|
Post by stevieinselby on Mar 5, 2023 21:34:30 GMT 1
Thanks for letting me know. I'm still learning about this kind of stuff. I believe that would still be enough time to make their money back? Transdev and some other operators evidently thought so – the lower purchase cost and lower running costs are supposed to offset the shorter lifespan. Whether that actually works out is another question – but and whether there is any benefit or loss from running breadvans rather than buses in terms of attracting ridership or possibly operational efficiency from being small and agile on the road.
|
|
|
Post by westyorkshirebus on Mar 5, 2023 21:37:48 GMT 1
It's only with the benefit of hindsight that the Ribble Country looked like a bad idea
Previously those services only existed in the background, nobody knew about them except people who used them. They were run with a random assortment of old Solos in various liveries and never promoted
Surely by actually telling people they exist they would grow the market? They weren't expecting the existing customers to drop off due to a global pandemic, so its probably been a case of 1 step forward 3 back.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2023 23:11:05 GMT 1
It's only with the benefit of hindsight that the Ribble Country looked like a bad idea Previously those services only existed in the background, nobody knew about them except people who used them. They were run with a random assortment of old Solos in various liveries and never promoted Surely by actually telling people they exist they would grow the market? They weren't expecting the existing customers to drop off due to a global pandemic, so its probably been a case of 1 step forward 3 back. Not just that - there was new fleet for Cityzap which was apparently highly profitable. My random sightings will be hardly scientific but I seldom saw them with a dozen passengers onboard. Couldn't those buses have been redeployed elsewhere? I know they have now. Ribble Country was an idea that took marginal services into somewhere new. The problem with marginal services is just that - they are marginal and will always require some level of council support. You need to do a lot of work to grow them. Unless you have a long contract period you'll struggle to justify new fleet for them. They are perhaps better provided by a smaller operator who has lower costs than a larger operator. And the smaller operator won't then come sniffing around Transdev's frequent commercial routes if they're busy running tenders. The new home for this newly acquired fleet might be a more sensible place for these vehicles if Transdev is seeing overall reductions on the commercial network post Covid. If you're carrying 60-70% of what you used to carry then you may no longer require an Optare Versa or Volvo B10BLE - what you now require is an Optare Solo... your double decker has become a large single.
|
|
|
Post by SCH117X on Mar 5, 2023 23:34:04 GMT 1
Tendered services were never a Blazefield thing - the Wharfdales initially were a lower cost undertaking using owned and long paid for Darts. Little Hotline did make some sence as it provided a unified brand with their only existing service to Preston.
If there is a pull back on unneccessary rebranding presumably the Cityzap livery will be staying on the X98/X99 vehicles.
Individual liveries have always been feature of Blazefield operations. The Witch Way, Starship, Mainline, Burnley Connect, 36, Shuttle (the original was also used for Harrogate Route 1), the Zone, Spot On, The Lancashire Way all being pre Hornby liveries/brands
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2023 14:46:47 GMT 1
It's only with the benefit of hindsight that the Ribble Country looked like a bad idea Previously those services only existed in the background, nobody knew about them except people who used them. They were run with a random assortment of old Solos in various liveries and never promoted Surely by actually telling people they exist they would grow the market? They weren't expecting the existing customers to drop off due to a global pandemic, so its probably been a case of 1 step forward 3 back. It it only with hindsight? I Would of thought it be easy to see that running a minibus only every hour or 2 via mostly rural areas wouldn't create much profit even without a pandemic. A Few of the routes have previously been branded if you go back about 10 or so years ago (The Pendle Green Line) or going back further there was also the 'Pendle Witch Hopper' & 'Pendle Wayfarer' so it's not like there hasn't been attempts.
|
|
|
Post by deerfold on Mar 6, 2023 17:55:13 GMT 1
It it only with hindsight? I Would of thought it be easy to see that running a minibus only every hour or 2 via mostly rural areas wouldn't create much profit even without a pandemic. The aim wasn't to make an absolute "profit", though - depending on their contract they'd be trying to increase fare income on top of the amount the route was subsidised by or increasing usage so the council would be sure to tender the route again as it would not be an increasing cost.
|
|
|
Post by 1875bd12teo on Mar 6, 2023 19:30:59 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by SCH117X on Mar 6, 2023 19:41:29 GMT 1
Notably for this forum Pendle Wizz is no more and Skipton joins the Mainline network with a M6
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2023 20:04:32 GMT 1
It it only with hindsight? I Would of thought it be easy to see that running a minibus only every hour or 2 via mostly rural areas wouldn't create much profit even without a pandemic. The aim wasn't to make an absolute "profit", though - depending on their contract they'd be trying to increase fare income on top of the amount the route was subsidised by or increasing usage so the council would be sure to tender the route again as it would not be an increasing cost. At the time it was said Transdev had invested £1 Mill of their own money alongside money the Council was paying to run the services, so i'm assuming expected to make some sort of profit from it to cover that investment? Notably for this forum Pendle Wizz is no more and Skipton joins the Mainline network with a M6 Looks like the Skipton > Burnley corridor is now permanently hourly (Wasn't the original plan for Wizz to increase to half hourly?) There's a slight irony to this as well, as Wasn't it one of first changes under Alex to remove the Skipton runs from Mainline to add them to X43 & now possibly one of the last changes under his management is to reverse it.
|
|
|
Post by stevieinselby on Mar 7, 2023 0:34:46 GMT 1
Looks like the Skipton > Burnley corridor is now permanently hourly (Wasn't the original plan for Wizz to increase to half hourly?) The original plan for the Wizz, which was published pre-Covid and due to start in April 2020, was a half-hourly service – but then the world stopped and the service has never run more than hourly. With only 3 buses painted into the Wizz livery, it doesn't feel like they have at any point anticipated it picking up. Disappointing when you think that in 2010, they went into competition with Pennine on that corridor running a half-hourly service alongside Pennine's hourly, and after Pennine pulled out of the business they were running 4 buses an hour from Skipton to Barlick, Colne and Burnley on weekdays. And it looks like Skipton to Burnley will be back on the slow route through Nelson rather than wizzing down the M65, so Skipton to Burnley is seeing the worst service it has had in 12 years, by quite some margin. And if it is becoming part of Mainline, does that mean it will be stepping down from double-deckers to Versas? Could get very cosy 😬 But they are still trying to sell it as an improvement!
|
|
|
Post by dwarfer1979 on Mar 7, 2023 9:21:12 GMT 1
The aim wasn't to make an absolute "profit", though - depending on their contract they'd be trying to increase fare income on top of the amount the route was subsidised by or increasing usage so the council would be sure to tender the route again as it would not be an increasing cost. At the time it was said Transdev had invested £1 Mill of their own money alongside money the Council was paying to run the services, so i'm assuming expected to make some sort of profit from it to cover that investment? That expectation of 'profit' would have come through the contract terms not simply from on bus revenue even if they felt that they could, through their improvements, increase ridership generally (which depending on the type of contract could have all been extra money for them justifying the investment). The principle idea around these minibuses is that if you are going to run low volume contracts/routes it makes more sense to use a size appropriate vehicle. If you are never carrying more than a dozen passengers at any time why pay more for a larger & more expensive vehicle which uses more fuel to carry extra space for fresh air - you don't save on driver costs necessarily but you do on vehicle running costs - using a vehicle which will comfortably last the duration of the current contract and any extensions and if you are using nicer and newer buses than old cascaded/secondhand Solos you may generate growth in and of itself. It is still a debate whether the extra cost of buying new buses is worth the cost savings & benefits of newer buses that are likely to have a shorter life than a conventional bus (even if similar to a secondhand vehicle) but it is a balance to be considered.
|
|
|
Post by steve440 on Mar 7, 2023 10:52:57 GMT 1
It's only with the benefit of hindsight that the Ribble Country looked like a bad idea Previously those services only existed in the background, nobody knew about them except people who used them. They were run with a random assortment of old Solos in various liveries and never promoted Surely by actually telling people they exist they would grow the market? They weren't expecting the existing customers to drop off due to a global pandemic, so its probably been a case of 1 step forward 3 back. It it only with hindsight? I Would of thought it be easy to see that running a minibus only every hour or 2 via mostly rural areas wouldn't create much profit even without a pandemic. A Few of the routes have previously been branded if you go back about 10 or so years ago (The Pendle Green Line) or going back further there was also the 'Pendle Witch Hopper' & 'Pendle Wayfarer' so it's not like there hasn't been attempts. I would imagine that by integrating the Ribble Country services into their own network, then Blazefield hoped that more day ticket holders would sample these services. I did myself in 2021, catching a 64 from Burnley to Clitheroe and then a 67 from Clitheroe to Nelson. Both journeys were reasonably well used apart from the section from Downham to Roughlee on the 67. It was summer though and the ride was a bit rough on the Mercs!
|
|
|
Post by Burnside on Mar 7, 2023 18:33:31 GMT 1
...All this site has done is to praise Transdev and a certain person... Interesting, considering said 'certain person' joined the forum but left after a short while because people voiced their criticism and opinions. Not sure that would have happened if all those opinions had matched his own, but you do you...
|
|
|
Post by mk2mcw on Mar 7, 2023 18:38:31 GMT 1
Is the new M6 the same as Pennines old 215 route?
|
|
|
Post by mk2mcw on Mar 7, 2023 18:49:13 GMT 1
So now we know what changes are happening in Burnley and we’ve got a general idea about Yorkshire with the 840 and team pennine does anybody else think there may be more changes or “cuts”to transdevs network
|
|
|
Post by westyorkshirebus on Mar 7, 2023 19:13:30 GMT 1
So now we know what changes are happening in Burnley and we’ve got a general idea about Yorkshire with the 840 and team pennine does anybody else think there may be more changes or “cuts”to transdevs network Harrogate’s 8 and York’s 22/23 are two that were on the list that haven’t been announced I believe
|
|
|
Post by SCH117X on Mar 7, 2023 19:30:08 GMT 1
The latest Harrogate network map images.transdevbus.co.uk/2023-02/Harrogate%20Town%20map%20Feb23%20copy.pdf has no mention of the 8, nor the 22 which I think featured previously. The Yorkshire network map still does show the 22. Whilst both were listed as being routes to be exited from there is seemingly no sign of any retendering by NYCC (or NYC as it will be come April). It does show how ridiculously large the loop of the 2 is. A 2A running in the opposite direction would be appropraite if they were to reduce the service further to half hourly. Wonders what now is the plan for the 3 which was to be split into two routes once a bus gate is complete to serve the expanding north western surburbs as a single loop was said to be too big. There is now an additional service to Killinghall via a further new housing development off the Skipton Road, as opposed to the Ripon Road used by the 24 and 36, being spoken about.
|
|
|
Post by stevieinselby on Mar 7, 2023 19:52:32 GMT 1
Is the new M6 the same as Pennines old 215 route? It looks like it, although the map only shows the environs of Burnley and not the full Mainline network so it's hard to be sure.
|
|
|
Post by westyorkshirebus on Mar 7, 2023 22:09:43 GMT 1
The M6 will be exactly the same as the Pendle Wizz to Colne and then just via the normal Mainline route onward to Burnley
|
|
|
Post by Craig on Mar 7, 2023 22:13:31 GMT 1
Locking this thread because it is serving no purpose. I have just deleted a raft of nonsense posts made by several people, and if I don’t lock this, it will just continue.
For the legitimate things being discussed here, such as upcoming service changes or fleet changes, please use the appropriate threads elsewhere. Regarding the rumours about Transdev, we can wait until any news is confirmed, and then we can try and be a bit respectful about it (for anyone unsure about what this means, I refer you to the forum rules).
To the forum member who is being particularly vocal at the moment, please be more considerate in future and please do not post meaningless rants (your initial posts had more content but lately they have descended into personal attacks).
To other forum members who like to respond to provocative posts, I again remind you that ignoring such things remains a valid option.
Normally I would send individual emails to the people in question, but there’s several people contributing to the nonsense at the moment (those people know who they are) and as it is affecting the whole forum group, I am posting this as an open message. I am not looking for responses from any individuals; I am simply asking for the unwanted behaviours to stop.
Cheers all
|
|