First Class meal cost to produce

[Lampshade]

This is the problem Wilko & Pizza Hut are facing, giving staff pay rises in the cost of living crises has proved unsustainable.

Rubbish.

 

[Deafdoggie]

I’d agree that staff are the biggest cost, although I think the railways could pinch a trick or two from the airline industry. Airline cabin crew on the budget carriers are on commission for sales and, funnily enough, they’re a lot more active in selling and upselling as a result.

XC trolley staff have targets to hit, again that might be why you see more of them!

Call it £40k a year with employer on-costs and assume 6 weeks a year off holiday+sickness. It works out about £25/hour cost to the TOC. Five meals an hour and it’s £5 staff costs per meal and £5 ingredient costs.

£10 a meal in first class and the TOCs are pleading poverty? Please.

I bet they don't do 5 meals an hour every hour! They'll be long periods of no meals at all. Yes, they'll be busier times but as an average that's still very high

 

[DarloRich]

But, of course, precisely because intangibles are, funnily enough, intangible

But: you cant build a business case on intangible benefits! They are nice to haves but your application for funding is going in the bin unless you can show a proper return. Hard but reality.

Do you think DfT are going to OK the kind of spend needed to deliver an intangible benefit for first class, metropolitan, woke, elites to quaff champagne and canapes in comfort while decent, honest, commons sense, hard working, yeoman stock of olde England are crammed in cattle class like, erm, cattle?

I would love to be a romantic person given to flights of fancy but i am tight, miserable, northern bloke who doesn't like spending money, even if it is YOUR money!

My signature refers, funnily enough, to one of the main sources of such damaging thinking

This board is always very happy to spend other peoples money on nice to haves!

Certainly despite massive cut backs to on train catering in both classes it doesn't appear to be putting people off travelling. Arguably we couldn't accommodate more people on an operation like LNER if we did try and improve the onboard service offer.

My central point - on train catering is rubbish and none cares. The trains are full to bursting especially at weekends.

We do need some kind of flexible pricing to drive demand on empty trains and if food can be part of that fair enough - I do think the expectation of posters here for a meal service and the reality of a sandwich box or a tray meal might be quite wide!

But it does frustrate me that so much is derided and simply ignored on the basis that "well it would cost more than it would bring in tangible, immediate, benefits, therefore we cannot do it".

It isn't we cannot do it - it is we cant do it until you show me some actual benefits! The obvious one is the projected increase in revenue from ticket sales. ( i don't mean you personally btw!)

Indeed, it's almost certainly subsidised to some degree, but not £80 per passenger. I just can't believe that.

Agreed - I think it will be fairly high mind!

it is a lovely service: several menu choices, napery, cutlery, proper plates and glasses, fresh food, cooked to order., high quality and good service. I am sure there will be off train prep but the meals are put together and cooked on the train. It is really nice.

Two Saturday morning HST services were utilised for the service, one via Derby and the other via Nottingham. I used it several times and it was always full or almost full. I once asked the Chief Steward on one service whether he knew if it made a profit such was the bargain I considered it to be. He thought that it did, perhaps a small surplus because all those 1st Class seats, on a Saturday, would otherwise have remained largely empty.

The steward wouldn't have a clue if it was profitable. He wouldn't be close enough to the data. As I say above - I do support some kind of flexible pricing structure to drive people to under capacity trains and am happy to include first class in that

In 2023 we don't need to attract people to weekend travel. The trains are bursting!

 

[ainsworth74]

But: you cant build a business case on intangible benefits! They are nice to haves but your application for funding is going in the bin unless you can show a proper return. Hard but reality.

Do you think DfT are going to OK the kind of spend needed to deliver an intangible benefit for first class, metropolitan, woke, elites to quaff champagne and canapes in comfort while decent, honest, commons sense, hard working, yeoman stock of olde England are crammed in cattle class like, erm, cattle?

I would love to be a romantic person given to flights of fancy but i am tight, miserable, northern bloke who doesn't like spending money, even if it is YOUR money!

Yes that's sort of the point I'm trying to make. Not just about catering, I don't think in the grand scheme it's all that important because the trains are full in standard and first class on the basis of the current catering provision. Even if improvements to catering in both classes (your disdain is well known for people who suggest that advertising should match the reality of first class catering but I'm not just talking about that ) were to increase demand there ain't much point at the present time on lots of operators (such as LNER or CrossCountry) when both are already often at or beyond capacity. Particularly for leisure travel which is likely where you'd pick up extra custom from the "soft" product that catering represents.

My point was that we, in general, speaking on a societal basis, have gotten to a point where if you cannot make a positive cost:benefit analysis then it simply cannot be allowed to happen because it cannot be a good thing. Take an NHS example. I rather suspect that investing more money on improving peoples fitness and trying to reduce their weight would have massive savings for the NHS. But drawing that up in a such a way that you could make a business case for spending millions on it, particularly when the pay back period will be measure in decades, and it will be hard to show that it was this specific interventions that helped to save money is going to be nigh on impossible. Therefore it will not get a business case, therefore HM Treasury nor the Government would have any interest in it.

I'm sure that there are other interventions across government, business, the railway, the world that would have positive impacts that likely outweigh their costs. But would be impossible to draw up a business case for and therefore will not happen.

This board is always very happy to spend other peoples money on nice to haves!

The Treasury, of course, loves spending other peoples money in ways that ensures they keep within their annual spending limits even if that means things cost more than necessary in the long run! As long as it's a Treasury "nice to have" I guess that's okay though!

My central point - on train catering is rubbish and none cares. The trains are full to bursting especially at weekends.

Yes I basically said as much in the post you're quoting

We do need some kind of flexible pricing to drive demand on empty trains and if food can be part of that fair enough - I do think the expectation of posters here for a meal service and the reality of a sandwich box or a tray meal might be quite wide!

I don't disagree. I sometimes feel like you think I think things that I don't in reality!

It isn't we cannot do it - it is we cant do it until you show me some actual benefits! The obvious one is the projected increase in revenue from ticket sales. ( i don't mean you personally btw!)

But if the only benefits that count are "does this make the line of the graph of money go up or down?" that does rather make things tricky...

 

[DarloRich]

My point was that we, in general, speaking on a societal basis, have gotten to a point where if you cannot make a positive cost:benefit analysis then it simply cannot be allowed to happen because it cannot be a good thing. Take an NHS example. I rather suspect that investing more money on improving peoples fitness and trying to reduce their weight would have massive savings for the NHS. But drawing that up in a such a way that you could make a business case for spending millions on it, particularly when the pay back period will be measure in decades, and it will be hard to show that it was this specific interventions that helped to save money is going to be nigh on impossible. Therefore it will not get a business case, therefore HM Treasury nor the Government would have any interest in it.

OT but it must, MUST, be possible to show this as a cost reduction over a short term and over a longer term. I suspect what is lacking is the political will/leadership/sponsorship to make this happen and a fear of media backlash over nanny stateism.

Example: How much are we spending on anti depressants? Surely we can show that some kind of social proscribing of nice activities will reduce costs on this one item by £x over 5/10/15 years?

 

[GS250]

I guess it's fair enough to compare UK Intercity catering with that in Continental Europe?

I'll happily admit I've not done that much 'Eurorailing' but was reasonably impressed by the fayre on offer on the DB ICE services. No 'pullman dining' or anything elaborate but hot and cold snacks were readily available. Ditto that on the services in Finland.

I think it's safe to say those of us who lament the 'good old days' of more comprehensive on board catering are probably going to be disappointed moving forward. However I'd argue that the one thing that BR did brilliantly was the Full English Breakfast. Usually cooked up in a grubby old MK1 catering vehicle. We even had one on a 37 hauled Liverpool Street to Kings Lynn service in the early 80s. It wasn't advertised but was most certainly there. No doubt plenty went hungry that day, probably on a Liv st Norwich service of which that consist was probably due on. I guess that was the main problem with catering back then....inconsistency of provision.

 

[AlterEgo]

At risk of getting political, there is plenty of wealth in this country to tax. It’s not an inherently exploitative demand to have a meal on a train, indeed I’m sure that if the service were good enough you could charge above all the necessary costs and make a profit.

Indeed, Switzerland has some of the best restaurant cars in Europe.

 

[AndrewP]

I have been involved with catering a lot over the years and as mentioned earlier, about £3 for a meal sounds about right including drinks but the big difference is on train staff and prep costs.

I really like the LNER service, which I enjoy a lot, but this means that I expect similar on other InterCity services and you don't seem to get it. What would be good (and really easy to do) is for food and drink to be specified for services so there is a standard that can be expected on InterCity Trains no matter who operates them or who provides the food - it would be interesting to see what some new market entrants could do.

The other factor is that the quality of food available at or near stations is so much better than it used to be so any paid for option needs to be good or people will just get what they want before they board from the brands they like (M&S, Starbucks, Costa, Greggs etc. etc.) and that applies to all classes on the train.

When choosing my class of travel on LNER I have my 'Pret Test' - is the comfort in first worth the extra cost less the cost of a pret meal and extra coffee?

 

[LickeyIncliner]

I seen them loading the breakfasts to an LNER HST few years back. The breakfasts were all in containers which I guess the staff heat up.

I was intrigued to see LNER's mid-day menus this summer claiming that ""just as they did a century ago, LNER's chefs carefully craft our dishes in our onboard kitchen". That would be "craft" mostly meaning "heat up in a microwave", I guess?

 

[RT4038]

I'll happily admit I've not done that much 'Eurorailing' but was reasonably impressed by the fayre on offer on the DB ICE services. No 'pullman dining' or anything elaborate but hot and cold snacks were readily available. Ditto that on the services in Finland.

But it is just microwaved stuff, which I doubt would come in the category of 'high quality dining' to @GWVillager or @DarloRich

Indeed, Switzerland has some of the best restaurant cars in Europe.

Which only reflects on the standard of the other railways. My last Swiss Restaurant car meal , on the Zurich-Hamburg train, was microwaved food decanted onto a china plate with some garnish. Pleasant enough, but hardly 'high quality dining'. Dining car run by one member of staff, possibly assisted by another who also went through the train with a trolley.

One must also take into account that travelling on holiday in a foreign country is not pyschologically the same as travelling on business or commuting in your own - ask a German about DB meals and I expect they'll say 'overpriced rubbish' [having asked one or three myself!]

i wouldn't agree an airline meal is high quality. I think the infrastructure to store, handle and load the meals would be the issue rather than the staff

You may well be right. Airline meals may work where you've got fairly long non-stop runs with fullish trains (compulsory reservations so number is known), such as Madrid-Barcelona, Paris-Avignon etc.. The storing, handling and loading could be designed into trains for limited application in this country where there could be long non-stop sections London-Exeter/Preston/York etc.

 

[Busaholic]

I was intrigued to see LNER's mid-day menus this summer claiming that ""just as they did a century ago, LNER's chefs carefully craft our dishes in our onboard kitchen". That would be "craft" mostly meaning "heat up in a microwave", I guess?

It's a meaningless phrase, carefully chosen by LNER for that reason so that they can't be challenged on untruthful advertising. Misleading, yes, but not enough to earn them censure.

 

[Deafdoggie]

My point was that we, in general, speaking on a societal basis, have gotten to a point where if you cannot make a positive cost:benefit analysis then it simply cannot be allowed to happen because it cannot be a good thing. Take an NHS example. I rather suspect that investing more money on improving peoples fitness and trying to reduce their weight would have massive savings for the NHS. But drawing that up in a such a way that you could make a business case for spending millions on it, particularly when the pay back period will be measure in decades, and it will be hard to show that it was this specific interventions that helped to save money is going to be nigh on impossible. Therefore it will not get a business case, therefore HM Treasury nor the Government would have any interest in it.

Governments of all persuasions have spent millions on anti-smoking measures. So these things do happen. The trouble is, the public aren't always receptive to them.
For example, right now the NHS will prescribe gym membership for certain people (obviously not everybody!) to try to stop them ending up needing NHS treatment in the future. But the take-up is very low.
I imagine trying to get a case together to say more people will travel by train if we improve catering isn't going to worth the effort though.

 

[RT4038]

It's a meaningless phrase, carefully chosen by LNER for that reason so that they can't be challenged on untruthful advertising. Misleading, yes, but not enough to earn them censure.

LNER chefs carefully crafted our dishes, wrote down the menu, sent to ACME food co. of Grimsby who mass produced it, the LNER chef checked it was something like he expected, it was then distributed to catering points who loaded it in the train, where it was microwaved and decanted onto our crockery in our onboard kitchen.

The marketing is just a simple precis.....

 

[TPO]

Rubbish.

Indeed. One of the issues with the chain eateries is that they are often in prime sites and they lease the premises (even stores that used to own their sites havefrequently been taken over by asset strippers who sell the property and lease back at higher cost but there is short term gain which gives a quick shareholder boost).

Now they are saddled with costly leases, increasing business rates, increasing energy costs, increasing food costs and reduced footfall (with less money to spend, people may eat in or may eat out less often). The only "flexible" cost is the staff...........

Yes that's sort of the point I'm trying to make. Not just about catering, I don't think in the grand scheme it's all that important because the trains are full in standard and first class on the basis of the current catering provision. Even if improvements to catering in both classes (your disdain is well known for people who suggest that advertising should match the reality of first class catering but I'm not just talking about that ) were to increase demand there ain't much point at the present time on lots of operators (such as LNER or CrossCountry) when both are already often at or beyond capacity. Particularly for leisure travel which is likely where you'd pick up extra custom from the "soft" product that catering represents.

My point was that we, in general, speaking on a societal basis, have gotten to a point where if you cannot make a positive cost:benefit analysis then it simply cannot be allowed to happen because it cannot be a good thing. Take an NHS example. I rather suspect that investing more money on improving peoples fitness and trying to reduce their weight would have massive savings for the NHS. But drawing that up in a such a way that you could make a business case for spending millions on it, particularly when the pay back period will be measure in decades, and it will be hard to show that it was this specific interventions that helped to save money is going to be nigh on impossible. Therefore it will not get a business case, therefore HM Treasury nor the Government would have any interest in it.

I'm sure that there are other interventions across government, business, the railway, the world that would have positive impacts that likely outweigh their costs. But would be impossible to draw up a business case for and therefore will not happen.


The Treasury, of course, loves spending other peoples money in ways that ensures they keep within their annual spending limits even if that means things cost more than necessary in the long run! As long as it's a Treasury "nice to have" I guess that's okay though!


Yes I basically said as much in the post you're quoting

I don't disagree. I sometimes feel like you think I think things that I don't in reality!

But if the only benefits that count are "does this make the line of the graph of money go up or down?" that does rather make things tricky...

There's a wider perspective here.

If it's only profit then any trains would be scrapped......... just because a train is full doesn't mean it's profitable, depends on the amount being paid per head per mile. Be careful what you wish for.................

The Treasury is very good at spending other people's money on ego projects (country-ego and politician-ego) whilst claiming that things which offer a good service to the citizens of UK are "costs" which cannot be afforded.

A change in priority to focus spend on infrastructure and other things that offer improved life for citizens (e.g. subsidising bus routes consistently) would be a start.

TPO

 

[Rescars]

A further ingredient in this mix is passenger average journey times. The faster the train between two points, the less attractive catering provision becomes. On many routes, there simply isn't enough time to prepare and serve more than a snack. There is also the matter of volumes. Catering outlets at or near stations have a large pool of potential customers. On a train, once the doors are closed, that's it! The potential for more business only comes with the next station.

All the points made upthread about food and staff costings are very valid, as are the issues about the construction and maintenance of mobile catering facilities. It isnt just menu choice which creates waste. Unlike trains, land-based operations do not find themselves disorientated because the set loses its timetabled path, resulting in the staff and/or supplies ending up in the wrong place at the wrong time.

A long time ago BR ran some very profitable services, at least from a catering perspective. For example, full dining race specials, with 448 pre-booked dining passengers treated to a set menu. Lunch going out and then dinner served on the back trip. Drinks on top. A very cost effective use of rolling stock and staff. The trouble was this type of working was by definition special, and didn't happen every day! Many of the vehicles involved spent most of their time depreciating in sidings.

 

[Tetchytyke]

This is the problem Wilko & Pizza Hut are facing, giving staff pay rises in the cost of living crises has proved unsustainable.

Most companies that fail have failed because their owners loaded them with debt. Wilko had £40M debts but managed to pay its owners a £3M dividend this year. Pizza Hut UK is the same, being loaded with £100M debt to fund the management buyout in 2018.

What’s sinking them is the interest on the debt.

I bet they don't do 5 meals an hour every hour! They'll be long periods of no meals at all. Yes, they'll be busier times but as an average that's still very high

LNER’s 9-car Azuma has 100 first class seats and 2x 5-car has 96 first class seats. Even at 50% occupancy that’s pretty much 50 meals to plate up in the two hours from London to York or Leeds. Some of those passengers will be going beyond York and won’t get another meal, but there is significant churn of passengers at York and Newcastle on the Scotland trains who will need feeding. It’s not a steady flow but in the five hours from Edinburgh to London they’ll prepare and plate up more than 25 first class meals.

 

[HSTEd]

Even beyond the huge staffing costs (due to very low efficiency kitchen layout and very small serving capacity), the reality is that the kitchen area probably consumes something like 20 seats that could be sold instead.

The fully burdened cost of on board catering will far exceed the already substantial costs of staff and equipment.

 

[Master29]

One could argue that part of the reason we're in such a state, generally speaking, is a ruthless focus on costs at the expense of intangible benefits or long term benefits meaning that actually in a more holistic view being ruthless on cost:benefit is harmful. But, of course, precisely because intangibles are, funnily enough, intangible, it's hard to know one way or the other for certain.

I have no idea whether treating on train catering as a loss leader, that is to say it doesn't wash it's face but it's part of the package that makes train travel attractive, outweighs the fact that it costs more than it brings in. Certainly despite massive cut backs to on train catering in both classes it doesn't appear to be putting people off travelling. Arguably we couldn't accommodate more people on an operation like LNER if we did try and improve the onboard service offer.

But it does frustrate me that so much is derided and simply ignored on the basis that "well it would cost more than it would bring in tangible, immediate, benefits, therefore we cannot do it". My signature refers, funnily enough, to one of the main sources of such damaging thinking

I agree that there is no way to know how certain of long term effects but I think this is probably harmful precisely because of those intangible benefits that you speak of . Each of us has a connection with the railway in some form. I also think rail travel is booming simply because other than a clogged road network (I`m speaking mainly to the West of England here) there is only flying which is hit and miss at the moment although Ryanair might be making significant inroads there in time. I can see why people are having to use the trains for holiday traffic but not enjoying the prospect of having too.

 

[AlterEgo]

Even beyond the huge staffing costs (due to very low efficiency kitchen layout and very small serving capacity), the reality is that the kitchen area probably consumes something like 20 seats that could be sold instead.

It's a little less than that - maybe 14 or so - because of the crush/impact area at the front of high speed multiple units. But even so, these trains are already without a buffet car or any other form of static catering provision, and are fairly densely specified.

 

[GWVillager]

It's a little less than that - maybe 14 or so - because of the crush/impact area at the front of high speed multiple units. But even so, these trains are already without a buffet car or any other form of static catering provision, and are fairly densely specified.

Yes, the real problem is that too many 5 car IETs were specified - if there were more 9 (or even 11) car sets, they could fit them in no problem.

 

[PupCuff]

To me, one of the key issues we have currently with onboard catering is that we seem to be under the general assumption that the two options need be either a customer host serving primarily pre-packaged stuff, or a silver service chef cooked meal with things like "jus" and costing a fair whack.

I recall the difference in first class service on Avanti or Virgin at one point - perhaps still today - depending on whether a chef was on board was whether you got scrambled egg with your breakfast or a fried egg. Is that a good justification for the cost of a qualified chef?

Clearly there is a happy medium where someone who doesn't need to have worked in the kitchen at the Ivy can knock together simple food from a simple menu but is good quality and fresh. I'm certainly not saying the BR menus of the 80s are suitable for today's tastes but it was simple to prepare, and simple to serve either seated on proper crockery or in some form of takeaway container for standard class customers. Where trains are fitted with the facilities to offer a decent catering proposition, my view is that we should equip the customer hosts to offer one.

 

[GWVillager]

To me, one of the key issues we have currently with onboard catering is that we seem to be under the general assumption that the two options need be either a customer host serving primarily pre-packaged stuff, or a silver service chef cooked meal with things like "jus" and costing a fair whack.

I recall the difference in first class service on Avanti or Virgin at one point - perhaps still today - depending on whether a chef was on board was whether you got scrambled egg with your breakfast or a fried egg. Is that a good justification for the cost of a qualified chef?

Clearly there is a happy medium where someone who doesn't need to have worked in the kitchen at the Ivy can knock together simple food from a simple menu but is good quality and fresh. I'm certainly not saying the BR menus of the 80s are suitable for today's tastes but it was simple to prepare, and simple to serve either seated on proper crockery or in some form of takeaway container for standard class customers. Where trains are fitted with the facilities to offer a decent catering proposition, my view is that we should equip the customer hosts to offer one.

I do think the VT offering was probably the optimum. Enjoyable and appealing, but also simple enough to not require a Michelin Star chef, and whilst the tables were laid, it wasn’t exactly a silver service.

 

[occone]

This is my general point, I was inquiring to see if it would be financially viable to offer a better first class experience, as I do think there is a market for it. Even if it may be more profitable to not provide meals, I completely agree that there is nothing at all wrong with providing a nice journey for the sake of a nice journey - travel should be enjoyable.

My experience is the main benefit of first class is the space and physical comfort. Nothing better than being slightly further away from the public. Edit for tone:

Catering does feel lacking though, in fact the overall approach to catering for first class seems backwards to standard class - in standard class they'll have sales data on what sells and what doesn't, with a carefully refined and priced trolley to account for this. But in first class, it feels very prescriptive where you actually have less say on what you can have.

For example, the snacks with GWR are Coronet brand, which appears to be a wholesaler home brand: https://www.bidfood.co.uk/our-products/our-range/coronet/

My most memorable instance though was onboard XC. Who knew voyagers could be comfortable? Even with the knackered engine underneath thrashing about on the brink of stalling (dangerously overexciting the fizzy drinks) and the ex-Virgin seat fabric clinging on for dear life, it was moderately acceptable. What made me laugh was when the host just shoved a dirty plastic crate of biscuits in my face and said help yourself, then walked off with the rest. No tracking of what people actually want, a very prescriptive approach with no desire to replicate the offering in standard class.

"We are catering because we have to"

 

[Deafdoggie]

To me, one of the key issues we have currently with onboard catering is that we seem to be under the general assumption that the two options need be either a customer host serving primarily pre-packaged stuff, or a silver service chef cooked meal with things like "jus" and costing a fair whack.

I recall the difference in first class service on Avanti or Virgin at one point - perhaps still today - depending on whether a chef was on board was whether you got scrambled egg with your breakfast or a fried egg. Is that a good justification for the cost of a qualified chef?

Clearly there is a happy medium where someone who doesn't need to have worked in the kitchen at the Ivy can knock together simple food from a simple menu but is good quality and fresh. I'm certainly not saying the BR menus of the 80s are suitable for today's tastes but it was simple to prepare, and simple to serve either seated on proper crockery or in some form of takeaway container for standard class customers. Where trains are fitted with the facilities to offer a decent catering proposition, my view is that we should equip the customer hosts to offer one.

Anyone working in a kitchen preparing food needs a food hygenine level 2, even 3. Therefore you generally end up with a chef. Or at least you call them that to justify the training. I guess you could call them "kitchen team leader" or some such. I suspect very few, if any, on board chefs have worked in top hotels. In Virgin days the hosts could train up and become the "chef". The problem remains that you still need to pay a member of staff, and that's where the expense is.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

My experience is the main benefit of first class is the space and physical comfort. Nothing better than being slightly further away from the public.

Really?! Some might say that's rather self-entitled.

 

[GWVillager]

My experience is the main benefit of first class is the space and physical comfort. Nothing better than being slightly further away from the public.

Catering does feel lacking though, in fact the overall approach to catering for first class seems backwards to standard class - in standard class they'll have sales data on what sells and what doesn't, with a carefully refined and priced trolley to account for this. But in first class, it feels very prescriptive where you actually have less say on what you can have.

For example, the snacks with GWR are Coronet brand, which appears to be a wholesaler home brand: https://www.bidfood.co.uk/our-products/our-range/coronet/

My most memorable instance though was onboard XC. Who knew voyagers could be comfortable? Even with the knackered engine underneath thrashing about on the brink of stalling (dangerously overexciting the fizzy drinks) and the ex-Virgin seat fabric clinging on for dear life, it was moderately acceptable. What made me laugh was when the host just shoved a dirty plastic crate of biscuits in my face and said help yourself, then walked off with the rest. No tracking of what people actually want, a very prescriptive approach with no desire to replicate the offering in standard class.

"We are catering because we have to"

Sorry to bring this back to VT… but they were good at this as well. Numbers of specific meals taken were recorded, and presumably the quantity of ingredients brought on future trains adjusted accordingly. Their menu certainly seemed to be relatively well optimised, most trains saw a relatively equal distribution of dishes.

 

[Master29]

To me, one of the key issues we have currently with onboard catering is that we seem to be under the general assumption that the two options need be either a customer host serving primarily pre-packaged stuff, or a silver service chef cooked meal with things like "jus" and costing a fair whack.

I recall the difference in first class service on Avanti or Virgin at one point - perhaps still today - depending on whether a chef was on board was whether you got scrambled egg with your breakfast or a fried egg. Is that a good justification for the cost of a qualified chef?

Clearly there is a happy medium where someone who doesn't need to have worked in the kitchen at the Ivy can knock together simple food from a simple menu but is good quality and fresh. I'm certainly not saying the BR menus of the 80s are suitable for today's tastes but it was simple to prepare, and simple to serve either seated on proper crockery or in some form of takeaway container for standard class customers. Where trains are fitted with the facilities to offer a decent catering proposition, my view is that we should equip the customer hosts to offer one.

It doesn't necessarily have to jump between the 2 criteria you quote. Just a step in the right direction would be a start. I still think long term things will need to improve on the catering front for aesthetic benefits as well. The experience. I think damage may be done to the West of England lines reputation if every summer it is going to be like we are having now. Driving is an equal nightmare and airlines like Ryanair now have more flights to Newquay than before so they're clearly looking to cash in....And I don't think it's long before others do likewise. Although this is for another thread.

My experience is the main benefit of first class is the space and physical comfort. Nothing better than being slightly further away from the public.

I don't think this is the case with GWR IET first. It's quite claustrophobic to be honest and itself often packed

 

[godfreycomplex]

I would love to be a romantic person given to flights of fancy

Well unlearn your previous behaviours and be one then! It’s that simple, and that liberating

Really?! Some might say that's rather self-entitled.

Indeed

 

[GS250]

I do think the VT offering was probably the optimum. Enjoyable and appealing, but also simple enough to not require a Michelin Star chef, and whilst the tables were laid, it wasn’t exactly a silver service.

Does anyone remember the Microwaved curries that XC (under BR) and Virgin XC used to offer? Didn't the GE services also offer a choice of curries at some point?

I thought something like that was a decent compromise. Proving you liked curry of course.

Although I can imagine the smell may have irritated other customers. Oh well we used to have plastic orange seats in the buffet car for this kind of activity.

 

[robert thomas]

Helps out, but not responsible for it. To comply with Enviromental Health regs it would involve the TM changing their outfit to cook in the kitchen. Serving drinks and pre-packed foods is okay, but freshly cooked stuff and/or unwrapped food is a different matter. I don't know if trains are exempt from EHO regulations, but I still wouldn't fancy any food that hadn't been prepared following the health guidelines.


Accountants rule the world I'm afraid. I tried to convince my accountant I wanted to travel by train, but he promptly showed me it was six times cheaper to take the car! It may be nicer to take the train (but not always, if it is heaving full and/or cancelled) but money (like it or not) is the determining factor for many, both business & leisure. It's a hard sell to justify it. Indeed the accountant showed me someone who had found it cheaper to buy a car and do the journeys than travel by train. And they they still had a fully taxed and insured car at the end of it! So I'm not massively surprised TOCs are pulling costs where they can. Catering is an easy saving for them.

That seems like very creative accounting. At least 50% of my journeys using a senior railcard cost less than the cost of petrol for the same journey and that's before taking account of the cost of parking at the other end which can often exceed the fare on its own.