I suppose they could, but Roger Ford seems fairly certain that DOR will be able to take over on the 9th should they need to.
-
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!
First win Intercity West Coast franchise
- Thread starter Zoe
- Start date
- Status
I suppose they could, but Roger Ford seems fairly certain that DOR will be able to take over on the 9th should they need to.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
It would be interesting to know how services would continue to run in the very unlikely event of a franchisee walking away without warning. It's a bit different in this case but if DOR were to not be ready in time (although seems they will be) then would there be any option other than for Virgin to run the franchise on a management contract?
Last edited:
I think that's been suggested by Virgin management, and disseminated by a friendly journalist. It certainly hasn't been suggested by Patrick McLoughlin, Stephen Hammond, or Philip Rutnam the Permanent Secretary of the DfT in their various parliamentary hearings.
I doubt it's going to be that difficult for people. Same trains, same staff and from the same places.
If changing operator was that hard, how would you ever change over when someone else wins the franchise? It's happened loads of times before, including Virgin losing Cross Country, so it's no big deal.
The important thing is that any tickets purchased will be valid on the new service, yet I'm sure that there are people who will be spreading rumours that this isn't the case to cause more panic.
Eagle
Established Member
Which a considerable portion of the public seems not to have noticed (despite the fact that XC managed to completely rebrand/relivery all their trains in about three months).
But different IT system, different finance arrangements... it's those things that take the time and those things which need to be prepared. The areas you highlighted can be done overnight.
The other question is about uniform. Virgin Trains said no to Cross Country using the VT uniform while XC got theirs sorted... I suspect it'll be the same this time around too unless DOR has a large stock of all types and sizes?
Which I believe was a franchise commitment?
But this is what I suspect many thousands of people who signed the petition don't really understand, that it'll be more or less the same anyway!
In fact, we're likely to get a better deal as VT know where they can make the cuts, while FG don't (yet!).
Maybe not but if the ticket person can't log on because their user ID was a Virgin Trains one, then they can't sell tickets. If the Fasticket machine dialled in to Virgin infrastructure then that won't work either. Plus if food stock for the trains isn't charged to a DOR account, then there will be no food on the trains either.
That's a totally different issue, and only came about because of Virgin kicking up a fuss and causing the delay and uncertainty.
The other issues, namely the change of name on a certain date - with a new livery and staff uniform is always going to happen. The logistics having been done months ahead of time.
I was merely commenting about the fact that a franchise change might confuse passengers, suggesting the only option is to always let the current operator carry on. Kind of making the franchising system rather pointless!
Interesting stuff in the October edition of Modern Railways. No less than the first four articles are about ICWC. The opening graph tells an interesting story.
Also interesting is the comment from Hugh Clancy that he did not fully understand the GDP mechanism, and that it had taken his team of "very clever" people a while to get it. Now I was aware that one bidder had struggled with it, but had assumed it to be Keolis, not First. Perhaps these "very clever" people had difficulties understanding crowding too...
Also interesting is the comment from Hugh Clancy that he did not fully understand the GDP mechanism, and that it had taken his team of "very clever" people a while to get it. Now I was aware that one bidder had struggled with it, but had assumed it to be Keolis, not First. Perhaps these "very clever" people had difficulties understanding crowding too...
I can accept them doing it, but still share the widely held opinion that they're simply sore losers and are taking a punt at using public opinion to get the decision overturned.
Can't necessarily blame them for trying, but they're playing many people for fools. They know a lot of information is classified, but seem to be trying to make it seem like there's a cover up and conspiracy - thus justifying the need to overturn the decision. And people have mostly bought that, and will believe the conspiracy theory even more if Virgin doesn't succeed. Just you wait!
Can't necessarily blame them for trying, but they're playing many people for fools. They know a lot of information is classified, but seem to be trying to make it seem like there's a cover up and conspiracy - thus justifying the need to overturn the decision. And people have mostly bought that, and will believe the conspiracy theory even more if Virgin doesn't succeed. Just you wait!
YorkshireRider
Member
Does anyone know if the revenue for advance tickets that are sold now for travel after the handover in December go to Virgin or First/DOR? I only ask because i seem to remember a seat sale by both GNER and NXEC when they knew they were on the way out.
Virgin. Unlike, say, Seasons, there is no industry process for dealing with revenue from AP Sales. First should have taken cognisance of this in their bid; plus DfT ought to police VT against abuse of the system.
Most of the routes ditched in East Lothian and Midlothian had parallel Lothian Buses routes - you could argue that the level of competition on routes like the 44 was over the top.
After Lothian stepped in with a handful of replacement services (linking Dalkeith to Mussleburgh etc) there's not really a lot of links lost
Ah, here we go again, the "First handed the keys back to early" argument
What next - Pacers can't run on Third Rail track and Richard Branson designed 390s himself to feel like planes inside?
WSMR was always going to be a slim operation, even before any recession - employing fifty five people whilst running three return trips a day may have meant high passenger satisfaction scores (based on the level of attention that staff could afford to give passengers) but not a great business model.
It'd have struggled even if Virgin had sat back and done nothing.
Just because it doesn't suit your argument, doesn't make it untrue. Your analysis of First's abandonment of the Lothians and killing off 200 jobs is completely inaccurate, if typical of First Forum at its best.
Having soaked up all the public money they could, they baled out without a thought for their customers. Like they did with FGW. Again, it may not suit your, and this forum's,First-based agenda but the taxpayer is still down £800 million due to these profiteering shysters.
But don't let the truth get in the way of the fashionable hysterical RB-bashing,eh?
This Forum is not normally inclined to support First. That the mood is so pro-First here seems to be largely based on a desire to counterbalance lots of uninformed and inaccurate posts by "RB Groupies".
I remain deeply sceptical about the First bid, but let's bash them on the facts, not stuff from the Branson PR machine, or completely inaccurate or irrelevant claims.
That said, their behaviour regarding Lothian might not be entirely irrelevant. It does support the idea that they would hand back the keys if the going got tough.
Let's posit the following situation...
1. First make more WC style bids, winning a great number of franchises with back-end loaded payments
2. If the economy goes well they make lots of money for 15 years
3. If the economy doesn't do so well they start handing back the worst performers - the threat to cross-default doesn't have much teeth if they're also loss-making.
4. By the time the next bidding round starts all the parties will have changed and like NX at the moment, it doesn't seem like a good idea to ignore one of the biggest players in the market.
I remain deeply sceptical about the First bid, but let's bash them on the facts, not stuff from the Branson PR machine, or completely inaccurate or irrelevant claims.
That said, their behaviour regarding Lothian might not be entirely irrelevant. It does support the idea that they would hand back the keys if the going got tough.
Let's posit the following situation...
1. First make more WC style bids, winning a great number of franchises with back-end loaded payments
2. If the economy goes well they make lots of money for 15 years
3. If the economy doesn't do so well they start handing back the worst performers - the threat to cross-default doesn't have much teeth if they're also loss-making.
4. By the time the next bidding round starts all the parties will have changed and like NX at the moment, it doesn't seem like a good idea to ignore one of the biggest players in the market.
Not sure I agree with you here.
Exercising a break in a contract i not bailing out. It is something that has been agreed by both parties and if there is blame it is on the client side for bad negotiation.
However, if First (or anyone else) is making super-profits then a break cleause is good for the client.
Break claueses are always a risk! My assumption is that GW was let on the basis of expected growth and the break was a rational step to keep First's profits under control.
With regard to RB - he is a larger than life personality and this is his style. I have a lot of respect for him and see Virgin as an exemplary way of promoting brand values and stretching it over multiple sectors. However, in this case I think if he had been more measured in his approach it would have been more effective.
I just wish either Virgin or First could take over East Coast who's service seems in a downward spiral - despite some excellent staff.
Someone earlier made the comment about uniforms and branding - give me 7 days and I could sort that one out and most would be possible in less than 48 hours.
If we stick to truth - or at least reports of the truth - then everyone should be able to get along fine. There seems just as much 'hysteria' from those annoyed by First Group's behaviour in their bus operations as in some of the more extreme anti-Virgin ideas. Including your posts.
At least you didn't accuse anyone of working for First. :roll:
RPI
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Dec 2010
- Messages
- 3,359
Anyone who still accuses First of "Walking away" from GW obviously does not have enough knowledge to comment on the subject, for the umpteenth time, if First had taken up the 3 year extension then the DfT would have paid MORE in compensation to FGW (due to no electrification, IEP etc, etc) than FGW would have paid in premiums, get your facts right. As for First's bus operations, yes they leave much to be desired but their business model seems to be shifting from Bus to Rail anyway.
I see First as a rail company that happens to run buses than the other way around these days.
There can't be much money in running buses for anyone, and it's not going to get any better as long as fuel prices keep going upwards - but the users either don't pay anything at all, or can't afford to pay the ever increasing fares.
At least rail is fairly protected in this regard, especially on the electrified routes where I doubt there's as big an increase in electricity costs for the train operator?
There can't be much money in running buses for anyone, and it's not going to get any better as long as fuel prices keep going upwards - but the users either don't pay anything at all, or can't afford to pay the ever increasing fares.
At least rail is fairly protected in this regard, especially on the electrified routes where I doubt there's as big an increase in electricity costs for the train operator?
tbtc
Veteran Member
I'm getting bored of typing this, but First didn't "walk away from FGW without a thought for their customers". They ran the franchise for the agreed time. They had an option to extend this operation. They didn't take that option up.
Any company (Stagecoach, Arriva, whoever) wouldn't have taken the option (given the uncertainty of running the GWML franchise over the next couple of years, electrification, IEP, massive disruption). If you want to blame anyone, blame the Government for putting this one sided option into the contract.
Profiteering shysters stealing £800 million from the taxpayer? And you think I'm the hysterical one with the "agenda"?
As for the bus cuts around Edinburgh, most of the buses involved were on routes that directly competed with Lothian services (the 44, the 86, the 129 etc).
Of the abandoned routes that had no direct Lothian competition, the few useful links (like Dalkeith - Mussleburgh, Edinburgh - Pencaitland, ERI - Mayfield, the Dalkeith town service etc) were replaced by Lothian routes.
Really, the Mussleburgh/ Dalkeith operations have been a basket case ever since the days of the "Edinburgh Overground" a decade ago - they were clearly struggling so it's no huge surprise that they've cancelled the services.
(and given they they still run a fair few services to Linlithgow, Bathgate, Livingston, Penicuik, North Berwick, Dunbar etc, they've hardly "abandoned the Lothians", just the bits that had competing Lothian Buses routes)
Also if First had walked away, in the way most (miss informed) people assume, then they would not still be running the trains on the GW line, unless someone can cite an example of another operator who "walked away" and still got to run the trains they walk away from.
Donny Dave
Established Member
I'll not comment on most of your post, as others have gone over everything else, but .....
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Virgin currently making the largest profit (percentage of revenue) out of all the current TOCs?
You obviously work for First. We all know First ran away from the GWML and took all of its trains with it. The Government has merely been using holograms to pretend its business as usual.
D365
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 13,194
Just like National Express, but the government actually wanted to shame them...
You obviously work for First. We all know First ran away from the GWML and took all of its trains with it. The Government has merely been using holograms to pretend its business as usual.
That's two fanciful things:
1) me working for a TOC
2) holographic trains that can actually carry passengers as I'm sure I've been on some since they took over
I don't think you're allowed to mention such things. As Richard Branson said himself he doesn't care about money or profit as he has enough for breakfast, dinner and supper for the rest of his life. Although I can't remember whether he said that a few minutes before or after Tony Collins said Virgin wanted a 40% bigger profit margin than FirstGroup.
sprinterguy
Veteran Member
Well, First are only due to "walk away" at the end of March 2013 anyway (The three year franchise extension would have taken them into 2016), so not only are those mis-informed commentators incorrect in saying that "walking away" from the franchise is what First are doing, but they're also speaking in the wrong tense!
Mainliner
Member
I use East Coast every week, and I haven't seen any downward spiral.
(I travel standard class, so my comment does not include the First Class food, etc., changes.)
Good service yesterday, on one of the first NCL-KGX trains after the re-opening of the flooded section at Croft - full updating throughout the journey, extra(?) staff on the train taking details of everyone's connections, and an extra stop arranged at Doncaster for people with connections to Grantham, Peterborough, etc.
- Status