10%

s8080

take with a pinch of salt.

a little bird told me the private response to the 10% routes tender has been less than enthusiastic.
dublin bus might have been the best offer.

the process could be delayed for “technical reasons”.

expect a new found hole in dublin bus finances to magically appear which will result in a emergency fare increase.

got to make the conditions for the 10% tender a little better to get the response they want.

we should know within the next few weeks

end of the road

the NTA determine the fares now don't they?

Aard

Is this the orbital+local routes package? Unsurprising theres little interest. The setup costs are high, and setting up depots etc just to get the scraps of the bus network isn't attractive. Dublin Bus OTOH have the resources to operate the routes.

They should have put a corridor or routes out to tender. This would also have inspired confidence for future tenders. For example, all routes east of the N11 plus an orbital/local or two.

n97 mini

Is this the shítty routes like the 239? No wonder there's no interest. Let the operators decide the route between A and B.

end of the road

or just leave it as it is

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime

I believe it was delayed as unions were trying to save the 10%

Also you'd want to be an idiot of a private operator to take loss making routes

Also youd be ddat as a customer to want a private operator doing it also.

LXFlyer

Given that the process has been delayed until mid-January (in terms of submissions being requested from interested parties by the NTA), so as to allow the NTA and unions thrash out a deal on how this goes forward, I'm not sure anyone can make any sort of conclusion at this stage.

foggy_lad

Maybe the NTA will bring back City IMP type minibuses to operate these routes hiring several private operators to provide drivers for them, like they have done with other routes in Laois where they paid for buses and the company M&A coaches supply the drivers and recieve a set amount from the NTA.

end of the road

foggy_lad wrote: »

Maybe the NTA will bring back City IMP type minibuses to operate these routes hiring several private operators to provide drivers for them, like they have done with other routes in Laois where they paid for buses and the company M&A coaches supply the drivers and recieve a set amount from the NTA.

my fealing is that each private company supplying drivers and the NTA paying a set amount is the plan. it all depends on whether operators are interested though.

AlekSmart

Aard wrote: »

Is this the orbital+local routes package? Unsurprising theres little interest. The setup costs are high, and setting up depots etc just to get the scraps of the bus network isn't attractive. Dublin Bus OTOH have the resources to operate the routes.

They should have put a corridor or routes out to tender. This would also have inspired confidence for future tenders. For example, all routes east of the N11 plus an orbital/local or two.

The NTA have stated that where a successful tenderer does not have Depot facilities,the the Authority would take steps to provide these.

The NTA does NOT have any legal entitlement to CIE premises,so it would most likely be a combination of hard-standing and portacabins in the short term.

However,what appears to be causing the current uncertainty within the Authority,is the speed with which bus demand has escalated.

With BAC having reduced it's fleet by some 200+ 72 seat vehicles since 2008 and the NTA specified replacements being 67 seat,it can be seen that the overall carrying capacity of BAC is substantially reduced (1,000 Seats).

If we look at the Fleet Size requirements outlined by then Transport Minister Martin Cullen in 2006,we get an indication of where Dublin should be in relation to Buses.

http://www.eamonryan.ie/2006/09/28/the-departments-plans-for-the-regulation-of-the-dublin-bus-market/

Minister for Transport (Mr. Cullen): The Government yesterday made a number of significant decisions which will provide a solid basis for expanded and improved bus services throughout the country over the coming years, while ensuring better value for money for both passengers and taxpayers.

In the case of the greater Dublin area, there is a requirement for an expansion of the number of buses providing scheduled services.? This will require an increase in the total number of buses to approximately 1,800, under Transport 21, with a requirement for at least 200 extra buses over the next two years.? The Government has decided to meet this initial requirement by providing up to ?30 million immediately to enable Dublin Bus to buy 100 additional buses for delivery over the period 2006-2007 and by mandating the proposed Dublin Transport Authority, DTA, to procure the additional 100 buses from the private sector to provide services on new routes.

The 100 buses procured from the private sector will form part of an initiative to facilitate the entry of new, private operators by awarding franchises to operate routes accounting for 15% exclusively to such operators by way of competitive tendering.? Following this period, all new routes will be subject to a competitive tendering process open to all operators.? The precise arrangements will be approved by Government on the basis of proposals from the DTA.? This approach will encourage new investment and innovation in the Dublin bus passenger market.

The proposals outlined by Minister Cullen,stemmed from the Dublin Public Transport Forum,and were broadly agreed upon by ALL of those participating,Unions,Companies,IBEC,DCCBA and DTA/NTA.

Had these proposals been speedily acted upon then we would be far further along the road of an integrated and efficient Bus Service in Dublin.

The reality now dawning upon the NTA,is of Dubin now having only around 50% of the Bus Fleet it requires,and each passing day provides it with an ever greater challenge.

The policies which appeared viable up until early 2014,are now proving to be highly restrictive,so some means will have to emerge to either modify the parameters or devise totally new strategies.

For a very small outlay,the NTA could reactivate the 100 EXTRA vehicles for NEW routes plan which represented the agreed way forward back in 2006.

Expansion,represents the only socially viable answer in the current recovery,always remembering that the current base is artifically low.

If one goes back a little further,one can appreciate just how lost in space Irish Public Transport policy really was,and how much improved it currently is....

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/now-road-is-cleared-for-private-bus-fleets-26118212.html

Victor

AlekSmart wrote: »

The NTA does NOT have any legal entitlement to CIE premises,so it would most likely be a combination of hard-standing and portacabins in the short term.

There is an obligation on dominant operators to provide facilities (on a commercial basis) no new entrants. GoBÉ was the first prominent manifestation of this.

With BAC having reduced it's fleet by some 200+ 72 seat vehicles since 2008 and the NTA specified replacements being 67 seat,it can be seen that the overall carrying capacity of BAC is substantially reduced (1,000 Seats).

the extra buses were provided, but then cut back.

etchyed

n97 mini wrote: »

Is this the shítty routes like the 239? No wonder there's no interest. Let the operators decide the route between A and B.

The proposed arrangement is for an operating concession, in which the operator receives a fixed or performance-based payment in return for operating the service. Farebox revenue would be passed directly to the NTA.

As such, it is not that the routes are "shítty", as you put it (as the revenue-earning potential would be of no relevance to potential operators), but rather that the size of the operation on offer is simply too small to attract any major players.

Allowing operators to "decide the route between A and B", as you advocate, would essentially be complete bus deregulation, a policy (to the best of my knowledge) not in operation anywhere in the developed world, but for our nearest neighbours (except in London, which is too important).

devnull

AlekSmart wrote: »

If we look at the Fleet Size requirements outlined by then Transport Minister Martin Cullen in 2006,we get an indication of where Dublin should be in relation to Buses.

http://www.eamonryan.ie/2006/09/28/the-departments-plans-for-the-regulation-of-the-dublin-bus-market/

The proposals outlined by Minister Cullen,stemmed from the Dublin Public Transport Forum,and were broadly agreed upon by ALL of those participating,Unions,Companies,IBEC,DCCBA and DTA/NTA.

Had these proposals been speedily acted upon then we would be far further along the road of an integrated and efficient Bus Service in Dublin.

Thinking of Dublin Bus in 2006 makes me shudder. I remember the Labour Party campaigning along the likes of asking for 300 new buses in their election manifesto, only for a short while later for the fleet to be cut back due to the economic downturn. If those 300 extra vehicles would have ended up n service funded by the taxpayer and all of the extra staff hired, the company would be in an even worse situation right now and the number of duplicated services, with nonsensical non-joined timetables and empty buses was huge.

Dublin Bus in 2006 was an extremely poor operator and not to mention very inefficient. You cannot compare the likes of the current day Dublin Bus with the one operating 8 years ago. The current operation is around average, it still has some way to go before it can be considered good, but at least it's vastly better than what was being operated 8 years ago and I think even the biggest critics of the company on this board would admit the company has improved and become more efficient in the last few years.

I wouldn't give the Department of Transport as they then were called much praise under the FF government. Some people called them almost "The Department for CIE" because for a long period they seemed more concerned with protecting the state companies rather than the good of public transport users. The NTA have been a lot better in the regard that they have generally saw the bigger picture on a far bigger number of occasions, rather than what is best for a company. The job of any Transport Regulator is not to preserve and protect the status quo, it's to ensure the best service for the public and the best transport services overall.

Of course the staff will come on here and moan about the NTA all they like, because the fact is they are so used to the Celtic Tiger mentality of getting vast swaves of money thrown at CIE with nothing in return, thankfully that era has ended and I am glad for one that now the NTA is having a more hands on role, to actually demand improvements in exchange for ticket rises and investment.

n97 mini

end of the road wrote: »

or just leave it as it is

No, it's rubbish as is. Impossible to travel Lucan to Blanchardstown on a Sunday because there's no Sunday service. One example of many orbital journeys on the west side of Dublin that are not possible due to stupidity.

antoinolachtnai

Not an option, unfortunately. Routes must go to tender under Directive 1370/2007.

cdebru

s8080 wrote: »

take with a pinch of salt.

a little bird told me the private response to the 10% routes tender has been less than enthusiastic.
dublin bus might have been the best offer.

the process could be delayed for “technical reasons”.

expect a new found hole in dublin bus finances to magically appear which will result in a emergency fare increase.

got to make the conditions for the 10% tender a little better to get the response they want.

we should know within the next few weeks

No really surprising given that the date for applying was postponed at the recent labour court talks.

Secondly fare increases won't make any difference, perhaps you should look up the model or ask the little birdy about it, the franchise model is based on a cost per km, what the fare is or how many travel will be irrelevant to the operator they will get paid an agreed rate either way. :-)

s8080

cdebru wrote: »

Secondly fare increases won't make any difference, perhaps you should look up the model or ask the little birdy about it, the franchise model is based on a cost per km, what the fare is or how many travel will be irrelevant to the operator they will get paid an agreed rate either way. :-)

where do you think the money will come from to pay these agreed rates?

how can the NTA get more money so they can sweeten the pot offered to run these 10% routes?

antoinolachtnai

Under current arrangements, NTA pays just under five euros/km for bus services in Dublin. This is already an immensely sweet rate.

the groutch

how will prepaid tickets pan out with private operators?

lets say someone had bought an annual ticket, then their main route(s) of use got privatised and rendered their ticket virtually useless, they'd have every right to be very p155ed off.

devnull

There is no privatisation taking place, that is a common myth and de-regulation and privatisation is not happening.

At the moment Dublin Bus are contracted by the NTA to provide services, the only thing that will change is other operators will have the chance to provide the services on some routes.

The fares and tickets will be the same ones, since such things will be under the control of the NTA and not the operators exactly like in London.

Tickityboo

devnull wrote: »

There is no privatisation taking place, that is a common myth and de-regulation and privatisation is not happening.

At the moment Dublin Bus are contracted by the NTA to provide services, the only thing that will change is other operators will have the chance to provide the services on some routes.

The fares and tickets will be the same ones, since such things will be under the control of the NTA and not the operators exactly like in London.

So we are going to have the same buses the same tickets and fares and more than likely the same drivers!!
What's the point in that?

markpb

Tickityboo wrote: »

So we are going to have the same buses the same tickets and fares and more than likely the same drivers!!
What's the point in that?

Maybe a private operator can provide the same service at lower cost (to the NTA) than DB or a better service (to customers) at the same cost.

end of the road

Tickityboo wrote: »

So we are going to have the same buses the same tickets and fares and more than likely the same drivers!!
What's the point in that?

they have to under the EU directives posted above. i agree with you though

Tickityboo

markpb wrote: »

Maybe a private operator can provide the same service at lower cost (to the NTA) than DB or a better service (to customers) at the same cost.

In other words a race to the bottom!! I don't think that will improve things but only make them worse.
What driver is really going to give a toss about giving good service if they are getting paid less and less for a job that is just getting more stressfull!!

Aard

It's not a race to the bottom since there is a minimum level of service the operators must provide.

It works in London. The previous system we used here -- everybody complained about it. Total privatisation doesn't work. It's the only proven way that works to provide *coordinated* public transport.

end of the road

Aard wrote: »

It works in London.

doesn't mean it would work in dublin though. many of the things that make londons bus services the way they do have been down to TFL have they not? the operators then just operate and get a fee. so that would mean it would be up to the NTA to implement what it believes a bus service needs and not the operator?

Aard wrote: »

The previous system we used here -- everybody complained about it.

yes, but any of its issues could have been sorted and still can.

Aard wrote: »

It's the only proven way that works to provide *coordinated* public transport.

keeping it as is and sorting out the issues could also do the same. obviously we can't do that it seems because of these EU directives

Tickityboo

Aard wrote: »

It's not a race to the bottom since there is a minimum level of service the operators must provide.

It works in London. The previous system we used here -- everybody complained about it. Total privatisation doesn't work. It's the only proven way that works to provide *coordinated* public transport.

Race to the bottom in wages!!
Because that is the way private operators will provide their services cheaper to the nta.

Aard

You could well be right on the wages thing. That, however, is a different debate to transport planning.

Victor

end of the road wrote: »

yes, but any of its issues could have been sorted and still can.

82 years on from the Road Transport Act, 1932 and they haven't fixed it yet?

etchyed

devnull wrote: »

There is no privatisation taking place, that is a common myth...

No, it's not. The myth that pervades is that that part of Dublin Bus is going to be sold off. That is what is incorrect.

What is not incorrect is to call the tendering of bus services privatisation. Dublin Bus is allowed to bid, admittedly, but if they do not win, privatisation will have taken place. Privatisation does not necessarily have to mean the sale of a state company. If the service was previously operated by a public body, and is then operated by a private company, that is privatisation.

Aard

It's privatisation of the operation of each route. But not "full" privatisation including route selection, as happened in the UK (excluding London). Network design remains under the control of the NTA.

AlekSmart

etchyed wrote: »

No, it's not. The myth that pervades is that that part of Dublin Bus is going to be sold off. That is what is incorrect.

What is not incorrect is to call the tendering of bus services privatisation. Dublin Bus is allowed to bid, admittedly, but if they do not win, privatisation will have taken place. Privatisation does not necessarily have to mean the sale of a state company. If the service was previously operated by a public body, and is then operated by a private company, that is privatisation.

With significant negotiations now under way in the Labour Relations Commission,much of the NTA/Govt policy is only now beiong teased out.

It is fair to suggest that the NTA's perception of the "London Model" as it proposes to introduce into Dublin,is somewhat flawed,as it is but ONE single element of this "Model" - Bus Route Tendering.

With Cities all over London now clamouring for similiar vote catching service levels,Transport for London's senior people repeatedly warn that introducing elements of TfL Bus policy on a stand-alone basis will not work...The London Model is a FAR more diverse and intricate method of managing the Transport requirements of an entire City than our Government appears to think.

However,such considerations have not stopped us before and unless a miracle occurs,it looks as if we are going down the (London) "Irish solution to an Irish Problem" road yet again.

AngryLips

Will the private operators operate under the DB brand and provide services such as stop announcements and RTPI?

antoinolachtnai

AlekSmart wrote: »

However,such considerations have not stopped us before and unless a miracle occurs,it looks as if we are going down the (London) "Irish solution to an Irish Problem" road yet again.

With Dublin Bus being such a slovenly, inefficient company that it is unlikely that the proposed changes could result in anything worse than what we have.

end of the road

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

With Dublin Bus being such a slovenly, inefficient company

not anymore. they are improving and have improved a hell of a lot over the years.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

it is unlikely that the proposed changes could result in anything worse than what we have.

they're is no guarantee. anything better that people believe should be implemented can be with dublin bus, it will probably be the NTA implementing it anyway and not the actual operators?

clunked

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

With Dublin Bus being such a slovenly, inefficient company that it is unlikely that the proposed changes could result in anything worse than what we have.

And of course you would have absolutely NO vested interest yourself in the bus industry. I honestly think that we don't have a bad bus system at all but I'd worry about the NTA making a total balls of things. If anything they have hampered Dublin Bus in recent years.

LXFlyer

clunked wrote: »

And of course you would have absolutely NO vested interest yourself in the bus industry. I honestly think that we don't have a bad bus system at all but I'd worry about the NTA making a total balls of things. If anything they have hampered Dublin Bus in recent years.

Perhaps you would care to outline how the NTA have hampered Dublin Bus?

n97 mini

end of the road wrote: »

not anymore. they are improving and have improved a hell of a lot over the years.

Coffee coming out my nose after reading that. Personally I have less services available to me at greatly increased costs. The major failings (lack of orbital routes, one ticket per journey not per bus, last bus too early) that existed when I started using DB twenty years ago all still exist.

etchyed

Aard wrote: »

It's privatisation of the operation of each route. But not "full" privatisation including route selection, as happened in the UK (excluding London). Network design remains under the control of the NTA.

I understand and agree with your sentiment, here, Aard, but not with your use of the dictionary. It is privatisation. It is not deregulation.

etchyed

AngryLips wrote: »

Will the private operators operate under the DB brand and provide services such as stop announcements and RTPI?

They won't operate under the DB brand, but they will provide all of those services, yes, and will be co-branded as Transport for Ireland. Public transport information and bus stops will, eventually, be in a standardised format, across directly awarded (DB and BÉ) and tendered bus services.

end of the road

n97 mini wrote: »

Personally I have less services available to me at greatly increased costs.

what services would you like. would they're be a demand for such services. have you written to the NTA or your local td or the department of transport in relation to such services? costs have increased due to the fact they're is less government subsidy. none of us like it but we can just hope the subsidy goes up again.

n97 mini wrote: »

The major failings (lack of orbital routes, one ticket per journey not per bus, last bus too early) that existed when I started using DB twenty years ago all still exist.

they can be sorted out with what we have got at the moment if it could be kept.

devnull

clunked wrote: »

And of course you would have absolutely NO vested interest yourself in the bus industry. I honestly think that we don't have a bad bus system at all but I'd worry about the NTA making a total balls of things. If anything they have hampered Dublin Bus in recent years.

What do you think the NTA have done wrong out of interest?

devnull

etchyed wrote: »

I understand and agree with your sentiment, here, Aard, but not with your use of the dictionary. It is privatisation. It is not deregulation.

Privatisation is when public companies are turned private.

That is not what is happening here, since Dublin Bus is not being privatised, people are being allowed to bid for routes, including the public operators. Note the the last part.

It may turn out a public or a private company gets to run the routes. But they will have no more control than Dublin Bus have now, in fact they will probably have less.

But Dublin Bus is not being carved up and sold to the highest bidder, they just will now have competition for a contract which the former contractor (Dublin Bus) did not In true privatisation, the public operator would not have any chance of staying on.

Aard

etchyed wrote: »

I understand and agree with your sentiment, here, Aard, but not with your use of the dictionary. It is privatisation. It is not deregulation.

I agree with you. And I'm not claiming it's deregulation. The NTA will still be a regulatory body.

AlekSmart

clunked wrote: »

And of course you would have absolutely NO vested interest yourself in the bus industry. I honestly think that we don't have a bad bus system at all but I'd worry about the NTA making a total balls of things. If anything they have hampered Dublin Bus in recent years.

Anton's credentials within the industry are well enough known,and as such I'd be happy enough to go with the old Mandy Rice-Davies quote..."He would,would'nt he ?".

Personally,as one of the hewers of wood and drawers of water,upon whom the likes of Antoin have to rely upon to operate their magnificent examples of commerciality,I would see great chances of progress under the NTA...IF it can be shown to listen and learn from past mistakes,both here and abroad.

The issues with the early NTA,were largely down to unfamiliarity with their chosen subject,and the need to assimilate a staff drawn from so many different sectors.

The roll-out of Leapcard would be one area where easy-does-it,"soft-launches" have been taken to their absolute limit.

I would have confidence in the more robust NTA to put some shape on the City's Public Transport,but,I note the silence surrounding the nub of so many of Dublin's Transport & Traffic problems......The inability to divert Private Motoring Traffic from the City Centre due to the need to maintain full access to Multi-Storey Car Parking...operated,of course,by yet more entreprenurial types,all keen to maximize revenue.

However,with the Irish political scene currently in a highly unstable situation with a sense of anarchy on it's fringes,the Irish Water situation carries added relevance to Government Policies in so many other areas,including Public Transport.

Quoting EU directive numbers to a baying crowd calling for the Country to leave that community may not prove very fruitful,but it is no longer a scenario which can be dismissed out of hand.:(

clunked

devnull wrote: »

What do you think the NTA have done wrong out of interest?

Wasn't there trouble with the extension of the 37 to Blanch. There was also issues with the 41x. I tend to have a natural suspicion towards quangos in general tbh.

LXFlyer

clunked wrote: »

Wasn't there trouble with the extension of the 37 to Blanch. There was also issues with the 41x. I tend to have a natural suspicion towards quangos in general tbh.

Neither of those had anything to do with the NTA.

Both were as a result of Department of Transport ineptitude.

The DoT licensing section had an enormous backlog of licence applications, and had got to the stage of not approving any changes to any Dublin Bus routes that had any private operators serving any section of them for fear that the private operators would bring an action under EU law against them.

Hence they refused any extension of the 37 from Diswellstown to the Blanchardstown Centre because of a perceived threat to the UrBus service, due to the fact that they shared the same route from Ashtown to Castleknock. The fact that this deprived thousands of residents of a direct bus to/from Blanchardstown SC was a side issue.

Similarly the DoT had issues about the 41x operating via the Port Tunnel due to Swords Express operating via the tunnel. It took several local TDs to get involved before compromise routings around Swords were devised to allow both operators operate via the tunnel, but was followed by legal action by Swords Express, who won their case against the Minister for Transport.

Dublin Bus were also not allowed increase capacity on routes to Leixlip and Maynooth (which they alone served) due to Circle Line operating along the Lucan QBC to Lucan and Celbridge, despite a huge increase in housing in the two towns.

None of that has anything to do with the NTA. Thanks to the NTA, we now have a licensing section that approves changes in a much more timely manner and there are very clear criteria for how competing services should be operated.

etchyed

devnull wrote: »

Privatisation is when public companies are turned private.

That is not what is happening here, since Dublin Bus is not being privatised, people are being allowed to bid for routes, including the public operators. Note the the last part.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=93138134&postcount=12
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=93163277&postcount=30

Please:

• Read the thread in full (it's not very long) before replying.
• Don't tell me things I already know.
• Find a better dictionary.

clunked

lxflyer wrote: »

Neither of those had anything to do with the NTA.

Both were as a result of Department of Transport ineptitude.

The DoT licensing section had an enormous backlog of licence applications, and had got to the stage of not approving any changes to any Dublin Bus routes that had any private operators serving any section of them for fear that the private operators would bring an action under EU law against them.

Hence they refused any extension of the 37 from Diswellstown to the Blanchardstown Centre because of a perceived threat to the UrBus service, due to the fact that they shared the same route from Ashtown to Castleknock. The fact that this deprived thousands of residents of a direct bus to/from Blanchardstown SC was a side issue.



Similarly the DoT had issues about the 41x operating via the Port Tunnel due to Swords Express operating via the tunnel. It took several local TDs to get involved before compromise routings around Swords were devised to allow both operators operate via the tunnel, but was followed by legal action by Swords Express, who won their case against the Minister for Transport.

Dublin Bus were also not allowed increase capacity on routes to Leixlip and Maynooth (which they alone served) due to Circle Line operating along the Lucan QBC to Lucan and Celbridge, despite a huge increase in housing in the two towns.

None of that has anything to do with the NTA. Thanks to the NTA, we now have a licensing section that approves changes in a much more timely manner and there are very clear criteria for how competing services should be operated.

Fair enough lx, I stand corrected.

etchyed

Aard wrote: »

I agree with you. And I'm not claiming it's deregulation. The NTA will still be a regulatory body.

Sorry, I know you weren't. What I meant to say was that what you described as "full privatisation" is better described as deregulation.

The point I'm trying to make in being so pedantic is that, in terms of eventual outcomes, it doesn't make much difference whether something is sold or put out to tender. They're both privatisation (provided, of course, that a private bidder wins). As far as I'm concerned, the complete free-for-all that is the British bus market outside London is nuts, and I'm glad that's not happening here. But that doesn't mean that what's happening is not a form of privatisation. Even from a staff perspective, some Dublin Bus staff could find themselves TUPEd across to a new operator. The transaction that leads to that situation is of little consequence to them - they would be working for a newly privatised operator.

I will stop posting about terminology now.

For the record, I'm not anti-privatisation. I think a tender where the incumbent public operator is allowed to bid ensures that the government is getting the best possible value for money. But I think the government has been too tentative here, offering a contract that's not worth enough, and doesn't provide much opportunity for economies of scale. I would imagine the OP is correct about lack of interest from the private sector.

LXFlyer

etchyed wrote: »

Sorry, I know you weren't. What I meant to say was that what you described as "full privatisation" is better described as deregulation.

The point I'm trying to make in being so pedantic is that, in terms of eventual outcomes, it doesn't make much difference whether something is sold or put out to tender. They're both privatisation (provided, of course, that a private bidder wins). As far as I'm concerned, the complete free-for-all that is the British bus market outside London is nuts, and I'm glad that's not happening here. But that doesn't mean that what's happening is not a form of privatisation. Even from a staff perspective, some Dublin Bus staff could find themselves TUPEd across to a new operator. The transaction that leads to that situation is of little consequence to them - they would be working for a newly privatised operator.

I will stop posting about terminology now.

For the record, I'm not anti-privatisation. I think a tender where the incumbent public operator is allowed to bid ensures that the government is getting the best possible value for money. But I think the government has been too tentative here, offering a contract that's not worth enough, and doesn't provide much opportunity for economies of scale. I would imagine the OP is correct about lack of interest from the private sector.

That's why we are now seeing the discussions happening between the Dublin Bus/Bus Eireann unions and the NTA taking place to try to thrash out a deal and establish procedures for this situation going forward. Given the unions' implacable opposition to any private operator involvement, this may not be easy!

We don't as yet know what expressions of interest/otherwise have or will be made, as the whole process is in abeyance while the above discussions are carried out. I would tend to take any comments saying to the contrary with a pinch of salt.

I'd fully expect certain routes to be retained by the existing operators, but there are certainly other routes that may be attractive.