The only alternative maybe is if the SMEs joined forces to present a joint bid, but it's too late for that.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
West Yorkshire bus franchising
- Thread starter tomoufc
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
TheGrandWazoo
Veteran Member
It's tricky. They could try to pool their resources in some areas of constructing a bid (still not cheap) but then there's any financial criteria that they may have to meet.
The sad thing is that the government is trying to actively encourage public sector bodies to increase SME participation but in franchising, they make it almost impossible. Aside from Vision Bus with some schools, SMEs have lost out to the big corporates in GM and (so far) in Merseyside.
I'm not sure deliberately removing their buses from service will get them much sympathy.
psmith2023
Member
Will get fined as well
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Trouble is smaller operators cannot do weekend work when it's actually busyier as it's busyier on a Saturday and Sunday then in the week in some areas
JKP
Member
Have never seen smaller operators having problems covering weekend work. Perhaps this is an issue local to your area.
stevieinselby
Established Member
It varies from one company to another, but some smaller operators do a lot of weekend work, running leisure buses and rail replacements and all sorts. This is particularly good for operators who do a lot of school buses, if they have a lot of drivers who are nowhere near their weekly hours limit and may be glad of the opportunity to do some extra.
TheGrandWazoo
Veteran Member
The only operator where this really seems to be an issue is Brylaine who stopped doing Saturdays around Covid and didn't seem to come back.
psmith2023
Member
Connecxtions won't do Sunday or square peg
For all we know Squarepeg would have used this as a last resort, they wouldn't straight to jump into this action without considering and doing other alternatives like trying to reach out and have meetings with the authority, but they have either not listened, or bothered to communicated with Squarepeg.
Plus the fact if the authority have lied to these companies, and have not made it easier for smaller companies to take part in this process, do you expect these companies just to sit there and do nothing, when there is so much on the line for them?
I see nothing wrong with what Squarepeg have done whatsoever. Desperate times call for desperate measures, and it's not much difference to bus drivers withdrawing their labour or farmers going to protest in London.
Go Ahead are only in West Yorkshire because of franchising otherwise they would never run routes like the 112/112A in a million years. Wouldn't it be easier just to give everything to Go Ahead in franchising, because that is what I think will happen, Go Ahead to win everything.
I don't think there's anyone at the authority who gives a damn about these small operators, these small companies are often ran by not many people who probably gave up their family life, livelihood, working when sick to try and keep their independent bus companies running, and all their hard work is about to be ruined by a Mayor with a huge ego, who clearly doesn't care about these small bus companies and is a member of a party that has killed thousands of small businesses with their policies.
These are the same companies who run all the tenders, that the big operators cannot be bothered to do
Plus the fact if the authority have lied to these companies, and have not made it easier for smaller companies to take part in this process, do you expect these companies just to sit there and do nothing, when there is so much on the line for them?
I see nothing wrong with what Squarepeg have done whatsoever. Desperate times call for desperate measures, and it's not much difference to bus drivers withdrawing their labour or farmers going to protest in London.
Go Ahead are only in West Yorkshire because of franchising otherwise they would never run routes like the 112/112A in a million years. Wouldn't it be easier just to give everything to Go Ahead in franchising, because that is what I think will happen, Go Ahead to win everything.
I don't think there's anyone at the authority who gives a damn about these small operators, these small companies are often ran by not many people who probably gave up their family life, livelihood, working when sick to try and keep their independent bus companies running, and all their hard work is about to be ruined by a Mayor with a huge ego, who clearly doesn't care about these small bus companies and is a member of a party that has killed thousands of small businesses with their policies.
These are the same companies who run all the tenders, that the big operators cannot be bothered to do
Steve440
Member
T
That's all very well, but as already mentioned above, some small operators don't work evenings or Sundays such as Stotts for example so I don't see how they can realistically expect to win contracts.
TheGrandWazoo
Veteran Member
That's not the same.
Currently, if there's a tender that involves Sunday or evening work and you don't do that... you don't tender.
What this is that you might well want to do work and it does involve (or requires you to do) Sundays or evening work but the system is simply loaded against SMEs.
YorkRailFan
Established Member
Not on public services but Connexions do occasionally do Sunday rail replacement work interestingly. Connexions is in a better position than Squarepeg as they have some work in North Yorkshire (albeit limited) that won't be affected by franchising, unlike Squarepeg.
It will be interesting to see how simple it is to apply for a permit to operate cross-border services into West Yorkshire, especially for SMEs. Thinking about Connexions with the X52, X70 & 412 in particular.
The schools lots could be easier for SMEs to win but we saw how that panned out in Greater Manchester...
I see a lot of complaints but no solutions. So here is the question. How do you design a system that helps SMEs. Because Greater Manchester tried with it's small franchises. They were designed for SMEs. And it didn't work. So what do you do? Because everything I can think of to make things easier would also make it easier for the big groups as well. You could try to say this bid has to go to a company if X size, but I bet that would get nasty in court. And even if an sme did do will all that would do is make them a takeover target.
I'm also going to say that it may not be helpful to compare with Greater Manchester. There were very few SMEs left there anyway. Vision, Stotts and the very tiny Nexus Move spring to mind. But that wasn't much. Stotts had owners in their 80s. Vision obviously bid. But we don't know if anyone else did. So we don't know if they failed or just didn't bother.
I'm also going to say that it may not be helpful to compare with Greater Manchester. There were very few SMEs left there anyway. Vision, Stotts and the very tiny Nexus Move spring to mind. But that wasn't much. Stotts had owners in their 80s. Vision obviously bid. But we don't know if anyone else did. So we don't know if they failed or just didn't bother.
Two ways would be - make the documentation required comparable to the current tendering process, not massive legal documents that need specialist teams to compile and secondly specify that the company bidding must have less than say 100 buses or £X in annual turnover, and this applies to the whole company not just a local subsidiary. I’m not sure how legal that would be.
Does that just apply at the time they win or do they forfeit their routes if they're taken over? Is it legal to put off takeovers like that? Who would run the routes it that did happen?
Last edited:
JKP
Member
There is OTS as well as Hopleys.
YorkRailFan
Established Member
Connexions originally operated the 64 (Monday-Saturday daytime) under-contract from First Leeds. It's now a fully commercial service by Connexions (Monday-Saturday daytime) with First Leeds operating the Evening and Sunday journeys.
markymark2000
On Moderation
Small franchises shouldn't be any different to tendering a few interworking routes in the current system. Take the Todmorden local T network for example, a little 3 bus (rough guesstimate) tender currently. I see no reason why this can't be tendered in the same way as now but with a few conditions on higher vehicle spec and metro taking responsibility for a few things such as ticket machines and open data.
stevieinselby
Established Member
One of the complaints seems to be that the bidding process was excessively onerous, and disproportionate to the size of the contract. This meant that a large company with its own legal team could put in the time needed to go through the paperwork – and because they were doing this for lots of bids, the amount of time needed for each one wasn't too bad. Whereas a small operator that is only bidding for one or two 'B' lots won't have a dedicated team of people who have the time to spend on that kind of work, so the boss will be trying to do it in and around actually running the company, and so it causes a lot more work relative to the potential wins. That also potentially means their bids will be as well received if they are not as polished or may be missing some of the minor details. None of that means they will be any less able to successfully and effectively run the buses on those contracts.
BULLSAREMAGIC
Member
In an earlier post reference is made to a Mayor with an ego problem. This may well be the case but isnt the root cause of franchise operation the appalling job privatised post de regulated groups have made of providing a service, I grew up in Bradford and when I return Im appalled at the poor level of service offered. The situation was the same in Manchester were the operators understandably threw resources where maximum profit was to be gained. When a specific level of profit is required providing a service to the public is secondary. Many areas end up with little or no service. For this reason we need SME operators as they are the ones who will step in and where possible provide a service, for example Connexion service 64. I have mixed feelings regarding Franchise operation and it will be interesting to see how it develops in the future
If the tracking on bustimes is accurate (and in the afternoon it seems to be), some routes had no service for 4 or 5 hours. Some simply had no morning service (resuming after 1400). Route 80 ran just one trip, then immediately returned.
I can't see where that looks anything like a responsible bus operator to those affected. At least with strikes there has to be notice so people can plan.
But here's the thing. You make it less onerous, you make it less onerous for everyone. Including the big groups. To my mind, it doesn't change anything. That's the problem. No matter what you do, they win. If you go on price, they can bid lower. If you go on quality, they can promise more. Pretty much all you can go is put limits on size of company bidding. And that will end up in the courts. I have no idea if they'd win, but I can 100% guarantee it will happen.
And even if a sme wins under a fair and open to all system, they become a takeover target because they have a valuable thing. They have a contract. You're a small company with a big contract. First or Stagecoach turn up offering you a pile of cash... It takes a lot to turn that down.
The fact is that small operators have been driven out of major markets under deregulation already. There were very few in Manchester. There are none left in London. And personally I don't see much of a role for them under franchising because whatever you do, whether you try, the big guys win.
TheGrandWazoo
Veteran Member
Except it does markedly and materially change things. At the moment, a highly complex and onerous tendering process requires large amounts of time and money, creates a barrier to entry and so it favours the large corporates.
Except it is extremely common to have change of ownership clauses in contracts so there’s no guarantee that a business can be bought by just anyone.
markymark2000
On Moderation
Stotts, Little Gem, Vision, Nexus, Belle Vue, Tyrers all ran local buses within Manchester. 3 independent operators ceased as a direct result of franchising, and 3 have had to explore new ways to make money and keep in business (Belle Vue with the Cheshire East work and Flixbus and private contracts. Vision with the schools and major expansion into Lancashire. Tyrers with private contracts and Lancashire schools mostly). Jim Stones also closed up in part due to the uncertain future with bee network.
Plus Atlantic, Olympia, Bullocks, Selwyns, Swans all had school bus contracts and they have had to move their businesses in some way to focus more on private contracts, rail replacement, and other work. Finches had schools and I think ceased trading.
This is on top of Warringtons Own Buses and High Peak losing out on a little bit of work and funding as a result of franchising but it was only a minor part of the business.
Very few independent in Manchester you say? The evidence suggests otherwise.
Uno run some TFL routes and Falcon are about to start for TFL.
You've also got to consider that even the big ops are struggling in London too, hence the number of takeovers in the past few years. I believe that it also to do with the bidding and ways of operating there too.
Ballyheigue
Member
Personally I think Squarepeg simply need to pack up now and relocate elsewhere, they're on to a lost cause as they won't get a look in so they should withdraw from all contracted routes as soon as they can find enough work for 20 vehicles in another location. North Yorkshire's not that far away and it may even be some decent commercial service opportunities. Take Seamer for example, very underserved by the 843 (and 28 on the edge of the village) so could do with a commercially provided alternative. Lancashire isn't too far away either, if Lonsdale Buses can make a go of connecting settlements commercially over that way then Squarepeg have a chance too. There's rail replacement work all over the shop too, lots of opportunities out there so they should focus on saving the business now before it's too late.
YorkRailFan
Established Member
Worth noting here that Cornwall is not franchised. Go Ahead submitted a package bid and successfully won the whole tendered network.
Regarding Seamer, if Squarepeg (or anyone else for that matter) got a commercial operation up and running, I'm sure East Yorkshire Buses would counter launch a service to better serve Seamer. We saw it when Viscount launched the X28 between Scarborough & Pickering.
Also, simply moving an entire operation isn't simple whatsoever. You'd be abandoning drivers and starting from scratch with a customer base.
Like I say, making it simpler also makes it quicker and easier for the big companies. What does that mean in practice? It means it costs them less so they can bid less.
I am not saying don't do it. What I am saying is that it is not a silver bullet that will save everything for SMEs. And personally I highly doubt it will change much in terms of outcome because it doesn't favour SMEs in any way.
Good luck with putting that in the contracts. It would end up in court, guaranteed.