The problems with having a privatised bus network.

[buspassenger]

A bit of a rant here. I live in Broadbridge Heath and commute in to Horsham every day. We get four buses an hour between Broadbridge Heath and Horsham but all four are run by four different bus operators.

1bph - Arriva - 63
1bph - Compass Bus - 100
1bph - Metrobus - 93
1bph - Sussex Coaches - 68

All four bus operators charge completely different fares as well.

Arriva 63:
• £2.60 Single
• £4.20 Return

Compass Bus 100:
• £2.40 Single
• £3.80 Return

Metrobus 93:
• £2.80 Single
• £4.50 Return

Sussex Coaches 68:
• £2.00 Single
• £3.00 Return

So how much you pay depends on which bus turns up first. Or if you want to pay a certain amount then you have to wait for a specific bus.

What is even worse is that none of the four will accept each others Return tickets so you either have to carefully plan which bus you get back if you buy a Return ticket or you have to spend more money and buy two Single tickets which is much more than a Return ticket.

The only ticket that is accepted on all four is the £9.00 Discovery ticket which is very expensive unless you are travelling on lots of buses.

This is the problem with having a privatised bus network. If our entire bus network was just one nationalised bus company than it would really make it so much more simple.

What do others think? Does this sort of thing annoy you as well? Is it time to do something about it? Perhaps it is time to nationalise our entire bus network (and ideally our railway network and our ferry network as well) to end this nonsense for passengers. Anyway rant over.

 

[Hophead]

In fact, you get 5 buses per hour, as Sussex Bus 68 is generally half-hourly, but to answer your point regarding ticket acceptance, given enough time and patience, you can find a page entitled "Other operators' ticket acceptance" on the Metrobus website. Here, it states:

Route 100, Compass Travel - Metrobus returns, weeklies and Metrovoyagers accepted between Broadbridge Heath and Horsham/Horsham Hospital, also between Hicksted and Albourne. Horsham Metroriders accepted between Broadbridge Heath and Horsham/Horsham Hospital. If using a key card, please show the driver a printed receipt of your ticket purchase, along with your key card.

So, you're fortunate, unlike many others, though whether this arrangement is known to all drivers, I'll leave for you to find out. It's entirely possible that the web page is out-of-date, I suppose.

I've never been able to find out whether Metrobus themselves offer a similar concession to holders of Compass Bus returns. Nor is there any mention of the deal on Compass's own website, though they do list the services which accept Brighton & Hove Saver tickets. Arriva's website is too confusing and lacking useful information to bother with and Sussex Bus seem to regard publicity as a frivolous luxury.

In general, though, the general lack of ticket inter-availability is one of the most frustrating aspects of the deregulated scene and must be responsible for a reasonable proportion of the bus's declining share of the travel market. After all, 4-5 buses per hour over the roads you mention is pretty reasonable. It's unfortunate in the extreme that, unless you're getting on in years, you effectively have only half that number.

 

[radamfi]

This is the problem with having a privatised bus network. If our entire bus network was just one nationalised bus company than it would really make it so much more simple.

It doesn't have to be nationalised. You just need a public authority overseeing transport. In Germany and Switzerland you have the "verkehrsverbund" system where public and private companies have to follow the fare structure laid down by the state. In London, the Netherlands and Denmark, private companies are paid to run services by the transport authority, who set the fares.

 

[Darandio]

Hold on, aren't we always being told that competition is good and helps to drive prices down? Or we could have one national operator that charges twice the price. Be careful what you wish for!

 

[RT4038]

It doesn't have to be nationalised. You just need a public authority overseeing transport. In Germany and Switzerland you have the "verkehrsverbund" system where public and private companies have to follow the fare structure laid down by the state. In London, the Netherlands and Denmark, private companies are paid to run services by the transport authority, who set the fares.

You are just playing with semantics. The actual operation of the services may not be 'nationalised' , but where the buses run and how much they charge is. Any private company in this regime has little freedom of action and no security of tenure. The industry is effectively nationalised as control is entirely with a public authority, and any private bus operator has as much status as a private stationery supplier to the public body.

 

[radamfi]

You are just playing with semantics. The actual operation of the services may not be 'nationalised' , but where the buses run and how much they charge is. Any private company in this regime has little freedom of action and no security of tenure. The industry is effectively nationalised as control is entirely with a public authority, and any private bus operator has as much status as a private stationery supplier to the public body.

Tell that to the people who complain about the "privatised" train companies which operate under a not very different system.

 

[RT4038]

Tell that to the people who complain about the "privatised" train companies which operate under a not very different system.

So you are not denying it then?
The 'privatised' train companies are running under a bit of a different system, in that only a proportion of their fares are 'regulated' and that train service levels are set at a minimum, with additional services possible under a 'commercial' remit. Many on this forum have argued (rightly?) that even this is not properly privatised, but the train operators by and large have a greater freedom than 'verkhersverbund' private bus operators to justify the 'privatised' moniker.

People will complain about anything - I well recall the amount of complaint about nationalised and municipal bus operators before de-regulation in 1986, and British Rail before the current regime, and the calls for 'privatisation' and 'deregulation' to give them some proper competition and incentive for better customer service. I think we know where those complaints got us.
Currently there is a similar level of complaint calling for regulation and nationalisation - if this was to happen how many years before the complaints would start again for its reversal? Not many I should think.

 

[radamfi]

So you are not denying it then?

What is there to deny? It is quite clear what the situation is. The key question is whether private tendering is preferable to state ownership. It is common for private companies to be engaged in the provision of a wide range of public services in most developed countries these days, a lot of the time satisfactorily. The main problem is when the private contractor successfully bids to provide a service and then later wants to renegotiate.

 

[RT4038]

In general, though, the general lack of ticket inter-availability is one of the most frustrating aspects of the deregulated scene and must be responsible for a reasonable proportion of the bus's declining share of the travel market. After all, 4-5 buses per hour over the roads you mention is pretty reasonable. It's unfortunate in the extreme that, unless you're getting on in years, you effectively have only half that number.

This is not quite right - if you buy single tickets you effectively have 4-5 buses per hour, sounds a pretty good service for your neck of the woods. If you wish to trade cost for convenience, you can buy a return ticket on one of the operators. You pay extra for convenience, not unlike most sectors of business!
However a centrally controlled, effectively nationalised, system could easily result in a halving of the service to match demand with capacity, perhaps with buses connecting along the route and forcing passengers to change buses to get higher load factors (such as the situation in Zurich apparently), and/or a standardisation on the highest fare in order to 'cross-subsidise' loss making services, with no market forces to check such action. Alternatively the country could decide to invest heavily in bus services to cut fares and improve mobility.
I know what I would like, but I also have a hunch of what would be most likely!

 

[PeterC]

SNIP

People will complain about anything - I well recall the amount of complaint about nationalised and municipal bus operators before de-regulation in 1986, and British Rail before the current regime, and the calls for 'privatisation' and 'deregulation' to give them some proper competition and incentive for better customer service. I think we know where those complaints got us.
Currently there is a similar level of complaint calling for regulation and nationalisation - if this was to happen how many years before the complaints would start again for its reversal? Not many I should think.

In other words "be careful what you wish for".

A couple of years ago I was regularly using a local route with two competing providers. No problem for me with ENCTS and quite competitive fares for those without but there would regularly be somebody having a "discussion" with the driver about the validity of their ticket. As far as a significant minority of "Joe Public" is concerned all buses are equal regardless of the name on the side.

 

[RT4038]

What is there to deny? It is quite clear what the situation is. The key question is whether private tendering is preferable to state ownership. It is common for private companies to be engaged in the provision of a wide range of public services in most developed countries these days, a lot of the time satisfactorily. The main problem is when the private contractor successfully bids to provide a service and then later wants to renegotiate.

The main problem is when the private contractor successfully bids to provide a service and then later wants to renegotiate, or when the State Operator is unable to contain its costs and the resulting inefficiency has to be paid for by taxpayers, and/or when the Public Authority has no will to challenge the status quo and the services are arranged for the benefit of narrow political interests or the operators themselves (private or state owned). Plenty of examples of all these around the world in statutory monopoly situations.

 

[APT618S]

It may be simpler but does that mean better ?
After all if there was just one nationalised company then the fares might be £2.50 single & £4.00 return. That would mean anybody currently using the two cheapest options would pay more.
I do not know the area but would current passenger demand warrant a 12min service (i.e. 5 buses/hr) if there was just one company ?
If not you may be looking at a 20 or 30 min interval which would mean that you could end up with a service not that different from the current Sussex coaches but costing more.
For me personally it does not bother me as I would have the choice between cost and flexibility, although in the example given the actual times each service runs and the reliability of each company would also impact strongly on my strategy.
For Arriva, Metrobus and Compass there are live tracker websites and/or Apps which may help decision making on the day.
Remember in a nationalised system I would have no choice.

 

[cnjb8]

Council owned companies do have there pros and cons.
Some are very successful such as Reading and NCT but others like Cardiff see repeated service withdrawals. At one point or another, austerity will probably catch up.

 

[Megafuss]

For me, it has and always will be a matter of management, rather than ownership.

Those in favour of public ownership always use NCT and Reading as the example. But Ipswich and Halton are awful.

Likewise in the private sector. Go South Coast, National Express WM and some of the Stagecoach operations are very good and some of the First, Go Ahead and Stagecoach operations are just as bad as the poor council operated services.

 

[SCH117X]

Back in the days of regulated services different fares existed between different operators for the same journey so its nothing new

 

[satisnek]

Back in the days of regulated services different fares existed between different operators for the same journey so its nothing new

Yes indeed. When I used to catch the bus to school I had a choice of Alder Valley (NBC) or Safeguard. The former was more frequent, the latter more reliable. After a few terms of having an Alder Valley pass, my parents eventually saw the light and just gave me the cash to catch the first bus which came along!