As much as there are valid points on either side, the 'wonky seats and dusty floors' argument has blown way out of proportion and really detracts from the main issue. As poor as it may be to have dirty rolling stock inside and out, if it were such that the GEML offered c2c levels of punctuality (putting aside any infrastructural reasons why that TOC is more punctual for a moment) and c2c did not, but the GEML had much dirtier trains, you'd see me using the GEML as often as possible. Even though it gives a bad first impression, sub-par upkeep of the rolling stock is only actually an issue when it affects the service by units failing due to mechanical/electrical/whatever defects.
I've been logging the services I've used since the start of the year and intend to compile them if ever I get home from work at a reasonable hour this month! That's nothing to do with train punctuality, I simply have a lot on. However, from what I can recall at present, I have had one 25 minute delay and one 15 minute delay since the start of 2015. The remainder are all mostly 5-6 minutes or less and furthermore, a fair proportion of my journeys are on time. As many as 90%? possibly not, but out of around 50 journeys into and out of London, the majority of which carried out on the GEML - some on the fast lines, some on the slow lines, only two have been substantially delayed, and most wouldn't have impacted any onward connections. The only real problem is if you are connecting with low frequency tube services and have a tight connection you routinely miss due to East Anglian trains very often running 3-5 minutes late. It's annoying and it shouldn't be necessary, but you can just leave home 10 minutes earlier. Major 30+ minute delays that cause severe disruption to my day are still pretty rare on the Liverpool Street line and always have been. Again, some good reasons for why, but what I neglected to mention in my comments during the inaugural meeting was that I find the punctuality of Thameslink considerably worse. Fortunately I tend only to use the line in the core section, but if I used that line for a daily commute for considerable distance, I'd be impressed with AGA's punctuality.
The routine small delays, occasional long delays, dirty rolling stock, ageing fleet, high fares and minimal investment all add up to a grim picture but individually they aren't huge issues. There's a lot that can be done to improve services in the region but tact is absolutely essential. Personally speaking I'm still not happy with the website design or content. I almost think it should be ditched entirely and rebuilt with straightforward info, rather than blog posts. Personal blogs from disgruntled commuters are fine and helpful data, but for the passenger voice group as a whole - I'd much prefer to see a cleaner, simpler site, devoid of Abellio-style branding, simply referencing issues as they are without opinions, or use of phrases like 'filth infested rust bucket' - we might all think it, but it's not language you'd use in a letter to an MP, which is effectively what this site is to be. There is a lot more to professionalism in the cause than just not swearing at TOC staff. I consider the website to be pretty fundamental to this idea if it's ever to take off, so I will draft up some ideas for the next meeting.
even if they're more worn than stock of similar-aged and older interiors. I don't mind the covers really, they're better than other stuff you can sometimes find on public transport 