WCML InterCity Franchise

[CheshireCrusty]

pt-mad: "Price seems to be more a factor than it was though from my experiences. Some customers may have been willing to pay more to travel flash, fast and to be seen to be on a Virgin Train."

I believe the incredible brand loyalty to Virgin is partly because of the price competitive Advance tickets sold by Virgin even for shoulder and peak travel provided you book your seat in advance using their booking systems. In my case my Manchester to London tickets never cost me more than half the equivalent "national" fare (Anytime or Offpeak tickets).

I particularly fear the introduction of a national "Oyster" form of ticketing will significantly increase my ticket costs and also discourage seat booking in advance and thereby lead to significantly more overcrowding on popular services. At least with the Virgin system you know that if Advance tickets are not offered for a particular train or are more than or close to the national fares - that train will be full and standing and their system gives you the tools to consider an alternative. This more than compensates for any inconvenience of having a set travel time (perhaps the rebooking fee for changing an advance ticket to another train could be lower). I do not find it a hardship to book an earlier or a later train if that will make my journey more comfortable and cheaper.

I also like the ability to choose/change your particular seat at the time of booking on their online system.

If I don't feel I am getting value and equivalent service from any new franchise holder, I will return to the car for my trips to London (perhaps stopping short of Central London and completing my journey by Tube or Overground) as I did before my conversion to Virgin Trains.

 

[pt_mad]

For them, this is quite diplomatic. It is emphasising the advantages of Virgin Trains' service and it's only implicit that they're better than Chiltern. I am not saying I'd go for it if I were a marketing manager, but it's in reasonably good humour mainly because it's absolutely true. VT do run a faster and more frequent service, Chiltern certainly wouldn't argue against that.

However, VT are 100% not above ludicrous gutter-rolling 'attack ads'. This one says "Time is money. Chiltern Railways haven't quite grasped this."

View attachment 62129

Directly mentioning your competitors for no other reason than to insult them is a serious marketing faux pas. But that's exactly what they do.

How did they ever get away with that?? (The billboard naming Chiltern)?

 

[Starmill]

How did they ever get away with that?? (The billboard naming Chiltern)?

Well they just did it, and it wasn't against the rules?

Or do you mean how did they do it and not face a negative customer response? To which the answer is, I'm fairly sure they did and don't care. Their corporate swaggering arrogance most definitely turns me off from them. But then, frequently for me, there's no realistic rail alternative.

 

[Starmill]

I particularly fear the introduction of a national "Oyster" form of ticketing will significantly increase my ticket costs and also discourage seat booking in advance and thereby lead to significantly more overcrowding on popular services. At least with the Virgin system you know that if Advance tickets are not offered for a particular train or are more than or close to the national fares - that train will be full and standing and their system gives you the tools to consider an alternative.

Is this post serious? Are you just trolling us...

 

[pt_mad]

Well they just did it, and it wasn't against the rules?

Or do you mean how did they do it and not face a negative customer response? To which the answer is, I'm fairly sure they did and don't care. Their corporate swaggering arrogance most definitely turns me off from them. But then, frequently for me, there's no realistic rail alternative.

Marketing can be really intreging. On one hand, you have say Aldi who have had TV ads where they say you can get this for this much (supermarket name shown), or you can get this for this much at Aldi (unbranded products and more of them shown). Kind of factual. I think Lidl are doing a similar thing at the moment, showing an expensive bottle of Alcohol, and then a selection of products for X occasion for a cheaper price.

The billboard (the poster posted the image of) saying the rival (Chiltern) hadn't quite grasped time is money yet. How did they know Chiltern hadn't grasped that? To be fair they are limited by the linespeeds obviously, as would any operator be on the route as things stand.

 

[tbtc]

Marketing can be really intreging. On one hand, you have say Aldi who have had TV ads where they say you can get this for this much (supermarket name shown), or you can get this for this much at Aldi (unbranded products and more of them shown). Kind of factual. I think Lidl are doing a similar thing at the moment, showing an expensive bottle of Alcohol, and then a selection of products for X occasion for a cheaper price

<off-topic> those Aldi ads are a bit cheeky as they tend to compare the cost of a BIG BRAND product at a large supermarket with the OWN BRAND Aldi equivalent - seems a bit of a false comparison as you can obviously buy cheaper own-brand products at Tesco or buy big-brand products at Aldi </off-topic>

Marketing is a funny thing. Companies spend millions of pounds on it but nobody ever wants to admit to being "impressionable" enough for it to sway their own decisions - look at how the Brexiters deny that the Russian votes influenced their votes - just like nobody wants to admit that they were scammed (and will complain about the people pointing out the scam, rather than the scammers), nobody wants to admit that their decisions were because of adverts/ marketing/ branding - we want to believe that we are too smart to fall for such things.

Companies under the Virgin-umbrella obviously spend huge sums promoting their various brands (radio, banking, trains...) - these hard nosed commercial companies seem to think that it's worth spending money (that could otherwise be used as profit for shareholders) on all of these adverts - yet people on here seem to treat the idea of boasting of your services seems a bit grubby and unbecoming. Strange that companies would do that if people think that the adverts make no difference.

Not just a Virgin thing, look at the way that bus enthusiasts complain about the "really good bus company" (Trent) or how First dared to claim that they were "transforming travel" - I think people would be happier if they had a sackcloth/ashes uniform and didn't dare try to boast or attract new passengers! Imagine if such people found out there was a world beyond public transport where lots of companies boast about what a great place they are to work, encourage new people to purchase their products and even give the impression that their service is rather fantastic!

 

[pt_mad]

<off-topic> those Aldi ads are a bit cheeky as they tend to compare the cost of a BIG BRAND product at a large supermarket with the OWN BRAND Aldi equivalent - seems a bit of a false comparison as you can obviously buy cheaper own-brand products at Tesco or buy big-brand products at Aldi </off-topic>

Marketing is a funny thing. Companies spend millions of pounds on it but nobody ever wants to admit to being "impressionable" enough for it to sway their own decisions - look at how the Brexiters deny that the Russian votes influenced their votes - just like nobody wants to admit that they were scammed (and will complain about the people pointing out the scam, rather than the scammers), nobody wants to admit that their decisions were because of adverts/ marketing/ branding - we want to believe that we are too smart to fall for such things.

Companies under the Virgin-umbrella obviously spend huge sums promoting their various brands (radio, banking, trains...) - these hard nosed commercial companies seem to think that it's worth spending money (that could otherwise be used as profit for shareholders) on all of these adverts - yet people on here seem to treat the idea of boasting of your services seems a bit grubby and unbecoming. Strange that companies would do that if people think that the adverts make no difference.

Not just a Virgin thing, look at the way that bus enthusiasts complain about the "really good bus company" (Trent) or how First dared to claim that they were "transforming travel" - I think people would be happier if they had a sackcloth/ashes uniform and didn't dare try to boast or attract new passengers! Imagine if such people found out there was a world beyond public transport where lots of companies boast about what a great place they are to work, encourage new people to purchase their products and even give the impression that their service is rather fantastic!

Going back to stuff like the Fly VT campaign. Could we say that that was still in the era where the brand could still ride the success of the still modern tilting train and make comparisons to the well known Virgin Airline?

I suppose this is the sort of thing we might see back when HS2 gets up and running, a beat the plane sort of thing.

 

[Starmill]

on all of these adverts - yet people on here seem to treat the idea of boasting of your services seems a bit grubby and unbecoming.

I don't think anybody really thinks that a good bit of bragging is grubby or unfair. It's essentially the point. A significant section of Virgin's positive marketing is actually pretty good. Emphasising hard qualities like frequency or speed is effective and it's a respectable reward. Some people might not be taken in, or not like the colours, but many will.

The attitude changes when the marketing is negative though. Shouting directly about how crap your competitors are is quite grubby. Hinting at your superiority in a tasteful, tactful way is usually fine. But groundlessly insulting another company (e.g. announcing that they don't understand something that, in reality, they probably do understand, just to be facetious and to try to make them look bad) is very unlikely to win you many of their customers. Chiltern have done it too, they once put up a sign that said "£160 return from Birmingham to London? Virgin' on the ridiculous!". GWR have done it too. They put up ads at Marylebone LU that said "Chiltern Railways, what took you so long?".

 

[Bletchleyite]

<off-topic> those Aldi ads are a bit cheeky as they tend to compare the cost of a BIG BRAND product at a large supermarket with the OWN BRAND Aldi equivalent - seems a bit of a false comparison as you can obviously buy cheaper own-brand products at Tesco or buy big-brand products at Aldi </off-topic>

You can't, mostly. Aldi primarily only sells own brand stuff.

 

[Bletchleyite]

How did they ever get away with that?? (The billboard naming Chiltern)?

As long as it's factual and on a subject of something that is already public (i.e. not libellous/slanderous) it's perfectly allowed. It's a fact that VT costs more than Chiltern and that VT is quicker than Chiltern. That's all it's pushing - that that extra speed is worth paying for.

 

[43074]

So why do we still get the same bunch of cretins winning franchises then? I frankly don’t see how past experience is taken into account. A good example is SWR.

Probably because what the DfT perceive as good past experience does not always equate to good experience from the point of view of the customer - for instance, FGW implemented the DfT specified December 2006 timetable ticking all the boxes there, but for the customer it resulted in overcrowding and fewer services after the said department sent various 150s to ATW and 153s/158s off lease. Likewise FCC was profitable (and hence paid a premium to the Department) but had a real issue with cleanliness and overcrowding as far as their passengers were concerned.

 

[43096]

Probably because what the DfT perceive as good past experience does not always equate to good experience from the point of view of the customer - for instance, FGW implemented the DfT specified December 2006 timetable ticking all the boxes there, but for the customer it resulted in overcrowding and fewer services after the said department sent various 150s to ATW and 153s/158s off lease. Likewise FCC was profitable (and hence paid a premium to the Department) but had a real issue with cleanliness and overcrowding as far as their passengers were concerned.

I suspect you’re right. So past experience = DfT’s “teacher’s pet”. It’s the only explanation for Abellio getting East Mids: who in their right mind would give them another franchise with total fleet replacement after the mess of ScotRail and Anglia fleet introductions?

No wonder Stagecoach have struggled: as Ian Walmsley put it in Modern Railways “the company does have a severe handicap: it knows what it is doing.”

 

[Bletchleyite]

I suspect you’re right. So past experience = DfT’s “teacher’s pet”. It’s the only explanation for Abellio getting East Mids: who in their right mind would give them another franchise with total fleet replacement after the mess of ScotRail and Anglia fleet introductions?

What large fleet introduction hasn't resulted in delays?

 

[D9009Spotter]

"I suspect you’re right. So past experience = DfT’s “teacher’s pet”. It’s the only explanation for Abellio getting East Mids: who in their right mind would give them another franchise with total fleet replacement after the mess of ScotRail and Anglia fleet introductions?"

Scotrail aren't doing a full fleet replacement. An introduction of 2 maybe 3 news classes isn't a total fleet refresh. GA are fully within their rights to refresh their fleet with the majority of it dating back to the 80s and 90s, and let's be fair here they're doing a good job of it thus far on the GEML, the Stadler units, even with the funky door position for an IC unit, look class while also being on time, delivery schedule wise. The Aventras are behind because of the faf from London Overground. So I'm interested to see what they bring the East Midlands. And while I'm at it you can't call a bid a bad one if it hits all the criteria... I can see First and Trenitalia getting the WCML franchise. First with the mainline know how and the High Speed experience of Trenitalia.

 

[GrimShady]

For them, this is quite diplomatic. It is emphasising the advantages of Virgin Trains' service and it's only implicit that they're better than Chiltern. I am not saying I'd go for it if I were a marketing manager, but it's in reasonably good humour mainly because it's absolutely true. VT do run a faster and more frequent service, Chiltern certainly wouldn't argue against that.

However, VT are 100% not above ludicrous gutter-rolling 'attack ads'. This one says "Time is money. Chiltern Railways haven't quite grasped this."

View attachment 62129

Directly mentioning your competitors for no other reason than to insult them is a serious marketing faux pas. But that's exactly what they do.

I would always use Chiltern over Virgin any day!

No crappy camp humour and decent rolling stock!

 

[Robertj21a]

"I suspect you’re right. So past experience = DfT’s “teacher’s pet”. It’s the only explanation for Abellio getting East Mids: who in their right mind would give them another franchise with total fleet replacement after the mess of ScotRail and Anglia fleet introductions?"

Scotrail aren't doing a full fleet replacement. An introduction of 2 maybe 3 news classes isn't a total fleet refresh. GA are fully within their rights to refresh their fleet with the majority of it dating back to the 80s and 90s, and let's be fair here they're doing a good job of it thus far on the GEML, the Stadler units, even with the funky door position for an IC unit, look class while also being on time, delivery schedule wise. The Aventras are behind because of the faf from London Overground. So I'm interested to see what they bring the East Midlands. And while I'm at it you can't call a bid a bad one if it hits all the criteria... I can see First and Trenitalia getting the WCML franchise. First with the mainline know how and the High Speed experience of Trenitalia.

I think many would be far happier if First was kept as far away from it as possible !

 

[Bletchleyite]

decent rolling stock!

I think you mistyped "rattly DMUs" for the vast majority of services. Not forgetting the Mk3s with nasty IC70 seats, except the one coach they got from Wales with decent seats.

 

[cactustwirly]

I think you mistyped "rattly DMUs" for the vast majority of services. Not forgetting the Mk3s with nasty IC70 seats, except the one coach they got from Wales with decent seats.

168s maybe, but I'd take a 68 + Mk3 any day of the week over a pendolino or voyager!
That's coming from someone, who dislikes the IC70s

 

[Bletchleyite]

168s maybe, but I'd take a 68 + Mk3 any day of the week over a pendolino or voyager!
That's coming from someone, who dislikes the IC70s

I wouldn't, I hate IC70s. Put some decent seats in, though...

(OT, but it's such a shame the Mk3s weren't built with the newer seat from the Wessie - indeed the Wessie is basically the Mk3 done to perfection...)

 

[GrimShady]

I think you mistyped "rattly DMUs" for the vast majority of services. Not forgetting the Mk3s with nasty IC70 seats, except the one coach they got from Wales with decent seats.

I'll take 168s and Mk3s over Voyagers and Pendolinos every time especially if it's got Virgin branding on it.

 

[whhistle]

Errr....

Are you kidding me? I lived adjacent to Moor St station in Birmingham for three years and the advertising billboard (the same one photographed by Causton above) was permanently booked out for Virgin Trains with adverts criticising Chiltern.

Admittedly, I don't venture that way very often.
Appears what I was told by someone in the marketing department was a lie. I should have known better!

 

[cactustwirly]

I wouldn't, I hate IC70s. Put some decent seats in, though...

(OT, but it's such a shame the Mk3s weren't built with the newer seat from the Wessie - indeed the Wessie is basically the Mk3 done to perfection...)

The Pendolino seats aren't that much better, and they're cramped as hell, with awful ride quality.
The Mk3s on the other hand are bright and airy, plus they have very good ride quality.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Pendolino seats aren't that much better, and they're cramped as hell, with awful ride quality.

I couldn't disagree more on point 1 and 3 (to me the IC70 is an awful seat, beaten in the 2+2 world only by the Class 800 seat for awfulness[1]), and for point 2 I take your "cramped" and raise you "cosy". Let's not go too far with a seat debate, though, it is very much a personal preference thing. I'd take a GWR HST Mk3 over a Pendolino because they have my all-time favourite seat (importiert aus Deutschland), but with an IC70 you can keep it.

[1] The cause of this is the fixed armrests, and this is only an issue for the larger gentleman so I understand why skinnier people like them. If you're tall and built like a rugby player with cyclist's legs and a bit of middle-age lard (that's me, I am not a small person in any dimension) they are literally painful, with the added bonus of a sharp, pointy bit of plastic (the table support) positioned precisely to impact your kneecap.

 

[StaffsWCML]

Also Interesting SNCF getting in on the court action!


http://www.cityam.com/276804/french-rail-firm-sncf-threatens-legal-action-against

French rail firm SNCF threatens legal action against government over failed HS2 bid

Reporter at City A.M. covering City politics, transport and law. Get in touch: a [..] Show more
Follow Alexandra

SNCF bid alongside Stagecoach and Virgin for the West Coast partnership (Source: Getty)

France's state-owned rail company SNCF is threatening legal action against the UK government after it was barred from bidding from a contract to run HS2 in an ongoing dispute over pension liabilities.





SNCF is the latest firm to get caught up in a row over pensions, which prompted the Department for Transport (DfT) to bar Stagecoach and Richard Branson's Virgin Trains from bidding for three rail franchises last month.

The DfT wants rail companies to share pension liabilities with the government, which Branson said would have been "reckless".

SNCF had also teamed up with Stagecoach, which owns 49 per cent of Virgin Trains, to bid for one of the franchises, the West Coast franchise, the Sunday Times reported.





An SNCF spokesperson said: “We are disappointed by DfT’s decision to disqualify our consortium from the West Coast Partnership competition. We are frustrated that the main differentiator amongst bidders is their appetite for taking on risks – such as pensions – they can neither control nor manage, rather than their ability to successfully introduce HS2 while delivering outstanding customer experience.”

A DfT spokesperson said: “It is entirely for Stagecoach and their bidding partners to explain why they decided to repeatedly ignore established rules by rejecting the commercial terms on offer.”

Earlier this month Virgin and Stagecoach said they were considering legal action against the government's decision to spurn its bids for the West Coast, South Eastern and East Midlands franchises. The East Midland franchise, which Stagecoach currently runs, was awarded to Abellio.


The prospect of legal action from SNCF will be a further headache for transport secretary Chris Grayling, who is battling claims on all fronts from ferry firms who were not chosen for the government no-deal Brexit contract.

On Friday, ferry operator P&O said it was suing the DfT following its decision to grant Eurotunnel, which runs train services across the Channel, a £33m settlement after it complained that the procurement process for the no-deal Brexit ferry contract had been "secretive".

[\QUOTE]

 

[pdeaves]

What a litigious world we live in now. This will rumble on and on and on. Whatever the court outcome (if indeed it does get that far), who will the real winners and losers be?

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

What a litigious world we live in now. This will rumble on and on and on. Whatever the court outcome (if indeed it does get that far), who will the real winners and losers be?

The solicitors and barristers, as always!

 

[StaffsWCML]

What a litigious world we live in now. This will rumble on and on and on. Whatever the court outcome (if indeed it does get that far), who will the real winners and losers be?

The Losers are the train users and tax payers. We are going to end up with 3rd rate companies being the only ones interested in running our trains due to unrealistic franchise 'conditions' set by the DfT. The customers will likely have to suffer numerous franchise failures over the coming years unless these issues are resolved.

I suppose if the DfT had a competent leader, and a competent process. It may help them to avoid these scenarios.

They deserve everything they have got really.

They have a franchising system that is broken, is under review, significant failings and pensions gaps have been highlighted by the RDG yet they still continue to award franchises whilst trotting out the same childish response to their failings. It is mindless stupidity of the highest order.

 

[GrimShady]

The Pendolino seats aren't that much better, and they're cramped as hell, with awful ride quality.
The Mk3s on the other hand are bright and airy, plus they have very good ride quality.

Agreed. IC70 seats are far, far superior to anything on Virgins nasty trains.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Agreed. IC70 seats are far, far superior to anything on Virgins nasty trains.

They're all yours, then. I'd rather take LNR and spend 2.5 hours in the 3 side on a Class 350/2 than get my backside squashed for an hour.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Agreed. IC70 seats are far, far superior to anything on Virgins nasty trains.

Yes, we get you are averse to anything Virgin.
You've forgotten the improvement in journey times over the whole WCML from using tilting trains.
There is no other solution which will give you anything similar.
Using Mk3/4 stock would take us back to c2002.