|
|
|
JayMac
|
 |
« Reply #1 on: March 11, 2014, 13:08:58 » |
|
Great news! For FirstGroup shareholders.   |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"A clear conscience laughs at a false accusation."
"Treat everyone the same until you find out they're an idiot."
"Moral indignation is a technique used to endow the idiot with dignity."
|
|
|
|
DidcotPunter
|
|
« Reply #2 on: March 11, 2014, 13:19:47 » |
|
Great news! For FirstGroup shareholders. Depends on the deal. Whatever you think of FGW▸ at least this would provide some continuity in franchise operator over a period of change. Trying to re-let the franchise from 2016 with the wires still going up, new IEPs▸ being tested and commissioned and ERMTS on the horizon would represent too big a commercial risk for the DfT» to hope to get a decent deal for taxpayer. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
broadgage
|
|
« Reply #3 on: March 11, 2014, 15:00:13 » |
|
For all their faults I would prefer First group to the likely alternatives.
And as posted previously there is going to be a lot of disruption and potential diversions and c**k ups with electrification and the new trains, not a good time to make other changes as well.
Also I see another very good reason to keep First group.
I and others have expressed concerns about the internal fit out of the new trains, and it has been stated that the design is not set in stone, but can be customised according to the wishes of the TOC▸ .
A cynic like me forsaw First group choosing an inferior layout and then loosing the contract to run the trains. The new TOC could then say "the layout is far from ideal for the prestige Inter City service that we aspire to run, but unfortunatly it was not choosen by us, and we have to make do with what we have"
If however First group are to run Western services for another 5 years, then they can hardly object to the internal fit out of the new trains, into which they had some input.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
A proper intercity train has a minimum of 8 coaches, gangwayed throughout, with first at one end, and a full sized buffet car between first and standard.
It has space for cycles, surfboards,luggage etc.
A 5 car DMU▸ is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
|
|
|
|
SDS
|
|
« Reply #4 on: March 11, 2014, 20:02:21 » |
|
This would be against EU» laws to award it. So expect legal challenges.
Should go back into public ownership!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I do not work for FGW▸ and posts should not be assumed and do not imply they are statements, unless explicitly stated that they are, from any TOC▸ including First Great Western.
|
|
|
|
JayMac
|
|
« Reply #5 on: March 11, 2014, 22:11:45 » |
|
Things are very rosy in franchise land. For the franchisees and their owners that is. Certainly not the passenger or taxpayer. Since franchising began, only 9% of TOC▸ profit has been reinvested in the industry or returned to government. 91% of TOC profits have gone to shareholders, if the TOC is part of a PLC, or to the state. But not the UK▸ state you understand. Nope. To Germany, France and the Netherlands, who have realised that the UK's bonkers franchising system is an ideal source of income to subsidise their own railways.
I don't buy the argument that this direct award is necessary now because of infrastructure and rolling stock changes in the coming years. More reason, in my book, if we must have franchising, to put Greater Western out to tender now. A competition where each company tendering can offer its plans for the transitional period. That was what was supposed to happen anyway until someone at the DfT» forgot how to use a calculator when awarding ICWC▸ to FirstGroup.
The one part of franchising that should keep franchisees on their toes and offering best value? Re-tendering. That is just being ignored at the moment.
What's the point of franchising on a fixed term basis if that fixed term can just be ignored by government in collusion with the TOCs? FirstGroup seem to be playing the politics very well at the moment with a Government seemingly scared that owning groups will walk away. So it seems that Government, because of their political hue, are colluding in private with TOCs to present these Direct Awards (full details of a third DA▸ will be announced soon - Northern's franchise expires 31st March - no re-tendering in place) as a fait accompli.
Stinks.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"A clear conscience laughs at a false accusation."
"Treat everyone the same until you find out they're an idiot."
"Moral indignation is a technique used to endow the idiot with dignity."
|
|
|
|
Electric train
|
|
« Reply #6 on: March 11, 2014, 22:37:41 » |
|
Possibly part of the reason why DfT» would consider the direct award is through lessons learnt on the Capital Connect franchise while the Thameslink works are being done the franchise TOC▸ errrrrrrrrrrrr First have take full commercial advantage of the fact the Thameslink project needs extra possessions and track access outside that agreed by DfT, with all the work on the GW▸ franchise area in the next 5 years it may be a difficult franchise to safely tender. A deep alliance with NR» will force a closer working relationship
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Starship just experienced what we call a rapid unscheduled disassembly, or a RUD, during ascent,”
|
|
|
|
bobm
|
|
« Reply #7 on: March 12, 2014, 01:24:09 » |
|
Great news! For FirstGroup shareholders. Certainly First Group shares have been on the rise over the last few days. Closed at 143.4 on Tuesday - their highest since May last year. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SDS
|
|
« Reply #8 on: March 12, 2014, 19:35:56 » |
|
Great news! For FirstGroup shareholders. Certainly First Group shares have been on the rise over the last few days. Closed at 143.4 on Tuesday - their highest since May last year. Glad I bought the maximum I could during the 85p 3for2 rights issue. I have a just under a few thousand 'liquid' shares plus some BAYE shares I cant touch for 4-5years due to tax issues. Apparently the Telegraph has made FGP.L one of its tips for 2014. Cant wait for the dividend to be finally re-instated. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I do not work for FGW▸ and posts should not be assumed and do not imply they are statements, unless explicitly stated that they are, from any TOC▸ including First Great Western.
|
|
|
|
Super Guard
|
|
« Reply #9 on: March 12, 2014, 23:04:59 » |
|
To be fair, a minor drop in mid-jan aside, they have been steadily rising since December.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Any opinions made on this forum are purely personal and my own. I am in no way speaking for, or offering the views of First Great Western or First Group.
If my employer feels I have broken any aspect of the Social Media Policy, please PM me immediately, so I can rectify without delay.
|
|
|
|
Lee
|
|
« Reply #10 on: March 14, 2014, 18:30:27 » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JayMac
|
|
« Reply #11 on: March 14, 2014, 19:05:08 » |
|
As I've already said. Stinks.
What was the Railways Act 1993 for if it can just be ignored wholesale?
I don't agree with franchising - we should have concessions - but that doesn't mean I agree that the franchising legal framework should be ignored just because it suits the politicians of the day.
Backroom deals between Government and suppliers of public services are never good or acceptable. The only winners from this are FirstGroup shareholders.
FGW▸ frontline staff I have a lot of time for. FirstGroup at a corporate level have no care whatsoever for passengers or the greater good. Neither does this supine Government, who appear to be bending over backward to keep a company at the helm of one of the largest rail franchises for the flimsiest of reasons. A company that has already demonstrated that they will walk away when times are bad.
We have one publicly owned TOC▸ - East Coast - which is making a healthy return to the exchequer. Yet despite that, it is the only one that will be refranchised by the current bunch of no-mark politicians we have running this country. Why isn't East Coast being postponed while the franchising mess at the DfT» is sorted out? Because it is publicly owned and the current mob on the Government benches can't stomach the idea of a public company actually making a net contribution to the public purse.
The proposed FGW 'deal' will do nothing for passengers or taxpayers. FirstGroup say it may "create better overall value", but neglect to say who for. That's very telling.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"A clear conscience laughs at a false accusation."
"Treat everyone the same until you find out they're an idiot."
"Moral indignation is a technique used to endow the idiot with dignity."
|
|
|
|
ellendune
|
|
« Reply #12 on: March 14, 2014, 20:40:10 » |
|
Basically the DfT» is stuffed on a new competition until electrification and IEP▸ is in place. Who would put in a decent bid for a franchise that is going to be subject to major delays due to the electrification works and introduction of a completely new set of rolling stock?
If FGW▸ can run the system during that period with the minimum of disruption to us passengers then they would come out with a good record that will be to their credit. The risk to them is that even if they do wonderfully other factors will make the experience so bad that they will become a toxic brand.
This is a big risk for FGW but less so for DfT
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
trainer
|
|
« Reply #13 on: March 14, 2014, 22:27:31 » |
|
What was the Railways Act 1993 for if it can just be ignored wholesale?
I don't agree with franchising - we should have concessions - but that doesn't mean I agree that the franchising legal framework should be ignored just because it suits the politicians of the day.
Once again The Nose hits the proverbial nail where it counts. I strongly agree with everything said in his last post. Basically the DfT» is stuffed on a new competition until electrification and IEP▸ is in place. Who would put in a decent bid for a franchise that is going to be subject to major delays due to the electrification works and introduction of a completely new set of rolling stock?
This is also true but is a result of the rules of a flawed franchise system being made up as we go along. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Oxman
|
|
« Reply #14 on: March 14, 2014, 23:31:42 » |
|
Quote from BNM:
"The proposed FGW▸ 'deal' will do nothing for passengers or taxpayers"
This suggests you (BNM) have had sight of the deal. Would you care to share it with rest of us?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
