers how spectacularly awful GWRs performance has been over the last year or so, you can only contemplate those 4 with a mixture of horror and relief if you don't have to use them, and incredulity that GWR don't make the list too................I guess it may go some way to explaining why Hopwood et al got the gong for "Rail Operator of the Year", on the basis that they are slightly less awful than the rest, and/or are still raking in enough cash for all of the significant stakeholders to look the other way?
Logged
ray951
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 222


View Profile
« Reply #58 on: May 17, 2018, 11:56:52 am »

Those other 4 TOC's are probably in trouble for financial reasons, i.e. they have overbid and passenger growth has not been as strong as they predicated.
That is different from GWR who 'are in trouble' because they don't have enough trains and/or staff and therefore have not been able to provide a very satisfactory service.
Logged
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2093



View Profile
« Reply #59 on: May 17, 2018, 12:19:18 pm »

Those other 4 TOC's are probably in trouble for financial reasons, i.e. they have overbid and passenger growth has not been as strong as they predicated.
That is different from GWR who 'are in trouble' because they don't have enough trains and/or staff and therefore have not been able to provide a very satisfactory service.


Agree entirely.
I feel that some people are confusing poor performance from the PASSENGERS point of view, with a poor FINANCIAL  performance.
The two are very different, though either would be grounds for concern.

GWR are doing very poorly from the passenger service point of view, simply look at the endless problems reported elsewhere on these forums. But AFAIK they are not in danger of going bust.

SWR, by contrast are doing better from the passengers point of view. There is always room for improvement of course but as regards the percentage of trains that are short formed/cancelled/part cancelled they are doing better than GWR.
SWR are however reportedly in financial trouble.
Logged

"When customers say that they want a seat, they dont mean they want to sit with their knees behind their ears so that 4 more can sit down. They mean that they want an extra coach so that 74 more can sit down"
"Capacity on intercity routes should be about number of vehicles, not compressing people"
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants