Bust Éireann

oppenheimer1

According to reports today, Bus Eireann has about 18 months left before it goes insolvent. The company lost 7m last year on top of accumulated losses for previous years.

What future does the company have? Looks like service cuts and forced redundancies are on the way at a minimum. Do you think they will sell off expressway?

Boulevardier

Part of the problem seems to be that the "National Transport Authority" licenced competing carriers in the knowledge that their drivers were paid much less than those of BE, and that they have vastly fewer overheads, such as upkeep of Busaras. BE have therefore been operating with both hands tied behind their back.

Also, the current minister is Shane Ross, who is known to loathe the CIE companies.

It is a toxic environment for what should be the premier national passenger carrier.

devnull

Boulevardier wrote: »

It is a toxic environment for what should be the premier national passenger carrier.

I believe that providing good public transport services is the most important thing. Ultimately who provides the service doesn't bother me in the slightest. Many of the improvements that Bus Eireann have made over recent years have only been made because they have had no choice but to. We should always reward people who offer innovative new services.

But we do also need to prevent predatory competition such as two operators running from exactly the same places 5 minutes behind or 5 minutes in front of a competitor and then have an hour gap with no service or those who offer silly fares which are far below a companies cost. That's the kind of UK system we certainly don't want to import here.

This is why the NTA allows two operators per route on commercial routes and requires them to be at least 15 minutes apart from the competition. It rewards the first two operators who innovate, whilst at the same time protecting them from predators who just want to come after the service has been proven and cynically run buses at exactly the same time as the opposition who spend considerable money marketing and the up front costs of establishing a new service.

If a private proposes and starts operating an innovative new service that Bus Eireann say is not viable, as has happened on a number of occasions, why should we stop them? Public transport is supposed to be for the public not specified to the best interests of any other groups. No Monopoly is good no matter if it is a private company or a public company.

Part of the problem seems to be that the "National Transport Authority" licenced competing carriers in the knowledge that their drivers were paid much less than those of BE.

Indeed, the NTA should should simply tell passengers who avail of services operated by private operators who put licenses in to operate later, faster, and more frequent services that Bus Eireann they must be canceled because Bus Eireann don't like it, since the interests of Bus Eireann are far more important than someone who wants to travel to the airport, on holiday or to work.

The problem in BE is that the staff have no commercial acumen on the front line whatsoever. They believe that the company is run for them as proven by the fact their company is struggling yet they are still asking for extra money. Just saying remove the competition is basically saying that the well being of their company is more important than the bigger picture and the service offered to the customers which should never be the case.

However in some respects I see the unions point. Their management has sold them down the river so to speak by not developing their products or services enough and management should take their share of the blame and their own mistakes rather than saying that the staff are on too expensive wages and totally absolving themselves of any blame whatsoever.

To say that it's all about wages though is also false. the fact is that privates operated services that Bus Eireann didn't want to operate or didn't think were worthwhile. Early morning services to airports, late night services from airports, non stop services, 24 hours services, online seat reservations, leather seating, on-board Wifi, plug sockets on buses etc, all these were innovations by privates that BE only started offering when they realised they had to seriously up their game.

ED E

Boulevardier wrote: »

Also, the current minister is Shane Ross, who is known to loathe the CIE companies.

As much as I loathe the ***** the problems with BE are inherited and not really of his making. There's been a long road to ruin for them.

sat matt

I know little about the ops of BE so sorry for hopping in here

I'm just curious about their Expressway service as I saw it in the news before Christmas about them wanting to split it off from BE.
What's the story with it? Is it losing money?

Boulevardier

My preferred model for bus provision is that the publicly-owned service should get first refusal on all routes, with other operators permitted to fill in the gaps. Also, independent operators should be required to provide terms and conditions to their staff which are comparable to those of the main provider, otherwise the latter will simply become uncompetitive, as is now happening.

Also badly needed is an increase in our derisory public transport subvention to the levels taken for granted in mainland Europe. Perhaps a percentage of motorway tolls and road taxes should be earmarked for this purpose.

There is no evidence whatsoever that the improvement of passenger facilities in BE is the result of private competition. Iarnrod Eireann has hugely improved their trains and onboard facilities with no competition at all from other rail operators. The idea that state companies cannot be bothered to improve themselves, except when forced to, is completely without foundation.

Boulevardier

Expressway is in a financial death-spiral. It is not yet clear what is going to be done to rescue it (or not).

sat matt

Boulevardier wrote: »

Expressway is in a financial death-spiral. It is not yet clear what is going to be done to rescue it (or not).

Wow! Thanks

This I cannot understand though as it seems only a year or so ago they were buying new buses for it at close to half a million € / bus.
It speaks woeful management to me

Del.Monte

Boulevardier wrote: »

Expressway is in a financial death-spiral. It is not yet clear what is going to be done to rescue it (or not).

The entire CIE group has been in a death-spiral for years and should have been sorted out long ago. Crap management and overly powerful unions have brought CIE to edge of the abyss. Nearly forgot to mention the charlatans in the Dept.of Transport and the various fools who have been the line ministers down the years - with the honourable exception of Seamus Brennan.

amcalester

Boulevardier wrote: »

My preferred model for bus provision is that the publicly-owned service should get first refusal on all routes, with other operators permitted to fill in the gaps. Also, independent operators should be required to provide terms and conditions to their staff which are comparable to those of the main provider, otherwise the latter will simply become uncompetitive, as is now happening.

Also badly needed is an increase in our derisory public transport subvention to the levels taken for granted in mainland Europe. Perhaps a percentage of motorway tolls and road taxes should be earmarked for this purpose.

There is no evidence whatsoever that the improvement of passenger facilities in BE is the result of private competition. Iarnrod Eireann has hugely improved their trains and onboard facilities with no competition at all from other rail operators. The idea that state companies cannot be bothered to improve themselves, except when forced to, is completely without foundation.

Who does this benefit?

Bus Eireann's customers or employees?

devnull

Boulevardier wrote: »

My preferred model for bus provision is that the publicly-owned service should get first refusal on all routes.

Where you and me differ is that I believe that the best model is one where the users of public transport are placed first and before any single company. We should reward innovation, if there is no incentive to innovate, nobody will innovate and nothing will improve and you propose removing rewards for innovation.

with other operators permitted to fill in the gaps

That is what happens now, private operators have filled the gaps and operated more frequent, later finishing, earlier starting services that Bus Eireann have not provided. It's not all about costs, it's about the private operators operate the kind of services that BE do not operate either because they don't want to or don't think they were viable.

Why should a company who operates a service have to give their business plan to another company. If the other company was as good as you seem to think they are, surely they should be able to come up with this themselves?

If another operator proposed a service and BE were given first refusal, BE would in a lot of cases only operate said services because of the fact they wanted to stop someone else from doing so.

Also, independent operators should be required to provide terms and conditions to their staff which are comparable to those of the main provider, otherwise the latter will simply become uncompetitive.

Which basically will drive wages up and increase the end costs to public transport users, be that through the higher required PSO and higher fares. Essentially what your statement implys that you believe you believe the private interests of the staff are more important than the interests of the people who actually use the service.

Also badly needed is an increase in our derisory public transport subvention to the levels taken for granted in mainland Europe. Perhaps a percentage of motorway tolls and road taxes should be earmarked for this purpose.

There is no evidence whatsoever that the improvement of passenger facilities in BE is the result of private competition.

I notice you spin my words there.

Private operators were the first to offer 24 hour services, late services to/from the airport, non stop services, early services to/from airport and Wifi, plug sockets and other things. You are telling me that it's just a complete co-incidence that Bus Eireann who ran many of these routes for many years without a single meaningful change to their timetable, only got around to changing them a short while after the privates started a competing service that offered people what they wanted to.

Iarnrod Eireann has hugely improved their trains and onboard facilities with no competition at all from other rail operators.

Irish Rail has improved without doubt but they are still very far behind what I would call a good railway operator, their standards of passenger information is exceptionally poor. This is a company that has had one class of DART train that has had exceptionally unreliable passenger information systems from day one and still not fixed them 10 years later.

Also you claim Irish Rail have no competition! Rubbish! Do you really think that the private cars with the new motorways and expansion of coach services on said motorways has had no effect on them? Of course it has, they saw a customer bleed to the coach companies and then adjusted their fare structure to deal with this and managed to win some of the customers back

The idea that state companies cannot be bothered to improve themselves, except when forced to, is completely without foundation.

So it's just a co-incidence that the things I mentioned were all done by privates first and Bus Eireann always did them a short while later? How come other companies are always first and Bus Eireann are always last? If BE were leading the way in such things how comes they are always acting in a reactionary way rather than a proactive way?

devnull

sat matt wrote: »

Wow! Thanks

This I cannot understand though as it seems only a year or so ago they were buying new buses for it at close to half a million € / bus.
It speaks woeful management to me

This year they will start retiring coaches that are approx 9 years out from service work, whilst privates on similar routes are still operate coaches that are 12 years old and have been worked much harder for their working lives.

That's the paradox in BE Expressway itself, they can spend 10s of millions a year on coaches and marketing but claim they have no money to pay the staff wages. Just one year of not purchasing new coaches would make a big difference to their bottom line and they would still have perfectly acceptable coaches on the routes.

That's the trouble with BE though at the end of the day, too much money is spent on nice shiny coaches and marketing and not enough on the nuts and bolts of the service,

amcalester

devnull wrote: »

This year they will start retiring coaches that are approx 9 years out from service work, whilst privates on similar routes are still operate coaches that are 12 years old and have been worked much harder for their working lives.

That's the paradox in BE Expressway itself, they can spend 10s of millions a year on coaches and marketing but claim they have no money to pay the staff wages. Just one year of not purchasing new coaches would make a big difference to their bottom line and they would still have perfectly acceptable coaches on the routes.

That's the trouble with BE though at the end of the day, too much money is spent on nice shiny coaches and marketing and not enough on the nuts and bolts of the service,

Driver salaries are not the nuts and bolts of the service but newer vehicles very much are.

Boulevardier

Devnull, Irish rail leaves its overpriced, ramshackle and unsafe British (privatised) counterparts in the ha'penny place, but if you prefer the British model, I can't really help you.

devnull

amcalester wrote: »

Driver salaries are not the nuts and bolts of the service but newer vehicles very much are.

.

Nuts and bolts of the service is making the service attractive, investing in developing schedules, better timetables, additional services etc there's been precious little of that by Bus Eireann in the last 5 or 6 years, which is why privates have been able to take customers off them.

If newer vehicles are the nuts and bolts of the service, please explain why Dublin Coach are able to operate 2004 vehicles on Dublin to Waterford and take passengers away from Bus Eireann that has almost brand new vehicles on them? For the money that BE are spending on such vehicles, it's not really helping them enough competitively to make the investment feasible.

It shows that given a choice of older vehicles with a faster timetable / more frequent service or newer vehicles with a less frequent service and slower timetable, people with choose the former, which shows that for all BE claim new vehicles are vital, it's not backed up by passenger numbers. I just don't believe that the formula that BE uses competitively is sustainable. They don't have their budgeting right, spending too much in some areas and not enough in others.

If BE buying new vehicles allowed them to win customers from their competitiors and beat them I'd agree that it was a sound investment, but in my view the problem here is they have loss making services and they're throwing even further costs into what appears to be almost a black hole. New vehicles do not make a service successful, they never have done and they never will do.

Look at GoBus, Citylink, Dublin Coach, JJ Kavanagh, Aircoach, all of these operators have been able to get a foot-hold in the market without needing to run brand new coaches and I presume decided not to because they felt it would just add extra costs into the business which could not be covered. Instead they adjusted their services, the returns improved and when the services started to be profitable they invested money.

All of those companies as well have been loss making for a few years in the recession, most of them stopped investing in coaches then as well because they were losing money and cut their cloth accordingly. With BE no matter how their finances is like it's spend spend spend. and to be quite honest it's pretty irresponsible for their management to continually to blame the staff for something they have played an equal part in themselves.

devnull

Boulevardier wrote: »

Devnull, Irish rail leaves its overpriced, ramshackle and unsafe British (privatised) counterparts in the ha'penny place, but if you prefer the British model, I can't really help you.

The UK System is far from perfect but the provision of passenger information is light years ahead of what we have in Ireland. I wouldn't say I prefer either system, there are much better systems than both countries in other European countries such as Germany, which to be fair is light years ahead of most other European countries.

What I will say though the British system is overcrowded for a large part due to the excessive regulation and interference by central government. Many operators are overcrowded because they have been prevented from ordering rolling stock and the fact central government couldn't close rolling stock deals to save their life.

As for safety there have been less incidents in the privatized network than there was before it started, but it's very hard to compare a small operation like Irish Rail compared to the British Network as a whole, whilst as far as the DOO dispute goes on Southern and safety issues caused by that, I assume you will have similar thoughts about the unsafe nature of DART and commuter trains which are also DOO?

Boulevardier

"What I will say though the British system is overcrowded for a large part due to the excessive regulation and interference by central government."

Well, that really is a new one on me. Has a single rail union or commuter group in the UK ever said that?

n97 mini

Boulevardier wrote: »

Devnull, Irish rail leaves its overpriced, ramshackle and unsafe British (privatised) counterparts in the ha'penny place, but if you prefer the British model, I can't really help you.

Last summer I got a high speed train from London to Machester for £3.50. There is value to be had, for sure.

Your other point is akin to Ryanair only being allowed have a route if Aer Lingus didn't want it, but that model thankfully was scrapped 25 years ago after it became too embarrassing. Ryanair were never forced to offer the same terms and conditions as Aer Lingus. That'd be anti competitive, probably even in the 1980s.

amcalester

devnull wrote: »

.

Nuts and bolts of the service is making the service attractive, investing in developing schedules, better timetables, additional services etc there's been precious little of that by Bus Eireann in the last 5 or 6 years, which is why privates have been able to take customers off them.

If newer vehicles are the nuts and bolts of the service, please explain why Dublin Coach are able to operate 2004 vehicles on Dublin to Waterford and take passengers away from Bus Eireann that has almost brand new vehicles on them? For the money that BE are spending on such vehicles, it's not really helping them enough competitively to make the investment feasible.

It shows that given a choice of older vehicles with a faster timetable / more frequent service or newer vehicles with a less frequent service and slower timetable, people with choose the former, which shows that for all BE claim new vehicles are vital, it's not backed up by passenger numbers. I just don't believe that the formula that BE uses competitively is sustainable. They don't have their budgeting right, spending too much in some areas and not enough in others.

If BE buying new vehicles allowed them to win customers from their competitiors and beat them I'd agree that it was a sound investment, but in my view the problem here is they have loss making services and they're throwing even further costs into what appears to be almost a black hole. New vehicles do not make a service successful, they never have done and they never will do.

Look at GoBus, Citylink, Dublin Coach, JJ Kavanagh, Aircoach, all of these operators have been able to get a foot-hold in the market without needing to run brand new coaches and I presume decided not to because they felt it would just add extra costs into the business which could not be covered. Instead they adjusted their services, the returns improved and when the services started to be profitable they invested money.

All of those companies as well have been loss making for a few years in the recession, most of them stopped investing in coaches then as well because they were losing money and cut their cloth accordingly. With BE no matter how their finances is like it's spend spend spend. and to be quite honest it's pretty irresponsible for their management to continually to blame the staff for something they have played an equal part in themselves.

I don't disagree with any of that but I would argue that newer vehicles are a USP for BE and money spent on these vehicles are a better investment than increasing driving salaries.

Obviously BE need to improve their services in line with the competition as well but given the choice between a new coach operated by BE and an older private coach (and all other things being equal) I would choose the newer coach.

devnull

Boulevardier wrote: »

Well, that really is a new one on me. Has a single rail union or commuter group in the UK ever said that?

Yes - it has been covered many times by user groups. The UK Department of Transport and the SRA that existed before it has a right to modify or veto rolling stock orders that are placed by train operators if they feel that they are not in the taxpayer interest and constitute over predicting future passenger numbers.

One of the most well known ones is the First Transpennine Express order for 168 carriages with later options for another 56 that was cut to 153 with no options for extra carriages, South West Trains had an order cut as well.

There's also the extremely poor management of contracts that are managed by the government directly such as the Thameslink and the Intercity Express order where operators outlined that additional capacity was needed and by the dates that they were needed, but the government took many many years to sign the deal.

Here's a timeline of Thameslink rolling stock for instance
2007 - Operators make approach to government on what they need
2008 - Procurement program begins
2011 - Contract Awarded
2013 - Commercial Terms Agreed
2015 - Start of Deliveries.

devnull

amcalester wrote: »

I don't disagree with any of that but I would argue that newer vehicles are a USP for BE and money spent on these vehicles are a better investment than increasing driving salaries.

I don't disagree with that, but personally I think that the answer to BE's problems doesn't lie in either of the two camps since shifting one to the other won't fix all the problems.

Obviously BE need to improve their services in line with the competition as well.

The problem is though they are locked out on a lot of key markets now, because NTA only issue licenses for two operators on any corridor so on many of these routes it's too late because two other companies got there before they did which is the key failings which have led them to the current situation.

A little less being spent on vehicles in the past and a little more being spent on service development would have been a better balance. I mean I don't think they should have stopped buying vehicles altogether, they should just have just spent less there and more on other areas.

For me saying they cannot afford to take commercial risks or innovate new services because they have no money but at the same time can buy so many new vehicles is not an example that they have no money, it's an example of that the money which they do have is not being spent in the way that is best for their business.

For example, Aircoach were a complete basket case for a few years and were losing money hand over fist. During this time they cut back investment in vehicles and started to invest in service development by being first operators on Dublin to Cork and Dublin to Belfast non stop. When things picked up again they increased investment in vehicles. If they kept investing in vehicles and didn't launch two new routes they'd most likely be dead now.

but given the choice between a new coach operated by BE and an older private coach (and all other things being equal) I would choose the newer coach.

And most people would be the same, but the problem is that on most Expressway routes the choice is an older private coach on a more frequent, faster service or a newer Bus Eireann coach with a slower less frequent service and the problem BE faces is that new coaches are a smaller positive value than an inferior timetable is a negative value and I'm sure that if BE could have done things differently with hindsight they would have.

Since the CEO job in Bus Eireann is up for grabs now, it's VITAL that they get someone in the door who is an experienced transport manager who is used to acting in a commercial environment, just promoting from within will be not good enough, they need someone who can succeed and thrive in that environment, just like Irish Rail have improved commercially by hiring an outside person in rather than endless promoting from within or someone from the public sector who has never had to work in a commercial environment.

oppenheimer1

devnull wrote: »

.




It shows that given a choice of older vehicles with a faster timetable / more frequent service or newer vehicles with a less frequent service and slower timetable, people with choose the former, which shows that for all BE claim new vehicles are vital, it's not backed up by passenger numbers. I just don't believe that the formula that BE uses competitively is sustainable. They don't have their budgeting right, spending too much in some areas and not enough in others.

If BE buying new vehicles allowed them to win customers from their competitiors and beat them I'd agree that it was a sound investment, but in my view the problem here is they have loss making services and they're throwing even further costs into what appears to be almost a black hole. New vehicles do not make a service successful, they never have done and they never will do.

The key point you're missing though is not only do the private operators provide a superior service, it is significantly less expensive than BE. On the routes that there is no competition from privates, fares are still much higher.

What BE have let happen is that they have failed to innovate and let their cost base get out of control. It will be interesting to see how the government and the union's react to the inevitable layoffs, cuts to services and reorganisation of the company.

Boulevardier

Of course the privates are cheaper than BE, they pay their drivers less and they do not have Busaras to keep up.

I think as a matter of urgency, the government should consider something like the following steps:

1. Close down or restructure the National Transport Authority, who allowed this situation to develop.

2. Announce the phasing out of operating licences for companies which pay their drivers significantly less than BE.

3. Have all BE Expressway routes and timetables re-designed by an expert group on which passengers are represented.

4. Double the public transport subvention, to be financed in whole or part by road tax.

draiochtanois

This post has been deleted.

ED E

Boulevardier wrote: »

2. Announce the phasing out of operating licences for companies which pay their drivers significantly less than BE.

Why? Because they love to gouge the public/taxpayer? Ehh no thanks.


If BE cant compete tender it all out. Lads driving for Aircoach were always perfectly competent despite the wage gap.

bk

Boulevardier wrote: »

I think as a matter of urgency, the government should consider something like the following steps:

1. Close down or restructure the National Transport Authority, who allowed this situation to develop.

2. Announce the phasing out of operating licences for companies which pay their drivers significantly less than BE.

Hell no, do you really think anyone who regularly takes a bus from Dublin to Cork wants to go back to:

- It taking 5 hours rather then 3
- No buses after 6pm, sure why would anyone want to travel between Irelands two largest cities after 6pm :rolleyes:
- Only one bus every two hours
- No toilets, wifi, sockets on the bus.

Because that was the reality of the service BE offered on the Cork route until Aircoach stepped in and blew them out of the water, operating almost hourly buses 24/7, that did the same journey in just 3 hours and had toilets, wifi and sockets.

The truth is that the service offered by the private operators is SO much better and more innovative that no one wants to go back to BE's terrible service.

In the end it is all about the public and the service you deliver to them. I genuinely feel sorry for BE staff who lose their jobs, but in the end the public doesn't care if the driver is private or public, they just want a really good service.

BTW Boulevardier you can forget about the government revoking the licenses, it would be illegal under EU law anyway.

foggy_lad

Bus Eireann are in a difficult position really because they operate the majority of the PSO routes in the country and many of these routes are operated using their Expressway services for which they receive no subvention! (Exceptions would be commuter services like the 103,105,111,109,120,133,115,126 and most city services)

What is needed is for them to receive proper subvention payment for using Expressway for PSO routes, Take Waterford-Dublin or most other long distance routes and the majority have a need for a PSO element due to the stage carriage element of most routes. There is only an Expressway service on most of these routes and there is no alternative PSO routes available to Free travel holders.

OR the removal of Free travel from all Expressway services and those routes in need of PSO services would then have both Expressway and PSO buses travelling side by side on the same routes!

devnull

foggy_lad wrote: »

Bus Eireann are in a difficult position really because they operate the majority of the PSO routes in the country and many of these routes are operated using their Expressway services for which they receive no subvention! (Exceptions would be commuter services like the 103,105,111,109,120,133,115,126 and most city services)

What is needed is for them to receive proper subvention payment for using Expressway for PSO routes, Take Waterford-Dublin or most other long distance routes and the majority have a need for a PSO element due to the stage carriage element of most routes. There is only an Expressway service on most of these routes and there is no alternative PSO routes available to Free travel holders.

OR the removal of Free travel from all Expressway services and those routes in need of PSO services would then have both Expressway and PSO buses travelling side by side on the same routes!

That would be considered as illegal state aid.

What the company should do is run expressway as a commercial service and not run any parts that are not viable and either absorb them into the pso network and make the NTA give them funding for it or allow the NTA to sort it out.

Graham

Boulevardier wrote: »

Of course the privates are cheaper than BE, they pay their drivers less

That's a rather roundabout way of saying BE can't compete because they pay their drivers over the market rate.

Boulevardier

No, it's a way of saying that in the absence of decent labour laws, private operators (like Ryanair in aviation) have driven down the rate for the job.

amcalester

Boulevardier wrote: »

No, it's a way of saying that in the absence of decent labour laws, private operators (like Ryanair in aviation) have driven down the rate for the job.

And the price.

They also have no problem finding people to work for those rates, so what is the issue?

So now we have a better service, at a lower cost with more people employed.

Everyone's a winner.