[Poll] - London-Hull: Hull Trains or LNER?

[xotGD]

You mean the private operator that identified a gap in the market that has not been filled by the specification of the DfT nor by the own initiative of the franchised operator and indeed the gap which only existed because of cuts instituted by a publicly owned service provider axing all but one train per day despite their being quite clearly plenty of demand for the service (see the unsubsidised private operator continually expanding, making money and procuring now three sets of brand new rolling stock for their service)?

You think they'd have bothered serving Hull if they had been allowed to run services to York or Leeds?

These services are all the same - use an underserved destination as a fig-leaf to poach passengers on the more lucrative stretch of the journey.

 

[westv]

You think they'd have bothered serving Hull if they had been allowed to run services to York or Leeds?

These services are all the same - use an underserved destination as a fig-leaf to poach passengers on the more lucrative stretch of the journey.

Why would Hull Trains want to run services to York or Leeds?
Undeserved? Rather condescending don't you think?

 

[Deerfold]

Why would Hull Trains want to run services to York or Leeds?
Undeserved? Rather condescending don't you think?

Because they're bigger markets, even if they're better served.

Of course they might have come up with a different name.

 

[westv]

Because they're bigger markets, even if they're better served.

Of course they might have come up with a different name.

Why provide a service where there is already plenty already though?

 

[xotGD]

Why provide a service where there is already plenty already though?

To poach passengers, like I said.

For the same reason Starbucks open a coffee shop next door another coffee shop.

 

[ainsworth74]

To poach passengers, like I said.

So if we assume that Open Access was not permitted because they "poach" passengers Hull would have to suffer a much worse service than it does now? I'm not sure that's a benefit!

Plus I do find it interesting that in the upcoming engineering works on the ECML when Kings Cross is closed Hull Trains are running their services calling at Hull and Brough only. They could easily fill their train just on "poached" Doncaster passengers I'm sure but they're not doing that instead they're deliberately excluding them from being served and focusing on undeserved people from Hull and Brough!

 

[westv]

To poach passengers, like I said.

For the same reason Starbucks open a coffee shop next door another coffee shop.

I look forward to seeing your breakdown of passengers by station boarded.

 

[Deerfold]

Why provide a service where there is already plenty already though?

You quoted my reason. Because they're bigger markets. Train operators, on the whole, are not driven to provide a service from a particular station, they're looking for ideas that will bring in the most money. If open access was allowed to Leeds, the average number of passengers per train may drop (in the short term at least), but their trains would be better loaded than from many other stations.

 

[westv]

You quoted my reason. Because they're bigger markets. Train operators, on the whole, are not driven to provide a service from a particular station, they're looking for ideas that will bring in the most money. If open access was allowed to Leeds, the average number of passengers per train may drop (in the short term at least), but their trains would be better loaded than from many other stations.

As bolded. Is there any evidence that First Group attempted to access Leeds or York?
As a matter of interest, what is the current loading Doncaster to Leeds and back? LNER appears to show light loading to Doncaster on Monday and to Leeds on Friday.

 

[xotGD]

I look forward to seeing your breakdown of passengers by station boarded.

Sounds like you already have the data to hand, so you might as well post it first.

 

[westv]

Sounds like you already have the data to hand, so you might as well post it first.

How would I know? You were the one that claimed HTs were "poaching passengers" so surely you must know which stations get what passengers to be able to claim that?

 

[westv]

From what I've seen on Facebook, Hull Trains seem to be keeping the existing seats on their Class 800's:

View attachment 67398

Poor seat alignment on that pic.

 

[xotGD]

How would I know? You were the one that claimed HTs were "poaching passengers" so surely you must know which stations get what passengers to be able to claim that?

So you have no basis to challenge my assertion.

Looks like we are evens!

 

[Darandio]

So you have no basis to challenge my assertion.

Looks like we are evens!

I'm not sure that's how it works. If you make such a claim, you need to back it up.

 

[ainsworth74]

I'm not sure that's how it works. If you make such a claim, you need to back it up.

Yes quite...

 

[xotGD]

OK, fine. Hull Trains make all their money from Hull passengers and provide an essential public service for the city.

Likewise Grand Central with their services up the Durham coast and making a circuitous tour of West Yorkshire.

 

[Deerfold]

As bolded. Is there any evidence that First Group attempted to access Leeds or York?

They're also looking for routes that will be accepted.

 

[Deerfold]

Why provide a service where there is already plenty already though?

Like First's new Edinburgh to London route?

 

[westv]

Like First's new Edinburgh to London route?

Would that suggest then that perhaps Leeds has over capacity but Edinburgh doesn't?? Hence why First haven't gone there?

 

[yorkie]

It's an undeniable fact that open access operators have grown the market. I'm unsure why some people are so hostile towards the concept of open access. I think it's a good thing, though the execution isn't always the best.

Another key factor for me is the staff: if the price was the same, then I'd be more likely to go with the open access operator if it meant avoiding LNER's London-based crews (there will always be exceptions, but on average the attitude of many them appears to be vastly inferior on the crews based further North), so that would be a consideration if was looking to travel on an evening service to London.

 

[Deerfold]

It's an undeniable fact that open access operators have grown the market. I'm unsure why some people are so hostile towards the concept of open access. I think it's a good thing, though the execution isn't always the best.

I'm not sure anyone has been hostile. They've just pointed out these are businesses and don't provide these links out of the goodness of their hearts.

 

[yorkie]

If post #31 isn't within your interpretation of the meaning of the word hostile then we will agree to disagree on the meaning of the term

All train companies are businesses at the end of the day.

What matters to me is the sum of various factors such as the price, comfort, whether the times suit, the attitude of staff, reliability, compensation policy when things go wrong, etc.

 

[Deerfold]

If post #31 isn't within your interpretation of the meaning of the word hostile then we will agree to disagree on the meaning of the term

All train companies are businesses at the end of the day.

What matters to me is the sum of various factors such as the price, comfort, whether the times suit, the attitude of staff, reliability, compensation policy when things go wrong, etc.

It doesn't sound hostile to me. It's pointing out how many open access companies pick routes (and which stations they want to call at). There's always a bit of a game of which they will be allowed and whether they then still want to provide the service.

 

[Harpers Tate]

In my view, it matters not whether there is any "malicious" revenue extraction occurring here.
The outcome is that
- Hull has many, many more direct services to London and other places down the ECML than were offered by the franchise and its operator.
- Beverley now has through services to places south of Doncaster to London - I'm guessing for the first time ever
- Retford has an hourly service - again something it did not have under the franchise arrangements
- ditto Grantham (?)
If it takes some cross-subsidy from ECML revenue (that "should" have gone to the EC franchise) to fund these absolute benefits then I don't have a problem with that. After all, the franchise operator could have offered a decent service to Hull rather than expecting folk to spend over a third of any journey made outside the single direct service each way on what might very well be a pacer.

 

[westv]

As a matter of interest, how many Open Access operations are there in the UK currently?

 

[NoMorePacers]

As a matter of interest, how many Open Access operations are there in the UK currently?

Well, there's Caledonian Sleeper, Eurostar, Hull Trains and Grand Central, although only the latter two can really be considered really "open access".

 

[westv]

Well, there's Caledonian Sleeper, Eurostar, Hull Trains and Grand Central, although only the latter two can really be considered really "open access".

Ok many thanks. It was just that when Deerfold talked about
"how many open access companies pick routes (and which stations they want to call at). There's always a bit of a game of which they will be allowed and whether they then still want to provide the service."
It gave me the impression there were a number of them.

 

[NoMorePacers]

Ok many thanks. It was just that when Deerfold talked about
"how many open access companies pick routes (and which stations they want to call at). There's always a bit of a game of which they will be allowed and whether they then still want to provide the service."
It gave me the impression there were a number of them.

There were several that had a go/had proposals, like Wrexham & Shropshire, Renaissance Trains, Platinum, Alliance, and others; maybe he was referring to them.

 

[ainsworth74]

Caledonian Sleeper,

Caledonian Sleeper is subject to Franchising, it is not an Open Access Operator. I'd also be hesitant to describe Eurostar as such.