Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both 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!
Some of the bus stop plates in Holymoorside still show 25 as the only bus picking up at that stop.
This Stagecoach route number has not operated to Holymoorside for at least 15 years!
Are you sure? I recall the Whittington bus running to Holymoorside and I've only been in Chesterfield 10 years.
I think the main problem is that no-one seems to know what to do with Holymoorside. The main village loop takes best part of 10 minutes so it's a pain to add on to a through service, but is far enough from Chesterfield (and with traffic blackspots inbetween) than an extension of another service is troublesome.
Stagecoach ran a 45 minute frequency on the 91 but that didn't really work - it takes 3 hours for the same past the hour time to repeat, so knowing where you are is difficult. It could do with a half-hourly service really, but things don't seem to quite stack up for that to be the case. Personally, I'd like to see someone try an alternate direction loop via Somersall Lane / Walton Back Lane. That would bring benefits to more people so might be more viable. For example, despite being a little over a mile apart, there is no bus link between Somersall and Holymoorside, plus Somersall residents don't have a bus to their nearest doctor / pharmacy / shop, something that would fix.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
There is room for Hulleys in the market doing what they've always done. It's possible to expand the operation as well in a steady and measured way using that existing work as a springboard. Instead there is continual change, stopping and starting of routes, high turnover of fleet and frequent cancellations of services, presumably because drivers don't want to work in a strained operation.
I wonder if the owner has sensed there is a big opportunity at the moment and wants to get as much of it as possible. The larger operators are pulling out from rural services - and even some edge of urban services - and the government is spaffing large sums (often poorly directed) on buses, so someone who can be nimble and adapt could do well. Maybe better decisions (and had the pandemic not happened) and things would be in a much different place.
While I don't have direct knowledge, anecdotes I've picked up suggests there is negotiation with DCC over who takes what. However, the main issue is lack of operators serving the area. Other than Hulleys, only Stagecoach have a depot in the area and they seem to have limited interest in serving the more rural routes. TM, Trent or High Peak would have a lot of dead mileage to serve most of the routes DCC tender. Littles, who another poster mentioned, aren't that local either.
Thanks - that's exactly what I was trying to get at. I'm not from the area so didn't know, but it did make me wonder whether the tone of some posts here might be slightly misplaced.
It sounds awfully like - to simply things drastically - more a question of who thinks they can run the service at all, rather than an actual tender where price and quality come into it and the operator could be accused of desiring a "quick buck".
It sounds awfully like - to simply things drastically - more a question of who thinks they can run the service at all, rather than an actual tender where price and quality come into it and the operator could be accused of desiring a "quick buck".
Well, that's a factor at the moment due to bus and driver shortages, but there is an element of the council having to pay any other operator a premium to cover how far the route is from their depot. I'd imagine also there will be factors such as travelling time for driver swaps and so on. Hulleys, being on the spot so to speak, can cover most peak district routes more cost effectively than any other operator.
TM seem to be the only other operator who take on contracts in this part of the Peak District. High Peak near Buxton, and Trent to the south, but that leaves a very large area with not many operators. And TM have pulled back from quite a few of late - I think the 218 is the only service they run far in to the Peak District and that is only partly subsidised as it generates a lot of traffic for Chatsworth on nice days so can be run mostly commercially.
I do recall a few other local operators - GJ Holmes I believe was one that covered a few services - but they all seem to have fallen by the wayside. Stagecoach only seem interested if the subsidy is significant so to get VFM the council look elsewhere. There is a new community transport operator in Chesterfield now who I suspect will start taking the very minor routes that even Hulleys don't want.
In the 90s I can remember quite a few buses going from the Manchester area on summer Sundays for example 395 and 460 over the Snake Pass .and I think Hulleys ran a service from Dronfield to Hartington for Dovedale
It's obvious that Hulleys want to expand their operation from what they've bought, but it neither has the capacity (buses, depot space, drivers) or finances to achieve it. As you suggest, a second satellite site in Chesterfield would help in this respect. That would then allow the Baslow operations to continue as they've always done and provide facilities to keep a larger fleet maintained. The limiting factors then would be drivers and the finances to sustain the period in which routes become established.
I can see why they've pulled Breezer journeys to reuse the drivers on local services, but why bother registering the route in the first place if there's no plan to operate the route in the long term? It takes a long time to make a route viable, and it's this length of time Hulleys appear not to have at their disposal. If they can't commit to the length of time it takes, they shouldn't bother at all as all they'll achieve is their own demise when the capital runs out and the bank doesn't let them continue having an overdraft. As the last filed accounts reveal a loss on the Profit & Loss account, it's a few thousand a week they're losing. Eventually that ends.
There is room for Hulleys in the market doing what they've always done. It's possible to expand the operation as well in a steady and measured way using that existing work as a springboard. Instead there is continual change, stopping and starting of routes, high turnover of fleet and frequent cancellations of services, presumably because drivers don't want to work in a strained operation.
With all the constant changes the journey from Chesterfield to Bakewell is not as convenient as it was last summer. With the 170 and X70 there was a bus every half hour for day trips to Bakewell. Now there’s only an hourly 170 which runs via Chatsworth and not very convenient timed buses for the return journey. I always avoided the return bus at around 4pm which originated at Lady Manners School because it was so overcrowded and noisy. Now to avoid that bus my only alternative is to leave Bakewell as early as 1450. Hulleys reduce their service from Chesterfield to Bakewell to at best hourly just as Stagecoach increase the frequency on the X17 to Matlock.
You are right, Stonegravels is massive and when Stagecoach bought it, Chesterfield Transport had 154 vehicles (albeit with some in Calver and Retford). There's less than 100 there now. However, I can't understand why Stagecoach would want Hulleys to have an outstation in their depot when they compete for tenders (and possibly for staff).
@M803UYA is on the money - Hulleys can expand and develop their operation in a steady, sensible manner but the current management (and remember, they are bus people) seem to be tearing around as if their hair's on fire. Don't think Andrews of Tideswell would be a good solution... the expansion opportunities are to the east not the west; whilst a Chesterfield area outbase would be more logical, I'd be concerned about the ability to manage a satellite given their current travails!
I don't know the geography of the area particularly well, but would it not make sense for any out-station to be located where there is a ready labour market whilst at the same time being convenient for routes or potential routes? My understanding of Hulleys problems stem from recruitment difficulties - rather than try to attract staff to the depot, the depot (or outstation) should, within reason, be where the potential staff are.
With all the constant changes the journey from Chesterfield to Bakewell is not as convenient as it was last summer. With the 170 and X70 there was a bus every half hour for day trips to Bakewell. Now there’s only an hourly 170 which runs via Chatsworth and not very convenient timed buses for the return journey. I always avoided the return bus at around 4pm which originated at Lady Manners School because it was so overcrowded and noisy. Now to avoid that bus my only alternative is to leave Bakewell as early as 1450. Hulleys reduce their service from Chesterfield to Bakewell to at best hourly just as Stagecoach increase the frequency on the X17 to Matlock.
I'm led to believe the demand on the route didn't justify two an hour. Personally, I think the X70 was the better route, but serving Chatsworth is also fairly important - and I believe attracts funding from Chatsworth themselves.
The X17 increase was BSIP funded. I wasn't too convinced at first but reports suggest it's doing well. I'm not convinced by the timing though - while that and the Peak Sightseer were launched, local services were being cancelled regularly due to lack of buses and drivers. I don't believe Derbyshire County council did due diligence to confirm Stagecoach had the resources without impacting their existing network. (And this is partly why I find it frustrating when only Hulleys get stick for cancelling services)
The loss of the X70 was to free resources so they could take over the 48/49 - which they have now offloaded for the 80. Oddly, the 80 is mainly commercial while the 48/49 were tendered, so they are taking more of a risk, although I suspect the rewards will be higher if run well.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I don't know the geography of the area particularly well, but would it not make sense for any out-station to be located where there is a ready labour market whilst at the same time being convenient for routes or potential routes? My understanding of Hulleys problems stem from recruitment difficulties - rather than try to attract staff to the depot, the depot (or outstation) should, within reason, be where the potential staff are.
Partly. I think the owner expects others to have the same work ethic he does which can lead to some friction. All local operators are short of staff though, I guess when you run services that are every 15-30 minutes it's less visible than when they are only hourly or two-hourly.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
You are right, Stonegravels is massive and when Stagecoach bought it, Chesterfield Transport had 154 vehicles (albeit with some in Calver and Retford). There's less than 100 there now. However, I can't understand why Stagecoach would want Hulleys to have an outstation in their depot when they compete for tenders (and possibly for staff).
@M803UYA is on the money - Hulleys can expand and develop their operation in a steady, sensible manner but the current management (and remember, they are bus people) seem to be tearing around as if their hair's on fire. Don't think Andrews of Tideswell would be a good solution... the expansion opportunities are to the east not the west; whilst a Chesterfield area outbase would be more logical, I'd be concerned about the ability to manage a satellite given their current travails!
They seem to be focusing on Chesterfield services, so having a base there makes the most sense. Baslow isn't a terrible location to serve Chesterfield if the capacity was there, but the depot is too cramped to allow any more vehicles to be added to the fleet. Makes much more sense to me to have a few spares there and run just the Peak District services out of it, and then have even just half a dozen vehicles elsewhere for the 80 / 55 and any other scraps Stagecoach may throw their way.
There is a patch of land on Goytside Road that is up for sale at the moment, that was previously used by the Ford dealer who used to have a showroom where Lidl is now for storing vans. Wouldn't take much to have a basic yard there and can be developed later on when money is more plentiful. Otherwise, the old GJ Holmes site in Clay Cross seems empty still.
There was talk a couple of years back also of the Hulleys owner buying a couple of coach operators in Clay Cross / Alfreton. The posts got pulled from the Facebook group so I'm guessing there were sensitive negotiations going on that they potentially compromised, but nothing seemed to come of it in the end.
Presumably as well as managing it and the cost of buying the land in the first place there must be some cost involved in applying for a new operating site with the TC?
I'm led to believe the demand on the route didn't justify two an hour. Personally, I think the X70 was the better route, but serving Chatsworth is also fairly important - and I believe attracts funding from Chatsworth themselves.
The X17 increase was BSIP funded. I wasn't too convinced at first but reports suggest it's doing well. I'm not convinced by the timing though - while that and the Peak Sightseer were launched, local services were being cancelled regularly due to lack of buses and drivers. I don't believe Derbyshire County council did due diligence to confirm Stagecoach had the resources without impacting their existing network. (And this is partly why I find it frustrating when only Hulleys get stick for cancelling services)
The loss of the X70 was to free resources so they could take over the 48/49 - which they have now offloaded for the 80. Oddly, the 80 is mainly commercial while the 48/49 were tendered, so they are taking more of a risk, although I suspect the rewards will be higher if run well.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Partly. I think the owner expects others to have the same work ethic he does which can lead to some friction. All local operators are short of staff though, I guess when you run services that are every 15-30 minutes it's less visible than when they are only hourly or two-hourly.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
They seem to be focusing on Chesterfield services, so having a base there makes the most sense. Baslow isn't a terrible location to serve Chesterfield if the capacity was there, but the depot is too cramped to allow any more vehicles to be added to the fleet. Makes much more sense to me to have a few spares there and run just the Peak District services out of it, and then have even just half a dozen vehicles elsewhere for the 80 / 55 and any other scraps Stagecoach may throw their way.
There is a patch of land on Goytside Road that is up for sale at the moment, that was previously used by the Ford dealer who used to have a showroom where Lidl is now for storing vans. Wouldn't take much to have a basic yard there and can be developed later on when money is more plentiful. Otherwise, the old GJ Holmes site in Clay Cross seems empty still.
There was talk a couple of years back also of the Hulleys owner buying a couple of coach operators in Clay Cross / Alfreton. The posts got pulled from the Facebook group so I'm guessing there were sensitive negotiations going on that they potentially compromised, but nothing seemed to come of it in the end.
Presumably as well as managing it and the cost of buying the land in the first place there must be some cost involved in applying for a new operating site with the TC?
The only financial cost of registering a new operating centre with the Traffic Commissioner is the £122 registration fee for doing so. However, expect to be asked to answer detailed questions on your business practices, staffing levels and especially availability of competent qualified Transport Managers for the number of vehicles that you want to operate. Being able to answer these questions both honestly and to the TC’s satisfaction is what proves expensive!!
The only financial cost of registering a new operating centre with the Traffic Commissioner is the £122 registration fee for doing so. However, expect to be asked to answer detailed questions on your business practices, staffing levels and especially availability of competent qualified Transport Managers for the number of vehicles that you want to operate. Being able to answer these questions both honestly and to the TC’s satisfaction is what proves expensive!!
That's what I was wondering, can Transport Managers cover more than one operating centre, or would they need to recruit more? And is there a limit to how many vehicles one TM can be responsible for?
While it's just a finger in the air guess, I'd imagine you be looking at a minimum of £250k to buy the site, do basic works (fencing, clearing and tidying up, possibly getting a portacabin or similar) and buying half a dozen decent buses to put in it. I can only imagine if you wanted to also add refuelling (to avoid trips back to Baslow) then that's going to need some complex paperwork as well. So, while expansion would give them a lot more scope, it isn't going to be easy to find that much money while renewing the existing fleet.
That's what I was wondering, can Transport Managers cover more than one operating centre, or would they need to recruit more? And is there a limit to how many vehicles one TM can be responsible for?
While it's just a finger in the air guess, I'd imagine you be looking at a minimum of £250k to buy the site, do basic works (fencing, clearing and tidying up, possibly getting a portacabin or similar) and buying half a dozen decent buses to put in it. I can only imagine if you wanted to also add refuelling (to avoid trips back to Baslow) then that's going to need some complex paperwork as well. So, while expansion would give them a lot more scope, it isn't going to be easy to find that much money while renewing the existing fleet.
Possible to rent/lease a site, and at the bare minimum you'd want a lock up yard and possibly a portacabin. No need for on site fuelling or maintenance, as buses can be refuelled at filling stations (using a fuel card, cash or a credit card) and maintenance can be undertaken at the workshop. If you have on site fuelling at your main depot you can schedule buses back to there. A lot of school bus operators run this way - you'd just go in once a week for the fuel.
A Transport Manager needs to be in place per every 30 vehicles in the fleet - so up to 30 needs one transport manager. Besides that cost, there's the c£3k needed to prove financial standing, plus more of that endless supply of new drivers and buses. Buses can be variable too - they range in price from not much for a complete shed, to £200k+ for something brand new. You can rent/lease them which is what most do with newer vehicles. Hulleys seem to operate at the lower end of the price bracket, so presumably get buses in bulk and do deals, then shift vehicles on after a time.
Possible to rent/lease a site, and at the bare minimum you'd want a lock up yard and possibly a portacabin. No need for on site fuelling or maintenance, as buses can be refuelled at filling stations (using a fuel card, cash or a credit card) and maintenance can be undertaken at the workshop. If you have on site fuelling at your main depot you can schedule buses back to there. A lot of school bus operators run this way - you'd just go in once a week for the fuel.
A Transport Manager needs to be in place per every 30 vehicles in the fleet - so up to 30 needs one transport manager. Besides that cost, there's the c£3k needed to prove financial standing, plus more of that endless supply of new drivers and buses. Buses can be variable too - they range in price from not much for a complete shed, to £200k+ for something brand new. You can rent/lease them which is what most do with newer vehicles. Hulleys seem to operate at the lower end of the price bracket, so presumably get buses in bulk and do deals, then shift vehicles on after a time.
Interesting, thanks. I've got to admit I've got no idea of the 'range' of a bus so assumed daily refuelling.
Just for clarity, is it 30 vehicles or 30 discs? I believe Hulleys have typically 25 vehicles for 19 discs, so if the former then they can't add many more before needing a second Transport Manager, which I guess is another issue with expansion.
Some of their current issues arise from buying complete sheds, so I had a quick search online for 8-10 year old vehicles to guestimate costs. They actually seem to have two contrasting ways of getting buses. Some they buy new and keep for much or all of their lifetime. I believe one of the 09 Solos was new for example. Others they acquire, run for a year or two (sometimes less...) until they can't keep them going any longer and replace with a similar age vehicle. They've gone through a lot of older Darts and Solos over the last few years in that way, while also adding two Evoras and an E200MMC which will likely still be in the fleet in the 2030s.
Interesting, thanks. I've got to admit I've got no idea of the 'range' of a bus so assumed daily refuelling.
Just for clarity, is it 30 vehicles or 30 discs? I believe Hulleys have typically 25 vehicles for 19 discs, so if the former then they can't add many more before needing a second Transport Manager, which I guess is another issue with expansion.
Some of their current issues arise from buying complete sheds, so I had a quick search online for 8-10 year old vehicles to guestimate costs. They actually seem to have two contrasting ways of getting buses. Some they buy new and keep for much or all of their lifetime. I believe one of the 09 Solos was new for example. Others they acquire, run for a year or two (sometimes less...) until they can't keep them going any longer and replace with a similar age vehicle. They've gone through a lot of older Darts and Solos over the last few years in that way, while also adding two Evoras and an E200MMC which will likely still be in the fleet in the 2030s.
I think there's a third way as well. Sometimes they buy middle-aged buses of a type they already have in the fleet, i.e Solos or E200s, and run them for a bit longer. I think if they did this more, there wouldn't be as big a problem.
I think there's a third way as well. Sometimes they buy middle-aged buses of a type they already have in the fleet, i.e Solos or E200s, and run them for a bit longer. I think if they did this more, there wouldn't be as big a problem.
That doesn't seem to have been the case of late unfortunately. Recent additions have included:
09 E400
57 Solo
23 Evora
23 E200MMC
57 E400
57 Solo
55 Scania on loan (Returned unused)
52 Trident (Withdrawn due to engine failure)
09 E200 MCV (Withdrawn due to corrosion)
08 E200 (Recently scrapped due to engine failure)
57 Solo
56 Omnicity on loan (Returned)
2x E200 MCV, one withdrawn.
2x 09 E400
Not to mention the open topper, and this is all in the last 18 months or so.
The last middle-aged buses I can think they added would be the 11 reg Solo and 64 Reg E200 & Streetlite which were added maybe 3 years ago, and the Streetlite has been moved on as it was non-standard in the fleet. As an enthusiast it is nice to see the variety, but in terms of running a reliable service I'm less sure this is the most sensible path, especially as they are taking on more and more evening services, meaning a decent proportion of the fleet is running 16-18 hours a day.
Interesting, thanks. I've got to admit I've got no idea of the 'range' of a bus so assumed daily refuelling.
Just for clarity, is it 30 vehicles or 30 discs? I believe Hulleys have typically 25 vehicles for 19 discs, so if the former then they can't add many more before needing a second Transport Manager, which I guess is another issue with expansion.
Some of their current issues arise from buying complete sheds, so I had a quick search online for 8-10 year old vehicles to guestimate costs. They actually seem to have two contrasting ways of getting buses. Some they buy new and keep for much or all of their lifetime. I believe one of the 09 Solos was new for example. Others they acquire, run for a year or two (sometimes less...) until they can't keep them going any longer and replace with a similar age vehicle. They've gone through a lot of older Darts and Solos over the last few years in that way, while also adding two Evoras and an E200MMC which will likely still be in the fleet in the 2030s.
My understanding is that it's on discs on the licence. The company would need a second transport manager. I thought they had a lot more than 19 discs! Range of a vehicle depends on the work it's doing, but work on 200 miles at the most.
I'd anticipate the Evoras and E200 MMC would be flipped some way along and they'd be replaced with older low floor buses. This raises cash. The old regime did buy new and keep for as long as humanly possible, whereas the new owner seems to flip vehicles quite often. Something like a batch of MCV Evolutions with dual doors would be rather cheap and available in bulk from the dealers. Likewise with the first generation ADL Enviro 200 ex London - available rather cheaply and presumably very pre-loved.
Guess we'll know if Breezer returns for 2024 - if the open topper appears for sale ahead of the winter then that'll suggest not?
I'm struggling to understand why a high turnover of vehicles makes good business sense. To be fair Hulleys do usually present buses in fleet colurs, so every purchase costs £3000 or so for a respray. If you ru n a vehicle for a little while, presumably you know what has been fixed, and what future repairs costs could be. Keeping standard fleet should also help. So why do Hulleys keep replacing their buses?
I'm struggling to understand why a high turnover of vehicles makes good business sense. To be fair Hulleys do usually present buses in fleet colurs, so every purchase costs £3000 or so for a respray. If you ru n a vehicle for a little while, presumably you know what has been fixed, and what future repairs costs could be. Keeping standard fleet should also help. So why do Hulleys keep replacing their buses?
Cashflow management? Selling vehicles fairly regularly ensures a supply of cash coming in to meet bills as they arise.
The last set of accounts filed reveal the business to have made a loss. Some of the fleet must be on lease given their value. That's a monthly payment or two to meet.
Flipping a vehicle or two here/there helps with those bills which will come along.
Cashflow management? Selling vehicles fairly regularly ensures a supply of cash coming in to meet bills as they arise.
The last set of accounts filed reveal the business to have made a loss. Some of the fleet must be on lease given their value. That's a monthly payment or two to meet.
Flipping a vehicle or two here/there helps with those bills which will come along.
My understanding is that it's on discs on the licence. The company would need a second transport manager. I thought they had a lot more than 19 discs! Range of a vehicle depends on the work it's doing, but work on 200 miles at the most.
I'd anticipate the Evoras and E200 MMC would be flipped some way along and they'd be replaced with older low floor buses. This raises cash. The old regime did buy new and keep for as long as humanly possible, whereas the new owner seems to flip vehicles quite often. Something like a batch of MCV Evolutions with dual doors would be rather cheap and available in bulk from the dealers. Likewise with the first generation ADL Enviro 200 ex London - available rather cheaply and presumably very pre-loved.
Guess we'll know if Breezer returns for 2024 - if the open topper appears for sale ahead of the winter then that'll suggest not?
From what I’ve been told the MMC is on a 12 month lease with an option to buy at the end, with the cash flow issues we can only assume they needed a bus fast, with the interior being stock it was probably already built & ready to go, while the ADLs are cheap to run they are awful for passenger comfort & they’ve got more rattles than a snake, has this helped with the decline of passengers ?
Cashflow management? Selling vehicles fairly regularly ensures a supply of cash coming in to meet bills as they arise.
The last set of accounts filed reveal the business to have made a loss. Some of the fleet must be on lease given their value. That's a monthly payment or two to meet.
Flipping a vehicle or two here/there helps with those bills which will come along.
They aren't really flipping vehicles though. Apart from the Streetlite everything that has left in the last year or more has been on the back of a wrecker.
I'd imagine they have some decent guaranteed income from tenders and BSIP so maybe that helps to pay for the Evoras and the MMC, but obviously isn't enough to allow them to rent or buy anything under 10 years old to refresh the rest of the fleet, so they just keep impulse buying when something breaks beyond economical repair.
Pure speculation here, but I wonder if there is backing to the parent company that isn't publicly known. I don't know if the depot was part of the sale but it would appear the vehicles where - the owner was one of the drivers, is it realistic that a driver can save up enough to buy a company, even a fairly modest one like Hulleys? The X57 was obviously going to be massively loss making for a long time, although it didn't help that Manchester didn't cough up on the fuel duty payments. Still, there must have been a decent budget put aside to be prepared to start that, especially during the pandemic.
But this only works if you sell an asset, and replace with a leased vehicle? Or if you replace a new vehicle with an old vehicle, but there is still the cost of repaining etc. In either case, you can only do that for so long, before all your vehicles are old or leased.
From what I’ve been told the MMC is on a 12 month lease with an option to buy at the end, with the cash flow issues we can only assume they needed a bus fast, with the interior being stock it was probably already built & ready to go, while the ADLs are cheap to run they are awful for passenger comfort & they’ve got more rattles than a snake, has this helped with the decline of passengers ?
Interesting, I'd not heard that. I'd assumed it was to order as it had to go straight back after delivery for rectification and was temporarily replaced by a dealer bus. They do need a minimum of 5 Euro VI buses for their Sheffield services, I guess 6 to cover for servicing / MOT etc. At the moment they are reliant on ex-London buses that have been retrofitted, but they are getting on and two have already had to be scrapped. Apparently also the depot isn't best laid out to dedicate buses to one particular service, so having a few more would help.
I do know they (and TM) got a temporary pass on the Sheffield ULEZ, not sure if that has expired or not.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
My understanding is that it's on discs on the licence. The company would need a second transport manager. I thought they had a lot more than 19 discs! Range of a vehicle depends on the work it's doing, but work on 200 miles at the most.
Guess we'll know if Breezer returns for 2024 - if the open topper appears for sale ahead of the winter then that'll suggest not?
I'm struggling to understand why a high turnover of vehicles makes good business sense. To be fair Hulleys do usually present buses in fleet colurs, so every purchase costs £3000 or so for a respray. If you ru n a vehicle for a little while, presumably you know what has been fixed, and what future repairs costs could be. Keeping standard fleet should also help. So why do Hulleys keep replacing their buses?
Only guess I have is they are basically doing a bus version of Bangernomics. A 15 year old bus costs a fraction what a 8-10 year old one does. You can replace it several times and even including respray costs it still works out cheaper. What that doesn't allow for us loss of customers due to the worse reliability and resulting service cancellations.
Thanks, I suspected they did but that does make their school-time services very tight on discs. Must also really mess things up when there is a breakdown as presumably they need to go to the broken down bus first to retrieve the disc?
But this only works if you sell an asset, and replace with a leased vehicle? Or if you replace a new vehicle with an old vehicle, but there is still the cost of repaining etc. In either case, you can only do that for so long, before all your vehicles are old or leased.
They aren't really flipping vehicles though. Apart from the Streetlite everything that has left in the last year or more has been on the back of a wrecker.
Pure speculation here, but I wonder if there is backing to the parent company that isn't publicly known. I don't know if the depot was part of the sale but it would appear the vehicles where - the owner was one of the drivers, is it realistic that a driver can save up enough to buy a company, even a fairly modest one like Hulleys? The X57 was obviously going to be massively loss making for a long time, although it didn't help that Manchester didn't cough up on the fuel duty payments. Still, there must have been a decent budget put aside to be prepared to start that, especially during the pandemic.
Sorry, I was assuming there were other 'new' vehicles in the fleet so I sit corrected
Possible for the owner to remortgage his home or take out a bank loan to purchase the business. In which case, those payments may take priority over other things. Would then explain why vehicles randomly come up for sale and why X57 bombed so fast - it was burning cash faster than it could be made. Equally, it's possible the owner doesn't own the yard, and it's being rented off the previous owners?
Does the company always repaint their vehicles? I've seen several photos of Go Coach buses working for Hulleys still in full livery.
Possible for the owner to remortgage his home or take out a bank loan to purchase the business. In which case, those payments may take priority over other things. Would then explain why vehicles randomly come up for sale and why X57 bombed so fast - it was burning cash faster than it could be made. Equally, it's possible the owner doesn't own the yard, and it's being rented off the previous owners?
There seems to be little rhyme or reason about what gets repainted and what doesn't. For example, a Dart ran around in all-over white for ages, got retro Hulleys branding eventually and was scrapped a few months later. The MCVs arrived in company livery despite being fairly old already and two only lasted a year or so. Others have been running around in white or previous liveries for a long time. I think at the moment unless they can get it painted before it arrives they are so much in need of working buses that repainting doesn't happen.
The X57 did run for a fair while all things considered. They did say they had funding to run it for a period but I think numbers didn't pick up as fast as they hoped, Manchester proved truculent and it was harder operationally than expected, leading to them giving up and concentrating closer to home.
The X57 did run for a fair while all things considered. They did say they had funding to run it for a period but I think numbers didn't pick up as fast as they hoped, Manchester proved truculent and it was harder operationally than expected, leading to them giving up and concentrating closer to home.
There are two very contrasting accounts on what happened. I've been told by the owner they submitted the paperwork and were still waiting for a response. He reckons they were owed in excess of £50k. He also mentioned they were still trying to bill them for use of timetable cases months after the service had been cancelled.
I've seen cryptic messages such as yours elsewhere that refute this, but with no detail. It may well be the owner is skewing things to his side, or outright lying, but when those claiming such don't back it up then it's hard to pay much heed.
RailUK was launched on 6th June 2005 - so we've hit 20 years being the UK's most popular railway community! Read more and celebrate this milestone with us in this thread!
