|
vacman
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: April 17, 2009, 23:05:45 » |
|
Chiltern are quicker than LM▸ (less stops!), and you have 2+2 seating in Clubmans, not 2+3 seating in Desiros.
Look on the journey planner and they're about the same, the last Desiro I went on had 2+2 seating? still, cheap and cheerful and no underfloor diesel engine noise! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Btline
|
|
« Reply #16 on: April 17, 2009, 23:24:40 » |
|
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. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
devon_metro
|
|
« Reply #17 on: April 17, 2009, 23:46:55 » |
|
Personally, i'd be travelling Virgin at the moment. 90+DVT‡ set replacing a pendolino. Luxury!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
vacman
|
|
« Reply #18 on: April 18, 2009, 19:24:51 » |
|
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. it may well be quicker to drive but is certainly easier to catch the train, bham to london is a prime example though of where competition is benefiting the customer! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Btline
|
|
« Reply #19 on: April 18, 2009, 19:39:10 » |
|
Agree. The competition is good - however, I think Chiltern vs. VT▸ is greater than CH vs. LM▸ .
What privatisation is all about!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
vacman
|
|
« Reply #20 on: April 18, 2009, 23:17:40 » |
|
Agree. The competition is good - however, I think Chiltern vs. VT▸ is greater than CH vs. LM▸ .
What privatisation is all about!
I don't doubt that but if you know the night before that you need to go from Brum to London at peak time then you have the cheap LM option, must say I was in the midlands a few weeks ago and travelled around quite a bit on LM and was quite impressed, was I just lucky? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Btline
|
|
« Reply #21 on: April 18, 2009, 23:57:22 » |
|
They're a big improvement on Central Trains! (run by NX)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Tim
|
|
« Reply #22 on: May 28, 2009, 13:52:48 » |
|
leave them to it. All's fair in love, war or business.
I don't think being "agressive" makes an advert illegal although I do wonder if Virgin are sailing close to the wind in using Chilterns trademark "Chiltern Railways" in an abusive way by refering to it as "Chiltern Snailways".
The Comparitive Advertising Directive permits the use of a competitor's Trademark without permission in order to identify their product, but you might argue that "Chiltern Snailways" is causing illegal damage to the brand. Will the public be refering to the TOC▸ by this disparaging name (thereby causing damage) long after the advertising campaign is forgotten?
I wonder how Chiltern will respond
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 28, 2009, 13:58:14 by Tim »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Tim
|
|
« Reply #23 on: May 28, 2009, 15:00:39 » |
|
More dull info from me :-)
Article 3 of teh Comparitive Advertising Directive provides a list of criteria where comparative advertising will be allowed:
^
(1) it is not misleading ^ ;
(2) it compares goods or services meeting the same needs or intended for the same purpose;
(3) it objectively compares one or more material, relevant, verifiable and representative features of those goods and services, which may include price;
(4) it does not create confusion in the market place between the advertiser^s trade marks, trade names, other distinguishing marks, goods or services and those of a competitor;
(5) it does not discredit or denigrate the trade marks, trade names, other distinguishing marks, goods, services activities or circumstances of a competitor;
The Trade Marks Act 1994
Section 10(6) states:
^Nothing in the preceding provisions of this section shall be construed as preventing the used of a registered trade mark by any person for the purpose of identifying goods or services as those of the proprietor or licensee.
But any such use otherwise than in accordance with honest practices in industrial or commercial matters shall be treated as infringing the registered trade mark if the use without due cause takes unfair advantage of, or is detrimental to, the distinctive character or repute of the trade mark.^
I would not be surprised if Chiltern speak to their lawyers about being called "Chiltern Snailways"
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Chris from Nailsea
|
|
« Reply #24 on: May 28, 2009, 18:33:10 » |
|
I would not be surprised if Chiltern speak to their lawyers about being called "Chiltern Snailways"
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. See http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=4737.0 - Chiltern ... reached the 95% mark.
... while Virgin's punctuality figure slipped from 86.2% in 2007/08 to 80.0% in 2008/09 ...
Hmm ...  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
William Huskisson MP▸ was the first person to be killed by a train while crossing the tracks, in 1830. Many more have died in the same way since then. Don't take a chance: stop, look, listen.
"Level crossings are safe, unless they are used in an unsafe manner." Discuss.
|
|
|
|
IndustryInsider
|
|
« Reply #25 on: May 29, 2009, 11:38:36 » |
|
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's an indication of how much custom has been lost to Chiltern during the WCML▸ upgrade. Virgin will now push their service frequency and speed, and conveniently forget to mention their higher fares and worse performance. The performance levels are now starting to creep up again from the very poor levels around the turn of the year - It will be interesting to see what percentage of passengers switch back to Virgin. Some, but by no means all, would be my guess. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
To view my GWML▸ Electrification cab video 'before and after' video comparison, as well as other videos of the new layout at Reading and 'before and after' comparisons of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/ |
|
|
|
Btline
|
|
« Reply #26 on: May 29, 2009, 18:16:54 » |
|
Chiltern won't be too worried. With Evergreen 3 on the way, they'll no longer be as much as a SNAILway.
With 100 minute timings and pick ups at places like Solihull, Dorridge, Warwick Parkway etc, Chiltern will be more convenient than VT▸ for many.
With destinations like Bicester and High Wycombe, they'll attract more than just "InterCity" passengers.
Chiltern also stop at Wembley on match days, and have rolling stock where >95% of people have a view (compared to just 66% on Virgin).
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
readytostart
|
|
« Reply #27 on: June 05, 2009, 15:44:28 » |
|
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!
VT▸ seem to be suffering from short term memory loss, it was only around twelve months ago that they were hailed along with Chiltern and Network Rail for coming up with 'Blockade Buster' diverted WCML service via Leamington and High Wycombe to reduce the need for replacement bus services. VT drivers were even trained on the route using Chiltern's Bubble Car and drivers! They do seem to have it in for DB» Schenker though, with the proposed and now shelved Shrewsbury service and introducing a morning service from Wrexham via Chester treading on WSMR▸ 's toes and now trying to muscle in on Chiltern! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
EBrown
|
|
« Reply #28 on: November 17, 2012, 16:48:20 » |
|
Removed.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: March 03, 2013, 19:33:52 by EBrown »
|
Logged
|
I am no longer an active member of this website.
|
|
|
|
Bristolboy
|
|
« Reply #29 on: November 17, 2012, 20:49:32 » |
|
I haven't got a photo but chiltern often seem to have massive advertising campaigns at euston. Not in the national rail station but on bus stops, billboards etc outside and also all over the London underground part of the station. this includes advertising on underground ticket barriers, on the walls opposite platforms, in the underground walkways and most glaringly what I can only describe as a wrap covering all of the walls, floors and ceilings of the escalators from the national rail part of the station underground. Can't see a problem with it myself - it is increasing competition on this busy route and hopefully helping to reduce prices.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
