Error in Easter 2015 changes document on the FGW web site?

[whole diary]

[grahame]

However, the majority of rail franchises do not make or pay for large scale (not just the odd station) infrastructure investment. FGW^▸ (First Great Western) do not and the point under discussion is that their advertising, to the layman, appears to suggest otherwise.

That was indeed, your original point, and views have been thoroughly aired.   What this discussion moved on to was  your contention that TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) are not even allowed to invest, which I disagreed with and quoted an example; thank you for backing up that change, and indeed talking about other examples.  Yes, the longer the franchise the more commercially attractive a large scale capital investment would be.

[ellendune]

The vast majority of infrastructure investment in the railways comes from fare revenues and the taxpayer. TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company), unlike almost any other business, make hardly any capital investment in infrastructure from profits. The byzantine franchising system doesn't allow for it.

It all comes from those two sources!

Even when TOCs put money up front they (rightly) expect a return which must come from the fare revenues. Or do you expect franchises to be run by their parent companies at a loss? They are not charities.

If a government owned TOC were to invest and not get a return then it would be coming from the taxpayer. 

The private sector is not a magic pot of money. 

 

[ChrisB]

The point immediately under discussion was your assertion that "flrailway franchising does not allow for TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) to make caputal investment in infrastructure"

That is what I'm calling you on. And you've just admitted you are incorrect

[JayMac]

It was another thread where I said TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) don't do capital investment.

I've modified that viewpoint after the examples given. Chiltern, with Evergreen 3 are an admirable exception. But then they have a long franchise. Even then though it could be someone else picking up the 'facility charge' tab in the future.

Nothing changes the fact that FGW^▸ (First Great Western) are giving an impression, through advertising, that they are contributing to the 'greatest investment since Brunel' in the Greater Western franchise area. Frankly I couldn't care less what other TOCs have done/are doing. There's no comparison with FGW hanging on the coat tails of Network Rail and looking to take credit.

I'm not suggesting at all that the private sector is a 'magic pot of money' either.

And there is the wider 'Wolmar' question. "What is franchising for?"

[4064ReadingAbbey]

And there is the wider 'Wolmar' question. "What is franchising for?"

Wolmar knows very well the answer to his question. He contributed two chapters on franchising to a book "All Change - British Railway Privatisation" edited by Freeman and Shaw and published by McGraw-Hill in 2000. The chapters are 6 'Creating the Passenger Rail Franchises' and  7 'Selling the Passenger Railway', the latter in conjunction with Roger Ford.

The man is not really a transport expert but a would-be politician whose utterances have to carefully analysed for ulterior motives.

The discussion about the different possible forms of organisation of what was a monolithic organisation is too long to go into in detail on this forum. Suffice it to say that it was recognised that the railways were a loss-making business which would continue to need subsidy for the foreseeable future and franchising was a method of making payments to private operators to keep the services running while allowing the Government to minimise these payments and get the best value for money through a competition every seven to ten years. 

[JayMac]

Or the alternate view:

https://www.tuc.org.uk/sites/default/files/tucfiles/The_Great_Train_Robbery_7June2013.pdf

[ellendune]

So government says they want to franchise railways.  They set some rules they want to work by.  Companies can put in a bid to take advantage of those rules or you can choose not to play games.  If they bid according to the rules we might want they will undoubtedly spend a lot of money on a bid that will loose.  A bid that includes investment to make a return by improving service (perhaps a legitimate way for a bidder to make money) is not possible because politicians will not allow long franchises. 

So they have a choice

- not to bid; or
- bid taking advantage of the rules. 

If none of them chose not to bid then DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) would be embarrassed by a lack of bidders.  If very few bid then it would be uncompetitive and the winning bidder would probably make a killing.  If DfT thought they would get few bids they would be trying to recruit bidders. 

So when private companies choose to bid to take advantage of the rules whose fault is it?

The whole fiasco of West Coast Bidding leads me firmly into thinking that it is the lack of business skills in those that let the contracts is the problem not the bidders. 

Don't blame FGW^▸ (First Great Western) for what you don't like. 

[JayMac]

I don't like FGW^▸ (First Great Western) taking credit for investment that is not theirs.

So who should I blame other than FGW?

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

I^m a bit surprised that the serious date errors in FGW^▸ (First Great Western)^s Easter publicity (ie the Easter Guide and the Poster) we discussed last Friday have STILL not been corrected on their website.

I run a website as I^m sure many others forum members do ^ if someone tells me about an error (and they do happen) I correct it within minutes, not days.

[TaplowGreen]

I^m a bit surprised that the serious date errors in FGW^▸ (First Great Western)^s Easter publicity (ie the Easter Guide and the Poster) we discussed last Friday have STILL not been corrected on their website.

I run a website as I^m sure many others forum members do ^ if someone tells me about an error (and they do happen) I correct it within minutes, not days.

Maybe a few ^ of the massive, multi billion ^ investment which FGW are claiming to be contributing to could be diverted into buying a few calendars? 

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

I^m a bit surprised that the serious date errors in FGW^▸ (First Great Western)^s Easter publicity (ie the Easter Guide and the Poster) we discussed last Friday have STILL not been corrected on their website.

So a week on and these date errors have still not been corrected on the FGW website.  They must have decided it doesn't matter if they refer to "Easter Monday 12th April" on the Welcome page to the Easter Guide, or "Sunday 6th April" on the pink poster.  I'm amazed.

[BerkshireBugsy]

I've taken the easy option and booked the week off following Easter Monday. Hopefully I got the dates right when completing the holiday request form

Easter is in August, isn't it?

[lordgoata]

Was just talking to a colleague and she said she has booked the week off due to the trains not running, and asked if I was doing the same.

Whatever FGW^▸ (First Great Western) are planning on running, they have really ballsed up the announcements. At this rate all the trains will be running around empty apart from a) those on here that know what's really happening, and b) those that pay no attention and will turn up as usual on Tuesday morning!

[wabbit]

So is there any advance info on what the timetables from RDG^▸ (Rail Delivery Group, or Reading station, depending on context) to PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains) will be like for next week then?

[ChrisB]

Check online planners? They're all there