West Lothian buses

[SpeedbirdA350]

Does anyone know when First canned the (X)27/(X)28 from Waterloo Place in to Livi? I can't see any timetables on the website, and the only map of 27 I can see if a local one around Livi and nothing in and out of Edinburgh. They had 66 plate buses too. Last info I had was 5th Aug 2018. Anyone know why they did this?

 

[Jordan Adam]

Does anyone know when First canned the (X)27/(X)28 from Waterloo Place in to Livi? I can't see any timetables on the website, and the only map of 27 I can see if a local one around Livi and nothing in and out of Edinburgh. They had 66 plate buses too. Last info I had was 5th Aug 2018. Anyone know why they did this?

It was replaced by the 23/X23 in the August 2018 service changes.

 

[In Focus]

"We're buying Lothian Buses..."

could you imagine.

This thread would melt ....

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

This thread would melt ....

Gingerbus would have to be placed under observation for his own safety

However, it ain't gonna happen any time soon so nothing to concern anyone really

 

[Jordan Adam]

Gingerbus would have to be placed under observation for his own safety

Don't even get me started on certain members on Flickr and Facebook! They'd go mental...

 

[winston270twm]

Gingerbus would have to be placed under observation for his own safety

However, it ain't gonna happen any time soon so nothing to concern anyone really

Totally agree, if it was going to be sold off, it would have gone by now. I somehow can't really see First Group buying it, if it ever is put up for sale. Someone like Go-Ahead / Transdev would be more fitting, i.e. someone that would retain identity & local livery over corporate colours.

 

[Gingerbus1991]

Gingerbus would have to be placed under observation for his own safety

However, it ain't gonna happen any time soon so nothing to concern anyone really

Don't even get me started on certain members on Flickr and Facebook! They'd go mental...

Totally agree, if it was going to be sold off, it would have gone by now. I somehow can't really see First Group buying it, if it ever is put up for sale. Someone like Go-Ahead / Transdev would be more fitting, i.e. someone that would retain identity & local livery over corporate colours.

All correct

 

[alchemy]

Maybe the announcement is First withdrawal (lol)

 

[In Focus]

Totally agree, if it was going to be sold off, it would have gone by now. I somehow can't really see First Group buying it, if it ever is put up for sale. Someone like Go-Ahead / Transdev would be more fitting, i.e. someone that would retain identity & local livery over corporate colours.

Makes you wonder how they did actually get around the law when other corporations were being sold off?

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Makes you wonder how they did actually get around the law when other corporations were being sold off?

Not certain what you mean by "getting around the law". The 1985 Transport Act demanded that the local municipals and PTE operations were moved to arms length companies. The shareholders usually being the local council though, in the case of Lothian, a number of councils. Any one of them can sell if they wished, AFAIK. There are numerous instances of part sales of municipals.

There was the situation with Burnley and Pendle Transport where the two shareholders were Burnley and Pendle Councils. Pendle Council sold their shareholding to Stagecoach; Burnley council announced they would not sell but then a year later, reversed that decision.

Leicester City Transport bought Trent's Loughborough operations. Rather than cash, they gave a shareholding in LCT. Hence why even though First own First Leicester, Trentbarton (Wellglade Group) own a shareholding. IIRC, Transdev own a small share (c.5%) of Nottingham City Transport.

However, nothing to suggest that the shareholders of Lothian are thinking of selling, despite apocalyptic predictions of losses totalling fifteen trillion per week*



(* Venezuelan Bolivars)

 

[GusB]

One thing that keeps coming up in discussions about Lothian etc. is that they're in receipt of "taxpayers' subsidy". Is there actually any truth to this? Obviously if either of the Lothian group companies run any tendered services then there will be subsidy involved, but that would be the case if any other company ran those routes.

 

[winston270twm]

Makes you wonder how they did actually get around the law when other corporations were being sold off?

What law? Where did my comments mention anything about a 'law' ?

Whether you like it or not, Lothian has a very good name & reputation within the bus industry. Should the council owners ever decide to sell Lothian, they may not want to sell out to a group that will bring in corporate colours & remove the Lothian identity.

 

[In Focus]

Not certain what you mean by "getting around the law". The 1985 Transport Act demanded that the local municipals and PTE operations were moved to arms length companies. The shareholders usually being the local council though, in the case of Lothian, a number of councils. Any one of them can sell if they wished, AFAIK. There are numerous instances of part sales of municipals.

There was the situation with Burnley and Pendle Transport where the two shareholders were Burnley and Pendle Councils. Pendle Council sold their shareholding to Stagecoach; Burnley council announced they would not sell but then a year later, reversed that decision.

Leicester City Transport bought Trent's Loughborough operations. Rather than cash, they gave a shareholding in LCT. Hence why even though First own First Leicester, Trentbarton (Wellglade Group) own a shareholding. IIRC, Transdev own a small share (c.5%) of Nottingham City Transport.

However, nothing to suggest that the shareholders of Lothian are thinking of selling, despite apocalyptic predictions of losses totalling fifteen trillion per week*



(* Venezuelan Bolivars)

That what I meant ,thanks for clearing it up , surprised, no shocked is the word that so many more local councils didn't take up the same options ,Manchester ,Glasgow ,Newcastle all these massive cities missing such a jackpot by doing as Edinburgh and some others done .
Surely the public should be asking questions of those responsible for such mismanagement of public funds?

 

[In Focus]

One thing that keeps coming up in discussions about Lothian etc. is that they're in receipt of "taxpayers' subsidy". Is there actually any truth to this? Obviously if either of the Lothian group companies run any tendered services then there will be subsidy involved, but that would be the case if any other company ran those routes.

Of course their is truth in it otherwise why they wouldn't be able to do half the things they do ....

 

[CM]

delete

 

[In Focus]

delete

Good move

 

[In Focus]

So the 600 service is going to go into Ingliston Park and Ride , interesting move considering the history of these .

 

[Jordan Adam]

So the 600 service is going to go into Ingliston Park and Ride , interesting move considering the history of these .

Perhaps to offer a link for the tram? The issue with the 600 is that it's far too slow for people in West Lothian

That what I meant ,thanks for clearing it up , surprised, no shocked is the word that so many more local councils didn't take up the same options ,Manchester ,Glasgow ,Newcastle all these massive cities missing such a jackpot by doing as Edinburgh and some others done .
Surely the public should be asking questions of those responsible for such mismanagement of public funds?

In fairness depending how you look at it they're not loosing money, their operating profit on average each year is just slightly above that of the funding they get from the councils, of course if they didn't get the funding they probably wouldn't be able to do half the stuff they do. However the whole point of the council funding sort of is for investment in "Fancy things".

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

That what I meant ,thanks for clearing it up , surprised, no shocked is the word that so many more local councils didn't take up the same options ,Manchester ,Glasgow ,Newcastle all these massive cities missing such a jackpot by doing as Edinburgh and some others done .
Surely the public should be asking questions of those responsible for such mismanagement of public funds?

Depends why the councils sold out. Many retained their operations for political or dogmatic reasons yet they were too small to invest in their fleets or came under sustained attack and were simply too small or geographically limited to survive. Even somewhere like Leicester was losing money IIRC.

I seem to recall that Busways in T&W were sold to an MBO (51%) ESOP (49%) type deal. However, they sold out to Stagecoach because they were simply too small to manage fleet replacement and vulnerable to attack.

Places like Lothian and Nottingham are exceptional in many ways.

 

[Swanny200]

Is there any monopoly at the airport as in stances, can First pick up and drop off where Lothian do or is there a different part of the airport that they have to.

 

[GusB]

They get approximately £6.4M from the tax payer annually, £5.8M of that coming from Edinburgh City Council, the rest split between Midlothian (£350K), EastLothian (£200K) & WestLothian (£25K) Councils respectively. I'm unsure right now if that includes subsidies for routes like the 63, i'd have to check.

Sorry, but I don't believe this is subsidy. I'd be interested to see where you're getting your figures.

 

[overthewater]

Is there any monopoly at the airport as in stances, can First pick up and drop off where Lothian do or is there a different part of the airport that they have to.

There could use the stance 600 uses which is near the front door.

Also some of the council bus compaines that were sold were to Employees, and that included Glasgow, but the Employees sold them off....

 

[livi man]

They have there own stands at the airport

 

[Siemens Trains]

Not certain what you mean by "getting around the law". The 1985 Transport Act demanded that the local municipals and PTE operations were moved to arms length companies. The shareholders usually being the local council though, in the case of Lothian, a number of councils. Any one of them can sell if they wished, AFAIK. There are numerous instances of part sales of municipals.

There was the situation with Burnley and Pendle Transport where the two shareholders were Burnley and Pendle Councils. Pendle Council sold their shareholding to Stagecoach; Burnley council announced they would not sell but then a year later, reversed that decision.

Leicester City Transport bought Trent's Loughborough operations. Rather than cash, they gave a shareholding in LCT. Hence why even though First own First Leicester, Trentbarton (Wellglade Group) own a shareholding. IIRC, Transdev own a small share (c.5%) of Nottingham City Transport.

However, nothing to suggest that the shareholders of Lothian are thinking of selling, despite apocalyptic predictions of losses totalling fifteen trillion per week*



(* Venezuelan Bolivars)

I expect it wouldn't have been 'a number of councils' at the time, just Lothian Regional Council rather than the four district councils that eventually fell heir to the shares when reorganisation took place some years later.

That what I meant ,thanks for clearing it up , surprised, no shocked is the word that so many more local councils didn't take up the same options ,Manchester ,Glasgow ,Newcastle all these massive cities missing such a jackpot by doing as Edinburgh and some others done .
Surely the public should be asking questions of those responsible for such mismanagement of public funds?

You mean somewhere like Aberdeen/Grampian? This thread, and the industry in general might look a bit different today if that had happened.

 

[Driver362]

How is the 600 doing for pax numbers ? IMHO do sent look busy when I pass them. It would appear this 600 is going to do a lot of things competition for 275 and rival the 100 , pretty sure someone said the longer the route the more unreliable it gets ? Whitburn to Edinburgh via airport wonder how that will work out?

 

[Jordan Adam]

How is the 600 doing for pax numbers ? IMHO do sent look busy when I pass them. It would appear this 600 is going to do a lot of things competition for 275 and rival the 100 , pretty sure someone said the longer the route the more unreliable it gets ? Whitburn to Edinburgh via airport wonder how that will work out?

Longer routes can be made reliable, just a case of having generous running time. If i was a planner i'd probably give a few minutes layover at Livingston and the Airport just to allow catch up if the bus got held up slightly.

 

[SpeedbirdA350]

Longer routes can be made reliable, just a case of having generous running time. If i was a planner i'd probably give a few minutes layover at Livingston and the Airport just to allow catch up if the bus got held up slightly.

I'd add more than a few minutes, as the A8 can be a nightmare at certain times of the day and if there is any issue on Eastfield road then it can easily add delays.

 

[oldman]

They get approximately £6.4M from the tax payer annually, £5.8M of that coming from Edinburgh City Council, the rest split between Midlothian (£350K), EastLothian (£200K) & WestLothian (£25K) Councils respectively. I'm unsure right now if that includes subsidies for routes like the 63, i'd have to check.

The last annual report shows (note 20) related-party transactions of £2.7m sales (which would include subsidies for specific services) and £1.7m purchases. Oddly they purchase more from the City council than they sell! What's your source?

 

[herb21]

They get approximately £6.4M from the tax payer annually, £5.8M of that coming from Edinburgh City Council, the rest split between Midlothian (£350K), EastLothian (£200K) & WestLothian (£25K) Councils respectively. I'm unsure right now if that includes subsidies for routes like the 63, i'd have to check.

I think you may have confused the dividends Lothian pay out to the council with the "funding" lothian receive from the council.

Per the 2017 financials total dividends paid by lothian to its shareholders (ultimately the 4 councils) were £6.8m (2016: £6.6m). Total related party (the 4 councils and their subsidiaries) income (all sales of goods and services - probably largely tenders) was £2.7m (2016: £2.7m). Total related party expenses (all purchases of goods or services - probably largely rates) were £1.7m (2016: £1.5m). Related party payables and receivables are all pretty low, so this doesn't look like disguised funding. There are no capital contributions in either year so that isn't a source of funding.

 

[Gingerbus1991]

I think you may have confused the dividends Lothian pay out to the council with the "funding" lothian receive from the council.

Per the 2017 financials total dividends paid by lothian to its shareholders (ultimately the 4 councils) were £6.8m (2016: £6.6m). Total related party (the 4 councils and their subsidiaries) income (all sales of goods and services - probably largely tenders) was £2.7m (2016: £2.7m). Total related party expenses (all purchases of goods or services - probably largely rates) were £1.7m (2016: £1.5m). Related party payables and receivables are all pretty low, so this doesn't look like disguised funding. There are no capital contributions in either year so that isn't a source of funding.

I assume that lothian didn't file there 2017-2018 financial year.

As far as I gathered they made £11.9m at the end of 2016, correct? And of course this was after they payed £6.5m to the council as a dividend.

Given that we haven't seen more accounts for the end of last year and will have to wait till September 2019 for this years to see there accounts they must be impressive surely.

I'm sure that the dividend that is being payed to the council was increased on request to help pay for the up and coming tram extension.

Its no quiet secret that they must be rolling in the dough.