Street Cred

It’s not a new phenomenon. Operators had used strategically placed, central area, stop-specific, off-bus conductors before deregulation, but not often.

Nowadays, such static conductors have their advantages, in selected locations. Though still rare, they can:

1. Speed up city bus services.
2. Offer a cheaper operational solution to a conductor on every peak bus.
3. Encourage people to buy a ticket rather than not.
4. Offer information and advice.

Again, the practice is rare. Stagecoach has recently introduced such so-called “ambussadors” in Carlisle and Sheffield, selling tickets before passengers board—or even before the bus is anywhere near. Indeed, they’ve been in Carlisle since the beginning of the month, coinciding with a couple of competing new bus services operated by Reay’s. And, Stagecoach is in competition in Sheffield with First.

Stagecoach states that, in Carlisle, their introduction is purely coincidental. I wonder whether anyone believes them. For, the fifth and prime reason for the introduction of such measures must surely be to gain a competitive advantage. Stagecoach may be acting quite honestly & innocently but passengers are often cynical about such moves. What do they make of Stagecoach's credibility?

Indeed, Stagecoach has had little history in using conductors as a competitive edge. Routemasters, for example, have played their part with Stagecoach. But I recall other locations with stop specific conductors offering tickets before you board. I just can’t recall where. And neither can I recall whether they were withdrawn at the end of open hostilities. I suspect they were. Can anyone help?

National Liveries

When we asked readers to comment on their preferred livery of the five shortlisted by routeONE trade magazine, we also asked readers’ views about four well known national schemes.

It’s a little unfair simply asking the readership to comment on their preferred livery, as the colours in which a bus is painted is but one part of a greater, overall branding and marketing campaign. I suspect some people in voting had taken not only the paintwork into account but also the brand the paint stands for. And that’s quite acceptable.

I don’t suppose there are any real surprises here. And I wonder what might be the case if you asked the travelling public. Would you get an accurate reflection? Some liveries would be known to some people, others not. And their views would be tainted by their local operator’s performance. And that’s quite acceptable, too. We’re talking brands, after all.

Acting Commercially

Not long after deregulation, I well recall an inspector being quoted in the local press. The actual article resulted from complaints of overcrowding on a newly converted minibus service. I’m sure the inspector said more but the bit that was quoted was along the lines of, “the more we cram on board the better, the more we’re acting commercially”.

Health & safety aside, the inspector was right. Kind of. Competition at the time meant life was pretty much cut throat. Any passenger paying a fare on my bus wasn’t contributing to the other lot. It was as simple and straightforward as that. Not that we could condone the inspector’s comments.

Fast forward 20 plus years. Attitudes have changed. We like to think that we offer passengers a better experience, competition or none. Many of us go the extra mile in providing as decent a service as the market will support and, where the investment can be justified, we try to wheel out vehicles that sell themselves.

But no matter out intent, there will be times when buses get full. This might be seasonal (high summer, Christmas) or daily (workers, schools, after the 0930 free travel watershed). Where there’s a known peak, operators will try to deal with it. If thy don't, they have to expect competition, bad press or a tender. An example of the last might be at school times on a corridor where an operator cannot provide sufficient capacity commercially.

I am not altogether surprised at some of the comments on yesterday’s piece on the Oxford Bus Company’s dilemma. You’ll recall that about once a week, on variable days, the 13 gets overloaded over a short, central section. I do get the impression from commenters here that operators don’t really care about such matters. They do. It’s what to do about it. I don’t know the Oxford Bus Co’s solution but, in one sense, an overloading problem is a good one to have. Far better than an empty bus. Here are the options:

• Increase to double decks. To avoid the problem of not knowing which journeys are overloaded—as seems to be the case here—this requires a total conversion. Running costs escalate but the overall costs might be lower, if the deckers are older than the single decks they replace. If their book value is lower, this will be reflected in the route costings and management accounts. New vehicles, especially deckers, obviously need budgeting for accordingly.

Some may welcome deckers, other may not. Older vehicles will be perceived as a diminution in service. Below stairs, seats fill up quicker, as there’s invariably fewer of them. Older people dislike stairs. Others may fear the sort of anti-social behaviour the upper deck seems to generate. Double decking might therefore actually have a detrimental affect on revenue, while accommodating those people who find their bus full, once a week.

• Duplication is a possibility and I am sure the Oxford Bus Company would’ve done this already had it been at the shoulder of the peak. Since the journeys in question seem to be during the peak, this becomes a high cost strategy. The vehicle will have to carry its entire costs in one outing. This is why few operators provide extra capacity commercially, specifically for large volumes of school traffic.

This is very much a pickle that the Oxford Bus Company will need to resolve. I expect to be shot down but sometimes, just sometimes, doing nothing is an option. Leaving passengers at a stop is rarely good for business but you also need to weigh up the costs in providing the capacity. It's easier when the overload is consistent and predictable. Where it is not, if the revenue is such that it pales into insignificance compared to the costs, then a reasoned commercial decision might simply be to take the risk of leaving some passengers to wait for the next bus.

Or cramming them on to the extent that this is allowable under C&U regs.

Resonates

Calls in Oxford for the conversion to double decks of service 13 from the infamous John Radcliffe Hospital resonate with me. It reminded me a little of the problems some routes face in Bournemouth.

The Oxford Bus Company’s 13 is not the most frequent of services but when you add in the X13, it doubles to every 10 minutes, though the X13 misses out the rail station which, apparently, is where residents of Marston are concerned about overloading. Probems seem to occur over but a short section of the route.

A group of residents says that in 13 days, eight *buses* were unable to pick up all passengers. “At least once a week, people can’t get on the bus”. Now, that’s hardly “chock-a-block” as the complainants suggest. Indeed, it seems to boil down to “too many students and their luggage.” And these aren’t archetypal Oxford university types, but foreign language students.

Regular travellers across Bournemouth & Poole will know that English as a foreign language (EFL) students can also cause sparodic overloading. They’re a good source of Glo Card revenue (smartcard season-type ticket) but, like in Oxford, they are unpredictable from one day and one week to the next and they often travel in packs, sometimes large ones. June is particularly problematic, as schools are in, workers working, tourists plentiful and EFL students abundant. Ordinary Bournemouth passengers tend to accept that, occasionally, buses become full. They accept, too, the EFL students’ loose concept of queuing. EFLs are, after all, continentals.

In Oxford, it would be foolhardy indeed to up capacity (and costs) for such an almost infinitesimal problem. Yet, the Oxford story about the 13s could so easily have turned into something of a bad PR gaff for the Oxford Bus Co. But, with so few occasions when the bus is overloaded, I liked the way its spokeswoman handled the press. Here we have a young woman as operations director who is probably someone to watch.

Said Miss Weeks, “I can assure our passengers in the Marston area that the last thing in the world we want to do is leave them at their bus stop.” And she went on, “We are aware that occasional journeys at the busiest times are full on a small part of the route. We know how frustrating that can be for passengers but it’s also really frustrating for us.” A refreshingly honest answer rather than a “no comment”, brush off, or we-know-best answer.

And that’s something else Oxford has in common with Bournemouth: TYB’s usual good handling of the press.

Of War & Wheels

There always seems to be something newsworthy going on at Trent Barton, these days. Since we felt “obliged” to take down that post on Trent Barton, Wellglade & the Nottingham statutory quality partnership, things have been moving along. On the engineering side, Wellglade’s four operating subsidiaries are up before the beak. More on that, later...

On the operating side, Wellglade is on the offensive. Whereas 99pbus Bargainbus 99pbus Bargainbus was purely reactive, in the face of Premiere’s Long Eaton 4, due to start on 15th November, Wellglade’s Kinchbus has over-registered a service on Premiere’s X9, between Nottingham and Loughborough. This has never been a Wellglade route. Kinchbus’ 9 starts on 13 December 2010 and avoids the SQBP by serving Broadmarsh bus station, though it remains unclear as to whether it uses any of the SQBP stops towards Broadmarsh. Premiere’s X9 terminates more centrally in Nottingham.

Premiere’s X9 started in July 2009 following the withdrawal of Arriva’s hourly 99 service. Premiere upped the frequency to every half hour. One can assume that, since the 99 didn’t meet Arriva’s operational indices at hourly and Premiere has already doubled its operation, there isn’t a commercial argument for Wellglade ploughing this particular furrow. But, then again, when was it ever about that? There is, of course, a certain irony here. Pre-Wellglade Kinch had a bit of reputation as a competitive irritant.

Back to the engineering side. This time next week Trent Barton is before the traffic commissioner, following allegations about is maintenance systems, a reported incident of a parked bus rolling into others and, more alarmingly, a claim that one of its buses lost a wheel. Though rare, the last is not something the commissioner can easily choose to ignore, though in view of Trent Barton’s reputation to date, I suspect that the available remedies of curtailing the number of vehicles, a licence suspension or revocation are probably unlikely.

Liveries: your verdict

The votes have been counted and Omnibuses can unveil the livery judged by its readers to be the best. And it is… Bluestar (though that shown below is unrepresentative of the livery it submitted).

If you need reminding, we took the five bus liveries selected by routeONE in its recent livery competition and asked Omnibuses readers to choose their favourite. See the five liveries, here.

The rankings were:
Like routeONE, we allocated three points for your first choice, two for second and three for third. Once we’d added all the scores together, Bluestar came out the clear winner, with nearly 45 per cent of the vote, and frankly there was little doubt of that, right from the outset. This compares to routeONE’s winner East Yorkshire Petuaria Express, with only a third of the vote total.

We’re not surprised Bluestar came out first. We invited participants to give a reason why they chose their top ranked. A significant proportion felt that Bluestar’s efforts represented a fleet rather than branded livery. Others felt that it was clean, modern, fresh, that it stood out, and was appealing. A few of these descriptions also represented visitors’ views about Black Diamond. Those who favoured EYMS looked upon the route specific livery as noble, offering old-fashioned values and the like. A handful felt EYMS won by default.

Are Omnibuses visitors different to those who read routeONE? We now that there are a significant proportion of professionals calling daily at Omnibuses but we also know that there are enthusiasts, too. Enthusiasts are less likely to read routeONE but are probably more likely to be passionate out a vehicle’s chosen livery. That does not say professionals are not. Mind you, there were those who felt that Bluestar was too fussy or that after a while you didn’t actually notice it. Most, though, felt that the livery stood Bluestar apart from its neighbour.

Over a quarter of those who voted felt that they could not bring themselves to rank any of the five in third place. And this draws out the fundamental problem as regards the routeONE livery competition. Operators submit their liveries and, from this year, a panel of five narrowed the list down. The five panellists were selected from a ballot. So, winning depends upon ensuring you enter and a subjective process, something routeONE will admit. Better perhaps to convene a panel including retired industry grandees (e.g. UK Bus Awards), industrial and graphic designers to make that difficult judgement call.

Or why not just ask Omnibuses’ readers?

Advertising

“Mr Gardem said that the service could have benefited from more advertising as very few people knew about it”.

How often have you heard statements like that? They come to light when there’s some sort of negative impact on a bus service. There’s a slight element of passengers grasping at straws. The public often lob this sort of thing at operators as justification for a service’s unaltered retention. Or that a route would have done really well had the operator been bothered to publicise it. It implies the operator isn’t trying hard enough.

As if an operator would just run a service without telling anyone. I know that in the past, there’ve been classic examples of poorly marketed bus services but this is less likely to be the case nowadays.

Sometimes, short of pulling people off the street at gunpoint, there’s little more you can do. New ideas are worth a try but, if no one’s travelling, you have to admit defeat. A barren service can’t be sustained for ever.

Mr Gardem (sic) was referring to the pending withdrawal of Arriva Green Line 712 from St Alban’s to London. In this particular case, the service will have been on the books for 18 months, long enough for Arriva to know that it won’t work. I say fair play to Arriva for giving it a try. If you don’t try, you’ll never know. There’s nothing wrong with a little measured risk in trying to grow a market. There’s also nothing wrong with getting it wrong as long as you recognise what you need to do to remedy the situation.

The public view it differently, of course. The difference between a failed bus service and, say, a failed food product is that the grocery line will simply fade away among the other nearby choices on the shelf. No one will really notice or lament its loss. If they do, they have alternatives.

The bus? Put on a service and you immediately raise expectations. It becomes part of the local fabric, part of the passengers’ collective memory. No matter that the service lasted but a season and no more, customers will swear it’s been on for decades and their lives have totally revolved around it. They will refer to it for ten years after the cull, as if it was on from the 1920s.

So, the question is, had Arriva marketed the 712 during its short life, or not? Yes they had, continuously, using radio, billboards, local door drops and press releases… at both ends of the route.

Any Publicity is Good Publicity

Not everyone in Merthyr Tydfil, Wales will have been left feeling indignant at a recent government view about getting on a bus to find work.

In echoes of Norman Tebbit’s 1981 plea for unemployed people to get on their bikes, last week a successor singled out Merthyr, an area crippled by structural long-term unemployment, suggesting that people should get on the bus to Cardiff, where there’s apparently work.

The fact is, for many, this is stating the obvious. There are no doubt plenty who already use the Merthyr-Cardiff X4 bus service regularly to do just that—commute. After all, why else would Stagecoach provide six arrivals in Cardiff before 0900, with the earliest arriving at 0718? This is a good bus service and it operates four times an hour thereafter. And, providing journeys at peak period comes with the territory of running a bus service.

I have only ever visited Merthyr twice. The first time was in the cold winter of 1979/80, also beset by recession. Then, the country service network was entirely in the hands of National Welsh. If I recall correctly, the only way to Cardiff by bus was via a connection, though I can’t now remember where. There was an hourly rail service and that took almost an hour. The rail option is now every half-hour, half the frequency of the bus, and it actually takes between five and 10 minutes longer than the X4.

There are, of course, limitations. If the jobs are in Cathays or the city centre, then access by bus is easy. We all know, however, that jobs are also located on industrial estates or retail parks away from the central business district and these are probably inaccessible by bus, from Merthyr at least, for 0800 or 0900.

We also know that should someone land a job an hour’s bus ride away, they will sooner than later use their income to buy a cheap car, thereby cutting the 23 mile run and hour’s commute to about 40-50 minutes, depending upon traffic. But, even so, what a difference in bus service over 30 years.

And, for the lowest paid work, even a bus service operating at frequencies such as this will be unattractive. Adding the amount of money spent on fares to the time and it will make the journey seem less than worthwhile, especially if the commuter is also trying to look after dependent children.

It’s more than conceivable that government cuts, whether in local subsidy or BSOG, will probably force bus service withdrawals. These are more likely at the margins. Since the X4 is operated largely commercially, this will be very low on the list. There is nevertheless a real danger for those who rely on local transport authority supported peak services. Even so, the public sometimes needs reminding that they have a good bus service on their doorstep. Although a ministerial announcement is an unusual advertisement, no doubt any publicity is good publicity.

All a Little Dutch

It’s not just in England that there will be savings made in operating bus services.

It seems that the Dutch cabinet want to see bus services in Amsterdam, Rotterdam and The Hague put out to tender. This is in order to save money, an estimated £100mil, in fact.

In spite of the three city region administrations that broadly support Dutch government policy, there’s resistance. This isn’t privatisation of municipal operators, English style, but large multinationals being allowed to bid to operate services more efficiently, using existing vehicles, premises and staff. The administrations point to resultant cuts in services in the early mornings and evenings, and fewer new buses. These are things that surely can happen now, under the existing regime, if needs be.

It also seems that Arriva and the like are threatening Amsterdam in particular unde EU rules with court action, to force the administration to tender its Gemeentelijk Vervoerbedrijf-operated services. Arriva already operates some suburban buses.

And you thought matters were complicated in England.

Crumbs! So that’s pretty bad, then. Or is it?

We now know that local authorities face cuts of 28 per cent over four years. What impact might we expect in terms of bus services?

The 28 per cent is front ended in 2011/12 but otherwise almost evenly spread year on year at about seven per cent per annum. Transport inflation, according to the CPT, is currently running at 3.4 per cent, the lowest annual increase since the CPT published its figures. Budgets would therefore need to rise by over three per cent just to keep pace. If applied to bus services, the seven per cent cut in real terms therefore equates to 10.4 per cent.

But that’s not all. Expect most local authorities to spare much if their education and social services budgets. Between them, these account for 60 per cent of funding (they do in Bournemouth, anyway). If protected, the seven per cent needs to come off the remaining 40 per cent. This equates to a cut of over 15 per cent.

Next, when considering the remainder of the budget after schools and social care, assume that authorities will look to make cuts where they are perceived to hurt least. Here, traditionally, bus subsidies have been a soft target. Could we therefore see supported bus services budget cuts of the order of 18 to 20 per cent?

Of course, all this is but speculation. What isn’t is BSOG. First, the good news. No change next year. This avoids the immediate impact of fares increases, service cuts or both. It safeguards jobs. Now, the bad. A 20 per cent cut from April 2012, with the new rate applying for three years (at least there’s no further cut expected as was believed. This will be some relief at this).

There are those who can applaud this as a victory. And, operators can now begin to budget properly, though the volatile base fuel cost is still an unknown. Yet, this is designed merely to give operators time to react to a reduction in 18 months’ time. Not that they need more than eight weeks if service changes are required: the entire industry has (or should’ve) already planned its strategy, as it was expecting an April 2011 cut plus further cuts beyond. But, a welcome relief all the same. Unlike kickstart and rural bus grants, both to go.

And then there are even heavier cuts expected in local infrastructure, including presumably in bus related infrastructure that might have cut a swathe through traffic jams or make the passenger experience that much more palatable. If all this contributes to more traffic & congestion, the industry when adding the BSOG related revisions, faces in pincer movement with an acceleration of two self-fulfilling trends: passenger decline and increased cost. With inevitable results.

Your Turn to Vote

A person’s choice as to what constitutes a good livery is a very subjective thing. In the recent routeONE livery competition, the editor offered readers five liveries in each of three classes: coach, minibus and bus. If you know the results and ranking, please don’t state them in the comments box. Instead, vote for *your* favourite bus livery out of these five bus finalists. It will be interesting to compare how Omnibuses readers feel when compared to those of routeONE. Yes, I know that you may wish to lend your vote to other schemes but these were the only choices available of the 64 bus liveries submitted.

(The survey has closed)

Education, Education, Education

Big day today and I must admit I would be feeling uncomfortable in the public sector right now. It was the private sector that went overdrawn but the public sector that now has to settle the account.

What fate for the bus service, after lunchtime’s comprehensive spending review? Local bus service subsidies are what are termed “discretionary”, which means they might be subject to cuts. School transport’s “essential” and mandatory and therefore is safe. At least operators can console themselves with ad rely on that.

Yet, there’ve been noises from a fairly largish number of LEAs about stopping transport for pupils attending denominational schools. That bit’s discretionary. Large faith catchments mean a large transport requirement.

Last week, the Times went one step further. In a bid to save money, it contemplated the *complete* withdrawal of home to school transport. It might be argued in today's world that the three-mile limit is somewhat arbitrary, in any case. Withdrawal of free transport would save several hundred million pounds though when last mooted, in the early 1980s, it actually cost a minister his scalp. Things are different now. For one thing, more families own more than one car.

Speak to operators who specialise in school transport. They often say they have no option but to enter such a market. Often, they feel their rates are poor or undercut. They can sometimes suffer for anti-social behavioural problems. A number of them aren’t therefore in the market through choice. The wholesale withdrawal of free transport would nevertheless have a significant impact on smaller coach proprietors whose bread & butter comes from the LEA cheque each month. Diminishing private hire & tour income might be the cream but such work is unsustainable without the daily school run. Withdrawing school transport entirely could spell the end of the road for struggling family coach firms.

And not just smaller operators. Local buss services carrying qualifying pupils are vulnerable, too, where the proportion of scholars at peak is high. It might put paid to some more rural services that operate on the back of school work, such is the importance of scholars' revenue.

Would any withdrawal see a balancing rise in fare paying bus services at peak times? Who can afford to operate large vehicles across the peak charging child fares but without subsidy? There *are* such services but invariably they are available to middle class parents whose preference is for a school other than the nearest and who are prepared to pay almost any price to see their offspring get a better schooling. Your ordinary, every day parent is going to struggle with the bill.

The debate has therefore cycled from the yellow school bus commission's pumping millions more into school transport to complete withdrawal. That’s not to suggest, of course, that the Times is either right or accurate about free transport withdrawals. In a separate occasion last week, the Times also wondered about free transport for people over 60, something the government has pledged to retain. And it’s one thing for the Times to highlight actual costs (and the costs given were large but meaningless out of context). It’s another for the government to act on the suggestion. I reckon they won’t. But may be they will.

Show Time Looming

This year, the picture’s slow to emerge regarding Euro Bus Expo 2010, due in exactly a fortnight. For a while, the promoters have been calling it a sell out but perhaps there’ll be little there out of the ordinary. Unless, of course, there are some hidden gems yet to emerge. And we can probably guess what might not be there. So, don’t expect 2010 to be a bumper year for innovation. For example, we are already seeing Streetlites on the road.

It wasn’t like that 15 years ago. The 1995 show was one of the most optimistic on record (indeed, the whole industry was stabilising or had almost done so). Super low floor single decks were the 1995 stars of an altogether imaginative show. At the time, the industry fell unevenly into two camps: those who accepted the SLF as potentially life changing and those who did not. The majority still sat in the latter category. Those working in the industry have always held a healthy scepticism. That’s because many businesspeople are realists and they need some persuasion, especially when the cost of SLF technology came at a considerable premium. And there were those who asked why some quango and, indeed, regulations were dictating how they should run their businesses.

Of those who realised the potential of SLF technology, few would’ve predicted the impact of it beyond wheelchair users. Within just two years, we were talking of the Dart SLF being a major triumph. How strange things sometimes turn out to be.

When we look around at what life changing options we might expect at the 2010 show, we have very limited options. Perhaps technology at last holds the key in coinless and ticketless travel. Perhaps manufacturers will have grappled with vehicle weight issues. Perhaps there might be a leap in hybrid technology to make it affordable. What we really would like to see is something as revolutionary as 1995. It’s hard to see anything like that being with us in 2010.

In an example of inevitable poor timing, the show is one week after tomorrow’s government spending review. Will this cast a shadow over the show? 1995 was on the cusp of a period of passenger and relative industry confidence...

Do we really need a new bus station in the centre of Bournemouth? Today on the Dorset Bus Blog

What Everyone Wants?

In the face of continued and sustained criticism over First’s fares and service cuts, 95 per cent of those who responded to a September Guardian Leeds poll answered “yes” to the question, “should Metro regulate Leeds’ buses?” Also, fewer than 10 per cent felt the bus service was “good”, about half felt it was “OK” and 40 per cent said it was “poor”.

Leaving aside the unanswered questions as to how many people actually voted and how often they used the bus, this research is at odds with the summer’s Passenger Focus surveys. These, I would assume, were unbiased samples. In West Yorkshire, 90 per cent felt satisfied with their bus service. If there was such a high satisfaction rating, why should so many people now want control over their buses?

Perhaps it’s because nearly a quarter of of those surveyed by Passenger Focus and who paid a fare in West Yorkshire indicated that they were less satisfied with the cost of travel.

Anyway, Metro the West Yorkshire PTE was quick to highlight the Guardian poll.

In something akin to bad timing, a week later, First chose to introduce its simplified Leeds fares. This, apparently, resulted in a “hike” (the word always used) of 20p on a £1.70 fare. First, however, claims that the increase affected seven per cent of passengers, while an equal percentage paid less. In actual fact and in spite of the headlines, about half of First’s customers were using pre-paid discounts. Said a director, “Over 50 per cent of people are getting on and not paying”. I think we know what he meant.

As if to poor oil on troubled Yorkshire waters, First last week launched a “new deal” as a kind of “half way house partnership” giving Metro PTE more say without removing First from the helm. Under the proposals, First would:

• Limit fares increases and network changes to once a year


• Only implement network changes after public consultation


• Accrue funds for investment in smart card' technology.

Metro PTE has cautiously welcomed the deal though, no doubt, they will be examining the detail for catches and loopholes. But what about the so-called long suffering public? It’s a shame that frustrated passengers haven’t welcomed the move for what it is, an olive branch aimed at re-establishing good relations. There are no doubt elements of self-preservation in the new deal. There’s also no doubt that First understands you can’t beat public perceptions. So, in a sense, this is a defensive stance. Yet, it is also an active gesture on First’s part aimed at reclaiming ground lost over the last ten years.

To think that all will be rosy in a quality contract environment misses the point in an era of austerity, something we’ll know a lot more about on Wednesday. It’s worth remembering, for those of us old enough to do so, that West Yorkshire PTE when authority & operator increased fares significantly in the early, middle and late 1970s.

As a First West Yorkshire director said at the time of the fares simplification, “We have to cover the costs of what we’re doing”. And that’s true whether there’s a commercial or franchised operation.

i Guardian Leeds poll
i Metro PTE press release
i Passenger Focus research—West Yorkshire

March 2010: Fotopic problems here

Fotopic’s down again. Doesn’t bother me personally (I have no such site) but we are still top of the Google.com pops for those searching for “Fotopic problems”. You'd be surprised how often people arrive here this way. Also, a rather revealing graph of Fotopic activity just before Fotopic took it down, is here.

Pointless?

What’s the point of a bus company’s bespoke London bus website, then? What use are they?

Take the East London Bus Group. Here’s a well designed front page. But click on those important links of most interest to the public—timetables, fares & journey planner—an you are immediately directed towards TfL. “Using the Bus” gets you to an ELBG page on fares that is basically a very cut down version of TfL’s own suite of fares information. It’s a bit of a vanity site.

OK, there’re sections on recruitment and these are important, though would the website be the first port of call for prospectives?

Abellio’s site has a little more raison d’être, if you consider that you can download Surrey timetables and route maps. In London, like ELBG, you’re directed to TfL but, unlike ELBG’s one click, it takes Abellio four.

Blue Triangle’s, Docklands’ Buses etc all point to a global Go Ahead London agglomeration. Here’s something slightly different. Click on Bus Services > Bus Routes and you actually get a list that allows a direct PDF download—from londonbusroutes.net, an unofficial site of “proper” TfL bus timetables. The same is true of Epsom Coaches’ Quality Line TfL buses. The Go Ahead site also looks at day trips, special events, Christmas specials and bus hire, so it isn’t simply so much of a vanity site.

Transdev London makes no pretence at offering its readers any timetable, journey planner or fares information whatsoever. There’s a link to hiring a bus but, otherwise, the general public would probably steer clear.

And then there’s Metrobus. With its mixture of services within and without London, here at last you can find details and site-supplied *timetables* and maps of all Metrobus services, even those wholly operated within London. The site’s not the tidiest but, then again, it does offer much more information than others, including a translation option. But who in London might use Metrobus rather than TfL’s more comprehensive service?

Ditto First. First London has its usual comprehensive list of bus services but, as with all of its subsidiaries, you have to guess the page number for the route you require. Timetables are there but you get no comprehensive information other than at TfL. Arriva doesn’t bother showing any London services, other than Green Lines.

So, with the possible exception of the bespoke Metrobus and corporate First sites, what’s the point of London-specific bus websites? On the street, no one can easily identify the operator, even if they wished to. Buses from multiple operators rub shoulders but that presents no identity problem for passengers, as everything’s a sea of red.

It’s much different when you control your own destiny in a deregulated market, where you need to encourage passengers with informative, lively and useful web content. There’s no incentive in London to provide an “useful” oprator website. If that sounds deprecating, it’s not meant to be. It’s just that TfL does it so much better.

i Unoffical London Bus Routes

Out of the Bag

The big purchase news of 2010 finally came out yesterday, after speculation on this very blog since Tuesday: the East London Bus Group has at last been sold, to the Boston Red Socks. Or something equally as surprising and remarkable.

Remember, you read it here, here, here and here first. Sort of.

London Transport to Selkent to Stagecoach Selkent to Stagecoach in London to Stagecoach to Selkent... to Stagecoach London. But will any passengers know, understand or care?

As England anticipates the contents of the government’s comprehensive spending review, Stagecoach’s Brian Souter will be banking on Mayor Johnson’s pitch to leave London’s transport well alone, something Johnson requested in the national interest. Nevertheless, expect the London bus to have had its recent heyday. That doesn’t mean Stagecoach won’t get benefit from a better-managed operation, though Stagecoach anywhere near the same scope to grow its business as in deregulated England.

What’s left to say that others have not?

1. The expected era of large financial institutions and private equity investors taking over-priced controlling interests in transport PLCs is over—before it began.


2. The very arguments implied by Stagecoach as it exited the regulated London market now seem turned on their head, as Stagecoach refers to their previous good track record in such an environment. At the sale, Stagecoach intimated it favoured the possibilities within deregulated markets rather than the shackles of a franchised regime.


3. The £260mil 2006 sale was as much driven by Macquarrie’s offer price as the £52mil 2010 purchase was driven by Macquarrie’s need to exit fast.


4. Future vehicles will be leased, not purchased. This adds cost but lowers risk. Provincial managers will be pleased no longer to receive unwanted, London spec, tired cast-offs. Stagecoach’s investment in deregulated markets remains king.


5. There remain concerns. True, Stagecoach will benefits from integrating its back office. True, it will manage the business well. True, profitability, currently in decline, can now only go in one direction. But Stagecoach’s hands remain as tied as Macquarrie’s. More so, perhaps . There’s a pincer movement afoot that will depress the London bus market’s lower-but-predictable margins still further: hardened, competitive pricing in a tightly performance controlled environment… at a time of financial austerity that will see reductions rather than the significant expansion of late.


6. Yet, Stagecoach rarely gets things wrong and you can expect ELBG to start to flourish again, especially because the “compelling rationale for acquiring the business at the price paid” will have less of a burden on the business.

Expansion in London: first buses, now the cycle superhighway

In spite of Souter’s Ptegosaurus-like views on PTE aspirations for regulation, it demonstrates that a good businessman will make the best of things, no matter the climate in which he finds himself.

i Stagecoach ELBG acquisition on the Leon Daniels blog

Exit Sage Left

OK then, nothing happening with the East London sale after all—not yet, anyway. Seems to be moving no faster than Brian the Snail on the Magic Roundabout. Sorry for all the false dawns. As my credibility plummets, I’ve decided to make no more predictions, in case all this sounds a little like a shaggy dog story (Brian: [to Moose] Have you seen our friend Dougal? Big black nose, looks like a bad hair day on legs.)

The Maths of Bus Operation

Take a modest corridor that can sustain a bus every 20 minutes, requiring PVR 4. Assuming it costs x to operate each vehicle, the total costs are 4x. With no competition, 100% of revenue y accrues to the operator.

The operator has managed to build profitability on the corridor, to the point where a competitor feels it’s worth entering. Say that competitor also operates at every 20 minutes. All other things being equal, the competitor has the same costs as the incumbent at 4x but will take half of the revenue, 0.5y, leaving the incumbent also with 0.5y. For the competitor, if he’s planned correctly, 0.5y will be sufficient for his margins. Other things being equal, if 0.5y is sufficient for the newcomer to break even, it should be so for the incumbent.

Say the incumbent then ups his game by increasing the number of buses from three an hour to five. By running the extra two per hour more directly, by shaving off between a few minutes off the running time, the incumbent requires PVR +2, not +3.

Other things being equal, the incumbent’s actions will result in revenue rising from 50% to 62½%, or 0.625y. This is 0.125y above the 0.5y breakeven point. Except, in doing this, costs have increases from 4x to 6x or by 50%. The revenue required to break even therefore increases from 0.5y to 0.75y. For an increase in costs of 50%, the incumbent sees an increase in revenue of just 12½% or 0.125y, 0.125y below his requirement to break even.

Other things being equal, the competitor’s share then falls below the breakeven threshold of 0.5y to 0.375y.

No one wins. The incumbent, once enjoying y revenue, has seen it fall to 0.5y and eventually rise to 0.65y. But costs have increased from 4x to 6x. The incumbent’s revenue is short by 0.125y. The competitor, relying on 0.5y, has also lost 0.125y.

Of course, other things aren’t always equal. In this case, the incumbent’s two buses per hour in every five operate more directly and this will have a bearing on the spread of passengers. It might encourage people to await a faster bus. On the other hand, since the incumbent’s five buses per hour are not equally spaced at every 12 minutes, he cannot fully gain from his investment because he doesn’t saturate consistently. To do that, above the PVR +2 injection, would require PVR +3 in total.

The revenue apportionment will also depend upon such things as:

• Overall passenger growth, following the injection of more buses per hour overall, and the spread of that passenger growth. This might help mitigate losses.
• Each operator’s cost base. And whether the newcomer can survive not on 0.5y but 0.375y.
• Whether the two original 20-minute services were equally spaced at ten minutes apart, or not.
• Fares charged. A cheaper offer will reduce revenue but distort passenger loyalty.
• The type, age, presentation and overall perception of each operator’s vehicles used.
• Driver attitude, friendliness and training.
• Reliability and punctuality.
• Equal access to stops and termini.
• Faster or slower journey times.
• Brand perception and marketing.
• Passenger preferences, especially regarding past performance.
• Numbers who are already locked into one operator’s season or period tickets.
• The networks, if any, provided by each operator, for onward travel.

Conclusion? The incumbent’s fightback is costing money and is a short-term expedient, in order to strengthen the market in the long run.

One further update about the East London Bus Group, regarding Tuesday’s post (entitled Roundabouts) and Wednesday’s. No announcement then but the waiting’s over now. It’s time for the City to stand and deliver. So, expect some excitement this morning. Watch the news. If I’m wrong and I don’t think I will be, well, don’t call me a donkey but a horse-drawn carriage that formerly travelled regularly over a fixed route while carrying passengers (customers?) and parcels…

What’s Happened to Traveline?

For those of you reading this in Dorset or elsewhere in that general area, Traveline South West’s changed. An equally smart front page cannot hide some behind the scenes alterations that seem a little odd.

Gone, for instance, are those useful, zoomable maps introduced in April 2009 that once showed stop by stop detail so helpful for visitors or those unfamiliar with an area. They tended to offer something far more detailed that any operator could provide.

What appears to have happened is that Travelinesw has finally migrated from Trapeze (before 2006, Action Information Management) to Mentz Datebverarbeitung GmbH (MDV). Neighbouring Traveline South East also uses MDV, as does East Anglia, East Midlands & London.

This, MDV announced in June. The recent transition doesn’t appear altogether complete. Here’s an example. Service 175/6 is a Wilts & Dorset route from Ringwood (Hampshire) to Christchurch (Dorset). W&D shows both routes together on a handy single PDF, the way you might expect it.

How does Travelinesw compare?

Traveline South West recognises both services when you use “Timetable Lookup”. Though I feel that PDFs have limitations, I have to acknowledge that the resultant Adobe file option is a useful addition. It also estimates times for intermediate stops, rather like the journey planning software itself. But both the 175 and 176 timetables display separately. They force themselves into another browser window and, curiously, a second timetable once opened overwrites the first, and the third overwrites the second, and so on. This could be a pain if you want to display both at once (as would logically be the case for the 175 and 176).  

The results are broadly accurate, though there is some confusion about schooldays. According to W&D, the 0710 from Ringwood operates on Hampshire schooldays only. Traveline SW acknowledges this too (without referring to the county) but adds a second 0710 that, according to Code 1, operates in four day blocks at “only 22.9.10 to 24.9., 28.9. to 1.10., 5.10. to 8.10., 12.10. to 15.10., 19.10. to 22.10., 26.10. to 29.10., 2.11. to 5.11., 9.11. to 12.11., 16.11. to 19.11., 23.11. to 26.11., 30.11. to 3.12., 7.12. to 10.12., 14.12. to 17.12., 21.12. to 24.12., 28.12. to 31.12.”.

Hmmm. Confused? There are also two “1” codes with different meanings.

Should Hampshire be in Traveline SW or SE? A moot point, as their respective maps both steak a claim, though Traveline SE does not explain why Hampshire is cross-hatched rather than coloured solid. The casual visitor might not understand, therefore, why neither the 175 nor 176 appear on Traveline SE’s MDV-driven “Find a Timetable” database. If they did appear, there’d be a map option. Plug Ringwood and Christchurch into the “From” and “To” elements of the SE journey planner and the result is a bizarre journey taking you by National Express, Underground, First Capital Connect and finally Embling’s Buses in a 6hr 23m marathon.

Returning to Traveline South West, there appear other quirks relating to schooldays and school holidays. Take W&D’s 183 (Blandford to Weymouth). There’s a Traveline SW 1527 journey from Blandford that operates schooldays only but no mention of the parallel Saturdays and school holidays journey. All very odd. Beforehand, you could pretty much rely on Travelinesw. Does that still remain the case, now?

It would be nice if you could enter your planned journey origin and destination from the front page, too.

I may have jumped the old gun yesterday when I referred to a buyer for the East London Bus Group. The stage seems set but we may have to wait a wee while to see just who emerges as the new owner.

Balanced

One week to go till the government’s comprehensive spending review. We’ll then know what’s happening to transport. The very last paragraph of current routeONE’s “Westminster Watch” column reads as follows:

“I hear Neil Scales is being tipped that he may be the next permanent secretary at the DfT”

There’s apparently a vacancy, or soon will be. Scales is chief executive of the Merseytravel integrated transport authority and director general of the PTE. Could he become the nation’s new top transport civil servant at this crucial time?

If this is more than just a rumour, at one level, does this seem odd? Are Scales’s views balanced? He was at the forefront of the PTEs’ push towards quality contracts. Though MPTE made less noise about it, it was the first of the fold to consider whether it should try for more control. Scales had already wrested control of the Merseyrail electric train set away from Network Rail and was thought to be keen to get the buses, as well.

An odd choice, then, if you recall that the Conservative arm of the coalition (if not the Liberals) wanted none of that QC nonsense. Even more odd, given Scales is currently chairman of industry arch-enemy The P.T.E.G. But these days, there’s a thawing, a rapprochement.

The government wants more co-operation between operators and local transport authorities and this is very much on the current Scales agenda on Merseyside, it seems. Partnership is the government’s and MPTE’s balanced way forward.

So, at another level, Scales is your man. He a big hitter, takes no prisoners, pulls no punches, works incredibly hard, fights for public transport and is the very glue that cements Merseytravel together. Of all the directors general, there is no personality so linked with his organisation than Scales to Merseytravel. It would be hard to imagine him anywhere other than at Hatton Garden (even if MPTE is about to move somewhere towards Mann Island by the river). But Marsham Street is certainly conceivable. And unlike most of his predecessors, he would be far more visible and noticeable.

Additional information from Omnibuses’ Northern Correspondent

Roundabouts

Could it be that we will hear later today that the East London Bus Group will be sold?

East London is currently owned by Macquarrie, following its take-over from Stagecoach in 2006. We learnt in June that Macquarrie was planning on a disposal. The $64,000 question is, who's buying? If I were a betting man, I'd say it was... no, surely not...

Writer’s Block

I seem to have hit a brick wall, today. After taking down (I trust temporarily) yesterday’s post I find this morning that it’s quite difficult to write anything at all.

I sometimes forget that this blog is quite well read. And I just wonder which parts of Andrew Marr’s “vision” of a blogger, as also stated yesterday, are particularly relevant to me. Perhaps the bit about ranting… but certainly not the reference to being young : (

“A lot of bloggers seem to be socially inadequate, pimpled, single, slightly seedy, bald, cauliflower-nosed, young men sitting in their mother's basements and ranting… so-called citizen journalism is the spewings and rantings of very drunk people late at night.” 

Drunk I may be but certainly not at night. As regulars will testify, I’m always up with the lark. And I thought Mr Marr was the bald one.

Still, not actually writing anything means that I have time to catch up on Dale Carnegie's How to Win Friends & Influence People.

The Other Dimensions

We regret that it has been necessary to remove today’s post, perhaps temporarily, perhaps permanently, owing to a concern the we have received about it. May I assure readers that the Omnibuses Blog tries always and wherever possible to act with fairness and integrity. We trust readers will understand the reason for the suspension of the post, the first such total break in transmission in the blog’s five plus year history (though on one occasion we have acceded to requests to withdraw part of a post and on another, at the request of an individual, have deleted a comment).



































































.

Equations

Only ten days to go to the government’s comprehensive spending review. We already know that transport is expected to shoulder a significant burden. Last week, we heard more hints as to what might happen. The inflationary cap safeguarding key rail fares, in place since privatisation, might be either curtailed or in some cases withdrawn. The nation’s rail travellers, who already perceive fares as expensive, are bracing themselves for something of a shock. To think a high-earning family with two children two will soon also be £1,700 worse off after child benefit goes.

Such a general rise in rail fares might be good news for home counties coach commuting, and express services in general. No one is saying that you can beat rail for speed but there comes a point where some commuters might consider the benefits and costs associated with rail and the coach and chose the latter, where the offer is good enough. Equally, though, commuters might decide that in spite of London’s congestion charge, they get more utility from their car. This is a worry and would be to the disbenefit of the coach and local bus services facing increased congestion.

The thing about rail increases is that, for the public, it demonstrates the link between fares and subsidy in a way that is easily understood. The basic equation also applies to commercial bus services, of course. To maintain a specified level of service, if you decrease one element and you must increase the other. It’s a question of balance that at its simplest is:

Cost of operation = fares revenue + subsidy

The industry is already planning for a significant (and tapered?) reduction in BSOG and, as a guide, we can perhaps expect to loose £5,000 per peak vehicle p.a. We’ve already suggested that this might increase fares by about 10-12 per cent. Short-term inelasticities mean that passengers will initially continue but in the medium and longer term, we might expect elasticities. Every time you put up fares, you need to take into account losses expected owing to this resistance. Plus, you need to round up (not down) to the nearest sensible 10p, though high rural fares might even go to the nearest 50p.

What’s different about the bus industry when compared to rail is the free travel market. Though this isn’t actually a subsidy, if we’re honest as an industry, the scheme has resulted in more of us being better than worse off than we like to admit. This relies on:

• Continual growth in the scheme. Some parts of the county are experiencing static growth but many still see the graph going upwards.


• Fares increases. We also need to be honest in that free travel is already determining our fares policies.

Here, then, by adjusting the balance between subsidy and fares, the government will potentially be shooting itself in the foot. Higher fares mean higher reimbursement. This assumes that the government will retain intact the free travel concession, something it says it will.

24 Hour Presentation

Trent Barton (what, them, again?) has steadfastly refused to show its times in the 24 hour clock. The introduction of the 99P timetable bucks that trend. This is probably one of the ways of trying to distance Wellglade’s two distinct operations.

This week we asked whether anyone had noticed a mainstream Trent Barton timetable was in the 24-hour clock. No one responded. The answer is the printed material for Trent Barton’s Red Arrow, between Derby & Nottingham. Look at the web page, though, and you’ll see the usual 12-hour presentation. Online, night services are shown separately from the main Mondays to Saturdays timetable.

All of Wellglade’s Kinchbus timetables are in the 12-hour format, save for its round the clock Skylink. The Red Arrow also operates weekends into the early hours. It strikes me that Wellglade/Trent Barton has concluded that the 12 hour clock is all very well, till you hit the problem of buses running at 2.45 a.m. and 2.45 p.m. on the same timetable. Here, there’s only one solution. Barry Doe would be proud of them.

Are there any other *printed* Wellglade timetables in the 24-hour format?

Thus far, this week's two main posts (here and here) on Premiere and Trent Barton have between them raised 51 comments (as at 0759 today)

More on Double Decks

The suitability or otherwise of double decks is again in the spotlight. This follows a recent incident where a bus was apparently blown over on to its side in Aberdeenshire, Scotland, leaving some of the 50 or so school children on board with minor injuries.

This is the latest in what seems an increasingly perceived long list of incidents involving double decks. Should double decks continue to be used for school transport? It’s an aspect to which we’ve referred in the past.

I can’t say I recall a double deck bus ever being blown over before, though I am aware that certain bridges during particularly gusty conditions have barred high-sided vehicles and that would include double decks.

What is the safety case for and against double decks?

• They can certainly be prone to damage from large enough branches and boughs but modern deckers usually have protectors.


• Many double decks on school buses tend to be older. This does not make them inherently unsafe.


• Should a double deck topple, it would be impossible for them to roll over. Single decks face the possibility of landing on their roof.


• Behaviour problems might be worse on a double deck but there’s no guarantee they might be better on a single deck, especially behind rows of higher backed seats where pupils are more invisible to CCTV.


• Double decks are safer in the event of rear and front end shunts—the majority of accidents—because compared to coaches passengers are set back further from the rear and especially front.


• Double decks can be evacuated quicker than 3+2 seated high capacity single decks. This requirement alone will likely see the end of the UK derogation for 70 seat single deckers, unless a second, proper service entrance is fitted.

Ultimately, I suspect local education authorities can’t win on this. Then there is the paucity of second hand examples and the need from 2017 to ensure all those carrying fare paying students are low floor.

Coming Soon to a Street near You?

Regular readers might recall the post from May 2009 on foreign businesses translating their marketing material into English. Still available to read, here

This week, someone commented that Arriva might in future buy German buses rather than their preferred vehicles with Wrightbus bodies. At the same time, I stated that the UK needs a solid and robust manufacturing sector. The two comments go hand in hand, for the biggest threat to the UK bus industry is yet to materialise—from the east.

"It is revealed that some subsidiaries of Arriva have pay attention to King Long Bus (from King Long)"

It’s very telling that, alongside former London bendy (German) Mercedes Citaros that will be shipped out, Arriva has chosen the Chinese to build its flotilla of buses for its newly acquired Maltese franchise. The announcement came well within Deutsche Bahn’s tenure, even if the planning goes back further.

"Arriva has started to focus on the performance of China buses in EU market 5 years before and made a lot of research. We found that the King Long products developed fast with good brand image in recent several years" (King Long quoting Arriva)

The vehicles are in the shape of no fewer than 200 XMQ6900J and XMQ6127J coaches and city buses. Though they look almost like former British vehicle J-reg plates of 1970/71, my guess is that we’d better start getting used to them. If these right hand drive models are successful in Malta, might they also appear in England?

Arriva is already evaluating 20 Temsa Avenue Turkish-built buses, in the north east. These are said to be lighter-weight heavyweights (if you follow me) and their presence if nothing else will spur home-grown producers into shedding the pounds. And when, for example, might we see the promised Optare Olympus integral, if at all, given the Olympus is now built to special order.

"Many customers showed high appraisals for King Long products" (from King Long)

Ever since the delivery from 1971 of the first Metro Scania buses initially for London Country’s Stevenage Superbus, followed by Volvo’s B58 coaches arrived from 1972, the writing’s been somewhat on the wall. Operators rose to the heavyweight challenge of express coach deregulation of the early 1980s, extensive motorway mileage and the requirement for stylish opulence by purchasing early MANs, Setras and others rather than home grown products. DAF, Van Hool, Scania later plus Mercedes, Irizar and VDL are now popular but their drawback is their cost, something perhaps King Long will be able to trump.

"It is believed that we felt satisfactory with King Long products and service" (King Long quoting Arriva)

So, the UK and indeed European manufacturing sector must now brace itself for an Eastern invasion. Some might argue that it’s sort of already begun, with the tie up between India’s Ashok Leyland and Optare. With Arriva now for the first time committed to significant numbers of vehicles from China, is their arrival in England almost a cert?

Spoiling for a Fight?

With so much happening at The Trent & Barton Motor Traction Co, I’ve thought about renaming this blog http://trentbarton.blogspot.com/. Forgive me for a third post on matters from Heanor but things are developing quickly. And, as befits industry watchers, opinions are split.

From this...

On Saturday, Premiere Travel announced via Facebook direct debit customers could have 28 days worth of travel for £30. Said Premiere, “Now that’s cheaper than any imitation cheap bus”.

... to this. Spot the difference

On Monday, Wellglade countered by morphing its 99P bus into “Bargain Bus”, halving fares from 99p to 50p. Out went 99pbus.co.uk in favour of hastily registered bargainbus.co.uk.

Now, I’m prepared to consider that Midland General’s 99P was aimed at “market segmentation” but with this latest development, that prospect looks increasingly less likely. Does such a move confirm the true intention behind Wellglade’s registration: old fashioned competition?

Opinions, via Friday’s post’s comments box, certainly varied. On the one hand, there are those who suggest that Trent Barton is facing its first major across the board attack since the area first saw Gilbert Kinch, more than a decade ago. Wellglade had thus far not reacted, but in the face of increasing competition must now do so. To do nothing would be a sign of weakness to be exploited.

On the other hand, there are those who felt that Wellglade was effectively setting a Competition Commission trap into which the entire industry would fall. “Bargain Bus” was nothing short of predition. Predictions were that “Bargain Bus” will last just as long as it needs to. It was a very 20th century response, even down to a week’s free service beginning this week, ahead of the main launch.

Where, then, does the modern industry draw the line? Venturer made the point that competition has arrived “precisely because the high quality service provided by Trent Barton has grown the market to the point where a competitor sees a large enough customer base for two operators”.

How will the Competition Commission view this and the response?

One commenter hoped that in the process Wellglade wouldn’t destroy its reputation. Welglade is at pains to distance its cheaper competition from the work it’s done at Trent Barton. Interestingly, 99pbus.co.uk and bargainbus.co.uk domains websites were registered by the Trent Motor Traction Co Ltd.

As if to emphasise the difference, “Bargain Bus” uses the 24 hour clock on its printed publicity. Yet, this is not a novelty for Wellglade. So, your starter for ten is, what other pure-Trent Barton product uses a 24-hour format timetable? Round the clock Kinchbus’ Skylink doesn’t count.

Back in the Game

The last time Trent Barton bought Tempos, niggles and problems with its 07-plate batch forced the company into the unusual position of publicly criticising Optare. This was via its newsletter and the venom was almost unprecedented.

At the time, Trent Barton stated that the vehicles represented five per cent of the fleet but 16 per cent of failures. And, remember, these were new. The problems Trent Barton faced included quite a catalogue. Quoting then director of service delivery Jeff Counsell, these included “buses shaking and rattling over the slightest bumps, brackets sheering in half, windscreens breaking, rainwater pouring in through leaking roof panels, fuel tanks leaking despite repair, electrical breakdowns, suspension problems, design faults and failures in new components, complete failure of a differential unit…and on it goes.”

Unsurprisingly, it resulted in Trent Barton re-evaluating its vehicle sourcing from elsewhere. Following a number of trials, it ordered significant numbers of Volvo B7RLEs with Wrightbus Eclipse bodies. Optare’s loss, as the 2007 order was much smaller than in subsequent years.

Either Trent Barton was exaggerating its problems or quality at Ashok Optare has improved significantly. For, yesterday, Optare announced an £8.1mil three-year vehicle order from none other than Trent Barton. This was for 17 Solos, nine Versas… and no fewer than 39 Tempos.

One reason for Optare’s success is its ability to tailor its product to Trent Barton’s (and others customers’) customisable specifications. Counsell, promoted to managing director, now states, “Tempo and Versa are certainly hard to beat when it comes to creating an attractive and comfortable environment for our customers”. A far cry from his views three years ago, when the Tempo was beginning to damage Trent Barton sub-brands, particularly the Black Cat.

The UK needs a thriving vehicle manufacturing sector, a sector that’s certainly been through the wringer in the last 20 years. Stagecoach favours Alexander Dennis (though has fallen out of love with MAN SLF chassis, perhaps also owing to niggles; plus it’s lost its once strong passion for Solos). Arriva fancies VDL/Wright products and First goes more for Volvo/Wrights. Medium and smaller operators seem increasingly content with Optares. In June, among a number of confirmed orders, Optare was able to announce eight Tempos for Transdev Lancashire United and, importantly, a further eight Olympuses for Nottingham City Transport, joining significant numbers of Omnidekkas in the NCT fleet.

But for Trent Barton to demonstrate such a renewed faith in Optare and especially the Tempo is remarkable. It must emphasise not only a change of fortune for Ashok Optare but an improvement in status for the supplier.

Through a Student’s Eyes

The expansion of higher education has provided bus operators with an opportunity to develop some attractive, bespoke student bus services, often in partnership with universities & colleges themselves. New halls of residence can no longer easily be accommodated on campus, even assuming they could in the first place. And, increasingly, teaching buildings are scattered, too.

It was ironic that yesterday I answered a plea from my grand-son by delivering over some distance his pushbike. No, I didn’t ride it there. He’d apparently been using the student bus service for a week and was fed up with it. He’d requested private transport. At least he’d held firm on the decision to keep his pre-historic supermini at home, recognising that private, fossil fuel-powered transport is a considerable drain on student finance.

I dutifully arrived with said bike, asking him what was going on. Two issues:

• The bus was too expensive. The fare didn’t represent value for money. Thanks to his research via Facebook, he’d also learnt that some peers scattered elsewhere in England were paying less than he was.


• His local peers who’d chosen to cycle, though occasionally getting wet, were often completing their journeys faster than those by bus. This was because, at key peak times, you usually had to queue & wait at both ends, as the first vehicle to arrive was full. This meant the journey was not only protracted, there was no guarantee you would arrive when you intended to. Or you had to get up earlier (bit of a problem for students!). The operator simply didn’t provide enough peak time capacity.

Since he has decent A Levels including Economics, he understood fares and service depended upon such factors as demand, frequency, competition, distance and the extent to which a university subsidises its travel. But as he told me, had he received the service he was hoping for (by arriving and departing on time), the fare might actually seem reasonable. Or, he was prepared to queue but only for a cheaper fare.

Annual Student Ticket Prices:

Bath (First): £249; Bristol (First): £367 ; Exeter (Stagecoach): £250; Leeds (First): £312; Leicester (Arriva): £280; Leicester (First): £290; Liverpool (Stagecoach): £200; Manchester (Arriva): £271; Manchester (Stagecoach): £175; Newcastle (Stagecoach): £225; Portsmouth (First): £220; Southampton (First): £220; Tyneside: (Arriva): £450; York (First): £240; Yorkshire (Arriva): £453.

Is FTR all Bad?

York University seems to have joined the rest of York and shown some disdain for the FTR Streetcar no. 4. The university’s “preferred supplier” is now York Pullman’s Unibus 44. The 4 has the advantage in terms of frequency and is operated with the assistance of a conductor but even so the 44 is reported as quicker—even if this is perceived rather than actual.

So, you pays yer money and you takes yer choice. In this regard, First is reported to be lowering its fares from the university to city centre to £2 return, to match Pullman’s. This would never have happened had there been no 44. And, from tomorrow, First will be extending its 4 from Heslighton Hall to Heslington East, again matching Unibus’ level of service. This is interesting for, without success, the university unsuccessfully tried this tack. It would now seem First is content to help.

In turn, a handful of peak Pullman’s Unibus services start from Acomb, the cross-city terminus of FTR. But the Pullman service operates only till twilight, with the last FTR arriving at the university after midnight.

One of York’s senior opposition councillors recently called FTR a “white elephant on wheels”. No one seems to be a big fan of York’s FTR. This is such a shame, as both the council and operator have invested thousands into infrastructure, stock and staff in a bold move to show what public transport can deliver. The partnership has tried to lift the bus to a new level but instead seems to be unloved by everyone.

Everyone that is, bar the passengers themselves. FTR has resulted in ridership increases (helped by the university expansion, no doubt). And, during all the arguing about its suitability (or not), above all the noise, no one actually hears or heeds the voice of users, most of whom, from what I hear, are pleased with the internal Streetcar environment, additional buggy space and conductors.

Move Over

We elect MPs to make difficult decisions on our behalves. Scrubbing the controversial M4 bus lane, however, was not difficult. It was rather easy, in fact, as no one seemed in favour of it during its 10-plus years.

No one other than passengers likes bus lanes. The millions of motorists on the M4 certainly don’t. Yet, it did give coaches a minor leg up, jumping the queue towards central London. Indeed, is this the only legitimate time when you could see a coach in lane three?

From personal experience, I’ve only ever seen a few PSVs in it but I can’t say I use the M4 that often. It’s taxis that benefit, and it’s debatable as to whether these are really public transport, as their licensed divers assert. If you use a taxi to reach your final destination at the end of a coach or rail journey then, yes, I would concede that they form part of the public transport mix, provided that there’s no reasonable bus connection. If you use one as a substitute for your car—keeping your car garaged while you go for a night out or flee along the M4 bus lane to or from the airport—then public transport it is not. Assuming the vehicle doesn’t wait to be backfilled, this involves twice the mileage and emissions.

The interesting thing about the decision to ditch the M4 bus lane is that it will be reinstated during the 2012 Olympics, for competitors only. Was it Clarkson or another so-called personality who bought a black cab to evade the bus lane? I wonder how Clarkson will get around that one, now his taxi is no longer a passport on the M4. Perhaps he’ll maintain his fitness till 2011 to be a competitor...

Cannibalised

Here’s an interesting quote buried far within one of the Competition Commission’s working papers relating to its market analysis of the bus industry. Whereas most other operators considered the fares of its competitors,

"Wellglade told us that it did not look at competing bus operators’ fares as it sought instead to compete on the entire offering, including frequency, service, hours of operation, etc."

Wellglade, owners of Trent Barton, seems to have changed its mind. From 11th October, its Midland General operation will be charging a flat fare of 99p on its new service 99P (Cotgrave to Nottingham). This, perhaps or no doubt, is in response to competition from August 2010 from Premiere’s Red2.

Those expecting Wellglade's Midland Genral to be turned out in the blue of old may be disappointed...

Here’s two changes in culture, then. Not only is Wellglade now a little more inclined to consider competitive fares, it seems to be ready to consider a 20th century response to competition—by offering a low cost option that threatens a competitor and cannibalises its own established Cotgrave Connection. And to think that, to date, Wellglade wasn’t at all well known for its direct retaliatory actions.

So, what’s changed? One thing that *hasn’t* is Wellglade’s desire to maintain its quality, high end Trent Barton offering. That appears to be why the 99P is distanced from and nothing whatever to do with Trent Barton. Wellglade must conclude that there’s a market for both high and lower end operations. It’s an interesting proposition. How much will customers be prepared to pay for a quality offering that’s almost second to none alongside a less frequent and more bread-and-butter service. Surely this is worth a try. It happens in other retail sectors. It has even happened in the bus industry, before. If successful at either thwarting competition or growing the market then who’s to say whether this approach might be tried elsewhere in England where there’s already an established value-added service. It would be the opposite response to a partnership agreement.

That this coincides with the appointment of former Go South Coast’s Bluestar’s commercially savvy Alex Hornby could be a coincidence. Either Hornby has brought his commercial instincts with him or was specifically hired because of them. If I were a betting man, I’d say the latter.

i Trentside Traveller covers Nottinghamshire in detail