What's the point of franchising and signing contract terms if they can just be ignored?
To say nothing of First Group exercising their Greater Western contractual break clause 2 years ago and yet still keeping the keys for 7 years beyond the date when they those keys should have been re-tendered.
The mess may be of the DfT's making, but why does that mean the incumbent gets to carry on regardless?
I don't buy the argument either that major infrastructure changes should mean the incumbent gets to continue. Franchise dates were known. Infrastructure improvement dates were known.
What we have is the worst of all worlds. No competition to invigorate the Greater Western franchise. We should be having a franchise renewal precisely because there are major infrastructure and rolling stock changes. Get the competing interests bidding now to show what they can offer.
Large listed companies are inherently risk advise to keep shareholders satisfied. Re-tendering in a period of uncertainty and upheaval would have only resulted in DfT achieving a poor franchise price, continuing with the incumbent on a management contract is best value for DfT.
It will be interesting to see what items DfT are prepared to allow funding for in terms of fleet modernisation / life extension, will the HST standard class coaches be refreshed internally or left to degenerate? The regional fleet obviously needs a lot of work will this now happen or will the extension only allow minimum work to keep them operating if replacement is to happen within the next term.?
TOC's currently have no control over rolling stock available, no control over infrastructure and little control over timetables with DfT specifying the lot. The only innovations possible are in on-board service, GWML trains run with high load factors throughout the day ex-pad so there is not much that can be done regarding on board service.
Crossrail poses an interesting problem in terms of paddington>reading IEP/HST services. The now agreed extension of Crossrail to reading could see much of the commuter traffic transfer away from GW to CR for commuters heading to points beyond pad within central London. Equally it could act to funnel more traffic to GW as work locations further east become commutable ex-reading/Thames valley. The former has negative effect on franchise revenues the latter a possible one, assuming that seat capacity is available.
Remember the original Greater Western franchise assumed that HST2 would be fully in service by before the end of franchise (2016) and that no other improvement works would happen. Electrification of the GWML/SWML route was at that point a pipe dream and crossrail a maybe but beyond the proposed franchise term.
Running a franchise tender prior to modernisation or during is massive risk for all parties as highlighted by the WCML modernisation being accompanied by a innovative franchise bid that ended up rather rapidly as a straight management contract when Virgin realised that basic business assumptions about the modernised route where not realistic for various reasons. This franchise has not yet had a commercial re-tendering since original award and will have effectively run for 20 years as a concession.
TOC's are unlikely to make the same mistake again in preparing bids.
Also where would you put them given a 6 car 159 fills most of the platform (A 6 Car 159 is almost as long as a 7 coach Mk2 rake) - A 9 Car won't actually fit 
