Great British Railways: Branding options?

[vuzzeho]

So with the SE 376 refurbishment including a repaint, does that mean we probably shouldn't expect branding this year?

 

[Meerkat]

GBR is going to be one organisation so it only makes sense to have branding consistent across the whole network so it’s clear that GBR runs things.

Not when it is selling different things to different people. VW hasn’t got rid of all the brands it has bought.

A single network with a single brand and single service proposition is a much better idea and worked well under BR.

Why is it a better idea, particularly to have one service provision in different markets (especially as it will be levelled down)?
In what way did BR work well?

If there is no competition and it's more of a service than a business the reputation of the 'brand' doesn't matter too much... its more of just a name for the service.

There is huge competition- driving being the obvious one, and to quite an extent just not going at all.
A national brand will be dragged down by its worst service, and beaten to death by the media.

 

[thenorthern]

Earlier today I was talking to someone about branding, back in the final days of British Rail it was largely 3 distinct brands which were Intercity, Network South East and Regional Railways. Sure there were things like Scotrail but that was still largely regional railways. With the advent of Devolution in Scotland, Wales and to a certain extent London things will be very different now.

This will be particularly interesting in Wales as back in the British Rail days and for the first few years of privatisation the South Wales services were part of the Wales and West area, Mid Wales were Midlands and later Central Rail and the North Wales coast line was North West and later First North Western. Since then we now have a single devolved Franchise for Wales and the Welsh Language Act 1993 has meant that trains in Wales now have branding in English and Welsh. It will be interesting to see how that works with GBR.

 

[Transilien]

Not when it is selling different things to different people. VW hasn’t got rid of all the brands it has bought.

People aren’t attracted to brands like c2c or northern like they do for car brands. It’s like saying that Trans Pennine Express as prestigious a brand as Lamborghini! Anyway 95% of the time people have no choice other than one operator on the railway network so GBR can only sell different things a minority of the time.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why is it a better idea, particularly to have one service provision in different markets (especially as it will be levelled down)?

The InterCity London markets aren't substantially different from one another.

In what way did BR work well?

InterCity was popular and profitable.

 

[Transilien]

This will be particularly interesting in Wales as back in the British Rail days and for the first few years of privatisation the South Wales services were part of the Wales and West area, Mid Wales were Midlands and later Central Rail and the North Wales coast line was North West and later First North Western. Since then we now have a single devolved Franchise for Wales and the Welsh Language Act 1993 has meant that trains in Wales now have branding in English and Welsh. It will be interesting to see how that works with GBR.

I can imagine the only areas that the GBR brands don’t touch are Scotland and Wales as devolution means that the operation of railways aren’t in Westminster’s hands. Perhaps GBR should be 'English railways' instead if this is the case, while cross-border intercity services could be branded separately; while regional services could stick with their devolved operator.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I can imagine the only areas that the GBR brands don’t touch are Scotland and Wales as devolution means that the operation of railways aren’t in Westminster’s hands. Perhaps GBR should be 'English railways' instead if this is the case, while cross-border intercity services could be branded separately; while regional services could stick with their devolved operator.

I have suggested "Rail England" as a potentially better name for the English passenger operation, with InterCity used as the main long distance brand including the cross-border stuff. I don't think there are any non-IC cross border services that aren't operated by ScotRail or TfW, are there? Perhaps just the TPE Newcastle-Edinburgh shuttle, but really that service makes very little sense and even so I can't see a big issue operating it under the IC brand - I'm sure the user of Reston (singular) would enjoy the prestige if not the fares.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

I don't think there are any non-IC cross border services that aren't operated by ScotRail or TfW, are there?

XC Turbostar Nottingham-Cardiff, depending how you define IC. Similarly GWR Cardiff-Bristol/SW.

 

[thenorthern]

I have suggested "Rail England" as a potentially better name for the English passenger operation, with InterCity used as the main long distance brand including the cross-border stuff. I don't think there are any non-IC cross border services that aren't operated by ScotRail or TfW, are there? Perhaps just the TPE Newcastle-Edinburgh shuttle, but really that service makes very little sense and even so I can't see a big issue operating it under the IC brand - I'm sure the user of Reston (singular) would enjoy the prestige if not the fares.

Depends on what you define as intercity, from memory there is the Portsmouth to Cardiff train which is operated by a Class 165. I think there is also one train a day from Exmouth to Cardiff operated by a Class 158 both are run by GWR. Other than that it seems to be TfW only.

An interesting one will be the TfW services that only operate in England which there are quite a few of.

 

[WAB]

An interesting one will be the TfW services that only operate in England which there are quite a few of.

Depending on who you listen to, TfW will lose the 'and Borders' component of 'Wales and Borders', or TfW will retain these routes but will be closely tied in with, and accountable to, GBR.

 

[Meerkat]

People aren’t attracted to brands like c2c or northern like they do for car brands. It’s like saying that Trans Pennine Express as prestigious a brand as Lamborghini! Anyway 95% of the time people have no choice other than one operator on the railway network so GBR can only sell different things a minority of the time.

Virgin did pretty well with their branding. Its market segmentation - VW sell cheap cars under one brand and expensive ones under others. Its harder to sell an expensive intercity ticket to someone with the same branding as the trains that make them late for work regularly.

The InterCity London markets aren't substantially different from one another.

Why do they have different products then, particularly on catering? GWR presumably has a bigger commuter market than LNER.
I'm just not seeing the benefits of making LNER the same brand as GWR, whilst I can see disadvantages.

InterCity was popular and profitable.

Was it popular, are you just comparing HSTs with the rubbish before that? And wasn't it really only profitable with some iffy cost allocations?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why do they have different products then, particularly on catering?

Because DaFT said so. Anyone with any sense thinks the GWR IETs should have had buffets.

 

[Transilien]

Its market segmentation - VW sell cheap cars under one brand and expensive ones under others. Its harder to sell an expensive intercity ticket to someone with the same branding as the trains that make them late for work regularly.

But under GBR it will all be the same company, so while I do agree with some amount of segmentation for different regions and service types. There is no need to pretend that the railway is competing with itself like it is now. The railway is a subsidised public service and it should be honest about that (It's not a profit making enterprise like Volkswagen) and therefore branding should be concise and say this is ONE railway with different service types for different passengers needs and to try and make this railway as attractive as possible. The goal of GBR isn't to continue with privatisation 'traditions'.

 

[renegademaster]

Because DaFT said so. Anyone with any sense thinks the GWR IETs should have had buffets.

I think most users will find actually getting a seat more important, which no buffet helps. Plus trolley is sufficient most of the time, and when it isn't because the train is packed standing, getting to the buffet isn't fun either

 

[Doctor Fegg]

Because DaFT said so. Anyone with any sense thinks the GWR IETs should have had buffets.

On 5-coach trains up the Cotswold Line? The issue with the medium-distance IETs is too much space devoted to catering, not too little. Penzance and Carmarthen, maybe.

 

[Bletchleyite]

On 5-coach trains up the Cotswold Line?

Those are regional expresses that happen to use IC style rolling stock because GWR doesn't have any regional bimodes.

 

[43096]

Those are regional expresses that happen to use IC style rolling stock because GWR doesn't have any regional bimodes.

Other way round, really. They are RE services that use RE rolling stock. The former IC services also use RE rolling stock, albeit with the addition of a kitchen which is used once every blue moon due to some perverse logic.

Anyone who thinks an IET is a suitable IC train needs their head testing, quite frankly.

 

[physics34]

I think most users will find actually getting a seat more important, which no buffet helps. Plus trolley is sufficient most of the time, and when it isn't because the train is packed standing, getting to the buffet isn't fun either

Should have both...a buffet and enough seats

 

[Cardiff123]

Earlier today I was talking to someone about branding, back in the final days of British Rail it was largely 3 distinct brands which were Intercity, Network South East and Regional Railways. Sure there were things like Scotrail but that was still largely regional railways. With the advent of Devolution in Scotland, Wales and to a certain extent London things will be very different now.

This will be particularly interesting in Wales as back in the British Rail days and for the first few years of privatisation the South Wales services were part of the Wales and West area, Mid Wales were Midlands and later Central Rail and the North Wales coast line was North West and later First North Western. Since then we now have a single devolved Franchise for Wales and the Welsh Language Act 1993 has meant that trains in Wales now have branding in English and Welsh. It will be interesting to see how that works with GBR.

TfW and ScotRail will not be rebranded as GBR, that was established pretty quickly by the Welsh and Scottish governments after GBR was announced in 2021.

TfW have almost completed the process of rebranding all stations in TfW colours and font/lettering. Welsh Govt see TfW as the master brand for an integrated public transport network across Wales, with the TfW brand already integrated into long distance bus services and Traveline Cymru. TfW operate the new Cardiff bus interchange and when Welsh Govt re-regulates bus services in Wales later this year (as Andy Burnham has done in Manchester), TfW will be playing a big role in that. It wouldn't surprise me if the TfW brand is used for local bus services in Wales as well.

'Great British Railways" was chosen as a name by Boris Johnson and Grant Shapps because Johnson hated devolution. Several public bodies were rebranded under his government that only had functions in England, but got new names to make it seem like they covered the whole UK.
Highways England was rebranded as National Highways, Public Health England became the UK Health Security Agency, and there's GBR. If Labour had any sense they would thought of a new name for GBR, with separate brands for the England only and cross border services.

 

[renegademaster]

The difference between GBR and Highways/Public Health England is that it will have numerous services running into the other home nations , many of that won't neatly fit into a "intercity" brand either , while the other agencies you listed don't have any role in the other nations . While I don't really like the name Great British Railways ( too wordy, just call it National Rail or even British Rail) I don't understand the handwringing over having "British" in the name. Putting inter-nation services and intra-england services into different silos would bring operational inefficiency just to please some cybernat types is silly, I don't the people of Scotland and Wales would care that much about seeing an odd union jack fly past .

 

[Transilien]

I don't understand the handwringing over having "British" in the name.

Having the name 'British' in the title simply makes no sense as GBR is going to run the vast majority of its services within England only, which is not the whole island of Great Britain as the name implies.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Jan 2025 ==

It's like calling Scotrail 'Great British Railways' while railways in England get called English Rail.

 

[renegademaster]

Having the name 'British' in the title simply makes no sense as GBR is going to run the vast majority of its services within England only, which is not the whole island of Great Britain as the name implies.

What operational benefits will placing the intra-england and cross border services into different sectors actually bring?

Additionally, hopefully the English operations, devolved TOCs like London Overground/Elizabeth line, and Scotrail/TfW should retain their current common ticketing system, and that brand will be likely be called Great British Rail or whatever the government wants to call the main brand. One of the benefits of the British Rail system is you can turn up to Wrexham station ticket office and buy a ticket if you want to Aberdeen or Sydenham Hill , and unlike Europe you won't have to buy separate tickets for each leg of the journey, hopefully we can keep that, and with some initiative, drag the bus system and London Underground into that.

 

[43096]

Having the name 'British' in the title simply makes no sense as GBR is going to run the vast majority of its services within England only, which is not the whole island of Great Britain as the name implies.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Jan 2025 ==

It's like calling Scotrail 'Great British Railways' while railways in England get called English Rail.

Or just don't bother with anything geographic in the name at all. Picking a name BR used for a complete different business from 30 years (which no-one outisde of a few enthusiasts will remember), something like "Transrail" - i.e. Transport by rail.

 

[WAB]

Having the name 'British' in the title simply makes no sense as GBR is going to run the vast majority of its services within England only, which is not the whole island of Great Britain as the name implies.

It's like calling Scotrail 'Great British Railways' while railways in England get called English Rail.

Highways England was rebranded as National Highways, Public Health England became the UK Health Security Agency, and there's GBR. If Labour had any sense they would thought of a new name for GBR, with separate brands for the England only and cross border services.

GBR will still have a huge involvement in railways across the three nations. The System Operator function at NwR will be taken on by GBR, with whole-network responsibilities for strategic planning, capacity allocation, operational planning and timetabling. NwR also have a large number of shared services, ranging from support roles to specialist engineering functions which are GB-wide. The cross-border services into Wales will be subject to some degree of scrutiny by GBR on behalf of DfT, and LNER plays a key role in providing transport up to Inverness and Aberdeen. GBR will likely take on the ticketing, data feeds, customer experience, National Rail Enquiries and industry responsibilities of RDG. It's also worth noting that the Wales route of NwR is still struggling to extricate itself from Wales and Western Region.

Therefore, I'm not sure an English-centric name would be appropriate for GBR.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

Some other names I suggested previously:

Allied Railways
United British Railways/British United Railways
United Railways

Personally I like Allied Railways the most.

 

[renegademaster]

You could even call it "National Rail" and avoid having to buy any new signs.

Yes for most people it's relatively unknown brand but that works to it's advantage, the reason why imagine the government dances around simply calling it "British Rail" is the negative connotations it has to people who can remember it's last few decades , but National Rail doesn't have that as much.

 

[Meerkat]

There is no need to pretend that the railway is competing with itself like it is now.

It doesn’t pretend that, and neither does market segmentation- quite the opposite, it’s to appeal to different consumers in a way a single brand can’t.

The railway is a subsidised public service and it should be honest about that

Highlighting that it is subsidised is the last thing the railway should do, for all sorts of reasons!

branding should be concise and say this is ONE railway with different service types for different passengers needs

That’s not concise!

 

[Cardiff123]

"National Rail" would've been a much better brand name, but under Johnson's government everything was fantastic and world beating, so needed to be branded as such, hence the "Great British Railways" name.

No doubt if the NHS was proposed today, it would be called something ridiculous like the "Great British Health Service".

 

[renegademaster]

"National Rail" would've been a much better brand name, but under Johnson's government everything was fantastic and world beating, so needed to be branded as such, hence the "Great British Railways" name.

No doubt if the NHS was proposed today, it would be called something ridiculous like the "Great British Health Service".

Last government maybe,
This government would call it something like Health Hub UK, or UK wellness taskforce

 

[Meerkat]

"National Rail" would've been a much better brand name, but under Johnson's government everything was fantastic and world beating, so needed to be branded as such, hence the "Great British Railways" name.

No doubt if the NHS was proposed today, it would be called something ridiculous like the "Great British Health Service".

National Rail is a terrible brand - pretty meaningless and incredibly bland.
And causes confusion between national rail and National Rail