Govia Thameslink Railway (GTR) Rebrand?

[agerj001]

Hi, I don't know if this has been covered elsewhere but I notices that the logo used for GTR on Govia's website is different. Instead its 'GTR' made up of coloured lines instead of the pink and blue rhombus and triangle. Does anyone know if they are re-branding?

Below is a URL for the page on Govia's website:

http://www.govia.info/our-companies/


Thanks

 

[yorkie]

I don't know, but that page is confusing and contradictory.

They should not be using multiple brands as if they were Train Companies in my opinion. I have no problem with sensible branding (e.g. giving names to particular trains or lines) but they should be totally honest and open about the name of the Train Company. They are causing a lot of confusion for passengers.

Any re-branding is useless if it doesn't change that fundamental issue.

 

[swt_passenger]

Hi, I don't know if this has been covered elsewhere but I notices that the logo used for GTR on Govia's website is different. Instead its 'GTR' made up of coloured lines instead of the pink and blue rhombus and triangle. Does anyone know if they are re-branding?

"GTR" isn't used as a public facing brand, i.e. you aren't going to see it on the side of any trains, and AFAICT the four individual brands are unchanged.

Although people in these forums routinely refer to the whole thing as GTR, and refer to catching a GTR service, that is not the firm's intention at all...

 

[asylumxl]

"GTR" isn't used as a public facing brand, i.e. you aren't going to see it on the side of any trains, and AFAICT the four individual brands are unchanged.

Although people in these forums routinely refer to the whole thing as GTR, and refer to catching a GTR service, that is not the firm's intention at all...

It might not be their intention, but it certainly is their own fault. For example, immediately after the changeover FCC Only tickets for TL journeys became GTR Only, which was a tad confusing.

The pessimist in me is inclined to think Govia prefers some confusion and obscurity in their branding. After all, people may join the dots and notice a common theme for all their franchises...

 

[yorkie]

Although people in these forums routinely refer to the whole thing as GTR, and refer to catching a GTR service, that is not the firm's intention at all...

Indeed you're right; the whole thing is GTR and they are the operator, and their intention appears to be to make their customers think they're 4 separate companies.

The GTR website correctly states it's all one Train Operating Company (the UK's largest) but the public-facing branding contradicts this.

 

[Stats]

It might not be their intention, but it certainly is their own fault.

No, it is not their fault. It is a DfT requirement that services though the 'core' use the Thameslink brand and airport premium services use the Gatwick Express brand. In other words, GTR are required to use different brands for their services.

 

[asylumxl]

No, it is not their fault. It is a DfT requirement that services though the 'core' use the Thameslink brand and airport premium services use the Gatwick Express brand. In other words, GTR are required to use different brands for their services.

Did you actually read what I said?

Note I said they used the GTR name on TL tickets. That's the opposite of what you are saying.

 

[yorkie]

No, it is not their fault.

At least partly their fault, surely?

It is a DfT requirement that services though the 'core' use the Thameslink brand

There is nothing to stop them using that brand for other services, is there?

and airport premium services use the Gatwick Express brand. In other words, GTR are required to use different brands for their services.

Abellio Greater Anglia have a similar requirement with Stansted Express, but there is never any attempt to make passengers think they are separate Companies.

I have no problem with a brand providing it's made clear who the operator is, for example the branding "Brighton Express" has been used (less so these days) but that's no issue because it's never claimed to be anything more than a brand for a particular service.

Other examples elsewhere include Cambridge Cruisers and suchlike. Brands are fine, but should never be claimed to be a fictional company.

 

[IanXC]

I don't know, but that page is confusing and contradictory.

They should not be using multiple brands as if they were Train Companies in my opinion.

I'm not sure that's an entirely fair view on that page - after all they do show GTR as operating 4 separate brands, in a very different way to how LM and Southeastern are shown.

That said I would entirely agree that the situation is far from satisfactory, Greater Anglia and Stanstead Express make a good comparison. I suspect the DfTs next case where this comes up (without wishing to go off topic, is 'Northern Regional Express'.

 

[jopsuk]

Stansted is a rather different situationFor stations between London and Stansted Mountfichet for ticketing there's no difference between a Stansted Express service and a GA West Anglia Service

 

[Surreytraveller]

The whole thing is a complete mess.

 

[yorkie]

Stansted is a rather different situationFor stations between London and Stansted Mountfichet for ticketing there's no difference between a Stansted Express service and a GA West Anglia Service

I don't see how this is "different"; a Stansted Express branded train is a Greater Anglia operated service. It's exactly the same with the Gatwick Express. Both are just brand names which the DfT require to be used.

 

[jopsuk]

Because with Gatwick there's an attempt to sell premium tickets (and there's alternative cheaper trains)

 

[yorkie]

Because with Gatwick there's an attempt to sell premium tickets

Exactly!

Unlike Abellio Greater Anglia, Govia Thameslink Railway appear to want there to be FUD in order to achieve this.

(and there's alternative cheaper trains)

I refer you to Govia Thameslink Railway: Issues regarding ticket validity across brands

 

[Surreytraveller]

Because with Gatwick there's an attempt to sell premium tickets (and there's alternative cheaper trains)

And everyone travelling on the cheaper trains get themselves and their luggage in the way of passengers using intermediate stations. The price on the Express should be the same price as on the peasants' trains. That would improve all customers' experiences.

 

[yorkie]

And everyone travelling on the cheaper trains get themselves and their luggage in the way of passengers using intermediate stations. The price on the Express should be the same price as on the peasants' trains. That would improve all customers' experiences.

Agreed. Tickets can be restricted by Train Company (but not by brand), a discussion on ticket validity can be found in Govia Thameslink Railway: Issues regarding ticket validity across brands

 

[Stats]

There is nothing to stop them using that brand for other services, is there?

It seems perfectly sensible that services operating entirely north of the Thames use a different brand to those operating entirely south of the Thames. It seem nonsensical to give south coast stopping services the brand name Thameslink. But we will just have to agree to disagree.

I have no problem with a brand providing it's made clear who the operator is, for example the branding "Brighton Express" has been used (less so these days) but that's no issue because it's never claimed to be anything more than a brand for a particular service.

OK, let me ask you this. Go Ahead have for a while put on their different bus companies "Part of the Go-Ahead Group". Given the requirement by the DfT to operate at least 2 of the 4 brands, and putting to one side the ticketing issues (although accepting that Southern and Thameslink exist at least in part to meet the DfT requirement to not cause undue hardship to FCC only ticket users by creating a sharp increase in FCC/Thameslink only fares in the early years of the franchise), would you accept the different brands in their current form if they had in a prominent form, "Part of Govia Thameslink Railway", or similar wording to indicate that. I accept you wouldn't be completely happy until they operate under a single brand, but given that isn't possible under the current DfT requirements I would be interested to know what would be acceptable to you.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

No, it is not their fault. It is a DfT requirement that services though the 'core' use the Thameslink brand and airport premium services use the Gatwick Express brand. In other words, GTR are required to use different brands for their services.

Out of interest, where is that stated? I'm not doubting you, I just can't find it in the franchise agreement.

 

[yorkie]

Out of interest, where is that stated? I'm not doubting you, I just can't find it in the franchise agreement.

It states here that the Thameslink brand has to be used, but there is nothing I can see that says this should be treated as if it were a separate Company, and I can't see a similar requirement for the Gatwick Express route either.

 

[Richardr]

Note I said they used the GTR name on TL tickets. That's the opposite of what you are saying.

I buy a few tickets online via the Thameslink website. They show up as "GTR Webtis, London" on my credit card statements.

 

[JonathanH]

And everyone travelling on the cheaper trains get themselves and their luggage in the way of passengers using intermediate stations. The price on the Express should be the same price as on the peasants' trains. That would improve all customers' experiences.

There is an easy way to make the fares the same and most people (myself included) would not like it.

 

[yorkie]

OK, let me ask you this. Go Ahead have for a while put on their different bus companies "Part of the Go-Ahead Group"

If they are Companies, then that's a separate matter.

Given the requirement by the DfT to operate at least 2 of the 4 brands, and putting to one side the ticketing issues (although accepting that Southern and Thameslink exist at least in part to meet the DfT requirement to not cause undue hardship to FCC only ticket users by creating a sharp increase in FCC/Thameslink only fares in the early years of the franchise), would you accept the different brands in their current form if they had in a prominent form, "Part of Govia Thameslink Railway", or similar wording to indicate that. I accept you wouldn't be completely happy until they operate under a single brand, but given that isn't possible under the current DfT requirements I would be interested to know what would be acceptable to you.

It should be clear that it's all one Company. I have no problems with different brandings providing there is no attempt whatsoever to claim that any of the brands are a separate Company for any purpose. Other Companies manage to apply different branding to different routes without causing confusion.

I believe the primary reason for the confusion is because of ticketing. The only reason for the FUD is because they don't want people using the cheap Thameslink tickets on all Govia Thameslink Railway trains, and many passengers will not question being told it's either a "separate Company", or that "tickets can be restricted by brand". Neither of those statements are true, yet I and others have heard both be quoted. This is clearly and obviously FUD.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

There is an easy way to make the fares the same and most people (myself included) would not like it.

Too late - it's already being done! The Thameslink Only fares (which are restricted under NRCoC 10 to the Train Company, not brand) are to be withdrawn (they are utterly pointless because all trains on many of the routes where these tickets exist are operated by Govia Thameslink Railway) but, in order to avoid a backlash, they are being ramped up in price gradually first.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/tran...ares-set-to-rise-664-in-new-deal-9733309.html

Shadow transport secretary Mary Creagh said cheaper Thameslink-only tickets from Brighton to London, currently offered by First Capital Connect, will be phased out.

And she claimed that the cost of some day fares could rise by up to 74 per cent as FCC and Southern services are merged under the new Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern “super franchise” which started this week.

Currently, commuters from Sussex can buy a FCC season ticket which has restricted access to trains which take longer to get to the capital but is cheaper.

Labour said eliminating the fare was part of the franchise arrangements....

 

[LLivery]

...would you accept the different brands in their current form if they had in a prominent form, "Part of Govia Thameslink Railway", or similar wording to indicate that. I accept you wouldn't be completely happy until they operate under a single brand, but given that isn't possible under the current DfT requirements I would be interested to know what would be acceptable to you.

AGA display the AGA brand and the Stansted Express brand on the 379s, use the same publications, even having one timetable book for West Anglia & Stansted Ex, same brand font and NXEA gave the 379s the same livery as the rest of the fleet. Govia haven't done that. Govia have made GatEx almost look as separate as Southeastern or South West Trains is from Southern. We've ended up with 4 brands, 3 websites, 3 liveries and all these different fares for the Brighton Main.

 

[JaJaWa]

That GTR logo with the multicoloured lines is brand new - it's wasn't there a few days ago.

I presume it's to more clearly show that the following are a part of GTR:

• Thameslink
• Great Northern
• Southern
• Gatwick Express

Whereas before it looked like just the following were:

• Thameslink
• Great Northern

 

[Surreytraveller]

That GTR logo with the multicoloured lines is brand new - it's wasn't there a few days ago.

I presume it's to more clearly show that the following are a part of GTR:

• Thameslink
• Great Northern
• Southern
• Gatwick Express

Whereas before it looked like just the following were:

• Thameslink
• Great Northern

Possibly because before it was only Thameslink and Great Northern. Southern did not become part of the franchise until the end of July.

 

[AM9]

On the GTR website, the words describing each of the GTR brands are designed to confuse:

"Thameslink operates train services ..."

"Southern operates train services ..."

"Great Northern operates train services ..."

but

"Gatwick Express is a non-stop train service ..."

Given that GTR billed themselves as operating 'Thameslink', 'Southern, 'Great Northern', and 'Gatwick Express', that implies that TL, SN and GN are operated by an operator whereas GX is a service. Really the other three should also be correctly described as services with their specific brand names.

 

[yorkie]

I agree, that would help.

 

[JaJaWa]

Weren't they meant to keep operations seperate? It's being split back into seperate operators after this franchise ends I think.

 

[AM9]

Weren't they meant to keep operations seperate? It's being split back into seperate operators after this franchise ends I think.

Well if that's the case then GTR isn't an operator, - unless the concept of an operator (GTR) operating three other operators (TL, SN & GN) means something that I can't understand. GTR is a fabrication of Govia to give them the ability to differentiate between some of their services to gain pricing advantages. It can't really be an operator of operators! I wonder if DfT is party to that.

 

[JaJaWa]

Perhaps the franchise should have been let as a bundle of 4 train operating companies, to appease forum members.