Main revenue flows on the WCML

[Peter0124]

So a journey such as Birkenhead-London or Liverpool-Croydon wouldn't be included in the Liverpool-London figures? If so, then Manchester's Metrolink might be skewing the figures relative to Merseyrail, since a Metrolink+Avanti journey would have a split ticket at Piccadilly whereas a Merseyrail+Avanti would likely be on a single ticket. Similarly for other places like Glasgow with good suburban rail networks

Whenever Im travelling on the WCML I always split my ticket at Glasgow Central. Sometimes a through ticket from a suburban station is 3x the price, and offers very poor routing.

 

[frodshamfella]

That was my thought too. My tickets are always Manchester Stations to London because I use Metrolink to connect. I imagine some people buy advanced tickets from Liverpool to London and then buy a flexible return on the Merseyrail so those tickets will still be classed as Liverpool Stations ticket.

The other variable is that Liverpool is located on the coast and therefore its catchment area is smaller than Manchester's. Parts of the Wirral will have an easier service via Chester and for the eastern areas of Merseyside, Wigan and Warrington may be more attractive. Most of Great Manchester's London pax will travel via Piccadilly or Stockport. The exception is Wigan and maybe parts of Bolton.

I'd expect that people from parts of West Yorkshire, Derbyshire, and Lancashire travel via Manchester too (e.g. Huddersfield, Buxton, Chorley). Outside of Merseyside, I'd expect that very few people travel via Runcorn or Liverpool. Purely comparing the populations of Greater Manchester excluding Wigan (2.5million) and all of Merseyside (1.5 million), you can see that Manchester has a far bigger catchment area.

Before everyone from Liverpool piles in on me I'm completely on board with the 2nd service per hour and think its justified. Liverpool is never going to be as big a market as Manchester though purely because of its position on the coast.

People from St Helens, Knowsley and North Cheshire do use Runcorn to reach London. Also from South Liverpool, where a second London service calliing at South Parkway would be useful. Id say on the Wirral, most would go via Lime Street, apart from those further down on the Chester line.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

[snip]

I think though that these figures show that these sorts of discussions are really not relevant. The fact is we exist, and are far more valuable than so many would care to allow anyone to admit.

I tend to agree. These figures tell us only about gross point-to-point revenues. They tell us nothing about average revenue per passenger nor the balance of capacity to average loadings. They also don't reveal anything useful about passengers connecting from off-route locations: railway geography would suggest those numbers will be higher via Manchester than Liverpool and there will also be numbers via Preston, and to a lesser extent Wigan, but the figures don't help with actually knowing these. In terms of pre-HS2 service changes what do we expect in terms of releasing suppressed demand either directly or by offering alternatives to passengers using other routes currently? Ultimately the document, interesting as it is by being novel, is really a rather basic tool for initial high-level discussions rather than detailed planning.

People from St Helens, Knowsley and North Cheshire do use Runcorn to reach London. Also from South Liverpool, where a second London service calling at South Parkway would be useful. Id say on the Wirral, most would go via Lime Street, apart from those further down on the Chester line.

It would also enable passengers from Southport to have a simpler interchange than either the "city centre shuffle" or the similar "Wigan walk".

 

[Grimsby town]

People from St Helens, Knowsley and North Cheshire do use Runcorn to reach London. Also from South Liverpool, where a second London service calliing at South Parkway would be useful. Id say on the Wirral, most would go via Lime Street, apart from those further down on the Chester line.

I'm sure they do. My point wasn't a dig at Liverpool and I agree it deserves a 2nd service to London. My point was that there are alternatives that are relatively accessible to places like Southport, St Helens and Widnes which isn't the case for most of Greater Manchester. That's on top of a smaller population.

Some people seem to think that Liverpool is as deserving of the same service as Manchester. Its that I disagree with purely because the Manchester services serve around double the population of the Liverpool services.

 

[irish_rail]

I'm sure they do. My point wasn't a dig at Liverpool and I agree it deserves a 2nd service to London. My point was that there are alternatives that are relatively accessible to places like Southport, St Helens and Widnes which isn't the case for most of Greater Manchester. That's on top of a smaller population.

Some people seem to think that Liverpool is as deserving of the same service as Manchester. Its that I disagree with purely because the Manchester services serve around double the population of the Liverpool services.

Yes but Liverpool has more than twice the tourist potential of Manchester. Liverpool draws in tourists from worldwide, not to mention from within the UK. Manchester on the other hand has far far less tourist draw, both internationally and domestically. Its not all about population, places like Bath attest to that fact.

 

[The Planner]

Yes but Liverpool has more than twice the tourist potential of Manchester. Liverpool draws in tourists from worldwide, not to mention from within the UK. Manchester on the other hand has far far less tourist draw, both internationally and domestically. Its not all about population, places like Bath attest to that fact.

Tourists don't equal the same revenue to the railway though as post COVID numbers show.

 

[Grimsby town]

Yes but Liverpool has more than twice the tourist potential of Manchester. Liverpool draws in tourists from worldwide, not to mention from within the UK. Manchester on the other hand has far far less tourist draw, both internationally and domestically. Its not all about population, places like Bath attest to that fact.

Visit Britain suggests overseas tourist visits to Manchester are quite a bit higher than Liverpool. I'd agree that Liverpool has a better tourist offering. I live in Manchester but I'm not from Manchester so I don't have an particular affinity for Manchester over Liverpool. If anything I prefer Liverpool. Looking at the cold hard stats shows why Manchester has more trains to London than Liverpool. Having the coast on one side and WCML on the other limits Liverpool's catchment for London pax.

 

[Djgr]

Visit Britain suggests overseas tourist visits to Manchester are quite a bit higher than Liverpool. I'd agree that Liverpool has a better tourist offering. I live in Manchester but I'm not from Manchester so I don't have an particular affinity for Manchester over Liverpool. If anything I prefer Liverpool. Looking at the cold hard stats shows why Manchester has more trains to London than Liverpool. Having the coast on one side and WCML on the other limits Liverpool's catchment for London pax.

Still looking for those beaches in Manchester!

 

[philosopher]

Visit Britain suggests overseas tourist visits to Manchester are quite a bit higher than Liverpool. I'd agree that Liverpool has a better tourist offering. I live in Manchester but I'm not from Manchester so I don't have a particular affinity for Manchester over Liverpool. If anything I prefer Liverpool. Looking at the cold hard stats shows why Manchester has more trains to London than Liverpool. Having the coast on one side and WCML on the other limits Liverpool's catchment for London pax.

Overseas tourists I suspect includes business travellers. My guess is that Manchester gets far more overseas business travellers than Liverpool.

Manchester also very likely has far more sporting events than Liverpool that will attract international specators. Indeed I suspect that this is main thing Manchester is known for outside the UK.

 

[DLAYKEGER]

Sorry you don't see the amount of proper tourists in manchester, the stats must relate to the ringway hotels. It's sad to say that the hourly Liverpool service means travellers fron Liverpool find going via Chester is quicker

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Yes but Liverpool has more than twice the tourist potential of Manchester. Liverpool draws in tourists from worldwide, not to mention from within the UK. Manchester on the other hand has far far less tourist draw, both internationally and domestically. Its not all about population, places like Bath attest to that fact.

Unfortunately it is notoriously difficult to persuade foreign tourists arriving into the country via the London airports (or even cross-Channel) to actually venture north. Those that are willing tend to stick to the Stratford-York-Edinburgh trail. Foreigners visiting Liverpool are more likely to fly direct to the region (ie Liverpool or Manchester airports) so the availability of rail services to/from London is of little interest to them. Direct services to the Lake District would be much more useful.

 

[deltic]

Yes but Liverpool has more than twice the tourist potential of Manchester. Liverpool draws in tourists from worldwide, not to mention from within the UK. Manchester on the other hand has far far less tourist draw, both internationally and domestically. Its not all about population, places like Bath attest to that fact.

Liverpool has half the number of international visitors and two thirds the number of domestic visitors that Manchester has - https://growthplatform.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Tourism-Data-Summary-June-2022.pdf

2022 tourism data

Domestic visitors Manchester 2,669k Liverpool 1,672k
International visitors Manchester 1,661k, Liverpool 845k

 

[irish_rail]

Liverpool has half the number of international visitors and two thirds the number of domestic visitors that Manchester has - https://growthplatform.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Tourism-Data-Summary-June-2022.pdf

2022 tourism data

Domestic visitors Manchester 2,669k Liverpool 1,672k
International visitors Manchester 1,661k, Liverpool 845k

As someone up thread pointed out, I suspect this relates more to business travellers than what I am terming tourists. Though I'm happy to concede business wise, Manchester probably does better.

 

[jagardner1984]

It would be interesting to compare the relatively uncompetitive (on operators, timings, fares, frequency) GLC-EUS service with the more competitive EDB-KGX service. Aside from the seasonal peaks, I suspect the difference is stark, though the flourishing market from Glasgow Airport would demonstrate their are passengers to be had should anyone in the DfT be interested in pursuing them.

 

[BeijingDave]

I think Manchester's combined student numbers across all universities are higher than Liverpool's too, some of whom will be from the south and some of whom will be foreigners flying into London (despite Manchester having its own airport).

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Birmingham to London is of course also served by Chiltern and LNW and Liverpool-Euston can be done with LNW whereas there is no rail competition between Manchester and London. It is not clear if the quoted figures are just Avanti revenue.

The LNWR tickets are also valid on TfW trains. So you can still do London-Manchester on the cheap LNWR tickets - you just do London-Crewe on LNWR and Crewe-Manchester using the Cardiff-Manchester TfW service.

I wonder whether a non-revenue=related extra reason for only 1tph Avanti London-Liverpool might be lack of paths on the constricted bit between Edge Hill and Lime Street?

 

[Parjon]

Lots of anxious willy waving going on I see. But interestingly nothing that suggests that Liverpool:

A) doesn't merit three tph to London based on the figures shown and as planned (two hs2, one wcml)
B) or will struggle to fill any of them (given the crowding concerns mentioned by hs2 themselves, and the projected remaining revenue for the one tph wcml).

So that's progress I suppose.

Perhaps we can get back to discussing revenue and its implications.
The parlous state of Liverpool's major city connectivity is I think a justifiable entry, including but not limited to its straining at the seams lack of actual consideration by hs2.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

People from St Helens, Knowsley and North Cheshire do use Runcorn to reach London. Also from South Liverpool, where a second London service calliing at South Parkway would be useful. Id say on the Wirral, most would go via Lime Street, apart from those further down on the Chester line.

On top of that, at least in Virgin days, Liverpool-London Advances were offered via Chester with a connection from Merseyrail.
And I've also seen the driver of a 221 arriving at Chester walk over to the Merseyrail service to get back to base.

 

[Krokodil]

I am surprised that Birmingham to Manchester is so low.

I'm not, it's served by XC so demand will be constricted by the number of people you can physically wedge into a four-car Voyager.

Also the surprising figure on the table for me!

Particularly given that Chester is so poorly served now.

 

[Carlisle]

It would be interesting to compare the relatively uncompetitive (on operators, timings, fares, frequency) GLC-EUS service with the more competitive EDB-KGX service.

But so far anyway it’s never been intended to have widespread on rail competition, aside from the few open access services trains essentially run to a pattern thats commercially, operationally & historically best for the governments & their contractors to provide with the available funding.

 

[deltic]

As someone up thread pointed out, I suspect this relates more to business travellers than what I am terming tourists. Though I'm happy to concede business wise, Manchester probably does better.

Non business visitors

International Manchester 1,229k, Liverpool 771k
Domestic Manchester 1,999k Liverpool 1,417k

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Sep 2023 ==

It would be interesting to compare the relatively uncompetitive (on operators, timings, fares, frequency) GLC-EUS service with the more competitive EDB-KGX service. Aside from the seasonal peaks, I suspect the difference is stark, though the flourishing market from Glasgow Airport would demonstrate their are passengers to be had should anyone in the DfT be interested in pursuing them.

London all airports to Edinburgh 1958k, London all airports to Glasgow 1731k

 

[fandroid]

European business visitors to Manchester (& Liverpool!) are likely to fly as the airport has relatively good direct connections to major European cities. They would use the train here if they had business in London too but otherwise they do tend to go for the convenience which sadly, our international rail connections really don't provide.

 

[pnjman]

Maybe Birmingham to Manchester appears so low as everyone splits at Stafford?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Maybe Birmingham to Manchester appears so low as everyone splits at Stafford?

More likely it is so low because a lot of people drive. Neither Birmingham nor Manchester is that horrific to drive to, unlike London. The rubbishness of CrossCountry will also not help massively, plus that unlike Manchester to London it is actually fairly slow.

Manchester-London by contrast is one of the biggest InterCity rail flows in the world, though is probably beaten by something somewhere in Japan.

 

[Peter0124]

Anyone know which of the xx:13 or xx:33 or xx:53 from London Euston to Manchester is the busiest? And least busy? The xx:33 is the via Crewe one.

Likewise which of the xx:15 or xx:35 or xx:55 from Manchester Piccadilly down to London is busiest and least busy?

 

[deltic]

More likely it is so low because a lot of people drive. Neither Birmingham nor Manchester is that horrific to drive to, unlike London. The rubbishness of CrossCountry will also not help massively, plus that unlike Manchester to London it is actually fairly slow.

Manchester-London by contrast is one of the biggest InterCity rail flows in the world, though is probably beaten by something somewhere in Japan.

Paris to Lyon is larger

 

[Krokodil]

Paris to Lyon is larger

That flow has of course benefitted from 40 years of TGVs. Manchester - Euston on the other hand has seen Anytime fares reach obscene levels in order to price off the demand that the existing railway can't handle. HS2 will be a huge driver for growth when it opens.

 

[philosopher]

The LNWR tickets are also valid on TfW trains. So you can still do London-Manchester on the cheap LNWR tickets - you just do London-Crewe on LNWR and Crewe-Manchester using the Cardiff-Manchester TfW service.

I wonder whether a non-revenue=related extra reason for only 1tph Avanti London-Liverpool might be lack of paths on the constricted bit between Edge Hill and Lime Street?

I am curious on how the passenger numbers between London to Manchester compare with London to Birmingham. Fares from London to Birmingham will be a lot lower than to Manchester due to both the shorter distance and the cheaper LNWR and Chiltern fares so I am guessing they are quite similar.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There is a path for a second Avanti Liverpool, it just can't run until the 807s are ready due to inadequate rolling stock.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

There is a path for a second Avanti Liverpool, it just can't run until the 807s are ready due to inadequate rolling stock.

Hmm, will that make much difference? I just checked on Wikipedia, and it seems that 10 7-carriage electric class 807's plus 13 5-carriage bi-mode class 805's will be replacing 20 5-car Voyagers. That doesn't seem like much of a capacity increase, so I'm struggling to imagine that alone would allow a 2nd tph to Liverpool - which I imagine would require 5 additional trainsets to run?