Virgin Franchise Extended

[swt_passenger]

A new operator is likely to have teething problems, so no, I'm not very confident that AGA (they should call themselves that ) will be sailing smoothly during the Olympics.

I think the Olympics are a red herring. If the franchise had changed hands next April as originally planned, why would exactly the same staff and middle management, operating the same trains on the same timetable - until Dec 2012 - be likely to have teething problems?

Apart from when FGW negotiated away a significant number of DMUs, when was the last franchise change to suffer major issues immediately after it changed hands, rather than after a subsequent SLC change?

 

[Zoe]

Apart from when FGW negotiated away a significant number of DMUs, when was the last franchise change to suffer major issues immediately after it changed hands, rather than after a subsequent SLC change?

I don't know the exact details but was it really FGWs decision to have less trains? The SRA back in 2005 specified quite a few service cuts and obviously this would result in the need for fewer trains. First were able to prevent many of these cuts and could run the service with fewer trains and even improved some commuter services by using HSTs instead of DMUs.

 

[tbtc]

I think the Olympics are a red herring. If the franchise had changed hands next April as originally planned

I think I agree with you - its one thing to use it as an excuse for NXEA/ Abellio, but I doubt it'd really affect the West Coast franchise.

Odds are that when a franchise changes hands, "normal" passengers would never notice the difference anyway.

 

[pemma]

Odds are that when a franchise changes hands, "normal" passengers would never notice the difference anyway.

They'll probably notice the change in name of the train. I remember some passengers had confusion when they were told Arriva Trains Northern staff were on strike because the TPE trains and timetables were red and had transpenninexpress branding on them so they didn't think they were Arriva Trains Northern services.

 

[sprinterguy]

They'll probably notice the change in name of the train.

In the case of Virgin, I wouldn't count on it if the Crosscountry franchise is anything to go by.

 

[bengolding]

9-car Pendolinos will not do "just fine" on the Birmingham to Scotland route. They have just 294 Standard Class seats, compared to a Super Voyager which has 236 Standard Class seats. That's not a huge jump in capacity! I traveled on a Pendolino to Edinburgh earlier (between Birmingham and Crewe) and almost every seat was taken in Standard Class. If a Super Voyager was running that service, it would be a squeeze to fit everyone into the train!

I appreciate that not every train on this route needs to be an 11-car Pendolino (morning services to Birmingham are fairly quiet for example, on a Super Voyager), but some services to Edinburgh can get packed after Crewe.

I'm shocked All Line Rover has downgraded himself to Standard Class!

I was on the 13:17 Preston to Birmingham last week, which aside from this week, is a double Voyager. 472 seats is far better than 294 on a single 390. But the problem then arises that people cram onto one Voyager with the other one being half empty, e.g. boarding the rear Voyager at both Warrington and Wigan heading south. All of the two hourly Edinburgh services need to be either a double Voyager or a lengthened Pendolino. I'm sure All Line Rover will be delighted that with more Pendolinos on this route, he can travel First Class far more often with cheap and plentiful First Advances .

 

[marks87]

Really Virgin was always prefered to introduce the new stock to service once the franchise was extended, giving the franchise to Directly Operated Railways was always a threat in case the financial negotiations didnt go well. In practise it would have been a nightmare.

Is it really a threat?

Surely Virgin know that while DOR hold the ECML franchise, they can't touch the WCML without getting into bother with the Competition Commission.

 

[tbtc]

They'll probably notice the change in name of the train. I remember some passengers had confusion when they were told Arriva Trains Northern staff were on strike because the TPE trains and timetables were red and had transpenninexpress branding on them so they didn't think they were Arriva Trains Northern services.

In the case of Virgin, I wouldn't count on it if the Crosscountry franchise is anything to go by.

I agree with sprinterguy - I know a few people in Sheffield who still refer to Cross Country services as being "Virgin" - I'm sure it'd be the same if Virgin "lost" the West Coast franchise too

 

[Zoe]

Surely Virgin know that while DOR hold the ECML franchise, they can't touch the WCML without getting into bother with the Competition Commission.

Directly Operated Railways is the Operator of Last Resort so would take over the services until a new franchise could be let. DOR are not competing for the franchise.

 

[marks87]

Directly Operated Railways is the Operator of Last Resort so would take over the services until a new franchise could be let. DOR are not competing for the franchise.

Yes, but they're still a company and holding both the ECML and WCML gives them a near-monopoly on Scotland and north England - London services.

 

[MCR247]

But I doubt that would matter, as it isn't a proper franchise

 

[tbtc]

Yes, but they're still a company and holding both the ECML and WCML gives them a near-monopoly on Scotland and north England - London services.

Which rule is that in breach of?

 

[Zoe]

Yes, but they're still a company and holding both the ECML and WCML gives them a near-monopoly on Scotland and north England - London services.

As I said above they are the operator of last resort, the franchise hasn't been let to them and the Railways Act 1993 explicitly prohibits that.

 

[WatcherZero]

DoR are Government management contractors on a annual retainer, they shouldnt really be considered a commercial Toc. They would only run a franchise until a tender could be organised and only as a last resort if they fail to negotiate an extension or short tender.

 

[YorkshireRider]

Is it really a threat?

Surely Virgin know that while DOR hold the ECML franchise, they can't touch the WCML without getting into bother with the Competition Commission.

Did the competition/monoplies commission say anything the last 2 times virgin put bids in to operate the ECML in both 2005 and 2007? Surely virgin wouldnt have put bids in if they knew of any problems?

 

[jopsuk]

Just thinking through the seating of the various formations:
Current formation: 294:145 = 2.03 Standard per first
11 car: 446:145 = 3.08 Standard per first, assuming same seating for new carriages as the TS
370:99 = 3.74 Standard per first - if a MF was given the Standard class seating of the TS
328:119 = 2.76 Standard per first, if the MF had 26 seats taken out and a partition plus 34 Standard class seats (as a conservative estimate of how much could be fitted in)
218:145 = 1.50 Standard per first - the 8 car layout!

What's the ratio in:
an East Coast mrk4 set
an East Coast, a MML, an XC and the various FGW HST configurations
the Virgin "Pretendolino"
The various configurations of 22x?
The East Anglia mark 3s
throw in the Chiltern "Silver" sets, counting the Business Zone as 1st

just as a comparison?

 

[tbtc]

Just thinking through the seating of the various formations:
Current formation: 294:145 = 2.03 Standard per first
11 car: 446:145 = 3.08 Standard per first, assuming same seating for new carriages as the TS
370:99 = 3.74 Standard per first - if a MF was given the Standard class seating of the TS
328:119 = 2.76 Standard per first, if the MF had 26 seats taken out and a partition plus 34 Standard class seats (as a conservative estimate of how much could be fitted in)
218:145 = 1.50 Standard per first - the 8 car layout!

What's the ratio in:
an East Coast mrk4 set
an East Coast, a MML, an XC and the various FGW HST configurations
the Virgin "Pretendolino"
The various configurations of 22x?
The East Anglia mark 3s
throw in the Chiltern "Silver" sets, counting the Business Zone as 1st

just as a comparison?

Thats a very interesting question, and one which I don't have the answer to, but I'd put my tuppence on the EMT Meridians having a high percentage of First Class on the five coach sets that have 1.5 coaches of First and 3.5 coaches of Standard.

 

[HH]

Did the competition/monoplies commission say anything the last 2 times virgin put bids in to operate the ECML in both 2005 and 2007? Surely virgin wouldnt have put bids in if they knew of any problems?

They wouldn't say anything until Virgin won. Why put the effort in (time/money) on something that might not (did not) happen.

 

[Zoe]

There isn't much competition though between the two routes, they serve different markets.

 

[WatcherZero]

Even going all the way to Scotland West Coast mainly serves Glasgow and East Coast mainly serves Edinburgh.

 

[sprinterguy]

What's the ratio in:
an East Coast mrk4 set
an East Coast, a MML, an XC and the various FGW HST configurations
the Virgin "Pretendolino"
The various configurations of 22x?
The East Anglia mark 3s
throw in the Chiltern "Silver" sets, counting the Business Zone as 1st

just as a comparison?

East Coast mark 4 set: 134/378
East Coast HST: 113/445
MML HST: 112/355
XC HST: 70/373 (7 carriage formation)

7-Car 222: 106/236
5-Car 222: 50/192
4-Car 222: 33/148

Chiltern "Silver Trains": 30/288 (5 carriage formation)

What are the formations of the Pretendolino and the East Anglian mark 3 rakes? The various FGW HST formations are too convoluted for me to attempt to fathom. My figures have been collated from the data in the Platform 5 Combined Volume.

 

[YorkshireRider]

Im pretty sure that figure for standard seats on the EC mark IV has missed off the seats in front of the buffet, it should be 404.

 

[Badger]

Why would it be a problem for one TOC to run both routes, but not for say, Cross Country to have the sole Birmingham to Leicester train, or London Midland the sole Birmingham to Lichfield trains? I don't know how concepts of unfair competition can exist on something like rail where there are typically only a few operators anyway.

 

[Zoe]

Why would it be a problem for one TOC to run both routes, but not for say, Cross Country to have the sole Birmingham to Leicester train, or London Midland the sole Birmingham to Lichfield trains? I don't know how concepts of unfair competition can exist on something like rail where there are typically only a few operators anyway.

I'm not sure it would be a problem as there would still have been different companies competing for the franchises even if they both went to the same company.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Why would it be a problem for one TOC to run both routes, but not for say, Cross Country to have the sole Birmingham to Leicester train, or London Midland the sole Birmingham to Lichfield trains? I don't know how concepts of unfair competition can exist on something like rail where there are typically only a few operators anyway.

Well i think it is something to do with the fact that for example. London birmingham is main trunk route. so having a monopoly over routes means you can charge what you want (to an extent) because there is no competition and people will always want london birmingham by train. But birmingham to lichfield is a local commuter route so even if it is only one operator they are drivent o keep fares low to make people catch the train at all. One possible reason im sure there are more technical ones.

 

[IanXC]

I think the Competition Commission wouldn't be concerned with ECML and WCML being with the same operator. Its a question of considering how much of each franchise's business is London to the Central Belt, compared to what competition there is from other modes of transport and what restriction the operator would face on pricing (eg regulated fares).

 

[sprinterguy]

Im pretty sure that figure for standard seats on the EC mark IV has missed off the seats in front of the buffet, it should be 404.

Yes, you're quite right. I miscalculated.

 

[cle]

Competition works on only a few routes that we've seen - mainly Gatwick/Brighton and Birmingham, through virtue of different London terminals and routes.

GC isn't true competition to York as it's just the same.

Manchester could work if a Rio style express up the MML was brought in, especially if fast (Leicester, Derby, Stockport only?).

Leeds via MML isn't so competitive I guess. Another option I suppose is West Country via Waterloo, which goes on and is good for Wiltshire (Warminster, BOA, Trowbridge) but too slow to be meaningful for Exeter, for example.

 

[pemma]

I agree with sprinterguy - I know a few people in Sheffield who still refer to Cross Country services as being "Virgin" - I'm sure it'd be the same if Virgin "lost" the West Coast franchise too

I think it'll depend what the next franchise is called. The Cross Country franchise is called CrossCountry not Arriva CrossCountry. Virgin used the name Cross Country in some instances anyway e.g. on their route maps they referred to Cross Country routes and on rail travel vouchers they issued for delays on Cross Country routes they said Cross Country Trains Limited. Therefore, a lot of people could think the change in name is just a rebranding exercise by Virgin.

If the new West Coast franchise is called West Coast Trains the same thing will happen. If it's called First West Coast, Arriva West Coast etc. then more people will notice the change in company operating the service.

 

[tbtc]

Why would it be a problem for one TOC to run both routes, but not for say, Cross Country to have the sole Birmingham to Leicester train, or London Midland the sole Birmingham to Lichfield trains? I don't know how concepts of unfair competition can exist on something like rail where there are typically only a few operators anyway.

I think the "competition" aspect gets exaggerated - there are several "point to point" journeys (run by a single TOC) which are bigger than the entire "London to Scotland" market.

For example, there is no competition on London to Manchester services.

There have also been a few examples of one company owning two TOCs in the same area (Valley Lines and Wales & West, Central Trains and Midland Mainline, NXEA and C2C, Connex South Central and Connex South Eastern...), which suggests that the "no one TOC can have a monopoly" argument is more a hypothetical one.

There will always be one TOC with a monopoly on some routes, its a fact of life, but there will always be more competition from cars/ buses/ coaches/ planes...

I think it'll depend what the next franchise is called. The Cross Country franchise is called CrossCountry not Arriva CrossCountry. Virgin used the name Cross Country in some instances anyway e.g. on their route maps they referred to Cross Country routes and on rail travel vouchers they issued for delays on Cross Country routes they said Cross Country Trains Limited. Therefore, a lot of people could think the change in name is just a rebranding exercise by Virgin.

If the new West Coast franchise is called West Coast Trains the same thing will happen. If it's called First West Coast, Arriva West Coast etc. then more people will notice the change in company operating the service.

There was someone on here earlier this week asking about when "GNER" would be getting new trains for the East Coast franchise, apparently not appreciating that its been a long time since GNER operated that service.

People in Sheffield still refer to London services as the Midland Mainline one - it takes a long time to change perception, and I don't think the "average" passenger pays too much attention to that kind of thing (as long as their train turns up).