BBC Two: The Passengers That Took On The Train Line

[southern442]

"Outdated trains" none of the Southeastern units are life-expired.
5 minutes in, shot of Victoria with what is very clearly an announcement from London Bridge.
8 minutes in, he very clearly says 'Greater ANGLIAN service'. grr.
Their three pledges:
Seats for everyone - never ever ever ever ever ever going to happen.
Better Communication - fair enough.
Timetable that works - rather vague.

Just a selection of things that annoyed me about this programme.

EDIT: They also appear to have overdubbed a TGV with an electrostar motor.

 

[RPM]

A comment about what Adrian Shooter said, does that mean he is trying to flog that stuff at say 15M a copy, or was he refering to a brand new train?

I certainly took it to mean he was referring to brand new trains.

 

[A0]

Cloud cuckoo land. The programme was just embarrassing.

Perhaps for a follow up they could recruit some of the better crayonistas from these boards to pull a franchise bid together.

That could be even more entertaining - I look forward to a franchise bid using push-pull 47s with the class 442s running a 10 minute timetable frequency between London and Portsmouth via Ashford and Hastings.

 

[RPM]

Worth noting also that they quote 25 million as the past year's profit made by the entire Govia rail division, but then treat that figure as if it is the yearly potential profit for Southeastern alone. Did nobody involved in this production even check through the figures?

 

[HH]

A comment about what Adrian Shooter said, does that mean he is trying to flog that stuff at say 15M a copy, or was he refering to a brand new train?

What he said means that 20 cars would cost more then £25m. That does seem expensive when compared to some of the prices I've seen for new EMUs.

I see others think he was talking about new trains; if so then £15m is about right for a 10-car EMU.

 

[HH]

The dismissal of the programme out of hand suggests a wilful ignorance as to how large corporations are governed. There is a wide range of governance types, I am not an expert in this subject, however at the top of the company are usually executives who run things and the governing board. These duties of the board are primarily those of steering and oversight and will include hiring and firing the executives. The board would not concern itself with the day to day operation of the railway and the directors might have other interests. The constitution of the organisation can determine the make-up of the board to include a certain number of passenger representatives, etc.

I would find it helpful if somebody explained why a board of directors made up of the passenger representatives and the industry insiders that were alluded to in the programme, would be unfit to perform the duties of a board. And if no such reason can be found then their bid ought, I would think, be judged on its merits.

Depends on who these mysterious industry insiders were. Of note is that they weren't called "industry experts".

As for how large corporations are governed, I think it's you who are showing wilful ignorance. You won't find railway experts running banks and you won't find bankers running transport companies. Every TOC board that I've known has been largely made of of railway experts, several of whom will be the senior people in charge of running the TOC.

Perhaps next week the BBC will make a programme about bank customers who want to run a bank... :roll:

 

[philthetube]

Depends on who these mysterious industry insiders were. Of note is that they weren't called "industry experts".

As for how large corporations are governed, I think it's you who are showing wilful ignorance. You won't find railway experts running banks and you won't find bankers running transport companies. Every TOC board that I've known has been largely made of of railway experts, several of whom will be the senior people in charge of running the TOC.

Perhaps next week the BBC will make a programme about bank customers who want to run a bank... :roll:

They did, (or someone did), they called it bank on dave and he seemed to do a good job at it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7bYTf_I1Mk

 

[SteveP29]

The good part about it for me, that I suspect a lot of commuters and non train enthusiasts would have missed was that for the first time ever (in my experience), they mentioned that the trains themselves are leased (but didn't go on to say that's one of the main reasons that a TOC can't just put on extra carriages when they need them)
I don't think I've heard it mentioned on either of Channel 5's The Railways series or All Aboard East Coast

 

[daikilo]

Depends on who these mysterious industry insiders were. Of note is that they weren't called "industry experts".:

IIRC, in media speak, an industry insider is a person who actually works for (and is paid by) a company in the industry whereas an industry expert does not (could be an author, consultatant, retired, ...).

For those who have not heard of Bank of Dave, as far as I am aware it still exists. One subtle difference between it and the idea of running a train or TOC is that he approached the subject by finding a way to make it feasible and simple (it is described as pier to pier) rather than trying to emulate what a TOC does. Interestingly he had nothing to do with banking when he started; in simple terms he brought together people who had money with those who believed they could make (gainful) use of it.

 

[squizzler]

Depends on who these mysterious industry insiders were. Of note is that they weren't called "industry experts".

As for how large corporations are governed, I think it's you who are showing wilful ignorance. You won't find railway experts running banks and you won't find bankers running transport companies. Every TOC board that I've known has been largely made of of railway experts, several of whom will be the senior people in charge of running the TOC.

Perhaps next week the BBC will make a programme about bank customers who want to run a bank... :roll:

I'll leave it to other forum members to list the Rosco's and other transport firms to which finance institutions have put their name...

 

[NSEFAN]

I'll leave it to other forum members to list the Rosco's and other transport firms to which finance institutions have put their name...

And those companies will be run by people who understand both the economics and railway side of things.

 

[RPM]

The good part about it for me, that I suspect a lot of commuters and non train enthusiasts would have missed was that for the first time ever (in my experience), they mentioned that the trains themselves are leased (but didn't go on to say that's one of the main reasons that a TOC can't just put on extra carriages when they need them)
I don't think I've heard it mentioned on either of Channel 5's The Railways series or All Aboard East Coast

But they did so in a way that suggested they leased trans because it was a cheap and easy option, not because it is the only viable way of doing it.

 

[daikilo]

But they did so in a way that suggested they leased trans because it was a cheap and easy option, not because it is the only viable way of doing it.

It is not cheap. It does however ensure that access to the trains is a monthly expenditure and not a one-off and is thus easy.

With franchises of less than 20 years it is probably the only viable way of acquiring new trains, assuming the ROSCOs see a second lease possibility - recent bumps such as 319s and 185s may temper their appetite for long depreciation periods thus increasing monthly rates for certain stock.

 

[Cowley]

Perhaps for a follow up they could recruit some of the better crayonistas from these boards to pull a franchise bid together.

That could be even more entertaining - I look forward to a franchise bid using push-pull 47s with the class 442s running a 10 minute timetable frequency between London and Portsmouth via Ashford and Hastings.

Re-geared 60s, not 47s and we're going to go via Westbury. We're not stupid you know. :roll:

 

[jon0844]

The good part about it for me, that I suspect a lot of commuters and non train enthusiasts would have missed was that for the first time ever (in my experience), they mentioned that the trains themselves are leased (but didn't go on to say that's one of the main reasons that a TOC can't just put on extra carriages when they need them)
I don't think I've heard it mentioned on either of Channel 5's The Railways series or All Aboard East Coast

Given they're filming with GWR again, I wonder if they could do something on the Class 800s and talk about the fact they're leased, and the company that is maintaining them.

You do of course have to make it educational but not too technical or boring, so at best you'll have the narrator briefly mention it every now and then (initially and then when recapping with the 'after the break, before the break' stuff).

 

[HH]

And those companies will be run by people who understand both the economics and railway side of things.

There are banks who will finance rolling stock without the benefit of rolling stock experts - as long as you get a guarantee from the franchising authority that they'll get paid for (say) 25 years. Of course, that's a bank working solely as a bank.

 

[D6975]

I thought the whole programme hilarious. Not even done their homework & seemed stumped when asked for £50m assurance. In another way if they where successful in gaining the franchise I would have enjoyed watching them be gradually hated by their own kind

I only saw a bit of the program, but I did see this bit. The looks on their faces when told how much they had to stump up were priceless.

 

[GodAtum]

i turned off after 30 seconds. They all seemed like a bunch of ****s. I have to admit I get frustrated at TOCs but anyone can run a railway with enough money. The problem isnt so much the people who run the railways but the investment in it. And also the bad relationship between the TOCs and unions.

 

[dk1]

I only saw a bit of the program, but I did see this bit. The looks on their faces when told how much they had to stump up were priceless.

I know, hilarious. Stupid people