Virgin Trains East Coast franchise to end 24 June 2018 and is temporarily re-nationalised

[Darandio]

If Labour win in 2022 there is a very high chance they will have a minority or small majority in parliament, they won't get legislation for a unified BR past the Tories, SNP, PC and Labour rebels.

It's at the risk of going off topic of course, but I don't think there is a cat in hells chance of the next General Election being in 2022. Much earlier, even next summer.

 

[route:oxford]

Somehow Virgin seem to get away with things other operators wouldn't. Remember in 2012 VTWC were promoting their petition on their social media channels and even on the departures screens at some stations. Although it does look like the days of one rule for Virgin, another for everyone else is starting to come to an end.

Are rail franchise holders really forbidden from promoting their business on social media, or is it just a personal aspiration of your own?

 

[route:oxford]

If Labour win in 2022 there is a very high chance they will have a minority or small majority in parliament, they won't get legislation for a unified BR past the Tories, SNP, PC and Labour rebels.

Can you imagine trying to get the SNP to vote for any single organisation that had the title "British" in the name?

Particularly the one that Margaret Thatcher refused to privatise.

 

[NSEFAN]

Are rail franchise holders really forbidden from promoting their business on social media, or is it just a personal aspiration of your own?

Perhaps not on their own social media channels, but I'd argue that it's a bit dubious them using station infrastructure to support a petition which was ultimately about them gaining financially, given that the infrastructure is ultimately owned by the state (through network rail).

 

[Chester1]

It's at the risk of going off topic of course, but I don't think there is a cat in hells chance of the next General Election being in 2022. Much earlier, even next summer.

I have heard this since the last general election, how the government will fall by Christmas... I have yet to hear a coherent argument about how it will actually happen. The Tories and the DUP will stick together, you can see at the moment how the fear of a general election is slowly forcing messy compromises within the Tories over brexit. Corbyn's recent visit to Northern Ireland has also reminded the DUP why they must support the government until 2022. Unless a general election is actually called early that is when it is.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

There have been several references to the Transport Select Committee hearing on the VTEC failure, held on May 21.
A video of the hearing is available on the Parliament site.
But if you don't want to watch it directly, there is now a transcript available too: http://data.parliament.uk/writtenev...ity-east-coast-rail-franchise/oral/83407.html

Unlike most TSC hearings, it's worth ploughing through it.
It gives a good insight into how franchise bids and evaluation works and what happens when they go wrong.
The first part of the hearing is 2 independent but very knowledgeable consultants (Iryna Terlecky and Nicola Wood) on how franchise bid evaluation works.
They have worked on both sides of the fence - preparing bids and assisting DfT in analysing others.
The second part is Andrew Adonis and Elaine Holt (who ran East Coast for DOR) describing the transition of East Coast to/from state ownership.

Quotes are invidious, but this one caught my eye:

Iryna Terlecky: [Q34] Full public ownership does not make economic upheaval go away. Right now, a public sector operator would be facing exactly the same issues of a large base of fixed costs, economic upheaval, and people deciding to travel by car rather than on your trains. The only difference would be that you, the Government, would feel the revenue loss absolutely immediately.

It's clear that at the hearing date, next to nothing was known about the intended OLR operation, or the future East Coast Partnership.
Andrew Adonis does a lot of complaining about Virgin/Stagecoach not being permitted to bid in the future.
He claims to have removed the ability of National Express to bid for new franchises, but they held on to c2c in 2014 (before selling on to Trenitalia) and still have a DfT franchise passport.

 

[John R]

Yes, but his government was no longer in power, so the successor government could rescind the ban, and would appear to have done so.

 

[43096]

Andrew Adonis does a lot of complaining about Virgin/Stagecoach not being permitted to bid in the future.

I’ve no idea why anyone listens to Adonis. He seems to have a problem when the truth doesn’t suit his purpose. Remember: he’s a politician. He is also a fool with an agenda, which is never a good combination.

 

[HH]

I’ve no idea why anyone listens to Adonis. He seems to have a problem when the truth doesn’t suit his purpose. Remember: he’s a politician. He is also a fool with an agenda, which is never a good combination.

Within the industry he was a lot better regarded than Grayling.

 

[43096]

Within the industry he was a lot better regarded than Grayling.

That's like saying Stoke City were better than West Brom last season. It's true, but they were both very poor sides and were relegated.

 

[Mikey C]

Within the industry he was a lot better regarded than Grayling.

To be fair to Grayling, Adonis was there when electrification was looking rosy and the way forward, something which continued into the coalition until the scale of NR's cost overruns became clear

 

[pt_mad]

Although I see the benefits in generic brands I personally don't see the problem if the winner of a franchise carries on using their existing brand as that's already known, of course the DfT might see things differently.

As seen by the percentage share they took of VTEC and also they've also let Stagecoach take the majority of the WCP bid it shows that Virgin are now happy to take the back seat and let others take control. They also gave up majority control of Virgin Atlantic, so it seems like Branson is more interested in new projects at the moment.

The strange thing about this recent DFT policy of generic brands only, is that traditionally a lot of businesses were grown on 'good will' and brand loyalty and a brand name.

Essentially they plan to take the brand out of it and even if a franchise was stripped it'd still be known by the same name and branding. It seems bizarre in some ways, as bidders are likely to end up being near enough anonymous as far as the occasional passenger is concerned.

If a big transport company can't display their corporate branding on their train company then it's a pretty drastic change of direction and may lower further the incentive for bidders to even bid, at a time bidders are required.


I am not in any way at all, all for the conglomerates and PLCs but it does strike me as a big change maybe for unknown reasons when surely one of the main incentives for bidders up to now was to grow their brand image.

 

[alexl92]

It's at the risk of going off topic of course, but I don't think there is a cat in hells chance of the next General Election being in 2022. Much earlier, even next summer.

I heard one suggestion that Theresa May could call a General Election as early as Autumn. Some MPs are already starting to prepare to seek re-election; I heard last week of one who’s already printing his campaign leaflets.

Back on topic: As much as I’d love to see the DfT get rid of Virgin Red altogether, the fact is that the fleet has just been refurbished with many interior seats in red. It would probably not make sense to create a new branding and colour (even though I’d love to see the branding changed to a shade of blue) just yet because the interior would still be red.

 

[pt_mad]

It does seem a bit like the DFT still hasn't made its mind up what it wants. The government are adamant that the TOCs should not be nationalised except as a last resort. And yet their 18 plus year model of corporate branded TOCs now is being rolled back it seems.

Yet the bus franchises retain their corporate branding. And you probably wouldn't have an airline known as say 'Cross Britain Airways' without any corporate branding that was told by the government they must keep that name no matter who runs it or who takes over or who fails. Although I realise the airlines aren't franchises but it does seem strange that the government is moving away from allowing corporate branding and yet at the same time being all for the free market and private business rules.

I totally get it for devolved TOCs such as WMR, Wales, Mersey Rail etc, but as for the East Coast it's such a flagship operation in terms of its potential national image and you'd think a conservative government would be all for private identity.

Seems like we are getting closer to a situation where the whole railway and it's operation will be perceived by the public as half nationalised in terms of control and half private company. As it's a private operation and yet the DFT tell them what they must be called and what they must brand their trains and stations. And the DFT own the brand. That seems more like half nationalised to me if that were to extend to all tocs nationwide.

 

[HH]

I heard one suggestion that Theresa May could call a General Election as early as Autumn. Some MPs are already starting to prepare to seek re-election; I heard last week of one who’s already printing his campaign leaflets.

Don't get financial advice from this man. On early elections I would say that May/the Tories have been once bitten. It would take some huge change in public perceptions to tempt another early GE and it's hard to think of any way that's going to happen.

 

[Joe Paxton]

Don't get financial advice from this man. On early elections I would say that May/the Tories have been once bitten. It would take some huge change in public perceptions to tempt another early GE and it's hard to think of any way that's going to happen.

Quite.

 

[The Ham]

Don't get financial advice from this man. On early elections I would say that May/the Tories have been once bitten. It would take some huge change in public perceptions to tempt another early GE and it's hard to think of any way that's going to happen.

It would also cause problems for the Brexit negotiations, possibly do much so that either the EU will turn around and say "right no deal" or "you're staying in till you can sort out want you really want and then come back to us". The former would annoy everyone the latter would annoy half the UK, but probably a result in more anger. For the EU the latter would save them finding funding from within the other EU nations and would still act as a warning to any other countries thinking that leaving is an easy option.

 

[SaveECRewards]

I drive when i have to so its helpful for me to know when the good offers are on and vtec don't run the local trains near me either so i don't have a choice of vtec or driving.

If you want to know the offers from BP then you'd have already signed up for Nectar or opted into BP marketing from another source if you didn't want to join Nectar.

VTEC encouraging people to sign up for a loyalty scheme that promotes the benefits of driving is at odds with their marketing messages comparing train to car. Perhaps they should have had a loyalty scheme that encouraged train use.

Are rail franchise holders really forbidden from promoting their business on social media, or is it just a personal aspiration of your own?

Can you name ANY other TOC that's protested losing their franchise on social media channels? It's not promoting your business in the traditional sense, it's putting social media staff who would be due to be TUPEd over to the new operator in an awkward position.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Yet the bus franchises retain their corporate branding.

Bus services are not in general franchised, they are owned directly (London is different, and a few other places).
Rail franchises always were a public/private partnership and will remain so.
The DfT (or SG, WG, TfL) owns the right to run services and contracts them periodically to the private sector under a set of complex rules.
A fixed or continuing brand stops the grumbles about the cost of all the repainting when the operator changes.
It also ensures that "foreign" brands are not prominent.
But it does reduce the value of the franchise to the more brand-aware bidders.

National Express didn't want its brand on trains initially. Once it changed its mind things went very wrong and its brand was damaged.
But the chopping and changing just confuses the public, with situations like XC still being believed to be a Virgin operation more than 10 years after they handed over to Arriva.
Meanwhile 20 years ago in the same timeframe as rail franchising, Ryanair and EasyJet hardly existed, but now they are the top two airline brands in Europe.
I'm reluctant to admit it, but branding is very important.

 

[transmanche]

Yet the bus franchises retain their corporate branding.

The only place where bus services are comprehensively 'franchised' (or rather tendered) is in London, where the buses use TfL branding. Only a relatively small operator logo is permitted. The vast majority of passengers will neither know nor care which company operates their local route.

 

[SaveECRewards]

The only place where bus services are comprehensively 'franchised' (or rather tendered) is in London, where the buses use TfL branding. Only a relatively small operator logo is permitted. The vast majority of passengers will neither know nor care which company operates their local route.

Weren't buses in London allowed more freedom to brand in the early days of tendering? I was never in London in the 80s but I'm sure I read somewhere that originally some operators did away with the standard red. By the time I started working in London buses had to be mostly red but could maintain some corporate branding (e.g. there was a red version of the Stagecoach livery). It was sometime around the Boris mayoralty that the buses became all red with minor operator branding and a TfL roundel on the side.

In London the current situation makes sense, you don't need to know who runs your bus but if you want to know it's right there in front of you. Having more prominent brands could just confuse visitors to London from other parts of the UK where the bus operator you choose matters (different fares, operator only tickets, etc).

Some people have said to me that in innovation in the private sector has improved buses outside of London (e.g. things like WiFi and USB) but I'd argue London buses are more attractive as they tend to run more frequently, have fixed fares and probably the best implementation of contactless ticketing. I use buses in London because I don't have to wait very long (usually) and the total cost is capped across all modes. I've never felt the need to charge my device or use WiFi for the 15 minutes I'm on the bus. Of course if TfL requires the operators to provide these features in the future I'd not complain as I'm sure they're useful to some.

 

[Mikey C]

Of all the private operators since privatisation, Virgin Trains West Coast are the one with most brand image, and who indeed changed things the most.

A complete change of rolling stock, indeed very different rolling stock to what was there before (using a neutral term), the in train entertainment, the "wacky" toilets etc and with the Virgin brand imagine at the forefront

With most other routes, the changes were far smaller, and the brand far less to the forefront. I doubt any of the operators operating the London "commuter" franchises would be that bothered if they had to use a DfT approved livery

 

[pt_mad]

But the chopping and changing just confuses the public, with situations like XC still being believed to be a Virgin operation more than 10 years after they handed over to Arriva.
Meanwhile 20 years ago in the same timeframe as rail franchising, Ryanair and EasyJet hardly existed, but now they are the top two airline brands in Europe.
I'm reluctant to admit it, but branding is very important.

But shouldn't the public know who is running the train service? The fact that VTEC runs the ECML, Virgin West Coast runs the WCML, GWR runs the south western routes, EMT runs the MML probably confises a lot of people to begin with anyway.

But if an operator goes bust in the future, and it hits the news, I think it will be equally confusing if the operation continues indefinitely under the name LNER or South Western Railway or whatever it be yet the public are awaiting a visible takeover.

Another issue is, do the operators not deserve corporate credit and 'good will' to their company name when they do a good job? Let's say FirstGroup took over the ECP in 4 years time under the name LNER. Say they did a superb job and turned everything around. But First would get little corporate or brand credit with the public because as far as Mr Blogs from Grantham is concerned 'LNER run that line'

 

[Rail Blues]

But shouldn't the public know who is running the train service? The fact that VTEC runs the ECML, Virgin West Coast runs the WCML, GWR runs the south western routes, EMT runs the MML probably confises a lot of people to begin with anyway.

But if an operator goes bust in the future, and it hits the news, I think it will be equally confusing if the operation continues indefinitely under the name LNER or South Western Railway or whatever it be yet the public are awaiting a visible takeover.

Another issue is, do the operators not deserve corporate credit and 'good will' to their company name when they do a good job? Let's say FirstGroup took over the ECP in 4 years time under the name LNER. Say they did a superb job and turned everything around. But First would get little corporate or brand credit with the public because as far as Mr Blogs from Grantham is concerned 'LNER run that line'

Not really, it will reassure the public that there's a continuity of service. Never underestimate how little people know about how the franchising system works. A friend was panicking that she'd bought a train ticket and had heard Virgin had gone bust and was worried that the trains would have been taken away and sold by Virgin East Coast.

In terms of 'knowing who runs the service ' remind me, what stake did Virgin hold in Vtec? Their involvement was mostly PR and brand licencing and served to obscure the real ownership of the operation.

 

[gavin]

Just had an email to say a seat sale is now on 150k tickets reduced until Midnight this Thursday (31st) for travel between 18th June and 20th July inclusive

 

[pt_mad]

Not really, it will reassure the public that there's a continuity of service. Never underestimate how little people know about how the franchising system works. A friend was panicking that she'd bought a train ticket and had heard Virgin had gone bust and was worried that the trains would have been taken away and sold by Virgin East Coast.

In terms of 'knowing who runs the service ' remind me, what stake did Virgin hold in Vtec? Their involvement was mostly PR and brand licencing and served to obscure the real ownership of the operation.

But why didn't the DFT use this model earlier? I.e. generic brands from the start or from the start of the conservative coalition government etc?

 

[transmanche]

Weren't buses in London allowed more freedom to brand in the early days of tendering? I was never in London in the 80s but I'm sure I read somewhere that originally some operators did away with the standard red. By the time I started working in London buses had to be mostly red but could maintain some corporate branding (e.g. there was a red version of the Stagecoach livery). It was sometime around the Boris mayoralty that the buses became all red with minor operator branding and a TfL roundel on the side.

Yes, in the early days of tendering there were no rules on livery used. LRT would often have to put out publicity at bus stops to let passengers know about the new colours.

Thankfully, they soon realised that passengers did not care who operated the route. But they did care about having a unified and integrated network.

Source: londonbuses.co.uk

 

[transmanche]

But why didn't the DFT use this model earlier? I.e. generic brands from the start or from the start of the conservative coalition government etc?

Quite simply, at the time of privatisation, it was more important politically to break up BR - both literally and metaphorically. Having a multitude of new brands (as per other privatised industries) was a good way of achieving that.

More recently, the DfT didn't insist on 'generic brands' per se, but (for example, in the East Coast franchise agreement) it did require the franchise operator to remove or cover branding that it considered "to be so distinctive or otherwise such that a Successor Operator could not reasonably be asked to use" at the end of the franchise.

 

[Mikey C]

Grey Green taking over the 24 was a massive moment for bus tendering, as it was the first high profile central London route to be operated by a non red bus. EVERYONE could see that something significant was happening with this bus route. The rules then changed so that all buses then had to predominantly red (80%? allowing coloured stripes and swirls etc) and then all red, indeed like London Overground or the DLR, I imagine many people don't realise that it's a private operator actually running the service

The red London bus is much more symbolic though than train liveries, especially as the previous sector liveries before privatisation were relatively recent anyway.

 

[GarethC]

But why didn't the DFT use this model earlier? I.e. generic brands from the start or from the start of the conservative coalition government etc?

I'm sure I have read somewhere that at the time it was "hoped" that the intercity operators would opt to use the INTERCITY brand voluntarily alongside their own to create an "intercity network". Not sure whether it was actually a real suggestion or just wishful thinking?