i think virgin should get the new west coast franchise

[All Line Rover]

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 try to avoid Northern at all costs, but I did travel with them during the recent West Yorkshire Challenge (I think it was called that). I certainly did not enjoy the experience! (By which I mean the rolling stock - not meeting others! )

I still find it inexcusable how little Northern pay their staff, in comparison to London Midland, TPE, etc...

As a frequent Virgin customer I am more than satisfied with the service. The majority of staff are excellent - customer relations is too.

I highly doubt that any of the other companies will do better - I fear that they may do far worse! So my preference would be for Virgin to retain the franchise, but it would be nice if they invested more money in improving stations.

 

[HSTEd]

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

Ewan

Apparently a performance bond of £10 million and a season ticket bond of £50 million is required for the Greater East Anglia franchise, which is the one I found the prequalification questionaire for.

 

[Greenback]

I try to avoid Northern at all costs, but I did travel with them during the recent West Yorkshire Challenge (I think it was called that). I certainly did not enjoy the experience! (By which I mean the rolling stock - not meeting others! )

I still find it inexcusable how little Northern pay their staff, in comparison to London Midland, TPE, etc...

As a frequent Virgin customer I am more than satisfied with the service. The majority of staff are excellent - customer relations is too.

I highly doubt that any of the other companies will do better - I fear that they may do far worse! So my preference would be for Virgin to retain the franchise, but it would be nice if they invested more money in improving stations.

Your faith in Virgin is quite touching! Down here we have had FGW operated trains on the GWML for 15 years. During that time, under the same company, their performance has been extremely variable, often depending on the quality of the Managing Director (of which there have been many) and their senior team.

There are no guarantees that any company, whethe rthey are running trains or doing something else completely, will maintain the same standards in five or ten years time!

 

[All Line Rover]

Your faith in Virgin is quite touching! Down here we have had FGW operated trains on the GWML for 15 years. During that time, under the same company, their performance has been extremely variable, often depending on the quality of the Managing Director (of which there have been many) and their senior team.

There are no guarantees that any company, whethe rthey are running trains or doing something else completely, will maintain the same standards in five or ten years time!

But the thing with Virgin Trains is that it is a "Virgin" company, which has a specific way of doing things that will not change significantly over time. Even though Richard Branson does not take a significantly active role in the business, he is not going to let it harbour a negative reputation. First has absolutely no "reputation" whatsoever - there isn't one to protect!

A good example of a company that does not care about its reputation - because it doesn't have one - is Arriva CrossCountry.

 

[gary47]

I would rather virgin have the franchise than govia if they took over you would have trains cancelled look what happened with london midland in the past when drivers didn't want to work on a sun they cancelled the whole service before and govia own london midland

 

[Zoe]

I would rather virgin have the franchise than govia if they took over you would have trains cancelled look what happened with london midland in the past when drivers didn't want to work on a sun they cancelled the whole service before and govia own london midland

The franchise will not go to Govia as they are not shortlisted. It can only go to Abellio, First, Keolis/SNCF or Virgin.

 

[Schnellzug]

But the thing with Virgin Trains is that it is a "Virgin" company, which has a specific way of doing things that will not change significantly over time. Even though Richard Branson does not take a significantly active role in the business, he is not going to let it harbour a negative reputation. First has absolutely no "reputation" whatsoever - there isn't one to protect!

A good example of a company that does not care about its reputation - because it doesn't have one - is Arriva CrossCountry.

But what is this reputation that Virgin have? many people say that Pendolinios and Voyagers are not terribly comfortable. How is that enhancing virgin's reputation? How is charging expensive fares enhancing virgin's reputation? Does Sir Richard Beard actually care in the slightest what VT does for vrigin's reputation, if they have guaranteed income and are protected from competition?

 

[Greenback]

But what is this reputation that Virgin have? many people say that Pendolinios and Voyagers are not terribly comfortable. How is that enhancing virgin's reputation? How is charging expensive fares enhancing virgin's reputation? Does Sir Richard Beard actually care in the slightest what VT does for vrigin's reputation, if they have guaranteed income and are protected from competition?

I don't think Sir Beard really cares much about any of the Virgin businesses these days. he has far too many other interests to concern himself with with such minutiae.

ALR's faith is bordering on naivety if he really thinks that the brand means much to those who manage Virgin Trains. The bottom line, as with all companies, is money. If there was suddenly a rash of negative publicity about Virigin Mediam it would have hardly any effect on the rail business or vice versa.

If, however, Virgin Rail didn't make as much money as the shareholders or Sir Beard would like, then it's probable that all of the values that ALR thinks they hold so dear will be out of the window in seconds!

 

[Geezertronic]

I don't really think it makes a lot of difference. Take National Express as an example, were they truely hurt by the East Coast fiasco? Doesn't appear so as their coach side is still ok and NXEA is still doing well (from what I hear and read).

 

[Minilad]

But the thing with Virgin Trains is that it is a "Virgin" company, which has a specific way of doing things that will not change significantly over time. Even though Richard Branson does not take a significantly active role in the business, he is not going to let it harbour a negative reputation. First has absolutely no "reputation" whatsoever - there isn't one to protect!

A good example of a company that does not care about its reputation - because it doesn't have one - is Arriva CrossCountry.

So when all us nasty XC staff were working for lovely Virgin we were the best thing since sliced bread. But now we work for horrible Arriva we are the dregs of society.
Do me a favour. We do the job to the best of our ability whatever colour the train is.

 

[Whistler40145]

Why take away the franchise from Virgin?

Virgin must have made a success of their reign unlike both GNER & National Express East Coast which flopped in spectacular style!

I admire Sir Richard Branson, he has ambition & isn't scared to have a go at anything.

 

[Schnellzug]

I think that GNER & NXEC, though, had it tougher in some ways, since Virgin had the WCML virtually rebuilt to suit them, whereas on the East Coast they had to put up with the infrastructure as it was. Virgin can't have it both ways; they may say that they had to put up with years of disruption, but it was all done for their interests.

 

[Whistler40145]

I agree.

How many times do the wires come down on the ECML versus the WCML? I know which was done on the cheap!

 

[All Line Rover]

So when all us nasty XC staff were working for lovely Virgin we were the best thing since sliced bread. But now we work for horrible Arriva we are the dregs of society.
Do me a favour. We do the job to the best of our ability whatever colour the train is.

I never said XC staff were nasty. I had some very good ones just today, in fact! But Arriva XC completely ignore customer comments, and their "cost-cutting" exercises border on the crazy. :roll: I'm 100% sure the passenger experience would be better if Virgin had retained the franchise (except ludicrous fares and the Voyagers, but there are always ways of getting around the former).

 

[Schnellzug]

But with regard to the Voyagers, one of the first things Arriva did when they got hold of XC was to bring back as many HSTs as they could find; i don't think you can just say "Things would be 100% better with Virgin, apart from the Voyagers", since Voyagers are synonymous with Virgin.

 

[Yew]

But with regard to the Voyagers, one of the first things Arriva did when they got hold of XC was to bring back as many HSTs as they could find; i don't think you can just say "Things would be 100% better with Virgin, apart from the Voyagers", since Voyagers are synonymous with Virgin.

Also alliterative

 

[Minilad]

I never said XC staff were nasty. I had some very good ones just today, in fact! But Arriva XC completely ignore customer comments, and their "cost-cutting" exercises border on the crazy. :roll: I'm 100% sure the passenger experience would be better if Virgin had retained the franchise (except ludicrous fares and the Voyagers, but there are always ways of getting around the former).

The point I was trying to make was that a companies reputation is down to it's workforce. And seeing that a majority of XC staff were also Virgin staff I don't think there would be a great deal of difference.
As an aside where do you think XC got Voyagers from, oh yes it was Virgin, And why do you think they have to have such high fares. Yes thats right because of the lack of capacity they have. So all Virgins fault then ?

 

[All Line Rover]

The point I was trying to make was that a companies reputation is down to it's workforce. And seeing that a majority of XC staff were also Virgin staff I don't think there would be a great deal of difference.
As an aside where do you think XC got Voyagers from, oh yes it was Virgin, And why do you think they have to have such high fares. Yes thats right because of the lack of capacity they have. So all Virgins fault then ?

I admit that the Voyagers are annoying - rattly, horrible, small things that often smell. 5-car 175's (with a shop and First Class) or 5 car 222's would have been much better, although the Class 222's wouldn't really have been invented without the Voyagers! The Class 175's really are excellent trains, but hopefully the Voyagers will improve somewhat on the "rattly" and "small" aspects if/when they have an additional carriage with a pantograph added.

To be honest, Virgin CrossCountry were a victim of their own success. That doesn't excuse the Voyagers - it was still a stupid decision! - but if Virgin had retained the franchise I'd have expected them to order extra trains by now (subject to the DfT's approval, etc., etc., on our "privatised" railway :roll.

Regarding the fares, I'd say that both XC and Virgin are responsible for making them so high, and it isn't totally down to a lack of capacity. The fares are high because they offer an "InterCity" (:roll service. Northern often have packed trains during peak times, but the season tickets are much more reasonable.

 

[districtline]

To be honest, Virgin CrossCountry were a victim of their own success. That doesn't excuse the Voyagers - it was still a stupid decision!

A decision that had absolutely nothing to do with Virgin, it was all specified by the DfT.

 

[All Line Rover]

A decision that had absolutely nothing to do with Virgin, it was all specified by the DfT.

What a surprise! :roll:

Honestly, I just don't understand why the government won't leave it all up to the train companies!

 

[districtline]

What a surprise! :roll:

Honestly, I just don't understand why the government won't leave it all up to the train companies!

Virgin did actually try and get them extended to 7 coaches and actually wanted loco hauled and not MUs on the longer services but the DfT said no and would only allow the 4/5 car MUs.

 

[All Line Rover]

Virgin did actually try and get them extended to 7 coaches and actually wanted loco hauled and not MUs on the longer services but the DfT said no and would only allow the 4/5 car MUs.

hock: I am surprised - I was not aware of that. Going to Plymouth on a Voyager is a horrible experience. Going on a HST is a lovely experience!

 

[Minilad]

hock: I am surprised - I was not aware of that. Going to Plymouth on a Voyager is a horrible experience. Going on a HST is a lovely experience!

You are not aware of it as it is completely untrue !

 

[districtline]

You are not aware of it as it is completely untrue !

What isn't true? Virgin planned for 7 coach trains but were denied them by the DfT. If Virgin had got what they wanted then there wouldn't be the issues we have now.

 

[Minilad]

What isn't true? Virgin planned for 7 coach trains but were denied them by the DfT. If Virgin had got what they wanted then there wouldn't be the issues we have now.

You have come up with this fantasy before. And it was just as wrong then as it is now

 

[markydh]

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?

They were given the franchise because they made the cheapest bid. Quite simple really. It's pretty well known that both First and Arriva made bids based on growth AND investment in new rolling stock. Northern, however, made a bid based on no growth and little, if any, investment and the DfT lapped it up. That's why I find it galling when Northern management plead poverty.

 

[Zoe]

They were given the franchise because they made the cheapest bid.

It will be interesting to see if Virgin decide to overbid this time to be more sure of retaining the franchise. In the case of XC they elected not to overbird and lost out.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

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. A bid is an extraordinarily long document filled with financial and operational minutae.

This is the first properly informed comment I have found in this thread.
95% of the current VT operation is determined by either DfT or NR.
VT chose the trains but nobody can complain because they are the ONLY tilting stock available for the WCML.
Traditionalists may not like them but they do EXACTLY the job they were bought for.
Pendolinos and Voyagers are brilliant at what they have to do, even if there are some shortcomings internally.
They will all be used by the incoming franchisee - nobody is going to ditch the Pendolinos for a new fleet.
The only possible variations are: (a) a few more Pendos; (b) converting Voyagers to electric operation (or some mix of these).

The future choice is between Virgin (not forgetting the Stagecoach 49%), Abellio, First or Keolis, against a spec which is not yet finalised (the current one will be changed for the real bids next year).
DfT are looking for the best value/most innovative/most deliverable bid for a 15-year franchise.

Past performance may be one of the factors, but I doubt any of the criteria mentioned in these posts will figure at all.
VT ride relatively high in customer satisfaction. Reliability/punctuality are on a par with EC/FGW, the only two comparable franchises, and much improved on a couple of years ago.
They are also very likely to be earning the DfT more money than planned just now, which is more than can be said for most franchises.

It is very likely to come down to price, and that is a crazy conundrum for all the players - look what happened to GNER and NXEC who bid too low.
They would not be shortlisted if the DfT did not think they were worthy of bidding next time.
I am no great fan of Branson or his brands, but without his "vision" thing tormenting DfT and RT/NR over the years, the WCML would look nothing like it does today.

Who wins will be in the hands of Philip Hammond.
He won't be bothering much about ticket checks, catering and seat alignment.
Only premiums for DfT, and earning a return on the £8 billion spent on WCRM.

 

[Zoe]

95% of the current VT operation is determined by either DfT or NR.

Would Virgin have done anything differently though if it had been their decision?

 

[All Line Rover]

This is the first properly informed comment I have found in this thread.

That's no surprise, as AlterEgo should be an expect in this field. I am just a humble paying passenger!

Both are very interesting posts. I completely agree with them.