Bust Éireann

LeinsterDub

Wanderer78 wrote: »

I wonder does neoliberal/free market policies and 'defunding' of public services have had anything to do with this?

BÉ PSO funding is going up. Its not a free market it's regulated and Neoliberal seems to be just a buzz word

Wanderer78

LeinsterDub wrote:

BÉ PSO funding is going up. Its not a free market it's regulated and Neoliberal seems to be just a buzz word

Plenty to well respected political and social commentators linking the demise of public services to neoliberal polices some have been writing about this for decades. 'Defunding' is a well known tool in these systems, I do suspect this is a part of what's going on here, but defunding is difficult to explain.

LeinsterDub

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Plenty to well respected political and social commentators linking the demise of public services to neoliberal polices some have been writing about this for decades. 'Defunding' is a well known tool in these systems, I do suspect this is a part of what's going on here, but defunding is difficult to explain.

Their PSO funding is going up . You seem to have ignored this point

Wanderer78

LeinsterDub wrote:

Their PSO funding is going up . You seem to have ignored this point

I'm not ignoring it at all, strangely defunding can still occur when there's an overall increase in funding. Yes it makes no sense at all

n97 mini

Wanderer78 wrote: »

I'm not ignoring it at all, strangely defunding can still occur when there's an overall increase in funding. Yes it makes no sense at all

It's not defunding if they're getting more taxpayer money.

If Expressway is dealt with, BE will be in a better financial position than ever, though a greater portion of it will be coming from the public purse. May as well make it a section of the Department of Transport almost.

LeinsterDub

Wanderer78 wrote: »

I'm not ignoring it at all, strangely defunding can still occur when there's an overall increase in funding. Yes it makes no sense at all

Their funding is increasing ahead on inflation . How are they being defunded?

Wanderer78

LeinsterDub wrote:

Their funding is increasing ahead on inflation . How are they being defunded?

Ah it's complicated to explain but noam chomsky has written about it in the past, I do suspect this is what's happening with our public services, amongst other things of course

schemingbohemia

Can someone tell me which routes are "saturated" - do those include Limerick & Cork where public transport numbers are up hugely? Is that a bad thing?
Should the passenger be punished by being obliged to use a service that takes 5 hours when a private operator will do it in 3? If the private operator wasn't doing it there would be more people driving cars, is that a good thing?
The main problem for BE is that they kept on acting as if Expressway was a PSO service and stopped off in minor towns that commercially (and Expressway is a commercial entity) made no sense. They also took way too long to react to the new legislative environment. The other commercial companies realised the potential of the new legislation far far quicker than BE who only now 7 years after the legislation was introduced seem to have copped on to the possibilities.
They should have pulled all the Expressway services from small towns and forced the NTA to include them in the contract for PSO services but they didn't, that's why they're in danger of going bust.

LeinsterDub

Why do BÉ need 3 intercity brands?

BÉ , GoBé and expressway?

LeinsterDub

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Ah it's complicated to explain but noam chomsky has written about it in the past, I do suspect this is what's happening with our public services, amongst other things of course

So your here to postulate a theory you neither understand nor have any evidence for with regards to BÉ?

n97 mini

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Ah it's complicated to explain but noam chomsky has written about it in the past, I do suspect this is what's happening with our public services, amongst other things of course

Chomsky wrote about actual defunding, meaning cuts in funding. Not the case with BE.

Wanderer78

n97 mini wrote: »

Chomsky wrote about actual defunding, meaning cuts in funding. Not the case with BE.

you could be right but im not convinced

Wanderer78

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Why do BÉ need 3 intercity brands?

BÉ , GoBé and expressway?

i suspect its to actually break up the group to increase worker insecurity, im sure theres other reasons though

Vic_08

schemingbohemia wrote: »

The main problem for BE is that they kept on acting as if Expressway was a PSO service and stopped off in minor towns that commercially (and Expressway is a commercial entity) made no sense. They also took way too long to react to the new legislative environment. The other commercial companies realised the potential of the new legislation far far quicker than BE who only now 7 years after the legislation was introduced seem to have copped on to the possibilities.
They should have pulled all the Expressway services from small towns and forced the NTA to include them in the contract for PSO services but they didn't, that's why they're in danger of going bust.

Did you even read what I posted earlier in the thread?

It is established that BE applied for a non-stop licence in 2005 for Galway-Dublin but were denied while 2 others that applied later were given them.

There is zero public information to say if similar things happened with any other applications as none of this information is publicly available.

I am aware of an application BE made to alter a particular route (7) to remove it from all stops north of Kilkenny and serve Carlow, Dublin and Dublin Airport only. This was refused by NTA on grounds that Carlow was already well served, at that time it only had BE non-stop to Dub/Airport roughly every 2 hours and Kavanaghs via Naas. BE had identified a route they had already improved service on ahead of other operators (Carlow-Dublin non-stop)which had successfully increased numbers and wanted to add departures to further increase their service but were denied.

What has happened since; Kavanaghs have been allowed drop all their intermediate stops and now run non-stop Carlow-Dublin, what happened to it already be well enough served?

You can't say that BE did nothing because you, me or anyone else do not know what services they tried to run but were denied.

howiya

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Why do BÉ need 3 intercity brands?

BÉ , GoBé and expressway?

Bus Eireann is the regular service that operates the PSO routes

Expressway their commercial arm

GoBé is a partnership between BE and GoBus on the Dublin to Cork non stop route. I suspect there was only one more licence on this route and they joined together to access it.

LeinsterDub

howiya wrote: »

Bus Eireann is the regular service that operates the PSO routes

Expressway their commercial arm

GoBé is a partnership between BE and GoBus on the Dublin to Cork non stop route. I suspect there was only one more licence on this route and they joined together to access it.

Seems like an excessive amount of branding and all that goes with it .

Graham

Vic_08 wrote: »

It is established that BE applied for a non-stop licence in 2005 for Galway-Dublin but were denied while 2 others that applied later were given them.

A decision twelve years ago is the basis for the ongoing losses in BE Expressway today?

Vic_08

Graham wrote: »

A decision twelve years ago is the basis for the ongoing losses in BE Expressway today?

That, along with a bunch of other decisions made by a mix of (BE management, DoT, NTA) yes.

Dublin-Galway was profitable for BE before 2009, it was the busiest route on the network with hourly departures and extra buses on many services. At busy times there would be at least 2 extra buses rostered for departures and more on standby to cope with demand.

And let's not forget the massive elephant that is still sh1tting all over the room: Free Travel.

It is an established fact that operators, particularly CIE companies are being massively underpayed for the usage from FTP holders, even the head of the DSP has admitted as much.

Why is this still being ignored on Expressway, a commercial operation? An increasing amount of competing services do not accept the passes, leaving BE to take an ever increasing % of them without any extra payment.

BE management if they are in any way competent should know these figures; how much is expressway getting in FTP payments; how much would they get if each FTP trip was paid at full fare; if they were to withdraw FTP acceptance how many of those journeys would they have to retain in order to increase revenue.

Graham

Vic_08 wrote: »

Dublin-Galway was profitable for BE before 2009, it was the busiest route on the network with hourly departures and extra buses on many services. At busy times there would be at least 2 extra buses rostered for departures and more on standby to cope with demand.

Before there was realistic competition then?

devnull

Vic_08 wrote: »

That, along with a bunch of other decisions made by a mix of (BE management, DoT, NTA) yes.

Dublin-Galway was profitable for BE before 2009, it was the busiest route on the network with hourly departures and extra buses on many services. At busy times there would be at least 2 extra buses rostered for departures and more on standby to cope with demand.

And let's not forget the massive elephant that is still sh1tting all over the room: Free Travel.

It is an established fact that operators, particularly CIE companies are being massively underpayed for the usage from FTP holders, even the head of the DSP has admitted as much.

Why is this still being ignored on Expressway, a commercial operation? An increasing amount of competing services do not accept the passes, leaving BE to take an ever increasing % of them without any extra payment.

BE management if they are in any way competent should know these figures; how much is expressway getting in FTP payments; how much would they get if each FTP trip was paid at full fare; if they were to withdraw FTP acceptance how many of those journeys would they have to retain in order to increase revenue.

Few points.

Licenses issued after a certain time were not eligible to join the free travel scheme. It's not that operators won't operate on the scheme in some cases they are not able to join a route to a scheme.

In addition you have shown no proof that the NTA have not upheld the 2009 act fairly constantly using an example which was both before they existed AND when different rules applied under an act dating from 1932. You can disagree with the rules at that point if you want but it's not really proof of what has happened in a different regime required to adhere to different rules.

In addition you claim that you cannot know how many applications have been denied by Bus Eireann whilst that may be the case this is the case for all operators. We do not know how many applications were turned down from other commercial operators either.

Also before you claim that the staff from the DOT are also at the NTA I think you will find that a lot of people including some managers came from the RPA.

Vic_08

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Seems like an excessive amount of branding and all that goes with it .

Go-Be is an irrelevance, it is owned and operated by Jim Burke/Go-Bus, Be have no involvement in the operation except stand space at the two bus stations and ticket sales at ticket office/machines.

Burke acquired the licence but was reluctant to start cold against two incumbents, particularly as Aircoach also gained a non-stop Dub-Cork licence.

As BE were then locked out of running non-stop Burke approached them for a partnership where he could jump-start his service by piggybacking on BE's established customer base rather than start a new service that would have taken longer to get noticed by the public.

There was also talk at the time about a similar arrangement on Galway-Dublin between Go-Bus and BE.

In the case of Cork-Dublin I believe that it was very much the fault of BE management not recognising the untapped potential of the route earlier. It was the one route that had virtually no improvement since the 1980s, back then it was assumed to be uncompetitive because of the long journey times and strong rail sevice and that attitude didn't change.

Even when Aircoach started they spent many years running a very similar uninspired low frequency service.

Neither incumbent seemed particularly keen on expanding until the Go-bus licence, this despite the route being relatively busy for both operators but particularly Bus Eireann.

Like Galway, it was so busy that on Fridays/Sundays BE had extra buses rostered for each departure (so much so that AFAIR Aircoach put in a complaint about it) to cope with demand.

I as a lowly driver clearly saw the potential for a full non-stop service but BE management were not interested, they were never interested in anything frontline staff had to say so this was not unusual.

devnull

Vic_08 wrote: »

Even when Aircoach started they spent many years running a very similar uninspired low frequency service.

Neither incumbent seemed particularly keen on expanding until the Go-bus licence, this despite the route being relatively busy for both operators but particularly Bus Eireann.

Like Galway, it was so busy that on Fridays/Sundays BE had extra buses rostered for each departure (so much so that AFAIR Aircoach put in a complaint about it) to cope with demand.

That's spin in the extreme.

Here is the facts.

Aircoach operated up to 25% more services than Bus Eireann

Aircoach first service was an hour or two hours earlier than BE

Aircoach last service was an hour later than bus Eireann.

Aircoach also introduced a 1am service

Aircoach were 35 minutes faster

Aircoach was first operator to have WiFi on board.

Aircoach alsoserved Dublin airport a few years before bus Eireann did.

Aircoach was granted a license several months before Gobus.

So yeah apart from the fact aircoach was faster started earlier. Finished later. Served the airport. Ran early morning and had WiFi much earlier it was pretty similar to BE

I know it doesn't suit your point of view but when I am home tonight I am happy to post the links to back that up.

As fair as aircoach putting a complaint in I have no knowledge of that either way but I suspect that was on the basis that the relief bus was operating a different route and may have been being operated as scheduled relief whether it was needed or not and was being filled before the service bus which would be deemed as an unauthorised auxiliary departure in the view of Aircoach.

Vic_08

devnull wrote: »

Few points.

Licenses issued after a certain time were not eligible to join the free travel scheme. It's not that operators won't operate on the scheme in some cases they are not able to join a route to a scheme.

So what, result is the same; Paying passengers have gone to competitors, FTP still on BE, BE not getting properly paid for taking them. Is there any part of that you are disagreeing with?

devnull wrote: »

In addition you have shown no proof that the NTA have not upheld the 2009 act fairly

And you have shown no proof that they have.

The head of bus licencing has said his department are above scrutiny.

All that I have stated is that this is a very easy statement to make when he knows full well that his decisions are not subject to scrutiny with the whole process being hidden from view.

You demand proof of anything that might go against your fixed thinking but when it comes to NTA proving they are acting above board this requires no evidence for you to 100% support them being above reproach.

There are fanboys on boards for many strange things but you appear to be in thrall to a government quango. You really like the NTA, therefore in your eyes they can do no wrong, it is as simple as that.

There really is no point discussing this further with you as you are unable to see past your own prejudices to accept even a simple logical premise, not believing something for which there is absolutely no proof.

devnull wrote: »

constantly using an example which was both before they existed AND when different rules applied under an act dating from 1932. You can disagree with the rules at that point if you want but it's not really proof of what has happened in a different regime required to adhere to different rules.

Point out the passage in the 1932 act that required sitting on licence applications for 4 years, showing clear bias towards different applicants and taking bribes?

This is ridiculous drivel, the change in regs means that nothing after the change should be questioned even though it is proven that things were not being done properly before? Either you are incredibly naive or you are so blinded by your prejudices you are unable to grasp a simple concept of not trusting government departments, quangos and vested interests.

devnull wrote: »

In addition you claim that you cannot know how many applications have been denied by Bus Eireann whilst that may be the case this is the case for all operators.

I don't believe I ever said that it was only BE that may have been unfairly treated. That is your bias projecting a side onto me that you are determined to argue against no matter what.

devnull wrote: »

We do not know how many applications were turned down from other commercial operators either.

No, we don't. It hasn't stopped you drawing definite conlusions based on nothing but your innate trust in a government quango. The mind boggles, it really does.

Just out of interest what other governmental bodies do you 100% believe are above reproach in everything they do without any public oversight?

>do I have to list all the government departments and agencies that have been implicated in shady dealings and massive in-competencies<

Or can we take it as said that the idea of implicitly trusting ANY of these bodies (CIE very much included) without proof and oversight is just about the most stupid thing anyone could do.

devnull wrote: »

Also before you claim that the staff from the DOT are also at the NTA I think you will find that a lot of people including some managers came from the RPA.

The way you go on anyone not informed would think the NTA have no connection wit DoT. They are an agency ran under the DoT, repoting directly to the DoT, with a board appointed by the head of the DoT, whose sole function is to run services on behalf of the DoT.

You are posting absolute nonsense.

devnull

I will respond to your points in full later but I just want to make one thing clear. In this society someone or a body are innocent until they are proven guilty.

If someone is making an allegation they need to back that up. So far all I have seen is that you are prepared to treat someone as guilty by default based on a different matter rather than directly supportive proof.

It is a usual tactic of someone that has no proof that they instead try and make someone else back up they are not true because they cannot prove they are.

Vic_08

Graham wrote: »

Before there was realistic competition then?

Are you asking or telling?

It has been thrown about liberally on here by people that are just basing facts on wild assumptions that there was an absence of competition until about 5-10 years ago, this is a complete fallacy, Bus Eireann never ran without competition. Private operators have had services on Galway-Dublin as well as Limerick, Waterford, Clonmel, Kilkenny to Dublin services and many more through the country for decades.

Citylink started in the 90s on Galway - Dublin (Burkes ran it as City-Link before selling out to a company co-incidentally called Citylink) and Nestors had operated the route long before that right through to today's Go-bus (owned by the same Burke who bought what was Nestor out after he sold Citylink).

This idea floated about that bad old Bus Eireann had it all their own way as a monopoly before the crusading privates swooped in and made everything better is a nice story but it is far from the truth.

There was never a proscribed monopoly on bus services, it just happened that the GSR who were formed into CIE had already built up an extensive bus network as well as their rail services, there were always independents and they continued after the formation of CIE.

There was minimal road transport on the main routes before the 80's, one or two per day from CIE, mainly as fill-in for gaps in the rail network and a similar or less frequent service from small independents whose main customer base were rural or small town passengers.

It was Bus Eireann (after CIE was split in the mid 80's and they became more than an adjunct of the rail service) mainly who saw the potential in improving inter-city bus as a cheaper alternative to rail. A handful of independent also expanded their existing services as well, Kavanaghs in the south east, Nestors in Galway but mainly the independents stuck to their largely parochial services, not because they were prevented but because they were mainly small family operations that had little will to go beyond their established niche.

BE expanded, particularly the expressway routes (with the notable exception of Dublin-Cork) through the 1990s from a few services/day to hourly on the main routes. The expansion stopped dead around the 2003-4 mark when the DoT decided to take an interest and started taking years to approve timetable changes.

end of the road

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Considering most of the private operators are operating a better quality of service and the staff in the most seem happy . Why don't BÉ staff equalise with the private operators?

they have no need to. it's not their job to. they seem to offer the best terms and conditions out of the operators. they can't change their services much due to licencing and a fear of government.

Morpheus wrote: »

Unions

insure good terms and conditions for workers. forced the bringing in of many of the rights we enjoy today.

Graham wrote: »

A decision twelve years ago is the basis for the ongoing losses in BE Expressway today?

quite possibly, yes. along with many more decisians including some by be management.

Graham wrote: »

Before there was realistic competition then?

yes, car and the train.

LeinsterDub

end of the road wrote: »

they have no need to. it's not their job to

Just as it's not the private operators role to match BÉ T&C

Morpheus

regarding unions

end of the road wrote: »

insure good terms and conditions for workers. forced the bringing in of many of the rights we enjoy today.

and each time they are suggested, the unions will continue to stifle working practice improvements, efficiencies and service changes with coinciding protests or strikes demanding more pay for implementing them, which would benefit the customer and ultimately the company but usually result in the company forgoing changing current practice for fear of the union response.

Graham

end of the road wrote: »

yes, car and the train.

I think your assertion that BE could only compete on a route where the only competition was car/train says it all.

Vic_08

devnull wrote: »

That's spin in the extreme.

Here is the facts.

Aircoach operated up to 25% more services than Bus Eireann

Aircoach first service was an hour or two hours earlier than BE

Aircoach last service was an hour later than bus Eireann.

Aircoach also introduced a 1am service

Aircoach were 35 minutes faster

Aircoach was first operator to have WiFi on board.

Aircoach alsoserved Dublin airport a few years before bus Eireann did.

Aircoach was granted a license several months before Gobus.

So yeah apart from the fact aircoach was faster started earlier. Finished later. Served the airport. Ran early morning and had WiFi much earlier it was pretty similar to BE

I know it doesn't suit your point of view but when I am home tonight I am happy to post the links to back that up.

Oh, dear. Hit a nerve there haven't I. Mustn't criticise Aircoach.

I am not going to multi-quote your rant.

7 (or 8) returns per day (Aircoach dropped the 6am departures at some point) versus 6 (or 7 until BE stopped the one a day via Thurles)

Both were 2 hourly through the day.

Aircoach didn't run directly to the Airport for a long time, it was just City-City with connections, don't recall exactly when they started but it was probably after the Portlaoise-Airports were cancelled.

Airport traffic was not a big load factor before the express services started in 2012 as the earliest flight you could connect to was around 1pm and the last arrival 5.30ish, really wouldn't want to miss the last bus to Cork. They missed the majority of flights and bothh Airport peaks.

Aircoach were quicker on paper, in reality both had similar running times and similar stopping patterns. BE served Cahir which Aircoach never did, BE stopped serving Kildare, Monasterevin. BE had an advertised break in Urlingford, Aircoach didn't but stopped there anyway for a toilet break even though they didn't pick-up there.

Timing was more dependent on traffic and the driver on both operators from my experience, Cork in 3h50 with the bloody 5 mile tail back into Abbeyleix on Sunday afternoons was an absolute fantasy whereas I would comfortably beat the BE 4h25 by 20-30 minutes even with a leisurely lunch/dinner break in Josephines on the 14.00, 16.00, 18.00 Cork-Dublin runs. But if you want to score some imaginary points based on the timetable then be my guest.

the 1 am from Cork was only a few months before the express services started AFAIR, not really relevant to the point I was making which you missed entirely

devnull wrote: »

As fair as aircoach putting a complaint in I have no knowledge of that either way but I suspect that was on the basis that the relief bus was operating a different route and may have been being operated as scheduled relief whether it was needed or not and was being filled before the service bus which would be deemed as an unauthorised auxiliary departure in the view of Aircoach.

It was posted on the internet somewhere, might have been true, might not.

Still a petty and ridiculous nonsense to complain about a bus company running extras to ensure any passenger who turned up without booking could get on the departure they wanted.

I assume AC were busy on the weekends too, I didn't really see much of them on those departures but would be surprised if they hadn't needed to run extras at some points too.

I am actually not sure what you are trying to argue about here but I am happy to bore everyone else by banging on about this sort of nonsense, unlike certain other routes I could mention I always liked the Cork run in those days, a long day at 11h30 day but a good drive.

Oh yes, my point which you seem to want to disprove for some inexplicable reason was that both operators were conservative on the route for a long time, no overnights, frequency improvements or massive expansions until the express services in 2012. If you want to argue that Aircoach were better then fine, it is academic really. 6 versus 7 services a day isn't a massive difference and from my observations both had healthy loads right up to the non-stop services starting.