Grand Central Discussion

[WillPS]

See, this is what I don't get.

GNER/NXEC have had a problem with Grand Central since its inception - obviously they're competition and any business with fresh competition is usually equal to a problem...

But every bit of objection they've proclaimed has struck me as being them trying to have their cake and eat it - they're given a franchise, a wadge of cash, and in return they have to provide a selection of train services within this franchise. They then have 'first dibs' on pathways between these destinations. So all in all, they have a pretty lucrative deal.

Grand Central on the other hand have had to 'take the leftovers' and forge together a handful of pathways to provide their services on, in this case giving a couple of places a new link to London. They'll receive no money from the government, and will have to pay for their track usage (albeit differently to how NXEC do) - so all their revenue will come straight from passengers. This, surely, is exactly what privatisation's stated purpose was/is; allow third parties to satisfy market needs/wants as long as this is actually possible and the government subsidised body fails to do so themselves.

I've never been on Grand Central, or in fact the ECML I think (unless part of Norwich - Liverpool uses it??), but just with a little reading GNER and NXEC seem to show through as a bunch of moaning ninis!

 

[paul1609]

Much to simplistic. No transport scheme is assessed in that way because it would only assess a narrow range of benefits. The ORR, in deciding last time, commissioned a full cost benefit appraisal from Arup. However this was not the only reason they granted the paths.

'To this end we commissioned consultants, Arup, to undertake an economic cost benefit appraisal. Arup’s economic appraisal used standard industry procedures (for example following DfT/SRA appraisal guidance) and utilised the most relevant 'state of the art' demand forecasting models, namely MOIRA and Planet Strategic Model (PSM). The appraisal considered the passenger and other benefits that flow directly from an improvement in rail services including fare revenues, reductions in journey time, improvements in service quality (for example reductions in crowding) and non-user benefits from reductions in road congestion from a shift of traffic from road to rail. The appraisal did not incorporate wider economic benefits such as increased employment in regeneration areas, or dynamic effects (for example, the effects of competition).'

http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/upload/pdf/ECML_reasons_doc.pdf

Absolutely I understand that but come 2011 all those benefits will be able to be qualified by the number of ticket sales. my gut feeling and I admit that its pure speculation is that GC will have generated little in the way of London originating ticket sales and that probably one train a day will be financially viable the early departure from Sunderland and late evening return from London. I guess the proof will ultimately be known in 2011 at this rate this thread will probably still be running by then.

 

[whoshotjimmi]

Absolutely I understand that but come 2011 all those benefits will be able to be qualified by the number of ticket sales. my gut feeling and I admit that its pure speculation is that GC will have generated little in the way of London originating ticket sales and that probably one train a day will be financially viable the early departure from Sunderland and late evening return from London. I guess the proof will ultimately be known in 2011 at this rate this thread will probably still be running by then.

I think it is not just GC who would generate more passengers outside London. The main point of Intercity is to get people to London. As a proportion, on all operators, traffic generated within London must be much smaller than that outside London. If you are already at the centre of the universe, there is no need to leave it! There will be more two way traffic now of course, but I don't think GC ticket sales from London will have that much bearing on the future course of things - same with FHT and Grand Union. The purpose of these services is to give people in the North East a link with London, and they are marketed as such. There are always going to be more passengers entering London in the morning and leaving in the evening, but it is the same at every London terminus.

At the end of the day, providing GC pay their for their access rights and do not interfere with future NXEC operations, they will be allowed the access. They had a very tough start and for a while it looked as though they were not going to make it, but it appears that now they have a foot in the door, they are making the most of the opportunity.

Also, the ORR has to be in favour of GC plans to introduce new rolling stock in 2010.

 

[Flyboy]

Not wishing to get involved in the detailed statistical game of tennis betwixt Paul & Metroland, I have to say that for me, WillPS hits the nail pretty much on the head. NXEC's response letter to the ORR's recent "minded to" decision is not yet up on the website, (HERE) but I'm expecting it to follow a 'have cake AND eat it' tone.

Update - NXEC's response is now on the ORR's website at the above link. It's essentially 8 pages explaining that the ORR is not actually legally or contractually entitled to make a decision at the present time with regard to the open access applications they are "minded to approve".

Could someone with a little more in-depth knowledge and understanding of rail contract language than I summarise what they're saying.

 

[yorkie]

I've never been on Grand Central, or in fact the ECML I think (unless part of Norwich - Liverpool uses it??), but just with a little reading GNER and NXEC seem to show through as a bunch of moaning ninis!

You've done Grantham-Peterborough then, but most of the time you'd have been on the bumpy slow line on the 4-track section which extends to Stoke Summit near Grantham, if looking out the left (in the direction of travel) you could be forgiven for not realising you were on a main line I guess!

BTW The ICEC franchise is not given cash - it pays a premium and the premium is supposed to rise exponentially soon (of course it won't - it'll collapse again, like last time, or be re-negotiated)

 

[Spaceflower]

Not wishing to get involved in the detailed statistical game of tennis betwixt Paul & Metroland, I have to say that for me, WillPS hits the nail pretty much on the head. NXEC's response letter to the ORR's recent "minded to" decision is not yet up on the website, (HERE) but I'm expecting it to follow their usual 'have cake AND eat it' tone.

It's a business in a fast moving world. Obviously it's going to want to protect it's interests. There will be no profits for moral highgrounds or sportsmanship.

 

[BOSCH]

Haway, do you not count the number of passengers waiting on the platform:roll:

Only the tottie young man,only the tottie !!!

 

[spoony]

Only the tottie young man,only the tottie !!!

I dont blame you, I know I would

 

[WillPS]

It's a business in a fast moving world. Obviously it's going to want to protect it's interests. There will be no profits for moral highgrounds or sportsmanship.

But a lot of money is being wasted on these pointless tit-for-tat appeals, for which NXEC seem to have gained nothing!

 

[tbtc]

But a lot of money is being wasted on these pointless tit-for-tat appeals, for which NXEC seem to have gained nothing!

They are just protecting their business, the way that any company would. Can you imagine Virgin allowing an open access operator to run (say) a Euston - Preston - Blackpool service without a fuss? Of course not. Whilst open access operators are good fun for us enthusiasts, you can understand why TOCs aren't keen...

 

[yorkie]

Here's the latest letter from National Express:-

http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/upload/pdf/ecml-propdec_NXEC_120209.pdf

Reading this incredibly pompous letter it makes you think just how fragmented and wasteful our railway is.

I wonder how much this legal temper tantrum campaign by National Express has cost the company? Of course they won't deduct the cost of it from their profits, they'll make sure it's paid for by cutting on-board services, ticket opening office hours, and getting rid of staff.

 

[Mojo]

Here's the latest letter from National Express:-

http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/upload/pdf/ecml-propdec_NXEC_120209.pdf

I find insulting the organisation you are writing to an odd way of trying to get your own way.

 

[Flyboy]

I find insulting the organisation you are writing to an odd way of trying to get your own way.

That was my initial thought too, 8 pages of basically telling the ORR they're not legally allowed to make the decision, :roll: but being a non-rail type I thought there might be at least one or two hidden valid comments that rail 'experts' might see within it. Apparently not!

 

[spoony]

I find insulting the organisation you are writing to an odd way of trying to get your own way.

Its beggars belief really Looks like NXEC are clearly rattled by having some competition.

 

[yorkie]

I find insulting the organisation you are writing to an odd way of trying to get your own way.

Sir, I question the legality of this statement. Please will you tell us why? You say we are insulting but you do not provide details of the methodology. We are at a distinct disadvantage and we note that you have not made a holistic approach and therefore you jeopardise our efficiency and materiality, which is still to be resolved and this is essential and complex. It is apparent that you are tentative and uncertain and your prematurity and inadequacy is abstractive in the extreme. We have ascertained and properly assessed allocation needs that we are the principle user of the route and therefore everyone else is primarily abstractive and our lawyers bills are greatly in excess of what you can afford to pay should we win and send you the invoice so we suggest you kindly answer all our unanswerable questions and we will continue to be pompous until we go bankrupt. Yours insincerely, David Frankenstein.

 

[Flyboy]

I wonder.....if NXEC threw in the towel, or eventually made their service so low cost (not low fare!) that they had their franchise removed, would Ian Yeowart be interested in taking the bull by the horns and put a bid in for the franchise? Would he be allowed to do so? and if so would it interest him? It was him who came up with the GNER name in the first place.

They say that small is beautiful, and at the moment Grand Central/Union/Northern appears to be just that, so they may want to keep it that way.

Just a thought.

 

[Royston Vasey]

One word tells me that NXEC won't succeed here and that is "primarily" in the "not primarily abstractive test". Undoubtedly under the definition of abstraction, GC do take some York-London revenue which would previously gone to GNER/NXEC. But "primarily" abstractive is both very difficult to prove and probably quite open to interpretation. I would previously have got a Royston - Sunderland ticket, now I buy a Royston - London and London - Sunderland GC only ticket because that is the service I prefer, cheaper and is more convenient.

It has meant I no longer fill NXEC's (therefore also FCC/HT/XC/TPE/NR/Nexus) coffers to take me from Stevenage to Sunderland. However, in my opinion GC haven't abstracted this revenue, it's just preferable to me because it is a better service, cheaper and more direct, they're providing a service NXEC don't. Because of GC only tickets being more competitive and GC getting the whole revenue from these tickets, these are very attractive and I would expect the these tickets would be enough to form the primary basis of their business, topped up by the "any permitted" revenues London - York - London. Don't forget Sunderland, Hartlepool and Eaglescliffe to York, previously not possible directly.


Re Flyboy, they would never secure the funding without entering a joint venture with a larger transport operator, you're talking one of First/Stagecoach/Virgin etc. But, all in good time!!

 

[Flyboy]

Thanks for the insight RV.

 

[GNERman]

Do you actually know how much it costs to put in a bid for a franchise - 100's of 1000's

 

[Flyboy]

Do you actually know how much it costs to put in a bid for a franchise - 100's of 1000's

Errr....in a word....NO.

.....but I do now thanks to this forum.

 

[GNERman]

It could happen but I know he's happy with GU

 

[Royston Vasey]

First Hull Trains on the other hand.......... could be First's proving ground for taking the Franchise!!!

 

[Flyboy]

First Hull Trains on the other hand.......... could be First's proving ground for taking the Franchise!!!

Potentially a recipe for disaster I think. Without going into specifics, FHT Management don't appear to be the sharpest tools in the box! :roll:

 

[whoshotjimmi]

Potentially a recipe for disaster I think. Without going into specifics, FHT Management don't appear to be the sharpest tools in the box! :roll:

I don't think that is an especially fair comment. FHT have done an excellent job with the access they have been granted. Ok, First group only stepped in once the access had been generated, but since then they have gone from strength to strength - something GC are also doing. My main issue if First group were to win the franchise is what would happen to access to Hull? Would First find a more profitable route using allocated paths?

 

[Flyboy]

Point taken, "disaster" was perhaps a bit strong, although I stand by the rest in regard to the Hull-based team, not the First management.

Update - Further response letters have been added to the ORR's website today, notably one from the D(a)fT who recommend that the 'minded to' decision about Grand Northern's services is NOT firmed up!

 

[spoony]

I caught the 16.40 back from Eaglescliffe to Sunderland as the girlfriends parents live down that way. Was impressed with the numbers onboard, and its actually the first time I have had to search for a seat Although numbers mau have been swelled due to Sunderland fans travelling back from Arsenal. Unfortuently for GC they missed out on my fare as no one seemed to be checking tickets todayhock:

 

[BOSCH]

Unfortuently for GC they missed out on my fare as no one seemed to be checking tickets todayhock:

I think they had had enough by then spoony ,nearly 400 on leaving KX and it wasnt just football fans either,I watched them board at kx,we were 2 a couple of mins late leaving due the time it took people to get on !! I was your driver BTW !!

 

[spoony]

I think they had had enough by then spoony ,nearly 400 on leaving KX and it wasnt just football fans either,I watched them board at kx,we were 2 a couple of mins late leaving due the time it took people to get on !! I was your driver BTW !!

Cheers for the free ride, I feel I should send a cheque for £4 to GC HQ Hopefully numbers like that will become the norm, when we arrived at Sunderland I dont think Ive ever seen the station that busy. Very pleasing as that can only be good for the area

 

[Royston Vasey]

I caught the 16.40 back from Eaglescliffe to Sunderland as the girlfriends parents live down that way. Was impressed with the numbers onboard, and its actually the first time I have had to search for a seat Although numbers mau have been swelled due to Sunderland fans travelling back from Arsenal. Unfortuently for GC they missed out on my fare as no one seemed to be checking tickets todayhock:

Doubt any will have been from the Sunderland Arsenal match, it wasn't over by the 1650 departure time! As I said before though, football crowds would fill the 4th train to the gills on an away match Saturday I reckon.

 

[spoony]

Doubt any will have been from the Sunderland Arsenal match, it wasn't over by the 1650 departure time! As I said before though, football crowds would fill the 4th train to the gills on an away match Saturday I reckon.

This was yesterday mate, I meant numbers may have been swelled from people making a weekend out a trip down to London and returning on the Sunday.