Great British Railways: Branding options?

[JLH4AC]

It also has lead to the highest frequncies and ridership in history.
Most people who can remember British Rail remember only the last 20 years of it. They imagine pacers and stuffy mark 2s

I have already addressed the ridership claim. Improvements to frequencies are mostly down to infrastructure improvements by Network Rail, and rolling stock replacements that in regard to regional and commuter fleets are effective the same was happening under BR until the 1990s recession led to the orders being cancelled, just a lot less standardised, and much more costly due to the procurement being done via leasing agreements.

Most people who can remember British Rail of that era will also imagine the HSTs/Mark 3s, the 225s, Super Sprinters, and the Networkers.

peak public optimism in my opinon felt around the time HS1 was just completed and Virgin et al was bringing in tons of shiny new trains and frequncies where getting better every year.

That peak public optimism did not last long, various early TOCs providing subpar service and conducting subpar rolling stock procurement soured that optimism.

Non enthusiasts dont really understand the benefits of boring stuff like electrifcation, they did understand British rail overseeing a rapid decline in track KM and their local lines closing.

The spark effect is a documented phenomenon where electrification increases ridership and general passenger satisfaction. While British Rail did oversee a rapid decline in track mileage, it also maintained a decent level of service on many nonprofitable yet socially necessary local lines which was reduced to the bare minimum during or just after the privatisation of British Rail.

 

[Ghostbus]

I just booked some tickets for a relative on Lumo. I had quite a bit of flexibility on schedule, and while cost is always important, It wasn't the most important factor for this journey. I was surprised how much the brand influenced me. Lumo positively, LNER negatively. Especially the strikes.

They are a nervous traveller who is easily confused. A big blue train with friendly staff fits the bill. These no frills slurs you hear around here certainly don't seem justified. I was able to book a table seat in the quiet coach. She doesn't even want to travel with more than a single piece of hand luggage.

She has been told to take only these exact trains, or face a month in Rikers. Big blue adds value yet again. An eyebrow was raised at the mention of "Lumo". But I'm quite sure she also has no idea what "LNER" stands for either. She's been told of both before, but has presumably forgotten. She knows what the Network Rail symbol means. And the Tube roundel for her transfer.

The historical brands and general nostalgia definitely needs to go. Anything remotely tainted by strikes, needs to go.

GBR brands need to be customer focused, complemented by the very long standing symbols for heavy rail and London crap.

 

[Meerkat]

The historical brands and general nostalgia definitely needs to go.

Why? Nostalgia has commercial value, long lasting and famous brands have commercial value.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why? Nostalgia has commercial value, long lasting and famous brands have commercial value.

I think some nostalgia works, I particularly like GWR's branding and promotional approach even if it's not technically historically correct. But I don't think some sort of nostalgia back to the frankly rubbish times of the 1970s-1990s blue and grey railway is helpful at all - this is one reason I so strongly dislike the RA2 white on black branding - it just reminds me of the railway being really quite rubbish, albeit a lot cheaper than now.

By contrast, I really like the TfW station branding package - it's modern, uses an attractive font rather than the clumsy one RA2 is, and the red stripe adds colour without overusing the BR symbol to the extent that FirstGroup irritatingly used to overuse the F-in-circle.

 

[HSTEd]

If we were going to take branding cues from a continental railway, I would certainly prefer SBB.

But I doubt we can just wholesale copy the white on blue signage and white/red trains!

I do really like the white on blue signage though.
How about white on dark blue for everything, including the trains (white doors on all over dark blue)

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Oct 2024 ==

this is one reason I so strongly dislike the RA2 white on black branding - it just reminds me of the railway being really quite rubbish, albeit a lot cheaper than now.

Isn't it black on white or am I misunderstanding?

 

[Mgameing123]

I'm not sure such a distinction is really sensible in the modern UK railway system.

As speeds have increased, journey times have reduced and I think there are only a few "intercity" services (in the traditional sense) left.

Don’t try convince me that you can’t see the difference between Avanti and LNWR, GN and LNER, GWR stoppers and GWR IET services, Greater Anglia Intercity and GA regional.

 

[HSTEd]

Don’t try convince me that you can’t see the difference between Avanti and LNWR, GN and LNER, GWR stoppers and GWR IET services, Greater Anglia Intercity and GA regional.

From the perspective of a passenger, they are largely the same.
You get on your train and sit in an airline seat and wait to get your destination, you might see a crew member for a ticket check, or you might not.

There is precious little for a typical passenger on an "intercity" train that would be out of place elsewhere.
You could make an argument for "London Overground-alike" and "non London Overground-alike" services, but that's about it.

Maybe in first class something might be different, but a large majority of the customer base does not travel first class, and even there the differences are dissolving over time.
Catering is becoming extinct, even stopping patterns are blurring together in the Transpennine-isation of the railway.

 

[Mgameing123]

From the perspective of a passenger, they are largely the same.
You get on your train and sit in an airline seat and wait to get your destination, you might see a crew member for a ticket check, or you might not.

There is precious little for a typical passenger on an "intercity" train that would be out of place elsewhere.
You could make an argument for "London Overground-alike" and "non London Overground-alike" services, but that's about it.

Maybe in first class something might be different, but a large majority of the customer base does not travel first class, and even there the differences are dissolving over time.
Catering is becoming extinct, even stopping patterns are blurring together in the Transpennine-isation of the railway.

Not really. One is seen as luxorious, fast but unreliable, one is seen as cheap, slow but reliable.

 

[HSTEd]

Not really. One is seen as luxorious, fast but unreliable, one is seen as cheap, slow but reliable.

I'm not sure standard class accomodation on a Pendolino or IEP really has much difference to standard class accomodation on say a Class 185 or a generic electrostar.
Indeed, I would suggest the Pendolino standard class accomodation is probably worse than many "non intercity" types!

The convergence of technologies has resulted in multiple units with very similar interiors.
That convergence has also eliminated a large part of the historical performance variation across the train fleet. It would now be quite feasible to operate the (classic) railway with only a handful of classes should we so chose.
Even with the high speed system, we can probably make the argument for only five train types:

1. High Speed unit
2. 110mph EMU
3. 110mph multimode
4. Urban EMU
5. Urban multimode

Arguably 2/4 and 3/5 could be made to differ only in interior and be mechanically identical. Some modern trains like the projected TGV-M supposedly allow for total replacement of the interior in a matter of a couple of days in any case.

If the only thing that sets an intercity train apart is a stopping pattern that can be changed at will, I see little justification for a separate branding. Doing so would only hurt fleet flexibility by impairing redistribution of resources to meet operational requirements.

 

[Meerkat]

I think some nostalgia works, I particularly like GWR's branding and promotional approach even if it's not technically historically correct. But I don't think some sort of nostalgia back to the frankly rubbish times of the 1970s-1990s blue and grey railway is helpful at all - this is one reason I so strongly dislike the RA2 white on black branding - it just reminds me of the railway being really quite rubbish, albeit a lot cheaper than now.

I couldn’t agree with you more!

I do really like the white on blue signage though.

We have/had those in SWT/SWR land, and they look/looked brilliant. Which is why I am appalled that they are spending money to replace them with austerity signage. The ludicrous thing is that the white on blue is far far more effective. The projects research saying borderless black on white is easier to see was clearly wrong, due to a terrible method (creating a blurred background to compare them against)

PS the Southern white on green were almost as effective, and almost as classy too.

 

[vuzzeho]

I'm not sure standard class accomodation on a Pendolino or IEP really has much difference to standard class accomodation on say a Class 185 or a generic electrostar.
Indeed, I would suggest the Pendolino standard class accomodation is probably worse than many "non intercity" types!

The convergence of technologies has resulted in multiple units with very similar interiors.
That convergence has also eliminated a large part of the historical performance variation across the train fleet. It would now be quite feasible to operate the (classic) railway with only a handful of classes should we so chose.
Even with the high speed system, we can probably make the argument for only five train types:

1. High Speed unit
2. 110mph EMU
3. 110mph multimode
4. Urban EMU
5. Urban multimode

Arguably 2/4 and 3/5 could be made to differ only in interior and be mechanically identical. Some modern trains like the projected TGV-M supposedly allow for total replacement of the interior in a matter of a couple of days in any case.

If the only thing that sets an intercity train apart is a stopping pattern that can be changed at will, I see little justification for a separate branding. Doing so would only hurt fleet flexibility by impairing redistribution of resources to meet operational requirements.

I get what you mean, but to be honest, I doubt the general public will have given it this much thought. 'Fast pointy long distance train with a cafe' vs 'slow commuter flat-fronted train' is usually most of the distinction. Even when there's only a 15mph difference. Of course, branding is also everything. Also, if certain trains are branded with an 'Intercity' branding, it could lead to them being expected to provide a higher level of service, even if that is only seen through the soft product.

 

[HSTEd]

I get what you mean, but to be honest, I doubt the general public will have given it this much thought. 'Fast pointy long distance train with a cafe' vs 'slow commuter flat-fronted train' is usually most of the distinction. Even when there's only a 15mph difference. Of course, branding is also everything. Also, if certain trains are branded with an 'Intercity' branding, it could lead to them being expected to provide a higher level of service, even if that is only seen through the soft product.

Is using on train catering really something that the general public does these days?
Train catering is not as pervasive as it once was, and in my, admittedly anecdotal, experience is more focused on first class than it used to be.

I'm not sure creating an expectation of a higher service standard is necessarily a good thing - it will only be a positive if the railway is able to meet that expectation at all times.

 

[vuzzeho]

Is using on train catering really something that the general public does these days?
Train catering is not as pervasive as it once was, and in my, admittedly anecdotal, experience is more focused on first class than it used to be.

I'm not sure creating an expectation of a higher service standard is necessarily a good thing - it will only be a positive if the railway is able to meet that expectation at all times.

Maybe. I'm not an industry insider so I don't really know for sure.

I think we have to start holding the 'new railway' to that expectation. Maybe not at first, but it needs to happen imo

 

[vuzzeho]

Coming back to this - I was looking on the Wikipedia article for c2c and I noticed that there was a new page made and linked to - 'c2c (2025)'. Same goes for SWR and GA. Is there any reason to believe they'll keep the names other than 'it's what has been done for Northern, SE, and TPE' (which were very different situations)?

c2c - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Greater Anglia - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

South Western Railway - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

From the talk page:

Based on what has happened when previous UK train operating companies have been nationalised, when this operator goes live this article will become the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. It has previously been established that the incumbent operator is the primary topic, e.g. when Northern Trains, ScotRail, Southeastern, TransPennine Express and Transport for Wales Rail were nationalised, with the new operator becoming the primary topic with the outgoing operator's article moved.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Coming back to this - I was looking on the Wikipedia article for c2c and I noticed that there was a new page made and linked to - 'c2c (2025)'. Same goes for SWR and GA. Is there any reason to believe they'll keep the names other than 'it's what has been done for Northern, SE, and TPE' (which were very different situations)?

c2c - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Greater Anglia - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

South Western Railway - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

From the talk page:

It would be very odd for a completely government owned operation, and not just one of last resort, to be called something as commercial and corporately meaningless as “c2c”

 

[LLivery]

Of course LNER wasn't LNER until (re)nationalisation, it could've just gone back to East Coast, so it's not a great assumption to make.

 

[Meerkat]

It would be very odd for a completely government owned operation, and not just one of last resort, to be called something as commercial and corporately meaningless as “c2c”

Why odd, and why do you think c2c is commercially and corporately meaningless?

 

[Sun Chariot]

Why odd, and why do you think c2c is commercially and corporately meaningless?

Coast to Capital. I can see why it would make less sense for routes not touching either or both.

 

[ScottGallagher]

Coast to Capital. I can see why it would make less sense for routes not touching either or both.

Wasn't it's original translation to be 'commitment to customers' I remember the backlash it got at the time in the rail magazines as meaningless drivel closely followed by 'one' a few years later.

 

[Sun Chariot]

Wasn't it's original translation to be 'commitment to customers' I remember the backlash it got at the time in the rail magazines as meaningless drivel closely followed by 'one' a few years later.

The c2c brand seemed to have multiple monikers and, yes, "Commitment to Customers" was utter gobbledegook.
Bring back LT&S. Simples!

 

[Meerkat]

The c2c brand seemed to have multiple monikers and, yes, "Commitment to Customers" was utter gobbledegook.
Bring back LT&S. Simples!

London, Thurrock, and Southend!

 

[Sad Sprinter]

It would be very odd for a completely government owned operation, and not just one of last resort, to be called something as commercial and corporately meaningless as “c2c”

Agreed.

 

[Mgameing123]

Why odd, and why do you think c2c is commercially and corporately meaningless?

I think it’s more simple with C2C and Greater Anglia being different brands. They run on seperate routes from separate London terminals (except the Weekend Liverpool Street service) so it’s much easier to keep them separate.

 

[Stephen42]

It would be very odd for a completely government owned operation, and not just one of last resort, to be called something as commercial and corporately meaningless as “c2c”

The government owned company Dft Operator Limited already controls a dormant C2C Railway Limited company.

There's nothing preventing a rebrand from that though. Arguments against would be rebranding costs money and opponents of nationalisation will include rebranding as money wasted on nationalisation. Marketing folks would probably push for rebranding all operations together as a combined campaign rather than piecemeal for larger impact. If one operator was going to be rebranded West Coast might be the one to distance from Avanti West Coast which is currently used in a lot of passenger facing info.

 

[Simon75]

The problem with the names LNER and LNWR is they sound similar and can confuse people (I rang the the wrong company up once myself)
Maybe the plan is stick with the current names, then gradually create a new name eg Great British Rail and having 2 2 sub brands (excluding PTE areas) ie Regional = for 'local' services eg Manchester to Stoke-on-Trent, then all the long distance as Intercity (which people still refer long distance)

 

[Meerkat]

Marketing folks would probably push for rebranding all operations together as a combined campaign rather than piecemeal for larger impact.

Only if their brief was to serve the political ideology. Otherwise they would probably argue to keep the brands separate.

 

[43096]

Only if their brief was to serve the political ideology. Otherwise they would probably argue to keep the brands separate.

Why would they keep separate brands? There is going to be a requirement to show that nationalisation has happened - what better way than a common brand that sweeps away all the old privatisation identities.

 

[Class15]

The problem with the names LNER and LNWR is they sound similar and can confuse people (I rang the the wrong company up once myself)

Would it be feasible to revert LNWR to the old London Midland, or incorporate it into West Midlands, without separate branding?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Would it be feasible to revert LNWR to the old London Midland, or incorporate it into West Midlands, without separate branding?

I'd more change LNER into INTERCITY.

 

[Meerkat]

Why would they keep separate brands? There is going to be a requirement to show that nationalisation has happened - what better way than a common brand that sweeps away all the old privatisation identities.

Because they target different markets, have local attachments, and won’t want all routes damaged by one of them - ie continuous headlines about GBR being late/cancelled etc when it’s just Northern for example.
Its not like nationalised railways have a great reputation (except amongst the political ideologues and the strangely nostalgic), and for similar but opposite political reasons GBR will get hammered in the media and social media.