First Great Western to Give up Franchise?

[whole diary]

[Zoe]

I did hear that National Express put in a higher bid for the franchise last time round but the fact that First owned the HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) resulted in the dft having little choice but to give the franchise to First.  I don't know how true this is.

[woody]

Silly question alert ...

The franchise was let on very low growth forecasts that have been exceeded with trains filled to the rafters all over the place.  On lines they're already 3 carriages when they were bid as 2 carriage services form the life of the franchise, and there's talk of those services needing 4 or 5.   Seven of the 10 most overcrowded trains in the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) are in FGW^▸ (First Great Western) land, and even on a Saturday morning and Sunday afternoon I can find you places where your journey will be uncomfortable or impossible due to overcrowding.

So to my simplistic mind, the train operator's getting rather more farebox income than they would have expected and that's not going to be offset by extra rolling stock costs - you only need one driver if a train is 2, 3, 4 or 5 carriages. Due to overcrowding I suspect they're getting more income per vehicle anyway, and fare haven't exactly lagged behind inflation.

So why has the franchise fallen into "Cap and Collar"?   Surely it can't be because fewer people are buying cups of railway tea as they travel, can it?

Trains may well be full at times but the bottom line is how much revenue do those trains now yield.The much tighter economic climate now means many passengers are ^trading down^ with less first class travel and more cheaper advance tickets.Set this against FGWs rocketing franchise premium profile particularly from 2013 to 2016 and its pretty obvious(to me at least) that First would ultimately have had to seriously consider excercising its option to throw in the towel in 2013 to avoid a financial meltdown on FGW.

[JayMac]

Let's not forget that there are possibly two very juicy cherries for First Group to attempt to pick ahead of 2013.

Inter-City West Coast is up for re-tendering, and Invitations To Tender (ITT^▸ (Invitation to Tender)) have already been sought, but I'm not sure whether First Group have applied. Short-list should be announced on 29th March.

Inter-City East Coast should also see ITTs later this year.

[Tim]

You have to remember that FGW^▸ (First Great Western) and First Group are two different entities.  IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion), FGW are (now) a fairly good operator and much better than some.  But their ability and commitment to the route need not be taken as a sign that FG is neccessarily as committed.  FG will be most concerned with the bottom line.

It seems a shame for the franchise end to no co-incide with the new stock.

[ChrisB]

I believe the franchise could work it First Group won't let others play with their trainsets. 5 Class 180s remember? Drop the use of an off-peak HST^▸ (High Speed Train) on the Cotswolds line. Plus possible use of a XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) set.

Got it in one. Sorry, Zoe, I don#'t think yopu're right either.

[qwerty]

Lots of nice speculation on this thread, so i'll add some of my own.

It seems the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) would want First to not to take the franchise extension as then they could re-tender it with a lower (cheaper) service franchise commitment.

First  and DFT^▸ (Department for Transport) all happy, passengers less so, and no arguments about taking home balls.

[Tim]

Silly question alert ...

Not a silly question, but a very important one that needs to be asked more often.  To my mind trains have the advantage over other modes when they are long and full as you are getting maximum returnn on your capital.   But consider a 2 car train carrying 100 people. Subsidy per passenger might be ^1 and total subsidy would be ^100.  Passenger numbers double and you need a 4 car train to carry 200 people.  Costs rise, but do not double (because you still only need one driver and Guard) Subsidy per passenger falls to 60p, but total subsidy is now ^120.   To you and I a doubling of passengers is good, but if you are only interested in total subsidy you can see how it might not be so welcome.

[ChrisB]

I did hear that National Express put in a higher bid for the franchise last time round but the fact that First owned the HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) resulted in the dft having little choice but to give the franchise to First.  I don't know how true this is.

It isn't (true)

Didn't FG buy these 125s after they won this franchise? I think so.

[ChrisB]

It seems the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) would want First to not to take the franchise extension as then they could re-tender it with a lower (cheaper) service franchise commitment.

With the country in dire straits, why would the DfT want less in way of a franchise payment? I'm sure they're hoping exactly the opposite - that FGW^▸ (First Great Western) continue to 2016 and get the near-^1billion in franchise payments due in those three years.

[Timmer]

Didn't FG buy these 125s after they won this franchise? I think so.

Don't quote me on this but I think First bought them before they won the franchise.

[ChrisB]

I thought they bought them just before the HST^▸ (High Speed Train) refresh?....

[Timmer]

When I have a moment I will do some digging. Wasn't some of the stock stored on the West Somerset railway or was that just the rolling stock involved in the Ladbroke Grove accident?

[Timmer]

I can confirm that First purchased ex Virgin XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) in 2004 so this would have been before the announcement of winning the new GW^▸ (Great Western) franchise which was announced Autumn 2005.

[ChrisB]

With the 180s in play now, those HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) aren't as necessary as they were.

[6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01]

With the 180s in play now, those HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) aren't as necessary as they were.

at the time didnt fgw have the 180's