First win Intercity West Coast franchise

[DarloRich]

What's the point of being gracious in defeat when you have no business left afterwards? The only people who attribute 'graciousness' and 'dignity' to Train companies are the ones on this board. I doubt many of the public are worrying about whether Virgin are being dignified.

do you understand the concept of a fixed term contract? Do you understand the concept of a competetive tender? Do you undertand the concept of an ITT? Do you understand the concept of a specification? Do you understand the concept of TUPE? Do you underdstand the concept of a rolling stock lease?

What is it that you think means that Virgin should have won the tender excercise or that the winning tender should be rejected?

When will Virgin lodge thier judical review request about this manifestly unfair system that has led to them loosing their cash cow, sorry, contract?

BTW Virgin are at liberty to bid for any other franchise they see fit.

 

[F Great Eastern]

Not to mention FGE, they were train operator of the year at the time and various commuter groups and local Representatives were very upset, as they were frequently topping performance tables and safety tables for years.

They considered taking legal action but didn't in the end as they believe that such behavior would look childish and that at the end of the day it would make them look like sore losers so they didn't do i t, they accepted that the department had made their decision, and acted professional.

So they shut up, got on with their jobs, and assisted fully with the changeover without being bitter to National Express, even if the vast majority of people were disgusted that NX got the franchise. The MD was deeply disappointed but he did not moan like Branson did and make such a public outcry, as he knew it was about more than just him.

The staff who did not want to switch left and in some cases went on to bigger and better things within the parent company. Others stayed on with National Express, but the same staff, despite their disappointment, were still there for the most part a year later apart from the ones who decided to leave, with the same great customer service.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

17 shy of 100,000 now.

EDIT - And it's just shrunk to 99,909 now

 

[WestCoast]

A fantastic TOC - doubling services by introducing new 100mph trains (creating links to Barnsley, Matlock, Burton etc), extending them with centre carriages, then when those services got even busier introducing a new class of longer 125mph trains (with ambitions to run an hourly London - Leeds service)... they really don't get the credit that they deserve (compared to everyone fawning over GNER at the time).

MM were National Express Group owned as well!

 

[PR1Berske]

And it's done it - 100,051 http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/37180

 

[Manchester77]

They have 100,051 now

 

[PR1Berske]

From the campaign group "Reinstate Virgin"

Don't think I need to make a comment, it speaks for itself........

FINAL VERSION - PRESS RELEASE FROM REINSTATEVIRGIN 24.08.12 RVTWC/1

100,000 People can't be wrong. ReinstateVirgin, the group of passengers behind the e-petition 37180 to convince the DfT to reconsider the bid on the West Coast Main Line are celebrating achieving the required threshold in less than a week.

E-petitions are an easy, personal way for you to influence government and Parliament in the UK. You can create an e-petition about anything that the government is responsible for and if it gets at least 100,000
signatures, it will be considered for debate in the House of Commons

Damian Bradley, their press officer said, "When we first promoted the e-petition there were 12 signatures on it, little did we believe that in less than a week we would have over 100,000 signatures"

What started off at 0723 on 15.08.12 as a one-man crusade has grown into a phenomenon.

Patric (Pad.A),
the creator and manager said "OK, I might have started the Facebook campaign but no one person can take the credit for this, without Ross's e-petition and our promotion none of this would have happened. I would however personally like to thank our dedicated team of contributors namely; Damian Bradley, Kyle Blunt,
Janette Plain and Bern Manning for their tireless hard work in achieving stage one of our campaign to ReinstateVirgin. We will now consider our options for stage two.

I would also like to thank the Virgin group
for recognising our efforts and the celebrities who have tweeted to their many followers about our cause."

When asked about the success he said, "If only e-petitions had been around at the time of Beeching!"
END OF PRESS RELEASE
Further information can be found at www.reinstateVirgin.co.uk
Contact us on www.twitter.com/reinstateVirgin & on www.facebook.com/reinstateVirgintrainswestcoast

 

[williamn]

do you understand the concept of a fixed term contract? Do you understand the concept of a competetive tender? Do you undertand the concept of an ITT? Do you understand the concept of a specification? Do you understand the concept of TUPE? Do you underdstand the concept of a rolling stock lease?

What is it that you think means that Virgin should have won the tender excercise or that the winning tender should be rejected?

When will Virgin lodge thier judical review request about this manifestly unfair system that has led to them loosing their cash cow, sorry, contract?

BTW Virgin are at liberty to bid for any other franchise they see fit.

I understand all of that. The question is whether the process was undertaken in the correct manner, given that Virgins bid was considered more 'deliverable'. There's lots more to say but I will save it as I realise this board is not a place for rational debate.

 

[tbtc]

From the campaign group "Reinstate Virgin"

Don't think I need to make a comment, it speaks for itself........

100,000 people can't be wrong?

I understand all of that. The question is whether the process was undertaken in the correct manner, given that Virgins bid was considered more 'deliverable'. There's lots more to say but I will save it as I realise this board is not a place for rational debate.

I'd be interested to know what you think was more "deliverable" about Virgin's bid (which they have been surprisingly shy to give us further details of) and why you think that the process wasn't done in the correct manner.

Or are you just casting aspersions that something wasn't correct?

 

[DarloRich]

I understand all of that. The question is whether the process was undertaken in the correct manner, given that Virgins bid was considered more 'deliverable'. There's lots more to say but I will save it as I realise this board is not a place for rational debate.

no - that was but one of the criteria used to score the tenders. What we need to see is the criteria and weighting given to each section of the criteria.

Has there been any confirmation of what criteria had the highest weighting? I assume the highest weighting to be premium to HMG.

Now if Virgin suspect this to be unfair (as they seem to!) when will they launch a judicial review?

To me they will have to prove that the weighting of the criteria AND/OR the criteria themselves were fundamentally flawed. Can they do this? If they could why wait? Why not simply launch a request for judicial review immediately? Why have they not published thier bid to show this unfair system up? What are they worried about?

Do we know what deliverable even means? What was more deliverable? What was the scoring criteria for deliverability. If your bid is more deliverable but deliverable is only worth 5% of the marks you have little groundfor challenge.

 

[bengley]

I love this forum, full of people who always go by the book. Why shouldn't Virgin keep the franchise? If it ain't broke (which it isn't) then don't fix it.

I hope Virgin do get the franchise back.

 

[F Great Eastern]

From the campaign group "Reinstate Virgin"

Don't think I need to make a comment, it speaks for itself........

With PR that good, I may ask them if they want to tender to take over my companies marketing!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I understand all of that. The question is whether the process was undertaken in the correct manner, given that Virgins bid was considered more 'deliverable'. There's lots more to say but I will save it as I realise this board is not a place for rational debate.

Most deliverable isn't always best. If I say I will make one change, that will be more deliverable as I have to do less. Doesn't mean it's better though

 

[HH]

I understand all of that. The question is whether the process was undertaken in the correct manner, given that Virgins bid was considered more 'deliverable'.

Do you know what deliverable means in this context? I rather suspect not, because if you did you'd realise that it's a rather large herring of the red variety.

 

[tbtc]

Why shouldn't Virgin keep the franchise?

Because its a franchise. Not a permenant business.

 

[DarloRich]

I love this forum, full of people who always go by the book. Why shouldn't Virgin keep the franchise? If it ain't broke (which it isn't) then don't fix it.

I hope Virgin do get the franchise back.

I think i might be feeding a troll but anyway

why should they keep the franchise when they lost a competative tender excercise? The franchise was for a fixed term but why not just let Virgin run it in perpetuity? much easier all round.

 

[HH]

Has there been any confirmation of what criteria had the highest weighting? I assume the highest weighting to be premium to HMG.

I've explained this several times. The premium payment is not part of the deliverability score. In fact if a premium is sufficiently higher than the next nearest bidder, then all the bid has to be is "deliverable". It doesn't need to be more deliverable than the second placed bid.

As it happens, First's deliverability score was considerably higher than that needed to be deemed 'deliverable'. All we know about Virgin's is that it was higher. How much higher? They haven't said. Why is that?

 

[tbtc]

If it ain't broke (which it isn't) then don't fix it

How come they've got such poor PPM stats (considering the quality of their trains and the upgraded WCML) then?

And if it ain't broke then why are some stations in such need of an overhaul?

I know I shouldn't bite, but...

 

[Realfish]

no - that was but one of the criteria used to score the tenders. What we need to see is the criteria and weighting given to each section of the criteria.

Has there been any confirmation of what criteria had the highest weighting? I assume the highest weighting to be premium to HMG.

Now if Virgin suspect this to be unfair (as they seem to!) when will they launch a judicial review?

To me they will have to prove that the weighting of the criteria AND/OR the criteria themselves were fundamentally flawed. Can they do this? If they could why wait? Why not simply launch a request for judicial review immediately? Why have they not published thier bid to show this unfair system up? What are they worried about?

The bid criteria are on the DfT Invitation to Tender with the weightings annexed. Looking through it it seems a very poor document, nothing in there at all about engagement with customers (as opposed to customer processes), or engagement with staff, (apart from their unions). That said I don't suppose that the Civil Servants at the DfT would know anything about those sort of fundamentals. Actually it's a rubbish document, but if anyone had concerns about the criteria, they should have been stated at the start of the process.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/publications/rail-passenger-franchise-intercity-west-coast

As you suggest, it looks as thought the 'softer' criteria have been ignired in favour of the ££££££'s - unfortunately First's was a 'jam tomorrow' bid - all independent observers are saying that for the first 7 years of the franchise, the Virgin bid was best for the taxpayer.

Regarding publication of the bid details, Virgin have said that they hope that details of their bid will emerge - which suggests that it isn't in their hands, or that there are legal matters going on in the background.

 

[DarloRich]

I've explained this several times. The premium payment is not part of the deliverability score. In fact if a premium is sufficiently higher than the next nearest bidder, then all the bid has to be is "deliverable". It doesn't need to be more deliverable than the second placed bid.

As it happens, First's deliverability score was considerably higher than that needed to be deemed 'deliverable'. All we know about Virgin's is that it was higher. How much higher? They haven't said. Why is that?

I am not saying the premium is part of deliverability.

I am saying we need to see the weighting behind each section of the tender criteria of which premium and deliverability are two sperate items.

If deliverability is worth 5% and Premium 75% of the marks then being deliverable isnt worth much!

 

[jon0844]

By admission an e-petition is an easy thing to set up. I laughed out loud (seriously!) when it went on to say that it's now time to think about stage 2.

That will be the stage where the actual hard work begins. And where stage 1 will prove to have been worthless.

You can create petitions about anything but it doesn't guarantee changing anything at all.

As for the comment about 'if it ain't broke' I nearly laughed out again. So when a franchise needs to be renewed, we just look at the current company and say 'nah, they're fine' and give the job to them forever? Do we do the same for any franchise? Retail, refuse collection or whatever?

Some people really don't understand what a fixed term contract is do they? If they don't understand that, I wonder how they manage to dress themselves in the morning!

 

[HH]

What we're seeing is what some of us have known for some time; Virgin have a reputation that far exceeds the reality. Not that they're bad, but they're just nowhere near as good as people seem to believe, by every objective measure. It just goes to show how good their PR is.

This differential between perception and reality is why VT can be bottom of the punctuality charts and yet top of customer satisfaction. Any other TOC would be close to the bottom. Somehow a Virgin Delay must feel shorter than other people's...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I am not saying the premium is part of deliverability.

I am saying we need to see the weighting behind each section of the tender criteria of which premium and deliverability are two sperate items.

If deliverability is worth 5% and Premium 75% being deliverable isnt worth much!

And I keep telling you that it doesn't work like that!!! There is no weighting on Deliverability vs Premium.

 

[Yew]

What we're seeing is what some of us have known for some time; Virgin have a reputation that far exceeds the reality. Not that they're bad, but they're just nowhere near as good as people seem to believe, by every objective measure. It just goes to show how good their PR is.

This differential between perception and reality is why VT can be bottom of the punctuality charts and yet top of customer satisfaction. Any other TOC would be close to the bottom. Somehow a Virgin Delay must feel shorter than other people's...

It must be the spacious Pendolino interior, with the soft seats, well provisioned standard class. Oh, Wait...

 

[DarloRich]

I agree - It isnt weighted deliverability v premium. Each criteria will have an individual score broken down from the whole 100%

 

[telstarbox]

The petition asking the government to reconsider awarding the franchise to First has topped 100,000 signatures which means it will be debated in Parliament.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I do feel sorry for Virgin losing their buisness this is it for them now they havent got any more enterprises milking us for money.
I will spend the next 12 months paying ridiculous amounts for virgin media broadband!

If virgin are going to struggle because of this they deserve it. Who bases their buisness on continually winning fixed term contracts!

 

[DarloRich]

The petition asking the government to reconsider awarding the franchise to First has topped 100,000 signatures which means it will be debated in Parliament.

point of order - it means it will be considered for a debate in parliament.

 

[YorkshireBear]

the petition asking the government to reconsider awarding the franchise to first has topped 100,000 signatures which means it will be debated in parliament.

MIGHT.... just to be correct.

And i love the 100,000 people cant be wrong!!!! had me on the floor! at least 80,000 must be wrong based on facebook!

 

[sonic2009]

Does the petition not have to be heard by law?

There's something that the Government are hiding, and Virgin obviously know about it otherwise they would not of bothered with the petition.

If First do get to run the franchise, they won't be able to cope and will see it handed back in 2013/2014.

 

[jon0844]

Think how many are staff, PR, celebs and the multiple signatures from people who have multiple email addresses.

Yes it is still an impressive achievement but for what purpose?

 

[Mainliner]

It's a franchise. One which was agreed to end in December 2012. It is ending in December 2012.

Surely Mr Branson, as a business minded person understands such things?

He certainly understands it when it comes to not renewing or extending a temporary staff contract in any of his businesses, no matter how well the individual might have performed, so now he knows how it feels to be on the other end of that.