Alexbus12
Member
- Joined
- 19 Jul 2018
- Messages
- 387
Fantastic?
Decent, yes, but fantastic? Er no....and from a poster who continually complains about Transdev’s #amazing hashtag
Aye, Fantastic.
Fantastic?
Decent, yes, but fantastic? Er no....and from a poster who continually complains about Transdev’s #amazing hashtag
Fantastic means extraordinarily goodAye, Fantastic.
Fantastic means extraordinarily good
In no way are they extraordinarily good. The Delaine are, Pulhams are, Brighton & Hove are.
Connexions aren’t. They’re a decent firm who are competing with 15 year old, partly repainted single deckers with a mix of elderly deckers and newer Solos.
You need to step away from your near pathological hatred of Transdev. They’re not amazing, Connexions aren’t fantastic.
Fantastic means extraordinarily good
In no way are they extraordinarily good. The Delaine are, Pulhams are, Brighton & Hove are.
Connexions aren’t. They’re a decent firm who are competing with 15 year old, partly repainted single deckers with a mix of elderly deckers and newer Solos.
You need to step away from your near pathological hatred of Transdev. They’re not amazing, Connexions aren’t fantastic.
Really? So this fantasticalness has nothing to do with Transdev losing work?Would someone remind me where in my two replies today Transdev was mentioned? And for your information I don't hate Transdev, far from it, I just have a dislike for some of the senior management....
But Connexxion (part of the Transdev group) isn't too bad!
Really? So this fantasticalness has nothing to do with Transdev losing work?
So what in your experience is so #fantastic about Connexions?
Possibly more than a coincidence that Connexions lost the 21 between York and Colton, along with other service reductions (X4,X6 for example), meaning they have vehicles sat about looking for work in the same way that Transdev had a fleet of owned Darts spare or almost spare at the time they won the tenders and hence being able to put in a low tender. Alternatively the cynic might suggest they put in a tender than was too low to get one over Transdev which is a dangerous tactic if it were true given the history of collapsed operators in Wharfedale - Pegasus, Aztecbird.
It was nothing to do with Transdev, and was a praise of an independent which I rate highly, I do the same with other independent operators who gain work and expand. I've always had a pleasant experience with them, as I have with most Transdev services. But that's my experience and understand of others have had different.
I don't think there is any reason to believe that what you suggest is the case. Tenders frequently change hands after every cycle - Dales & District lost a number of Contracts to Hodgsons of Barnard Castle. These things happen all the time.
Possibly more than a coincidence that Connexions lost the 21 between York and Colton, along with other service reductions (X4,X6 for example), meaning they have vehicles sat about looking for work in the same way that Transdev had a fleet of owned Darts spare or almost spare at the time they won the tenders and hence being able to put in a low tender. Alternatively the cynic might suggest they put in a tender than was too low to get one over Transdev which is a dangerous tactic if it were true given the history of collapsed operators in Wharfedale - Pegasus, Aztecbird.
Fair point though the Connexions reductions elsewhere may have influenced their approach.Let's not forget that when the tenders went in for both of these rounds they wouldn't have known the outcome of either of them.
back to when Transdev won most of the last round of Wharfedale tenders their were some snide comments from the Tockwith direction that Transdev had bid below cost, but however the "Cost" was worked out the free in terms of lease costs or balance of the purchase cost resulting from the availability of the Darts must have a significant influence
Going back to when Transdev won most of the last round of Wharfedale tenders their were some snide comments from the Tockwith direction that Transdev had bid below cost, but however the "Cost" was worked out the free in terms of lease costs or balance of the purchase cost resulting from the availability of the Darts must have a significant influence.
I remember when CX took on the 965 service commercially, and for some reason so did Transdev and there was the unusual situation of two different operators operating the same service at pretty much the same time.
There was a lot of less than friendly comments between the two operators, CX apparently attended a meeting with Metro and said they'll take it on where Transdev didn't, Transdev said they'd already discussed it with councillors, etc etc. But Transdev managed to paint up a Dart in no time at all and brand it for the route, when they still hadn't got anything in a dedicated Wharfdale Links livery.. and I still don't think they do.
That just came across as a bit of a F-U move to CX to me. Why not build up the existing brand with a dedicated livery, instead choosing to try and get one over on another operator?
There have been a couple of notable Transdev feet changes recently; the last non-school B10BLE (307) has been withdrawn at Starbeck, destined for further use as a driver trainer, with the rather bouncy IMO B7RLEs strengthening their dominance of non 36 / Electric routes with the arrival of a second Pride of the North former Manchester Cityzap vehicle, 1866.
That was 1867, as seen here. (Not my pic).There was one of the B7s in PotN livery that was often used as a MancZap spare... was the 09 plate one, not sure of the fleet number
That was 1867, as seen here. (Not my pic).
https://www.flickr.com/photos/127079988@N02/42145559195
I only found a recent pic of it on the York-Leeds Cityzap.1866 was also used on it. I mean to include the word spare, scroll down this page for example
https://gramha.net/explore-hashtag/prideofthenorth
Possibly more than a coincidence that Connexions lost the 21 between York and Colton, along with other service reductions (X4,X6 for example), meaning they have vehicles sat about looking for work in the same way that Transdev had a fleet of owned Darts spare or almost spare at the time they won the tenders and hence being able to put in a low tender. Alternatively the cynic might suggest they put in a tender than was too low to get one over Transdev which is a dangerous tactic if it were true given the history of collapsed operators in Wharfedale - Pegasus, Aztecbird.
So, for the pro Transdev (large multinational operator) Do we think that this is for the benefit of the public, or the benefit of profit and shareholders? I remember the dirty tricks Stagecoach played in and around Hyndburn back in the late eighties, early nineties. As soon as they forced other operators out of business, they hiked prices, and cut services. Regulated competition should be encouraged, as it benefits the already struggling bus user. But all I see here is support for a large multinational corporate shareholders group. As we can see by the state of society, corporatism is the scourge on society.
So, for the pro Transdev (large multinational operator) Do we think that this is for the benefit of the public, or the benefit of profit and shareholders?
Quite a few Keighley routes don't actually show any times - mostly school and Sunday only services - even when you select the right day (and there's no indication that these routes aren't supposed to run every day).
The school routes which do show times don't let you know which are school-only routes and which are available to the general public.