Greater Manchester Bus Franchising Assessment

[WatcherZero]

System One has always been owned and led by the commercial companies, GMPTE didnt even join it till later when Metrolink came along.

And yes government contracts where they choose to exclusively use one supplier are pretty common, they are called Single Source Procurement and are usually used when you need to guarantee availability long term (E.g. they require a production line to be kept open for a specified period of time to support future orders/replenishment), there isnt enough work to keep two different suppliers in business and it would endanger the commercial viability of both so you choose the best one to keep going, or having two different competing products in the market place would increase unit cost/danger of competing incompatible standards.

 

[Stan Drews]

System One has always been owned and led by the commercial companies, GMPTE didnt even join it till later when Metrolink came along.

Yes, SystemOne etc is administered by Greater Manchester Travelcards Ltd (GMTL), which is indeed led by the bus operators, with TfGM and the rail operators also represented. The politicians will never want you to know it, but the reason that there aren’t fully multi-modal tickets (bus/tram/train), especially ones covering peak periods, is down to TfGM and the rail operators, not the commercial bus operators!
However, keep that to yourselves, so that nice Mr Burnham can claim all the credit when he finally gets the nasty big bus baron bosses to agree!

 

[WatcherZero]

There is a one day off-peak bus-tram-train ticket (since buses dont have a peak unlike the other two modes) And rail season tickets to Metrolink are available, but Its difficult to imagine any one needing all three modes everyday for a season to be worthwhile with the cost of all three modes included.

 

[radamfi]

Yes, SystemOne etc is administered by Greater Manchester Travelcards Ltd (GMTL), which is indeed led by the bus operators, with TfGM and the rail operators also represented. The politicians will never want you to know it, but the reason that there aren’t fully multi-modal tickets (bus/tram/train), especially ones covering peak periods, is down to TfGM and the rail operators, not the commercial bus operators!
However, keep that to yourselves, so that nice Mr Burnham can claim all the credit when he finally gets the nasty big bus baron bosses to agree!

If they are so blameless, why do the bus companies undercut and therefore undermine the bus only ticket with single operator tickets?

 

[Bletchleyite]

It can be done by a third party. TfGM arguably do it as System One and OneBus could do it as long as it doesn’t discriminate.

I can think of a few local authorities that have done this too.

Agreed - but doesn't this have to be a scheme open to all operators to join even if they choose not to? SuperGEM wasn't and nor was this GoAhead etc scheme.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There is a one day off-peak bus-tram-train ticket (since buses dont have a peak unlike the other two modes) And rail season tickets to Metrolink are available, but Its difficult to imagine any one needing all three modes everyday for a season to be worthwhile with the cost of all three modes included.

That's the error. It would be better if the season tickets were zonal than modal.

 

[carlberry]

If they are so blameless, why do the bus companies undercut and therefore undermine the bus only ticket with single operator tickets?

They're cheaper because they cover less facilities. Are you suggesting that TfL only offers Travelcards that cover all zones instead of undercutting themselves with ones that only cover zone 1?

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

System One has always been owned and led by the commercial companies, GMPTE didnt even join it till later when Metrolink came along.

Apologies - thought it was TfGM who then drew in the bus companies rather than the other way round. Thanks for correcting me.

Agreed - but doesn't this have to be a scheme open to all operators to join even if they choose not to? SuperGEM wasn't and nor was this GoAhead etc scheme.

Yeah - that's what I meant when I said that you can't discriminate.

 

[radamfi]

They're cheaper because they cover less facilities. Are you suggesting that TfL only offers Travelcards that cover all zones instead of undercutting themselves with ones that only cover zone 1?

TfL tickets are valid on all services (except Heathrow Express and HS1) within the zones chosen, not just ones by certain companies. Although, TfL is far from textbook when it comes to integrated ticketing given that it can cost far more to use a combination of buses and tubes than by sticking to one mode exclusively.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

TfL tickets are valid on all services (except Heathrow Express and HS1) within the zones chosen, not just ones by certain companies. Although, TfL is far from textbook when it comes to integrated ticketing given that it can cost far more to use a combination of buses and tubes than by sticking to one mode exclusively.

Carl was clearly pointing out that if you have a basic single operator ticket you pay £x. With greater facilities, whether that be wider scope (in terms of TfL zones) or greater interavailability (multiple operators), then the price increases.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Apologies - thought it was TfGM who then drew in the bus companies rather than the other way round. Thanks for correcting me.

Something of note to this is that while the German Verkehrsverbuende are now statutory organisations, they were born out of effectively cartels between operators in the same way as System One seems to have done (possibly encouraged by GMPTE?), rather than out of statutory organisations in the first place like say the Merseytravel tickets.

A curiosity of public transport operation is that because of the benefits of a wider network, because competition is very narrow in scope due to most corridors not having the demand levels to sustain it, and because operators usually do not "take the mick" on things like fares, cartels are generally to the advantage of passengers, unlike almost every other industry. Legislation sadly doesn't recognise that...

System One does however post-date Metrolink - it was introduced somewhere between 1997 and 2001 - I distinctly remember it starting while I was at university.

 

[radamfi]

Carl was clearly pointing out that if you have a basic single operator ticket you pay £x. With greater facilities, whether that be wider scope (in terms of TfL zones) or greater interavailability (multiple operators), then the price increases.

The difference, compared to the difference in fares by crossing zones, is that price differences have relatively little to do with the area of coverage. For example, where my mum lives has two routes, both originally served by First but now one by Go-Ahead and one by Diamond. So a weekly ticket for both routes will go up from £16 to £19 for no reason other than the colour of the bus changing.

 

[Stan Drews]

If they are so blameless, why do the bus companies undercut and therefore undermine the bus only ticket with single operator tickets?

I’d imagine because 100% of £15 is significantly more than say 20% of £17.
Some customers don’t need to use multiple operators/modes, so there is a market for different products. I suppose it’s similar to Tesco selling own brand produce cheaper than the equivalent major brands, as they realise there is a market for a ‘lesser’ product, and I suspect they too will make a greater margin on the own brand stuff.

 

[radamfi]

Some customers don’t need to use multiple operators/modes, so there is a market for different products. I suppose it’s similar to Tesco selling own brand produce cheaper than the equivalent major brands, as they realise there is a market for a ‘lesser’ product, and I suspect they too will make a greater margin on the own brand stuff.

In the example above, if you could use either service, you don't strictly speaking *need* to use multiple operators, so you might decide to make do with just Go-Ahead in order to avoid the fare rise. But then the attractiveness of the service is much reduced.

 

[edwin_m]

The difference, compared to the difference in fares by crossing zones, is that price differences have relatively little to do with the area of coverage. For example, where my mum lives has two routes, both originally served by First but now one by Go-Ahead and one by Diamond. So a weekly ticket for both routes will go up from £16 to £19 for no reason other than the colour of the bus changing.

I’d imagine because 100% of £15 is significantly more than say 20% of £17.
Some customers don’t need to use multiple operators/modes, so there is a market for different products. I suppose it’s similar to Tesco selling own brand produce cheaper than the equivalent major brands, as they realise there is a market for a ‘lesser’ product, and I suspect they too will make a greater margin on the own brand stuff.

In the example above, if you could use either service, you don't strictly speaking *need* to use multiple operators, so you might decide to make do with just Go-Ahead in order to avoid the fare rise. But then the attractiveness of the service is much reduced.

All this sort of nonsense and we wonder why people don't bother with buses...

 

[WatcherZero]

System One does however post-date Metrolink - it was introduced somewhere between 1997 and 2001 - I distinctly remember it starting while I was at university.

Went something like this, Greater Manchester Travelcards Limited (GMTL) set up by the PTE in 1975 as a concessionary scheme principally to sell child bus tickets through the clipper cards scheme (10x child journeys for the price of 9, available from post offices), GMTL privatised along with buses in 1986 becoming non-profit concessionary scheme run by the privatised bus companies, in 1994 (two years post Metrolink) GMTL merged with the public transport information arm of the PTE (that ran the travel shops and published the printed bus timetables) and was transformed into a dividend paying company operating under the brand System One and offering multi-modal tickets.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

All this sort of nonsense and we wonder why people don't bother with buses...

Many reasons why people don’t bother with buses - this is less significant than most of them.

 

[Stan Drews]

Went something like this, Greater Manchester Travelcards Limited (GMTL) set up by the PTE in 1975 as a concessionary scheme principally to sell child bus tickets through the clipper cards scheme (10x child journeys for the price of 9, available from post offices), GMTL privatised along with buses in 1986 becoming non-profit concessionary scheme run by the privatised bus companies, in 1994 (two years post Metrolink) GMTL merged with the public transport information arm of the PTE (that ran the travel shops and published the printed bus timetables) and was transformed into a dividend paying company operating under the brand System One and offering multi-modal tickets.

I’ve posted this link before, and whilst it’s from 2011, it’s still a very useful summary about GMTL.
http://www.transportforgreatermanchestercommittee.gov.uk/download/4339/item_07_introductio..

 

[radamfi]

Many reasons why people don’t bother with buses - this is less significant than most of them.

But the GM fare system is clearly far from ideal. Would it be better if London decided to split their routes into three networks with different tickets, not by region but arbitrarily, meaning that most people would be served by 2 or more networks? Of course not. In cities where the main company has a monopoly or near monopoly, they don't generally split their routes into 2 or more networks with different ticketing systems.

The bus companies in GM say that they can offer the benefits of franchising without ending deregulation. But they can't even do the simplest thing they could do which is to harmonise tickets across all buses in GM.

 

[Stan Drews]

But the GM fare system is clearly far from ideal. Would it be better if London decided to split their routes into three networks with different tickets, not by region but arbitrarily, meaning that most people would be served by 2 or more networks? Of course not. In cities where the main company has a monopoly or near monopoly, they don't generally split their routes into 2 or more networks with different ticketing systems.

The bus companies in GM say that they can offer the benefits of franchising without ending deregulation. But they can't even do the simplest thing they could do which is to harmonise tickets across all buses in GM.

I’m fairly sure that if there were separate, lower priced, bus only or bus/tube only ticket options, there would be plenty of users that would benefit from them as they don’t regularly use all modes.
If the longstanding GMTL SystemOne tickets aren’t harmonised across all buses, I’d be curious to know what you would consider to be harmonised?

 

[radamfi]

I’m fairly sure that if there were separate, lower priced, bus only or bus/tube only ticket options, there would be plenty of users that would benefit from them as they don’t regularly use all modes.
If the longstanding GMTL SystemOne tickets aren’t harmonised across all buses, I’d be curious to know what you would consider to be harmonised?

I'm not talking about all modes, although that would be even better. Just buses would be good for starters.

If single company tickets exist as well as System One, that is not harmonised.

 

[edwin_m]

From the passenger's point of view it's arbitrary whether a bus journey of the same length has service by one operator or multiple operators - in the latter case you pay more to be able to use all available buses. Similarly if a journey requiring interchange involves using the services of several operators. There's a logic to zonal ticketing where people travelling through more zones will pay more. But people paying more for a multi-operator pass are unlikely to travel further or more often, they just have to travel on the services of more than one operator.

 

[carlberry]

I'm not talking about all modes, although that would be even better. Just buses would be good for starters.

If single company tickets exist as well as System One, that is not harmonised.

So the multi operator ticket that you want exists, however because other tickets also exist it dosent satisfy your requirements?

 

[Bletchleyite]

So the multi operator ticket that you want exists, however because other tickets also exist it dosent satisfy your requirements?

The existence of operator specific tickets cause the multi-operator ticket to be overpriced.

 

[radamfi]

So the multi operator ticket that you want exists, however because other tickets also exist it dosent satisfy your requirements?

You are paying a premium because buses in your area happen to be split between multiple owners.

 

[Stan Drews]

You are paying a premium because buses in your area happen to be split between multiple owners.

No, you get a discount if you only need to use one bus route/operator. The GM area System One prices compare very favourably with the heavily subsidised TfL equivalents.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

You are paying a premium because buses in your area happen to be split between multiple owners.

Don't you normally pay a premium for greater scope of services in most walks of life? Alternatively, you can say that you receive a discount for a lower level of service and one that perhaps better meets your needs?

 

[158756]

No, you get a discount if you only need to use one bus route/operator. The GM area System One prices compare very favourably with the heavily subsidised TfL equivalents.

If GM had only one private operator, and under the proposed franchising scheme, tickets would be priced in line with current single operator tickets, not System One. System One is a rip-off. The only real discounting you get from operators is on the single route Middleton/Walkden/MagicBus tickets.

 

[radamfi]

Don't you normally pay a premium for greater scope of services in most walks of life? Alternatively, you can say that you receive a discount for a lower level of service and one that perhaps better meets your needs?

So does that mean it would be better if towns with only one company would split up into different companies so there would be single operator tickets and a more expensive multiple operator one? That is effectively what's happened in GM to former First passengers and it is hard to see the advantage.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

So does that mean it would be better if towns with only one company would split up into different companies so there would be single operator tickets and a more expensive multiple operator one? That is effectively what's happened in GM and it is hard to see the advantage.

That tactic......I could reflect it back but why bother...

Walk around in life and look at pricing strategies in all manner of markets. It’s product augmentation - term one in most business courses incl. business and transport degrees.