I never cease to be amazed ...

[whole diary]

[grahame]

... what people will read on the train

[TaplowGreen]

............is it the details of how much compensation FGW^▸ (First Great Western) receive from NR^» (Network Rail - home page), or perhaps the full breakdown of the cost of FGW's vanity......sorry rebranding project to GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway)??? 

[IndustryInsider]

or perhaps the full breakdown of the cost of FGW^▸ (First Great Western)'s vanity......sorry rebranding project to GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway)??? 

You've yet to provide a source for the ^12.5m quote you used the other day.

[Red Squirrel]

............is it the details of how much compensation FGW^▸ (First Great Western) receive from NR^» (Network Rail - home page), or perhaps the full breakdown of the cost of FGW's vanity......sorry rebranding project to GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway)??? 

Out of interest, can anyone explain why it is that any project with a budget of more than 3s 6d gets labelled a 'vanity' project?

[stuving]

Out of interest, can anyone explain why it is that any project with a budget of more than 3s 6d gets labelled a 'vanity' project?

No. But is it, perhaps, related to the way any spending (such as rebranding) that you don't approve of is "paid for by passengers through higher fares", while something you do like (such as running a train you use, though hardly anyone else does, so it runs at a thumping great loss) can be "paid for out of the company's exorbitant profits"?

[ellendune]

Out of interest, can anyone explain why it is that any project with a budget of more than 3s 6d gets labelled a 'vanity' project?

No. But is it, perhaps, related to the way any spending (such as rebranding) that you don't approve of is "paid for by passengers through higher fares", while something you do like (such as running a train you use, though hardly anyone else does, so it runs at a thumping great loss) can be "paid for out of the company's exorbitant profits"?

Of course one benefit of the rebranding is that if the franchise changes hands the new franchisee will not have to spend a fortune repainting brand new trains, not to mention stations etc., because they are in First's corporate colours. 

That was the reason for the Scot Rail rebranding changing to the current livery which meant when First lost the franchise the new franchise holder olly needed to replace a few vinyl labels (well probably quite a lot of them).  That must have been a considerable saving.

 

[TaplowGreen]

or perhaps the full breakdown of the cost of FGW^▸ (First Great Western)'s vanity......sorry rebranding project to GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway)??? 

You've yet to provide a source for the ^12.5m quote you used the other day.

It was the figure given by Private Eye's "Signal Failures" correspondent. Happy to be corrected if an Insider such as yourself has a different figure with source? Similarly as to my assertion that it's a vanity project, happy to be corrected by anyone who can advise the improvements to service the rebranding is providing in returning the service to its "former glory" as the First Group blurb puts it?

[IndustryInsider]

Thanks for that, must be accurate if it's in Private Eye! As I said it's a shame we don't have a breakdown of how much of whatever was spent was wasted money and how much would have had to be spent anyway. I suspect it's weighted heavily towards the latter.

Whatever was spent must've made financial sense to First Group, even if not recouped for several years.  It's obviously a long term decision and won't/can't bear much fruit until upgrades are complete and new trains are in service.

[TaplowGreen]

Thanks for that, must be accurate if it's in Private Eye! As I said it's a shame we don't have a breakdown of how much of whatever was spent was wasted money and how much would have had to be spent anyway. I suspect it's weighted heavily towards the latter.

Whatever was spent must've made financial sense to First Group, even if not recouped for several years.  It's obviously a long term decision and won't/can't bear much fruit until upgrades are complete and new trains are in service.

If only I was a betting man, I would have had a flutter on a sarcastic response along the lines of "it must be accurate if it's in (select whichever publication was cited, add optional swivelling eyes)", I could be ^12 million richer by now! 

My other question was regarding the service improvements which this ^12 million creates (we'll stick to it unless/until someone comes up with another figure), rather than how long it'll take First Group to recoup it?

[IndustryInsider]

My other question was regarding the service improvements which this ^12 million creates (we'll stick to it unless/until someone comes up with another figure), rather than how long it'll take First Group to recoup it?

That depends completely on whether the alleged ^12.5m partly covers the cost of refurbishing several fleets of trains or whether that was what they spent on replacing letterheads etc.?  As I said it's obviously a long-term initiative, though I totally agree that some of the wording on the press releases/posters is pretty ridiculous.

[ellendune]

That depends completely on whether the alleged ^12.5m partly covers the cost of refurbishing several fleets of trains or whether that was what they spent on replacing letterheads etc.? 

You mean whether it included things like:

• refurbishing the Sleeper Trains
• refurbishing the interior of the first class

and  with the GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) branding and things like that?

[IndustryInsider]

Yes, money that would have been spent anyway.  You also have to factor in whether it covers the cost of advertising (and what additional revenue might result from it), the positive effect it might (or might not) have on staff attitudes, the positive effect moving away from the First brand might have on the media and the public (no more Worst Late Western etc.).  It really has to be judged over many criteria and over many years, rather than just taking the easy option of saying it was simply a vanity project that was a complete waste of ^12.5m or whatever it was.

One thing I'm pretty sure of though is that it's been an inauspicious start with the current electrification difficulties, and perhaps, with the benefit of hindsight, the powers that be would have waited another year or so.

[JayMac]

Or simply waited until a full fat franchise was let. It does seem rather profligate to rebrand for a period of just 54 months. Refurbishments could have been done in existing colours. The toxic word 'First' could have been quietly dropped from the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) brand.

[IndustryInsider]

Yes, that would've been another option, but then all the new trains would've had to be repainted not long after delivery/cascade/refurbishment.  Waste of money accusations would no doubt have flown then too.

Then again perhaps they will anyway when a new franchisee is awarded it!

[ChrisB]

As per Scotrail, I think it'll be just vinyl changes at franchise change going forward.