This has been touched on in the Southern 313 thread. My question is why does each franchisee have to have its own separate livery (and sometimes more than one). It can be confusing to the uninitiated, and they must make up a large proportion of passengers. Look at any other franchise arrangement - say Costa Coffee. There is one brand, one style, which means that wherever you are in the country you are already familiar with it and what it offers. Quality image control is handled centrally, so the information that the public requires is in a familiar format. These TOCs are surely (though probably not legally) in the same position as the bods running the coffee shop. There is not even (usually) like-for-like competition as an excuse to differentiate. Have three liveries: InterCity, Medium distance, short distance. Simples.
-
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!
Liveries - Why?
- Thread starter Oswyntail
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
90019
Established Member
It's just corporate branding, by the same token, you could say that Starbucks, Costa and all that have to have the same logo, just with different names on it, because they sell the same things.
And within companies, there are times when they don't want to associate one of their franchises with another, like Arriva Trains Wales and Arriva (Shh!) Cross Country.
There's also different companies wanting to make themselves distinguishable from each other, I mean, if you have a cr*p experience with one company, you'll try and avoid them next time you travel, but if all the trains are the same livery, how do you distinguish which is which?
And within companies, there are times when they don't want to associate one of their franchises with another, like Arriva Trains Wales and Arriva (Shh!) Cross Country.
There's also different companies wanting to make themselves distinguishable from each other, I mean, if you have a cr*p experience with one company, you'll try and avoid them next time you travel, but if all the trains are the same livery, how do you distinguish which is which?
Scotland's national livery will not be replaced at the turn of the franchise, and I think a similar thing should be adopted around the UK. A Welsh national livery would also be sensible. An English one would be harder to implement I think given the vast size of the area, but obviously not impossible. Intercity would be obvious, but more regional services, given that the units may well cover lots of different routes.
Perhaps, if privitisation is to stay, there should be set liveries for each operator which must not be changed? Aside from, of course, something like "Northern is operated by NedRail" on the side.
Perhaps, if privitisation is to stay, there should be set liveries for each operator which must not be changed? Aside from, of course, something like "Northern is operated by NedRail" on the side.
Yes, but, as they are FRANCHISES, the corporation they should be branding is the still publicly owned national railway network. And, while I take your point about distinguishing from crip brands elsewhere, there is an argument that says overall branding would tend to draw standards higher - at the moment the companies are in their own protected bubble and have no real public incentive to compare their service with others.
driver9000
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2008
- Messages
- 4,250
I have always advocated national liveries similar to what BR did (IC, RR etc). When a franchise ends old liveries end up looking tatty and faded to the point where it verges on embarrasing, with a national identity like ScotRail has done there is only a logo to change - which all operators do at changeover time anyway and mismatched and obsolete schemes running round for years after that particular operator has left the scene.
A common identity system was adopted for Londons buses when LTB was broken up - although operators are allowed to vary the basic red up to a certain limit and it works very well giving a unified look.
A common identity system was adopted for Londons buses when LTB was broken up - although operators are allowed to vary the basic red up to a certain limit and it works very well giving a unified look.
generalvegitable
Member
having one single livery for trains is a good idea, if you look at about half of the mk3 coaches they are still in the old virgin livery
rail-britain
Established Member
- Joined
- 12 Aug 2007
- Messages
- 4,102
Each company is a franchise in its own right
It was the same with the bus privitisation, one brand became a ridiculous number of companies some with two or more liveries
The public may have been confused by the numerous liveries, but equally competition helped drive the market
The same model was used for the railway, but the industry failed to ensure fair route competition
One final consideration is that as franchises change hands there can be a transition between liveries
It was the same during sectorisation, where there should have been just 7 plain liveries, but in reality there were more than 40 in use!
It was the same with the bus privitisation, one brand became a ridiculous number of companies some with two or more liveries
The public may have been confused by the numerous liveries, but equally competition helped drive the market
The same model was used for the railway, but the industry failed to ensure fair route competition
One final consideration is that as franchises change hands there can be a transition between liveries
It was the same during sectorisation, where there should have been just 7 plain liveries, but in reality there were more than 40 in use!
Daimler
Established Member
I would like to see more of the 'Scotland's Railway' type of branding around the UK - namely permanent brands for each franchise, with a non corporation-specific name - Southern or London Midland fit this bill, and it would be nice to think (though probably wrong) that the branding will be retained in these areas if/when GoVia lose the franchise - certainly, it seems a shame for new signs to be put up all over London Midland stations (as is happening at the moment) to simply bin them in 6/7 years' time.
I have no particular objection to each franchise having its own livery - I don't feel a return to a countrywide livery is necessary, simply less frequent changes for each area.
I have no particular objection to each franchise having its own livery - I don't feel a return to a countrywide livery is necessary, simply less frequent changes for each area.
northwichcat
Veteran Member
We don't need to see a Welsh livery on Arriva Trains Wales Chester-Crewe shuttles, for the reason that the service doesn't even go in to Wales.
I think local trains, regional trains and intercity trains branding would be better. Although, you would notice a big difference between 142s and 165s on local services and then should have regional livery on XC 170s and intercity livery on other XC trains.
I think local trains, regional trains and intercity trains branding would be better. Although, you would notice a big difference between 142s and 165s on local services and then should have regional livery on XC 170s and intercity livery on other XC trains.
The only thing with "local", "regional" and "intercity" is that some trains aren't restricted to that route. For example, a service from A-B is a local train and from A-C is a regional train. But the same stock may operate on these routes. I know this happens in Scotrail, and I'm sure it must happen elsewhere as well. I think "local" and "regional" branding would either be restrictive or, if units are in the same pool, cause a bit of confusion.
It's also pushing on "nationalisation by stealth" in my opinion. It's probably happening in Scotland as well, but Scotland's railway is a single franchise whereas with three liveries in England you would lose the distinction. As long as the railways are privatised, I think there should be individual brands for each franchise, preferably a "static" identity like the one we've seen in Scotland.
It's also pushing on "nationalisation by stealth" in my opinion. It's probably happening in Scotland as well, but Scotland's railway is a single franchise whereas with three liveries in England you would lose the distinction. As long as the railways are privatised, I think there should be individual brands for each franchise, preferably a "static" identity like the one we've seen in Scotland.
asylumxl
Established Member
I think companies shuld do like SWT has done, different liveries for different types of services.
EM2
Established Member
But to use your own analogy, Costa is a franchise that sells coffee. Caffe Nero is another franchise that sells coffee. Starbucks is also a franchise that sells coffee.
So why should they have different branding? I know they are all independent companies but they are all selling the same product.
It's all to do with catching the customer's eye. You have to make your product more attractive
To use the same analogy, Starbucks in St. Enoch Centre is branded as Starbucks, Starbucks in the West End is branded as Starbucks, Starbucks in London is branded as Starbucks, Starbucks in Manchester is branded as Starbucks, Starbucks in Seattle is branded as Starbucks...
Costa, Starbucks and Caffe Nero all sell coffee, but they sell their own products. Starbucks, for example, is the only company to sell a Frappuccino. The products are actually different.
The individual branches have the right to sell Starbucks' product. Similarly, the railway franchises have the right to run the country's railways in their area.
You seem to assume that each individual company is the franchise (like MacDonalds, Burger King...), but in reality each individual company is a "branch" of the franchise (ie, all "MacDonalds"). To say, therefore, that they shouldn't all have the same branding is like saying that Starbucks should have a different design for each individual outlet.
Failed Unit
Established Member
I wonder if railways had the real franchise thing going on what it would be like. We wouldn't for example have the massive differences in on board provision as every inter-city operator would need to offer an at seat service for first class for example (rather than in Virgins case none north of Preston if you are on a Voyager but a good one if you are on a pendo
) Likewise a 50 mile journey would cost the same whereever you are in the country. (As far as I am aware a big mac cost the same everywhere in the UK) Even better ticket restrictions would be the same everywhere so you don't get the I need to excess you as this fare is set by XC not EMT situation! (You don't get charged for extra's one branch of burger king but not another like you do with seat reservations on IC routes)I don't think that having IC, RR and NSE franchises would be a bad thing with levels of service nailed down, at least then we wouldn't get a gready franchise like national express eroding a high standard of service.
EM2
Established Member
I've bolded a few words as I think they're important. Let's say you live in Derby and you don't travel too much. But you know that Cross-Country, Northern and East Midlands Trains run through Derby station.
Your ticket is for East Midlands Trains. You know which train to get because it says East Midlands Trains in big letters on the side. If they all looked the same, how would you know which train your ticket is valid on?
Sorry to break your analogy, but Starbucks have just rebranded one of their outlets... in Seattle, of all places. It's the start of a new concept from them- having individually branded coffee shops.
37401
Established Member
I think FGW have done the most amount of changes Fag packet> Barbie (with the white stipe> the one thats like barbie that i for got the name of> FGW Neon blue
Bloody hell, I had to pick that particular brand didn't I
Go for Costa or MacDonalds, though. I'm sure they've still got the same branding throughout.--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Strangely enough; I support different liveries for different operators. Even in Scotland, we would have the same conundrum; "Virgin Only" tickets may be used on NXEC or TPE, "Scotrail only" on NXEC...
I was just saying that you've got the wrong end of the stick, and that the franchised operation by definition supports the idea of a single brand. However, I think they should be separate brands with a static livery for each one.
37401
Established Member
even during BR and before then with LMS GWR ect there has always been liveries, not only does it help to identify on from another but i think its much nicer than the undercoat provided by the ROSCO
Bloody hell, I had to pick that particular brand didn't I
I once went to a McDonalds in France that was styled and decorated as a fifties American diner, including special uniforms. There were mini jukeboxes dotted around connected to a central sound system; if you picked a particular song most of the staff had to come out into the restraunt and do a dance.On reflection, taking a coach load of school kids in may well have been a nasty thing to do
It's OK, though, I do understand your point, and the vast majority of McDonalds/Starbucks etc are decked out as close to identical as possible.
Last edited:
37401
Established Member
generalvegitable
Member
so do I, it was my brother. when he applied he never showered, he was rejected for being too cleanI know someone applying for a job who was rejected by McDonalds
Just on the same token,
As most of these franchises have a lot of movement (ie a tendency to change hands every so often) How much does it cost to re-livery all their associated stock? Surely this would be a waste of funds knowing that the franchise may change hands at any point and the process started again? Would rather the costs put into better servicing of the franchise?
As most of these franchises have a lot of movement (ie a tendency to change hands every so often) How much does it cost to re-livery all their associated stock? Surely this would be a waste of funds knowing that the franchise may change hands at any point and the process started again? Would rather the costs put into better servicing of the franchise?
Mystic Force
Member
- Joined
- 18 May 2009
- Messages
- 105
I wonder if the main beneficiaries of privitisation are the the train painting companies, every new franchise paints their train almost straight away and when ever the trains are relocated they have to be repainted. Maybe we should look see how much contribution these people are making to various political parties?
Waverley125
Member
we should have distinct liveries, and distinct regional franchises (I'd prefer nationalisation and then regionalisation, but TYG) to promote identity. E.g.
Scotrail
Trains Wales
London Midland
Great Western
Southern
Southeastern
Northern
Eastern
only problem is some, e.g. ECML/WCML would cross over. WCML would be london midland, northern & scotrail, while ECML would be Eastern (to Retford I'd imagine), Northern (to Berwick) and Scotrail, while the newcastle-edinburgh stopper that's been discussed on other threads would be in both northern & scottish.
Far better, IMO, to have a set of rail liveries e.g. for local PTE (Centro, metro, SPT), long-distance XC and london trains (intercity) and regional. To take an example, Leeds would have
Intercity-current NXEC, TPE & XC. Would be classified as 'fast' services.
Metro-Northern services within the Leeds area (Skipton, Harrogate, Doncaster etc.)
Northern-Northern services going beyond leeds e.g. Manchester Victoria, Hull, Sheffield, Carlisle.
Scotrail
Trains Wales
London Midland
Great Western
Southern
Southeastern
Northern
Eastern
only problem is some, e.g. ECML/WCML would cross over. WCML would be london midland, northern & scotrail, while ECML would be Eastern (to Retford I'd imagine), Northern (to Berwick) and Scotrail, while the newcastle-edinburgh stopper that's been discussed on other threads would be in both northern & scottish.
Far better, IMO, to have a set of rail liveries e.g. for local PTE (Centro, metro, SPT), long-distance XC and london trains (intercity) and regional. To take an example, Leeds would have
Intercity-current NXEC, TPE & XC. Would be classified as 'fast' services.
Metro-Northern services within the Leeds area (Skipton, Harrogate, Doncaster etc.)
Northern-Northern services going beyond leeds e.g. Manchester Victoria, Hull, Sheffield, Carlisle.
I was actually thinking about this the other day...
We should revert back to pre privatisation liveries.. (albeit modernised ones...)
Intercity, Network South East, Regional Railways etc... with the actual franchisee's name on the train somewhere.
A little like in London with London Buses now. They standardised that all buses should be 80% red, then 90% and now i think the rule is 100% red...)
We should revert back to pre privatisation liveries.. (albeit modernised ones...)
Intercity, Network South East, Regional Railways etc... with the actual franchisee's name on the train somewhere.
A little like in London with London Buses now. They standardised that all buses should be 80% red, then 90% and now i think the rule is 100% red...)
- Status