Potential bidders for the next Greater Western franchise

[whole diary]

[ChrisB]

true....

[Chris from Nailsea]

From the Bristol Evening Post:

Firms line up to bid for Great Western contract

TEN companies have expressed interest in taking over the Great Western railway when First's contract comes to an end next year, it has been claimed.

The deadline for registering interest in running the service for the next 15 years ran out yesterday.

A rail insider, who asked not to be named, told the Evening Post they had seen a list of all the companies to have shown expressions of interest.

It includes a number of European and one Asian company, although all but one of them already operate train services in the UK^▸ (United Kingdom).

The only company to have officially confirmed its interest to date is existing operator First Great Western.

The Department for Transport will not officially reveal the names until later on in the bidding process.

But the Post understands that, aside from First, the list includes Virgin; National Express; Arriva, French rail operator Keolis, which is owned by SNCF^▸ (Societe Nationale des Chemins de fer Francais - French National Railways); Dutch operator Abellio (formerly NedRailways); Go-Ahead; the Spanish state railway RENFE^▸ (Spanish National Railways (Red Nacional de Ferrocarriles Espanoles)); Hong Kong based MTR and Serco. RENFE is the only company that does not already operate some form of rail service in the UK.

The Post understands that the companies involved always bid for UK rail franchises.

Firms had to submit interest via a pre-qualification questionnaire with the Department for Transport.

The government is consulting on what services and provisions the new franchise should include. Once that comes to an end on March 31, the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) will put out an invitation for tender.

This will whittle down the list to around three bidders, with the names likely to be revealed in May or June.

A decision is expected in the autumn, with the new operator taking over the franchise next May. The service runs trains between London, Bristol and the West Country, South Wales and areas of the Midlands.

First began running the franchise in 2005 but announced it would pull out last year. It has been heavily criticised for the move, which meant it could save around ^800 million of money it should have paid the government.

The re-appointment of the franchise is seen as a great opportunity by campaign groups and the city council, which hopes improved local services will be included in the contract.

The council launched the Bristol Metro 2013 campaign last month to lobby the DfT for better services to smaller stations like Severn Beach, Clifton and Bedminster.

A First Great Western spokesman said: "We can confirm we have submitted our pre-qualification questionnaire."

[Btline]

I doubt Virgin are interested! It contains local routes...

[JayMac]

I agree about Virgin, more likely to be Stagecoach.

[Chris from Nailsea]

Hmm. 

A rail insider, who asked not to be named, told the Evening Post they had seen a list of all the companies to have shown expressions of interest.

Reality check required here? 

[inspector_blakey]

As a relatively unbiased observer I'd be happy if First retained the franchise as well. Of course they have their faults and have made mistakes, but they really have done a lot of good since 2006 after what might be described as a faltering start. Capacity remains a serious problem but when I was a customer using Oxford station frequently my experience was transformed from the Thames Trains days (for the better!). It's also good to see what First has done to boost traffic on the west country branch lines, with very impressive results.

Wasn't overly impressed with NX's stewardship of Wessex Trains (particularly towards the end) although oddly they did a nice job at Wales and West and subsequently Wales and Borders. Arriva leaves me fairly cold on ATW^▸ (Arriva Trains Wales (former TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company))) and XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)), I'm afraid, and Govia (in the form of GoAhead) were responsible for the truly awful Thames Trains operation so their copy book is forever blotted in my world. Goes to show that a company that is capable of operating a truly excellent bus service (GoAhead is the parent of the Oxford Bus Company) doesn't necessarily make a good train operator. I have fairly limited experience of Stagecoach but my few journeys on South West and East Midlands Trains have been perfectly fine, although in common with others I wouldn't be too keen on the idea of them controlling both FGW^▸ (First Great Western) and SWT^▸ (South West Trains). And it might cause some kind of aneurism at Hogrider Towers should Stagecoach also win GW^▸ (Great Western)... 

[anthony215]

I will state that my wish which is that First will get the new Great Western franchise.

I know they had a bad start (I hope they have learned from that) although some of the blame has to be put  with the DFT^▸ (Department for Transport) under the previous government.

There are still some problems which  still need solving  and I am sure the management at First will agree with this. Hopefully some of the overcrowding will be solved when new trains become available such as some possible class 170's etc. from Scotrail  from 2015 and some of the class 165/166 dmu's from the Thames Valley.

National exress did in my opinion do a good job with the wales & borders franchise a lot better than Arriva/DB^» (Deutsche Bahn - German State Railway - about) are doing so far although they do sometimes have their good idea's such as perhaps stopping more Manchester - Milford Haven trains at some of the smaller stations such as Pyle

[Steve Bray]

Personally I'm not a fan of First.

I'm still narked by decisions stemming from the Dec 06 timetable; just little things like the 1803 Gatwick to Reading not stopping any more at Dorking West (because the franchise didn't make it necessary), so that now it runs non-stop from Deepdene to Guildford and then sits at Guildford for 6 minutes; the continuous de-celeration (it seems) of services especially on the Cotswold Line and the lack of ambition it has shown on that line since the re-doubling with a dubious service pattern. Many other little things besides. Anyway, that's just my personal opinion.

[Chris from Nailsea]

Personal opinions are perfectly valid, Steve Bray.

In a possibly rather absent-minded moment, I seem to have volunteered to draft up a response (on behalf of the Coffee Shop forum) to the Great Western franchise tender consultation.

Any views, such as yours, will be very welcome - and they will help to form the basis of our response, as users (and indeed potential users) of railways in the Great Western area!

Chris.

[woody]

I have an open mind on this one,lets wait and see who offers what first.My only reservation about First getting yet another bite of the cherry is that we would effectively then be exchanging a public monopoly (British Rail) on Great Western for a private monopoly and that is not what privatisation was suppose to be about.Certainly in my own neck of the woods Devon and Cornwall First have not measured up to stake holders hopes whose discontent been strongly communicated to Government by a cross party coalition of MPs^▸ (Member of Parliament) in the run up to the bidding process.Not surprisingly then in the last few months there has been a dramatic improvement in train puntuality west of Exeter after what seems years of unreliability.Amazing what happens when your backs against the wall.

[eightf48544]

In general terms I believe we should expect any new franchisee to:

Run a reliable service briskly.

Have a timetable which gives all stations a commuter service for work school and college to the nearest large town or provincial centre to cater for 8/9 start and 4/5/6/7 finishes with a couple of trains in the day for the odd half day. Also possible  late "Arts Trains" to cater for night at the cinema theatre etc.

A connection to London to get you to London no later than 11:00 with a return after 20:00 or later depending on distance.

Reliable trains with sufficient capacity to prevent standing on regular basis OK this might upset the "bean counters" by having units spare at midday but to compensate the units won't be thrashed as much and  it gives more maintenance time and therefore should if the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) is working correctly increase reliability.   

7 day a week railway with all stations open on Sundays unless there is absolutely no likelyhood of any passengers.

ATOC^» (Association of Train Operating Companies See - here) must be made to sort out fares the current farce it can't last.

Basically I would give it to any bidder that says that that there will be more trains, with more capacity running more reliably through smarter, accesable stations open  7 day a week   at the end of the franchise than at the beggining. If they add a simple fare structure without stupid anolmolies then I'd go for them.
 
If it's going to be a long franchise then we should DEMAND that the whole service is much better at the end than at beggining. Look at Chiltern almost too successful with their route modernisation, extra stock, extra trains and there's still the Bicester curve to come.

Just as an  incentive why not give the succesful TOC a bonus based of the reduction of road traffic in the area at the end of the franchise? Sorry saw the rock and the pond  I await the ripples.

[Chris from Nailsea]

Over the past day or so, this topic has developed into a very interesting and lively debate over a couple of (sort of) related issues.

In the interests of clarity, I've now split a few of those slightly divergent posts off from this topic and used them to form a couple of new topics: one on the lessons of Melksham's service levels for the new franchise, at http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=10331.0 , and one on the extent to which locally-resident management may influence service levels at a station, at http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=10333.0 .

I hope this will help to encourage an ongoing discussion on all three subjects, without them getting too inter-mangled here! 

CfN 

[grahame]

Thanks, Chris ... this had become one heck of a thread to unpickle too!

This isn't REALLY a proper quote as I've used 8F's post as the basis of a "Powepoint Slide" 

1. Run a reliable service briskly.
2. Have a timetable which gives all stations a commuter service for work school and college to the nearest large town or provincial centre.
3. A couple of trains in the day for the odd half day.
4. late "Arts Trains" to cater for night at the cinema theatre etc.
5. A connection to London to get you to London no later than 11:00 with a return after 20:00 or later depending on distance.
6. Reliable trains with sufficient capacity to prevent standing on regular basis
7. 7 day a week railway with all stations open on Sundays unless there is absolutely no likelyhood of any passengers.
8. A simple fare structure without stupid anolmolies then I'd go for them.

1. Yes, but "reliable" and "frequent" needs to take priority over paring off a few minutes.  Give me a train every hour that takes 30 minutes in preference to a train every 2 hours that takes 25.

2. Yes - and you suggested a wide commuter range.  People should be able to arrive at some point in the 45 minutes prior to their start, and leave again within 45 minutes of their finish ... be that a start time of 8 or 9, and an end time of 4, 5 or 6.  And they should be able to set off home later too - "sorry, can't stay late - last train" is a real promotion killer

3. Yes - only in exceptional circumstances should a daytime service drop below every 2 hours.

4. The "art train" doubles as the late night connection back from London too.

5. Yes - up to 120 miles, you're in potential commuter land and should be able to get to London by 08:30 and leave back after 21:00; up to 200 miles, your 11 a.m. / 8 p.m. is fine.

5a. Please do not overlook outbound business people - from London, should people be able to reach anywhere within 120 miles by 09:00 and within 200 miles by 10:00 ?

6. Ideally, all trains should run all the time "nearly all seats taken".  I don't want to pay for 2 or 3 seats most of the time because trains only run at 33% to 50% capacity.  And that will lead to *some* standing at peak times.  Perhaps the target should be to avoid the need to stand for more than 30 minutes, and to have a cap on acceptablity of train loading at 120% of the number of seats?

7. Yes - and Sunday services shouldn't start too much after weekday services.  07:30 is NOT too early for the first train.

8. Yes, please!

I have NOT include the rock that you threw into the pond, 8F, because I'm not sure how you would measure that and I think it could become one of those statistical nightmares that cost a fortune to calculate and was prone to all sorts of manipulation - ORCATS^▸ (Operational Research Computerised Allocation of Tickets to Services) raid gone wild thing.

[Kernow Otter]

Struck by the similarity of the last response to 8F, and the responses generated by the Cornwall Council survey, http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=10064.0 . 

It is an unfortunate legacy of the historical development of our system, that the Network is effectively London-centric, with a majority of service provisions being built around that.  While obviously carrying less passengers, the railway in the regions is no less an important part of the local transport plan.  It would be refreshing for the peripheries of the GW^▸ (Great Western) network to be given more consideration in terms of rail service provision.

[ChrisB]

You could get them - but the stock, needing to carry fewer people, wouldn't ne suitable for long-distance runs to London. Choice to be made....