Catering provision - IEP / beyond 2017

[whole diary]

[broadgage]

I suspect that catering revenue DOES cover the direct costs of consumable supplies and catering crew wages.
But it probably does NOT cover the indirect costs such as purchasing or leasing the catering vehicle, and the catering vehicles share of track access charges, drivers wages and diesel fuel or traction current used.

In my view these indirect costs are part of running a railway, just like providing toilets, wheelchair spaces and luggage space.

[grahame]

If revenue covered costs we wouldn't be having this debate.

I suspect that catering revenue DOES cover the direct costs of consumable supplies and catering crew wages.
But it probably does NOT cover the indirect costs such as purchasing or leasing the catering vehicle, and the catering vehicles share of track access charges, drivers wages and diesel fuel or traction current used.

In my view these indirect costs are part of running a railway, just like providing toilets, wheelchair spaces and luggage space.

I suspect it's not so much about covering costs but rather more about maximising (income - expenditure)

If I had space that I could sell for - say - ^120 per hour at (say) ^5 pounds expenditure above running the train (2 extra seats) or that I could generate an income of ^150 from, at an expenditure of salary plus supplies plus maintenance of specialist equipment - say ^50 pounds, then it would be sensible for me to provide a couple of seats rather than a trolley / space.  Haven't a clue what the real figures are.   

P.S.  No catering on the train may leave me free to charge more for at-station concessions which would be more valuable

[stebbo]

What's wrong with a buffet car between first and standard class as on most HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) at the moment. Pretty poor if you can't get coffee/tea/soft drink/ bacon roll or breakfast roll /sandwich. Agree that silver service is probably unneccesary.

Let's not make the railway into Ryanair - any more than it's already become.

[IndustryInsider]

I think the location of some facilities is partly down to maximising the use of the 'crumple zone' at each end of the train.  Passengers cannot travel in that part of the train, so it makes sense to use it for other non-passenger carrying things, such as bikes (as on the Class 180s) or a galley (as on the Voyagers).  Personally I would like to see a galley/store at the first class end of the train, together with a small shop/buffet and store in between the standard and first class section - as allowed for in the design of the train but not specified by the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) (though as I've said before let's wait and see how the final layout shapes up).

[Super Guard]

I think the location of some facilities is partly down to maximising the use of the 'crumple zone' at each end of the train.  Passengers cannot travel in that part of the train, so it makes sense to use it for other non-passenger carrying things, such as bikes (as on the Class 180s) or a galley (as on the Voyagers).  Personally I would like to see a galley/store at the first class end of the train, together with a small shop/buffet and store in between the standard and first class section - as allowed for in the design of the train but not specified by the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) (though as I've said before let's wait and see how the final layout shapes up).

...at which point it's too late to object/do anything about it?

There won't be a buffet IMO^▸ (in my opinion), it'll be trolley, but as with other aspects of the interior, if voices aren't heard before the final layout is confirmed, then you cannot really complain when it's too late to change.

[IndustryInsider]

Oh yes, I'd encourage everyone (who feels a trolley isn't adequate) to do everything they can, through the proper channels and not a whinge on here, to put pressure on those responsible (Dft/FGW^▸ (First Great Western)) for the final layout - both members of staff and the public.  From what I've heard FGW management themselves have been very proactive in discussions with the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) with all aspects of the train, but I'm not sure how many changes they can specify, or would want to specify, as (likely) long term operators of them.

[TaplowGreen]

Oh yes, I'd encourage everyone (who feels a trolley isn't adequate) to do everything they can, through the proper channels and not a whinge on here, to put pressure on those responsible (Dft/FGW^▸ (First Great Western)) for the final layout - both members of staff and the public.  From what I've heard FGW management themselves have been very proactive in discussions with the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) with all aspects of the train, but I'm not sure how many changes they can specify, or would want to specify, as (likely) long term operators of them.

I read (on another thread I think?) that Travelling Chef was losing ^1 million per year.....no sensible business would tolerate this loss for very long......like I said if it was profitable we wouldn't be having this debate.

[IndustryInsider]

I'm not sure how the demise of the Travelling Chef is relevant?  I don't think many people (aside from the unions and the chef's themselves) can argue with the fact it's being withdrawn, and most comments on here (including my own) seem to have been of the 'regretful yet inevitable' type.  Even Barry Doe has agreed it is sensible to withdraw them.

Buffet's are a whole different ball game though, as all the other similar long distance operators have them (or a shop) except for the 'just do enough' franchise that is Cross Country.  So that's East Coast, Virgin, East Midlands Trains, Hull Trains, Grand Central and Greater Anglia that are all presumably still able to make them work (i.e. any losses are fairly small and outweighed by the benefits of having them), some with a combination of a buffet and trolley for all passengers.

[TaplowGreen]

.....apologies, I got the wrong end of the stick 

.....maybe if FGW^▸ (First Great Western) are reluctant to provide a buffet themselves, it could be franchised to Subway or similar?

[Super Guard]

I was told by XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) catering staff once (yes I know pinch of salt), that the trolleys themselves don't take as much as the buffets, but their running costs are less, so overall better value for money (less losses) for XC and knickers to the public.

[broadgage]

.....apologies, I got the wrong end of the stick 

.....maybe if FGW^▸ (First Great Western) are reluctant to provide a buffet themselves, it could be franchised to Subway or similar?

Not certain if that would help.

The problem is not so much in staffing and supplying a buffet, FGW, Rail Gourmet, Subway and many others are capable of doing this.
The reluctance to provide a buffet is partly due to the space taken up, removing or downgrading catering will provide more of the famous "thousands of extra seats" Remember that most of the new trains are much shorter than those they are to replace, and that even the full length ones offer only a modest increase if compared to a high density HST^▸ (High Speed Train).

I also suspect that modern railway management dislike catering on general principles ! "if we don't provide it, then the wretched customers can not complain about it"  doing the minimum certainly removes complexity and leaves less to go wrong and be complained about.

[JayMac]

Buffet's are a whole different ball game though, as all the other similar long distance operators have them (or a shop) except for the 'just do enough' franchise that is Cross Country.  So that's East Coast, Virgin, East Midlands Trains, Hull Trains, Grand Central and Greater Anglia that are all presumably still able to make them work (i.e. any losses are fairly small and outweighed by the benefits of having them), some with a combination of a buffet and trolley for all passengers.

A small point of order if I may. East Midlands Trains rarely staff their buffets these days. Even when they do it is most likely to be with a static trolley. Officially, for Standard Class passengers it's an at-seat trolley service on Monday-Fridays. At the weekend the trolley may be static in the buffet, or the buffet stocked with a similar range to that available from a trolley.

[stebbo]

Travelled on Cross-Country from Cheltenham to Birmingham today. Trolley service - far from great.

[chuffed]

And yet.... on Tuesday I travelled on the 1852 XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) Peterbro to Brum via Leicester. Trolley did 2 complete runs up and down in that 90 minutes, was fully stocked and operated by a very professional young lady who welcomed passengers on and off in person at the stations....but despite all her efforts, very few were buying. With that degree of patronage, it is very hard to argue against removal of the trolley service.

[grahame]

I'm struck by the different metrics of the journeys on some of the trains we're talking about ... with East Coast services (London - Edinburgh) taking 4.5 hours with 4 intermediate stops (54 minutes between stations) in contrast to FGW^▸ (First Great Western) (London - Swanse) taking 3 hours with 9 intermediate stops (18 minutes between stations) and that latter journey getting yet shorter with electrification.   Will people want a buffet / go to a buffet / even buy from a trolley on a shorter journey where many of the customers will be much more local?    In our neck of the woods, IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) isn't the longest journeys - they stay HST^▸ (High Speed Train), and presumably the buffets stay on there.