What is wrong with CrossCountry?

[1e10]

It's about time we tackled this "loss".

Is it the same sort of loss that causes major international companies such as Ebay, Costa Coffee and Amazon to have so much expenditure hitting their UK books that it means they pay very little UK taxes, but still continue successfully trading.

How is it that Arriva XC, a subsidiary of a hugely successful major international company with a wealth of skill and knowledge in the transport industry don't make a profit even when they have high fares and when so many of their trains are full to capacity? - and yet they still manage to continue with the XC franchise.

What is the cause of the "loss" - sloppy transport operations, or clever accountants?, or Dft franchising rules?

Whenever I purchase tickets from XC via their website my card is charged by 'Cross Country Luxembourg'. Why may XC be running their billing operations from Luxembourg other than to avoid tax?

 

[SussexSpotter]

Whenever I purchase tickets from XC via their website my card is charged by 'Cross Country Luxembourg'. Why may XC be running their billing operations from Luxembourg other than to avoid tax?

Certainly makes you wonder......i've never actually a bought a ticket with XC on their website though!

 

[transmanche]

Whenever I purchase tickets from XC via their website my card is charged by 'Cross Country Luxembourg'. Why may XC be running their billing operations from Luxembourg other than to avoid tax?

The booking operation www.buytickets.crosscountrytrains.co.uk (including the billing) is actually operated by Trainline.com Ltd. But routeing the payments via Luxembourg is nothing to do with avoiding tax, it's to save on credit card fees.

This Is Money has an article on it: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/...ropean-country-save-millions-pounds-fees.html

Online train ticket seller TheTrainline.com is routing credit card payments through Luxembourg to save millions of pounds in charges. It means a passenger in London buying an online ticket to Manchester pays for it in a foreign country.

But unlike many business moves to Luxembourg, it has nothing to do with cutting tax. Instead, it follows a crackdown on credit card fees by the EC, which has given retailers a chance to cut their bills by taking transactions abroad.

The EC forced companies such as MasterCard to cut their fees on cross-border payments – where the buyer is in a different country to the seller. But the crackdown did not cap the fees where the buyer and seller are in the same country. The effect is that online retailers pay up to 70 per cent less to the card companies if they make sure the sale is technically cross-border.

 

[1e10]

The booking operation www.buytickets.crosscountrytrains.co.uk (including the billing) is actually operated by Trainline.com Ltd. But routeing the payments via Luxembourg is nothing to do with avoiding tax, it's to save on credit card fees.

This Is Money has an article on it: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/...ropean-country-save-millions-pounds-fees.html

Ah, thanks for the information. Glad there is a reasonable explanation behind it

 

[SussexSpotter]

Ah, thanks for the information. Glad there is a reasonable explanation behind it

Yes thanks for the clarification....

 

[Geezertronic]

The continuation (because there is no going back now) of a financially flawed Virgin "Operation Princess" business plan. The massive, massive increase in cost was never even close to being overtaken by the revenue gains.

A four or five coach train may be full, even with high fares, but doesn't mean it is profitable.

But had the SRA not blocked the Virgin XC request to lengthen the Voyagers and allowed them to keep the HSTs then would the plan have been so "financially flawed" as you suggest?

 

[A0]

Ah, thanks for the information. Glad there is a reasonable explanation behind it

So it's OK to minimise the operating costs of a business but not OK to minimise its tax liability then? :roll:

Personally I don't have a problem with companies doing either - I certainly try to minimise my tax exposure (using legal methods e.g. ISAs) at a personal level and it would be a tad hypocritical of me to criticise others for doing the same.

 

[HSTEd]

But had the SRA not blocked the Virgin XC request to lengthen the Voyagers and allowed them to keep the HSTs then would the plan have been so "financially flawed" as you suggest?

Virgin wanted to butcher the HST trainsets and turn them into 2+5 formations. The SRA, quite reasonably, decided that the sets could be utilised elsewhere at full length.
They might have more luck requesting ex ICWC DVTs to utilise with shortened Mark 2 rakes that had no other use in the modern railway.

Virgin also only wanted to lengthen the Voyagers when it realised it had bitten off more than it could chew, they went into XC without a properly costed business plan.

 

[Qwerty133]

One thing I can't criticise with XC though is the staff. Generally speaking they have very friendly, pleasant people working for them and they're brilliant with the customers, both on the ex Central and Virgin side (with the usual fewexceptions you get everywhere).

I often find with them having no station staff, finding information on delays and short-forms to their services quite difficult. However I think this could be down to the platform staff (EMT) not being bothered to be helpful towards another company's passengers, but it is definitely not helped by XC not providing any service updates or replying to customers on twitter etc.
Another issue is revenue protection on shorter journeys where the guard hasn't got time to get through the train, the ticket office at the departure station is shut and the staff at the gated terminus (EMT) often let people out without asking them to buy a ticket.
The class 170s do seem to be having a number of faults such as broken or uncovered interior lights, faulty display screens and on more than one occasion in the last month I have been in coaches with a broken engine and no aircon. I have also seen at least one unit with out-of-date emergency light sticks in use.
One day last week a service that is meant to be formed of a 5 car turbostar, was instead formed of a two car as one of the services which join together to form it was formed of a voyager, which for some reason wasnt used on the return. There was no apology from the guard and 3, members of EMT staff gave incorrect information or didn't answer the question they were asked!
while most of the issues above are either EMT or LM's fault most normal passengers will see XC as the company to blame for the bad journey.

 

[cjp]

No-one's mentioned the price of the advance tickets yet!

But where would the Voyagers go that would not waste their 125mph capability? On balance, I think it'll just have to be wasted and the Voyagers be cascaded onto, ooooh, I dunno, Waterloo-Exeter, Liverpool-Norwich, or long-distance Scottish routes. It's sad that the Scots will have to suffer them, but unfortunately they've simply got to be taken off routes that I use. Ahem.

XC are cheaper than Scotrail between Glasgow and Edinburgh - but run far fewer trains

 

[Geezertronic]

Virgin wanted to butcher the HST trainsets and turn them into 2+5 formations. The SRA, quite reasonably, decided that the sets could be utilised elsewhere at full length.
They might have more luck requesting ex ICWC DVTs to utilise with shortened Mark 2 rakes that had no other use in the modern railway.

Virgin also only wanted to lengthen the Voyagers when it realised it had bitten off more than it could chew, they went into XC without a properly costed business plan.

But was all of that as a result of the XC routes at the time being increased (meaning that effectively not enough 220/221s were ordered to accomodate the additional routes) or was Operation Princess just a victim of its own success?

 

[Mugby]

Couldn't the Cross Country timetable do with being completely re-written from top to bottom?

Take a typical service, the 10.30 Birmingham to Newcastle.

It arrives in BHM at 10.18 and stands 12 minutes.
It then runs non-stop to Derby where it stands 7 minutes.
After that, non-stop to Sheffield where it stands 6 minutes
It then has a generous 27 mins to Doncaster where it usually stands 4/5 mins.
Next to York where it stands 9 minutes.

Successive improvements in line speeds and traction have never been reflected in the timetable.

But because it would affect so many other services and movements, is it a total impossibility?

 

[The Planner]

That is exactly what Cross Country want, A to B really quickly with a large dwell. The large dwell providing resilience in the timetable. They also prefer the longer dwell as waiting outside stations or being pathed out behind something isn't perceived as well by passengers as a longer station stop is according to their research. Improvements in linespeeds do get reflected, XC are vociferous in trying to get their journey times down.

 

[87015]

But was all of that as a result of the XC routes at the time being increased (meaning that effectively not enough 220/221s were ordered to accomodate the additional routes) or was Operation Princess just a victim of its own success?

Not really. It wasn't a success - it didn't attract the revenue. Everything else was a result of that, HSTs sent off lease to cut costs and there was never a chance of Voyager extension with it hemorrhaging monies - was only a matter of months before VXC threw the towel in and got a management contact from the SRA remember.

 

[Kettledrum]

Couldn't the Cross Country timetable do with being completely re-written from top to bottom?

Take a typical service, the 10.30 Birmingham to Newcastle.

It arrives in BHM at 10.18 and stands 12 minutes.
It then runs non-stop to Derby where it stands 7 minutes.
After that, non-stop to Sheffield where it stands 6 minutes
It then has a generous 27 mins to Doncaster where it usually stands 4/5 mins.
Next to York where it stands 9 minutes.

Successive improvements in line speeds and traction have never been reflected in the timetable.

But because it would affect so many other services and movements, is it a total impossibility?

These dwell times are theoretical. In practice, there are inevitably delays on the longer XC routes, so the dwell times are used to catch up. It would not be in anyone's interest to write the dwell times out of the timetable.

 

[TheWalrus]

What is the cause of the "loss" - sloppy transport operations, or clever accountants?, or Dft franchising rules?

The continuation (because there is no going back now) of a financially flawed Virgin "Operation Princess" business plan. The massive, massive increase in cost was never even close to being overtaken by the revenue gains.

A four or five coach train may be full, even with high fares, but doesn't mean it is profitable.

That doesn't make sense. So are you suggesting that any DMU service under 5 cars doesn't make a profit? I would really like to see some figures here as it seems odd they aren't making a profit on a packed train with high fares.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Whenever I purchase tickets from XC via their website my card is charged by 'Cross Country Luxembourg'. Why may XC be running their billing operations from Luxembourg other than to avoid tax?

Among other explanations, there is no tax on UK rail tickets.

 

[tbtc]

are you suggesting that any DMU service under 5 cars doesn't make a profit?

How many DMUs under five coaches do make a profit though?

The biggest subsidies tend to be required by operators who run a lot of short DMU services (ATW, Northern etc).

The biggest premiums (or lowest subsidies) tend to be TOCs who run a lot of longer trains (FCC, East Coast, Virgin etc).

Track access charges are cheaper (per passenger) in a longer train. Staffing costs are cheaper (per passenger) in a longer train(A Pendolino requires as many drivers as a Pacer). Presumably there's some economy of fuel costs?

 

[Jeni]

Couldn't the Cross Country timetable do with being completely re-written from top to bottom?

Take a typical service, the 10.30 Birmingham to Newcastle.

It arrives in BHM at 10.18 and stands 12 minutes.
It then runs non-stop to Derby where it stands 7 minutes.
After that, non-stop to Sheffield where it stands 6 minutes
It then has a generous 27 mins to Doncaster where it usually stands 4/5 mins.
Next to York where it stands 9 minutes.

Successive improvements in line speeds and traction have never been reflected in the timetable.

But because it would affect so many other services and movements, is it a total impossibility?

From experience, a large amount of XC arrivals into Birmingham arrive between 5 and 10 mins late, so that extra dwell time is a godsend for the timetable!

 

[transmanche]

Among other explanations, there is no tax on UK rail tickets.

Well to be specific, it's zero-rated rather than exempt. And that makes a big difference to a business as it means they can claim back the VAT they pay on purchases, because they make a taxable supply (even though the rate of VAT is zero). Whereas if travel was exempt, it would mean they couldn't claim back the VAT.

But that's all a moot point, as it's nothing to do with tax anyway!

 

[HSTEd]

That doesn't make sense. So are you suggesting that any DMU service under 5 cars doesn't make a profit? I would really like to see some figures here as it seems odd they aren't making a profit on a packed train with high fares.

A 4-car Voyager has the same number of seats as a 3-car Turbostar used by XC. The voyager uses ~2.16L of fuel per kilometre and the Turbostar uses ~1.35L of fuel per kilometre.
The crewing costs are similar or even worse for the Voyager than the Turbostar would be, even if a modular buffet was fitted.

It all adds up very quickly, especially considering the only part of the XC network with 125mph running that comes to mind is between York and Newcastle.

 

[The Planner]

Plus Bushbury Jn to Stafford and Branston Junction to Kingsbury Junction.

 

[DarloRich]

to be honest having thought about this some more it is the Voyagers that are the problem. Just dump them and get something better

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Plus Bushbury Jn to Stafford and Branston Junction to Kingsbury Junction.

And Didcot-Reading.
And a bit approaching Edinburgh (same profile as EC north of Doncaster).

 

[HSTEd]

And Didcot-Reading.
And a bit approaching Edinburgh (same profile as EC north of Doncaster).

As I understand it the Voyagers are pathed on the slow lines between Didcot and Reading and thus do not reach 125mph.

 

[TheWalrus]

are you suggesting that any DMU service under 5 cars doesn't make a profit?

How many DMUs under five coaches do make a profit though?

The biggest subsidies tend to be required by operators who run a lot of short DMU services (ATW, Northern etc).

The biggest premiums (or lowest subsidies) tend to be TOCs who run a lot of longer trains (FCC, East Coast, Virgin etc).

Track access charges are cheaper (per passenger) in a longer train. Staffing costs are cheaper (per passenger) in a longer train(A Pendolino requires as many drivers as a Pacer). Presumably there's some economy of fuel costs?

Makes sense. However the cost of a two-car train will be lower than a five-car although per unit cost (ie per passenger cost) it will be higher.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That doesn't make sense. So are you suggesting that any DMU service under 5 cars doesn't make a profit? I would really like to see some figures here as it seems odd they aren't making a profit on a packed train with high fares.

A 4-car Voyager has the same number of seats as a 3-car Turbostar used by XC. The voyager uses ~2.16L of fuel per kilometre and the Turbostar uses ~1.35L of fuel per kilometre.
The crewing costs are similar or even worse for the Voyager than the Turbostar would be, even if a modular buffet was fitted.

It all adds up very quickly, especially considering the only part of the XC network with 125mph running that comes to mind is between York and Newcastle.

so how much is a litre of fuel?

 

[WelshBluebird]

How many DMUs under five coaches do make a profit though?

The biggest subsidies tend to be required by operators who run a lot of short DMU services (ATW, Northern etc).

The biggest premiums (or lowest subsidies) tend to be TOCs who run a lot of longer trains (FCC, East Coast, Virgin etc).

Track access charges are cheaper (per passenger) in a longer train. Staffing costs are cheaper (per passenger) in a longer train(A Pendolino requires as many drivers as a Pacer). Presumably there's some economy of fuel costs?

I'd be surprised if FGW's Cardiff Central - Portsmouth Harbour services do not make a profit considering how stupidly busy they can get. Especially around the Bath and Bristol area.

On thing I have noticed with XC especially is quite often the train doesn't have a huge number of passengers. But there is an awful lot of luggage which makes the service seem a lot busier than what it actually is. It'll get a bit manic at stations (people trying to find their luggage and getting off, and then people getting on and trying to find a space for their luggage), but it often calms down soon enough and there are usually seats free.

 

[JamesRowden]

As I understand it the Voyagers are pathed on the slow lines between Didcot and Reading and thus do not reach 125mph.

Manchester services use the mainline. Newcastle services use the relief line.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'd be surprised if FGW's Cardiff Central - Portsmouth Harbour services do not make a profit considering how stupidly busy they can get. Especially around the Bath and Bristol area.

On thing I have noticed with XC especially is quite often the train doesn't have a huge number of passengers. But there is an awful lot of luggage which makes the service seem a lot busier than what it actually is.

Also, in my experience the Voyagers are fairly quiet off peak (e.g. northbound from Reading at 10-12 AM).

 

[TheWalrus]

My idea would be after 1930 only run hourly along Edinburgh-Plymouth, manchester-Bournemouth, Stansted-Birmingham and Derby-Nottingham with ATW operating Gloucester-Cardiff all stations. I don't know the XC network and services that well so really I am just making some suggestions on what could happen. What are your thoughts?

 

[VP185]

As I understand it the Voyagers are pathed on the slow lines between Didcot and Reading and thus do not reach 125mph.

Due to the track layout and continuing construction around Reading XC services often end up the fast lines at present.