Politics between Govt/NR and VT

[SamanthaJ1989]

Hello

I'm aware that the Gov't and NR don't allways see eye to eye with Richard Branson/Virgin Trains.

In a recent Survey VT rated no1 for customer satisfaction for TOC's yet theres all this big political ho-ha about them losing the franchise and what not.

Can someone enlighten me as to what its all about and how it plays out

 

[ChristopherJ]

Branson is a mummys boy, he thinks’ he's perfect and god's gift to the world.

When he loses a battle, like the ICWC franchise to FirstGroup, he throws his toys out the pram and runs crying to the highest authority and ultimately ends up getting his own way by sucking his thumb and pulling "kitten-in-distress" eyes to gain sympathy.

I think the guy is a female genitalia, he's useless in national politics and corporate business and is only successful because he got lucky first time and has a "good guy" image because he is a bit simple on the inside, other than that he is a waste of space.

The reason why Virgin Trains is a commercial success has nothing to do with Branson but Chris Green - a man I respect and would honour to shake his hand.

 

[Lampshade]

Branson is a mummys boy, he thinks’ he's perfect and god's gift to the world.

When he loses a battle, like the ICWC franchise to FirstGroup, he throws his toys out the pram and runs crying to the highest authority and ultimately ends up getting his own way by sucking his thumb and pulling "kitten-in-distress" eyes to gain sympathy.

I think the guy is a female genitalia, he's useless in national politics and corporate business and is only successful because he got lucky first time and has a "good guy" image because he is a bit simple on the inside, other than that he is a waste of space.

The reason why Virgin Trains is a commercial success has nothing to do with Branson but Chris Green - a man I respect and would honour to shake his hand.

So nothing to do with mistakes by the DfT then? :roll:

 

[ChristopherJ]

So nothing to do with mistakes by the DfT then? :roll:

Was it Branson who personally sat down and discovered the mistakes in the ICWC franchise himself?

No.

The bean counters at the Virgin Rail Group discovered the mistakes, whom then informed Branson, then Branson plots a huge song and dance to tally a revenge and makes out he's the one who was behind the unraveling of the the whole shenanigans.

 

[Monty]

Did Branson run over your dog or something?

 

[Morgsie]

There is another factor which no one has mention yet, Sir Richard and Tony Blair were quite chummy

 

[WatcherZero]

I think theres a confusion here, Virgin gets along extremely well with the Government both past and present, its the civil servants within the Dft it doesnt get along with.

 

[Aldaniti]

There is another factor which no one has mention yet, Sir Richard and Tony Blair were quite chummy

Branson is chummy with whoever pulls the strings.

He has created a brand name over many years despite many of his ventures being failures. He got lucky thanks to Mike Oldfield (and his mum when he had a run in with the VAT man). His only real enduring business success is Virgin Atlantic although I believe that even that has started to lose money. He is a master of PR, spin and and lies and the gullible and uninformed swallow it. Even now Virgin are still trying to perpetuate the myth that they 'invested' x millions in new Pendolinos and Voyagers - they've been spinning it for that long Joe Public believes it and this went a long way to getting public support when it looked like Virgin would lose the franchise. As has already been said, Virgin Trains was looking like it might be another of Branson's disasters until Chris Green took over. He's been a very lucky chancer.

 

[NSEFAN]

There was a good article in the Guardian about Branson and the Virgin brand. Link

Whilst it was a good thing that Branson made the public more aware of the DfT's failings, I don't for one minute believe that he had the Great British Public at the time.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I'm aware that the Gov't and NR don't allways see eye to eye with Richard Branson/Virgin Trains.

All three of them think they run the WCML and can call the shots.

And Branson did invest £x million in Pendolinos.
Who else has been paying the lease rental for the last 16 years?
Angel Trains made the purchase but only against a specification and leasing guarantees from VRG.
The DfT bought (ie allowed Angel to buy) the recent fleet expansion, but VT is now paying for it.
They are not taxpayer gifts.

 

[Eagle]

There is another factor which no one has mention yet, Sir Richard and Tony Blair were quite chummy

That's kind of irrelevant. When Virgin first won their rail franchises, John Major was PM. The two franchise competitions they were involved in in the days of Blair, they lost.

 

[Dolge]

All three of them think they run the WCML and can call the shots.

And Branson did invest £x million in Pendolinos.
Who else has been paying the lease rental for the last 16 years?
Angel Trains made the purchase but only against a specification and leasing guarantees from VRG.
The DfT bought (ie allowed Angel to buy) the recent fleet expansion, but VT is now paying for it.
They are not taxpayer gifts.

Branson leased the Pendolinos on the basis of a double taxpayer guarantee. Angel would not have bought the trains without assurances that:
1. any future franchise would continue the lease
2. if VT went bust the tax payer, through DOR would take over the lease.

More fundamentally the trains would not provide the service they do without the £8 billion taxpayer investment in the WCML. Virgin has not risked its own capital, at any stage beyond the modest deposit needed to secure the franchise at. Branson's claims to have 'invested' billions are , straightforwardly, lies.

 

[Oliver]

2. if VT went bust the tax payer, through DOR would take over the lease.

Yes, and a TOC does take the commercial risk of "going bust", in which case its owners suffer a huge loss. Ask any National Express shareholder. Therefore they are investing a lot of cash into a franchise by signing up to long-term rolling stock leases.

 

[JB25]

I actually like Richard Branson. hock: He's an inspirational bloke.

 

[asylumxl]

I think it will be hard to get an objective answer from a lot of posters on this forum due to their deep seated hate for everything Virgin and Branson.

There is history between the DfT and VT, which essentially boils down to VT getting one-up on the DfT after the WCML upgrade wasn't fully implemented. The DfT failed to realise that legally binding contracts work in both directions. and, when the contract did not work to their advantage, threw their toys out the pram.

NR and VT is far more recent, VT is taking legal action against NR as VT failed to meet targets due to the mediocre reliability of the infrastructure on the WCML. To be fair, I can see the reasoning behind this as at the end of the day they are operating a business.

In my honest opinion though, I think all this posturing will prove detrimental to passengers who should be the priority of the railway. Unfortunately this is not the way the government sees things it seems.

 

[Geezertronic]

Branson is a mummys boy, he thinks’ he's perfect and god's gift to the world.

When he loses a battle, like the ICWC franchise to FirstGroup, he throws his toys out the pram and runs crying to the highest authority and ultimately ends up getting his own way by sucking his thumb and pulling "kitten-in-distress" eyes to gain sympathy.

I think the guy is a female genitalia, he's useless in national politics and corporate business and is only successful because he got lucky first time and has a "good guy" image because he is a bit simple on the inside, other than that he is a waste of space.

The reason why Virgin Trains is a commercial success has nothing to do with Branson but Chris Green - a man I respect and would honour to shake his hand.

What a complete lot of rubbish, the first line lost the argument completely and made anything else said irrelevant. Regardless of what you think of the man, the Virgin brand as a whole proves you completeley wrong

 

[SamanthaJ1989]

I think it will be hard to get an objective answer from a lot of posters on this forum due to their deep seated hate for everything Virgin and Branson.

There is history between the DfT and VT, which essentially boils down to VT getting one-up on the DfT after the WCML upgrade wasn't fully implemented. The DfT failed to realise that legally binding contracts work in both directions. and, when the contract did not work to their advantage, threw their toys out the pram.

NR and VT is far more recent, VT is taking legal action against NR as VT failed to meet targets due to the mediocre reliability of the infrastructure on the WCML. To be fair, I can see the reasoning behind this as at the end of the day they are operating a business.

In my honest opinion though, I think all this posturing will prove detrimental to passengers who should be the priority of the railway. Unfortunately this is not the way the government sees things it seems.

Yes I do 100% agree with you. All the political nonsense ultimately harms the railway and its users. I suppose both Richard Branson and DaFT on some level need to grow up a bit and see the bigger picture.

 

[Aldaniti]

All three of them think they run the WCML and can call the shots.

And Branson did invest £x million in Pendolinos.
Who else has been paying the lease rental for the last 16 years?
Angel Trains made the purchase but only against a specification and leasing guarantees from VRG.
The DfT bought (ie allowed Angel to buy) the recent fleet expansion, but VT is now paying for it.
They are not taxpayer gifts.

Revenue expenditure isn't investment. There's a big difference my friend. One results in owning the asset, the other doesn't. Virgin don't own the Pendolinos and Voyagers.

 

[Darren R]

I think it will be hard to get an objective answer from a lot of posters on this forum due to their deep seated hate for everything Virgin and Branson.

There is history between the DfT and VT, which essentially boils down to VT getting one-up on the DfT after the WCML upgrade wasn't fully implemented. The DfT failed to realise that legally binding contracts work in both directions. and, when the contract did not work to their advantage, threw their toys out the pram.

NR and VT is far more recent, VT is taking legal action against NR as VT failed to meet targets due to the mediocre reliability of the infrastructure on the WCML. To be fair, I can see the reasoning behind this as at the end of the day they are operating a business.

In my honest opinion though, I think all this posturing will prove detrimental to passengers who should be the priority of the railway. Unfortunately this is not the way the government sees things it seems.

When you write "...VT getting one-up on the DfT...", others far more cynical than I might use the words "screwed-over the taxpayers" instead.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with much of what you say. The fact is that the DaFT Mandarins allowed themselves to be in the situation that Branson used so well to his advantage. This says more about the DaFt and its level of oversight than it does about Branson as a businessman. And as you say, it's the poor old passengers who are stuck in the middle of all this childishness. Not that they particularly matter to anyone, of course.

You probably also have a point about the anti-Branson/Virgin standpoint of so many of this forum's members (to be honest I'm probably one such myself.) But you have to ask: why is this? (And anyone who suggests jealousy as the reason gets barred! )

 

[asylumxl]

You probably also have a point about the anti-Branson/Virgin standpoint of so many of this forum's members (to be honest I'm probably one such myself.) But you have to ask: why is this? (And anyone who suggests jealousy as the reason gets barred! )

Because Pendolinos and Voyagers were introduced when Virgin was operating the WC and XC franchises.

I'm pretty sure some believe this to be the work of the devil, and that Branson is Satan himself.

 

[Eagle]

And because they killed off WSMR!

(Who obviously didn't die because of an overambitious business plan on a route without a proven market, and who were using stock that their parent company thought could be better used by another TOC.)

 

[Muzer]

I still feel that Virgin don't deserve some of the criticism they get from many enthusiasts.

I know a lot of people claim Virgin are good at PR and customer service and nothing else - but they're pretty important parts of being a TOC that, to be brutally honest, many other TOCs are very poor at.

My point is just that if Virgin's adverts encourage more people to use the trains (not just Virgin's trains, but probably connecting services too), how can this be a bad thing?