Virgin Trains: Untouchable?

[steamdrivenand]

We've been living near Crewe now for just over 3 years but I've only ever used the WCML twice in that time and the experience was nothing special on both occasions.

However between 2000 and 2005 I was a regular Virgin Cross Country passenger from York and Leeds through some of the direst times on the network. Few of the issues were Virgins fault but they dealt with them the best that they could.

I particularly remember a torrid HST journey from Bristol to York with only one power car operating, wall to wall speed restrictions and no grip on damp leaf sodden rails. By the time we reached York it was well after midnight, but the train manager made sure everyone left on board had a free taxi home. In my case a 45 minute drive.

Maybe any TOC would have done the same, but they could've really made things much, much worse but didn't.

As time went by and newer rolling stock came in and the PW restrictions lifted it was good to travel with them. I wasn't happy when they lost the franchise to a seemingly faceless grey consortium. Now it's probably the same staff, the same trains and mostly the same timetable but I'm not looking forward to my next XC trip like I used to.

 

[pinguini]

As you joking?! I'm going to London on the 17/01/12 on the 7.55 train and I've paid £108 for the luxury to be an a train where Ill be trapped for two hours in a cramped train with the smell of the lavatory making me want to puke. In the words of Penny from Miranda SUCH FUN!
There fares are ridiculous. Compare a similar journey on East Coast:-
York to Kings Cross - £48, 08:00
And even Newcastle to Kings Cross - £83, 07:55

They're similar times
I used the Trainline for all these prices

That's a shame - I usually travel into London from Coventry for less than a fiver. Even travelling before 8am, I've never paid more than £15 for a ticket with Virgin

 

[AndyLandy]

As you joking?! I'm going to London on the 17/01/12 on the 7.55 train and I've paid £108 for the luxury to be an a train where Ill be trapped for two hours in a cramped train with the smell of the lavatory making me want to puke. In the words of Penny from Miranda SUCH FUN!
There fares are ridiculous. Compare a similar journey on East Coast:-
York to Kings Cross - £48, 08:00
And even Newcastle to Kings Cross - £83, 07:55

They're similar times
I used the Trainline for all these prices

I think you're comparing apples with oranges there. York to Kings Cross is £123.60 if you want to travel at 08:20 or £249.00 earlier. Newcastle to Kings Cross is £196.50 after 07:28 and a whopping £301.00 before.

Both TOCs charge exorbitant Anytime fares, pricey off-peak fares and modest advance fares, I've always found their prices to be reasonably comparable. If anything, I'd say East Coast is the more pricey of the two.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That's a shame - I usually travel into London from Coventry for less than a fiver. Even travelling before 8am, I've never paid more than £15 for a ticket with Virgin

Those are pretty reasonable fares. My last trip with Virgin was Euston to Crewe, as part of a Southampton-Hartford ticket. £46, First Class. My return journey is standard class for £25.

 

[Dave1987]

All passengers. I have never travelled first class

Im not sure whether that would have been to stop a riot or just good customer service lol. When a similar thing happened on GA the company got slated. Interesting how passengers view different TOC's in different lights. Then again on GEML everything is GA's fault - signal failures, fatalities etc etc lol

 

[Paule23]

Ow dear another one brainwashed by the Virgin brand lol n.

Not brainwashed, just open minded. I use their service regularly and find it compares favourably with other TOCs (although i do prefer the East Coast HST trains!). I am not particularly pro or anti Virgin, and that is the point, you obviously are less open minded....

 

[Dave1987]

Not brainwashed, just open minded. I use their service regularly and find it compares favourably with other TOCs (although i do prefer the East Coast HST trains!). I am not particularly pro or anti Virgin, and that is the point, you obviously are less open minded....

No just frustrated Virgin don't get slated like other TOC's do for delays that are out of their control. Virgin have one of the lowest ppm's

 

[Paule23]

No just frustrated Virgin don't get slated like other TOC's do for delays that are out of their control. Virgin have one of the lowest ppm's

Fair enough, they definitely do have a low PPM!

 

[Manchester77]

PPM For 02/01/13:-
VT - 90%
EC - 86%
GA - 94%
FGW - 89%
EMT - 94%
Long Distence Sector in General - 90%

VT - 31 late, 3 very late/cancelled trains
EC - 18 late, 4 very late/cancelled
GA - 101 late, 20 very late/ cancelled*

* GA isn't just IC though they also operate medium, short, local and commuter services

 

[Dave1987]

PPM For 02/01/13:-
VT - 90%
EC - 86%
GA - 94%
FGW - 89%
EMT - 94%
Long Distence Sector in General - 90%

VT - 31 late, 3 very late/cancelled trains
EC - 18 late, 4 very late/cancelled
GA - 101 late, 20 very late/ cancelled*

* GA isn't just IC though they also operate medium, short, local and commuter services

Also GA operate on a 2 track main line so little scope for recovering service during disruption.

 

[Manchester77]

Indeed which hasn't just had a multi million pound upgrade

 

[Geezertronic]

As you joking?! I'm going to London on the 17/01/12 on the 7.55 train and I've paid £108 for the luxury to be an a train where Ill be trapped for two hours in a cramped train with the smell of the lavatory making me want to puke. In the words of Penny from Miranda SUCH FUN!

No one has forced you to though have they, however emotive your comments may be. You could drive (and pay congestion charge/car parking) or catch a coach for less so why don't you do that if you feel that way about the trains?

 

[Manchester77]

No one has forced you to though have they, however emotive your comments may be. You could drive (and pay congestion charge/car parking) or catch a coach for less so why don't you do that if you feel that way about the trains?

Um no and quoting Miranda is hardly emotive....

 

[IanD]

No just frustrated Virgin don't get slated like other TOC's do for delays that are out of their control. Virgin have one of the lowest ppm's

Maybe you should consider why other operators do get slated for delays out of their control.

In the case of GA it seems to me that the local ITV company (Anglia) and BBC East like to whip everyone to a frenzy if there's even a 10 minute delay between Cambridge/Ipswich/Norwich and London. It makes for easy news stories.

Any delays between Milton Keynes (at the other end of their catchment area) and London barely get a mention.

 

[Geezertronic]

Um no and quoting Miranda is hardly emotive....

Actually you can. Working on the mileage from Manchester Piccadilly to London Euston that is 198 miles.

198 miles at 0.25ppm is £49.50
Car Parking in London is say £30 (I have to pay £22 but that is Docklands)
Congestion Charge is £8

Total: £87.50 to go by car.

Coach prices range from £9.00 to £23.00 depending on when you travel (based on NatEx - Manchester Coach Station to London Victoria Coach Station)

Of course, car and coach will result in a longer travel time and most likely more delays (knowing the M1), so on that basis the train isn't too bad really is it?

As you joking?! I'm going to London on the 17/01/12 on the 7.55 train and I've paid £108 for the luxury to be an a train where Ill be trapped for two hours in a cramped train with the smell of the lavatory making me want to puke. In the words of Penny from Miranda SUCH FUN!

(My bold) - emotive comments highlighted.

 

[All Line Rover]

I think you're comparing apples with oranges there. York to Kings Cross is £123.60 if you want to travel at 08:20 or £249.00 earlier. Newcastle to Kings Cross is £196.50 after 07:28 and a whopping £301.00 before.

Both TOCs charge exorbitant Anytime fares, pricey off-peak fares and modest advance fares, I've always found their prices to be reasonably comparable. If anything, I'd say East Coast is the more pricey of the two.

No, it is an entirely fair comparison. Virgin, unlike every other intercity TOC, does not offer reasonably priced Advance fares during the peak. This means that the only people who can afford to travel on their services during the peak are:

• Railcard holders (because they can use Off-Peak tickets)
• Expenses paid business travellers
• The rich
• The desperate
• Everyone on Fridays (on Fridays, peak Advance fares are lower than on Mon-Thu, whereas off-peak Advance fares are higher than on Mon-Thu, which is probably to shift demand from off-peak services on the busiest day of the week)

Virgin, by and large, have good customer services, but they also have the highest fares of any TOC. It annoys me that RB promotes VT as the 'passenger champion,' when all they are doing is milking the system. The only reason I don't have any issues with VT winning the franchise again is because I don't think any other company will do better - most of the major benefits are 'indicated' by the DfT and, unsurprisingly, appear in multiple bids.

 

[Dave1987]

No, it is an entirely fair comparison. Virgin, unlike every other intercity TOC, does not offer reasonably priced Advance fares during the peak. This means that the only people who can afford to travel on their services during the peak are:

• Railcard holders (because they can use Off-Peak tickets)
• Expenses paid business travellers
• The rich
• The desperate
• Everyone on Fridays (on Fridays, peak Advance fares are lower than on Mon-Thu, whereas off-peak Advance fares are higher than on Mon-Thu, which is probably to shift demand from off-peak services on the busiest day of the week)

Virgin, by and large, have good customer services, but they also have the highest fares of any TOC. It annoys me that RB promotes VT as the 'passenger champion,' when all they are doing is milking the system. The only reason I don't have any issues with VT winning the franchise again is because I don't think any other company will do better - most of the major benefits are 'indicated' by the DfT and, unsurprisingly, appear in multiple bids.

I have no problem with Virgin winning the franchise again if it was based on merit not just taking credit for improvements not done by them and because they have such a powerful brand. Who says a smaller outfit couldn't do a better job on the WCML? The powerful brand and good PR have made people love Virgin. If they went purely off their prices and performance statistics they would hate them. Virgin have just benefited from a line that has has a lot of money pumped into it by network rail. If every other line had the investment the WCML has had people would love every TOC!

 

[AndyLandy]

No, it is an entirely fair comparison. Virgin, unlike every other intercity TOC, does not offer reasonably priced Advance fares during the peak

So you're saying it's fair to compare EC advance fares with Virgin Anytimes? Sorry, I don't buy that. I've looked at a few random dates comparing peak prices for ECML and WCML services (York-London and Manchester-London) and the only AP fares I can find are Grand Central ones. I don't believe that Virgin are any different from EC in their provision of AP fares in the peak.

 

[Robinson]

Oh dear. I reckon I had better lay off adding anything to what has already been said - as I'll inevitably be called "brainwashed by Virgin" or something...

 

[AndyLandy]

Oh dear. I reckon I had better lay off adding anything to what has already been said - as I'll inevitably be called "brainwashed by Virgin" or something...

It's OK, you can ignore those comments, since the people making them are just anti-Virgin naysayers.

 

[Manchester77]

No one has forced you to though have they, however emotive your comments may be. You could drive (and pay congestion charge/car parking) or catch a coach for less so why don't you do that if you feel that way about the trains?

It's easiest way to get to London
And also the trains wouldn't be so bad if the cost of the journey wash so expensive.
I could drive but then I'd have to be up at some ridiculous time to as well as counter in rush hor traffic around Birmingham.
You have the same issue with lavatories on coaches as you have the foul chemical smell
The point was that for the level of service you get in standard, it is not worth the cost of the ticket not that the train was bad in reply to your later post

 

[Geezertronic]

I've no opinion either way but I just find it strange that people complain that the VT peak fares are high, the 390s are uncomfortable and smell, yet the vast majority of services in the peaks are loaded sometimes to bursting. There are other travelling options such as the car or the coach but these cannot compete with the journey time of the train which makes it the most viable option for the majority during the peaks despite the cost of the fare

 

[All Line Rover]

So you're saying it's fair to compare EC advance fares with Virgin Anytimes? Sorry, I don't buy that. I've looked at a few random dates comparing peak prices for ECML and WCML services (York-London and Manchester-London) and the only AP fares I can find are Grand Central ones. I don't believe that Virgin are any different from EC in their provision of AP fares in the peak.

I am saying you should compare EC Advances with VT Advances. It is appropriate is to compare LDS to KGX with MAN to EUS.

On Wed 13th March (approx. 12 weeks in Advance, so these are the cheapest fares available), the 07:00 from LDS to KGX costs £30.50 Standard Class (£62.50 First Class), whereas the 07:00 from MAN to EUS costs £108.50 Standard Class (£202 First Class). The figures speak for themselves.

I have no idea where you are getting your figures from. The 06:58 YRK to KGX, again on Wed 13th March, costs £48.50 Standard Class (£86 First Class). Try finding similar prices VT that will get you into London at around 09:00 from Manchester, Liverpool or Preston. You won't find any!

 

[Manchester77]

I've no opinion either way but I just find it strange that people complain that the VT peak fares are high, the 390s are uncomfortable and smell, yet the vast majority of services in the peaks are loaded sometimes to bursting. There are other travelling options such as the car or the coach but these cannot compete with the journey time of the train which makes it the most viable option for the majority during the peaks despite the cost of the fare

Because they have the monopoly on the route. It's the fastest and most convenient but by no means does that make it worth the money

 

[All Line Rover]

I've no opinion either way but I just find it strange that people complain that the VT peak fares are high, the 390s are uncomfortable and smell, yet the vast majority of services in the peaks are loaded sometimes to bursting. There are other travelling options such as the car or the coach but these cannot compete with the journey time of the train which makes it the most viable option for the majority during the peaks despite the cost of the fare

And these services happen to be...?

I normally travel on Manchester to London or Chester to London services and the peak trains (before 10am arrival in London) rarely exceed 50% capacity and never go above 75%. On the 07:35 from Chester to London I last had a table to myself until Rugby (in the Wrexham Super Voyager), after which one person took a seat opposite. On the 18:10 from London to Chester I last had a table to myself through to Crewe!

It is the off-peak trains that are packed. The 20:10 from London to Chester is standing room only until Milton Keynes.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Because they have the monopoly on the route. It's the fastest and most convenient but by no means does that make it worth the money

Interestingly the (rip off) Birmingham to London Anytime fares have not risen at all this year. I wonder why that would happen on the only route where VT have strong competition...

 

[Geezertronic]

I am specifically referring to Birmingham services as those are the ones I use but I would assume the same applies to Manchester and even Liverpool judging from how the Euston concourse empties when one of those services is announced.

Whether VT (or even EC/DOR on the ECML) have a monopoly on the route is irrelevant from a businesspersons point of view because it is still quicker to get to/from London by train than car or coach plus you get the option of working whilst travelling compared to the car. That could be seen as a cost saving in itself to a business who could get an extra few hours of worktime from an employee.

That might not be good news for the non business train users but they would still have to squeeze into the same space as the business people on the busy peak trains if that was their choice to use it. As a previous regular user of the 1843 EUS-CRE (getting off at BHI), as a 9 car 390 that service was always rammed. Not used it in 11 car format yet

 

[Manchester77]

Wasn't the 18:43 Euston-Crewe on a Friday the pretendolino's service?

Anyway, since they have monopolies on their services there is no need to charge such high fares. Yes they have to run a business but over £100 for a 2ish hour train journey is ridiculous when the quality of service doesn't match the price tag. Yes charge enough so you keep the business going but bit so much that you price yourself out. Compare VT's fares to Chilterns or even LM's

That's my point the amount of money paid for something that isn't worth it yet you need

 

[Geezertronic]

Like you say for Birmingham travellers to/from London there is LM or Chiltern, however for business travel I would always choose VT for the quicker journey time and the Euston position on the tube map

Even from Manchester I guess you could get an XC to Birmingham New Street then a LM if you wanted to, similar options are probably available for any destination VT travel to if the extended journey time is an option.

I would say that you don't need it but you do choose it

 

[All Line Rover]

I am specifically referring to Birmingham services as those are the ones I use but I would assume the same applies to Manchester and even Liverpool judging from how the Euston concourse empties when one of those services is announced.

Whether VT (or even EC/DOR on the ECML) have a monopoly on the route is irrelevant from a businesspersons point of view because it is still quicker to get to/from London by train than car or coach plus you get the option of working whilst travelling compared to the car. That could be seen as a cost saving in itself to a business who could get an extra few hours of worktime from an employee.

That might not be good news for the non business train users but they would still have to squeeze into the same space as the business people on the busy peak trains if that was their choice to use it. As a previous regular user of the 1843 EUS-CRE (getting off at BHI), as a 9 car 390 that service was always rammed. Not used it in 11 car format yet

The 18:43 is still packed as an 11 car Pendo but it empties out at MKC. It is no surprise that this service is busy when it is the first VT service to call at MKC in the space of 3 hours.

My limited experience of travelling on VT is insignificant but it is of interest to note that the peak MAN/LIV to EUS services never appear in the DfT's overcrowding statistics.

 

[AndyLandy]

I am saying you should compare EC Advances with VT Advances. It is appropriate is to compare LDS to KGX with MAN to EUS.

On Wed 13th March (approx. 12 weeks in Advance, so these are the cheapest fares available), the 07:00 from LDS to KGX costs £30.50 Standard Class (£62.50 First Class), whereas the 07:00 from MAN to EUS costs £108.50 Standard Class (£202 First Class). The figures speak for themselves.

I have no idea where you are getting your figures from. The 06:58 YRK to KGX, again on Wed 13th March, costs £48.50 Standard Class (£86 First Class). Try finding similar prices VT that will get you into London at around 09:00 from Manchester, Liverpool or Preston. You won't find any!

My figures came from TheTrainLine, I couldn't find any of these discounted EC fares, only Anytime and Offpeak fares (which were the prices I quoted). However, you're quite right, when I give the date you suggested, it shows some discounted fares. I wonder why it didn't before...

That said, it's been my own personal observation that Virgin's AP fares are much cheaper than East Coast's for off-peak travel. I'm often looking to travel places from Southampton and I can get an IWC advance to Hartford for as little as £18.50 each way. The best price each way to Newcastle (admittedly a longer journey) has a best fare of £46.50, but I've never seen one of those available. Doncaster, which is probably a fairer comparison distance-wise, is £35 each way at the cheapest.

In fact, if we ask for Southampton to Scotland advances, IWC has a £27 fare to Glasgow Central, whereas IEC's cheapest is £47.50. In summary, Virgin's Advance fares are, on average, half the cost of East Coast's.

 

[Dave1987]

It's OK, you can ignore those comments, since the people making them are just anti-Virgin naysayers.

Yes because I can see that Virgin are just as bad as any other TOC's. it's just other TOC's don't try and claim credit for improvements that were not down to them!! But people who worship Virgin don't seem to be able to see the wood for the trees. Or at least wont admit virgin are not all they make themselves out be.