Great Western, Essex Thameside and Thameslink bidders

[charlee]

Arriva didn't own Wessex Trains, that was National Express.

Ha.

I meant to say. Arriva would be nice. And That NX was previously good with there Wessex franchise, but wouldnt trust them anymore especially on a franchise of this scale.

 

[YorkshireBear]

First to retain GW as i cant fault them on the second half of this franchise, so if they carry on as now with continued investment it will be a great franchise.

Thameslink... well i think MTR would be a good choice there, surely more similar to the HK system than any other british franchise?

Essex thamside, stay with NX to be honest as much as people dont like em they have done good with C2C.

 

[387star]

Yeah First have turned the GW franchise around and have carried out some well recieved refurbishments. They have an excellent catering service too on the HSTs

 

[Ivo]

First to retain GW as i cant fault them on the second half of this franchise, so if they carry on as now with continued investment it will be a great franchise.

Agree

Thameslink... well i think MTR would be a good choice there, surely more similar to the HK system than any other british franchise?

Could be interesting

Essex thamside, stay with NX to be honest as much as people dont like em they have done good with C2C.

Agree

 

[YorkshireBear]

Agree

Could be interesting

Agree

so you agree is that?

We all know GW and thameslink are gonna be absolute ***** with all the upgrades going on on both sections. So whoever takes it on has to be ready.

 

[ainsworth74]

We all know GW and thameslink are gonna be absolute ***** with all the upgrades going on on both sections. So whoever takes it on has to be ready.

Wasn't it Roger Ford who said that GW was shaping up to be the franchise of doom for the first five years or so? Certainly it's going to be fun and games for whoever wins that one...

 

[Sleepy]

Wasn't it Roger Ford who said that GW was shaping up to be the franchise of doom for the first five years or so? Certainly it's going to be fun and games for whoever wins that one...

NX will get it then - used to lots of weekend blocks - GE mainline

 

[Class377/5]

Wasn't it Roger Ford who said that GW was shaping up to be the franchise of doom for the first five years or so? Certainly it's going to be fun and games for whoever wins that one...

Originally but now he thinks it's Thameslink. Least with GW you have an idea of the plan post works. Thameslink is all unknowns.

 

[bnm]

First to retain GW as i cant fault them on the second half of this franchise, so if they carry on as now with continued investment it will be a great franchise.

Yes, lots of investment recently. Lots of little projects here and there to improve things. I'm a little more cynical as to First Group's motives for doing these things. It's coming across as a charm offensive to do all they can to win the next franchise.

New broom please.

 

[Firestarter]

So the line previously called Thameslink is to called Thameslink again no matter what?

 

[TheWalrus]

Greater Western will be between DB and First I'd imagine

 

[tbtc]

First to retain GW as i cant fault them on the second half of this franchise, so if they carry on as now with continued investment it will be a great franchise

Agree

Agree.

FGW have made some great steps forward recently (e.g. getting the HST extensions *and* the 180s back *and a bigger share of the 150 cascade)

Essex thamside, stay with NX to be honest as much as people dont like em they have done good with C2C.

Agree

Agreed

Thameslink... well i think MTR would be a good choice there, surely more similar to the HK system than any other british franchise?

Could be interesting

We all know GW and thameslink are gonna be absolute ***** with all the upgrades going on on both sections. So whoever takes it on has to be ready.

Wasn't it Roger Ford who said that GW was shaping up to be the franchise of doom for the first five years or so? Certainly it's going to be fun and games for whoever wins that one...

I wonder whether there's an argument for DOR to run franchises like these at times of huge infrastructure upheaval? It would avoid all of the increased subsidies required to cover the uncertainties and the squabbling about things (whilst the infrastructure settles in)?

I imagine that any company bidding for Thameslink will want a chunk of money to cover the potential losses caused by disruption - could we give DOR a year or two to get things "bedded in" and then let the franchise properly after that? Just a thought...

 

[YorkshireBear]

Well i dont think ive had this agreement on the forum before ivo and tbtc

Agree about DOR, its only fair at the end of the day, although you have to say they know what they are bidding for! But DOR being basically government may find it easier to change terms of franchise should they need to in relation to changes in work programme.

 

[IanXC]

Bidders for Great Western franchise:
First Great Western Trains Limited (FirstGroup plc)
GW Trains Limited (Arriva UK Trains Limited – DB (UK) Investments Limited)
NXGW Trains Limited (National Express Group PLC)
Stagecoach Great Western Trains Limited (Stagecoach Group plc)

I'm not sure this is a joint venture. It could actually just be stating that Arriva is owned by DB.

I think Arriva is their UK subsidiary (in passenger terms, at any rate), so they use that for purposes of bidding, and so on, don't they?

To me what the DfT put states that GW Trains is a joint venture between Arriva UK Trains and DB (UK) Investments. However having had a rummage on Companies House, GW Trains Ltd is wholly owned by Arriva UK Trains Ltd.

DB (UK) Investments Ltd is a dormant firm, previous names include Arriva Trains Thameside Ltd, Arriva Trains East Midlands Ltd and Arriva Trains South East Ltd.

So all in all, sorry for that diversion! Odd way for the DfT to show the information though!

 

[tbtc]

Agree about DOR, its only fair at the end of the day, although you have to say they know what they are bidding for! But DOR being basically government may find it easier to change terms of franchise should they need to in relation to changes in work programme.

Call me cynical but I can imagine the new TOC looking for things to claim money back from (e.g. over-running engineering works due to electrification, problems introducing the new EMUs, the "bedding in" period with the new timetables), rather than concentrating on running the railway.

There needs to be a period of compromise/ partnership on Thameslink and FGW during/after the infrastructure projects/ new trains, and I don't want a repeat of the WCML mess where Virgin seemed to spend more time arguing about the late running "upgrade".

 

[Tomonthetrain]

I've made my views known on my blog but here it is:

Great Western:
My View on who will win it: This franchise will be having, like Thameslink, a load of disruption, however this is because of the fact of the GWML Electrification. National Express has recently been in the doghouse with the DfT however that has not put them out of the race. With a bit of investment from them and a promise that they will behave for the DfT, I think they could be a good contender for this. However don’t forget the fact that FirstGroup plc have been running the franchise since 1998, before that, Badgerline (who merged with another company to form First), they might only just pip NX to the post.
My Backing: National Express, but the bidding managers need to put a lot of effort into it!

Essex Thameside:
My View on who will win it: The incumbents look strong having owned c2c since 2000 (prior to that it was Prism Rail whom National Express brought out) with Abellio looking a close second, simply because then they will truly a) knock NX out of the rail game for a bit and b) control all the services properly out of Liverpool Street. MTR, I think, may have a small chance at winning the competition, same as First, however I would not hedge my bets too closely. Especially as NX have invested a lot into the LTS Line (and got it out of the Misery Line mode that people were in. They’ve brought new trains, worked hard on keeping those trains, and basically not given the DfT an excuse to terminate the franchise early on poor performance of the line.
My Backing: National Express Essex Thameside, simply because they’ve kicked ass!

Thameslink:
My View on who will win it: Well, it looks a interesting field. No NX for starters. Govia want Thameslink back, however First are the incumbents. This is the tricky one simply because whoever will get it will have a load of disruption, hassle, especially because of the Thameslink 2000 Programme! Whoever gets the franchise might end up handing back the keys for it early because of it, or may not opt for the extension. First have already a, I say incorrectly but others may disagree, bad reputation on the line as the incumbents, however I think they will do it. Abellio and MTR, in my opinion, is just there for window dressing, and Stagecoach will have a chance, especially as they run the northern part of the route, however saying that, GoVia run the southern part of the route. It’ll be down to the wire!
My Backing: First Thameslink. But they have a long slog ahead!

 

[DownSouth]

I wonder whether there's an argument for DOR to run franchises like these at times of huge infrastructure upheaval? It would avoid all of the increased subsidies required to cover the uncertainties and the squabbling about things (whilst the infrastructure settles in)?

I imagine that any company bidding for Thameslink will want a chunk of money to cover the potential losses caused by disruption - could we give DOR a year or two to get things "bedded in" and then let the franchise properly after that? Just a thought...

I understand that DOR is not really an option because it would require legislation to make it legal.

A better option for Thameslink and Essex Thameside - tender it out, but drop the Britain-style gross tendering and switch to net tendering like they do for London Overground and all the more successful privatisation models across Europe. Rather than allowing the franchisee to bleat about revenue and disruption, take the fare box out of their hands and simply pay them to perform a service as a contractor - i.e. running the trains, cleaning the stations and selling tickets.

Treat them like a contractor - a plumber who is contracted to install a tap in a restaurant is paid a flat fee, not a proportion of all the revenue made from anything the restaurant sells that involves water somewhere in the process.

 

[RobShipway]

I understand that DOR is not really an option because it would require legislation to make it legal.

A better option for Thameslink and Essex Thameside - tender it out, but drop the Britain-style gross tendering and switch to net tendering like they do for London Overground and all the more successful privatisation models across Europe. Rather than allowing the franchisee to bleat about revenue and disruption, take the fare box out of their hands and simply pay them to perform a service as a contractor - i.e. running the trains, cleaning the stations and selling tickets.

Treat them like a contractor - a plumber who is contracted to install a tap in a restaurant is paid a flat fee, not a proportion of all the revenue made from anything the restaurant sells that involves water somewhere in the process.

Totally agree with this comment, however some of the Franchises I believe may have routes not as popular as the routes that London Overground run, so would the franchisee get their money back so to speak?

 

[DownSouth]

Totally agree with this comment, however some of the Franchises I believe may have routes not as popular as the routes that London Overground run, so would the franchisee get their money back so to speak?

The franchisee (i.e. train/station operator, more correctly the contractor) doesn't have to worry about how popular the route may be because their money comes in return for them running trains. All that they need to be interested in is that they run the trains they're being paid to run. They will make a profit as long as the cost of running their services is less than the amount they are paid to run it, just as a plumber will make a profit installing a tap if the cost of installing it is less than the amount the customer pays them.

The risk regarding whether the franchisor (the party awarding the franchise, or more correctly the contract, basically the relevant local/regional/provincial/national authority) "gets their money back" is entirely up to them. They are the ones who set the ticket prices (and penalties) and set the required service pattern prior to awarding the contract. Obviously they would set things up so the contractor is paid to operate a higher-capacity service on a well-used lines and they pay for a lower level service on a less-used line. Where they set the balance between getting their money back or making public transport a publicly funded service that is cheap at the point of delivery is a political question.

There are of course a number of variations that can be made to a net tendering approach. The ability to make money from selling advertising space or running vending machines selling concessions could be granted to the contracted operator or retained by the contracting authority. Maintenance of trains could be awarded as a separate contract from driving them every day or it could be integrated. Rolling stock could be provided by the contracting authority or required to be sourced by the contractor. Revenue protection could be done by either the contractor or by staff from the public contracting authority.

 

[Pugwash]

The winners will be those that deliver the largest amount of cash to the DFT, there will be no arguments about quality etc, look at Greater Anglia - its all about the money.

 

[Zoe]

To me what the DfT put states that GW Trains is a joint venture between Arriva UK Trains and DB (UK) Investments. However having had a rummage on Companies House, GW Trains Ltd is wholly owned by Arriva UK Trains Ltd.

If you read below that you will see that for Thameslink Govia is clearly shown as "Go-ahead and Keolis." This isn't the case for Arriva and DB.

 

[trentside]

While it's obviously about money, I'd be surprised National Express did not retain the Essex-Thameside franchise. By all accounts they've made a good job of it - and while it's a mostly self contained operation, by all accounts predecessor LTS Rail managed to muck it up.

Clearly the National Express bid team have got their house in order - isn't this now being headed by Elaine Holt?

 

[pemma]

If National Express get any of them (especially the Great Western), well might as well switch to the car!!!

NX franchises have been good for introducing new stock though, with a common complaint from the FGW area being old stock.

 

[Zoe]

NX franchises have been good for introducing new stock though, with a common complaint from the FGW area being old stock.

There's going to be new stock (the IEP) though regardless of who wins the franchise this time. Don't forget that FGW did introduce the class 180s.

 

[Pugwash]

While it's obviously about money, I'd be surprised National Express did not retain the Essex-Thameside franchise. By all accounts they've made a good job of it - and while it's a mostly self contained operation, by all accounts predecessor LTS Rail managed to muck it up.

Clearly the National Express bid team have got their house in order - isn't this now being headed by Elaine Holt?

New rolling stock, generous government grant, even national express could not cock that one up, given the state they left NXEA in they should never ever be considered for a rail franchise again.

This one has MTN written all over it.

 

[jopsuk]

NX franchises have been good for introducing new stock though, with a common complaint from the FGW area being old stock.

East Anglia would beg to differ; the only new stock introduced there during one/NXEA was the 379 fleet. A fair amount of stock cascaded in (especially 321s, but also the 90/mrk 3 fleet) but other than that, the other post-privitisation stock in that area predates NX.

On the other hand: yes, Scotrail's 170s were NX, Gat Exs 460s were NX, Central's 170s were NX and more

 

[tbtc]

I understand that DOR is not really an option because it would require legislation to make it legal.

A better option for Thameslink and Essex Thameside - tender it out, but drop the Britain-style gross tendering and switch to net tendering like they do for London Overground and all the more successful privatisation models across Europe. Rather than allowing the franchisee to bleat about revenue and disruption, take the fare box out of their hands and simply pay them to perform a service as a contractor - i.e. running the trains, cleaning the stations and selling tickets.

Treat them like a contractor - a plumber who is contracted to install a tap in a restaurant is paid a flat fee, not a proportion of all the revenue made from anything the restaurant sells that involves water somewhere in the process.

Fair comments - is that how London buses work? That seems to be okay there.

 

[dosxuk]

While it's obviously about money, I'd be surprised National Express did not retain the Essex-Thameside franchise. By all accounts they've made a good job of it - and while it's a mostly self contained operation, by all accounts predecessor LTS Rail managed to muck it up.

*cough* Midland Mainline *cough*

 

[anthony263]

There's going to be new stock (the IEP) though regardless of who wins the franchise this time. Don't forget that FGW did introduce the class 180s.

Seems roger ford is gearing up for one last attack aginst the Hitachi IEP and lets hope he is sucessful.

My money is on First group getting the new GW franchise which is what a lot of people want.

 

[pemma]

East Anglia would beg to differ; the only new stock introduced there during one/NXEA was the 379 fleet.

Compare that to FGW or Northern.