New Bartons Website launched and possible rebranding

dublinman1990

I just now noticed this evening that the Bartons company based in Maynooth have unveiled their new website last March. I think personally IMO that 50 years of operation in business is a great achievement for a private bus company.

http://www.bartons.ie/latest-news/2-march-2012.html

I have travelled sometime last year on and I have to say they are very well maintained. It was probably a 49/53 seater coach. Very Comfy.:)

Anyway, the website itself is impressive. I like the new feature of the interactive map you have in it is great.

http://www.bartons.ie/

And a question to ask; Are there any plans to rebrand the service; I am asking this on the basis of a photo showing a different bartons sign of your double deckers

Photo here:

http://images.yuku.com.s3.amazonaws.com/image/jpg/c1a16514230b5240feea8323f5b62dadbd5d689c_r.jpg

Is this a permanent new logo or it is for temporary basis.

Thanks.

AlekSmart

http://www.bartons.ie/coaches/78-seater.html

Perhaps I'm being churlish,but to describe their ex Dublin Bus Alexander R Type vehicles as Low-Floor Easy-Access is stretching things a wee bit....particularly as Dublin Bus is retiring them precisely because they do NOT meet the LFEA requirements......:eek:

Cookie_Monster

you sound like an advertisement for them tbh

dowlingm

Actually I think the web design isn't bad at all, relatively uncluttered, not festooned with google ads like IE's last website. A little bit of untidiness at the bottom where the request quote button overspills onto the rest of the table (in Chrome anyway)

CIE

AlekSmart wrote: »

http://www.bartons.ie/coaches/78-seater.html

Perhaps I'm being churlish, but to describe their ex-Dublin Bus Alexander R Type vehicles as Low-Floor Easy-Access is stretching things a wee bit....particularly as Dublin Bus is retiring them precisely because they do NOT meet the LFEA requirements......:eek:

How nice. Nobody ever heard of "grandfathering" in the EU or Ireland? Functional buses have to get chucked because some bureaucrat says they don't comply with some or other standard, and the taxpayers' money gets wasted yet again. Give me High Floor Normal Access buses any day. It was only a single step up on the high-floor buses anyhow...!!

AlekSmart

CIE wrote: »

How nice. Nobody ever heard of "grandfathering" in the EU or Ireland? Functional buses have to get chucked because some bureaucrat says they don't comply with some or other standard, and the taxpayers' money gets wasted yet again. Give me High Floor Normal Access buses any day. It was only a single step up on the high-floor buses anyhow...!!

Crikey CIE,with views like that you run the risk of incurring a Permaban :eek:....!!

I believe that 2016 is some "Line in the EU sand" for ALL Public Service Vehicles beyond which there be only dragons.

However,I do actually subscribe to a portion of your thinking.

As somebody who has driven Van Hool AN68's,KD and KC's,RH and RV's and now AV AX EV VT's in service it's argueable that as the accesibility has been increased so too has the ability of folks ability to cope decreased.

I coming around to a belief that somewhere along the process,officialdom has lost sight of a very important element in anything to do with Human behaviour.......that element being Human NATURE.

Lowering the floor level on buses,coaches,trains and the rest is all perfectly laudable,however the point at which this lowering moves from facilitating access to encouraging laziness is often blurred.

I would suggest that designers,engineers and worthy social planners tend to see their products as being 100% desireable and therefore brook no discussion on the wider implications of their designs.

Front-Line staff however,can often accquire a slightly different perspective as the reality of Human Nature comes into play.

One only has to look around an average Dublin street to witness an obvious level of obesity,restricted movement,muscular and joint problems,not all of which benefit from making daily movement easier...I would argue that in some cases it may be more Socially beneficial to actually engineer-in a slightly greater level of effort to be expended on a regular basis.

It's worth underlining that in all of this,I am referring to the "average" ambulatory person of whatever age-group as the issue of facilitating access to Public Transport for the registered physically disabled is a slightly different one.