Virgin Trains lose Holyhead service

Lapin

As a frequent(ish) user of the Holyhead - London service over the years, I can't say I'll miss Virgin.

Hardly a trip went by without a delay of some kind, and very seldom did I arrive into Euston on time. (Curiously, the return leg often went without a hitch although there were a couple of nightmares.)

In fairness, many of the delays were the fault of Railtrack and its successor, Network Rail as works on the West Coast Main Line continue.

The franchise is to be taken over by the UK's largest rail operator FirstGroup who have promised to "offer substantial improvements in the quality and frequency of the service".

While this is welcome news, I wouldn't expect them to say anything different. I'll believe it when I see it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19264614

Article -

Virgin Trains loses West Coast Mainline franchise



Virgin had held the franchise since 1997


Virgin Rail has lost its bid to continue running the West Coast Mainline and will be replaced by the UK's largest rail operator, FirstGroup.

FirstGroup said it would "offer substantial improvements in the quality and frequency of services".

Sir Richard Branson said Virgin's loss of the franchise was "very disappointing news".

Unions and rail campaigners have argued jobs will be cut, fares will rise and catering services will be cut back.

FirstGroup already operates a number of rail routes including Great Western and ScotRail.

The company, under the name First West Coast Limited, will take over the franchise from 9 December and is due to to operate the service until 2026.
More seats
The West Coast Mainline route serves 31 million passengers travelling between London, the West Midlands, the North West, North Wales and the central belt of Scotland.

FirstGroup says it will introduce 11 new 125mph six-car electric trains on the Birmingham-to-Glasgow route and provide more direct services between destinations.

Additional Pendolino tilting trains currently being introduced by Virgin will deliver more than 28,000 seats a day.

LeftBlank

They are going to remove the catering car from the Pendolino's to put in more seats, leaving a trolley service as the only catering on them. Hardly a great start I would say.

devnull

Don't believe everything Bob Crow says, he's first priority is his members which he is very good at doing, however he is known to exaggerate many claims in order to try and win public support in the hope he can get the public on his side which in turn will help his members, nothing wrong with that from his members point of view, but he's far from being the passengers friend that he is trying to portray.

The First Presentation to shareholders on the win is here:
http://www.firstgroup.com/assets/pdfs/investors/presentations/InterCity_West_Coast_franchise_award_presentation_150812.pdf

LXFlyer

LeftBlank wrote: »

They are going to remove the catering car from the Pendolino's to put in more seats, leaving a trolley service as the only catering on them. Hardly a great start I would say.

The only person suggesting this so far is Bob Crow, head of the RMT union, who is far from a reliable source.

As it happens First actually operate probably the best of the onboard catering services available on Intercity services in Britain, on their First Great Western franchise.

Until we see all the detail, it's a bit early to be predicting doom and gloom.

Duggys Housemate

lxflyer wrote: »

The only person suggesting this so far is Bob Crow, head of the RMT union, who is far from a reliable source.

As it happens First actually operate probably the best of the onboard catering services available on Intercity services in Britain, on their First Great Western franchise.

Until we see all the detail, it's a bit early to be predicting doom and gloom.

Not really, the distances they cover don't really merit it. First is generally disliked. Old carriages, reduced carriages on many routes where standing is common - there is no cost to that for a monopoly company as you dont get a reduction - snarly staff, ridiculously opaque pricing.

LXFlyer

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Not really, the distances they cover don't really merit it. First is generally disliked. Old carriages, reduced carriages on many routes where standing is common - there is no cost to that for a monopoly company as you dont get a reduction - snarly staff, ridiculously opaque pricing.

Actually you're wrong.

The Pullman and Travelling Chef services offered to Wales and the South West are generally regarded as the best available nowadays.

The old carriages as you refer to them as are the Mark 3 HST sets which have all been refurbished.

Yes it's true FGW were castigated (and rightly so) for poor performance at the start of the current franchise, but some of that was down to the rolling stock decisions of the Department for Transport. They have managed to turn that around and it is at this stage generally viewed as one of the better operated franchises.

Duggys Housemate

lxflyer wrote: »

Actually you're wrong.

The Pullman and Travelling Chef services offered to Wales and the South West are generally regarded as the best available nowadays.

The old carriages as you refer to them as are the Mark 3 HST sets which have all been refurbished.

Yes it's true FGW were castigated (and rightly so) for poor performance at the start of the current franchise, but some of that was down to the rolling stock decisions of the Department for Transport. They have managed to turn that around and it is at this stage generally viewed as one of the better operated franchises.

My arse it is. People are spitting about this decision in the UK. First is hated in the South West. Trains are overpriced and over-crowded.

see the comments on:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/aug/15/virgin-trains-west-coast-mainline-firstgroup

devnull

A lot of the problems with rolling stock on the FGW area relate to the crazy rolling stock procurement in the United Kingdom, train operators cannot go out there an order trains off their own back even if they wanted to as the order has to be approved by the department for transport who have a history of forcing train companies to cut orders, train lengths in new stock they wish to purchase. If anything has any government funding it holds the situation up even more, for instance when FGW took the franchise in 2006 there was a procurement going on for Intercity Express trains backed by the government that were supposed to enter service in 2012/3 the order was only made in the last few weeks due to government burecuracy and the trains will not arrive until 2017 at the earliest. The Thameslink Programme has also been hit by years of delays.

See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercity_Express_Programme

There is nothing that train operators can do in the UK with overcrowding whilst procurement processes are as long, drawn out as they currently are, with the government authorities continually announcing one thing, only to either delay or abandon plans completely for something else which then also gets abandoned which does nobody any favours. However this suits the government agencies as the operators get it in the neck when there is overcrowding, despite the fact the system rather than the operators are to blame in the most part. There is no free rolling stock in the UK at the moment, it is all in use so when people moan about overcrowding it's not like they can get some more trains, there are none, the only answer is new trains to enhance services, which then allow others to cascade elsewhere, unfortunately that is not possible either if the DFT are continually putting obstacles in the way of new orders being placed and delivered quickly.

First aw now refurbishing some ex-buffet vehicles into seating accommodation, because that is the only diesel stock that is available at the present time that is not in use.,

Duggys Housemate

the other thing they could do is get rid of first class, rarely full, given that people are generally standing on-peak for a lot of the route.

SandyfordGuy

Despite what the likes of Bob Crow would like to claim that privatisation has involved trains becoming shorter and less often it has no basis on reality. Indeed what has actually happened is not that the trains have been cut, leading to overcrowding, rather that rail in the UK has had a huge passenger boom in the last 10-15 years which has led to trains getting busier because there are more passengers, not because there are less trains but then again that does not fit his agenda so instead he will try and mislead the public as his one aim is to try and get the system renationlised, for the benefit of his members, he has no regard for the traveling public but claims he does so and makes outrageous claims because he hopes that will drum up extra support to bring the lines into public ownership, if he has to mislead the public in order to do so he doesn't mind.

Example of passenger numbers:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:GBR_rail_passenegers_by_year.gif

devnull

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

the other thing they could do is get rid of first class, rarely full, given that people are generally standing on-peak for a lot of the route.

There generally are business people on many routes who only travel First Class and would not travel if standard class if that was the only choice available to them due to the extras First Class offers etc.

AngryLips

Does the current rolling stock belong to Virgin? If so what will happen to it now that they've lost the franchise?

The Idyll Race

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

My arse it is. People are spitting about this decision in the UK. First is hated in the South West. Trains are overpriced and over-crowded.

see the comments on:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/aug/15/virgin-trains-west-coast-mainline-firstgroup

I used First Great Western and First Capital Connect for much of the last three years. FGW are notorious for overcrowding and working with old rolling stock and FCC have not covered themselves with glory on the old Thameslink franchise either.

I use the Holyhead train at least twice a year and am not holding my breath for any improvements.

Perhaps Irish Rail will have a customer for their old MkIIIs after regauging?

SandyfordGuy

FGW are notorious for overcrowding and working with old rolling stock

All of which has been refurbished extensively and the HST's look brand new inside and the overcrowding is related to continued broken government promises, as well as what was mentioned by Devnull, the government also backtracked on an agreement for 48 new coaches for local services which were announced here: http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/Bristol-s-Great-Western-set-52-extra-carriages/story-11233805-detail/story.html

Only to then backtrack on their commitment and tearing up the agreement saying that there would be no new order in the short term and the 202 coach order is going to be shelved, and after electrification they will consider doing a possible electric train order or cascade trains from elsewhere, electrification is still a good few years away and diesel stock is no longer being ordered thanks to the tearing up of this agreement.

and FCC have not covered themselves with glory on the old Thameslink franchise either

True, although at the same time the franchise was left in an awful state when they got it because of years of neglect and severe overcrowding when WAGN choose not to take up the option of extra trains when they were available. FCC have added 44 extra trains since they took over the franchise but there are still problems with overcrowding but there are no more trains left that are suitable for the line anymore.

There is supposed to be a Thameslink stock order being made by the government in conjunction with FCC which will result in 110 new trains being ordered, which will allow some of the existing electric fleet being freed up to operate elsewhere and reduce overcrowding by strengthening existing services. The tender process was started in 2008, and has been blighted once again by many delays and there is still no order placed. The contract for order was originally planned to be signed in Summer 2009, with the vehicles in service by February 2012, and a full service by 2015

Perhaps Irish Rail will have a customer for their old MkIIIs after regauging?

They'd need a hell of a lot of work to be something like this, besides, MK3's should be on their way out on the line right now, but thanks to government dithering they still will have to live on until at least 2017.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWmqgPltqAY

LXFlyer

AngryLips wrote: »

Does the current rolling stock belong to Virgin? If so what will happen to it now that they've lost the franchise?

With the exception of a small number of trains, none of the rolling stock belongs to the train operating companies.

devnull

AngryLips wrote: »

Does the current rolling stock belong to Virgin? If so what will happen to it now that they've lost the franchise?

No, it will transfer to the new operating company as nearly all of the stock int eh UK is owned by ROSCO's who are train leasing companies who also sometimes part finance deals for new stock.

SandyfordGuy

The leasing companies are one of the worst aspects of the UK system, they have much higher profit margins than the train operating companies, which is often overlooked.

The Idyll Race

SandyfordGuy wrote: »

The leasing companies are one of the worst aspects of the UK system, they have much higher profit margins than the train operating companies, which is often overlooked.

The whole GB set up is a farce anyway and has lead to the most eyewatering fares that I ever came across.

Pity neither GB nor the Republic looked at Translink as a model. It works.

SandyfordGuy

The UK system certainly is not perfect but neither is Translink.

The anytime fares are expensive in the UK alwright, but if you book in advance you can get vastly cheaper fares than you can here, for example London to Scotland for £18 for instance if booked far enough in advance. Also frequency is generally higher and trains longer in the UK and much bigger geographical coverage but that is more related to population density than anything I would say so you can't really compare the two countries fully as they're totally different kettles of fish.

The Idyll Race

SandyfordGuy wrote: »

The UK system certainly is not perfect but neither is Translink.

The anytime fares are expensive in the UK alwright, but if you book in advance you can get vastly cheaper fares than you can here, for example London to Scotland for £18 for instance if booked far enough in advance. Also frequency is generally higher and trains longer in the UK and much bigger geographical coverage but that is more related to population density than anything I would say so you can't really compare the two countries fully as they're totally different kettles of fish.

I have done that. In my latter days in Bath I used South West Trains more often to go to London but it was a PITA to ensure the conditions were met.

SNCF works, but it is heretical these days in the Anglosphere to think that State provision of transport can be a good thing. The Republic's problem is the gigantic outdoor relief scam that is CIE.

Duggys Housemate

I also travelled Bath-London, on and off, two times a week and back for a lot of the last few years and while you are generally not standing from Bath - but it is never ever easy to get a seat - from then on you can be standing. With cancelled trains the next train has twice as many people. I have, however, stood and paid more than a RyanAir flight to stand for 1 1/2 -2 hours.

I understand that Irish people are anti-Irish rail, and pro-privitisation, but living in England will remove that urge, let me tell you. In any case a private monopoly is a monopoly, not a capitalist enterprise competing for customers, the customers are locked in..

vard

First thing they should do is introduce an early morning train to meet ferry passengers arriving in Hollyhead looking to travel to London.

I frequently take the rail + sail to London. It ends up taking roughly 13 hours each way - the bus takes the same length of time.

When you arrive in Hollyhead however you end up having to wait along with everyone else from 1AM or so until the first train departs at about 5.30; Hollyhead couldn't be a more disgusting, depressing and dire place to be forced to wait around.

SandyfordGuy

SNCF may be great between the big cities etc in France but the frequency on a lot of the smaller and regional lines is well below that of the same kind of lines and areas in the UK so for many people who have very few train services a day I doubt they would agree it is better.

For instance the size of the rail network in France is approx 30,000km with the UK network being approx 16,000km.. Despite the fact that France has a far bigger network, it's trains are far less frequent on many lines, in fact the UK network that is just over 50% of the size of the French network has 20% more frequent services. The UK network is also carrying more people, despite the fact that the network is half the size of the French network.

According to Wikipedia despite the fact the UK network is the 18th biggest in the world, it is the fifth busiest.

bk

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

I understand that Irish people are anti-Irish rail, and pro-privitisation, but living in England will remove that urge, let me tell you. In any case a private monopoly is a monopoly, not a capitalist enterprise competing for customers, the customers are locked in..

There are many different ways to do privatisation, the English rail model is just one model and it obviously doesn't work.

On the other hand the model used for Luas seems to work very well, as does the London Bus model.

FYI The Luas model is operated by a private company, Veoila, under license from the Natinoal Transport Agency (basically the Irish Government).

London Bus is operated by a variety of private bus companies under license of Transport For London.

No one argues that some public transport needs to be subsidised. However some parts of CIE are just ridiculously overstaffed and inefficient.

devnull

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

I also travelled Bath-London, on and off, two times a week and back for a lot of the last few years and while you are generally not standing from Bath - but it is never ever easy to get a seat - from then on you can be standing. With cancelled trains the next train has twice as many people. I have, however, stood and paid more than a RyanAir flight to stand for 1 1/2 -2 hours.

If you book in advance for a specific train you will get dirt cheap fares and a seat reservation included in the price. This is the case for all tickets where you specify the train that you are taking on an advance fare.

If you take a flexible ticket you can still make a seat reservation on the service of your choice up to two hours before departure, I believe it costs a pound or something like that but I have not done it for a while as I normally book advance tickets.

Duggys Housemate

The cost of Bristol-London return first class is 375€. The cost on-peak normal is 228.6€. Todays exchange rate.

These are prices which are paid everyday by businesses and people on those trains. Its not a crazy price paid by the very few - well not the normal fare. And you could well stand for that. Although it is unlikely from Bristol, it can happen.

I wonder what the gross profit is per journey. The trains have a driver, a train manager and a guy selling food - which is possibly self financing. Thats 2 hours each labour cost. They do need cleaners either end. That and fuel expense, against which they have full carriages all the way down. 8 Carriages. About 60 seats per carriage, people standing at no discount. Rush hour trains must be minting it.

SandyfordGuy

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

I also travelled Bath-London, on and off, two times a week and back for a lot of the last few years and while you are generally not standing from Bath - but it is never ever easy to get a seat - from then on you can be standing.

Indeed, and can you imagine the train companies frustration that this is the case because of the fact the government keeps breaking rolling stock promises yet the greater public just blame the train operator for something that they have no control of. The system in the UK needs overhauls in several areas, but the average member just blames 'greedy private sector fatcats' when the problem is far deeper and is related to government incompetence, rolling stock provisions and train leasing companies who are making huge margins. The operators have margins of around 3% so they are not making the huge sums that people seem to think. The train leasing companies are the ones creaming the profits in my view.

With cancelled trains the next train has twice as many people

But that is not a problem that is related to the UK though is it, it happens everywhere. At least the frequency of the UK train system means it won't be a too long a wait.

Duggys Housemate

devnull wrote: »

If you book in advance for a specific train you will get dirt cheap fares and a seat reservation included in the price. This is the case for all tickets where you specify the train that you are taking on an advance fare.

If you take a flexible ticket you can still make a seat reservation on the service of your choice up to two hours before departure, I believe it costs a pound or something like that but I have not done it for a while as I normally book advance tickets.

You are talking ****e, mate. There is no reduction in booking in advance, not for weekday travel, and certainly not for rush hour travel. You get the same prices as at the ATM, you just get a reserved seat, but you also have to take that particular train, and be on that seat, or you pay the full price of £89.

Which is often too restrictive, particularly coming back.

Duggys Housemate

SandyfordGuy wrote: »

Indeed, and can you imagine the train companies frustration that this is the case because of the fact the government keeps breaking rolling stock promises yet the greater public just blame the train operator for something that they have no control of. The system in the UK needs overhauls in several areas, but the average member just blames 'greedy private sector fatcats' when the problem is far deeper and is related to government incompetence, rolling stock provisions and train leasing companies who are making huge margins. The operators have margins of around 3% so they are not making the huge sums that people seem to think. The train leasing companies are the ones creaming the profits in my view.

Ok, although I cant possibly see how any train from Bristol-London could lose money.

But that is not a problem that is related to the UK though is it, it happens everywhere. At least the frequency of the UK train system means it won't be a too long a wait.

True, but it serious when you are paying big money, and you have to stand for up to 2 hours..

devnull

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

The cost of Bristol-London return first class is 375€. The cost on-peak normal is 228.6€. Todays exchange rate.

And looking in 2-3 of weeks for advance tickets the off-peak singles in standard class start from €10 and the peak trains from £15. Even next week off-peak trains start from 12.50 and on-peak are either 15/18 so there are ways to save money. Remember also that regular users will also have season tickets which whilst are not as cheap as the advance bookings, have great savings on the top rates. First class fares start from 22.00 if booked in advance and have free food and drink, newspapers, tables, charging points leather seats among other things.

These are prices which are paid everyday by businesses and people on those trains. Its not a crazy price paid by the very few - well not the normal fare. And you could well stand for that. Although it is unlikely from Bristol, it can happen.

Not really, most business people have season tickets on a monthly or a yearly basis in the most part and most leisure travelers will travel off-peak, super off-peak, or will use advance tickets at dirt cheap prices, I heard that on the west coast route today that only 20% of people use the anytime flexible tickets, the vast majority of business users are on season tickets,leisure users on advance tickets or super off-peak or off-peak.

I wonder what the gross profit is per journey. The trains have a driver, a train manager and a guy selling food - which is possibly self financing. Thats 2 hours each labour cost. They do need cleaners either end. That and fuel expense, against which they have full carriages all the way down. 8 Carriages. About 60 seats per carriage, people standing at no discount. Rush hour trains must be minting it.

The thing is people always moan, there are people moaning now that FGW have took too many tables out of standard class on the High Speed trains, yet then the same people moan why the trains are overcrowded, the problem is that more tables = less seats so there has to be a sacrifice somewhere. The average FGW high speed train journey is much more than two hours, you also forgot to add in the customer host in First class, the payments to the ROSCO's who are the ones with the high margins, the huge premiums being paid to the government. The average profit margin in the industry is about 3p in the pound so I'd hardly call it creaming it, as even if the margins go above this margin, the excess goes back to the government.

devnull

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

You are talking ****e, mate. There is no reduction in booking in advance, not for weekday travel, and certainly not for rush hour travel. You get the same prices as at the ATM, you just get a reserved seat, but you also have to take that particular train, and be on that seat, or you pay the full price of £89.

Sorry, you're incorrect, see below from a fortnights time:

&

Duggys Housemate

Good man dev null, now can you try and post the on-peak times, like I said.

Hint: The peak times go the other way.

devnull

Yeah, I looked at the wrong way, but my point still stands, that tickets are cheaper if you buy in advance, even during evening peak advance tickets from London to Bristol are half the price of the walk up fares next week.

Duggys Housemate

Right, you must have spent some time searching for that, because I couldnt find any reductions, bar one six am from Bristol in the morning, 3 weeks ahead. All the others were full price. When I learn how to post images I will show what I have.

On-peak reductions like that are as useless as tits on a bull, though. If you were using this a commuting line you would probably get a pass. Otherwise the line is used by people who go to London periodically, and they probably book within a few days, paying the full fee. The other problem with advanced tickets is they are not transferable to the next train, while tickets bought at the ATM are. Which means you pay full l whack again if you are a few minutes late. Here is what I see, and the next time 7:30 is also full price.

Thats 3 weeks ahead. I am pretty sure the cheap 06:40 didnt every go through Bath, so for people from Bath its a 5 AM wakeup, or an expensive ticket.

[IMG][/img]

SandyfordGuy

All intercity services have discounted advance tickets, although there are only a certain number of tickets at each price level and obviously the peak advance tickets are more expensive than the outside peak, but are still much cheaper than the walk-up tickets. It's done deliberately to try and push leisure travelers to use later services outside peak to manage the crowd levels, if you had peak trains the same price you'd have even more people using the busiest services and less using the quiet ones.

It's called yield management and capacity management and works on the same principles as airlines and bus operators do in various countries, encourage people to use the less popular services by reducing prices which both encourages new business in times where trains are quite empty. There is nothing wrong or unusual with that, without yield management it would make overcrowding worse, and some services totally unviable.

devnull

No, I found it like that for weeks on end, now of course it depends onw hat dates you picked, if you picked when the paralympics are on in London, I would expect most of the cheap tickets have already been bought up so there would only be more expensive tickets, I found evening peak tickets at 48.50 pretty much solid for the next few weeks but I have not looked at morning peak.

Duggys Housemate

SandyfordGuy wrote: »

All intercity services have discounted advance tickets, although there are only a certain number of tickets at each price level and obviously the peak advance tickets are more expensive than the outside peak, but are still much cheaper than the walk-up tickets. It's done deliberately to try and push leisure travelers to use later services outside peak to manage the crowd levels, if you had peak trains the same price you'd have even more people using the busiest services and less using the quiet ones.

It's called yield management and capacity management and works on the same principles as airlines and bus operators do in various countries, encourage people to use the less popular services by reducing prices which both encourages new business in times where trains are quite empty. There is nothing wrong or unusual with that, without yield management it would make overcrowding worse, and some services totally unviable.

Nobody is denying that, I wasn't disputing the fact that there are on-peak and off-peak prices, just pointing out the cost of the on peak prices. As we can see here in my last post, most of the morning on-peak advance tickets are the same price as a normal tickets, though they do reserve a seat.

Now those costs are up to £179 for on-peak both ways. You will definitely be paying more than £100, you can reduce the prices on the way back by getting home later, of course.

SandyfordGuy

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Right, you must have spent some time searching for that, because I couldnt find any reductions, bar one six am from Bristol in the morning, 3 weeks ahead. All the others were full price. When I learn how to post images I will show what I have.[/quote[

The only dates that seem to be more expensive are ones during the Paralympics, before and after that time they are in-line with what devnull said apart from a very few number of exceptions.

On-peak reductions like that are as useless as tits on a bull, though. If you were using this a commuting line you would probably get a pass. Otherwise the line is used by people who go to London periodically, and they probably book within a few days, paying the full fee. The other problem with advanced tickets is they are not transferable to the next train, while tickets bought at the ATM are. Which means you pay full l whack again if you are a few minutes late.

You're saying that you are unhappy that tickets are up to 50% off and that is a bad thing? You'd rather pay full price? Advance tickets are normally available up to 2-3 days in advance if the quota of discounted tickets has not sold out, but what I would say is that people need to get used to booking in advance to get the best fares, like with flights. In addition most leisure travelers will not travel during peak times and will travel outside them. Also if you are delayed by a connecting train on the same booking on an advance ticket it will be valid on the next departing service if you inform the ticket office.,

devnull

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Nobody is denying that, I wasn't disputing the fact that there are on-peak and off-peak prices, just pointing out the cost of the on peak prices. As we can see here in my last post, most of the morning on-peak advance tickets are the same price as a normal tickets, though they do reserve a seat.

That is not a typical week though, that is when there is a major event is on in London, and thus ticket sales will be well up on normal and there will be lots more people traveling, the same as happened with the Olympics, meaning that the cheaper fares sell out very quickly.

This is no different to what happens with flights, you go and take a look at Aer Lingus flights the next time a major event is on somewhere, do they have higher prices or not? and if you miss a flight do you get allowed to transfer to the next one for free?

SandyfordGuy

You need to realise that the UK fare system is very similar to that used by Airlines, if you want a flexible ticket on an airline you need to pay extra for it do you not, it's exactly the same with train travel in UK with the benefit that with the UK train system flexible tickets cost less in off-peak times.

bk

SandyfordGuy wrote: »

but what I would say is that people need to get used to booking in advance to get the best fares, like with flights.

When you say that, I assume you are talking about the UK.

Because I don't think the airline type model works in Ireland. Irish Rail tried the airline model and it failed due to competition from motorway and the private coach bus companies.

The reality is that distances just aren't far enough and speeds high enough to justify the airline type model in Ireland.

The airline model fell apart when you could just walk up to a bus at any time, without advance booking, buy a ticket for a quarter of the price of rail and get to your destination in the same time or faster!!

I think for Irish Rail the future is more like the Dutch train system. Max walk up price is €20 one way. No need to book in advance, no seat bookings, etc. Just a very simple system, similar to the buses.

Irish Rail is currently trying a hybrid approach, you get the cheap €20 fare if you book more then 3 days in advance and pay higher fares closer. However I don't think this model will work, while better then the old airline style model, in the end they will just end up losing the "need to travel last minute" customers to the bus coaches. So in the end I think IR will simplify aggressively and embrace the Dutch model.

- Get rid of seat reservations
- Max €20 one way fares as walk up prices.
- Dump first class
- Review onboard catering (if self financing then fine, and don't forget to include the cost of lost seats in this calculation, otherwise dump)

The only way I can see Irish Rail doing different if they can knock minimum of one hour, preferably 90 minutes off journey times. This would put them at a speed advantage over bus and then they could charge a premium for such a service.

devnull

Oh without doubt I don't think the airline model will work for Irish Rail here, it's not suited to this market because of the line speeds, population density, competition and network size for some of the reasons you mention. I'm not sure what the correct model would be though. I've noticed in Ireland people seem to be less inclined to book in advance to get the best prices than in the UK also.

LeftBlank

This article makes for interesting reading, I think

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2011/dec/30/worst-train-reading-london-paddington?intcmp=239

£4,516 for an annual ticket (no taxsaver scheme) and desperately overcrowded trains.

Duggys Housemate

SandyfordGuy wrote: »

The only dates that seem to be more expensive are ones during the Paralympics, before and after that time they are in-line with what devnull said apart from a very few number of exceptions.



You're saying that you are unhappy that tickets are up to 50% off and that is a bad thing? You'd rather pay full price? Advance tickets are normally available up to 2-3 days in advance if the quota of discounted tickets has not sold out, but what I would say is that people need to get used to booking in advance to get the best fares, like with flights. In addition most leisure travelers will not travel during peak times and will travel outside them. Also if you are delayed by a connecting train on the same booking on an advance ticket it will be valid on the next departing service if you inform the ticket office.,

You are missing the point. Whatever way you dilly dally on the on-peak trips from Bristol to London, most people pay full price. Which is £90 in one direction. In general you can get better deals coming back, or wait until the off peak time. However that means getting back past 8 or 9 pm. And those trains are also packed to standing until past Reading or Swindon.

Booking 3 weeks in advance is not possible for most business travel, when meetings are decided a week, or less in advance. The day before in many cases. And there are very few at that price 3 weeks ahead. The 3 weeks I took was not for the paralympics, I tried previous weeks - the Paralympics won't, in any case be as popular as the olympics - most people on those trains will be for business. I used to live this life, and most people I talked to had full price tickets, or passes.

In any case this seems like there are representatives of FGW on this thread. Lets bear in mind that FGW is due an inflation busting increase in fares this year, and next, and the wages in England are not matching inflation. Increases will be 20 percent over a few years. The UK model is broken.

The Idyll Race

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

You are missing the point. Whatever way you dilly dally on the on-peak trips from Bristol to London, most people pay full price. Which is £90 in one direction. In general you can get better deals coming back, or wait until the odd peak time. However that means getting back past 8 or 9 pm. And those trains are also packed to standing until past Reading or Swindon.

Booking 3 weeks in advance is not possible for most business travel, when meetings are decided a week, or less in advance. The day before in many cases. And there are very few at that price 3 weeks ahead. The 3 weeks I took was not for the paralympics, I tried previous weeks - the Paralympics won't, in any case be as popular as the olympics - most people on those trains will be for business. I used to live this life, and most people I talked to had full price tickets, or passes.

In any case this seems like there are representatives of FGW on this thread. Lets bear in mind that FGW is due an inflation busting increase in fares this year, and next, and the wages in England are not matching inflation. Increases will be 20 percent over a few years. The UK model is broken.

From the perspective of First it certainly isn't broken. Britain's railways went from Beeching to Ker-Ching! for the few. :rolleyes:

SandyfordGuy

LeftBlank wrote: »

This article makes for interesting reading, I think

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2011/dec/30/worst-train-reading-london-paddington?intcmp=239

£4,516 for an annual ticket (no taxsaver scheme) and desperately overcrowded trains.

I agree that it is a problem and the overcrowding needs to be resolved, but what can train operators do when the Government continually cancels, delays and vetos orders for trains? companies can't just go out there and orde trains and fix the problem, the provision of new trains is controlled too much by the government Thameslink and the Great Western mainline along with a few lines up north have been overcrowded for a while now simply because the fact that procurement for rolling stock is taking too long and is too drawn out. There is nothing the train companies can do about this, they are restricted to the framework that is in place, all they can do is make the most of what they have, and what stock is spare (virtually nothing as several operators are in the same boat)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-17310289

SandyfordGuy

The Idyll Race wrote: »

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

You are missing the point. Whatever way you dilly dally on the on-peak trips from Bristol to London, most people pay full price. Which is £90 in one direction. In general you can get better deals coming back, or wait until the odd peak time. However that means getting back past 8 or 9 pm. And those trains are also packed to standing until past Reading or Swindon.

Booking 3 weeks in advance is not possible for most business travel, when meetings are decided a week, or less in advance. The day before in many cases. And there are very few at that price 3 weeks ahead. The 3 weeks I took was not for the paralympics, I tried previous weeks - the Paralympics won't, in any case be as popular as the olympics - most people on those trains will be for business. I used to live this life, and most people I talked to had full price tickets, or passes.

In any case this seems like there are representatives of FGW on this thread. Lets bear in mind that FGW is due an inflation busting increase in fares this year, and next, and the wages in England are not matching inflation. Increases will be 20 percent over a few years. The UK model is broken.

From the perspective of First it certainly isn't broken. Britain's railways went from Beeching to Ker-Ching! for the few. :rolleyes:

Well actually you will find many of the train operators are very unhappy about the current situation because many of their franchise calculations were based on the government actually delivering what they promised with thinks like the Thameslink Programme, DMU orders, infrastructure improvements and the High Speed trains programme, but the government are running several years behind which is hampering growth and new services because there simply is not the rolling stock around to be flexible as they want.

I agree that some of the anytime fares are without doubt overpriced and the UK system does have it's flaws and there are costs there that need to be taken out, especially in relation to the train leasing charges, which are run by banks and investment companies that take far bigger margins out of the system than any of the operators are doing. As stated previously the margin that the train operators make is very small in comparison and setting up such leasing companies upon the privatisation was a big mistake.

You say the Paralympics are not popular but close to 3 million people are reported to be attending them from 28th August until 9th September, which falls within your three week period, I Had a look at prices myself and the prices next week are discounted like has been pointed out by other posters on this thread. Of course not every single train is but for the vast majority there are discounted tickets around, but as they are quota controlled, just like airlines, when events are on they will sell more quickly.

An interesting article can be found here, which illustrates the problems in relation to rolling stock leasing companies: Many reports have come to the conclusion they are ripping off train operating companies which translates to higher running costs and higher fares: http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-are-the-train-operators-the-villains-of-the-piece/11169 there has to be real reform of such companies who are taking such high margins.

devnull

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

In any case this seems like there are representatives of FGW on this thread. Lets bear in mind that FGW is due an inflation busting increase in fares this year, and next, and the wages in England are not matching inflation. Increases will be 20 percent over a few years. The UK model is broken.

No connection whatsoever, as someone who has worked and lived in the UK in the past in the area I'm just giving my point of view so to speak. It is very easy to blame the train operating companies for lots of problems in the UK network, and there have been some bad operators down the years such as National Express East Coast, National Express East Anglia, Connex South Central, First North Western, the original C2C etc, which were entirely down to bad management and things under their control, but some of the operators right now are suffering because of problems with infrastructure, government policy and dithering, rolling stock provision and other things that are not under their direct control.

LXFlyer

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

In any case this seems like there are representatives of FGW on this thread. Lets bear in mind that FGW is due an inflation busting increase in fares this year, and next, and the wages in England are not matching inflation. Increases will be 20 percent over a few years. The UK model is broken.

For the record I've nothing to do with them - just an occasional user, more frequent observer and regular reader of transport journals, in one of which (RAIL) they did get acknowledged as having the best Intercity catering service.

Frankly your beef should be with the UK government on the fares and not the train operators - it is government policy that sets the fares.

LeftBlank

lxflyer wrote: »

Frankly your beef should be with the UK government on the fares and not the train operators - it is government policy that sets the fares.

This would be my point too - the fact than an annual ticket for 35 minute rail journey (plus LU) that you more than likely have to stand on costs in excess of 4,500 pounds is a cumulative failure of the whole system.

The Idyll Race

lxflyer wrote: »

For the record I've nothing to do with them - just an occasional user, more frequent observer and regular reader of transport journals, in one of which (RAIL) they did get acknowledged as having the best Intercity catering service.

Frankly your beef should be with the UK government on the fares and not the train operators - it is government policy that sets the fares.

It was certainly the failure of the last Labour government to undo privatisation. Britain is now stuck with the profit taking approach to the railways that has lead to First holding the Greater Western, Capital Connect and WCML franchises and the botch that is the state ownership by default of the East Coast Main Line when National Express handed back the keys.

British Rail was huge, unwieldy but it did do a job. Maybe not as efficiently as it could have, but the monster that is rail privatisation in Britain is only benefiting those who are profit taking in an unnecessarily complicated set of structures.

Translink has been criticised earlier, but it uniquely provides in these islands a fully integrated transport system. CIE doesn't do this, it grudgingly implements the decisions of its political masters and its different sectors do not integrate with each other. It has outlived any possible usefulness it ever had and should be abolished forthwith.

Reform of Britain's railways will have to wait for a Labour government that has the balls to stand up to the Murdoch and Rothmere press.