TfGM Bus franchising

[TheSmiths82]

While I support the plans as a Manchester resident I do have some concerns. The current situation could not be allowed to continue, with cuts everywhere but the highly profitable trunk routes. The fares got so high in areas with no competition that it is cheaper, faster, nicer for to get the tram to the city centre. In fact the bus just isn't an option.

I do sometimes have to get the bus to Stockport though if I can't drive (usually because Alcohol is involved ) so I am a regular bus user. My main concern is what what is to stop companies such as Diamond to hold TGFM to ransom and say they cannot afford to keep running the franchise? I assume there is some mechanism in place to stop this happening? Has this ever happened in London which has a similar system?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

While I support the plans as a Manchester resident I do have some concerns. The current situation could not be allowed to continue, with cuts everywhere but the highly profitable trunk routes. The fares got so high in areas with no competition that it is cheaper, faster, nicer for to get the tram to the city centre. In fact the bus just isn't an option.

There are many areas of Manchester with homes miles away from the tram services.

 

[mangad]

I do sometimes have to get the bus to Stockport though if I can't drive (usually because Alcohol is involved ) so I am a regular bus user. My main concern is what what is to stop companies such as Diamond to hold TGFM to Ransome and say they cannot afford to keep running the franchise? I assume there is some mechanism in place to stop this happening? Has this ever happened in London which has a similar system?

TfL runs on a system like the TfGM small franchises where individual services (or groups of services) are contracted out, and operators own their own depots. That means if an operator is in trouble, the impact is relatively less. Some operators have closed down over the years but often it's happened after contracts have been lost.

There were two bigger closedowns Harris Bus went into administration in 1999 - services were taken over by East Thames Buses, which was owned by TfL. Centra shut down its London services in 2006, resulting in its remaining services being hastily distributed between other operators.

But most of TfL's operators are big groups - I think Sulivan Buses are only independents running a TfL service. And most of the big companies avoid closures if they can. When RATP shut down Quality Line, they'd already transferred services to their other subsidiaries and the depot was only closed when their final contracts had expired.

So far all of TfGM's franchises are big groups (with one exception - Vision have some school bus franchises). And whilst these companies can fail, or could walk away (like Stagecoach and National Express both abandoning the East Coast rail franchise) there's a huge reputational risk in them doing that. Stagecoach and National Express used to be big names in rail. Now they have nothing in the UK.

I'm sure any company could try to push their luck and bid low and try and get extra cash later. But somehow I doubt they'd have a long term future in Greater Manchester's bus scene if they tried that.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

So far all of TfGM's franchises are big groups (with one exception - Vision have some school bus franchises). And whilst these companies can fail, or could walk away (like Stagecoach and National Express both abandoning the East Coast rail franchise) there's a huge reputational risk in them doing that. Stagecoach and National Express used to be big names in rail. Now they have nothing in the UK.

I'm sure any company could try to push their luck and bid low and try and get extra cash later. But somehow I doubt they'd have a long term future in Greater Manchester's bus scene if they tried that.

Also, be aware that public sector procurement is now such that they have mechanisms in there to preclude people just walking away. So even if you have, for instance, a new subsidiary specifically formed for the purpose (e.g. Abellio Manchester), they would expect some sort of Parental Company Guarantee (Abellio NV) or a Performance Bond (funds held in Escrow) to cover such eventualities.

 

[Goldfish62]

Also, be aware that public sector procurement is now such that they have mechanisms in there to preclude people just walking away. So even if you have, for instance, a new subsidiary specifically formed for the purpose (e.g. Abellio Manchester), they would expect some sort of Parental Company Guarantee (Abellio NV) or a Performance Bond (funds held in Escrow) to cover such eventualities.

Yes, and I understand at least two groups didn't bid due to the terms of the parent company guarantee.

The contracts will also undoubtedly have provision for early termination apart from default. In TfL's case this is 10 months notice by the operator, most recently exercised for route C3.

 

[TheSmiths82]

There are many areas of Manchester with homes miles away from the tram services.

Yep I get that, I just meant for me personally there is zero advantage of getting the bus compared with the tram, unless there are issues with the Metrolink but then it is about as quick to walk sometimes.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Jul 2023 ==

Thanks to the people that replied, that makes me feel a bit better about it . I really want this to succeed because we need to get people on the buses because they choose to, rather than because they have no choice. I don't think anything will change over night though.

 

[johncrossley]

Yep I get that, I just meant for me personally there is zero advantage of getting the bus compared with the tram, unless there are issues with the Metrolink but then it is about as quick to walk sometimes.

They shouldn't be in competition in any case. Trams and buses are supposed to be part of a unified network. Based on what was published the other day, there is likely to be some consolidation where there is an opportunity for buses to feed into the trams better than they do at the moment. So there are likely to be slightly fewer routes to the city centre than there are today.

 

[TheSmiths82]

They shouldn't in competition in any case. Trams and buses are supposed to be part of a unified network. Based on what was published the other day, there is likely to be some consolidation where there is an opportunity for buses to feed into the trams better than they do at the moment. So there are likely to be slightly fewer routes to the city centre than there are today.

That would make sense; a classic example of this would be Stockport to Parrs wood then onto Chorlton. At the moment I would have to buy two separate tickets whereas something like a £5 return ticket to Parrs Wood then the Metrolink would be ideal for this bus service. It would need to be more regular too, though. They did try this many years ago at Stretford Metrolink stop that had a shuttle bus to the Trafford Centre, although it wasn't that popular. I think it was a naff compromise that PEEL agreed to fund instead of funding a Metrolink line.

 

[johncrossley]

They did try this many years ago at Stretford Metrolink stop that had a shuttle bus to the Trafford Centre, although it wasn't that popular.

This sort of thing where they lay on a dedicated shuttle without changing other routes is highly unlikely as it costs money rather than saves money. The direction of travel in that TfGM document seems to point towards changing bus routes where it can lead to a reduction in bus operating costs whilst improving connectivity at the same time. Not just frequency cuts on parallel routes, which have already occurred to a large extent. In short, doing what they would have done had the tram lines opened if they were in charge of the bus routes back then.

 

[daodao]

That would make sense; a classic example of this would be Stockport to Parrs wood then onto Chorlton. At the moment I would have to buy two separate tickets whereas something like a £5 return ticket to Parrs Wood then the Metrolink would be ideal for this bus service.

Curtailing the through bus service from Stockport to Chorlton-cum-Hardy at Parrs Wood and by implication withdrawing the principal bus service along most of Barlow Moor Road would be a retrograde step. It is a historic long-established route (formerly number 16, run jointly by Manchester and Stockport Corporations); there have been enough withdrawals of former major bus routes in large swathes of Greater Manchester, including Chorlton-cum-Hardy, and proposals to curtail/scrap even more routes because there is a so-called "parallel" tram service will not encourage public transport use.

 

[johncrossley]

Curtailing the through bus service from Stockport to Chorlton-cum-Hardy at Parrs Wood and by implication withdrawing the principal bus service along most of Barlow Moor Road would be a retrograde step. It is a historic long-established route (formerly number 16, run jointly by Manchester and Stockport Corporations); there have been enough withdrawals of former major bus routes in large swathes of Greater Manchester, including Chorlton-cum-Hardy, and proposals to curtail/scrap even more routes because there is a so-called "parallel" tram service will not encourage public transport use.

I doubt that will happen because there is too much distance between Barlow Moor Road and the tram line other than where they meet in Didsbury. However the ability to change from a bus onto the tram without paying extra compared to a direct tram ride is probably something that is being considered.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Would an Altrincham to Wigan or Leigh bus service be a viable proposition, as it would connect two of the more westerly areas of Greater Manchester?

 

[158756]

This sort of thing where they lay on a dedicated shuttle without changing other routes is highly unlikely as it costs money rather than saves money. The direction of travel in that TfGM document seems to point towards changing bus routes where it can lead to a reduction in bus operating costs whilst improving connectivity at the same time. Not just frequency cuts on parallel routes, which have already occurred to a large extent. In short, doing what they would have done had the tram lines opened if they were in charge of the bus routes back then.

In the Stretford case there are already various buses to the Trafford Centre, a dedicated shuttle makes no sense, better ticketing integration is the big thing there.

I wonder how far they'll go with the changes. Still using the Stretford example and going with the desire for shorter, simpler more frequent routes integrated with the trams, if you go all the way with it you could just have one route running Stratford-Trafford Centre only and one route Stretford to the University (NOT the city centre) running every 10-15 minutes, and then Urmston, Flixton, Partington and all that area round there could be served by shuttles to the Metrolink at either Stretford or the Trafford Centre. I doubt they go quite that far because a lot of passengers would be very unhappy with that, but it sounds like they want to go further than just getting rid of the 263.

 

[TheSmiths82]

I doubt that will happen because there is too much distance between Barlow Moor Road and the tram line other than where they meet in Didsbury. However the ability to change from a bus onto the tram without paying extra compared to a direct tram ride is probably something that is being considered.

This is kind of what I meant, I didn't mean scrap existing services but brand them make them integrate with the tram. I wouldn't want them to scrap the 23 etc. Sometimes though I have got off at Parrs Wood to get the tram even though the bus I am on goes to my destination. I just cannot be bothered sitting on the 23 for another 40 minutes (in rush hour) when the tram takes 15 minutes. Most people wouldn't want the hassle of though and I have only done it if the traffic is really bad.

 

[Leedsbusman]

The section of a cross boundary route outside GM. What else? Given that TfGM have correctly highlighted the importance of cross boundary routes they'll want sufficient time to assess any knock-on impact to the section within GM.

Like I say for cross boundary operations a permit is required and must be requested at 98 days before it starts. It will be issued within 28 days at which point the bit outside GM starts its 70 days process.

No idea where 30 days v 28 days comes from.

 

[Goldfish62]

Like I say for cross boundary operations a permit is required and must be requested at 98 days before it starts. It will be issued within 28 days at which point the bit outside GM starts its 70 days process.

No idea where 30 days v 28 days comes from.

But there may be instances where the section of route outside GM is changed, while the section covered by a TfGM permit remains unchanged.

 

[Djb1]

Would an Altrincham to Wigan or Leigh bus service be a viable proposition, as it would connect two of the more westerly areas of Greater Manchester?

I think the ship canal is a massive barrier to this - assuming no motorway use, services would run via warrington or trafford centre, making it a lengthy run.

In the theoretical world, reopening the train line timperley, glazebrook, wigan would solve this……

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I think the ship canal is a massive barrier to this - assuming no motorway use, services would run via warrington or trafford centre, making it a lengthy run.

In the theoretical world, reopening the train line timperley, glazebrook, wigan would solve this……

Oh, I am well aware of the condition of the rail bridge over the Manchester Ship Canal of 1894 vintage, which is why I specified a bus service. Would buses be able to use the (toll ?) bridge in the Warburton area?

 

[Steve440]

On page 18 of the document, a graph is reproduced which shows a drop of about 200 million passengers in the 10 years between 1975 and 1985, i.e. before deregulation, and a drop of about 150 million passengers in the 33 years after deregulation. So with that in mind was deregulation such a failure? It's only since the pandemic that bus services have really struggled and required serious bailouts but then so have other industries.

 

[johncrossley]

On page 18 of the document, a graph is reproduced which shows a drop of about 200 million passengers in the 10 years between 1975 and 1985, i.e. before deregulation, and a drop of about 150 million passengers in the 33 years after deregulation. So with that in mind was deregulation such a failure? It's only since the pandemic that bus services have really struggled and required serious bailouts but then so have other industries.

Clearly car ownership grew dramatically before 1985 severely reducing the captive market for public transport. That happened in all developed countries. After that, the growth in car ownership slowed down, as many households already had a car by then. Bus usage in GM had stabilised in the early to mid 80s but fell dramatically again in the late 80s following deregulation. That fall didn't happen in London.

 

[Djb1]

Oh, I am well aware of the condition of the rail bridge over the Manchester Ship Canal of 1894 vintage, which is why I specified a bus service. Would buses be able to use the (toll ?) bridge in the Warburton area?

No. It’s got a 3 (or 3.5) tonne limit.

 

[Leedsbusman]

But there may be instances where the section of route outside GM is changed, while the section covered by a TfGM permit remains unchanged.

Of course but as that has no relevance to GM the usual 70 days applies.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Jul 2023 ==

On page 18 of the document, a graph is reproduced which shows a drop of about 200 million passengers in the 10 years between 1975 and 1985, i.e. before deregulation, and a drop of about 150 million passengers in the 33 years after deregulation. So with that in mind was deregulation such a failure? It's only since the pandemic that bus services have really struggled and required serious bailouts but then so have other industries.

And Metrolink opened as well which will have abstracted from buses. If you add bus and tram together the decline is much less. Add local rail in too and it’s a far different picture!

 

[johncrossley]

And Metrolink opened as well which will have abstracted from buses. If you add bus and tram together the decline is much less. Add local rail in too and it’s a far different picture!

Metrolink didn't open until 1992. Much if not most of the damage was done by then.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Metrolink didn't open until 1992. Much if not most of the damage was done by then.

Most of the damage was done pre-deregulation, as GMPTE's own documents show.





Even at that reduced level, Metrolink has been a major abstraction to bus services, hence the major reductions on services from Oldham to Manchester, or along Washway Road. So as you can see, the steps down in bus patronage (with the exception of the economic downturn in 2008/9 that impacted all public transport) correlate with Metrolink increases with their phases.



From GMCA's Bus Franchising in Greater Manchester Assessment September 2019

 

[domcoop7]

Of course but as that has no relevance to GM the usual 70 days applies.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Jul 2023 ==



And Metrolink opened as well which will have abstracted from buses. If you add bus and tram together the decline is much less. Add local rail in too and it’s a far different picture!

Not only that but let's not forget this is Greater Manchester we are talking about, not London. When I grew up in Salford in the 80s, I'd barely been in a car, let alone had one! That wasn't unusual amongst people in my demographic (at school, etc.) So obviously bus use was higher back then, it would be the only way you could get around other than taxis or heavy rail.

It's an entirely different world now, where not having access to a car is much rarer. Nothing to do with deregulation or otherwise.

To back that up, it's also worth remembering that apart from some bus renumbering and the first skirmishes in the bus wars, Greater Manchester Transport simply changed to GM Buses and carried on pretty much as before. The real effects of deregulation didn't kick in until the early to mid 1990s, but as you can see from the chart on @TheGrandWazoo 's post, there's nothing detectable in the figures at that point in time.

So what about London? Well London shows the same decline in buses which tracks car use until 1982 and then rises sharply from the mid to late 1990s onwards. My guess is that the reason for this is obvious. Car use in London is an entirely different proposition to car use in Greater Manchester. On a good day I can drive the 25 miles from my house in Greater Manchester to the City Centre in about 45 minutes; on a very bad day it's about 1 hour 15 and the average is in between. A few weeks ago I had to drive from Twickenham to Crystal Palace - at gone midnight - and it still took over an hour to do the 15 mile journey! Google maps suggests that journey can take between 50 minutes and 2 hours depending on traffic! Add in your congestion charges, ULEZ zones, bus lane cameras and in fact cameras literally every few hundred meters trying to fine you for something or other and it's hardly surprising that this urban area - which has grown in population from 6.3 million in 1991 to circa 9 million today (not that anybody really knows the actual figure) - has had increasing bus use.

So it's apples and oranges to try to compare London bus use to anywhere else.

 

[GusB]

Although the current line of discussion is interesting, it's not really appropriate for this thread. Could I please ask everyone to continue discussing the current state of affairs, rather than delving into the historical situation in Manchester?

I suggest that anyone who wishes to continue along these lines should start a new thread. Remember that you can use the quote function, start a new thread and then "insert quote" there.

 

[daodao]

I wonder how far they'll go with the changes. Still using the Stretford example and going with the desire for shorter, simpler more frequent routes integrated with the trams, if you go all the way with it you could just have one route running Stratford-Trafford Centre only and one route Stretford to the University (NOT the city centre) running every 10-15 minutes, and then Urmston, Flixton, Partington and all that area round there could be served by shuttles to the Metrolink at either Stretford or the Trafford Centre. I doubt they go quite that far because a lot of passengers would be very unhappy with that, but it sounds like they want to go further than just getting rid of the 263.

The whole point of bus franchising is that "big brother knows best" rather than commercial private transport providers. Therefore, who knows how far TfGM will go in dictating how people are allowed to travel, and which through bus routes will be chopped arbitrarily for ideological reasons. One example of deliberate transport policy in Trafford that affects (and slows up) road transport in general, including buses, is coning off sections of the A56 Chester Road as far south as the M60 interchange, thus narrowing the carriageway from 2-3 lanes in each direction to 1-2 lanes in each direction, which as a consequence renders bus lanes unusable.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

The whole point of bus franchising is that "big brother knows best" rather than commercial private transport providers. Therefore, who knows how far TfGM will go in dictating how people are allowed to travel, and which through bus routes will be chopped arbitrarily for ideological reasons. One example of deliberate transport policy in Trafford that affects (and slows up) road transport in general, including buses, is coning off sections of the A56 Chester Road as far south as the M60 interchange, thus narrowing the carriageway from 2-3 lanes in each direction to 1-2 lanes in each direction, which as a consequence renders bus lanes unusable.

I had seen that last time I was up, and revisiting old haunts (of which Stretford is one). Looking at Streetview, looks like it's been coned off for 2.5 years. It is one of my annoyances in Manchester in that millions can be spent on Metrolink (and rightly so) but bus priority is a secondary consideration if it is considered at all.

One hopes the fine words are backed up with actions.

 

[javelin]

I had seen that last time I was up, and revisiting old haunts (of which Stretford is one). Looking at Streetview, looks like it's been coned off for 2.5 years. It is one of my annoyances in Manchester in that millions can be spent on Metrolink (and rightly so) but bus priority is a secondary consideration if it is considered at all.

One hopes the fine words are backed up with actions.

What incentive was there to support bus priority when the organisation responsible for it - the local council - did not own the farebox revenue, private companies did? It isn't exactly surprising why they'd have prioritised a system they do own.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

What incentive was there to support bus priority when the organisation responsible for it - the local council - did not own the farebox revenue, private companies did? It isn't exactly surprising why they'd have prioritised a system they do own.

The incentive? As with any local authority, the ability to move large numbers of people through the city more effectively.