Hulley's of Baslow (Defunct)

[tbtc]

The only point I can make regarding Hulleys is that Andrews/ Stagecoach/ First/ High Peak seem to be running pretty much everything Hulleys did, but without the high profile disruptions/ cancellations/ delays

Obviously Peak District buses are at the mercy of the weather (a warm weekend can see loads more passengers causing capacity problems, but also various cars parked badly on rural roads, Bakewell can be a standstill), Hulleys had to deal with the COVID era too, but these services seem to be in a more stable place at the moment

Nothing flash, no Manchester services or complicated interworking, just stable, solid

It's not ideal, a Sunday service from Sheffield to Lsdybower feels a market that should sustain a bus in the summer, the mishmash of companies (those listed above plus TM Travel) probably puts off a few potential passengers, there's always room for improvements. But that's not the desperate need that it was over the past few years

Things are adequate right now - sadly they weren't whilst Hulleys were trying to hold their operations together

 

[Russel]

The only point I can make regarding Hulleys is that Andrews/ Stagecoach/ First/ High Peak seem to be running pretty much everything Hulleys did, but without the high profile disruptions/ cancellations/ delays

Obviously Peak District buses are at the mercy of the weather (a warm weekend can see loads more passengers causing capacity problems, but also various cars parked badly on rural roads, Bakewell can be a standstill), Hulleys had to deal with the COVID era too, but these services seem to be in a more stable place at the moment

Nothing flash, no Manchester services or complicated interworking, just stable, solid

It's not ideal, a Sunday service from Sheffield to Lsdybower feels a market that should sustain a bus in the summer, the mishmash of companies (those listed above plus TM Travel) probably puts off a few potential passengers, there's always room for improvements. But that's not the desperate need that it was over the past few years

Things are adequate right now - sadly they weren't whilst Hulleys were trying to hold their operations together

Indeed, things do seem to be in a better place now than they have been for a while, to add as well, having full size single deckers back on the Transpeak service is a good sign too.

 

[Teapot42]

Indeed, things do seem to be in a better place now than they have been for a while, to add as well, having full size single deckers back on the Transpeak service is a good sign too.

It's not a service I see often, but I wonder how the High Peak runs on the 272 are managing with a single decker, especially on a nice Saturday? While most of the time a single is enough for the 272, there are times when even a double gets busy.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Apr 2026 ==

The only point I can make regarding Hulleys is that Andrews/ Stagecoach/ First/ High Peak seem to be running pretty much everything Hulleys did, but without the high profile disruptions/ cancellations/ delays

True, but only two remain commercial. Hulleys operated the 55, 80/84 and 257 on a (mostly) commercial basis - there was BSIP funding for evening / Sunday runs which wasn't available when these services were tendered.

I'm surprised how little flack Stagecoach got for reducing the 170 to 4 buses on Sundays, or for the delays and skipped route sections at busier times. Maybe people are just happy it's more reliable than it was, without wanting to ask too much?

It's not ideal, a Sunday service from Sheffield to Lsdybower feels a market that should sustain a bus in the summer

The current disruption to the 257 made me think there could well be a market for a Bamford Station to Fairholmes shuttle. An hourly run is easily doable with a minibus once an hour and could tie in with the 272. No need to cover the full 257 route and it might even be viable to do a three-legged run from Bamford - Fairholmes - Strines - Bamford. Summer weekends I'm sure it would be popular. Finding the funding would be the trouble - the national park can't even fund itself never mind buses. Maybe this 'Little Switzerland' scheme may make such things possible?

 

[Hyebone]

I'm surprised how little flack Stagecoach got for reducing the 170 to 4 buses on Sundays

If it's not commercially viable, they won't run it. It's more likely they wanted to cut the Sunday service entirely but had their arms twisted by the EMCCA Mayor.

 

[Teapot42]

If it's not commercially viable, they won't run it. It's more likely they wanted to cut the Sunday service entirely but had their arms twisted by the EMCCA Mayor.

Maybe someone pointed out that (seemingly) the one reason their registration was allowed as well as High Peak's was the promise of a Sunday service?

I think the timing was very poor though - just before the Chatsworth Christmas Markets which were guaranteed to deliver good loadings. The fact they then regularly skipped Chatsworth during the markets to recover from delays compounded matters. We nearly got stranded there once when the last bus of the day ran straight from Bakewell to Baslow.

All that being said, I really hope the EMCCA Mayor has a plan to better connect Chesterfield with the Peak District. It's more and more touted as being a gateway to the peaks (mainly because the hotels there are affordable with only one remortgage) yet bus links are poor at best. I understand it's hard to make them commercially viable due to their nature, but better provision would bring other benefits to the region and make it more widely accessible.

 

[Hyebone]

The fact they then regularly skipped Chatsworth during the markets to recover from delays compounded matters. We nearly got stranded there once when the last bus of the day ran straight from Bakewell to Baslo

Was this an official diversion or a driver taking matters into their own hands?

 

[markymark2000]

The only point I can make regarding Hulleys is that Andrews/ Stagecoach/ First/ High Peak seem to be running pretty much everything Hulleys did, but without the high profile disruptions/ cancellations/ delays

There's more operators than that. Notts & Derby took the 55. Ashbourne Little Bus has the 110/111.

You also haven't considered the fact that most of these new operators don't actually use social media or rarely use it to post service updates. Infact the only 2 operators to use social media more regularly are Andrews (and many of their posts get lost in amongst the coach holidays promotion) and High Peak (who only have the 272 which if I remember rightly was rarely featured on Hulleys list of issues). So while yes, Hulleys did look to have a lot of disruptions, is it more that they were honest and kept passengers informed, unlike the new operators (new to the routes).

Manchester services or complicated interworking, just stable, solid

You're not comparing apples and apples though.
One bus company running 30 odd buses on a vast network far from the depot, comparing to 6 companies running a few extra buses almost always on routes which are within 10-15 minutes from their depot or staff bases. I'm not saying it's right what Hulleys did in this case, but you have to acknowledge that you aren't giving a fair comparison here.

Hulleys didn't have the operators discs or capacity to just have buses sitting around all day like Notts and Derby and Andrews seem to (Notts and Derby runs 3 buses on the 55 when it only needs 2 buses, so in theory each driver has an hour off after each round trip. Andrews has seemingly inefficient duties with buses sitting around for upto 50 minutes each hour).

 

[Teapot42]

Was this an official diversion or a driver taking matters into their own hands?

Come on, you know how difficult it is to get any meaningful response out of Stagecoach! Everything gets 'reported to the depot for investigation' and you never hear back.

It was running quite late due to the heavy traffic so someone made the decision, but whether it was control or the driver I don't know. It left Chatsworth on the way to Bakewell not long before it should have been there on the way back - might have been more sensible to skip Chatsworth in that direction as there were other services passengers could have used to get there, but no others to Chesterfield.

 

[Hyebone]

Come on, you know how difficult it is to get any meaningful response out of Stagecoach! Everything gets 'reported to the depot for investigation' and you never hear back.

I have to agree.

 

[Mugby]

I'm surprised how little flack Stagecoach got for reducing the 170 to 4 buses on Sundays, or for the delays and skipped route sections at busier times. Maybe people are just happy it's more reliable than it was, without wanting to ask too muc

If it's not commercially viable, they won't run it. It's more likely they wanted to cut the Sunday service entirely but had their arms twisted by the EMCCA Mayor.

Surely there must be a case for Summer and Winter Sunday timetables on the 170 ?

 

[derbyveg]

Ashbourne Little Bus has the 110/111.

Ah yes, shame the 110/111 has become what it is, now runs full time with sprinter vans... quite offputting for tourists to Carsington..

is it more that they were honest and kept passengers informed, unlike the new operators (new to the routes).

Notts+Derby have never been social media friendly, not sure how considering who the parent company is (they could even sort the social media site out like they do for Kinch), a lot of people know it might be late but 99.9% of the time n+d turn up regardless, whereas nobody had that confidence with hulleys..

 

[m79900]

Ah yes, shame the 110/111 has become what it is, now runs full time with sprinter vans... quite offputting for tourists to Carsington..

And I bet they'll hang on to it becuase they'll be able to bid lower when using low cost vehicles. Like you said, a shame.

 

[Teapot42]

Ah yes, shame the 110/111 has become what it is, now runs full time with sprinter vans... quite offputting for tourists to Carsington..

While they never released the detail, Hulleys suggested they had proposed an option to DCC which involved a combined 110/111 serving the villages, in conjunction with a direct service between Matlock and Ashbourne.

It's likely a good thing this didn't happen as I rather suspect it would have been run as an extension to the X1, but the idea in principle seems sound, especially at the weekends and during summer. A Sunday service of any description would be nice - a shame they never got the chance to try the X71 which was very much aimed at walkers / tourists.

I would say though that sprinters are probably quite appropriate for much of the route as there are some fairly narrow lanes. Certainly anything bigger than a Solo would be a challenge depending on other traffic.

 

[JD2168]

While they never released the detail, Hulleys suggested they had proposed an option to DCC which involved a combined 110/111 serving the villages, in conjunction with a direct service between Matlock and Ashbourne.

It's likely a good thing this didn't happen as I rather suspect it would have been run as an extension to the X1, but the idea in principle seems sound, especially at the weekends and during summer. A Sunday service of any description would be nice - a shame they never got the chance to try the X71 which was very much aimed at walkers / tourists.

I would say though that sprinters are probably quite appropriate for much of the route as there are some fairly narrow lanes. Certainly anything bigger than a Solo would be a challenge depending on other traffic.

YourBus when they ran the 110/111 used Streetlite WF’s with route branding on them which are about the same size as a short Enviro 200

 

[derbyveg]

YourBus when they ran the 110/111 used Streetlite WF’s with route branding on them which are about the same size as a short Enviro 200

They also used short E200s, Citaros, Long ADLs.. believe it was quite tight in the citaro but it made it out unharmed..

 

[Teapot42]

It's not so much about what will fit, it's more about what's best suited. If you come across someone parked badly, or a larger vehicle coming the other way then it's much easier navigated in a Sprinter than in even a Solo or short E200.

It was the case for a number of the Hulleys routes that while larger buses fitted there were often delays or issues caused by other, less considerate, motorists. Outside of school runs, I don't think any of the services such as the 172/173 carry enough to get close to troubling a Sprinter.

 

[38291018]

To be honest, I'm surprised that evora they had even managed to get down some of the routes in general

 

[BULLSAREMAGIC]

It's not so much about what will fit, it's more about what's best suited. If you come across someone parked badly, or a larger vehicle coming the other way then it's much easier navigated in a Sprinter than in even a Solo or short E200.

It was the case for a number of the Hulleys routes that while larger buses fitted there were often delays or issues caused by other, less considerate, motorists. Outside of school runs, I don't think any of the services such as the 172/173 carry enough to get close to troubling a Sprinter.

I would agree. On the several occasions I have used this service a London Taxi would have sufficed or even on one occasion a tandem

 

[Travelmonkey]

It is a shame still, the X57 was a good principal route but hulleys got greedy, the X1 ran for 2 days leaving egg on the face of Staffordshire & Cheshire East councils with even D&G condemning them (Council's & Hulleys) with D&G and Aimees scrambling to get their routes back in to cover the gaps.

That and the excursion buses, 3 hours on a evora to Skegness, I like my buses but even I know that would be super long and painfull.

Hulleys have left scars, it could be seen with the 406 when evolve registered it Staffordshire County Council let Select continue rather than withdraw it right away like for the routes X1 was gonna superceded,

 

[M60lad]

While X57 was a good idea I'm not to sure how reliable it would have been if it was still running today what with the current Mottram By-Pass works, also there's the subsidence problems with A57 itself.

 

[Teapot42]

While X57 was a good idea I'm not to sure how reliable it would have been if it was still running today what with the current Mottram By-Pass works, also there's the subsidence problems with A57 itself.

I said at the time that it really needed the Mottram Bypass to be complete before the X57 could be close to reliable. Even then a lot depends how much it improves Glossop traffic. That was always the thing in favour of using Woodhead - once past Mottram (towards Sheffield) your route was usually clearer. However, it's also longer and doesn't really serve anywhere.

I used to drive to Mottram regularly - I feel sorry for anyone driving a bus around there, as the traffic can be an utter nightmare and you can't really take the rat runs the locals know when in a bus. It's a prime example of underinvestment in this country going back decades. Denton flyover and the Mottram Bypass should have been built at the time the M67 was constructed.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 May 2026 ==

It is a shame still, the X57 was a good principal route but hulleys got greedy, the X1 ran for 2 days leaving egg on the face of Staffordshire & Cheshire East councils with even D&G condemning them (Council's & Hulleys) with D&G and Aimees scrambling to get their routes back in to cover the gaps.

The council didn't really have an option as I understand it. Indeed, it seems they did fairly well considering. Hulleys registering a commercial service meant they had to withdraw the subsidy, then they reinstated services fairly quickly once things went pear-shaped.

This did give an insight in to future problems though - muddle on and hope things come right. The reason for cancellation - driver shortages - was valid, but could also have been predicted. Maybe not when the service was registered, but in the weeks leading up to it starting there would have been signs. Maybe, as claimed, a few drivers reneged on their contracts, but there should have been enough cover in place to allow for things like that.

I also remember buses working empty to Manchester Airport on Sundays for the X57 - how can so much dead mileage possibly be viable?

That and the excursion buses, 3 hours on a evora to Skegness, I like my buses but even I know that would be super long and painfull.

Yeah, I fancied that and the Scarborough run, but after travelling on the Evora I changed my mind. I remember I started a discussion on here at the time about long distance bus configurations - it's the perfect vehicle for that sort of run, but needs at least 4 less seats for legroom, as well as more comfortable seats.

It's a bit like the X17, the new E400EVs really don't have seats suitable for such a long service.

Hulleys have left scars, it could be seen with the 406 when evolve registered it Staffordshire County Council let Select continue rather than withdraw it right away like for the routes X1 was gonna superceded,

At the time I was told you can't subsidise a service where there is a commerical alternative. It actually makes sense in a way - it makes it harder for the commercial operation to succeed if a competing operator doesn't need to make the same margins.

 

[Dwarfer1979]

Hulleys have left scars, it could be seen with the 406 when evolve registered it Staffordshire County Council let Select continue rather than withdraw it right away like for the routes X1 was gonna superceded,

I think that the issue was more the history and reputation of the owner/management of Evolve rather than any scar left from Hulleys in this case. Multiple failures, multiple run-ins with the DVSA & multiple examples of short-notice service withdrawals soon after service introductions though it does seem to be sticking around a bit more as Evolve than some of the previous attempts though I understand there is still some issue around having the correct planning permission for the depot they are operating from that is hanging over them.

At the time I was told you can't subsidise a service where there is a commerical alternative. It actually makes sense in a way - it makes it harder for the commercial operation to succeed if a competing operator doesn't need to make the same margins.

That is the basic understanding but as with anything there are exceptions to prove the rule and there is always a way to avoid doing it if you really, really want it. The most silly reason I have had from a council for not ending a tender when a commercial service was going to be introduced was that they didn't have a clause in their contracts to end one early so it had to run to full term regardless, more for how they managed to write a contract that they couldn't end themselves if circumstances changed. The issue is less the margin, though the fact that one operator has a guaranteed base income regardless of passengers will have a significant effect, and more that if it is/was council funded it is unlikely to be generating that much "profit" so will never be able to sustain two operators if it can barely support one commercially.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Various posters have said the X57 was a good idea... but was it? A route that hadn't seen a bus service for 30+ years gets 7 return journeys, carried penny numbers, and when it started had evening journeys on Friday and Saturday nights. It was telling that Roger French had a couple of trips on it and both his and reader's comments were very much aligned - you really cannot knock the scenery and they did some good publicity that RF gushed about but it carried a handful of passengers on trips if that.

As for the X1, and the cancellation of the Aimee's/D&G routes.... As @Dwarfer1979 says, there is no absolute rule that you cannot run a supported service over a commercial one. We see many tendered routes that run over sections of commercial routes but they may provide other facilities, or that they are unconvinced about the long term viability of a commercial registration. In the X1, Staffs had the opportunity to save some money and Hulley's were at that time still regarded as a long established and reliable operator.

 

[Deerfold]

Various posters have said the X57 was a good idea... but was it? A route that hadn't seen a bus service for 30+ years gets 7 return journeys, carried penny numbers, and when it started had evening journeys on Friday and Saturday nights. It was telling that Roger French had a couple of trips on it and both his and reader's comments were very much aligned - you really cannot knock the scenery and they did some good publicity that RF gushed about but it carried a handful of passengers on trips if that.

As for the X1, and the cancellation of the Aimee's/D&G routes.... As @Dwarfer1979 says, there is no absolute rule that you cannot run a supported service over a commercial one. We see many tendered routes that run over sections of commercial routes but they may provide other facilities, or that they are unconvinced about the long term viability of a commercial registration. In the X1, Staffs had the opportunity to save some money and Hulley's were at that time still regarded as a long established and reliable operator.

I could see the X57 working with a couple of journeys a day each way on a Summer Saturday/Sunday/Bank Holiday (and not starting when there's travel restrictions due to a pandemic) - and some very good and widespread publicity.

 

[mayneway]

Various posters have said the X57 was a good idea... but was it? A route that hadn't seen a bus service for 30+ years gets 7 return journeys, carried penny numbers, and when it started had evening journeys on Friday and Saturday nights. It was telling that Roger French had a couple of trips on it and both his and reader's comments were very much aligned - you really cannot knock the scenery and they did some good publicity that RF gushed about but it carried a handful of passengers on trips if that.

I’ve mentioned before but at the time the X57 launched it was heavily publicised in and around Glossop, Mottram and Hyde and the feedback was really good with many wanting to use it. The travel restrictions didn’t help but the major issue was the unreliability. This can’t all be put down to traffic. Trips would get dropped frequently, the big one being staff sickness but running a trip to Sheffield but dropping the return journey which happens to be the last of the day is just poor.

Another issue was drivers doing what they wanted. The service was extended and advertised as serving Hyde bus station yet many journeys didn’t bother because drivers didn’t want to leave the M67 so anyone waiting in the bus station was left behind. Complaints to the company just got terrible reply’s with the we don’t care attitude of Alf and the company.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I could see the X57 working with a couple of journeys a day each way on a Summer Saturday/Sunday/Bank Holiday (and not starting when there's travel restrictions due to a pandemic) - and some very good and widespread publicity.

That's probably fair enough as per some of the other routes that operated on a similar basis e.g. Dalesbus, the 901 from Hudds to Glossop but a two hourly service in the depths of a Peak District mid-week in winter...

I’ve mentioned before but at the time the X57 launched it was heavily publicised in and around Glossop, Mottram and Hyde and the feedback was really good with many wanting to use it. The travel restrictions didn’t help but the major issue was the unreliability. This can’t all be put down to traffic. Trips would get dropped frequently, the big one being staff sickness but running a trip to Sheffield but dropping the return journey which happens to be the last of the day is just poor.

Another issue was drivers doing what they wanted. The service was extended and advertised as serving Hyde bus station yet many journeys didn’t bother because drivers didn’t want to leave the M67 so anyone waiting in the bus station was left behind. Complaints to the company just got terrible reply’s with the we don’t care attitude of Alf and the company.

I'm dubious that even with better execution and operational compliance, there was really a sustainable market for it. And as we know, the road to hell is paved with people saying "if only they'd put a bus on, I'd use it"

 

[Teapot42]

Various posters have said the X57 was a good idea... but was it? A route that hadn't seen a bus service for 30+ years gets 7 return journeys, carried penny numbers, and when it started had evening journeys on Friday and Saturday nights. It was telling that Roger French had a couple of trips on it and both his and reader's comments were very much aligned - you really cannot knock the scenery and they did some good publicity that RF gushed about but it carried a handful of passengers on trips if that.

If you look at it as a through route then maybe it's hard to see the sense in it, but break it down in to sections and it becomes more practical.

Sheffield to Ladybower already had the 275 (as it was before the X57 was introduced) which was 2-hourly. Beyond Sandygate Road it is the only service on that stretch of Manchester Road, so making it hourly can be argued was a good thing.

Glossop did previously have direct buses to Manchester, although not that direct! There is certainly an argument for such a service, indeed originally there was a companion X56 giving an hourly service between Glossop and Manchester.

From memory there were also issues at the time with the Northern service between Sheffield and Manchester, plus a hope to compete on price where timing was less sensitive.

The only section which is hard to claim needs a service is the fairly short link between Glossop and Ladybower, and being able to offer a through service is a strong argument for reinstating that link.

As for passenger numbers, I only used it a handful of times and the loadings were decent considering the circumstances. Of course the fuller picture may tell a different story. Hulleys did say they had funding for three years to allow the service to bed in, so it looks like expectations were reasonable.

...there is no absolute rule that you cannot run a supported service over a commercial one.

Interesting how I've read very contrasting views on this. One comment I read was that it's misuse of public funds to duplicate a commercial operation.

It's also notable that Hulleys were on the receiving end of this right at the end, where DCC tendered the 257 despite it being run as a commercial service. Of course, they probably knew that Hulleys were gone and that no-one else would take it on commercially.

 

[Tetchytyke]

I'm dubious that even with better execution and operational compliance, there was really a sustainable market for it.

Sustainable being the big issue.

On a sunny day a bus over Snake Pass would be rammed. I've been up at Hayfield before and watching the walkers getting off a High Peak Solo from Glossop was like watching that meme of all the clowns getting out of a small car.

But when the clouds come in, it'd be empty.

Interesting how I've read very contrasting views on this. One comment I read was that it's misuse of public funds to duplicate a commercial operation.

It's generally a misuse of funds to duplicate a commercial operation.

But how do you define duplication? There's a lot of grey there to explore.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Sustainable being the big issue.

On a sunny day a bus over Snake Pass would be rammed. I've been up at Hayfield before and watching the walkers getting off a High Peak Solo from Glossop was like watching that meme of all the clowns getting out of a small car.

But when the clouds come in, it'd be empty.


It's generally a misuse of funds to duplicate a commercial operation.

But how do you define duplication? There's a lot of grey there to explore.

Exactly this! It's weather dependent so get a nice sunny Sunday and I'd imagine you'd get a few punters but a wet October Wednesday... less so.

And yes, it's how you define duplication. To use an extreme example... the 55 runs south out of Chesterfield and over the top of various commercial Stagecoach services. It then, of course, goes on a scenic wander around various spots around Wingerworth before coming out and running over the same roads as the Comet. Of course, the justification is that it duplicates part of the routes but isn't an outright competitor. Also, if an operator deems a commercial service to be a couple of round trips a day but the local authority believes that a social need for a higher frequency is required, then that is also justified.

We have the current example in Chelmsford P&R where Essex CC are paying First for a service whilst TMS have decided to run commercially. Why have Essex done this? Well, depends on the contractual side and also whether they feel it isn't sustainable as a commercial enterprise and are concerned that if they cancel the tender, what guarantee is there that TMS won't eventually do the same or provide a slimmed down service?

As you say... shades of grey.

If you look at it as a through route then maybe it's hard to see the sense in it, but break it down in to sections and it becomes more practical.

Sheffield to Ladybower already had the 275 (as it was before the X57 was introduced) which was 2-hourly. Beyond Sandygate Road it is the only service on that stretch of Manchester Road, so making it hourly can be argued was a good thing.

Glossop did previously have direct buses to Manchester, although not that direct! There is certainly an argument for such a service, indeed originally there was a companion X56 giving an hourly service between Glossop and Manchester.

From memory there were also issues at the time with the Northern service between Sheffield and Manchester, plus a hope to compete on price where timing was less sensitive.

The only section which is hard to claim needs a service is the fairly short link between Glossop and Ladybower, and being able to offer a through service is a strong argument for reinstating that link.

As for passenger numbers, I only used it a handful of times and the loadings were decent considering the circumstances. Of course the fuller picture may tell a different story. Hulleys did say they had funding for three years to allow the service to bed in, so it looks like expectations were reasonable.

Having an hourly service beyond Sandygate Road may have been a very laudable idea... but is it sustainable or profitable, or even required?

As for Glossop to Manchester... Well, there's a train service every 30 mins and whilst it undoubtedly has it's own "moments", that is a much better prospect than a direct bus service in terms of reliability (timing) and provision, which is probably why Stagecoach didn't try it in the previous 20 years AFAIK.

Hulleys said they had funding for three years... Hulleys said a lot of things, and it lasted for less than half that.

 

[Teapot42]

Exactly this! It's weather dependent so get a nice sunny Sunday and I'd imagine you'd get a few punters but a wet October Wednesday... less so.

Oddly not. Weekday services seemed to do OK, but not the sort of punters needed. I did it one day, can't recall the month but the weather was far from great. Plenty heading for Glossop and beyond, mostly ENCTS though.

I didn't realise at the time how much faith I put in Hulleys - I got off at the top, intending to catch the bus the other way back. I'd not realised how bitterly cold it was, I was probably waiting less than 15 minutes but it felt like an eternity. Thank goodness the bus did run - although I'd been able to track it most of the way to Glossop before I lost mobile reception. Indeed, it was delayed to the point where I could have carried on and picked it up in Glossop, but without being able to confirm that I didn't want to risk missing it and having 2 hours to wait.

And yes, it's how you define duplication. To use an extreme example... the 55 runs south out of Chesterfield and over the top of various commercial Stagecoach services.

The 55 shares very little of the route with anything Stagecoach runs, even the Comet has little in common. It's easy to justify as nothing else serves Wingerworth, Pilsley, Hardstoft or Stonebroom. Even parts of Birdholme it's the only service. In the case of the X1, as there isn't much between Macclesfield and Leek it's hard not to have significant overlap.

In the case of the 257 it was a clone of the route Hulleys had commercially registered.

Having an hourly service beyond Sandygate Road may have been a very laudable idea... but is it sustainable or profitable, or even required?

Within Sheffield there is a decent number of houses it covers. Beyond? It's the only service to Bamford - whether they need an hourly service depends on your views on serving rural communities. As with much of what we are discussing here, on a nice day better than hourly would not go amiss. Bakewell to Hathersage? I'm not sure of the benefits of it being hourly. Hathersage has the 272, Grindleford gets the 65, as does Eyam. Baslow to Bakewell is well covered. Personally, I'd have run every other service via Bradwell (as per some school runs) and coordinated with the 173 and 272 to give a better service for that end of the Hope Valley.

As for Glossop to Manchester... Well, there's a train service every 30 mins and whilst it undoubtedly has it's own "moments", that is a much better prospect than a direct bus service in terms of reliability (timing) and provision, which is probably why Stagecoach didn't try it in the previous 20 years AFAIK.

I remember being shocked when I went back to GM recently how much rail fares had increased since I lived there. Maybe a cheaper bus would appeal more? Unfortunately, as above I suspect it would appeal more to those with plenty of time on their hands who travel for nothing. Buses, of course, should be able to compete with railways end-to-end as stations aren't always that conveniently placed.

Hulleys said they had funding for three years... Hulleys said a lot of things, and it lasted for less than half that.

None of us fully understood the longer term implications of Covid in terms of price rises and issues around getting and keeping staff. Of course, had it carried on much longer there would have been the fuel price shock from the invasion of Ukraine. However, you are right to infer they were being unduly optimistic there.