'Only two bidders for SWT Franchise'

[iantherev]

Some of us are just grateful that Govia haven't taken the opportunity to spread their own brand of (mis) management further west.

The thing that interests me is why only First wanted to take on Stagecoach. I'm guessing that people were put off by two things:

1. Stagecoach will be a hard incumbent to beat (they wouldn't have known individually it would come down to a 1 on 1 as well, so would have expected 2 further competitors).
2. There's a lot of risk inherent in the franchise - so winning it might not mean a happy ending. DfT should have taken steps to reassure bidders on areas they have no control over.

I don't think that DfT have managed this well at all. Only two bidders is going to place them under all sorts of pressure.

 

[Robertj21a]

The thing that interests me is why only First wanted to take on Stagecoach. I'm guessing that people were put off by two things:

1. Stagecoach will be a hard incumbent to beat (they wouldn't have known individually it would come down to a 1 on 1 as well, so would have expected 2 further competitors).
2. There's a lot of risk inherent in the franchise - so winning it might not mean a happy ending. DfT should have taken steps to reassure bidders on areas they have no control over.

I don't think that DfT have managed this well at all. Only two bidders is going to place them under all sorts of pressure.

Perhaps First will put in one of their 'ridiculous' bids like they did for the WCML - you know, the one where virtually everybody else thought those incredible figures proposed for the final few years were totally unrealistic.

 

[30909]

Depends on the depots concerned. Outer depots have very limited if not zero suburban route knowledge, the nearer you get to London, the more it gets. However conversely, the number of crews putting in for outer depots increases.

For example Bournemouth/Fratton/Sarum generally won't know any suburban routes or diversionary routes other than those they require outside of London, although SOME but not all Fratton drivers do know via Cobham, there would be a problem if they got sent that way and then they subsequently had an issue between Effingham and Surbiton, as they don't know via Epsom.

It'll be interesting to see what happens when TfL starts to take on the suburban network. I'll be putting in for an outer depot when my next move is available.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The timetable is rubbish and doesn't work, it's all about the quantity and not about the quality, it's slower than steam days in many cases.

If you don't like the criticism levelled at you, then perhaps you should do something about it.

456s are known to be a problem and cause of a significant rise in cancellations, due to traction and door faults. Pieces of junk that should be consigned to the scrapyard, which were forced onto SWT by DfT.

Management need to learn tact and diplomacy when dealing with their own staff, that's why so many staff and managers are quitting.

Passengers are often rude and ignorant and don't/won't listen to what you tell them, so they can get on with it. Not my fault if they break a train which they regularly do by jamming the doors or deficate, urinate or vomit all over it, smash thing's. Trains generally don't break themselves.

And DfT an nasty organisation that couldn't run a booze up in a brewery.

If you don't like the truths, perhaps you shouldn't avail yourself of them.

Now that's much more like a diatribe. Though I fail to see where you have assumed that I do not agree with some or all of your posted comment just, perhaps, the tone.

 

[Simon11]

The thing that interests me is why only First wanted to take on Stagecoach. I'm guessing that people were put off by two things:

1. Stagecoach will be a hard incumbent to beat (they wouldn't have known individually it would come down to a 1 on 1 as well, so would have expected 2 further competitors).
2. There's a lot of risk inherent in the franchise - so winning it might not mean a happy ending. DfT should have taken steps to reassure bidders on areas they have no control over.

I don't think that DfT have managed this well at all. Only two bidders is going to place them under all sorts of pressure.

I would also add:
3. The size of the franchise is huge adding to the risk, although more commuter based than long distance routes.
4. There are too many franchises being put out to bid and there are only limited resources.

 

[cjmillsnun]

DfT press release confirms First and Stagecoach are the two shortlisted bidders https://www.gov.uk/government/news/...ete-for-the-next-south-western-rail-franchise

Good. They're the two best in the business. Hopefully Stagecoach retains it.

 

[455driver]

Remember that Stagecoach couldn't agree acceptable terms for a franchise extension, so that may mean that they consider all the exciting things a competitor would offer to be too expensive or too risky.

What?
Just like First didn't take the option at the end of the FGW franchise which then resulted in them getting a direct award on much better terms!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

So, after the the extentions to platforms 1-4 have been carried out, they will then go in for the kill and take it all from the new Franchisee?

Basically Yes!
The incumbent TOC has to put up with all the bad press about the disruption etc and then once Overground take over, things obviously improve resulting in Overground bathing in all then good press about how 'they' have improved things for the passengers etc! :roll:

 

[cjmillsnun]

I don't think bidders will be much worried by the prospect of losing some suburban services to TfL. SWT make more money from the long-distance services than they do from the suburban ones, and the operation of an intensive suburban serve on a complex group of routes must be a difficult task..

SWT makes its money from commuter season tickets. Most of that from its suburban network. TfL taking over most of that will severely impact on the future franchisee's potential profits.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Indeed, SWT have it quite lucky over the 20 years with no major infrastructure projects.

Ummm PARS? Portsmouth brought almost to a standstill.

Southampton tunnel works?

That's just two.

Admittedly they've had less than other franchises, however as commuters will tell you, when it goes tits up at Waterloo, the result is worse than it would be at Paddington.

 

[Class 170101]

I think as susers of the railway we should be concerned that only two bidders reduces competition and thus wehat could be on offer in terms of investment in new trains stations and other infrastructure as well as susbidy reductions / premium payments.

 

[deltic]

SWT makes its money from commuter season tickets. Most of that from its suburban network. TfL taking over most of that will severely impact on the future franchisee's potential profits.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


.

There is a big difference between what services/customers generate the most cash and those that actually contribute the most profit. The area where TOCs can generate profit is increasing discretionary travel while using no additional resources. Some TOCs may be happy to operate inner London commuter services as a concession while concentrating on generating additional higher earning traffic on longer distance services.

 

[HowardGWR]

There is a big difference between what services/customers generate the most cash and those that actually contribute the most profit. The area where TOCs can generate profit is increasing discretionary travel while using no additional resources. Some TOCs may be happy to operate inner London commuter services as a concession while concentrating on generating additional higher earning traffic on longer distance services.

I think you may be right.
It seems to me that the difficulty is that commuters are generally travelling in the peak, so in the old days, the stock and their crews would "sit in depots and tea rooms" (as it were) from 1000 to 1600. I imagine that is broadly still the case. Thus the cost of the commuter operation results in appropriated costs rather than allocated costs. In the case of long distance services, the relationship of those marginal costs to revenue is more closely drawn. One should also not forget the nature of the individual deals agreed by the franchisee with the franchiser (DfT).

A better man than I could perhaps unravel all that but I think SWT has made big profits so it must be doing something right. Whether DfT has done us proud is a different matter.

 

[3141]

SWT makes its money from commuter season tickets. Most of that from its suburban network. TfL taking over most of that will severely impact on the future franchisee's potential profits.

It was Tim Shoveller in an email to a member of our local council who said they make more from the long distance services. He offered the info to help explain why he'd like to be able to increase long distance capacity, but cannot do much until the shorter distance improvements have been completed, and perhaps not until Crossrail 2 is operating.

 

[HowardGWR]

It was Tim Shoveller in an email to a member of our local council who said they make more from the long distance services. He offered the info to help explain why he'd like to be able to increase long distance capacity, but cannot do much until the shorter distance improvements have been completed, and perhaps not until Crossrail 2 is operating.

Mr Shoveller seems a straightforward kind of chap (the chin and he started as a guard, I understand) and I am sure he must be right about , well, everything.

Someone asked what the new franchise should be called. Not LSWR perhaps but just SWR, emphasising the wish to get rid of the suburban stuff to TfL, as much as possible.

 

[tbtc]

I hope that that Scottish company win it because I prefer the colour of their trains, and I naively think that this means that they will run (INSERT CLASS HERE) which they already operate on their other franchise, because that's how it works

As with so much on the Forum, the same glass appears to be half full and half empty at the same time.

The fact that "only" two companies are bidding is either evidence that the processed is rigged/ same old faces/ poor value for the taxpayer/ too many being let at the same time *or* it's evidence that franchises aren't lucrative enough (so minimal interest)?

The franchise is both too big/complicated and to simple/self-contained.

If the new winning bid pays less premium to the Government (or even requires subsidy) then that means it's poor value for taxpayers/ fat-cats creaming profits/ would all have been better under BR.

If the new winning bid pays more premium to the Government then that means "price gouging" fare increases/ poor value for the passengers/ the greedy DfT squeezing too much etc.

A couple of questions:

1. Are the Bristol extensions currently part of the franchise requirement? (i.e. if the SWT and GWR franchises were operated by the same company, could they withdraw the Waterloo - Salisbury - Bristol services?)

2. IF the 158/159s were replaced by 100mph DMUs* then would that free up any extra paths east of Basingstoke (i.e. 100mph units may keep pace with current EMUs through Surbiton better than 90mph Sprinters)?

(* - I say IF because I'm not suggesting replacements will happen - whilst the 158/159s would be useful on other TOCs, they do seem pretty ideal for the splitting nature of services through Salisbury - I just wondered whether 100mph units would be less-wasteful of paths alongside the 444s etc east of Basingstoke)

 

[Class 170101]

2. IF the 158/159s were replaced by 100mph DMUs* then would that free up any extra paths east of Basingstoke (i.e. 100mph units may keep pace with current EMUs through Surbiton better than 90mph Sprinters)?

Are the EMUs able to run at full power acceleraqting such as to 'run' away from the frementioned DMUs? I always understood the Desiro DMUs were power limited on the 3rd Rail anyway.

 

[TEW]

The linespeeds are only greater than 90mph once you get passed the M25 bridge at Byfleet heading out of London AFAIK anyway. So the 90mph top speed doesn't hold up DMUs compared to 100mph EMUs on the most congested part of the route from Surbiton to Waterloo.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Desiros only draw 100% very briefly when starting away, it soon drops back to around the 50% mark, to around 40 mph, when it ramps up slightly to between 60 & 70% all the way up to 100 mph (where permitted), when the computer will then automatically reduce the power to hold it there and that's very weird when you're going downhill and it doesn't use any brakes to do it!

The power delivery is smooth and is deceptively fast and can easily catch you out, a 4 car 450 can quite easily achieve 90+ through West Byfleet from a standing start at Woking, they can easily match a 158/159, even an 8 car can, a 12 is considerably slower initially, but will get there.

A 444 is a bit slower than a 450 getting away, but get a good one and it'll not be far behind the 450 sets for performance, a 10 car 444, is somewhere between an 8 x 450 and 12 x450 for performance, again they'll be able to match and beat a 158/159 on most stretches of fast track.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Desiros only draw 100% very briefly when starting away, it soon drops back to around the 50% mark, to around 40 mph, when it ramps up slightly to between 60 & 70% all the way up to 100 mph (where permitted), when the computer will then automatically reduce the power to hold it there and that's very weird when you're going downhill and it doesn't use any brakes to do it!

Is that why the UFO sound from the motors on a 444 or 450 initially sounds like a 350 and then changes tone after it gets moving?

 

[new2this]

Is that why the UFO sound from the motors on a 444 or 450 initially sounds like a 350 and then changes tone after it gets moving?

I do not know what a 350 sounds like but SWT lines only allow for a top speed of 100mph on the lines south of woking, its not like the HST's doing 125, if it was possible then they would quite easily do that speed if needed and it would be great if they could let them open up a bit and do more long distance stuff non stop, especialy to weymouth like they do from Paddington to Swansea.

 

[The Ham]

A couple of questions:

1. Are the Bristol extensions currently part of the franchise requirement? (i.e. if the SWT and GWR franchises were operated by the same company, could they withdraw the Waterloo - Salisbury - Bristol services?)

2. IF the 158/159s were replaced by 100mph DMUs* then would that free up any extra paths east of Basingstoke (i.e. 100mph units may keep pace with current EMUs through Surbiton better than 90mph Sprinters)?

(* - I say IF because I'm not suggesting replacements will happen - whilst the 158/159s would be useful on other TOCs, they do seem pretty ideal for the splitting nature of services through Salisbury - I just wondered whether 100mph units would be less-wasteful of paths alongside the 444s etc east of Basingstoke)

In answer:
1 - I think that by removing the Bristol service from the Waterloo Salisbury services there would be a number of people who would stop using the trains, whether it's enough to justify keeping the service I don't know.

However I wouldn't be suprised if the next franchise looked (even if a First run one) at increasing them.

2 - change of DMU's could be done if there were a suitable bi-modal train was available and/or 5 coach sets with a few more seats per 10 coach train be delivered. As an example a 10 coach 444 has 668 seats vs the 588 of a 9 coach, that means that a pair of 159's and a pair of 158's would need to squeeze in an extra 80 seats, even though they have an extra pair of cabs.

It could mean that some trains had less seats (a 6 coach pair of 159's has 372 seats vs the 444's 334 seats. However, if the buffet area was removed you could minimise some of this loss (maybe 12 to 20 seats of 38 seats lost) and to increase capacity into London (an extra 24 to 40 seats per train or 3.5% to 6.5% more seats)

On a related note I wouldn't be suprised to see the 444's be refurbished and lose their buffet so as to provide a little more capacity per train. Likewise there could be a case made to modify some 450's to create a bit more standing space at the cost of a few seats.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

A 444 is a bit slower than a 450 getting away, but get a good one and it'll not be far behind the 450 sets for performance, a 10 car 444, is somewhere between an 8 x 450 and 12 x450 for performance, again they'll be able to match and beat a 158/159 on most stretches of fast track.

If 444s weren't limited as to their maximum power draw how would they probably compare with a 450?

Is that why the UFO sound from the motors on a 444 or 450 initially sounds like a 350 and then changes tone after it gets moving?

It might be caused by 450s running on DC and 350s running on AC or just down to the quality of sound recordings

 

[infobleep]

In answer:
1 - I think that by removing the Bristol service from the Waterloo Salisbury services there would be a number of people who would stop using the trains, whether it's enough to justify keeping the service I don't know.

However I wouldn't be suprised if the next franchise looked (even if a First run one) at increasing them.

2 - change of DMU's could be done if there were a suitable bi-modal train was available and/or 5 coach sets with a few more seats per 10 coach train be delivered. As an example a 10 coach 444 has 668 seats vs the 588 of a 9 coach, that means that a pair of 159's and a pair of 158's would need to squeeze in an extra 80 seats, even though they have an extra pair of cabs.

It could mean that some trains had less seats (a 6 coach pair of 159's has 372 seats vs the 444's 334 seats. However, if the buffet area was removed you could minimise some of this loss (maybe 12 to 20 seats of 38 seats lost) and to increase capacity into London (an extra 24 to 40 seats per train or 3.5% to 6.5% more seats)

On a related note I wouldn't be suprised to see the 444's be refurbished and lose their buffet so as to provide a little more capacity per train. Likewise there could be a case made to modify some 450's to create a bit more standing space at the cost of a few seats.

Never understood why they have kept the buffet area, given I never see it in use and commuter trains are packed to standing.

Thr 18.46 Clapham Junction to Poole could have done with the space when it was a 5 car train. It's now 8 cars I believe. The 7.17 and 7.54 definitely could do with the extra space.

Of course it would mean less stock whilst converting but then that's already been the case with the 458s.

 

[Muzer]

Never understood why they have kept the buffet area, given I never see it in use and commuter trains are packed to standing.

Thr 18.46 Clapham Junction to Poole could have done with the space when it was a 5 car train. It's now 8 cars I believe. The 7.17 and 7.54 definitely could do with the extra space.

Of course it would mean less stock whilst converting but then that's already been the case with the 458s.

I've seen the buffet area in use precisely once, when an enterprising trolley guy decided he would be a buffet for the day on a train that was too packed to move through. He just parked up his trolley inside the buffet counter and served people through it

 

[SpacePhoenix]

What does the buffet look like on a 444? A Google image search for "class 444 buffet car" doesn't turn up any images of it

 

[Bletchleyite]

What does the buffet look like on a 444? A Google image search for "class 444 buffet car" doesn't turn up any images of it

About the same size as a small bog, smaller than a Voyager shop. You'd only add 2 or at most 4 seats if you removed it.

 

[infobleep]

I've seen the buffet area in use precisely once, when an enterprising trolley guy decided he would be a buffet for the day on a train that was too packed to move through. He just parked up his trolley inside the buffet counter and served people through it

On the packed 18.30 Waterloo to Portsmouth they just use the middle coach vestibule until it thins out some point beyond Guildford.

 

[infobleep]

About the same size as a small bog, smaller than a Voyager shop. You'd only add 2 or at most 4 seats if you removed it.

That's still more space. They could alternatively make it a standing area then you'd get more than 4 people there.

444s don't have so much space for standing

On a selfish point of view, in the next franchise I'd like to see better connections from Surbiton to Alton during the evening peak and even post evening peak between 18.40 and 20.00.

For example on Tuesday I'm going to a board games evening in Farnham. It starts 18.30.

Of peak I could just catch a 44 minutes passed service, which arrived at 25 minutes past and takes 44 minutes.

During peak rush hour to get there for 18.30, I have to catch a 17.18, which takes 56 minutes and arrives 18.14. So an extra 12 minutes.

May not seem like much but they were talking about the Great Western Railway electrification project saving people about 20 minutes to Wales and that's a far greater distance than this, so I'd like to save the 12 minutes. Good job I don't live in Farnham, or I'd have that commute every day.

There is one direct train in the morning peak rush hour but that takes 2 minutes longer than changing at Woking as it waits at West Byfleet.

 

[HH]

As with so much on the Forum, the same glass appears to be half full and half empty at the same time.

The fact that "only" two companies are bidding is either evidence that the processed is rigged/ same old faces/ poor value for the taxpayer/ too many being let at the same time *or* it's evidence that franchises aren't lucrative enough (so minimal interest)?

The franchise is both too big/complicated and to simple/self-contained.

If the new winning bid pays less premium to the Government (or even requires subsidy) then that means it's poor value for taxpayers/ fat-cats creaming profits/ would all have been better under BR.

If the new winning bid pays more premium to the Government then that means "price gouging" fare increases/ poor value for the passengers/ the greedy DfT squeezing too much etc.

I speak as someone who's been involved in a lot of bids, including discussions of whether to bid or not. If you look at the potential bidders (i.e. those with a passport) you can exclude several straight away, e.g. Virgin would never bid for this and it's way too big a first franchise for Trenitalia. On top of that you are not likely to see Go Ahead, Keolis and Govia involved in the same bid. Several groups have just won franchises and LO2 & EA are still in the works; I can see that several are likely to view a big bid like SW as too much to add to their plate.

I also think that some would view the franchise, as specified, as too risky, although I would expect the two actual bidders to view that as an opportunity - different groups have different perspectives on these things. Go Ahead might not want too many similar eggs in the same basket, already running Southern and Southeastern.

The one absence I'm surprised by is National Express; Dean Finch had two bites at SWT while at First. Maybe they believe EA is coming their way...

 

[Robertj21a]

I speak as someone who's been involved in a lot of bids, including discussions of whether to bid or not. If you look at the potential bidders (i.e. those with a passport) you can exclude several straight away, e.g. Virgin would never bid for this and it's way too big a first franchise for Trenitalia. On top of that you are not likely to see Go Ahead, Keolis and Govia involved in the same bid. Several groups have just won franchises and LO2 & EA are still in the works; I can see that several are likely to view a big bid like SW as too much to add to their plate.

I also think that some would view the franchise, as specified, as too risky, although I would expect the two actual bidders to view that as an opportunity - different groups have different perspectives on these things. Go Ahead might not want too many similar eggs in the same basket, already running Southern and Southeastern.

The one absence I'm surprised by is National Express; Dean Finch had two bites at SWT while at First. Maybe they believe EA is coming their way...

Is it possible that National Express did put in a bid but it was not accepted for some reason ?

 

[Clarence Yard]

The word is that they weren't interested.

 

[swt_passenger]

About the same size as a small bog, smaller than a Voyager shop. You'd only add 2 or at most 4 seats if you removed it.

I reckon you'd get 8 in if done properly, four each side of the gangway. The present buffet area includes the full width of the train. (They could probably also get another 4 seats in the space given over to the guards office if they wanted).

The current 2007 franchise agreement includes options to alter most of the then existing rolling stock into high capacity versions, coincidentally the 444 was shown gaining 8 seats in exchange for 8 standing spaces.