• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

FT reporting Government about to reopen rail contracts with Operators: how could this be achieved?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
6,257
Location
West Wiltshire
Financial Times is reporting that Ministers are about to reopen rail contracts to try and drive revenue, instead of the pandemic era management fee.
Sounds like it has finally been realised that way to cut subsidy is either cut costs (very little can be cut), or boost revenue, which appears to be new plan.

Ministers are preparing to allow private train companies in England to make greater profits if they succeed in boosting passenger numbers that were hit hard by the Covid pandemic.
The transport department is holding talks with operators to reopen their contracts and introduce an incentive to boost passenger revenue as soon as next month, according to industry executives and government officials.
The government stepped in to save the industry from collapse when the pandemic struck and assumed all financial risk by shifting train companies on to tightly controlled contracts that paid a fixed management fee.
This de facto renationalisation ripped up the franchising model introduced after privatisation in the 1990s, which had put full revenue and cost risk on each operator and had led to a series of failures, including three times on the east coast main line.
Passenger numbers are still 10 to 20 per cent below pre-pandemic levels, equivalent to a daily revenue loss of £8mn compared with 2019 levels, according to the latest government figures.
The loss of higher-fare paying business travellers and commuters has hit the industry finances particularly hard.
Rail bosses have urged ministers to give them commercial incentives to grow traffic, generate more revenues and allow them to increase their profits, instead of focusing on cost-cutting to reduce the industry’s reliance on the billions of pounds of state subsidies.
Transport secretary Mark Harper told MPs on the House of Commons transport select committee earlier this week it was “imperative” that the industry could focus on “getting more passengers and driving up revenues”. He added: “There are only two ways you can make the rail industry sustainable. You either drive up revenue or you reduce costs. And taking costs out means reducing services.”
Under existing arrangements each operator is paid a fixed fee of 0.5 per cent of its operating cost base, with the chance to earn an additional 1.5 per cent if it hits performance targets ranging from punctuality and cleanliness to efficient financial management.
One option to incentivise passenger growth would be to redraw these performance targets to focus more on growing ticket revenues, one person familiar with the matter said. The planned contractual changes were expected to part of deeper reforms of the rail industry which appear to have stalled.
Two years ago, the government pledged to bring private train companies and the state-owned infrastructure operator, Network Rail, together in a new public body to be known as Great British Railways. But Harper told the committee that the necessary legislation was “unlikely” to make it through parliament before the general election, which is expected next year.
There are 17 train operating companies in England, of which four are fully nationalised and operated by the government.

 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Bevan Price

Established Member
Joined
22 Apr 2010
Messages
7,345
Apart from increasing fares, how can some operators boost income when many of their trains are already over-full?
 

frediculous

Member
Joined
23 May 2017
Messages
110
Part of me expects all operators to be given nice long contracts with expensive break clauses, just so any incoming Government can do very little about it
 

dk1

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Oct 2009
Messages
15,994
Location
East Anglia
About flipping time. Allowing them hopefully to negotiate industrial relations rather better than this government has done & get us back to where we should be.
 

irish_rail

Established Member
Joined
30 Oct 2013
Messages
3,889
Location
Plymouth
Part of me expects all operators to be given nice long contracts with expensive break clauses, just so any incoming Government can do very little about it
That would be my suspicion, could it be the nail in the coffin for a possible Labour renationalisation? Assuming the contracts are 6 years plus then there is every chance renationalisation in a proper, joined up, effective sense would be dead in the water.
 

dk1

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Oct 2009
Messages
15,994
Location
East Anglia
That would be my suspicion, could it be the nail in the coffin for a possible Labour renationalisation? Assuming the contracts are 6 years plus then there is every chance renationalisation in a proper, joined up, effective sense would be dead in the water.
Labour was never very keen on nationalisation in the 2000s when in power with several franchises re-let.
 

Richardr

Member
Joined
2 Jun 2009
Messages
409
About flipping time. Allowing them hopefully to negotiate industrial relations rather better than this government has done & get us back to where we should be.
How would that work if they are just being paid a fee? The labour costs aren't being bourne by the operators.
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
6,257
Location
West Wiltshire
That would be my suspicion, could it be the nail in the coffin for a possible Labour renationalisation? Assuming the contracts are 6 years plus then there is every chance renationalisation in a proper, joined up, effective sense would be dead in the water.
Some already are that long
eg Abellio East Midlands expires 13 October 2030

Some expire toward end of next Parliament
eg Greater Western expires 25 June 2028

Others expired this year (2023) got 2 year extensions
eg SWR to 25 May 2025 and C2C to 20 July 2025

But if we consider those needing replace rolling stock soon :
South Eastern only has direct award until 20 October 2024
Northern only has direct award until 1 March 2025
Chiltern expires 31 March 2025

Another of the biggies, Thameslink expires 1 April 2025

So looks like quite a few expire 15-18 months time, but unclear if they could be let without open franchise competition (even if it can be rushed through before next election)
 

dk1

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Oct 2009
Messages
15,994
Location
East Anglia
How would that work if they are just being paid a fee? The labour costs aren't being bourne by the operators.
Gives them a chance to properly continue with growth. My TOC does advertising & promotion very well I hasten to add.
 

irish_rail

Established Member
Joined
30 Oct 2013
Messages
3,889
Location
Plymouth
Some already are that long
eg Abellio East Midlands expires 13 October 2030

Some expire toward end of next Parliament
eg Greater Western expires 25 June 2028

Others expired this year (2023) got 2 year extensions
eg SWR to 25 May 2025 and C2C to 20 July 2025

But if we consider those needing replace rolling stock soon :
South Eastern only has direct award until 20 October 2024
Northern only has direct award until 1 March 2025
Chiltern expires 31 March 2025

Another of the biggies, Thameslink expires 1 April 2025

So looks like quite a few expire 15-18 months time, but unclear if they could be let without open franchise competition (even if it can be rushed through before next election)
Am I right in thinking there is a break clause in GWR though that would have allowed it be one of the first renationalised operations in 2024 provided Labour win the election next year? Could be wrong mind you.....??
 

RailWonderer

Established Member
Joined
25 Jul 2018
Messages
1,609
Location
All around the network
There is only so much fare increasing you can do before people abandon trains in count of being stupidly expensive and see driving as a better option. Already for 3 or more people, driving is far cheaper long distance and even mid distance than the train. The train is by default the premium choice on count of being faster than driving. Cost cutting seems more sustainable and if it means freezing fares I'm all for the latter.
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
6,257
Location
West Wiltshire
To some extent, can attract more passengers to fill empty seats that are going to be provided anyway.

Where the operators struggle is when demand increases and they need more stock. At best some can add about 70-90 seats by swapping say a 2car for 3car, but for others it means coupling another unit and adding 300+ seats (that's if the platforms etc can actually hold the longer train).

What they have in recent years is not be creative with marginal time, running a train to an attraction, or market / tourist town etc. They seem to like sticking to core routes even if off peak demand is lower to that destination
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
39,058
Location
Yorks
They need to retain units such as 153's to provide additional capacity cheaply and build the market.
 

Clarence Yard

Established Member
Joined
18 Dec 2014
Messages
2,498
Forget about the contract end dates if you want to take them back in house - It is the core term expiry dates in each contract that you should look for. That is the earliest a contract can be taken back,. From then to the expiry date you only need to give three periods notice..

So for GWR the earliest it can be taken back is in 2025.
 

YorkshireBear

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2010
Messages
8,692
Hopefully this gives them the commercial freedom to try different things in what is not a different market to before.
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
19,707
Location
Mold, Clwyd
Currently the rail revenue goes to the Treasury and the costs fall on DfT.
There would have to be a top government decision to get the full P&L to lie with DfT, in preparation for passing to GBR under rail reform.
Maybe the Chancellor will outline the change in next week's Autumn Statement.
You'd also expect any change to start from April 1, for the new fiscal year.
 

43066

Established Member
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
9,436
Location
London
Financial Times is reporting that Ministers are about to reopen rail contracts to try and drive revenue, instead of the pandemic era management fee.
Sounds like it has finally been realised that way to cut subsidy is either cut costs (very little can be cut), or boost revenue, which appears to be new plan.




Good to see that some common sense is returning.

There is only so much fare increasing you can do before people abandon trains in count of being stupidly expensive and see driving as a better option. Already for 3 or more people, driving is far cheaper long distance and even mid distance than the train. The train is by default the premium choice on count of being faster than driving. Cost cutting seems more sustainable and if it means freezing fares I'm all for the latter.

I think years of experience shows that the opposite is the case: successive governments (both Labour and Tory) have evidently considered it more “sustainable” for the railway to be as self funding as possible, rather than drawing more subsidy from general tax revenues. There’s nothing I’ve seen to suggest an incoming Labour government will deviate from this strategy - in fact the mood music suggests the opposite.

This makes sense as a strategy when you consider that years of above inflation fare rises have corresponded with increases in passenger numbers, thus showing that demand for rail fares is price inelastic. The latest fare increase was below the rate of inflation (ie a cut in real terms), but certainly wasn’t a freeze, and passenger numbers continue to rebound strongly post pandemic. Therefore there’s nothing to suggest we’ve yet reached the point where further increasing fares will decrease revenue.

On the other hand, as the last few years have shown, ham fisted attempts at cost cutting just result in a worse service for the public, with the savings realised being insignificant due to the railway’s high fixed costs, many of which are baked in eg rolling stock costs. I’d therefore suggest it’s cost cutting as a strategy that’s increasingly revealing itself to be unsustainable as passenger numbers rise. It seems the government (even this government!) now agree.
 
Last edited:

Nicholas Lewis

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2019
Messages
6,139
Location
Surrey
Merriman spoke about this six months ago at Transport Select Committee but probably taken this long to convince Treasury. The cynic in me thinks this is why revenue protection isn't what it was as its an easy win for operators to up the ante. Ultimately until the operators have full responsibility for revenue and costs not sure the dynamics will seriously change though. This will need a new form of contract and still feel franchises are the best model to deliver both services and lower cost to the taxpayer but unlikely any party will go back to them. Franchises can have backstops against the unlikelihood of another pandemics etc as well as inflation protection if it exceeds a certain level.
 

Kingham West

Member
Joined
17 Oct 2017
Messages
111
Let’s hope cross country , can boost revenue , and lease a few more Voyagers, with advertising and promotion.
Quite frankly there is 100 percent latent demand untapped , or those who won’t travel due to overcrowding, commercial freedom is all that is needed, not micromanagement.
It’s great news, I look back on the Virgin days with affection , they were constantly advertising, and attracting new to rail passengers, and did over 100% growth .
 

Towers

Established Member
Joined
30 Aug 2021
Messages
1,684
Location
UK
The obvious answer to boosting revenue is to properly tackle fare evasion, which remains absolutely rife. And whilst that may be very challenging on some urban or regional routes with many ungated stations, it is unavoidably clear that there are obvious opportunities for far easier targets - many gatelines are now left out of use in the evenings and at weekends, even at major “flagship” stations. A main gateline being operational while a secondary one elsewhere at the same station is quietly left unstaffed and wide open seems to be a favourite, again particularly at weekends.

You don’t have to be a conspiracy theorist to ponder the effect that TOCs not having to worry about revenue has on the willingness to pay overtime to cover shifts or keep up with recruitment, with the above results. It has also been mentioned elsewhere here recently how long it now takes staff to conduct ticket checks on board, with a plethora of apps of differing degrees of reliability, plus the ongoing confusion in contactless areas of how the system works and where it is valid. Frankly, the current system seems messier than ever, and amongst all the chaos the opportunity to not pay the appropriate fare for a journey appears to be greater than it ever has been.
 

Llandudno

Established Member
Joined
25 Dec 2014
Messages
2,205
Let’s hope cross country , can boost revenue , and lease a few more Voyagers, with advertising and promotion.
Quite frankly there is 100 percent latent demand untapped , or those who won’t travel due to overcrowding, commercial freedom is all that is needed, not micromanagement.
It’s great news, I look back on the Virgin days with affection , they were constantly advertising, and attracting new to rail passengers, and did over 100% growth .
Indeed, XC has the most potential IF additional units are leased!

Reinstate hourly Newcastle - Reading/Southampton

and operate 8/9 car sets on Edinburgh-Plymouth and 6 cars on Nottingham -Cardiff

Introduce some innovate fares and the passengers will come flooding back at the expense of air travel, Express coach services and more importantly fewer car journeys on our already overcrowded roads!
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
18,841
at the expense of ... Express coach services
It would be good if people didn't continue to express this myth that there is an express bus and coach market for the railway to annihilate. It just doesn't exist any more to the point that there are passengers to go after.

If anything we should be looking to coaches to also take passengers out of cars alongside the railway.
 

Killingworth

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2018
Messages
4,892
Location
Sheffield
It would be good if people didn't continue to express this myth that there is an express bus and coach market for the railway to annihilate. It just doesn't exist any more to the point that there are passengers to go after.

If anything we should be looking to coaches to also take passengers out of cars alongside the railway.

Newcastle to London by National Express coach offers 7 daily services taking about 8 hours.

Lumo alone offers 5 daily departures taking under 3 hours.

Coaches do compete on price and aren't as hampered by engineering work and strikes as rail travel and may pick up some intermediate stops not well served by rail.
 
Last edited:

Kingham West

Member
Joined
17 Oct 2017
Messages
111
It’s air travel XC can go for , not coaches , currently a cramped 4 car voyager ( full and standing ) can not compete with internal air routes from Bristol and Southampton.
But it could if there were better seats , more of them , and a Buffet.
Tragically in the last 7 years , air has become the easy choice, you don’t travel standard class on a voyager twice in peak time , unless you have to ..
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
6,257
Location
West Wiltshire
It’s air travel XC can go for , not coaches , currently a cramped 4 car voyager ( full and standing ) can not compete with internal air routes from Bristol and Southampton.
But it could if there were better seats , more of them , and a Buffet.
Tragically in the last 7 years , air has become the easy choice, you don’t travel standard class on a voyager twice in peak time , unless you have to ..
Yes XC offering in the West is very poor, from Bristol (and the tourist city of Bath) ought to be able to do easy leisure trips, but a 4car crowded voyager is not very appealing, and prices compare badly with air.

Bristol airport having grown to over a million passengers per month (CAA data) shows there is big demand from the region to travel, but XC hasn't made any attempt to grab a decent share of it.
 

Robin Saunter

Member
Joined
5 Aug 2019
Messages
6
I travelled on XC today (Friday) between Reading and Birmingham International. On both journeys the four-coach trains were absolutely packed to the extent that some people could not get on and some barely got off before the doors closed, a situation made worse by a large number of pax with airline luggage. Surely XC know from their management information systems that extra rolling stock is needed to meet passenger demand and they must know at what times and on what days of the week that demand is greatest. Judging from other posts on this forum, I imagine XC has been a poor performer for some time. Will this be borne in mind at re-selection time?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top