Should the Wales and Borders franchise be branded differently e.g. 'Wales & Borders'?

[pt_mad]

Everyone has an opinion. Are people getting in a lather about this elsewhere, or just on RailUK? How long was it known before the actual franchise change that the Transport for Wales brand would appear in England? Genuine question.

My point is though, do you think we would ever viably see a brand in the network called Transport for England or Transport for Britain? If not, why is for Wales acceptable?

 

[Darandio]

My point is though, do you think we would ever viably see a brand in the network called Transport for England or Transport for Britain? If not, why is for Wales acceptable?

Was British Rail not exactly that? Or discounted because there was no for?

 

[Gwenllian2001]

Two issues that I can see with it:
- use of Welsh language first, particularly for announcements. With the vast majority of people being English speakers, that is nonsensical. Just political correctness gone mad.
- use of Transport for Wales branding on stations and services not in Wales. If you don't think it is relevant, can you imagine the riot if "Transport for England" branding was applied at Newport (for example)? This is no different. It should be "Wales & Borders" or similar.

So? Great Western nor Virgin have any reference to Wales in their names but they both serve Welsh cities. What is apparent is the usual drivel that's bandied about whenever Wales is mentioned. I wonder why. Is it the loss of Empire or just sheer ignorance. Why does it seem that Welsh speakers should be treated differently? We do not live in Apartheid South Africa. Transport for Wales has tough enough task ahead of it, in any language, without this childish not picking. Good luck to them and their customers.

 

[Esker-pades]

Try renaming Lockerbie and Dunbar stations 'Transport for England' and see what Nicola Sturgeon says?

Or would any objections be silly?

Renaming stations to "Transport for England" would be a silly idea wherever they were. Perhaps a re-phrase is in order.

Nicola Sturgeon continues to allow non-Scottish operators to operate in Scotland.

My point is though, do you think we would ever viably see a brand in the network called Transport for England or Transport for Britain? If not, why is for Wales acceptable?

If there was a single TOC for the whole of England, quite possibly.

 

[Honest Ross]

Imagine complaining that Wales has train announcements in Welsh.

 

[43096]

So? Great Western nor Virgin have any reference to Wales in their names but they both serve Welsh cities. What is apparent is the usual drivel that's bandied about whenever Wales is mentioned. I wonder why. Is it the loss of Empire or just sheer ignorance. Why does it seem that Welsh speakers should be treated differently? We do not live in Apartheid South Africa. Transport for Wales has tough enough task ahead of it, in any language, without this childish not picking. Good luck to them and their customers.

Deary me. Suggest something for practical purposes (English language first, so helping the vast majority of users) and applying the same rule for England as Wales in terms of branding and you start using terms like "apartheid" and "empire". Absolutely pathetic.

 

[transmanche]

Although, imagine if when MTL won the Northern Spirit franchise they had not only put 'Merseyside Transport Limited' branding all over the North East and Yorkshire stations instead of Northern Spirit and local PTE branding but used Scouse dialect on station notices.

MTL were not shy about plastering their name on buses in London after they purchased the London Buses Ltd subsidiary, London Northern.

What is strange is the use of a special .Wales website domain. We have .uk domains and Wales, like England, is part of the UK so what's wrong with a .uk one?

It's not that strange. Scotrail has scotrail.scot and the Scottish Government has gov.scot.

 

[transmanche]

I don't think anyone has taken any issue about it having the word Wales in it.

It's probably more that it says for Wales.

I.e. the management are for Wales rather than (for England) as well, yet they manage stations in England who serve thousands of customers making England only journeys.

Having ''for Wales' branding on every station sign on their English stations does seem a little odd we should all be able to admit that.

Even if it was called Transport Wales I don't think that's the same as 'Transport for Wales'.

Scotrail is not like saying Trains for Scotland and then branding Carlisle and Berwick with that name. It just wouldn't make sense.

Gosh, you'd better get onto Transport for London post haste. They have a number of stations and bus stops located outside Greater London which are branded with various TfL brands. Shocking!

 

[transmanche]

It may get quite confusing between the two organisations, one managing the contract and the other the public facing train operator, both essentially having the same name.

Why?

Is there mass confusion in London caused by TfL Rail (the public-facing train operator, run by MTR) and TfL who manage the contract. No. it's a complete non-issue.

There really are some quite ludicrous comments being made on this thread...

 

[Gwenllian2001]

Deary me. Suggest something for practical purposes (English language first, so helping the vast majority of users) and applying the same rule for England as Wales in terms of branding and you start using terms like "apartheid" and "empire". Absolutely pathetic.

There is nothing 'pathetic' about it. You obviously believe that 'English' is the only language that matters. Stick to that belief and 'win friends and influence people'. There is nothing more 'pathetic' than that. On the other hand, you could always send a Gunboat up the Taff to keep the natives quiet but just like the rest of the Empire you might get a rather unwelcome reception.
n

 

[krus_aragon]

Two issues that I can see with it:
- use of Welsh language first, particularly for announcements. With the vast majority of people being English speakers, that is nonsensical. Just political correctness gone mad.
- use of Transport for Wales branding on stations and services not in Wales. If you don't think it is relevant, can you imagine the riot if "Transport for England" branding was applied at Newport (for example)? This is no different. It should be "Wales & Borders" or similar.

I'll grant you that the latter is an issue, and I'm surprised that they're not using the W&B brand.

On the former, I disagree, but that's not an issue for this thread. (It's also been discussed numerous times in the past.) If you want to start a new thread or reopen one of the existing ones, drop me a PM and I'll gladly share my reasoning with you there.

 

[pemma]

And Scottish Power is owned by Spanish firm Iberdola

When they acquired MANWEB they weren't owned by a Spanish firm and even now the registered head office of Scottish Power is in Glasgow even if they are a subsidiary of a Spanish company.

The company who runs the Wales & Borders franchise has a registered head office in London: https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/11389531

MTL were not shy about plastering their name on buses in London after they purchased the London Buses Ltd subsidiary, London Northern.

Are you saying they branded buses in London as Merseyside Transport Limited in big large letters? If not what point are you trying to make?

MTL were not shy about plastering their name on buses in London after they purchased the London Buses Ltd subsidiary, London Northern.

It's not that strange. Scotrail has scotrail.scot and the Scottish Government has gov.scot.

The Scotrail website is advertised as scotrail.co.uk and appears in Google as such, you can have multiple domains all pointing to the same website.

It's normal for a UK business to have a .co.uk domain or a .com domain, quite often .co.uk if their business/website is aimed at UK customers only and .com if they are international. Domains like .scot and .wales are relatively new and as the main website address they aren't really appropriate for businesses whose market isn't limited to one country - unless they have a different website for the different countries within the UK.

 

[Honest Ross]

How dare a Welsh based business have a a Welsh based domain name!!

Next, they’ll have the cheek to use the welsh language at Welsh train stations!

 

[craigybagel]

It's clear there are strong arguments on both sides.

On the one hand, the franchise has been set up and awarded by the Welsh Government, so transport for Wales seems like an appropriate title. It's true that people rarely complained about the previous franchise holder running exclusively English services whilst still incorporating the word "Wales" in its title. It's also true that some services will be serving areas where Welsh is the first language for many of the population - maybe not as many as certain folk in Cardiff Bay would like, but enough that some arrangement for their needs should be catered for (although I am a little worried about how long the automatic announcements will be if they're going to be bi-lingual).

But the fact is, as pointed out by Dai Corner and Envoy,

The Government of Wales Act 2006/Railways Act 2005 (Page 36) states:

Welsh Ministers shall ensure that the Brand Guidelines developed with and issued to the Franchisee on trains, stations and for marketing material and publicity (excluding that for Wales-only services), shall recognise and demonstrate the cross-border nature of the Franchise and continue to comply with any licensing requirements regarding the use of trademarks licensed by the Secretary of State to Welsh Ministers.

And clearly "Transport for Wales" does not comply with that. Personally, being aware of the requirements of that act I was very surprised when it became obvious that TfW was the everyday brand name we were all going to be expected to use.

Regardless of the rights and wrongs of the name (and personally I find it odd, but no more odd then countless other things on the British railway network) - I do fear that there are strong grounds for objection, and potentially an enforced change of branding, which isn't going to please passengers or indeed achieve anything much other then confusion.

Watch this space. I already suspect work between Shrewsbury and Crewe could be switched to West Midlands trains. The Cardiff to Manchester could easily become Cardiff to Crewe just over the border. The Manchester path is extremely sought after. I'm sure London North western would love it

You can suspect all you want - neither of those things are going to happen.

 

[Honest Ross]

Announcements are already bi-lingual and have been for several years. Well before TfW were even mentioned.

 

[craigybagel]

Announcements are already bi-lingual and have been for several years. Well before TfW were even mentioned.

I meant the on-board ones - I'm well aware of the bi-lingual nature of the announcements at certain stations.

 

[Mojo]

I must admit, I don't get what the fuss is about; is it any different to Transport for London who operate rail and/or bus services in Buckinghamshire, Hertfordshire, Essex, Slough, Surrey, and Kent?

 

[Dai Corner]

clearly "Transport for Wales" does not comply with that. Personally, being aware of the requirements of that act I was very surprised when it became obvious that TfW was the everyday brand name we were all going to be expected to use.

Having far too much time on my hands I have written to TfW (copy to my AM) asking them to confirm the (UK) Secretary of State is happy with the brand and there is no danger of having to change it in the future, incurring more expense.

 

[krus_aragon]

Having far too much time on my hands I have written to TfW (copy to my AM) asking them to confirm the (UK) Secretary of State is happy with the brand and there is no danger of having to change it in the future, incurring more expense.

Thank you. That should do more to resolve the confusion than a great many of the posts on this thread ever could.

Who knows, we may learn that we've all over-reacted to a misunderstanding somewhere along the line.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Considering the other challenges the franchise has - I severally doubt the brand name is anywhere near the top of anyone's priority list!

 

[pemma]

I must admit, I don't get what the fuss is about; is it any different to Transport for London who operate rail and/or bus services in Buckinghamshire, Hertfordshire, Essex, Slough, Surrey, and Kent?

I don't know the exact TfL arrangements but I'd suggest it's very different. The Greater London boundary has moved as London has expanded, plus London is the biggest place TfL serve - Birmingham is the biggest place TfW serve and that's neither in Wales nor close to the boundary, plus the Wales/England boundary doesn't move as one country expands.

 

[Honest Ross]

I meant the on-board ones - I'm well aware of the bi-lingual nature of the announcements at certain stations.

Then make it clear in your post.

 

[pemma]

Considering the other challenges the franchise has - I severally doubt the brand name is anywhere near the top of anyone's priority list!

If the posts saying the brand name is not compliant with the agreement between Westminster and Cardiff are true then Cardiff might end up wasting time and money on another rebrand when there are higher priorities, how would that be in anyone's interests?

 

[Honest Ross]

Having far too much time on my hands I have written to TfW (copy to my AM) asking them to confirm the (UK) Secretary of State is happy with the brand and there is no danger of having to change it in the future, incurring more expense.

Farcical, not like they’ve got FAR more important things to be concentrating on!

 

[Mojo]

I don't know the exact TfL arrangements but I'd suggest it's very different. The Greater London boundary has moved as London has expanded, plus London is the biggest place TfL serve - Birmingham is the biggest place TfW serve and that's neither in Wales nor close to the boundary, plus the Wales/England boundary doesn't move as one country expands.

The boundary of Greater London hasn't moved since it was created in 1965.

Birmingham only has one train an hour in each direction operated by TfW Rail. Surely the name of the operator is about the place it primarily exists to serve, (ie. Wales)?

 

[si404]

Gosh, you'd better get onto Transport for London post haste. They have a number of stations and bus stops located outside Greater London which are branded with various TfL brands. Shocking!

I know, London Council Tax payers subsidising services beyond the boundary - how dare that be the case! As the user of one of such services, I've noticed a shift towards such parochialism at City Hall.

They are fine with bringing Outlanders in for work and leisure, but taking Londoners out for such reasons is not something they are willing to spend money on, despite those Londoners mostly having access to cars and will simply drive out to their destination rather than taking the train or bus.

Luckily the Marches line links two parts of Wales and the Crewe, Manchester, Birmingham and future Liverpool services help bring people to Wales. TfW will always prefer Cardiff-Holyhead services reversing at Chester over Liverpool-Holyhead and Liverpool-Cardiff services, and perhaps some of the lesser stations in England will be seen as unimportant - but parochialism of devolved Government will have less of a negative effect on public transport in the area near Wales than in the area around London.

 

[si404]

The boundary of Greater London hasn't moved since it was created in 1965.

So these boundary changes are imaginary then!

• The Greater London and Hertfordshire (County Boundaries) Order 1992
• The Greater London and Hertfordshire (County and District Boundaries) Order 1992
• The Greater London and Kent (County Boundaries) Order 1992
• The Greater London, Kent and Surrey (County Boundaries) Order 1993
• The Essex, Greater London and Hertfordshire (County and London Borough Boundaries) Order 1993
• The Greater London and Kent (County Boundaries) (Variation) Order 1993
• The Essex and Greater London (County and London Borough Boundaries) Order 1993
• The Greater London and Surrey (County and London Borough Boundaries) Order 1993
• The Greater London and Surrey (County and London Borough Boundaries) (No. 2) Order 1993
• The Essex and Greater London (County and London Borough Boundaries) (No.2) Order 1993
• The Greater London and Surrey (County and London Borough Boundaries) (No.3) Order 1993
• The Greater London and Surrey (County and London Borough Boundaries) (No.4) Order 1993
• The Essex and Greater London (County Boundaries) Order 1993
• The Greater London and Surrey (County and London Borough Boundaries) Order 1994
• The Greater London and Surrey (County and London Borough Boundaries) (Variation) Order 1995

That said, they are all pretty minor tweaks - getting it aligned with post-1965 developments where it was already close - motorways, the Heathrow Airport boundary. There might have been half-a-dozen bus stops switching sides (counting both ways), and Heathrow T4 station moved from Surrey to Greater London, but that's it. Few dwellings changed sides, etc. They were tweaks, not expansions.

 

[pemma]

The boundary of Greater London hasn't moved since it was created in 1965.

Which means the meaning of the term London has changed within the lifetime of some rail users, you can't say the same about Wales or England.

Birmingham only has one train an hour in each direction operated by TfW Rail. Surely the name of the operator is about the place it primarily exists to serve, (ie. Wales)?

Yet the most lucrative flows in the franchise relate to the routes the franchise operates in England.

 

[Llanigraham]

Yet the most lucrative flows in the franchise relate to the routes the franchise operates in England.

Can you please produce your evidence for that statement?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

"Transport for Wales apologises for the delay and any inconvenience caused".
This was repeatedly announced at Crewe today regarding a late running Manchester service.
There's no hiding place for WG now, without a punch-ball private firm to blame.
When the train finally showed up, it was the newly rebranded 175 107, looking very smart.
The staff uniforms are very - grey.
It's hard picking them out from everybody wearing a grey suit.
This morning's TfW service from Flint had a conductor who greeted everybody with a cheery Bore Da.
He also used both Welsh and English forms of TfW to thank people for travelling, and for the first time ever called off all the connections at Chester with times and platforms.
I've also seen 3 people today still in ATW uniforms.
There was no flag on top of Chester station (used to say Arriva).