Why isn't Irish rail privatised?

lufties

I sometimes get a train from thurles to Dublin return, it costs 55 euros. Absolute madness. If it was privatised the service would be much more competitive.

prinzeugen

lufties wrote: »

I sometimes get a train from thurles to Dublin return, it costs 55 euros. Absolute madness. If it was privatised the service would be much more competitive.

Compared to the UK, Irish Rail is bloody cheap.

lufties

prinzeugen wrote: »

Compared to the UK, Irish Rail is bloody cheap.

You must be joking, 1hr 15 mins to thurles 55 euro. Clapham junction to Brighton is a similar distance and far cheaper. Also the demand is much higher.

Irish rail are a total and utter rip off

Grab All Association

Thurles is an exception. Iarnród Éireann have a monopoly here. They had cheap €25 (vs the €40 five day return) day saver return fares to Dublin and Cork up until about 2010.

Route 8 Dublin, 71 Cork-Athlone and a Limerick to Kilkenny CIE bus services served the town. IÉ competed with them on price. When these services were withdrawn in the 1990s/2000s the fares rose quickly. Over a 100% increase of fares on some routes in a day Thurles to Monasteravin 2011.

thomond2006

lufties wrote: »

You must be joking, 1hr 15 mins to thurles 55 euro. Clapham junction to Brighton is a similar distance and far cheaper. Also the demand is much higher.

Irish rail are a total and utter rip off

Book it online in advance and it's much cheaper, though I agree the walk up fares are ridiculous.

lufties

thomond2006 wrote: »

Book it online in advance and it's much cheaper, though I agree the walk up fares are ridiculous.

Yeah, I live overseas and its hard to rely on connections to book it online for a specified time. Its a case of taking a risk.

end of the road

as a short answer, it's unlikely to be financially viable and going on the uk at least, would be hugely disruptive, likely for no gain. fares certainly wouldn't go down. over all irish rail is quite cheap, perhapse not as much as we might like, but still cheap. they could offer more deals though.

Hilly Bill

lufties wrote: »

I sometimes get a train from thurles to Dublin return, it costs 55 euros. Absolute madness. If it was privatised the service would be much more competitive.

But may not be cheaper.

jhenno78

Wasn't there a thread about this recently?
Bottom line is that rail travel in Ireland is theoretically open and that any private company is allowed in but that nobody has even expressed interest?

If you mean privitisation of Irish Rail the company then...why? Private doesn't equal cheaper - especially not to the consumer.

Drifter50

FGS, train journeys are cheap here compared to the UK. I travel Dublin Connolly / Dromod for €15.00. Thats a 2 hr train journey. London / Birmingham would be €70/€100. Ok prices in Europe are cheaper but don`t go down the privatisation route, it won`t be cheaper than IR

jhenno78

Drifter50 wrote: »

FGS, train journeys are cheap here compared to the UK. I travel Dublin Connolly / Dromod for €19.50. Thats a 2 hr train journey. London / Birmingham would be €70/€100. Ok prices in Europe are cheaper but don`t go down the privatisation route, it won`t be cheaper than IR

I agree with your point, but in fairness that mightn't be the best measure...

Drifter50

OK perhaps another example is Belgian rail travel. Arrivals hall in Brussels Zavantem airport, down 1 level to the rail platform, DB EMU zips you to downtown Antwerp in 40 minutes for €11

lufties

jhenno78 wrote: »

Wasn't there a thread about this recently?
Bottom line is that rail travel in Ireland is theoretically open and that any private company is allowed in but that nobody has even expressed interest?

If you mean privitisation of Irish Rail the company then...why? Private doesn't equal cheaper - especially not to the consumer.

It could be made open for tender to private train companies. Perhaps even some competition, even on a select few routes as a trial. Who knows, it might even spur on hi speed rail in Ireland, or a Dublin airport rail service.

I've lived in hong kong, London, and Frankfurt. Yes I know they are metropolis', but Dublin and other regional cities could do with modernised rail services badly. Hong Kong MTR train stations are impeccable and so efficient. Ok, yes they have a population to justify it, but Ireland badly needs investment in rail infrastructure, and privatisation could shake off the cobwebs a bit.

Dravokivich

lufties wrote: »

It could be made open for tender to private train companies. Perhaps even some competition, even on a select few routes as a trial. Who knows, it might even spur on hi speed rail in Ireland, or a Dublin airport rail service.

I've lived in hong kong, London, and Frankfurt. Yes I know they are metropolis', but Dublin and other regional cities could do with modernised rail services badly. Hong Kong MTR train stations are impeccable and so efficient. Ok, yes they have a population to justify it, but Ireland badly needs investment in rail infrastructure, and privatisation could shake off the cobwebs a bit.

We won't get high speed rail in Ireland. Unless someone puts the money forward and expects no return on it.

Privatisation here... isn't a magic wand. What do ye think competition means? If someone was to bit for a line. They'll be the only one's running it. That isn't competition for the consumer. You're just sharing out the "monopoly." Irish Rail's competition isn't another Rail Operator. It's the bus services running through the same origin and destination. Who I believe have shorter journey times?

Vic_08

lufties wrote: »

You must be joking, 1hr 15 mins to thurles 55 euro. Clapham junction to Brighton is a similar distance and far cheaper. Also the demand is much higher.

Utter bollocks.


Dublin - Thurles (approx 155km) is twice the distance of Clapham - Brighton (approx 80km)

Even your supposed fare comparison is crap, the closest fare to the €55 (funny how you just happen to pick the most expensive unrestricted fare available) for CLJ-BTN is around €39 but is off-peak only, no unrestricted open return is available for that journey.

Not to mention you are comparing a journey from a small town on a sparsely populated regional express line with a very heavily populated suburban commuter route to a major city that also serves a large international airport.

The comparison is obviously farcical and if anything it proves exactly the opposite of your whinge, based on that IE fares are considerably cheaper than UK ones.

Vic_08

Drifter50 wrote: »

OK perhaps another example is Belgian rail travel. Arrivals hall in Brussels Zavantem airport, down 1 level to the rail platform, DB EMU zips you to downtown Antwerp in 40 minutes for €11

That'll be the same Belgium which has 97% of it's population living in urban areas, yes?

lufties wrote: »

It could be made open for tender to private train companies. Perhaps even some competition, even on a select few routes as a trial. Who knows, it might even spur on hi speed rail in Ireland, or a Dublin airport rail service.

I've lived in hong kong, London, and Frankfurt. Yes I know they are metropolis', but Dublin and other regional cities could do with modernised rail services badly. Hong Kong MTR train stations are impeccable and so efficient. Ok, yes they have a population to justify it, but Ireland badly needs investment in rail infrastructure, and privatisation could shake off the cobwebs a bit.

Hong Kong? One of the most densely populated places on the planet.

These comparisons are ludicrous, People need to cop on and face the reality that in international terms Dublin is a small city and everywhere else in Ireland is little more than widely scattered towns with a ridiculous amount of ribbon housing in between totally screwing up the economics of mass transport provision.

Rail in Ireland will never be a profitable business, private money will not be an option for development without mass state support.

end of the road

lufties wrote: »

It could be made open for tender to private train companies. Perhaps even some competition, even on a select few routes as a trial. Who knows, it might even spur on hi speed rail in Ireland, or a Dublin airport rail service.

I've lived in hong kong, London, and Frankfurt. Yes I know they are metropolis', but Dublin and other regional cities could do with modernised rail services badly. Hong Kong MTR train stations are impeccable and so efficient. Ok, yes they have a population to justify it, but Ireland badly needs investment in rail infrastructure, and privatisation could shake off the cobwebs a bit.

competition on routes won't happen. it's just not viable on the irish network. it mostly isn't viable on the british network either, for which any competition that does exist does due to circumstance and in some cases competing lines.
the only possible way any form of competition could happen anyway is every second train ran by a different operator, however that would highly likely increase costs, and likely would bring complexities and other issues which the railway does not need nor want. anyway, rail's competition is road transport.
tendering out to private train companies is possible but IMO pointless as it brings nothing to the table here. the operator won't be making any decisians given the national transport authority will be mandating everything in the contract. i actually think the government are railing against the idea anyway.
an airport line can very easily happen, it needs the government to commit to it and fund it. you are very very unlikely to get any private rail company funding it. high speed rail in ireland is a nice idea and i certainly wouldn't be against it myself but it's not going to happen unfortunately. even if it did, it's the government probably with european funding who will build it.
i absolutely agree that rail needs more investment, but privatization won't bring it. even in the uk, the government are putting up the vast majority of the cash toards investment and funding of the railways.

lufties

end of the road wrote: »

competition on routes won't happen. it's just not viable on the irish network. it mostly isn't viable on the british network either, for which any competition that does exist does due to circumstance and in some cases competing lines.
the only possible way any form of competition could happen anyway is every second train ran by a different operator, however that would highly likely increase costs, and likely would bring complexities and other issues which the railway does not need nor want. anyway, rail's competition is road transport.
tendering out to private train companies is possible but IMO pointless as it brings nothing to the table here. the operator won't be making any decisians given the national transport authority will be mandating everything in the contract. i actually think the government are railing against the idea anyway.
an airport line can very easily happen, it needs the government to commit to it and fund it. you are very very unlikely to get any private rail company funding it. high speed rail in ireland is a nice idea and i certainly wouldn't be against it myself but it's not going to happen unfortunately. even if it did, it's the government probably with european funding who will build it.
i absolutely agree that rail needs more investment, but privatization won't bring it. even in the uk, the government are putting up the vast majority of the cash toards investment and funding of the railways.

I'm talking about certain routes, similar to what's happening with Dublin bus. I get the train heuston to thurles when I'm back in the country, its always jammed, even at non peak times. Some private investor might open up competition and more frequency to certain routes. The government also owned are lingus once upon a time, but now its fully privatised and it has prospered.

In the U.K there are private companies like virgin trains, its hard to evolve when its all state owned. This is standard philosophy among most industries, why would rail be any different.

Dravokivich

They do that with buses because the outlays are less.

Irish Rail don't have additional rolling stock to lease. So where is a private company going to get some? That's the first hurdle to increasing frequency.

end of the road

lufties wrote: »

I'm talking about certain routes, similar to what's happening with Dublin bus. I get the train heuston to thurles when I'm back in the country, its always jammed, even at non peak times. Some private investor might open up competition and more frequency to certain routes. The government also owned are lingus once upon a time, but now its fully privatised and it has prospered.

In the U.K there are private companies like virgin trains, its hard to evolve when its all state owned. This is standard philosophy among most industries, why would rail be any different.

my points still apply. no private invester will open up competition and more frequency to certain routes, the return just isn't there. if it was, they would already be here, as the ability to do it is already there, our railway is open to private operators to come in and operate if they wish to do so. so far the only one to come into operate here is the belmond luxury tourist train (which contracts IE staff to operate the train i believe and provide locomotives) . with belmond owning the carriges. the reason being they will get a return because wealthy tourists will pay good money to travel ireland in a luxury train. the same just isn't there for run of the mill passenger services.
the air industry is a different beast to rail. with air, anyone as long as they have the funding and meet the relevant criteria can set up and more or less go. okay it isn't quite that simple but it's a lot easier to access then rail, which has the added complications of infrastructure, train paths and the extra expence of acquiring rolling stock due to our rail gauge being wider then elsewhere (something that would be way to costly and disruptive to change)
it's easy to evolve when it's all state owned if there is good management in place and even easier if there is a supportive government. british rail proved the former on a number of occasions. while they got lots wrong, they did lots to evolve, not necessarily in ways visible to the customer but still evolved. they got a lot more done with less money then the current privatized railway has got done with the billions of government funding it has received since later on in it's inception. private companies like virgin trains simply operate on the back of investments and work by others. they don't own the trains and they don't own and operate the infrastructure which is necessary so that anyone else winning the franchise doesn't face obstruction and difficulty.

Markcheese

It's probably not impossible to privatise certain services...
. . . It'd probably involve breaking up Irish rail into various state owned companies, track ownership and maintenance, maybe including station ownership and management,
Probably a separate train maintenance and servicing division,
A separate entity that owns and provides the actual trains (like some buses are)
Probably the same entity could be in charge of managing government subvention...
And then there's be the actual companies tendering to run the routes,
All with management structures,offices, policies branding, P.R. Ect,.

Yes it's a pity a private company can't tender to provide a certain (improved) level of service on an (underused) line, for X amount of subvention, but I can't see it happening...

lufties

end of the road wrote: »

my points still apply. no private invester will open up competition and more frequency to certain routes, the return just isn't there. if it was, they would already be here, as the ability to do it is already there, our railway is open to private operators to come in and operate if they wish to do so. so far the only one to come into operate here is the belmond luxury tourist train (which contracts IE staff to operate the train i believe and provide locomotives) . with belmond owning the carriges. the reason being they will get a return because wealthy tourists will pay good money to travel ireland in a luxury train. the same just isn't there for run of the mill passenger services.
the air industry is a different beast to rail. with air, anyone as long as they have the funding and meet the relevant criteria can set up and more or less go. okay it isn't quite that simple but it's a lot easier to access then rail, which has the added complications of infrastructure, train paths and the extra expence of acquiring rolling stock due to our rail gauge being wider then elsewhere (something that would be way to costly and disruptive to change)
it's easy to evolve when it's all state owned if there is good management in place and even easier if there is a supportive government. british rail proved the former on a number of occasions. while they got lots wrong, they did lots to evolve, not necessarily in ways visible to the customer but still evolved. they got a lot more done with less money then the current privatized railway has got done with the billions of government funding it has received since later on in it's inception. private companies like virgin trains simply operate on the back of investments and work by others. they don't own the trains and they don't own and operate the infrastructure which is necessary so that anyone else winning the franchise doesn't face obstruction and difficulty.

You could say the exact same about airport infrastructure, ATC ops, and operators flying leased aircraft.

I guarantee a well managed private investor would make a return on certain rail routes. It just needs some analysis and political will (which there obviously isn't).

Dravokivich

lufties wrote: »

You could say the exact same about airport infrastructure, ATC ops, and operators flying leased aircraft.

I guarantee a well managed private investor would make a return on certain rail routes. It just needs some analysis and political will (which there obviously isn't).

Why would an investor, pay a higher outlay, that'll take longer to get a return on, than a bus?

Reputable Rog

Drifter50 wrote: »

OK perhaps another example is Belgian rail travel. Arrivals hall in Brussels Zavantem airport, down 1 level to the rail platform, DB EMU zips you to downtown Antwerp in 40 minutes for €11

Why are DB running EMU's in Belgium? The distance from BRU to Antwerp is only 40km significantly less than Dublin to Thurles.

end of the road

lufties wrote: »

You could say the exact same about airport infrastructure, ATC ops, and operators flying leased aircraft.

I guarantee a well managed private investor would make a return on certain rail routes. It just needs some analysis and political will (which there obviously isn't).

if a well managed private investor could or would make a return on certain rail routes, they would be here already. the reality is the upfront costs make other options a better bet for an investor. remember, it's the government in the uk who are putting up nearly all of the cash that goes toards investment. i believe even the investments in rolling stock by the leasing companies is guaranteed by government.
political will doesn't come into it as the railway is open for private operators. any operator who can meet the relevant criteria can come in and operate, neither government nor irish rail can do anything about it.

Markcheese

I don't doubt that a private company could make a profit from the rail network, I doubt they'd take on the contract if they weren't more or less guaranteed to.. At the taxpayers expense.

Marcusm

lufties wrote: »

It could be made open for tender to private train companies. Perhaps even some competition, even on a select few routes as a trial. Who knows, it might even spur on hi speed rail in Ireland, or a Dublin airport rail service.

I've lived in hong kong, London, and Frankfurt. Yes I know they are metropolis', but Dublin and other regional cities could do with modernised rail services badly. Hong Kong MTR train stations are impeccable and so efficient. Ok, yes they have a population to justify it, but Ireland badly needs investment in rail infrastructure, and privatisation could shake off the cobwebs a bit.

At least the trams in dublin are more modern than Hong Kong.

Del.Monte

Marcusm wrote: »

At least the trams in dublin are more modern than Hong Kong.

Only because the original Dublin tramway system was scrapped and the Hong Kong system continued to operate.

Jamie2k9

prinzeugen wrote: »

Compared to the UK, Irish Rail is bloody cheap.

True however service levels are significantly better and investment.

jhenno78

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

True however service levels are significantly better and investment.

I think you'd have to say that in terms of punctuality, British railways are nothing to write home about.

Frequency of service is down to planning regulations, population and infrastructure investment, all of which are matters of government policy and thus independent of the public/private debate.

Franz Von Peppercorn

lufties wrote: »

I'm talking about certain routes, similar to what's happening with Dublin bus. I get the train heuston to thurles when I'm back in the country, its always jammed, even at non peak times. Some private investor might open up competition and more frequency to certain routes. The government also owned are lingus once upon a time, but now its fully privatised and it has prospered.

In the U.K there are private companies like virgin trains, its hard to evolve when its all state owned. This is standard philosophy among most industries, why would rail be any different.

This has been explained to you. There would be no competition on the line. The price would be the same or more for profit seeking.

Drifter50

Reputable Rog wrote: »

Why are DB running EMU's in Belgium? The distance from BRU to Antwerp is only 40km significantly less than Dublin to Thurles.

Can`t answer you that, I`m not familiar enough with the train operators there. All I know is its usually a 3 car or 6 car EMU with DB decals on it. I`ve also seen similiar units with DB decals operating around Eindhoven and Utrecht in NL. Before you ask no, not the DB IC intercity trains that carry on through to Germany

lufties

Dravokivich wrote: »

Why would an investor, pay a higher outlay, that'll take longer to get a return on, than a bus?

jhenno78 wrote: »

I think you'd have to say that in terms of punctuality, British railways are nothing to write home about.

Frequency of service is down to planning regulations, population and infrastructure investment, all of which are matters of government policy and thus independent of the public/private debate.

I travelled daily from Clapham junction to Gatwick daily for 6 months. Weekly tickets worked out quite cheap as I recall. The frequency was very good, as was the Punctuality 90% of the time.

Jamie2k9

jhenno78 wrote: »

I think you'd have to say that in terms of punctuality, British railways are nothing to write home about.

Frequency of service is down to planning regulations, population and infrastructure investment, all of which are matters of government policy and thus independent of the public/private debate.

I'm not agreeing however there is a far superior service over there despite its flaws and high prices. Irish Rail are fine but could be so much better and yes you can argue its down to funding/investment but the problems are way bigger which is down to the company.

Punctuality could be better over there however when you compare it to here Irish Rail look pretty poor simply because there is no congested routes here yet there is constant delays. The current 10 minute DART should be working significantly better than it is and its current issues are not exclusively leaves related.

People would support higher fares if they delivered for customers in terms of capacity, frequency and reliability.

jhenno78

lufties wrote: »

I travelled daily from Clapham junction to Gatwick daily for 6 months. Weekly tickets worked out quite cheap as I recall. The frequency was very good, as was the Punctuality 90% of the time.

And is that a fair comparison to dublin/thurles? Your example is something more like greystones to dublin...if greystones had an international airport. That journey is, I think 155 for the month?

Drifter50

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

I'm not agreeing however there is a far superior service over there despite its flaws and high prices. Irish Rail are fine but could be so much better and yes you can argue its down to funding/investment but the problems are way bigger which is down to the company.

Punctuality could be better over there however when you compare it to here Irish Rail look pretty poor simply because there is no congested routes here yet there is constant delays. The current 10 minute DART should be working significantly better than it is and its current issues are not exclusively leaves related.

People would support higher fares if they delivered for customers in terms of capacity, frequency and reliability.

Not sure how much more capacity there is in the Connolly/Tara/Pearse area and also the Heuston area at the peak times. Seems pretty congested to me and if the Dart 10 min was operating properly like you say I don`t think there is any more slack. If I`m wrong feel welcome to correct me.

i think one of the biggest problems in IR is the manyana factor amongst staff. If that was cleared up you could make real progress

jhenno78

@Jamie

Others here know much more about this than i do, but there is indeed congestion. Looking around the sub, some of the most referenced issues are congestion at Connolly, general lack of quad-tracking in/around Dublin, rolling stock and further electrification of commuter routes. This stuff is the real guts of what's limiting capacity/frequency.

Now Irish rail might well be their own worst enemies, but the stuff that's in their control is small-fries compared to the issues above.

People might be happy to pay higher fares, but not when they won't see any benefit from it for 10+ years!

lufties

jhenno78 wrote: »

And is that a fair comparison to dublin/thurles? Your example is something more like greystones to dublin...if greystones had an international airport. That journey is, I think 155 for the month?

I meant in the comparison of time taken, from clapham to Brighton is a similar time as Dublin to thurles. Its also a high demand route, but its still reasonably priced.

Reputable Rog

Drifter50 wrote: »

Can`t answer you that, I`m not familiar enough with the train operators there. All I know is its usually a 3 car or 6 car EMU with DB decals on it. I`ve also seen similiar units with DB decals operating around Eindhoven and Utrecht in NL. Before you ask no, not the DB IC intercity trains that carry on through to Germany

Is this the logo you saw? IMG_7651.PNG

jhenno78

lufties wrote: »

I meant in the comparison of time taken, from clapham to Brighton is a similar time as Dublin to thurles. Its also a high demand route, but its still reasonably priced.

It's also nearly twice the distance and much lower volume. Your concerns were very well addressed above(by Vic08).
High-demand != expensive here, it implies better ecconomies of scale.

At best you're saying "there should be a better fair structure"...maybe, but that can be done equally well public or private.

end of the road

lufties wrote: »

I meant in the comparison of time taken, from clapham to Brighton is a similar time as Dublin to thurles. Its also a high demand route, but its still reasonably priced.

it's a similar time, but not a similar distance from what i understand, with dublin thurles being a longer distance. the brighton main line from what i understand runs more like a outer suburban operation then a long distance inter city or regional operation. so it's not a fair comparison.

Losty Dublin

jhenno78 wrote: »

And is that a fair comparison to dublin/thurles? Your example is something more like greystones to dublin...if greystones had an international airport. That journey is, I think 155 for the month?

2 years ago I flew into Gatwick on a day trip. Before we flew I checked into train fares into central London. Prices went from about £8 to a whopping £270, and these were train service specific single fare at that :eek::eek::eek:

In the end a little birdie told me to ask nicely at a London Transport counter and I got use a return ticket plus a seven zone Bus/Rail ticket day pass for £11.85.

Dravokivich

lufties wrote: »

I travelled daily from Clapham junction to Gatwick daily for 6 months. Weekly tickets worked out quite cheap as I recall. The frequency was very good, as was the Punctuality 90% of the time.

So? That has nothing to do with the question I asked. It's far more cost effective for someone to run a bus than to run a train here.

Jamie2k9

Losty Dublin wrote: »

2 years ago I flew into Gatwick on a day trip. Before we flew I checked into train fares into central London. Prices went from about £8 to a whopping £270, and these were train service specific single fare at that :eek::eek::eek:

In the end a little birdie told me to ask nicely at a London Transport counter and I got use a return ticket plus a seven zone Bus/Rail ticket day pass for £11.85.

Day returns are about 16 quid (walk up) and not service specific and Oyser Cards get this price on the Gatwock Express.