Grand Central to Blackpool denied

[jopsuk]

The ORR have killed Grand Central's Blackpool/Westcoast plan for being abstractive.

refused Grand Central's application to run services from Euston to Blackpool, which, on the basis of the information provided, failed our not primarily abstractive test (the services as proposed would take business and revenue away from existing operators without adequate offsetting benefits). We will be discussing with Grand Central how it can take forward any revised application.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Notice that they've also killed Alliance Rail's plans as well- the end for Open Access?

 

[The Planner]

Pretty sure LM to Preston was chucked out too. The Alliance Rail proposal was barking mad anyway and was never going to get anywhere. Like you say, makes OA seem a bit pointless as everything would abstract revenue somewhere along the line.

 

[djw1981]

Yeah but Blackpool-euston would be abstracting primarily one company and directly competeing with VWC Preston-Euston. If glasgow-Liverpool ran, then it is not primarily abstracxtive as the current rail market is small due to the number of changes. A direct service may abstract from northern merseyrail, TPE and Virgin, but is not in direct competition (assuming some station stop pattern clauses0.

 

[jopsuk]

The alliance rail proposal under consideration wasn't to Glasgow- here's the summary from the page linked above:

refused Alliance's application to operate services between Euston and Leeds/Bradford interchange/Blackpool and Carlisle. The application was not completed fully and did not provide sufficient information and data by the deadline for it to be considered. Alliance subsequently submitted a detailed submission in support of its application, but we were unable to consult on it for reasons of commercial confidentiality. We will be discussing with Alliance how it can take forward any revised application.

I'm gussing this was their "GNWR" proposal? The full document says that they submitted a detailed poropsal on Feb 1st (way too late) and did not want it publicly accesible (which falls foul of the transparcy rules).

 

[Solent&Wessex]

I have long harboured views that the majority of Open Access Operators are far too obsessed with London, and I assume mainly because of the large fares and the possibility for a share of revenue via ORCATS even if the overall additional benefits of the service are minimal.

As mentioned above, some sort of Open Access Cross Country type operation would probably prove attractive to passengers. North West to Scotland, Mid & North Wales to North East England and Scotland spring to mind - they are busy flows with no direct trains and the current services are often overcrowded and require a number of changes. North East to Birmingham via Huddersfield, Stockport etc would also be beneficial - again a significant business and leisure flow but with inadequate services.

But, would these generate sufficient returns for an open access operator who wouldn't be able to rely on just pinching money from a franchised operator going into London?

I am not surprised about the GC Blackpool proposals. What does it achieve? Apart from a direct service from Blackpool to London it gives no new benefits to the Railway network or passengers as a whole.

 

[merlodlliw]

The door is still open, but that's it, I see Arriva was funding Alliance rail, so that's the 2nd time Arrivas involvement failed the open access paperwork test, first it was ATWs business plan for London that did not add up. DB will no doubt ask questions about Arrivas competence.


Bob

 

[tbtc]

Good sensible decision

Blackpool may get a London service in a few years, after electrification from the main WCML provider (not that many "southeners" have holidays on the Golden Mile), but an Open Access service to Blackpool now would be a waste

 

[jopsuk]

Very interesting to read the whole document- I suggest people do. Has quite a lot more detail on those Alliance proposals. Interestingly, one of their proposed services was to Blackpool. Seems to be an obsession.

Bob- as far as I know, no, Arriva had no involvement in this.

Interesting to Alliance Rail's spin on the desicion! Despite it being pretty clear that from the overall desicion the ORR are minded against OA on the WCML and the damage they'll have done themselves with an incomplete application.

 

[merlodlliw]

Very interesting to read the whole document- I suggest people do. Has quite a lot more detail on those Alliance proposals. Interestingly, one of their proposed services was to Blackpool. Seems to be an obsession.

Bob- as far as I know, no, Arriva had no involvement in this.

Interesting to Alliance Rail's spin on the desicion! Despite it being pretty clear that from the overall desicion the ORR are minded against OA on the WCML and the damage they'll have done themselves with an incomplete application.

This is on the web.

The other company is Alliance Rail Holdings who are partly funded by Arriva, who are owned by Deutsche Bahn. There plans are to run a four daily train services from London Euston, calling at Kings Langley Parkway, Nuneaton, Tamworth, Crewe, Winsford Parkway, Newton-le-Willows Parkway, Preston, Kirkham & Wesham and Blackpool North.

I was sure Arriva were involved.

Bob

 

[tirphil]

This is on the web.

The other company is Alliance Rail Holdings who are partly funded by Arriva, who are owned by Deutsche Bahn. There plans are to run a four daily train services from London Euston, calling at Kings Langley Parkway, Nuneaton, Tamworth, Crewe, Winsford Parkway, Newton-le-Willows Parkway, Preston, Kirkham & Wesham and Blackpool North.

I was sure Arriva were involved.

Bob

I think it is in everyones interests that Arriva just concentrate on what they have for the time being. Because if they don't that might find they end up with nothing at all.

 

[tbtc]

Interesting to Alliance Rail's spin on the desicion! Despite it being pretty clear that from the overall desicion the ORR are minded against OA on the WCML and the damage they'll have done themselves with an incomplete application.

They have a brass neck, that's for sure. Not only were they turned down, they had the quality of what they provided seriously questioned, and they still try to turn it round into sounding positive - they come from the Football Manager School Of Denial...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think it is in everyones interests that Arriva just concentrate on what they have for the time being. Because if they don't that might find they end up with nothing at all.

Are you suggesting that DB will end up with no franchises?

 

[tirphil]

They have a brass neck, that's for sure. Not only were they turned down, they had the quality of what they provided seriously questioned, and they still try to turn it round into sounding positive - they come from the Football Manager School Of Denial...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Are you suggesting that DB will end up with no franchises?

Arriva lost Northern due to in part to their industrial relations 'difficulties' if I recall correctly.

DB Schenker is a different situation in as much as it is not a franchise.

No idea regarding XC but there were rumours (A TPE driver alleged to me) about 18 months ago that the XC and TPE franchises were going to be combined in the next round of re-newals.

Who knows.

 

[gordonthemoron]

perhaps DB should sort out the ATW management? OTOH, DB have been having strikes in Germany too

 

[Masbroughlad]

◦refused Grand Central's application to run services from Euston to Blackpool, which, on the basis of the information provided, failed our not primarily abstractive test (the services as proposed would take business and revenue away from existing operators without adequate offsetting benefits). We will be discussing with Grand Central how it can take forward any revised application.
◦refused Alliance's application to operate services between Euston and Leeds/Bradford interchange/Blackpool and Carlisle. The application was not completed fully and did not provide sufficient information and data by the deadline for it to be considered. Alliance subsequently submitted a detailed submission in support of its application, but we were unable to consult on it for reasons of commercial confidentiality. We will be discussing with Alliance how it can take forward any revised application.

It doesn't read like either have been written off to me but have been asked to revise applications.

I can't understand why the ORR put the option to run OA services out there and then knock them all on the head!! Wastes everybody's time and lots of money!

I think OA should be given more chances of actually getting services running. Any innovative rail plans by OAOs or exisiting TOCS wanting to run on new routes, seem to be written off. So much for privatisation enabling competition on the rails!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

No idea regarding XC but there were rumours (A TPE driver alleged to me) about 18 months ago that the XC and TPE franchises were going to be combined in the next round of re-newals.

Who knows.

Always thought that would make sense!

 

[Failed Unit]

Slightly off topic, but I wonder if this precidence will kill of the Grand Central objective of stopping the Sunderland trains at Doncaster? Not saying it is a bad thing as it will give Sunderland and Hartlepool passengers better connections, but then when you think about it where to?

Sheffield & Midlands? - Can already change at your for XC {not sure how long you need to wait}
Hull? - Again quicker to change at York
Wakefield and Leeds - Change at York Leeds, would be surprised if Wakefield is much quicker}
Cleethorpes, Lincoln & Scunthorpe. Yes but I wonder how many people from those towns really want to go to Hartlepool, Sunderland etc.

Join / Split the Interchange trains? Very good idea!

The reason I specifically mention this is in this weeks Modern Railways, Grand Central are saying that they are upset that Eureka will lower thier share of ORCATs at York as East Coast are adding more services. Stopping at Doncaster will redress that balance, really?

Now East Coast and GC are friends maybe they won't object, but I wonder if HT will be so supportive and watch thier ORCATs share stop. If they stop at Doncaster they should be forced to stop at Retford as well to improve that towns service.

 

[Johnny Lewis]

.

Now East Coast and GC are friends maybe they won't object, .

Erm... not last time I looked!

 

[Zoe]

I can't understand why the ORR put the option to run OA services out there and then knock them all on the head!! Wastes everybody's time and lots of money

There are EU requirments for Open Access. That was the point of separating infrastructure and operations back in 1994.

 

[Masbroughlad]

There are EU requirments for Open Access. That was the point of separating infrastructure and operations back in 1994.

They haven't worked very well!

 

[ainsworth74]

Erm... not last time I looked!

Perhaps friends is too stronger word, but EC and GC are most certainly trying to work together on the ECML which is rather different to EC's predecessors who spent most of their time attempting to kill of GC.

 

[Zoe]

They haven't worked very well!

Well the point is that Open Access applications have to be considered. In this case it was decided that they would be taking revenue from a franchised operator and so the application was rejected.

 

[northwichcat]

Pretty sure LM to Preston was chucked out too.

It has been although extra paths have been approved for more Crewe-Trent Valley-Northampton-London services.

Apart from the above and extra Glasgow-London services all WCML proposals seem to have been rejected or not included. Manchester Airport to Derby and extending the Manchester-Stoke service to Birmingham aren't mentioned. Proposals for franchised Blackpool/Lancaster to London 221 operated services and 4tph between Manchester and London have been rejected.

 

[Masbroughlad]

Well the point is that Open Access applications have to be considered. In this case it was decided that they would be taking revenue from a franchised operator and so the application was rejected.

The fare allocation system doesn't support true competition then!

 

[cle]

This is on the web.

The other company is Alliance Rail Holdings who are partly funded by Arriva, who are owned by Deutsche Bahn. There plans are to run a four daily train services from London Euston, calling at Kings Langley Parkway, Nuneaton, Tamworth, Crewe, Winsford Parkway, Newton-le-Willows Parkway, Preston, Kirkham & Wesham and Blackpool North.

I was sure Arriva were involved.

Bob

Where are all these imaginary parkway stations?! Are they trying to make tiny villages and towns sound important?

 

[Zoe]

Where are all these imaginary parkway stations?

King's Langley has the potential to serve as a parkway station for London. An M25 parkway station is one thing we seem to be lacking at this time.

 

[northwichcat]

Where are all these imaginary parkway stations?! Are they trying to make tiny villages and towns sound important?

Winsford is the interesting one. The station is 1.5 miles from the town so it's car park is already well used, while nearby green land is at risk from subsidence due to salt mining in the area. Also Winsford has poorer road access to the A556 and M6 over Hartford.

 

[IanPooleTrains]

This is a big blow I believe for Grand Central but it doesn't look like it has been fully ruled out.

I don't know how they would have competed with Virgin for passengers other than taking passengers out of Euston but maybe the competition wasn't with Virgin, it was with London Midland instead because look at the list of stations that are on that list; Kings Langley, Nuneaton, Tamworth, Crewe, Winsford Parkway, all stations that LM call at on their way to Crewe so that they can get to Liverpool

So maybe it wasn't so much Virgin, maybe it was London Midland that shovelled on their proposals

 

[jopsuk]

It's not in the ORR's interest to say "go away and never darken our doors again", I think they'd got a statutory duty to be open to OA proposals; however the detail of dismissal does indicate that the applicants need to think very carefully about future applications. if you look through, there were objections to both Alliance and GC from not just Virgin; the freight operators (including DBS) were concerned by both.

it isn't just Alliance and GC that are knocked back; even the DfT have been turned down from all of what they were proposing.

 

[Zoe]

Is there any point in allowing an Open Access service if it just goes the way of Wrexham and Shropshire?

 

[Masbroughlad]

I wonder if Blackpool is part of the West Coast new franchise?

 

[merlodlliw]

This is a big blow I believe for Grand Central but it doesn't look like it has been fully ruled out.

I don't know how they would have competed with Virgin for passengers other than taking passengers out of Euston but maybe the competition wasn't with Virgin, it was with London Midland instead because look at the list of stations that are on that list; Kings Langley, Nuneaton, Tamworth, Crewe, Winsford Parkway, all stations that LM call at on their way to Crewe so that they can get to Liverpool

So maybe it wasn't so much Virgin, maybe it was London Midland that shovelled on their proposals

All stakeholders including NR & TOCs will have been consulted,the replies will go on the ORR website.

Bob