FGW - W announcement

[HowardGWR]

Yahoo Groups

I can't see the connection -sludge is brown /grey.

 

[michael74]

"Managing director Mark Hopwood said the rebrand was a "historic milestone", to recall what Isambard Kingdom Brunel first achieved in 1833."

I bet IKB didn't "achieve" his rolling stock with p i $ £ poor leg room a la Class 158

 

[Bletchleyite]

"Managing director Mark Hopwood said the rebrand was a "historic milestone", to recall what Isambard Kingdom Brunel first achieved in 1833."

I bet IKB didn't "achieve" his rolling stock with p i $ £ poor leg room a la Class 158

I reckon a 158 would be luxury compared with what Third Class passengers would have been offered on the original GWR.

 

[michael74]

I reckon a 158 would be luxury compared with what Third Class passengers would have been offered on the original ɢWʀ.

I may be sitting on benches with no heating an no suspension but still think I would rather have more leg room..... Hang on did I just describe a 142

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

"Managing director Mark Hopwood said the rebrand was a "historic milestone", to recall what Isambard Kingdom Brunel first achieved in 1833."
I bet IKB didn't "achieve" his rolling stock with p i $ £ poor leg room a la Class 158

I'm not convinced about all this IKB hero-worship.
He engineered the route, and built some locos, but I'm not sure he had much to do with running the trains, or such "customer service" aspects of the Great Western.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I love the way the forum seems to be set to change GWR into the logo with the big W

 

[yorksrob]

I may be sitting on benches with no heating an no suspension but still think I would rather have more leg room..... Hang on did I just describe a 142

Yes, except without the leg room.

 

[michael74]

Yes, except without the leg room.

I was thinking of the flip up benches by the doors

 

[yorksrob]

I was thinking of the flip up benches by the doors

Ah yes, they're sometimes the best option (particularly on a Merseyrail monstrosity).

 

[Trog]

I'm not convinced about all this IKB hero-worship.
He engineered the route, and built some locos, but I'm not sure he had much to do with running the trains, or such "customer service" aspects of the ɢWʀ.

I thought the locos to his original specification were so poor they had to buy in locos from Robert Stephenson and co, which were the basis for the Star class. Also while we have the knives out his baulk track on piles was not up to much either.

 

[HowardGWR]

Also while we have the knives out his baulk track on piles was not up to much either.

All right, I'll take the bait. As the baulk road was still there more than six decades later, it could not have been that bad.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Oi, what have mods done to my moniker? I have always hated that shirt button and still do. Nasty thirties modernism. The twin coat of arms was classy and should have been adopted by FGW if they had really wanted to go up-market.

 

[ainsworth74]

The forum's software got a bit carried away with all the excitement around the rebranding of FGW and decided to change any instance of 'GWR' into the new stylised logo that they're using whether or not it should be changed.

We've given it a stern talking to and the forum apologies and promises not to do it again.

 

[fgwrich]

The forum's software got a bit carried away with all the excitement around the rebranding of FGW and decided to change any instance of 'GWR' into the new stylised logo that they're using whether or not it should be changed.

We've given it a stern talking to and the forum apologies and promises not to do it again.

Thanks! I was wondering why my name had been 'Rebranded'! I'm not even in favour of the rebrand, so to see mine and Howards username rebranded was unexpectedly surprising!

 

[superalbs]

The forum's software got a bit carried away with all the excitement around the rebranding of FGW and decided to change any instance of 'GWR' into the new stylised logo that they're using whether or not it should be changed.

We've given it a stern talking to and the forum apologies and promises not to do it again.

Aww, I liked that 'ɢWʀ' stylising, it was cool!

 

[CockneySparrow]

First have decided to unbrand themselves from the GWR, website logos and apps all now gone retro, reading from their new website there is a load of spin of being proud to unbrand and mention of Brunel

Just wondered what is going on really

 

[jon0844]

I'm not sure he had much to do with running the trains, or such "customer service" aspects of the Great Western.

Well, he certainly wasn't on Twitter to deal with complaints.

 

[HowardGWR]

First have decided to unbrand themselves from the GWR, website logos and apps all now gone retro, reading from their new website there is a load of spin of being proud to unbrand and mention of Brunel

Just wondered what is going on really

I think the explanation could be that 'First' had become a toxic component (think of the joke words applied such as 'Worst, Last', etc.) and thus could be better removed.

My feeling about this change is that the word 'Great' could be similarly altered to something derogatory. It only will not be if the service level justifies the aggrandisement.

I have often wondered about the original application (to several lines, Great Northern, Great Central, etc). Could those have just meant 'large' as opposed to the modern interpretation?

 

[Mojo]

My feeling about this change is that the word 'Great' could be similarly altered to something derogatory. It only will not be if the service level justifies the aggrandisement.

I have often wondered about the original application (to several lines, Great Northern, Great Central, etc). Could those have just meant 'large' as opposed to the modern interpretation?

Do they need to rename the island as well? :roll:

 

[infobleep]

Who owns the GWR and Great Western Railway trademarks? Would they fall out of copyright after a certain number of years?

 

[virgintrain1]

Seems they have started to un-brand some of the HSTs wonder if this will happen across the fleet?

https://goo.gl/VW2QWM

https://goo.gl/T8G6zV

 

[GatwickDepress]

Seems they have started to un-brand some of the HSTs wonder if this will happen across the fleet?

https://goo.gl/VW2QWM

https://goo.gl/T8G6zV

You know, I really do like the dynamic lines livery there without the dynamic lines!

 

[HowardGWR]

Do they need to rename the island as well? :roll:

Whoosh (am up with the latest terminology on the net). What were the rolled eyes for? Reread my post possibly?

I was pondering the origin of the use of 'Great'.

 

[virgintrain1]

You know, I really do like the dynamic lines livery there without the dynamic lines!

I think they should just remove the FIRST logo and temporary leave the lines otherwise like you say it a bit boring.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

The might be going to stick on a GWR logo at the middle on both sides. Typically how often with any given HST have a full exterior repaint (not caused by a change of corporate image)?

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

As it is now GWR... Any chance of some Kings and Castles out of Paddington?

 

[superalbs]

Seems they have started to un-brand some of the HSTs wonder if this will happen across the fleet?

https://goo.gl/VW2QWM

https://goo.gl/T8G6zV

They are the newest sets back from refurbishment. Instead of painting green, they were painted FGW Blue, but without the Dynamic Lines. (Or so I have heard.)

 

[Noddy]

Who owns the GWR and Great Western Railway trademarks? Would they fall out of copyright after a certain number of years?

I was wondering about that too. Presumably GWR (and other historic railway names) are owned by the government/DfT having coming through BR. But I'm not sure how copyright to a historic company name would apply in this situation? For instance if (First) Hull Trains decided they fancied calling themselves LNER...

 

[londiscape]

Who owns the GWR and Great Western Railway trademarks? Would they fall out of copyright after a certain number of years?

I was wondering about that too. Presumably GWR (and other historic railway names) are owned by the government/DfT having coming through BR. But I'm not sure how copyright to a historic company name would apply in this situation? For instance if (First) Hull Trains decided they fancied calling themselves LNER...

As I understand it (IANAL of course, happy to be corrected):

I don't think copyright comes into the equation as it applies to creative works (e.g. writing or literature, sound recordings, video, works of art etc). As a separate element of intellectual property, trademarks drop off the register after 10 years from date of registration, so if not renewed, could be said to be in the public domain and available for fresh registration by another relevant individual or company.

So it depends on whether BR / DfT have kept up the 10-year renewals in the intervening period.

 

[fgwrich]

I think the explanation could be that 'First' had become a toxic component (think of the joke words applied such as 'Worst, Last', etc.) and thus could be better removed.

My feeling about this change is that the word 'Great' could be similarly altered to something derogatory. It only will not be if the service level justifies the aggrandisement.

I have often wondered about the original application (to several lines, Great Northern, Great Central, etc). Could those have just meant 'large' as opposed to the modern interpretation?

Maybe so, but it still won't let people use digs at FGW/gWr with newer terms. The example, and probably most likely to be used in the Thames Valley was Worst Late Western > Goes Wrong Repeatedly.

 

[ainsworth74]

Maybe so, but it still won't let people use digs at FGW/gWr with newer terms. The example, and probably most likely to be used in the Thames Valley was Worst Late Western > Goes Wrong Repeatedly.

Indeed! Considering GWR is an old name I'm sure the insults that commuters from the 19th and early 20th century will soon re-appear! Nothing new under the sun and all that