FGW▸ have improved travel in the South West overall, but let's not forget the infamous "Son of Beeching" scandal, when massive service cuts were planned at the beginning of the franchise, the appalling conditions in the Bristol area which provoked two "Fare strikes"
Nowt to do with FGW. Their original franchise held the TT that the
DfT» wanted them to run, and also specified the stock they could hire in. You can't blame them for not wanting to have to hire additional stock at their own expense? It's a commercial contract that the DfT let.
Chiltern are opening the railway to Oxford in order to become more profitable. It is a lucrative market (especially Water Eaton Parkway).
I thought they were doing it because they had a franchise commitment to do it.
No, their franchise simply specified that certain sums were to be spent on "services & stations" in their franchise, by certain dates. The projects that Chiltern wanted to do had to be approved by the DfT.
Just how they got the sign-off on Oxford (which
isn't part of their original route), I doubt we shall ever know. Agreed it was chosen for the new profit stream - someone managed to persuade them that competition on the Oxford route was a good thing (or else good as a diversionary route when the
PAD» route is shut)....
Lastly, in my view, Chiltern IS profitable. As some may know,
TOCs▸ hire trains from ROSCOEs. Chiltern have admitted in a Passenger Board meeting that they 'hire' the silver sets to themselves (Arriva/
DB» )! Stop doing that and I suspect Chiltern would a) make a profit and b) pay taxes on that profit to the Govt. Instead, Arriva/DB take the profit out gross rather than after tax.
Remember Starbucks and their taxes? This is DB/Chiltern's. The press got close a while back to this story, but didn't quite make it.