Dublin Bus - can anyone be happy with the price and service?

Dyr · 25-02-2015 01:02PM

Most the people I know who travel up and down to dublin from rural parts are now using private operators mainly for the price but also the service is as good/better than BE

I'm skeptical about privatizing dublins bus services but anyone who thinks that dublin bus are not a part of the problem is codding themselves

bk · 25-02-2015 02:22PM

end of the road wrote: »

what is crap about be's service.

Really, I've gone over why BE is crap numerous times, for instance on the Cork - Dublin BE route:

- 4.5 hour journey time to Dublin
- Bus only every two hours
- Last bus of the day 6pm (inexcusable between our two largest cities).
- No toilets on a bus of such a long journey time.

Which now has been replaced by private service that offers:

- 3 hour journey time
- Hourly service
- Almost 24 hours a day operation
- Brand new toilet equipped coaches.

And you can see the same pattern repeated on all the intercity routes (Citylink, Dublin Coach, etc.).

The private operators have been an absolute revolution for intercity transport. Encouraging people out of their cars with high quality coaches, low fares and quick journey times.

These companies have shown how ridiculously inadequate BE's intercity services are and they have been richly rewarded with jam packed buses, clearly showing that there was always a massive public appetite for services like this that BE simply wasn't delivering.

end of the road wrote: »

why would you want it to be privatized. why should our tax money go on private ventures. privatizing it because "shur they wouldn't do any worse" is a ridiculous reason. private companies can't improve anything. the NTA is incharge of the bus services and they decide everything. so privatization is pointless. no point in comparing a socially necessary bus service like dublin bus and be to a luxury unnecessary bus service like the intercity private coaches. and i say luxury/unnecessary because if they went chances are you would have some sort of service. to clear it up for discussion purposes, i've nothing to do with CIE.

Why should it be privatised? Because DB over the last 30 years has proven it's complete lack of ability of delivering a modern european level city bus service.

DB is just like BE, a total failure to deliver the services the people of Dublin want and demand. So now it is time to give another company to see if they can do better, because they certainly can't do any worse.

I don't really care about getting caught up in stupid ideological arguments about privatisation versus state ownership. I really don't see any difference in pissing away our taxes and fares on a crappy semi-state then a private company. All I care about is that the company, whether it be public or private, finally delivers us a high quality bus service that a European capital city deserves.

end of the road · 25-02-2015 06:10PM

bk wrote: »

Really, I've gone over why BE is crap numerous times, for instance on the Cork - Dublin BE route:

- 4.5 hour journey time to Dublin
- Bus only every two hours
- Last bus of the day 6pm (inexcusable between our two largest cities).
- No toilets on a bus of such a long journey time.

Which now has been replaced by private service that offers:

- 3 hour journey time
- Hourly service
- Almost 24 hours a day operation
- Brand new toilet equipped coaches.

And you can see the same pattern repeated on all the intercity routes (Citylink, Dublin Coach, etc.).

The private operators have been an absolute revolution for intercity transport. Encouraging people out of their cars with high quality coaches, low fares and quick journey times.

These companies have shown how ridiculously inadequate BE's intercity services are and they have been richly rewarded with jam packed buses, clearly showing that there was always a massive public appetite for services like this that BE simply wasn't delivering.

Why should it be privatised? Because DB over the last 30 years has proven it's complete lack of ability of delivering a modern european level city bus service.

DB is just like BE, a total failure to deliver the services the people of Dublin want and demand. So now it is time to give another company to see if they can do better, because they certainly can't do any worse.

I don't really care about getting caught up in stupid ideological arguments about privatisation versus state ownership. I really don't see any difference in pissing away our taxes and fares on a crappy semi-state then a private company. All I care about is that the company, whether it be public or private, finally delivers us a high quality bus service that a European capital city deserves.

how many people have they taken out of their cars? i believe all services aren't "jam packed" as you would have us believe? privatization isn't going to deliver "a modern european level city bus service" the NTA is apparently. its not time to give it to another company to "see if they can do better" because they won't be doing anything apart from simply operating the busses to the NTA' requirements, and paying the drivers wages. and as for giving a company a go because "they can't do any worse" thats hardly a shining indorcement for privatization. sounds like you want privatization for the sake of it, which is absolutely not a reason for it. infact i can't see any reason for it if the NTA is going to be deciding everything. its not the tax payers job to piss away money on private companies running our bus and train services. it will be the NTA delivering "a high quality bus service that a European capital city deserves" not the companies.

_Kaiser_ · 25-02-2015 06:47PM

end of the road wrote: »

how many people have they taken out of their cars? i believe all services aren't "jam packed" as you would have us believe? privatization isn't going to deliver "a modern european level city bus service" the NTA is apparently. its not time to give it to another company to "see if they can do better" because they won't be doing anything apart from simply operating the busses to the NTA' requirements, and paying the drivers wages. and as for giving a company a go because "they can't do any worse" thats hardly a shining indorcement for privatization. sounds like you want privatization for the sake of it, which is absolutely not a reason for it. infact i can't see any reason for it if the NTA is going to be deciding everything. its not the tax payers job to piss away money on private companies running our bus and train services. it will be the NTA delivering "a high quality bus service that a European capital city deserves" not the companies.

None of this justifies the piss-poor service offered by the CIE group for the past several decades... and as I said previously I refuse to accept that it's because of under-investment - the problem is the company is run for the benefit of the staff, not the paying customer, the money was pissed away on buying shiny new buses every year since the early 90s (buses which then go on to several more years of daily service in their "early retirement" from the DB fleet), and of course inflated wages and benefits for the staff.

The reality that we don't even have a limited 24 hour regular service in 2015 in a city which no longer sleeps and with some of the biggest multinationals in the world for example is ridiculous.

DB have had decades to get things right and at the end of the day, it's just running a bus service not reinventing the wheel.. just copy what other cities of comparable size/layout have done successfully but yes, if they are incapable of providing the services demanded by a modern capital/country then they most certainly SHOULD lose their near-monopoly on things.. especially in Dublin.

The NTA "deciding everything" makes no difference. Inefficiency and incompetence should never be rewarded.

end of the road · 25-02-2015 07:10PM

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

None of this justifies the piss-poor service offered by the CIE group for the past several decades... and as I said previously I refuse to accept that it's because of under-investment - the problem is the company is run for the benefit of the staff, not the paying customer, the money was pissed away on buying shiny new buses every year since the early 90s (buses which then go on to several more years of daily service in their "early retirement" from the DB fleet), and of course inflated wages and benefits for the staff.

The reality that we don't even have a limited 24 hour regular service in 2015 in a city which no longer sleeps and with some of the biggest multinationals in the world for example is ridiculous.

DB have had decades to get things right and at the end of the day, it's just running a bus service not reinventing the wheel.. just copy what other cities of comparable size/layout have done successfully but yes, if they are incapable of providing the services demanded by a modern capital/country then they most certainly SHOULD lose their near-monopoly on things.. especially in Dublin.

The NTA "deciding everything" makes no difference. Inefficiency and incompetence should never be rewarded.

they should not lose their necessary monopoly. the NTA deciding everything makes all the difference as DB won't have a choice in the matter but to do what they say. the companies won't be deciding anything by the looks of it. its not rewarding anything as nothing is being awarded. the wages are not inflated, they are of a certain amount to take account of the high skill involved in driving a double decker around with a lot of people through city streets and other such situations

bk · 25-02-2015 07:37PM

end of the road wrote: »

the wages are not inflated, they are of a certain amount to take account of the high skill involved in driving a double decker around with a lot of people through city streets and other such situations

Dublin Bus drivers are the third best paid drivers in the whole of Europe! Yet Dublin Bus delivers a service far from the third best in Europe. It delivers a service that is probably one of the worst in a European capital city.

But honestly I'm not attacking DB drivers and staff here, who I honestly believe do a tough job, with anti-social hours and having to deal with anti-social people. Most manage to do it in a friendly and professional manner, despite all the difficulties.

What I'm attacking is the dreadful level of service delivered by this company. A level of service that simply isn't good enough for a modern European capital that runs 24/7 and has some of the largest US multinationals operating here.

DB has had 30 years to implement what is the norm in other European cities for the last 30 years and they have failed miserably to do so.

Because of DB's ineptitude, it is now left to the NTA to buy and give dual door buses to DB (which continue to not use them) and to create a new BRT service, to show DB what a modern, fast, efficient European bus service looks like.
Ridiculous, DB simply shouldn't left being rewarded for such ineptitude.

_Kaiser_ · 25-02-2015 07:59PM

end of the road wrote: »

they should not lose their necessary monopoly.

Necessary monopoly? Explain why...

The NTA deciding everything makes all the difference as DB won't have a choice in the matter but to do what they say.

And yet they're still not operating the dual-door buses they've been provided in the manner for which they're designed

the companies won't be deciding anything by the looks of it. its not rewarding anything as nothing is being awarded.

You're contradicting yourself here.. you're arguing that they should maintain their monopoly (at the expense of other providers). That's a re/award right there... again, why?

the wages are not inflated, they are of a certain amount to take account of the high skill involved in driving a double decker around with a lot of people through city streets and other such situations

Oh please... it's driving a bus around a city and suburbs. It's done all over the world every day. That's not to say it isn't a challenging stressful job but it's not rocket science either.. As bk points out, they are the third highest-paid drivers in Europe.

What exactly justifies this? They don't run a 24 hour service, services start at a ridiculously late 9/9:30 on Sundays (something which caused me lots of problems when I worked for a multinational supporting the US market on a shift basis), and the service itself ranges from abysmal to mediocre, but never consistent.. and has done so since I started getting buses to school in the early 80s.

Bottom line is that DB/CIE hasn't been up to the task for decades but it's become more obvious in the last 15/20 years when the country boomed, and the Irish started travelling more and realising just how poor the services at home are. DB/CIE have absolutely failed to keep up with the demands of a modern European capital with a 24/7 workforce, and to suggest we should continue to still let them at it anyway is the very definition of insanity - repeating something over and over but expecting a different result!

end of the road · 25-02-2015 08:08PM

bk wrote: »

Dublin Bus drivers are the third best paid drivers in the whole of Europe! Yet Dublin Bus delivers a service far from the third best in Europe. It delivers a service that is probably one of the worst in a European capital city.

But honestly I'm not attacking DB drivers and staff here, who I honestly believe do a tough job, with anti-social hours and having to deal with anti-social people. Most manage to do it in a friendly and professional manner, despite all the difficulties.

What I'm attacking is the dreadful level of service delivered by this company. A level of service that simply isn't good enough for a modern European capital that runs 24/7 and has some of the largest US multinationals operating here.

DB has had 30 years to implement what is the norm in other European cities for the last 30 years and they have failed miserably to do so.

Because of DB's ineptitude, it is now left to the NTA to buy and give dual door buses to DB (which continue to not use them) and to create a new BRT service, to show DB what a modern, fast, efficient European bus service looks like.
Ridiculous, DB simply shouldn't left being rewarded for such ineptitude.

dublin bus aren't being rewarded for anything.

end of the road · 25-02-2015 08:18PM

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Necessary monopoly? Explain why...

because much of the services are unproffitable and run through areas where services wouldn't exist if there wasn't a state run public transport system

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

And yet they're still not operating the dual-door buses they've been provided in the manner for which they're designed

because the routes these busses operate aren't set up for them

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

You're contradicting yourself here.. you're arguing that they should maintain their monopoly (at the expense of other providers). That's a re/award right there... again, why?

i'm not contradicting myself at all. its not a reward. if were to fund public transport, then to a state company it should go.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Oh please... it's driving a bus around a city and suburbs. It's done all over the world every day.

and? not anyone can do it. its not like driving a car. you need people who are able to deal with the pressures of driving such a vehicle.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

That's not to say it isn't a challenging stressful job but it's not rocket science either..

its not like driving a car either. you need people who are able to deal with the pressures of driving such a vehicle.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

As bk points out, they are the third highest-paid drivers in Europe.

good for them

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

What exactly justifies this? They don't run a 24 hour service, services start at a ridiculously late 9/9:30 on Sundays (something which caused me lots of problems when I worked for a multinational supporting the US market on a shift basis)

many reasons. it will happen eventually

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

the service itself ranges from abysmal to mediocre, but never consistent.. and has done so since I started getting buses to school in the early 80s.

not really. its not perfect but its not rubbish either.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Bottom line is that DB/CIE hasn't been up to the task for decades but it's become more obvious in the last 15/20 years when the country boomed, and the Irish started travelling more and realising just how poor the services at home are. DB/CIE have absolutely failed to keep up with the demands of a modern European capital with a 24/7 workforce

hence why we have a regulator

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

to suggest we should continue to still let them at it anyway is the very definition of insanity - repeating something over and over but expecting a different result!

not at all. if were to fund public transport then to a state company the money should go. other operators can operate along with dublin bus but their operations should offer something different, but not be abstractive from dublin bus.

_Kaiser_ · 25-02-2015 08:30PM

end of the road wrote: »

because much of the services are unproffitable and run through areas where services wouldn't exist if there wasn't a state run public transport system

Not true... if the NTA is deciding things now they define the routes

because the routes these busses operate aren't set up for them

As others have pointed out, it's commonplace for buses all over the world to operate multi-door loading/unloading in less than ideal spaces. Why is DB different?

i'm not contradicting myself at all. its not a reward. if were to fund public transport, then to a state company it should go.

IF they're capable of providing the required service then sure. If not (as DB/CIE clearly aren't) then it should go to someone who can

and? not anyone can do it. its not like driving a car. you need people who are able to deal with the pressures of driving such a vehicle.

If ya can't handle the pressure, get out of the kitchen... no need to pay over the odds for it.

good for them

Individually? Sure... not so good for the public that's getting the substandard service though!

many reasons. it will happen eventually

Eventually? Like maybe in another 20/30 years?

not really. its not perfect but its not rubbish either.

Many who depend on the "service" would disagree. Just read through this forum every week

hence why we have a regulator

Who should then regulate and if the existing provider isn't up to the task, they should be replaced with someone who is

not at all. if were to fund public transport then to a state company the money should go. other operators can operate along with dublin bus but their operations should offer something different, but not be abstractive from dublin bus.

DB is not fit for purpose in a 24/7 capital city in Europe. They've proven that time and again. Suggesting we continue to fund them regardless without significant improvement is nonsense.

end of the road · 25-02-2015 09:35PM

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

As others have pointed out, it's commonplace for buses all over the world to operate multi-door loading/unloading in less than ideal spaces. Why is DB different?

compo culture here. and i expect to be able to get off right at the kerb. i can do that with the current operations.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

IF they're capable of providing the required service then sure. If not (as DB/CIE clearly aren't) then it should go to someone who can

no . to a state company only.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

If ya can't handle the pressure, get out of the kitchen... no need to pay over the odds for it.

nobody is paying over the odds for it at all. and if you can't stand the heat, change the conditions.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Who should then regulate and if the existing provider isn't up to the task, they should be replaced with someone who is

no . dublin bus or no bus. state money to a state company. private operators can operate along with dublin bus but must survive on their own merrits and must offer something different, but must not be abstractive to dublin bus

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

DB is not fit for purpose in a 24/7 capital city in Europe. They've proven that time and again. Suggesting we continue to fund them regardless without significant improvement is nonsense.

the NTA is deciding everything so its not. dublin bus won't be getting a say in how things are run

hmmm · 25-02-2015 09:45PM

end of the road wrote: »

no . dublin bus or no bus. state money to a state company.

State money i.e. taxpayer money should go to whomever can provide the best service to the taxpayer.

I can't think of a single example of a state service that was privatised where I haven't received better service as a consequence.

end of the road · 25-02-2015 10:14PM

hmmm wrote: »

State money i.e. taxpayer money should go to whomever can provide the best service to the taxpayer.

no . state money to state run services

hmmm wrote: »

I can't think of a single example of a state service that was privatised where I haven't received better service as a consequence.

yeah. i'm sure.

bk · 25-02-2015 10:31PM

hmmm wrote: »

State money i.e. taxpayer money should go to whomever can provide the best service to the taxpayer.

I can't think of a single example of a state service that was privatised where I haven't received better service as a consequence.

While I would generally be in favour of privatisation, I would be careful about how it is done.

For instance Eircom should never have been privatised in the way it was. The network should have been kept under government ownership, while the rest of the company was privatised.

Fortunately the government seems to have learned it's lesson there and have done a much better job in privatising the ESB and Bord Gais, while keeping their networks under state ownership.

When it comes to public transport, I think it is important to keep the infrastructure under state ownership, while leaving the day to day running to a private company, Luas is a very successful example of this.

I would be against a full, every man for himself privatisation of Dublin citys bus services. However a London/Luas style model, where the routes, schedules, branding, fare boxes are all controlled by the NTA and then routes contracted out to various operator, both private and semi state * seems like it could be a very successful model.

* Interesting thought that this doesn't just mean DB. If BE had a bit of innovation, they could also bid for Dublin City routes, in fact even IR could!

bk · 25-02-2015 10:35PM

end of the road wrote: »

no . state money to state run services

Why?

That simply makes no sense. As hmmm says, the state money (subsidy) should go to the company who delivers the best service for our money.

I see no logical reason why state money should be limited to only semi-state companies. Specially when they aren't using that money efficiently or delivering a quality service.

end of the road · 25-02-2015 10:51PM

bk wrote: »

Why?

That simply makes no sense. As hmmm says, the state money (subsidy) should go to the company who delivers the best service for our money.

I see no logical reason why state money should be limited to only semi-state companies. Specially when they aren't using that money efficiently or delivering a quality service.

the NTA is deciding everything. so no point in wasting money on drawing up tendering contracts and nonsense when the state operator can be told what to do instead for the little subsidy that is currently given. private operators as i said can operate along the same routes but they must not be abstractive from dublin bus. that way there is actual competition

bk · 25-02-2015 11:06PM

end of the road wrote: »

the NTA is deciding everything. so no point in wasting money on drawing up tendering contracts and nonsense when the state operator can be told what to do instead for the little subsidy that is currently given. private operators as i said can operate along the same routes but they must not be abstractive from dublin bus. that way there is actual competition

That really doesn't explain your reasoning?

Why reward the contracts to DB, if other companies (might even be BE) will offer the same service for less money. Thus freeing up money for use in other areas (for instance more routes).

end of the road · 25-02-2015 11:12PM

bk wrote: »

That really doesn't explain your reasoning?

Why reward the contracts to DB, if other companies (might even be BE) will offer the same service for less money. Thus freeing up money for use in other areas (for instance more routes).

how can they do it for less money. all the operating costs will mostly be the same. i just can't see how the services can be provided for any less and for the private companies to make a proffit, after all we would have to give them enough subsidy so they can make a proffit.

bk · 25-02-2015 11:22PM

end of the road wrote: »

how can they do it for less money. all the operating costs will mostly be the same. i just can't see how the services can be provided for any less and for the private companies to make a proffit, after all we would have to give them enough subsidy so they can make a proffit.

In the same way that the private companies can so easily undercut BE and offer far superior services.

But not having such massive number of unnecessary "management" and office staff, DB is definitely a very top heavy organisation with far too many inspector grades and cushy management jobs that really aren't necessary for a bus company. Specially if much of the management function is increasingly been taken over by the NTA.

Either way, the other companies (which may include other semi-states) either bid for the routes and either undercut DB or they don't. They certainly should be given the opportunity to do so.

_Kaiser_ · 25-02-2015 11:30PM

end of the road wrote: »

the NTA is deciding everything. so no point in wasting money on drawing up tendering contracts and nonsense when the state operator can be told what to do instead for the little subsidy that is currently given. private operators as i said can operate along the same routes but they must not be abstractive from dublin bus. that way there is actual competition

Hang on a sec...

The reality is DB is supposed to exist to provide a city bus service for Dublin - something it has, and continues to be, extremely poor at.

Despite the "changing with the city" tagline a few years back, DB has in fact done anything but. It hasn't adapted to where people live and work, how they get there, and the hours they work and socialise, instead persisting with an outdated model that has made commuting a nightmare unless you're doing a simple A-B single vehicle trip within the hours of operation that they've decided to provide (you can talk about the NTA running things now, but that doesn't change the reality of the last 20/30 years).

On those basis alone, DB should be stripped of responsibility of service provision in Dublin unless it can rapidly up its game and ultimately, despite what the employees may think, a city bus service is not supposed to be a job creation scheme for lazy, inefficient and change-resistant staff. The idea that we as taxpayers should just continue funding this organisation regardless is madness.

To put it in simpler terms - times are changing and DB and its staff need to get with the programme or GTFO.

end of the road · 25-02-2015 11:45PM

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Hang on a sec...

The reality is DB is supposed to exist to provide a city bus service for Dublin - something it has, and continues to be, extremely poor at.

Despite the "changing with the city" tagline a few years back, DB has in fact done anything but. It hasn't adapted to where people live and work, how they get there, and the hours they work and socialise, instead persisting with an outdated model that has made commuting a nightmare unless you're doing a simple A-B single vehicle trip within the hours of operation that they've decided to provide (you can talk about the NTA running things now, but that doesn't change the reality of the last 20/30 years).

On those basis alone, DB should be stripped of responsibility of service provision in Dublin unless it can rapidly up its game and ultimately, despite what the employees may think, a city bus service is not supposed to be a job creation scheme for lazy, inefficient and change-resistant staff. The idea that we as taxpayers should just continue funding this organisation regardless is madness.

To put it in simpler terms - times are changing and DB and its staff need to get with the programme or GTFO.

not at all. the NTA are responsible for service provision. dublin bus don't need to GTFO at all.

punisher5112 · 25-02-2015 11:46PM

bk wrote: »

Dublin Bus drivers are the third best paid drivers in the whole of Europe! Yet Dublin Bus delivers a service far from the third best in Europe. It delivers a service that is probably one of the worst in a European capital city.

But honestly I'm not attacking DB drivers and staff here, who I honestly believe do a tough job, with anti-social hours and having to deal with anti-social people. Most manage to do it in a friendly and professional manner, despite all the difficulties.

What I'm attacking is the dreadful level of service delivered by this company. A level of service that simply isn't good enough for a modern European capital that runs 24/7 and has some of the largest US multinationals operating here.

DB has had 30 years to implement what is the norm in other European cities for the last 30 years and they have failed miserably to do so.

Because of DB's ineptitude, it is now left to the NTA to buy and give dual door buses to DB (which continue to not use them) and to create a new BRT service, to show DB what a modern, fast, efficient European bus service looks like.
Ridiculous, DB simply shouldn't left being rewarded for such ineptitude.

I would love for you to try been a db or be driver and then come back and tell us all how crap pay is because in no way are we highly paid.

The highly paid are management, clerical, inspectors and chief inspectors who manage the managers who then are managed by managers.

Things need to change I fully agree with you but why always why does it always come back to drivers who do a very unsociable job with bad hours, long days/nights, stressful job and I mean that even when you do try not to let things get to you.
Listen to people giving out all the time and try and deal with everything else going on.
Not an easy job I can honestly tell you.

bk · 26-02-2015 10:34AM

punisher5112 wrote: »

Things need to change I fully agree with you but why always why does it always come back to drivers who do a very unsociable job with bad hours, long days/nights, stressful job and I mean that even when you do try not to let things get to you.
Listen to people giving out all the time and try and deal with everything else going on.
Not an easy job I can honestly tell you.

And you will see that I have repeatedly said I have no problem with the drivers, as you say they do a difficult job. No one blames the drivers.

The problem is with the company overall. As you say yourself, the company is way too top heavy with way too many cushy highly paid management jobs, which really shouldn't be necessary for a bus company. Which we the tax payers and fare paying passengers are expected to pay for!

But that is why much leaner private companies, with far fewer management types, just the ones actually needed, could do the job for a lot cheaper. But reducing the unnecessary overheads.

Now in some ways end of the line has managed to side track me here. I'm not so worried about saving money, I'm much more concerned with the quality of service delivered.

(Though if another company can do the same routes for less subsidy, then that frees up money to be used on new routes, thus better for the public)

If DB can deliver a modern, european standard city bus service, then fine, I've no major problem with it doing so.

But I see zero evidence of it changing or being able to do so. DB has had 30 years to take on these standard practices (multi-door operations, zero driver interaction, off bus ticketing, 24 hour operations) and they haven't done so. Non of these things are rocket science or require advanced technology, they have all been the norm on mainland Europe for the past 30 years.

We now see the NTA doing the right thing and buying dual door buses for Dublin. But we see DB continue to not use them!!!

I see little or no evidence that DB is willing to change, so if they are going to continue to stand in our way of having a modern, european style bus service, then DB should be pushed aside and the job given to another company who is willing to innovate.

end of the road · 26-02-2015 01:55PM

bk wrote: »

the company is way too top heavy with way too many cushy highly paid management jobs, which really shouldn't be necessary for a bus company. Which we the tax payers and fare paying passengers are expected to pay for!

you will be paying whether they exist or not though

bk wrote: »

that is why much leaner private companies, with far fewer management types, just the ones actually needed, could do the job for a lot cheaper.

again, how. most of the routes are loss making and require subsidy to operate. if these oh so perfect lean companies are to make money then they can't afford to do it any cheeper.

bk wrote: »

But reducing the unnecessary overheads.

which were replaced by the NTA, but would most likely make no difference in terms of cost to operate the services.

bk wrote: »

Now in some ways end of the line has managed to side track me here. I'm not so worried about saving money, I'm much more concerned with the quality of service delivered.

well, that will be the NTA's doing, not companies.

bk wrote: »

(Though if another company can do the same routes for less subsidy, then that frees up money to be used on new routes, thus better for the public)

again, how can a company do it for less subsidy if they are to make money on it. can we really expect private companies to operate bus services for little in return? that is unreasonable

bk wrote: »

If DB can deliver a modern, european standard city bus service, then fine, I've no major problem with it doing so.

but it isn't dublin bus delivering anything. its the NTA deciding everything.

bk wrote: »

But I see zero evidence of it changing or being able to do so. DB has had 30 years to take on these standard practices (multi-door operations, zero driver interaction, off bus ticketing, 24 hour operations) and they haven't done so. Non of these things are rocket science or require advanced technology, they have all been the norm on mainland Europe for the past 30 years.

when we can set up stops properly for multi-door operation meaning we can avoid the compo culture, it will be used. the NTA will be the ones to have the final say on it, dublin bus only have an opinion on the matter.

bk wrote: »

We now see the NTA doing the right thing and buying dual door buses for Dublin. But we see DB continue to not use them!!!

yes, for good reasons, otherwise the NTA would be forcing them to do so

bk wrote: »

I see little or no evidence that DB is willing to change, so if they are going to continue to stand in our way of having a modern, european style bus service, then DB should be pushed aside and the job given to another company who is willing to innovate.

dublin bus should not be pushed aside and any attempt to do so should be faught against no matter how messy it gets. innovate? how are companies who by the looks of it aren't going to have much of a say going to "innovate" . the NTA is the one doing the so called "innovation" so dublin bus can keep all the routes and offer a bus service that suits the needs of ireland only.

_Kaiser_ · 26-02-2015 03:37PM

EOTR: You have yet to explain WHY DB should be retained (apparently at any cost) despite their legacy of providing an inadequate, outdated service to the people of Dublin. "State money for State jobs" doesn't cut it when the service doesn't meet the demand.

As for your constant it's-up-to-the-NTA-now responses, have you considered that the REASON the NTA are "deciding everything" is because DB have failed to do the job?
No amount of passing the buck will change the fact that DB have spectacularly failed to keep pace with the changes in Dublin and its commuting requirements over the past 2/3 decades, which has both damaged the reputation of the company (probably irrevocably at this point) and resulted in more cars on the road than are necessary.

As I said before, DB is not a job creation scheme (or it certainly shouldn't be!). If they can't provide the service demanded at a price point attractive to the customer, then they should be forced to make room for someone who can.

end of the road · 26-02-2015 04:07PM

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

EOTR: You have yet to explain WHY DB should be retained (apparently at any cost) despite their legacy of providing an inadequate, outdated service to the people of Dublin. "State money for State jobs" doesn't cut it when the service doesn't meet the demand.

As for your constant it's-up-to-the-NTA-now responses, have you considered that the REASON the NTA are "deciding everything" is because DB have failed to do the job?
No amount of passing the buck will change the fact that DB have spectacularly failed to keep pace with the changes in Dublin and its commuting requirements over the past 2/3 decades, which has both damaged the reputation of the company (probably irrevocably at this point) and resulted in more cars on the road than are necessary.

As I said before, DB is not a job creation scheme (or it certainly shouldn't be!). If they can't provide the service demanded at a price point attractive to the customer, then they should be forced to make room for someone who can.

no price would be attractive enough for some. they shouldn't be forced to make room for anyone, unless its someone operating along side them rather then instead of them. they should be retained as they are able to continue to operate services even with severe cuts in subsidy, when other businesses endure severe cuts in their income due to various reasons they have to make severe cutbacks whereas the CIE companies for all their faults can keep going providing the services. you want a good transport system it has to be payed for either by the passenger or by the government. it would be unreasonable to expect private companies and their shareholders to operate with what little subsidy db gets. a regulator was coming anyway as they will at least take a bit of the heat off the government in terms of transport, as well as having one umbrella organization. all the stuff done in european cities such as multi-door operation is coming and will be implemented as soon as is possible. the NTA are obviously understanding that it can't be implemented at the moment for various reasons, if they weren't, dublin bus would be forced to use it.

bk · 26-02-2015 05:35PM

end of the road wrote: »

no price would be attractive enough for some. they shouldn't be forced to make room for anyone, unless its someone operating along side them rather then instead of them. they should be retained as they are able to continue to operate services even with severe cuts in subsidy, when other businesses endure severe cuts in their income due to various reasons they have to make severe cutbacks whereas the CIE companies for all their faults can keep going providing the services.

This is hilarious!! Basically what you are saying is the CIE companies are so inefficient and over-subsidised, that they can easily take cuts to their subsidies and still maintain services!!!

This is an argument that they are costing us way more then they should :eek:

end of the road · 26-02-2015 06:01PM

bk wrote: »

This is hilarious!!

i'm glad you find it funny. the fact we don't subsidise public transport enough is something i don't find funny.

bk wrote: »

Basically what you are saying is the CIE companies are so inefficient and over-subsidised, that they can easily take cuts to their subsidies and still maintain services!!!

no . they have taken large cuts in subsidy but are still able to keep services going, however that is possible as they don't have to make a proffit for the shareholder which is the state. only the management part is inneficient, but that will die out soon. they certainly aren't over subsidized as public transport in this country in my view isn't subsidized enough

bk wrote: »

This is an argument that they are costing us way more then they should

its not. infact they are costing us less, as the subsidy we pay for transport is rather small. fares are high for cash payment on dublin bus, but people should be going to the leep card anyway.

bk · 26-02-2015 06:50PM

EOTR you do know that private companies can also absorb loses for a few years in order to stay in a market.

For instance Aircoach was making loses for the past few years during the recession, but stuck it out and I believe has now returned to profitability with the uptick in the economy.

Certainly nothing unusual about this at all and certainly nothing specific to semi-states. In fact many would argue that is is easier to negotiate with private companies to reduce costs, then semi-state unions, specially when they have a monopoly on the market.

end of the road wrote: »

its not. infact they are costing us less, as the subsidy we pay for transport is rather small. fares are high for cash payment on dublin bus, but people should be going to the leep card anyway.

More bull, reports from the NTA have clearly shown that DB has one of the highest per-km charges of any city bus service in Europe. Along with the third highest paid drivers in Europe!

DB is also subsidised similar to other European bus services when you include all the indirect subsidies:
- Bus depots bought and paid for by the taxpayer
- Nearly all of DB's new buses bought over the last 3 years, bought and paid for by the Irish taxpayer.
- Free passes paid for by the department of social welfare
- 50%+ subsidisation of monthly and yearly passes by the government.

When you take all that into account, DB is heavily subsidised.

Now I have no problem with all that, if they delivered a bus service that was one of the best in Europe. But they don't they deliver a bus service that is one of the worst and that simply isn't acceptable.

cdebru · 03-03-2015 11:41AM

howiya wrote: »

The customer would be very unlikely to return if the meal didn't taste great and would choose a different restaurant instead of paying a higher price for the same meal

You ignore the point the ingredients aren't there for supplying a quality service, every morning I see delivery drivers parked in bus lanes when there is an empty loading bay not 100 meters away, why because nobody does anything to stop them, everyday I see taxi drivers park up at bus stops creating pop up ranks, but nobody does anything, school starting and finishing times privates cars blocking the streets the pedestrian crossings the bus stops, nobody does anything, cars piling into bus lanes 500, 1000 metres early to queue for turns, this is not random nobody knows when it will happen stuff this is the same people in the same places doing the same things, day in day out nothing is done.

The NTA goes out and buys double door buses whoopie, how does that fix the problem, if you just ignore bus stop location and design ? Why didn't they do an audit route by route stop by stop and see which stops in the normal course are safe for dual door use and which aren't and then work at fixing or moving those that aren't up to standard ? No just half arsed buy the buses and it will fix itself, like everything in this country paint a white line, bring in a new law, no need to do anything else ah sure it will be grand. It is actually laughable to follow the Gardai on Twitter and see them post pictures of cars blocking footpaths or dangerously parked or with faulty lights, eh how about leading by example the amount of garda cars with faulty lights is unreal, they park in bus stops, on footpaths in bus lanes on double yellow lines, someone tweeted them a picture the other day of a Garda van completely blocking a footpath up near the new courts of justice, it wasn't parked there the next day but a private car was in the exact same spot, monkey see monkey do.

Yes we don't have a fully functioning transport system, but that won't change no matter who operates it, unless all the other stuff is addressed, DB is not perfect, but a lot of the stuff it takes flak for are stuff beyond their control.

Dublin Bus - can anyone be happy with the price and service?

Comments