Ideas for a brand for a single English railway system?

[43096]

Some small elements of the of branding of Network South East still exist: my travelcard to London has NSE printed on it; I bought a discounted ticket from Maidstone to Winchester (using 3 TOCs) using my Network Railcard, etc...

I would start with the first brand right there - it doesn't have to be NSE but use something along those lines. With the exception of GWR, all the current TOCs could become "concessions" to be part of the one brand to cover the London and South East market. With the inevitable fall in season ticket revenue (several City companies I know have banished staff until January 2021 and some are even re-evaluating the size of their offices in London), I think this is where you will struggle most. One strong brand to try to get people on the train would be the way to go. The Network Railcard was itself an example of what was done before. "The new three-day-a-week Brighton commuter gets a free trip to Cambridge on Sundays..." that kind of thing....

Inter-City or Intercity or some other new word that means long distance and fast, is the next obvious one. If you remember how we struggled with 3 million unemployed in the 1980s, then you know we are going to have something stronger than "the famous five" to cope with 4 million unemployed over the next 4 or 5 years. It will be all about fighting car, coach and plane with cheaper innovative fares and consistent quality. You certainly need different branding to NSE. Again, with the exception of EMR and GWR, the new concessions already exist to be grouped together.

That leaves Regional England. I can't see any arguments for splitting that up any further.

So I think 5 brands would be enough: England, Scotland, Wales, "Fast" & "London"

So, InterCity, Network SouthEast, Regional Railways, ScotRail and whatever Wales wants to use as a brand. We're back at BR with the additional of Wales.

If you go that route then I'd suggest HS2 should be InterCity Express.

 

[Belperpete]

Inter-City 125 was the brand for the HST. It was derived from the Inter-City brand. The brand name was applied to coaching stock and used in advertising

I think this is 1970.

The argument is for a common brand for all long distance servcies as distrinct from others - It does not neccesarily need to be "Inter City"

The Italians use freccia, the Frence Ouigo, the Germans ICE etc....

So the Liverpool to Norwich and Euston to Crewe stoppers would be branded as "Intercity" because they are long distance?! It would surely make more sense to brand services as Intercity based on their speed, rather than distance covered.

The problem as previous posters have pointed out is that our services are multi-functional, they don't fall into these neat binary divisions. And as I previously pointed out, whereas Intercity was a good branding, it led to everything else being treated as second-best.

 

[haggishunter]

Early on there were comments about how EnglandRail doesn't work like ScotRail. Railway England was suggested, but with the idea from this Network Rail Scotland video - England's Railway would read better:

If you don't want the current range of TOC brandings but neither a single brand with no differentiation between long distance / intercity services, while this wouldn't fit with the historic use of names, what about:

LNER retained for longer distance and Intercity services on the East Coast including major England <-> Scotland services via ECML.
GWR expanded to cover long distance / Intercity services on WCML and some TPE services, but more local services in the SW dropped from the brand.
England's Railway for everything else.

Above assumes TfW and ScotRail continue as is since the discussion was about England. As a Scot and a Highlander at that, I'll go back to minding my own business now!

 

[Belperpete]

England's Railway for everything else.

And that is exactly the problem, by attempting to define a premium brand, you inherently dismiss "everything else".

What is the point of defining a premium brand unless it is actually going to be premium, and therefore you charge extra for it? In the same way as Gatwick Express, which used to be an Intercity service?

 

[Horizon22]

Larger regions would seem to be the most sensible way forward for me, with a few exceptions. That would essentially be a return to BR but with better devolution to larger regions - something along the lines of.

- South East (Kent, Sussex, Anglia, Thameslink & GN bits and pieces)
- Greater Western (basically what GWR & SWR cover although some SWR metro siphoned off to SE)
- Midland (the two TOCs combined, Chiltern)
- Northern (TPE & Northern)
- Wales [if not devolved]
- Scotland [if not devolved]
- Intercity (and) Crosscountry.

For the latter, not sure if they should be separate or not.

This reminds me that I definitely remember seeing an online mock up a few years ago of what a "British Rail Mark 2" would like like in design terms which looked fairly sharp.

 

[Gareth]

BR or NR would be fine. DfT stuff is British. Strictly speaking there aren't any "English TOCs", like there's no English government (there is an English legal jurisdiction but even that's shared with Wales).

Also, Wales and Scotland have significant intercity operations linking the main centres of population with London and many other notable towns and cities in England, which are DfT-specified.

I'm also assuming Merseyrail and London Overground are omitted.

One thing that needs to be considered here is the double arrow icon. Presumably it would form part of the core of the BR corporate identity but would it also be used for the wider "national rail services" including Merseyrail, London Overground, TfW and Scotrail?

 

[xotGD]

Inter City was such a popular brand it was even adopted by football fans - the Inter City Firm (ICF)

I await the emergence of the 'Northern Connect Casuals'.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The argument is for a common brand for all long distance servcies as distrinct from others - It does not neccesarily need to be "Inter City"

The Italians use freccia, the French use Ouigo, the Germans use ICE etc....

The InterCity brand has been used in all three of those - though I think the Italians may have replaced it with Frecciabianca I think? The French still have "Intercites" for secondary long distance services, and DB of course still has InterCity as well as InterCityExpress.

I personally think it's a really strong brand and should return, and that the nature of the services it would be used on haven't really changed that much since BR days. However, we could use something else if someone (Stenning?) could come up with something that sounds good.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If you go that route then I'd suggest HS2 should be InterCity Express.

If DB will let us. Or we could use "Intercity Hispeed" or even "InterCity Javelin" though I think the latter would need buying from the IOC as I think they own it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Early on there were comments about how EnglandRail doesn't work like ScotRail. Railway England was suggested, but with the idea from this Network Rail Scotland video - England's Railway would read better

I prefer "Rail England", which works like "Highways England" etc. "England's Railway" is a possible strapline like it is in Scotland though I think that's a bit repetitive and am not sure we even need one.

Failing that just use "National Rail" with the double-arrow-in-a-circle which is already quite well established and is a bit more "blurred" so as not to hack off the Welsh and Scots regarding their "international trains".

 

[43096]

If DB will let us. Or we could use "Intercity Hispeed" or even "InterCity Javelin" though I think the latter would need buying from the IOC as I think they own it.

InterCity Rapide?

 

[Bletchleyite]

InterCity Rapide?

Will there be a jolly hostess serving crisps and tea, who'll provide you with drinks and theatrical winks for a sky-high fee?

 

[43096]

Will there be a jolly hostess serving crisps and tea, who'll provide you with drinks and theatrical winks for a sky-high fee?

DfT specification, so more likely something like this...

 

[adrock1976]

Could the organisation of the railways in England be based on the European Parliament Regions?

There was once Network SouthEast (could be used for the former London & South Eastern Railway routes, with Southern being for the former London, Brighton, & South Coast and the former London & South Western), Regional Railways North West, North East (including Yorkshire & Humber), Central (both West and East Midlands), and Wales & West.

I'm unsure if there are any railways in Gibraltar, but if there are, they could be part of England's South West Region as they were with the European Parliament elections.

 

[David Goddard]

Go back to the old regions, with IC or regional services within each one.... XC services would need to sit atop of them all, or be tied to one region or another (prob Midland)

 

[Bevan Price]

1. I would not pay a small fortune to some design consultant. Far too much money goes to consultants that would be better retained within "the railway".

2. I would invite staff to suggest names, liveries, etc., then compile short lists (to exclude silly names such as "Trainy McTrainface"), and then invite staff and public to vote for their favourites.

 

[BigCj34]

To be honest I think the set up is fine as it is! All franchises use some kind of geographical description, rossCountry is a nice brand name if not much else while, GWR has strong historical branding as does LNER. I would say SWR is geographically inaccurate as does not go to Devon and Cornwall, while I am not a huge fan of Avanti. LMS would be better but that is not geographically accurate either.

If anything Transport for England could be a subtext on the branding, in the same way Norther by Arriva was.

 

[Bletchleyite]

1. I would not pay a small fortune to some design consultant. Far too much money goes to consultants that would be better retained within "the railway".

One exception in my eyes - Ray Stenning could make an amazing job of the whole marketing of the railway as he has for a number of bus companies.

 

[tbtc]

To be fair, Intercity was around longer than 5 years, as a sub-brand it started back in 1965/1966: so 30+ years. "Intercity 125" was a hell of a lot stronger brand than Azuma, Nova321, "Famous Five Express", will ever be.

Sorry, I should have specified the period in the early '90s when everything was neatly packaged into InterCity/ ScotRail/ Provincial/ Network South East.

To try to recreate this nowadays would mean amending services to try to fit the binary definitions that some people obsess about.

It's a bit like these ideas of trying to chop services around to try to fit neatly into geographical regions... e.g. do you split a long established service at a boundary station because you want to force it to remain inside the "Midlands"?

Or that we reduce everything to certain approved levels of service provision (when there are plenty of routes that don't require the buffet car/ bells/ whistles of a "full on" InterCity route but do justify something a bit more special than being dumped in the "cheap and cheerful" kind of Regional Railways level. Supermarkets might try to "shame" people into buying the Value/Smartprice/Basics range in the hope that you'll avoid that stigma and upgrade to the "ExtraSpecial" level of the same product but this doesn't work with trains where there's often only one TOC providing the service that you want to use.

I'd rather that we focussed trains on where people actually want to go, rather than worrying about counties/regions - people don't live their lives in such simplistic boxes.

Once you've reached a decision over the amount of risk/reward/ innovation/ contract that you want to get companies to sign up to then either keep something like the current franchise levels/boundaries or go for the London Buses approach (everything under one branding). Trying to go back to how things were thirty years ago because of the fixation with trying to copy Germany just isn't going to work.

 

[HSTEd]

Wouldn't anyone care if the trains were painted in all over grey with a contrasting door colour and the only branding was a darker grey British Rail arrow logo?

 

[Belperpete]

What no-one has yet explained, is WHY. Why do we need separate brands, what does it achieve?

For example, if I were to suggest that we were to pick an arbitrary selection of London bus routes, say those over a certain length, and give them a different branding, everybody would be saying what a stupid idea.

To say that Bristol to London is Intercity but Bristol to Birmingham isn't would be stupid. Likewise Cardiff to Birmingham. Although having to paint 3 car sprinters into Intercity livery might prompt the introduction of some decent stock for the service (like painting class 73s into Intercity livery did with Gatwick Express!).

 

[tbwbear]

For example, if I were to suggest that we were to pick an arbitrary selection of London bus routes, say those over a certain length, and give them a different branding, everybody would be saying what a stupid idea.

Correct: It would be stupid because all the London bus routes; shortest and longest, are basically the same product, all being sold into the same kind of market.

But might you not consider giving a different brand to a long-distance bus that ran from, say, Edinburgh to London ?

Maybe you wouldn't. Fair enough. But if you did, perhaps it would be because such a service is a different product.

Rail is the same isn't it ? You probably want to differentiate between the long distance train or "service" and the local train. The product and the market is different.


But there are, always have been and always will be exceptions to the rule; especially over short distances.

For example, the customer in Leeds wanting to go to Doncaster can catch the local train marketed by Northern or the faster train marketed as Azuma by LNER.

It was always ever thus, in the days of BR, Intercity, GNER Virgin and the rest.

It is a factor of fast long distance trains in the UK being priced at the same level as slow stopping trains, which is actually unusual in the world context.


It seems we are moving towards a model that is similar to the TfL one; a few different brands operated as concessions.

The question is how many brands and how many concessions ?

At TfL you have "buses" as one brand identity with several concessions for routes, Overground as another, DLR as another, Crossrail (TfL rail currently) as another etc..

The question is are the current rail franchies to be treated as bus routes and absorbed into "one brand", or are they to be all kept as different brands (which to me is stupid) or should they be grouped into fewer brands in order to make marketing a bit easier and cost effective.


Even with TfL, I would actually argue that you don't really need Crossrail as a separate brand - couldn't you argue that it is just another part of London Overground ?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Even with TfL, I would actually argue that you don't really Crossrail as a seperate brand - couldn't you argue that it is just another part of London Overground ?

Yes, I find that a bit cack-handed, to be honest. It'd make more sense for LO (or something else) to be the brand for TfL heavy rail, then for each line to have e.g. Elizabeth Line as the Tube does. So the present Crossrail is the Elizabeth Line, but Crossrail 2 could be the Charles Line or whatever, and the NLL something else, and the WLL something else again.

"Crossrail" as a brand should probably go away, it was a name for an infrastructure project, just like we don't have trains branded HS1 and we are I suspect unlikely to have them branded HS2 either.

 

[py_megapixel]

Choose something which is difficult to make fun of. First Capital Connect, for instance, is a bad example due to its obvious spoof "Worst Craptial Disconnect." I first thought "RailEngland" might be a good idea though that could easily be "FailEngland"

Edit: someone beat me to it with "RailEngland" further up the page

 

[Bletchleyite]

Choose something which is difficult to make fun of. First Capital Connect, for instance, is a bad example due to its obvious spoof "Worst Craptial Disconnect." I first thought "RailEngland" might be a good idea though that could easily be "FailEngland"

Realistically the wags will come up with a silly insulting name for whatever they use, so it's probably not worth bothering about that.

 

[py_megapixel]

I'll raise something I suggested on another thread about branding - what about something completely unrelated?
In the context of a TOC it's not difficult to always present it with a slogan such as "Connecting England" which makes it clear what it is.

 

[Belperpete]

You probably want to differentiate between the long distance train or "service" from the local train. The product and the market is different.

But there are, always have been and always will be exceptions to the rule; especially over short distances. For example the customer in Leeds wanting to go to Doncaster can catch the local train marketed by Northern or the faster train marketed as Azuma by LNER.

As has previously been pointed out, in the UK there is no distinction between long distance and local, and the same product/train serves both functions. It is not the exception, it is the norm.

But I think you may inadvertently hit on the one reason why a different brand may be necessary. There are currently many fares that are TOC specific, purely for the purposes of maximising revenue for the TOC concerned. I would hope such fares would disappear under a concession model (but am not holding my breath). However, it makes sense to offer discounted fares on some services, to attract custom to them, for example the West Midlands stopping services between Birmingham/Crewe and London. Currently these can be advertised as not available on the fast services by saying they are not valid on Avanti, but if trains cease to be branded as Avanti how are passengers going to know which service their ticket is and isn't valid on?

The obvious answer to situations like this is that you give the fast services a separate brand. How about "express"? I think people are far more likely to accept that they have to pay a premium fare for travelling on an Express service, rather than something called Avanti which means nothing to most people. Okay, you would still get the chancers, but express is a term that most people recognise, like first class and off-peak. And it would only be needed where there is a fare differential between fast and slow services, although there may be some marketing cachet in advertising certain services as Express.

 

[Energy]

What no-one has yet explained, is WHY. Why do we need separate brands, what does it achieve?

I'm a fan of the German system on which they all have the same name but have an extra bit for the location, so for example all the stopping services around cities are called s bahn but include the name of their location.

 

[py_megapixel]

I'm a fan of the German system on which they all have the same name but have an extra bit for the location, so for example all the stopping services around cities are called s bahn but include the name of their location.

That's all right in Germany where the S-bahns are usually pretty self-contained systems. The problem with that in the UK is that stock from the same fleet operates services centred on different cities (e.g. do you brand the Allerton 323s as Liverpool or Manchester?) and there are even some cases of services which change type completely halfway through (for example the stopping service from Cheltenham to Swindon which then runs fast to London calling only at Didcot and Reading).

 

[HSTEd]

England has no firmly defined urban areas that have self contained services, beyond a tiny handful of examples.

It's pretty difficult to meaningfully break the system up into Regional S-Bahns when the distances are so small.