TfGM Bus franchising

[johncrossley]

The whole point of bus franchising is that "big brother knows best" rather than commercial private transport providers. Therefore, who knows how far TfGM will go in dictating how people are allowed to travel, and which through bus routes will be chopped arbitrarily for ideological reasons.

Surely "ideology" implies doing something out of the ordinary? As far as I can tell, ideas that have come out of TfGM so far seem in line with similar organisations elsewhere. Nothing earth shattering.

 

[mangad]

The whole point of bus franchising is that "big brother knows best" rather than commercial private transport providers.

Intrigued why commercial transport operators should know best. The goal of a private company is to make money. A bus company makes money by running services. But those services that it wants are the ones that make the most money. If it doesn't make money, it goes. Doesn't matter who it affects. If a service doesn't make money, the operators don't want to know. The social good of providing services to everyone are irrelevant to them. Why? Because they're a business! If it wasn't for subsidies, huge chunks of our public transport system wouldn't exist.

Incidentally we are one of the few countries in the world where most of our major cities have public bus services run like this. Even in the USA - that bastion of capitalism - you'll find that bus companies in major cities are publicly owned, and publicly run. We're an outlier.

 

[johncrossley]

Buses in Manchester haven't been run commercially for over 3 years now anyway. Even outside Manchester you have a fare cap running until late 2024 at the earliest. That makes neatly 5 years of direct subsidy. At what point do you stop pretending that buses are commercial?

 

[Deerfold]

Buses in Manchester haven't been run commercially for over 3 years now anyway. Even outside Manchester you have a fare cap running until late 2024 at the earliest. That makes neatly 5 years of direct subsidy. At what point do you stop pretending that buses are commercial?

It's still a commercial decision which routes are chopped - anything that's being subsidised by the fare cap isn't giving anyone else power to make that decision, though it may change the decision for a while.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Surely "ideology" implies doing something out of the ordinary? As far as I can tell, ideas that have come out of TfGM so far seem in line with similar organisations elsewhere. Nothing earth shattering.

That's not what ideology means It's about following a set of principles or beliefs.

Buses in Manchester haven't been run commercially for over 3 years now anyway. Even outside Manchester you have a fare cap running until late 2024 at the earliest. That makes neatly 5 years of direct subsidy. At what point do you stop pretending that buses are commercial?

At the point that bus companies are simply paid a management fee for service provision rather than taking on the commercial risk.

Intrigued why commercial transport operators should know best. The goal of a private company is to make money. A bus company makes money by running services. But those services that it wants are the ones that make the most money. If it doesn't make money, it goes. Doesn't matter who it affects. If a service doesn't make money, the operators don't want to know. The social good of providing services to everyone are irrelevant to them. Why? Because they're a business! If it wasn't for subsidies, huge chunks of our public transport system wouldn't exist.

Incidentally we are one of the few countries in the world where most of our major cities have public bus services run like this. Even in the USA - that bastion of capitalism - you'll find that bus companies in major cities are publicly owned, and publicly run. We're an outlier.

To haul this back on topic, the concern is that you end up with decisions that reflect, not what customers want or need, but simply reflect political or ideological considerations. So in Greater Manchester, they've adopted the sensible approach on cross-border routes. That is a positive. Better integration into Metrolink will be a positive, where buses and Metrolink positively co-exist and provide network connectivity, with many local routes simply acting as feeders into Metrolink in Bury or Rochdale or wherever. What we don't want is to see a series of Gateshead-type nodes that artificially distort bus service flows. More Heworths, fewer Gatesheads.

Commercial bus companies do pursue what the market wants - that's true. Also, I can't and won't defend some of the operators who mismanage their businesses - looking at Arriva and First in this respect. So again, it's not some Animal Farm world of absolutes in that something is "Good" or "Bad". Remember that the deregulated market was based on the ability to support socially necessary services. Greater Manchester had the ability to do that but has been undermined (as have all local authorities) in having their finances regulated and reduced by central government on the altar of austerity. Again, the allure of cross-subsidy seems attractive but we don't want to see a situation where good bus services are pared back (as in London) in order to support a growing proportion of peripheral "nice to haves" out in the sticks.

Interesting that you mention the US as an example of public ownership. They are indeed...and if you've travelled on them, you'll know what an experience that can be. Far scarier than getting a bus in the UK! I might also add that being an outlier is less pronounced - once upon a time, you had the UK vs. most bus services in Europe (and indeed, public services) being directly owned and operated by local authorities. Of course, Veolia, RATP, Arriva, Abellio have managed to create substantial businesses based on the movement of services to being outsourced so a place for capitalism does exist!

I passionately want to see better services, appropriately and sustainably financed, across the UK.

 

[Donny85]

a classic example of this would be Stockport to Parrs wood then onto Chorlton. At the moment I would have to buy two separate tickets

Sorry, why are two separate tickets required instead of a System One Bus & Tram?

Would an Altrincham to Wigan or Leigh bus service be a viable proposition

Looking at the most direct routes these could take there’s probably not much demand.

For those in Wigan wanting to reach Altrincham, train & tram at 1hr16ish probably covers any demand.

For Leigh, the v1 & tram at 1hr20ish again probably covers any demand.

 

[Goldfish62]

To haul this back on topic, the concern is that you end up with decisions that reflect, not what customers want or need, but simply reflect political or ideological considerations.

My main concern with the whole thing is the governance structure. The bus network will still be controlled by a group of councillors in the GMCA Bus Committee and TfGM can't do anything without their approval. Individual members will also have their own agendas and block certain beneficial decisions to get their own way. This is in contrast to TfL, which legally is a separate local authority from the GLA. It does not need formal approval for bus network decisions from anyone (having said that it has been coming under increasing micromanagement from City Hall, eg Superloop, but that's a temporary situation dependent on the incumbent as self-appointed Chair of TfL).

I very much agree with you that there's a place for public and private, but unfortunately everything is so polarised these days the choice is often seen as either/or rather than a bit of both.

Again, the allure of cross-subsidy seems attractive but we don't want to see a situation where good bus services are pared back (as in London) in order to support a growing proportion of peripheral "nice to haves" out in the sticks.

In danger of going off topic here, so I'll keep it brief. The paring back of services is to balance the books, not to fund Superloop, which I assume is what you were referring to. Superloop(y) was unbudgeted (ref micromanagement from the Chair of TfL).

Summarising, and notwithstanding the stories I'm hearing of a rather chaotic and fractious mobilisation, I think in time the Bee Network has great potential. Just need to stop those politicians from interfering!

 

[TheSmiths82]

Sorry, why are two separate tickets required instead of a System One Bus & Tram?

Because I might only want to do a single journey, e.g I've had a couple of pints after work and left the car behind. A system one would make it a very expensive 8 mile journey. Stockport to Chorlton via the tram is probably a bad example because there are direct buses, but there are other situations that might require a single journey via tram and bus and buying two tickets gets expensive, although the £2 bus cap helps with this.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

In danger of going off topic here, so I'll keep it brief. The paring back of services is to balance the books, not to fund Superloop, which I assume is what you were referring to. Superloop(y) was unbudgeted (ref micromanagement from the Chair of TfL).

Summarising, and notwithstanding the stories I'm hearing of a rather chaotic and fractious mobilisation, I think in time the Bee Network has great potential. Just need to stop those politicians from interfering!

Actually, Superloop wasn't what I had in mind I was thinking of those disparate routes like the 404 - 3 buses wandering around Caterham serving everywhere.

I very much agree with you that there's a place for public and private, but unfortunately everything is so polarised these days the choice is often seen as either/or rather than a bit of both.

Exactly this. The system was largely working, especially with the twirly pass, until 2008 (economic downturn) and the austerity budgets of Osborne - another ideologically driven approach from the right wing and their obsession with small government.

I think there's more fundamental issues in tackling the congestion and car dependancy in Manchester; traffic jams won't discriminate on the ownership or operational model.

 

[WWH44L]

Good luck with that, they've already gone!

Blimey!! Thought they might have done. Oh well.

 

[TheSmiths82]

Nice to see those brand new 11 year old buses Is there any age limits to the fleet you can use under the new contracts? I would have thought those 62 plates are already 2/3 of their useful heavy city usage life.

 

[winston270twm]

Nice to see those brand new 11 year old buses Is there any age limits to the fleet you can use under the new contracts? I would have thought those 62 plates are already 2/3 of their useful heavy city usage life.

Go North West are bringing in 59/60/61/12 plate double deckers ex London + 60/10 & 12 plate Volvo B7RLE / Citaro / E200's.

I believe the age limit is 16 years old.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

That some how looks quite smart with the back contrasting the yellow.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Jul 2023 ==



That seems rather high, I would have thought ten would have been better. I suppose it is due to cost and encouraging bus companies to bid. I also get they can't get brand new buses over night but I think image is important to a point too. If this flagship scheme ends up being full of smoking old bangers questions might get asked. I sometimes travel on 58 plate E400's and they are feeling old and tatty now despite the fact they have been well maintained. I suppose some of the older buses might be used less frequently e.g in rush hour.

It's no different to London where there are plenty of vehicles that are >12 years old in service.

Buses are generally depreciated over 15 to 17 years so it makes sense that the age limit is similarly aligned.

If you ensure at least one midlife repaint and internal refurbishment a 15 year old bus can still look respectable.

Absolutely. In fact, I had a journey on a 62 plate e400 the other day. Dateless plate and a high-quality refurb - you really wouldn't know it was nearly 11 years old. To a lesser degree, First got a number of ex London e400s from Ensign into Essex (and Somerset). Not so keen on the grey eLeather but looking less than their age.

 

[Leedsbusman]

It's still a commercial decision which routes are chopped - anything that's being subsidised by the fare cap isn't giving anyone else power to make that decision, though it may change the decision for a while.

That becomes muddy esp where services are being reduced as a result of reduced concessionary fares payments.
Indeed while it may be a ‘commercial’ decision to reduce its a ‘social’ decision where to find a replacement or not. So arguably a lost service is as much a council decision as an operator one!

London has been reducing services for economic reasons - is that a commercial decision too? GM has had spells of reducing tendered services for economic reasons too.

 

[Leyland Bus]

The Citaros have long since left the Deepdale site.

He means the ex Preston Citaros that are redundant at Bolton.

 

[Mwanesh]

Every policy has its flaws. The only problem is those areas outside the large urban areas. No one seems to know what will happen to bus provision.

 

[WWH44L]

He means the ex Preston Citaros that are redundant at Bolton.

I do indeed.

 

[kiewilk0970]

I

It's the same font but Stagecoach and Go North West seemed to have adopted larger ones for some reason...

33024 has now exited the paintshop, to head back into the workshops to continue its rehabilitation.

We are actually using the rest of today to try and catch up with all the buses missing fleetnames and logos etc. 40740 and 40795 now both done, just waiting for the next one to roll in.

We should have another paint bus in tomorrow.

I much prefer the Diamond logo placement on the front of 33024 compared to 33028

 

[Leyland Bus]

Streetdeck 40766 is the latest returnee from painting. Now stickered and returned to traffic.

 

[WWH44L]

Streetdeck 40766 is the latest returnee from painting. Now stickered and returned to traffic.

Thanks for the update. Did you manage to get anything in the Bolton paint shop this week?

 

[Leyland Bus]

Thanks for the update. Did you manage to get anything in the Bolton paint shop this week?

Due to commercial reasons, we'll be repainting some buses for Preston Bus going forwards, unsure for how long for but obviously no longer than end of September.

Streetdeck 40724 returned from Blackburn this afternoon and 40770 went in the opposite direction.

 

[ryan06]

Due to commercial reasons, we'll be repainting some buses for Preston Bus going forwards, unsure for how long for but obviously no longer than end of September.

Streetdeck 40724 returned from Blackburn this afternoon and 40770 went in the opposite direction.

Preston Bus is due a Major depot revamp "Soon" so they could install at paint boot at Preston or get them done at Blackburn bus & coach world

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

https://twitter.com/buses2012/status/1686435947942989836?s=46&t=NwCcaynuPR-k7xjMa0OtGQ

(For some reason I can’t get the bee emoji in this X post to work so I had to just add the word)

Forgive my ignorance, but what does GNW signify?

 

[darloscott]

Forgive my ignorance, but what does GNW signify?

Go North West

 

[WibbleWobble]

Sorry, why are two separate tickets required instead of a System One Bus & Tram?


Looking at the most direct routes these could take there’s probably not much demand.

For those in Wigan wanting to reach Altrincham, train & tram at 1hr16ish probably covers any demand.

For Leigh, the v1 & tram at 1hr20ish again probably covers any demand.

Either that or change at the Trafford Centre. A Wigan/Leigh to Altrincham service just isn't worth it when interchange is available at a suitable location, and traffic congestion in one half will significantly impact the other - that's why the 22 was split (as it was so long), and look what happened to the 500 (albeit from Bolton) - it was curtailed at the Trafford Centre, although that was a gradual cut back until it eventually just disappeared.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Either that or change at the Trafford Centre. A Wigan/Leigh to Altrincham service just isn't worth it when interchange is available at a suitable location, and traffic congestion in one half will significantly impact the other - that's why the 22 was split (as it was so long), and look what happened to the 500 (albeit from Bolton) - it was curtailed at the Trafford Centre, although that was a gradual cut back until it eventually just disappeared.

Was the 22 the service from Bolton to Stockport that had two regular named operators who did batches of services between each other? I recall someone told me they accepted the other companies' passes. It must have been a few hours to do a return trip from Bolton and back for the driver.

I note what you say about interchange, but is there not some TfGM aspiration to have cross-city services such as Middleton to Sale that go against the use of interchanges in central Manchester.

 

[WibbleWobble]

Was the 22 the service from Bolton to Stockport that had two regular named operators who did batches of services between each other. I recall someone told me they accepted the other companies passes. It must have been a few hours to do a return trip from Bolton and back for the driver.

Yes, it was about two-thirds First Bolton to one-third Stagecoach Stockport - it was normally batches of something like three consecutive journeys run by Stagecoach, then around six First. It did mean First ran dead to/from Stockport at times.

Some tickets were accepted on each others' buses (namely saver tickets), which stems from the days of the old SuperGem tickets which harks back to the old GM Buses days.

Evening journeys were tendered, which led to some interesting operators at times, including Stagecoach Ribble running from Chorley!

 

[M60lad]

I can see congestion being the issue why the original 22 Stockport-Bolton was withdrawn. It wasn't unheard of to have 2 22s running together sometimes, despite it being a 30min service and especially if something special had been happening at Trafford Centre. There are just too many pinch points on the route that could make the service unreliable at times.

 

[WWH44L]

31407/15, 33019 & 40704 at Diamond Bolton have been changed on bustimes as being repainted into Bee livery. Anyone confirm this as I don’t always trust the changes on that site especially when there are no links to verify?

 

[daodao]

I can see congestion being the issue why the original 22 Stockport-Bolton was withdrawn.

For the historical record, the original 22 route ran from Levenshulme (Lloyd Road) to Eccles via Chorlton-cum-Hardy and Urmston, and was operated by the North West Road Car company jointly with Manchester Corporation Transport.