i think virgin should get the new west coast franchise

[martinsh]

People who dislike Virgin tend to do so for one of a few reasons:

1. They hate Branson andr Souter
2. They dislike Voyagers and Pendolinos (fair comment with the Voyagers IMO - look how nice a 222 is)
4. They dislike the informal corporate image
5. They don't like the VHF timetable (people who live in Rugby or Nuneaton)
6. They think it's too expensive

Thanks for summarising my feelings so well ! [ Note I don't dislike Virgin staff ]

Also, their considered neglect of managed stations, lack of revenue protection (particualrly if you're not travelling to/from Lodnon), and policy of closing gates before departure time at Euston. Need I go on ?

 

[AlterEgo]

Thanks for summarising my feelings so well ! [ Note I don't dislike Virgin staff ]

Also, their considered neglect of managed stations, lack of revenue protection (particualrly if you're not travelling to/from Lodnon), and policy of closing gates before departure time at Euston. Need I go on ?

OK put it another way - what do you know about the other bidders that makes you think another operator would be better?

 

[tbtc]

I can never get a seat in Standard Class when travelling between Manchester and Leeds on TPE. I'm not happy about having to stand for almost an hour! I don't really blame First themselves, though (as I believe they wanted 4 carriages originally) - I blame the DfT. They're not a bad TOC, really.

Northern have dreadful, appaling, horrendous rolling stock

So First are excused for their inadequate Rolling Stock because they wanted something better, whilst Northern are blamed for their inadequate Rolling Stock because...

...do you think Northern really wanted to be stuck with the stock they have? That they didn't try to import Pacer replacements?

 

[Lampshade]

Right, so the trains will be slower if that happens. So how will the minimum specification of journey times be met? You would breach that specification if the trains are not fast enough surely?

Hmm, didn't know there was a minimum specification of journey times

You mean Nuneaton and Lichfield, right?

Not so much Lichfield (it's tiny) but certainly Tamworth/Nuneaton. Maybe alternate calls on the second Liverpool service, when it comes, so hourly Stafford on one, hourly Tamworth/Nuneaton on the other.

 

[Gareth]

Liverpool is under-served when it comes to London services too.

Not sure how much of that's in Virgin's hands though. There seems to be a lot of 'pass the buck' in the British rail industry since privatization, as pretty much no one knows who's responsible for what.

 

[Zoe]

Hmm, didn't know there was a minimum specification of journey times

The minimum specification is for first and last trains and number of calls per day. The invitation to tender does not list minimum journey times. When Hammond was asked if more trains could stop at Nuneaton, he said that this would not be specified but that the bidders could choose to do so. Here is the minimum service requirement: http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&so...sg=AFQjCNEUToHSt-d6VMakKlnuW5AQqX0ShA&cad=rja

 

[markydh]

So First are excused for their inadequate Rolling Stock because they wanted something better, whilst Northern are blamed for their inadequate Rolling Stock because...

...do you think Northern really wanted to be stuck with the stock they have? That they didn't try to import Pacer replacements?

Northern made their bed when they placed a 'winning' bid based on absolutely no growth and minimal stock improvements. The fact they've since come to realise that their stock is inadequate, that they were at one time interested in obtaining Chinese DMUs and that they have had one or two little 'triumphs' when it comes to obtaining a few cast offs is immaterial. The fact still remains that barely a penny of their £20million+ annual profits have been spent on improving the tat they have.

 

[Lampshade]

Northern made their bed when they placed a 'winning' bid based on absolutely no growth and minimal stock improvements. The fact they've since come to realise that their stock is inadequate, that they were at one time interested in obtaining Chinese DMUs and that they have had one or two little 'triumphs' when it comes to obtaining a few cast offs is immaterial. The fact still remains that barely a penny of their £20million+ annual profits have been spent on improving the tat they have.

Exactly. They knew what they were bidding for right from the start.

£29.5m profit last year and still getting subsidy, of course they're not going to improve any of it, they're lining shareholder's pockets and leaving the staff on the front line to take all the flak.

 

[HSTEd]

Exactly. They knew what they were bidding for right from the start.

£29.5m profit last year and still getting subsidy, of course they're not going to improve any of it, they're lining shareholder's pockets and leaving the staff on the front line to take all the flak.

The only responsibility of Northern Rail is to line the shareholder's pockets.
Thats kind of the point.
I believe the term is "sweating the assets".

 

[Zoe]

The only responsibility of Northern Rail is to line the shareholder's pockets.

PLCs have a duty to maximize profits for their shareholders.

 

[HSTEd]

PLCs have a duty to maximize profits for their shareholders.

Indeed, thats how capitalism works, the only duty of the company is to its shareholders.

 

[Zoe]

Indeed, thats how capitalism works, the only duty of the company is to its shareholders.

Income tax was much higher back in the days when transport and the utilities were public services though. The objection I often hear to public services is that people have to pay for a service that they don't use.

 

[markydh]

Indeed, thats how capitalism works, the only duty of the company is to its shareholders.

That is indeed quite true, which is exactly why allowing private companies to run regional monopolies was never going to work for the benefit of the passenger in the long run. In fact, I'd say the two main stakeholders i.e. fare paying passengers and subsidy paying government are the two who have suffered the most from it. I'm pretty certain the government of 2011 pays more towards running the 'privatised' railways in real terms than the government of 1991 did when it was still a nationalised industry. Passengers are paying through the roof for the privilage of travelling these days. Meanwhile, European state-owned companies (or in the case of Abellio, a company whose only shareholder is the Dutch government) are making large profits at our expense. It's a mess but sadly it's a mess that we've got to make the best of.

Back on topic, I'd personally say Virgin have generally been a rare force for good in the last 15 years. They lead the way when it comes to advertising their product and their results in terms of increasing those using their services is highly impressive. Even when they ran XC, despite problems with train length, they achieved some amazing results in this area.

 

[All Line Rover]

So First are excused for their inadequate Rolling Stock because they wanted something better, whilst Northern are blamed for their inadequate Rolling Stock because...

...do you think Northern really wanted to be stuck with the stock they have? That they didn't try to import Pacer replacements?

I can't like Northern because of their rolling stock. I am sure that many of their commuters are unhappy. At least First have some decent (if small) rolling stock.

In my honest opinion, the DafT are to blame for all of the rolling stock issues in the north! So I'll stop knocking Northern.

 

[Schnellzug]

It's a sealed bid....

So everything that has been mentioned so far in this thread is utterly and totally irrelevant in terms of actually awarding the new franchise. Completely.

The bid will be assessed on what each (anonymous) bidder tenders in terms of aspirations - what they want to do over the next X number of years.

I don't think that's how it should be. It should be about what they've done, not what they promise to do, since, as we all know from Politicians, anyone can promise anything.

 

[graham43404]

Bottom of the pile in terms of what?

I was asked about revenue protection and of the TOC's I travel most with I put Virgin at the bottom as it really is too easy for people to fare dodge on there.

 

[richardderby]

they have also -stretched-- the peaks, and brought in worse and worse off peak restrictions.... think they are now the worse TOC for using off peak (saver) tickets unless you are lucky enough to have a a railcard...

 

[swt_passenger]

Liverpool is under-served when it comes to London services too.

So some people reckon - but a long sequence of franchise specs and RUSs thinks not. Either the DfT and NR have got it in for Liverpool, or there really isn't a demand for more trains.

 

[WestCoast]

I can't like Northern because of their rolling stock. I am sure that many of their commuters are unhappy. At least First have some decent (if small) rolling stock.

In my honest opinion, the DafT are to blame for all of the rolling stock issues in the north! So I'll stop knocking Northern.

Yes, please stop knocking Northern. I thought you had never travelled with them? Of course, the DfT are to blame for rolling stock, Northern have shown much interest in improving the situation, although they have little control. I am a Pacer commuter and I quite like Serco-Abellio's Northern because they try and concentrate on getting the basics right - staff, fares, customer service e.t.c. Abellio would probably love to bring ideas over from the Netherlands (e.g. CyclePoint) but they just can't because of the nature of the current operation.

I was asked about revenue protection and of the TOC's I travel most with I put Virgin at the bottom as it really is too easy for people to fare dodge on there.

Yes, this is a point I have raised on numerous occasions. Virgin seem disinterested in revenue protection on some short-distance journeys.

Meanwhile, European state-owned companies (or in the case of Abellio, a company whose only shareholder is the Dutch government) are making large profits at our expense. It's a mess but sadly it's a mess that we've got to make the best of.

Yes, but simplistically, if there was no profit to be made, then you would struggle to find franchisees and the current system would fail! You just have to choose which company you would like to run the service, or see making a profit.

The UK has made its bed as far as I am concerned, the 'blame' (if there needs to be one) can be attributed to previous governments as appropriate. The Dft is now choosing operators between a pool of European rail operators and British bus companies. That is the system that has been created.

Is anything going to change? I am not so sure.

 

[FManc]

I'm crossing my fingers and toes that Virgin keep the franchise!
They're a really good company to work for, pay very well and I don't wanna be without a job at the end of it. I'm one the casual CSA's so don't think staff transfer will cover me :cry:

 

[Geezertronic]

Makes me laugh when people go on about Branson, he might be the face of the Virgin brand but as far as I am aware he has nothing to do with the day to day running of Virgin Trains. Also the ill informed who go on about nasty Virgin and the moderation of competition - complain to the DfT as I understand it was them that made Virgin apply it as it was part of their WCML contract

Also makes me laugh when people go on about the staff - as if they are going to change the staff if a new company comes onboard, they will be the same staff just in a different uniform

 

[HSTEd]

Hell, since the rolling stock is leased and the staff would likely be TUPEd... is there any reason a random person off the street could not submit a bid and demand that it be considered?

 

[Darandio]

I'm crossing my fingers and toes that Virgin keep the franchise!
They're a really good company to work for, pay very well and I don't wanna be without a job at the end of it. I'm one the casual CSA's so don't think staff transfer will cover me :cry:

Surely there would be no guarantee even if Virgin retained the franchise.

 

[Greenback]

Surely there would be no guarantee even if Virgin retained the franchise.

Indeed, it's impossible to predict whether someone would be better or worse off.

 

[tbtc]

Northern made their bed when they placed a 'winning' bid based on absolutely no growth and minimal stock improvements. The fact they've since come to realise that their stock is inadequate, that they were at one time interested in obtaining Chinese DMUs and that they have had one or two little 'triumphs' when it comes to obtaining a few cast offs is immaterial. The fact still remains that barely a penny of their £20million+ annual profits have been spent on improving the tat they have.

So why did the Government give them the franchise?

And, given the marginal/ low profit lines that they operate on, and lack of Government support for new trains, what are they supposed to do?

I can't like Northern because of their rolling stock. I am sure that many of their commuters are unhappy. At least First have some decent (if small) rolling stock.

In my honest opinion, the DafT are to blame for all of the rolling stock issues in the north! So I'll stop knocking Northern.

I don't think that Northern are happy with their rolling stock either. They inherited what Northern Spirit/ FNW were operating, they have tried to obtain additional/new units, they haven't been able to.

The Government hold all the strings - they are the ones who allowed First to buy new stock, they are the ones who cut that order down to just 51 trains, they are the ones who wouldn't allow a fourth coach, they are also the ones who wouldn't allow Northern some Chinese DMUs. That doesn't mean First/ Keolis are better or worse than Serco/ Ned.

 

[Schnellzug]

On the subject of Virgin and their popularity, there's a letter in the latest Railways Illustarted from Chris Gibb about the popularity of Voyagers and Pendos. Apparently 89% of people expressed satisfaction! Which rather misses the point that it's only those who are lucky enough to catch the Mk 3 set that have anything to make comparisons with, Virgin-wise. If they're more or less on time and they haven't been too rudely insulted by the staff, most people would , if someone stuck a Customer Satisfaction Survey in front of them, probably tick "OK, I suppose" to get rid of them, wouldn't they. It would only mean anything if they're able to make a direct comparison with other kinds of stock.

 

[Gareth]

So some people reckon - but a long sequence of franchise specs and RUSs thinks not. Either the DfT and NR have got it in for Liverpool, or there really isn't a demand for more trains.

Must be the former then, as I've heard enough stories from people being packed into the Liverpool trains like cattle.

Also, I don't believe for a minute that there is three times demand for Manchester services.

 

[Greenback]

Just a question for you Gareth. Do you think there is more, less or the same demand from/to Liverpool and Merseyside as there is from/to Manchester and its environs?

 

[MacCookie]

Hell, since the rolling stock is leased and the staff would likely be TUPEd... is there any reason a random person off the street could not submit a bid and demand that it be considered?

Yes. You can only submit a bid if you pre-qualify. You could always try pre-qualifying though.

Ewan

 

[Gareth]

Just a question for you Gareth. Do you think there is more, less or the same demand from/to Liverpool and Merseyside as there is from/to Manchester and its environs?

Perhaps not, but I strongly doubt it's anywhere near three times less, either way.