TfGM Bus franchising

[Bletchleyite]

What would be wrong with for example an NBC company competing with a local municipal one?

The competition is the car.

 

[507020]

The competition is the car.

Exactly

 

[Robertj21a]

The deregulated system is cheap (as far as subsidies are concerned) but has a number of flaws which means it doesn't deliver very good public transport to a lot of people, but delivers well for car using taxpayers. The franchised system only has London (in this country) as an example, the profligacy of which has plenty of critics and costs a huge amount of subsidy, but delivers pretty good public transport.

This Government has at least given some proper attention and some funding to buses, and is piloting various schemes ranging from DRT to Manchester franchising. Hopefully somewhere more people will get pretty good public transport for an affordable amount of subsidy (more than the provinces but less than London). If Andy Burnham can deliver this and it acts as baseline for improvements across the country then it can only be good for public transport users? Rather than knocking the initiatives, how about cautiously supporting them until shown to be unsustainable, rather than merely scoffing and hoping they fail , somehow 'proving' the glorious success of the deregulated minimalist provision we have now.

Not sure where I am 'knocking the initiative', it was a statement of opinion. I hope he succeeds in improving bus services across the area, and that others can learn from his approach.
As I said, interesting to watch.

 

[daodao]

Not sure where I am 'knocking the initiative', it was a statement of opinion. I hope he succeeds in improving bus services across the area, and that others can learn from his approach.

The only way that bus services can be increased across most of the Greater Manchester conurbation is by a massive increase in subsidies paid for by marked increases in the council tax. TfGM already pour money down the drain by subsidising under-used infrequent (often roundabout) services, particularly in the evenings and Sundays. Compare the local town bus services in Altrincham (in Trafford) and Macclesfield (in East Cheshire). East Cheshire Council appears to have a more frugal and wiser approach to bus subsidies.

 

[Greybeard33]

More damning is that I lived in Stretford in the late 1990s. Here we are some 25 years later and you can still travel, 6 miles up the A56, and there is still not one bit of bus priority between Altrincham and Old Trafford.

A corridor that runs parallel to one of the most successful Metrolink lines is hardly a high priority for bus priority measures! I use the buses on the A56 from time to time, and have observed that few users travel more than two or three stops. Journey times are acceptable for such short distances.

Cycle lanes have been introduced on the A56, and are a more appropriate use of the limited road space than bus lanes.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The only way that bus services can be increased across most of the Greater Manchester conurbation is by a massive increase in subsidies paid for by marked increases in the council tax. TfGM already pour money down the drain by subsidising under-used infrequent (often roundabout) services, particularly in the evenings and Sundays. Compare the local town bus services in Altrincham (in Trafford) and Macclesfield (in East Cheshire). East Cheshire Council appears to have a more frugal and wiser approach to bus subsidies.

Burnham's vision of the future bus travel within Greater Manchester envisages vast sums to bring his aspiration to full fruition from outside sources.

I see two current matters that could thwart it. Firstly, He seems to feel that a Conservative government facing debt rescheduling will be looking to matters where finance can now be saved, will magically see a Burnham project as their number one priority.

Secondly, talk of excessive council tax increases, as mentioned above, will go down like the proverbial lead balloon with the Greater Manchester electorate faced with current worries over how to make ends meet and will be thinking of their heating utility bills as a main priority, certainly not Burnham's vision of unrealistic over-provision of bus travel.

 

[Goldfish62]

The only way that bus services can be increased across most of the Greater Manchester conurbation is by a massive increase in subsidies paid for by marked increases in the council tax. TfGM already pour money down the drain by subsidising under-used infrequent (often roundabout) services, particularly in the evenings and Sundays. Compare the local town bus services in Altrincham (in Trafford) and Macclesfield (in East Cheshire). East Cheshire Council appears to have a more frugal and wiser approach to bus subsidies.

So you don't think subsidising evening and Sunday services where necessary is a good thing?

 

[Goldfish62]

Unsurprisingly the court has rejected Rotala's appeal:

Home

Last year, the Mayor of Greater Manchester made a decision to implement a bus franchising scheme

www.greatermanchester-ca.gov.uk

Transport

Statement from the Mayor of Greater Manchester on the bus franchising Judicial Review Appeal judgmen​

1. Home
2. News
3. Statement from the Mayor of Greater Manchester on the bus franchising Judicial Review Appeal judgment

In March 2022, the High Court made a judgment that the Mayor of Greater Manchester’s decision to implement a bus franchising scheme across Greater Manchester was lawfully carried out; as were all other aspects of the franchising process.
This judgment was appealed by Rotala Plc and today, the Court of Appeal unanimously rejected the appeal by Rotala and upheld the original decision of the High Court in March.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Unsurprisingly the court has rejected Rotala's appeal:

Home

Last year, the Mayor of Greater Manchester made a decision to implement a bus franchising scheme

www.greatermanchester-ca.gov.uk

Not a surprise. Stagecoach could clearly see no way in which to appeal. Why Rotala thought they had grounds, I can't imagine.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Why have Stagecoach decided to withdraw quite a number of their commercial routes in the end-October period?

 

[Megafuss]

Why have Stagecoach decided to withdraw quite a number of their commercial routes in the end-October period?

BRG?

 

[Goldfish62]

BRG?

Yes, the same as elsewhere. Nothing to do with franchising.

 

[158756]

Yes, the same as elsewhere. Nothing to do with franchising.

Speculation though, could the coming of franchising potentially make routes in Greater Manchester more vulnerable to cuts right now?

If, as far as the operator is concerned, these routes have no future beyond the franchise start date anyway, there's no point trying to restore profitability if it didn't happen immediately, there's no risk of any competition moving in, it might not be worth replacing or refurbishing buses for the time there is left, etc.

On the subject of the actual cuts, for reasons largely beyond his control it seems inevitable that Andy Burnham will leave office with the bus system in a far worse state than when he arrived.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Speculation though, could the coming of franchising potentially make routes in Greater Manchester more vulnerable to cuts right now?

If, as far as the operator is concerned, these routes have no future beyond the franchise start date anyway, there's no point trying to restore profitability if it didn't happen immediately, there's no risk of any competition moving in, it might not be worth replacing or refurbishing buses for the time there is left, etc.

On the subject of the actual cuts, for reasons largely beyond his control it seems inevitable that Andy Burnham will leave office with the bus system in a far worse state than when he arrived.

I think that we both have been "reading between the lines".

 

[Goldfish62]

Speculation though, could the coming of franchising potentially make routes in Greater Manchester more vulnerable to cuts right now?

If, as far as the operator is concerned, these routes have no future beyond the franchise start date anyway, there's no point trying to restore profitability if it didn't happen immediately, there's no risk of any competition moving in, it might not be worth replacing or refurbishing buses for the time there is left, etc.

Quite possibly there may be a bit of that, although the imminent changes to registration notice periods in GM is going to make it harder for operators to eviscerate the network ahead of franchising.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Jul 2022 ==

On the subject of the actual cuts, for reasons largely beyond his control it seems inevitable that Andy Burnham will leave office with the bus system in a far worse state than when he arrived.

That could be said for just about anywhere in the country.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

That could be said for just about anywhere in the country.

Yes. but not many areas will be faced with a fleet of yellow-liveried buses....

 

[Leedsbusman]

Quite possibly there may be a bit of that, although the imminent changes to registration notice periods in GM is going to make it harder for operators to eviscerate the network ahead of franchising.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Jan 1970 ==


That could be said for just about anywhere in the country.

Out of interest what imminent change to notice periods? The only possible change under franchising is to move from 42+28 to a flat 112. That happened in March 2021.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Quite possibly there may be a bit of that, although the imminent changes to registration notice periods in GM is going to make it harder for operators to eviscerate the network ahead of franchising.

I doubt there's any form of scorched earth policy going on. As with the rest of the country, passenger figures are down, revenue is down, costs have massively increased and there's a shortage of staff for a number of reasons. Greater Manchester is no different in that regard.

 

[Goldfish62]

I doubt there's any form of scorched earth policy going on. As with the rest of the country, passenger figures are down, revenue is down, costs have massively increased and there's a shortage of staff for a number of reasons. Greater Manchester is no different in that regard.

I know that, but the extended registration period is being put in place specifically to prevent a scorched earth policy if an operator is unsuccessful in winning any work.

 

[daodao]

Certainly. We have quite a few where the developer pushes the 'countryside' location, green surroundings, no other housing in sight (until the next development) perhaps water features*. Road design with plenty of curves because they want to move away from straight line roads for the photographs (even if it means that residents have stupid shaped gardens) as well as for road safety, with plenty of cul-de-sacs making them bus-unfriendly.
These developments are, necessarily, built in stages, a few roads (or part roads) at a time, residents move in, no bus service so use the car(s), bike (developers push 'bike friendly'), get a lift (like kids to school); more residents move in, the originals have developed a non-bus life, so the newbies have to adapt, and so it continues. Once it becomes large enough, the development might get tagged on to the start or end of a school run. That's it!

Increasingly bus services will be dominated by the old and young (school kids). Even in the former case, some of these new 'retirement living' estates do all they can to keep you on site, restaurants, events and clubs that I bet you are encouraged to join in, special on-line shopping arrangements. To me it sounds like hell (and, as I'm expecting to go there in the afterlife, I'd rather not go in this) but for others it might be fine.

* - they can sell these for more if they can make it seem rural; gravel pits become lakes, ditches become streams, If the council object, the developers take it to the Planning Inspectorate, who rubber stamp it (usually) or to whoever is Levelling Up nowadays who does the same.

One good example of this is the Woodford aerodrome development, but given that this housing estate is sited in Greater Manchester, there is the additional issue of the TfGM bus franchising. There is no point in any commercial bus operator developing services to Woodford only for its assets (physical and intangible) to be expropriated by Burnham and his gang in the next couple of years.

I doubt there's any form of scorched earth policy going on. As with the rest of the country, passenger figures are down, revenue is down, costs have massively increased and there's a shortage of staff for a number of reasons. Greater Manchester is no different in that regard.

However, there is now no point in commercial bus companies maintaining marginal services in Greater Manchester, when they will lose most of their investments in the next 2-3 years. They may as well just keep the profitable services going to make some money while the hay shines before the sword of Damocles falls on them.

 

[Goldfish62]

One good example of this is the Woodford aerodrome development, but given that this housing estate is sited in Greater Manchester, there is the additional issue of the TfGM bus franchising. There is no point in any commercial bus operator developing services to Woodford only for its assets (physical and intangible) to be expropriated by Burnham and his gang in the next couple of years.

However, there is now no point in commercial bus companies maintaining marginal services in Greater Manchester, when they will lose most of their investments in the next 2-3 years. They may as well just keep the profitable services going to make some money while the hay shines before the sword of Damocles falls on them.

All very dramatically put!

 

[JetBlast]

Why have Stagecoach decided to withdraw quite a number of their commercial routes in the end-October period?

Could it be to put the resource into the commonwealth games services?

seems inevitable that Andy Burnham will leave office with the bus system in a far worse state than when he arrived.

I doubt it. Im not a fan of the guy but the service is awful. Something needed to be done.

 

[Goldfish62]

Out of interest what imminent change to notice periods? The only possible change under franchising is to move from 42+28 to a flat 112. That happened in March 2021.

Sorry, I was confused. Yes, of course it's happened already.

 

[RT4038]

Could it be to put the resource into the commonwealth games services?

As the Commonwealth Games are now, late July/early August, it would be a bit odd to withdraw services at the end of October to resource them retrospectively?

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I know that, but the extended registration period is being put in place specifically to prevent a scorched earth policy if an operator is unsuccessful in winning any work.

I'm just a bit puzzled as to why they think such a scorched earth policy would be undertaken by an operator.

If said services are profitable, then you are denying yourself a profit and doubtless be consigning yourself to a future out of the game. Or is this a means for TfGM to ensure that operators would prop up loss-making services for longer... I think I've answered my own question.

 

[Goldfish62]

I'm just a bit puzzled as to why they think such a scorched earth policy would be undertaken by an operator.

It's sensible to mitigate the risk, even if no operator would think of doing such a thing. And I don't necessarily share your belief that in some cases they wouldn't want to.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Jul 2022 ==

As the Commonwealth Games are now, late July/early August, it would be a bit odd to withdraw services at the end of October to resource them retrospectively?

It's because of removal of Bus Recovery Grant (2). It's happening all over the country. Why should GM be immune?

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

It's sensible to mitigate the risk, even if no operator would think of doing such a thing. And I don't necessarily share your belief that in some cases they wouldn't want to.

What level of risk is there really? Deny yourself profits? Sticking it to the man and effectively denying yourself future opportunities?

I don't see operators doing that, even Rotala.

 

[Goldfish62]

What level of risk is there really? Deny yourself profits? Sticking it to the man and effectively denying yourself future opportunities?

I don't see operators doing that, even Rotala.

Given Rotala's attitude right from the start I wouldn't put anything past them.

The depot compulsory purchase option is I think a dead duck. Everything I know of so far is based on new TfGM-owned sites.

Say if X large operator won nothing in the round currently out to tender, but then got a time-limited excellent offer for their premises for which it was worth dumping their whole operation early.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Given Rotala's attitude right from the start I wouldn't put anything past them.

The depot compulsory purchase option is I think a dead duck. Everything I know of so far is based on new TfGM-owned sites.

Say if X large operator won nothing in the round currently out to tender, but then got a time-limited excellent offer for their premises for which it was worth dumping their whole operation early.

Rotala are a commercial organisation and judge everything by a £ sign. I'd be shocked.

As for a time limited property offer... We'll give you millions but you've got to be out in 8 weeks? Commercial property sales are always more protracted than that.

 

[Goldfish62]

Rotala are a commercial organisation and judge everything by a £ sign. I'd be shocked.

As for a time limited property offer... We'll give you millions but you've got to be out in 8 weeks? Commercial property sales are always more protracted than that.

Oh well, whatever. That's the stated reason for the extended notice period and it seems a sensible mitigation to me.