GoBus/BE launch new Cork to Dublin/Airport Express service

bk

schemingbohemia wrote: »

Where do you get this six figure sum from?

- Google Ads
- Facebook Ads
- Sponsored Bus during the Saint Patricks Day Parade in Cork (BTW a really good idea, great example of gorilla marketing).
- Sponsorship on the Bus to UCC

This will all easily add up to a 6 figure sum.

BTW I'm strongly of the opinion that BE should be separated into two completely separate companies BE-PSO and BE-Expressway, with separate staff of all types (drivers, mechanics, management, IT, accounting, etc.), separate website, branding, marketing, etc.

Also I believe that all bus stations should be taken off BE and put under the control of the NTA. The NTA could then publish a price list for access to the bus stations that all companies can avail of equally including BE-PSO, BE-Expressway, Aircoach, Citylink, etc.

This is the only way to ensure a fair and level playing field. And to ensure that the commercial side of BE doesn't benefit unfairly due to their integration and scale with the PSO side.

Then I have no problem at all with BE-Expressway competing aggressively with Aircoach, GoBus, etc. And doing any sort of advertising that they like.

Again I would ask:
- Are GoBE paying for access to the bus stations?
- How much are they paying?
- Is the same level of access available to Aircoach, Citylink, etc. and for the same price?

Koops80

bk wrote: »

Yes and that is why there are very serious questions to be asked here:

- Are GoBus paying for access to BE stations (which were paid for by public money).
- How much are GoBus paying for this access?
- Is the same level of access available to Aircoach, Citylink, etc. for the same price?
- Are GoBus paying for the ads on the BE websites?
- What is the commercial relationship between BE and GoBus?
- How much money is BE pumping into the GoBE entity to pay for advertising etc.

We all know that there are all sorts of ways that public funds can help indirectly pay for BE's commercial services, the most obvious being BE commercial services using bus stations paid for by the public. But there are many other ways, BE doesn't have separate repair depots, mechanics, parts, account department, website, IT department, marketing department, etc. for their commercial and PSO routes, these sections are all at least partly funded by public money and gives BE a scale in purchasing power that benefits it's commercial operations too.

So the question is how much of this benefit is going to the GoBE entity.

I have absolutely zero issue with two private operators competing aggressively with one another. In fact I love it, it is good for the consumer.

But what I don't like seeing is a semi state in some sort of weird quasi relationship with a private company attempting to kill off another private company.

The worst thing that could happen for the travelling public to Cork is that Aircoach are killed off and then BE kill off GoBE and we go back to the old ways of no late night services, slow buses and expensive tickets. No one but CIE employees gain from that scenario.

And this is what is leading me to question if GoBE are really just BE now. Logically from a business perspective it makes sense for GoBE to target Irish Rail passengers, not Aircoach passengers.

GoBE's product is a higher end product then Aircoach, GoBE have a much newer fleet with all toilet equipped. Aircoach on the other hand have much cheaper prices and much better schedule.

It makes sense for Aircoach to be targeting the more price conscious student market. On the other hand it makes more sense for GoBE to be targeting less price sensitive but comfort oriented people.

The obvious easy pickings for GoBE here are Irish Rail passengers, the folks who are currently paying 2 to 4 times more then bus, of course you won't win them all over, but you will win over at least some of them, in particular with GoBE's higher spec product.

It is much, MUCH, easier for GoBE to win over people who are paying 2 to 4 times more, then it is to win over people who are actually paying less for a very similar service!

Look at it this way, in 2011 the modal share between Galway and Dublin was 50% car, 25% train, 25% bus. Between Cork and Dublin it was 50% car, 40% train, 10% bus. Looking at these numbers it is obvious that the major area of expansion for bus companies is to target train passengers, so they end up with a modal share similar to the Galway route.

The fact GoBE aren't doing the logical, sensible thing makes me seriously question what the relationship between BE and GoBus is and who really is pulling the strings here.

After that big rant you only get a thanks one thanks.

You have one record and that's anti civil servant and you ram it down everyones neck, this was especially clear in this case as from day one of gobes operations at every opportunity you post a pro aircoach comment and I doubt it will stop until gobe close up

bk

Koops80 wrote: »

You have one record and that's anti civil servant and you ram it down everyones neck, this was especially clear in this case as from day one of gobes operations at every opportunity you post a pro aircoach comment and I doubt it will stop until gobe close up

Hmmm.... You couldn't be more wrong!!

Go back and look at who actually started this entire thread in the first place, I did!!

And take a look at my posts where I actually used the GoBE service and reviewed it pretty fairly, giving both the pros and cons and then tried to give positive feedback on how to improve the GoBE service (some of which were actually implemented, e.g. walk up ticket sales, tickets on your smartphone):

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=81017931&postcount=142

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=81027417&postcount=147

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=81491313&postcount=153

And then this thread from back in September 2012 pretty much describes my position:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80584434&postcount=84

Absolutely, personally I want to see both Aircoach and GoBus run successful, profitable services. Just like CityLink and GoBus seem to be in Galway.

So you see I don't want to see GoBus go down, I want to see GoBus being a strong, successful service along with Aircoach.

However having watched these routes develop closely over the last few months, I do believe that Aircoach is the far more daring and innovative company, that is most benefiting travellers to Cork.

- Aircoach were the first to introduce non stop fast direct services to Cork
- Aircoach were the first to introduce late night services.
- Aircoach were the first to introduce almost an hourly service.
- Just this week Aircoach added yet another daily departure, 11pm ex Cork.

Meanwhile GoBE have in the last two months raised prices, cut their services in half to bi-hourly and cut a late night service. Not good for the travelling public.

GoBE cutting their schedule in half just weeks before they launched this massive marketing campaign is particularly strange!

BTW calling me anti civil servant is bizarre!! What civil servants are you actually talking about? CIE and BE staff are neither civil nor public servants. They are employees of a semi state.

The only civil servants involved in all of this are the members of the NTA and Department of Transport and I actually have a great deal of respect for them.

monument

Koops80 wrote: »

After that big rant you only get a thanks one thanks.

You have one record and that's anti civil servant and you ram it down everyones neck, this was especially clear in this case as from day one of gobes operations at every opportunity you post a pro aircoach comment and I doubt it will stop until gobe close up

Attack the post and not the post -- play the ball and not the man.

- Moderator

Richard Logue

monument wrote: »

Attack the post and not the post -- play the ball and not the man.

- Moderator

Yes that is sensible advice monument. Play the ball not the man.

schemingbohemia

bk wrote: »

- Google Ads
- Facebook Ads
- Sponsored Bus during the Saint Patricks Day Parade in Cork (BTW a really good idea, great example of gorilla marketing).
- Sponsorship on the Bus to UCC

This will all easily add up to a 6 figure sum.

BTW I'm strongly of the opinion that BE should be separated into two completely separate companies BE-PSO and BE-Expressway, with separate staff of all types (drivers, mechanics, management, IT, accounting, etc.), separate website, branding, marketing, etc.

Also I believe that all bus stations should be taken off BE and put under the control of the NTA. The NTA could then publish a price list for access to the bus stations that all companies can avail of equally including BE-PSO, BE-Expressway, Aircoach, Citylink, etc.

This is the only way to ensure a fair and level playing field. And to ensure that the commercial side of BE doesn't benefit unfairly due to their integration and scale with the PSO side.

Then I have no problem at all with BE-Expressway competing aggressively with Aircoach, GoBus, etc. And doing any sort of advertising that they like.

Again I would ask:
- Are GoBE paying for access to the bus stations?
- How much are they paying?
- Is the same level of access available to Aircoach, Citylink, etc. and for the same price?

So it's a guess then?

Also how do you know that it's BE that's paying for it and not Gobus or the special purpose vehicle GOBE?

alaimacerc

bk wrote: »

BTW I'm strongly of the opinion that BE should be separated into two completely separate companies BE-PSO and BE-Expressway, with separate staff of all types (drivers, mechanics, management, IT, accounting, etc.), separate website, branding, marketing, etc.

So in other words, you're arguing on the one hand, that what public transport needs is for the inept and inefficient public sector to be sent hurtling off the road and end up in a ditch, wheels spinning and on fire; and on the other, that public entity is "unfairly" benefiting from being more efficient due to economies of scale?

It's clear there are unlikely ever to be a number of private operators for competition to really operate "optimally", even on a theoretical basis. ("Two" is not the magic number, in case anyone missed this, and nor is "three".) Given that free-market theory tells us that the free market isn't going to work properly here, I would personally not at all relish the prospect of scrapping or crippling existing provision just to "clear the field" for that. To say nothing about the salutary lesson of what's happen in the name of a free market in public transport on the island immediately to the right.

Again I would ask:
- Are GoBE paying for access to the bus stations?
- How much are they paying?
- Is the same level of access available to Aircoach, Citylink, etc. and for the same price?

And again I say "heck if we know" and "they won't tell you in a fit". If you actually want to know this, write to your TD, and maybe in a couple of years there'll be a Dail transport committee hearing that'll tell you... well, almost certainly, same as the above. Just banging on about it here comes across more like an exercise in rubbishing the venture.

alaimacerc

schemingbohemia wrote: »

Also how do you know that it's BE that's paying for it and not Gobus or the special purpose vehicle GOBE?

I don't there even is a special purpose "vehicle" (I see what you did there!) GoBE. Or if there is, it would have to a holding entity just for the purposes of carving up the profits (or losses): according to the ToS document, the actual operator is simply GoBus. My guess is that GoBE is just a trademark.

bk

alaimacerc I have actually no idea what you are trying to say!! You post isn't very clear.

My opinion is that BE are a slow, expensive operation that has little innovation.

I'll remind you the before Aircoach entered the Cork market. The bus service to Cork operated by BE took 4 hours 30 minutes, was only bi-hourly, stopped at 6pm (no late night public transport at all between are two largest cities!!) and didn't operate to Dublin Airport.

Thanks to Aircoach we now have an hourly service that runs almost all day including over night, that takes just 3 hours and which goes to Dublin Airport.

You can see the same in Galway and Limerick with private companies offering similar services.

So yes, I think the private sector are doing a far better job then BE in offering a far superior and innovative service.

I don't see how anyone can argue against that?

bk

Ok, I'm going to try and answer your questions.

alaimacerc wrote: »

So in other words, you're arguing on the one hand, that what public transport needs is for the inept and inefficient public sector to be sent hurtling off the road and end up in a ditch, wheels spinning and on fire; and on the other, that public entity is "unfairly" benefiting from being more efficient due to economies of scale?

A semi-state can at the same time be inept and inefficient, but also pose a major treat to leaner private company if the semi-state decides to use it's massive scale and resources, many of which are paid for by the public, to specifically target the private operator, in an attempt to drive them out of the market.

GoBE is a particularly interesting case, as BE get the benefit of using a lean private operator with little over heads, but can help that operator benefit significantly from BE resources such as use of their Bus Stations, ads on their website, marketing on their twitter/facebook pages, IT staff, sell tickets using their TVM's, etc.

Aircoach is the best thing to ever happen to travellers between Dublin and Cork and I don't want to see them driven away so that we end up with the same old crap BE schedules, etc.

alaimacerc wrote: »

It's clear there are unlikely ever to be a number of private operators for competition to really operate "optimally", even on a theoretical basis. ("Two" is not the magic number, in case anyone missed this, and nor is "three".) Given that free-market theory tells us that the free market isn't going to work properly here, I would personally not at all relish the prospect of scrapping or crippling existing provision just to "clear the field" for that. To say nothing about the salutary lesson of what's happen in the name of a free market in public transport on the island immediately to the right.

It is the NTA who seem to have decided to license only two direct non stop services to each city. It seems to have worked very well in the case of Galway. Don't forget that these services don't exist in a vacuum, they are also competing against the car and Irish Rail and BE. That is a lot of competition.

serfboard

Fadó, fadó CIE were the only ones allowed to operate inter-city bus services. Certain private operators spotted a loophole in the law that said that a club could offer an alternative service, so long as those travelling were members of the club.

So, the intial competition to BE was these private clubs, some of whom dropped the pretence entirely and ended up in court (for not making passengers members of the club).

In Galway, one of the first into the Galway->Dublin market was Nestors bus, and I'd guess that was at least 25 years ago. They were followed by Citylink (operated by Jim Burke who subsequently sold the company and now operates GoBus).

Now that we've finally got our act together we have the NTA who operates the licences and they seem to have a policy of only allowing two non-stop inter-city operators. So we have GoBus & Citylink on Galway->Dublin (BE's X20 is not non-stop Inter-City), Citylink & BE on Galway->Limerick, Citylink only on Limerick->Cork (AFAIK) and two services on Cork->Dublin. Aircoach got one and GoBus got the other. As others have said, BE missed out.

Now for some (presumably financial) reason, GoBus were persuaded to go into an alliance with BE on this route, and most importantly, this was allowed by the NTA. In my opinion it should not have been. BE missed the bus(!) - tough. Them's the breaks.

However, I presume GoBus went to the NTA and said "We have to team up with BE or we won't be able to operate the route", and the NTA, wanting competition, allowed it.

If that's what happened, and it's pure speculation on my part, the NTA should have withdrawn the licence from GoBus and put it out to tender/offer again, and which point BE could have applied on their own.

I would have less of a problem with a straight BE Vs Aircoach fight on Dublin->Cork than I do with this hybrid business.

LXFlyer

bk wrote: »

alaimacerc I have actually no idea what you are trying to say!! You post isn't very clear.

My opinion is that BE are a slow, expensive operation that has little innovation.

I'll remind you the before Aircoach entered the Cork market. The bus service to Cork operated by BE took 4 hours 30 minutes, was only bi-hourly, stopped at 6pm (no late night public transport at all between are two largest cities!!) and didn't operate to Dublin Airport.

Thanks to Aircoach we now have an hourly service that runs almost all day including over night, that takes just 3 hours and which goes to Dublin Airport.

You can see the same in Galway and Limerick with private companies offering similar services.

So yes, I think the private sector are doing a far better job then BE in offering a far superior and innovative service.

I don't see how anyone can argue against that?

For the record I would point you to the Deloitte report which found that BE operations were very efficient which does seem to contrast with your statements. But why let that get in the way of a good rant?

Also bear in mind that BE like Dublin Bus were until recently constrained by political interference that meant retaining existing services and not axing loss making routes. Neither you nor I know what BE potentially tried to introduce but were not allowed to do so.

Also, by breaking BE up you also lose the integrated network that allows anyone but a ticket from say Castletownbere to Sligo for example. How is that good for the consumer?

bk

lxflyer wrote: »

Also, by breaking BE up you also lose the integrated network that allows anyone but a ticket from say Castletownbere to Sligo for example. How is that good for the consumer?

Well integrated ticketing could be required by the NTA. You don't need BE for that.

LXFlyer

bk wrote: »

Well integrated ticketing could be required by the NTA. You don't need BE for that.

Maybe, maybe not. Don't know too many countries that have fully integrated multiple bus operator integrated ticketing on a national basis.

Glad to see you conveniently ignored my point on BE efficiency.

alaimacerc

lxflyer wrote: »

Also, by breaking BE up you also lose the integrated network that allows anyone but a ticket from say Castletownbere to Sligo for example.

Integrated network? Ha. At present, not only do we not have integration across operators, we don't even have integration within each operator. Most obviously, between the different "arms" of CIE. Want to travel up to Dublin on the train in comfort, then return on the late bus, long after the stations are all closed? Tough, that'll be two separate single tickets, please, at full whack. There's not even "integration" between the different BE operations, last time I checked, like getting a "local" service to the bus station, and an only-ever-so-slightly-less-local bus to the airport.

In fact, the last time I tried to "through ticket" even on a BE expressway service, when I got on the second bus the driver looked at me exasperatedly, told me the ticket was already used, and then acted like he was doing me a major personal favour by letting me on the bus at all.

bk wrote: »

Well integrated ticketing could be required by the NTA. You don't need BE for that.

And mandating it on that basis would be administrative nightmare. Whole new systems for cost-coding each component, and dividing up the passenger revenue accordingly. As noted above, the baby's already in rough enough shape without chucking it out with the bathwater just yet.

alaimacerc

serfboard wrote: »

Now for some (presumably financial) reason, GoBus were persuaded to go into an alliance with BE on this route, and most importantly, this was allowed by the NTA. In my opinion it should not have been. BE missed the bus(!) - tough. Them's the breaks.

I don't really see the basis for this. By your own account, GoBus (or more precisely, the company trading using the "GoBus" brand) has the licence for the route. They're still operating the same route. Where's the foul? They've just changed the branding, and made some (admittedly entirely opaque and mysterious) side-deal with BE for use of their stations (or in the case of my bus back to Cork, "somewhere vaguely near" the station), ticketing machines, departure boards, use of their name and logo, and whatever the heck else the deal actually covers.

alaimacerc

bk wrote: »

A semi-state can at the same time be inept and inefficient, but also pose a major treat to leaner private company if the semi-state decides to use it's massive scale and resources, many of which are paid for by the public, to specifically target the private operator, in an attempt to drive them out of the market.

Which is precisely what I said: you're arguing opposite propositions simultaneously, on whatever basis suits. BE is either more efficient or less efficient than private operators, across the piece. Whether its component efficiencies are the kind you don't like, and its inefficiencies the kind you do, is entirely a matter for your aesthetic judgement. Not of economics, much less of what's for the good of the transport system. Economies of scale and anti-competitive practices aren't particular to the public sector.

Aircoach is the best thing to ever happen to travellers between Dublin and Cork and I don't want to see them driven away so that we end up with the same old crap BE schedules, etc.

The regulator should presumably act if has reason to believe there's "below-cost selling" or the like going on here, or other such anti-competitive shenanigans. (I assume it has access to the "commercially sensitive" details that we don't, for the public and the private operators, though one assumes such commonsense details at one's peril, in my experience.) Obviously it should be acting in such a way as to improve the overall provision, by whatever means necessary. It doesn't follow from that that it should be acting systematically in a Milton-Friedman-approved "in the spirit of free enterprise, you can fight to the death for it" manner in which subsidies are cut, public provision is kneecapped, and private operators cherrypick gleefully, as seems to be your main take-away.

It is the NTA who seem to have decided to license only two direct non stop services to each city. It seems to have worked very well in the case of Galway. Don't forget that these services don't exist in a vacuum, they are also competing against the car and Irish Rail and BE. That is a lot of competition.

And the magic number isn't four, either! Though counting the car and the rail as direct competitors is in any case problematic, if one has an objective on the one hand, cutting or eliminating rail subsidy, or on the other, of managing down total car road-miles. Plus to belabour the obvious, if one doesn't have a car, it's not an option on a per-journey basis.

We seem to have as little idea about the NTA's policy as we do any of the other actors', so this surmise may or not be accurate, and may or may not be variable according to whatever circumstances it perceives. The real point, however, is that not all goods and services are as amenable to direct competition as others. For there to be enough distinct bus operators to optimally compete would make a nonsense of any attempt at scheduling and capacity, and certainly doesn't seem consistent with your other suggestion of mandating fare-sharing across them all.

Victor

lxflyer wrote: »

Glad to see you conveniently ignored my point on BE efficiency.

Play nice.

Moderator

currins_02

lxflyer wrote: »

For the record I would point you to the Deloitte report which found that BE operations were very efficient which does seem to contrast with your statements. ?

Just to point out that the McCarthy and Mazars reports to varying degrees both raised issue with the "efficiency" of BE.

The reality is that you must remian objective with "independent" reports, they tend to favour who "commissioned" them.

Great discussion lads/lassies!

schemingbohemia

Victor wrote: »

Play nice.

Moderator

Seriously? How is what lxflyer asked not being nice, s/he's asking a simple question.

What specific rule as s/he broken through reminding bk that they didn't answer the point raised?

monument

schemingbohemia wrote: »

Seriously? How is what lxflyer asked not being nice, s/he's asking a simple question.

What specific rule as s/he broken through reminding bk that they didn't answer the point raised?

It's against the rules to question mod instruction on threads. If you have a problem send a PM.

Mod

bk

lxflyer wrote: »

Glad to see you conveniently ignored my point on BE efficiency.

The reason I didn't respond is because BE is probably "largely efficient" for a semi state. I don't think it is as efficient as a private operator, but no where as bad as Irish Rail.

I certainly do think there are big questionable areas, like why in gods name is the 109 route a PSO route? It has to be one of the busiest routes in the country, with the 109 buses almost always full, including the double deckers and relatively high ticket prices. Yet BE get a PSO subsidy for this route and the buses they use are paid for by the NTA!!!

I find it very hard to believe that this route couldn't be operated by a private operator with no subsidy required and probably cheaper ticket prices too.

However the reason I didn't mention all of this, is because my issue with BE is not their efficiency, rather it is their complete lack of innovation.

Again they don't operate a single late night service to Cork, Galway or Limerick. Hell the last service from Cork is 6pm. They don't operate a direct non stop service to a single city in Ireland. For years they didn't bother servicing Dublin Airport. They only introduced free wifi recently after the private companies did. They bought brand new coaches and didn't bother to include a toilet!!

My biggest problem with BE is they seem to go out of their way not to compete with their sister company Irish Rail. We have ended up with the worst possible situation, no integration of services between Irish Rail, DB and BE, yet no competition between them either.

It is BE's lack of innovation, leadership and competitiveness that I object to.

serfboard

bk wrote: »

They don't operate a direct non stop service to a single city in Ireland.

Incorrect. The X51 is a non-stop direct service from Galway to Limerick operated by BE. It takes an hour and 20 minutes.

It competes with Citylink's Galway->Limerick non-stop service (same duration) but is far more frequent (hourly - 10 services a day from 09:00 to 18:00 Vs 5 services a day from 08:30 to 19:30).

However, taking your other point the X51 finishes at 18:00 whereas the last Citylink service is at 19:30. However I'd guess BEs response would be that the last 51 service (the slow one that takes 2 and a quarter hours :eek:) leaves Galway at 20:05 (and serves Ennis and Shannon airport - which is handy).

Richard Logue

bk wrote: »

My biggest problem with BE is they seem to go out of their way not to compete with their sister company Irish Rail. We have ended up with the worst possible situation, no integration of services between Irish Rail, DB and BE, yet no competition between them either.

It is BE's lack of innovation, leadership and competitiveness that I object to.

The X51 was introduced by BE specifically to compete with IE on the Limerick-Galway route. Since the reign of Mary O'Rourke all CIE Group companies compete with each other, this was confirmed by former IE executive Oliver Doyle at an IRRS meeting in London last month.

I don't think it's healthy for the CIE Group companies to compete with each other, they should be running as an integrated transport service.

foggy_lad

serfboard wrote: »

Incorrect. The X51 is a non-stop direct service from Galway to Limerick operated by BE. It takes an hour and 20 minutes.

It competes with Citylink's Galway->Limerick non-stop service (same duration) but is far more frequent (hourly - 10 services a day from 09:00 to 18:00 Vs 5 services a day from 08:30 to 19:30).

However, taking your other point the X51 finishes at 18:00 whereas the last Citylink service is at 19:30. However I'd guess BEs response would be that the last 51 service (the slow one that takes 2 and a quarter hours :eek:) leaves Galway at 20:05 (and serves Ennis and Shannon airport - which is handy).

From experience the x51 regularly acts as a limited stop service on the route with some drivers droping off friends and neighbours and regulars in the villages along the route.

bk

But if I'm not mistaken, the X51 was only introduced after the GoBus/Citylink direct non stop services were introduced.

The X51, X8 etc. are responses to competition from private companies, rather then competing with Irish Rail.

devnull

The X51 was actually out before the Citylink Galway - Limerick - Cork service.

The X20 came out after the non stop services though, they made it go to the airport first rather than the city to try and give it a USP.

The X8 was clearly aimed at Aircoach though.

alaimacerc

bk wrote: »

My biggest problem with BE is they seem to go out of their way not to compete with their sister company Irish Rail. We have ended up with the worst possible situation, no integration of services between Irish Rail, DB and BE, yet no competition between them either.

Richard Logue wrote: »

I don't think it's healthy for the CIE Group companies to compete with each other, they should be running as an integrated transport service.

I agree with you both (to one extent or other) on this. I'd strongly prefer to see integration, and I think that strong public section provision is the most straightforward way of doing it. If it can be done by regulatory mandation, as well as or instead, fair enough. But if we're not going to have that (for whatever mysterious reason), some actual private section behaviour could be preferable to the present "arm's length state" arrangement, which seems to have no logic to it at all. It seems to have been arrived at very some muddled combination of a desire to use it as a political buffer for ministerial responsibility (AKA the HSE model, or "I'm using Neil as a condom"), a move towards privatisation or public-private partnership that's indefinitely stalled, and the usual "things happened because they happened, don't ask us, we just live here".

alaimacerc

monument wrote: »

It's against the rules to question mod instruction on threads. If you have a problem send a PM.

OK, here's a comment and a request without recourse to the Forbidden Rhetorical Practice of asking a mod a question, then.

If you're going to give an instruction, in public, where all participants can see it, it would seem preferable to make it specific, and even handed. Just issuing a number of one-sided reprimands and vague injunctions, in a discussion that would best be characterised by both sides being "mildly tetchy", kinda comes across as rowing in behind.

alaimacerc

bk wrote: »

The reason I didn't respond is because BE is probably "largely efficient" for a semi state. I don't think it is as efficient as a private operator, but no where as bad as Irish Rail.

Again, a claim that it's lacking in efficiency (albeit backing off on the extent of this), having just claimed that it benefits from excessive economies of scale, making it more "unfairly efficient", as compared to the privates. Are you comparing it to the actual private companies, or some notional private company on an entirely different scale?

I certainly do think there are big questionable areas, like why in gods name is the 109 route a PSO route? It has to be one of the busiest routes in the country, with the 109 buses almost always full, including the double deckers and relatively high ticket prices. Yet BE get a PSO subsidy for this route and the buses they use are paid for by the NTA!!!

Having never been to Navan, Cavan, or anyplace else ending in "avan" that I can think of, I have to take your word for that. But that's purely a criticism of the regulator, or the broader framework the regulator is operating under. What are BE supposed to do, wring their hands, say "we're an incompetent public body, we hate ourselves and run the busses, please don't give us any money to run this service any more"? If it's that much of a cash cow, isn't at least one of the private operators, on the precedent of the "route creep" model from the intercities, able to run the cheaper, better, and unsubsidised service you envisage right now, and have the BE one "wither on the vine"?

However the reason I didn't mention all of this, is because my issue with BE is not their efficiency, rather it is their complete lack of innovation.

[...]

It is BE's lack of innovation, leadership and competitiveness that I object to.

I don't see what the distinction you intend between "efficiency" and "competitiveness" is. They're essentially synonyms. And you've already criticised them for behaving in a 'predatory' manner in their involvement with GoBE, so presumably it's not that you're looking for some more direct response to the action of their competitors.