Great Western Coffee Shop

From the Maidenhead Advertiser (http://www.maidenhead-advertiser.co.uk/News/Areas/Maidenhead/First-Great-Western-and-South-West-Trains-in-bottom-third-of-train-operators-for-customer-satisfaction-27012015.htm):

No great surprise there however I wonder if what period constituted "Autumn"?

I suspect the signalling meltdown from early October onwards would have had quite an impact on customer satisfaction.

Surely Autumn 2014 was worse than 2013 due to the signalling problems, however satisfaction is up 1% from the year before  ???

Although, I personally think 'leaf-fall' was not as problematic last year.

Survey conducted (i.e. forms handed out) over a 10-11 week period, primarily in September-October. But it could be more at the start, I suspect, if they do the bulk of them first and then check their quotas and see where they need to do some more.

The TOC, FGW, getting the blame for Network Rail responsibility failures.

Why do I never get asked to fill in one of these questionnaires?  Given the amount of time I spend waiting for trains at stations there must be a flaw in their process if I haven't been asked   ;)

What I don't get is how Virgin Trains can get a 90% satisfaction yet receive twice as many complaints per passenger than any other operator?   ???

Generally it seems TOCs with a high proportion of commuters among their customers have a lower satisfaction rating. I assume this is because commuters tend to remember the bad journeys far better than the good ones, simply because if you rely on the train to get you to work you want to take it for granted the journey will be problem-free. And sometimes it isn't. Also there may be a degree of resentment at feeling trapped into having to use the train and being reliant on a specific TOC in order to get to work if there's no realistic alternative. Obviously this is more likely to apply to London commuters than elsewhere. (You could argue no-one 'needs' to live in Basingstoke or Reading and commute into London and they could change their lifestyle if it's that much of a problem but I doubt the average commuter would agree).

In comparison I'd imagine East Coast and Virgin have a smaller proportion of commuters (note the word 'proportion') as they don't run local services. Because it's more important to try to ensure as many people as possible get a seat on long distance journeys, their services are more aimed at providing a pleasant environment than Class 150s or Class 455s which are just designed to ferry people around swiftly. If people travel less regularly it's more likely they'll remember a pleasant journey.

Also outside of London, commuting into large cities on intercity services is doubtless a more pleasant experience. On FGW, commuting into Bristol from Chippenham is clearly going to be much less crowded than commuting in from Trowbridge or Weston-Super-Mare, particularly because a temporary reduction in carriages from 8 to 7 is less problematic than 3 to 2.

Obviously Crosscountry is a law unto itself as it doesn't go to London (so MPs don't use it much) and its largest fleet has 4 more seats than a 3 car class 159 (which also has first class)...

Hmmm....I give you C2C & Chiltern....mostly commuters?

The Virgin brand - somehow (and I know it's carefully nurtured) comes across as being customer respecting and friendly.  Which gives people both the strong support attitude, and also the feeling that they can complain if something goes wrong.   I''m not at all surprised at this apparent contradiction.

Personal experience in this area is our of date, and airline rather than rail. I've had some shocking delays with Virgin and with others.  But the difference I always noted was that Virgin kept you informed, gave good updates, and weren't afraid to say "we're not sure" as to how long it would take.   Made you feel wanted as a customer.  Contrast to those where you felt First class were being looked after, and the rest of you had a cheap flight and they would have much preferred no to have had to look after lower class travellers during times it wasn't running smoothly.

I suspect you are right.  Personally, I dislike the Virgin brand (the cheery accessibility doesn't convey competence or professionalism to me in the way that, say GNER with their very sharp uniforms did) but I must be in a minority.  On the ECML, the trains will be branded "Virgin" despite Virgin being a minority shareholder with only a 10% stake.  One wonders if Stagecoach (who are as capable of running a franchise on their own as any of the other owning groups) teamed up with Virgin solely for the brand name.

The brand is absolutely key to what Virgin is all about - Branson (and the Virgin Group) own very few of 'their' branded businesses outright, most have a significant ownership by another business, typically 51/49% in Virgins favour, for example Virgin Atlantic is 49% owned by Delta Airlines. Reduces the financial liability for Virgin, yet keeps the brand visible and has been a hugely successful business model for Mr Branson. So yes, I would agree that Stagecoach are probably most interested in the brand (and reduced liability) and also the spare capital availability. Branson, I presume, is interested in the London to Scotland rail routes to try to compete on some level with BA domestic routes and of course furthering the virgin brand. I doubt we'll see them on any other UK rail routes.

C2C is a relativley easy rail to operate out and back, with a bit of freight around Tilbury and adedicated train fleet and depot.

Chiltern has a lot of dedicated tracks and has increased both rolling stock and line capacity. I'd hate to see the level of complaints now if they hadn't aquired more stock and done the various Evergreen upgrades.

They do run into lack of track capacity North of Leamingtion competing with freight, cross country (some) and whoever the local TOC is (I can't keep up). 4 tracks Lapworth to Tysley?

It must be all about the brand, given Stagecoach own 49% of Virgin Trains, in reality Virgin East Coast is 94.9% Stagecoach and 5.1% Virgin management.

For me Chiltern are a good operator and have also benefited from the freedom their longer franchise gives them and a route that is largely 'their own' to a greater degree than most other franchise operators.

C2C also benefits from a largely self contained network and a uniform fleet of modern reliable EMUs.

And FGW?....vast majority of their network 'is their own' too....

FGW's area is much more difficult to operate effectively as there's a huge variety of other traffic, both freight and other passenger operators on many of their routes, the average train journey is longer and, within the company, there's a big mix of train types. 

All of those factors make it more difficult to satisfy the public than small TOC's like Chiltern and c2c.

That's not to say that FGW couldn't do much better in many areas of its operation though, just that any operator would find it incredibly difficult to achieve satisfaction scores that compare with those other two.