As mentioned by Simon Dunn in the Rotala Management thread, service 226 is set to be withdrawn alongside services 45 (I assume it is the Walsall 45) and 002.
https://www.diamondbuses.com/news/45_002_226-services/
QuoteSince COVID we have been working in partnership with Transport for West Midlands (TfWM) in the hope that these services would recover. Since the end of August 2022 we have continued to sustain losses. The decline in viability of these routes is linked to the escalation in labour and operating costs and the lack of income growth. In January 2023, service revisions were put in place to try and align the income and expenditure of these routes and improve their viability.
This alignment has subsequently failed, and Diamond Bus has now reluctantly taken the decision to cancel our 45, 002 and 226 services from 15th April 2023.
Quote from: the trainbasher on February 09, 2023, 08:50:52 PMAs mentioned by Simon Dunn in the Rotala Management thread, service 226 is set to be withdrawn alongside services 45 (I assume it is the Walsall 45) and 002.
https://www.diamondbuses.com/news/45_002_226-services/
A similar strategy to what happened in Redditch last year to get the local authority to stump up some cash.
Quote from: MW on February 09, 2023, 08:56:08 PMA similar strategy to what happened in Redditch last year to get the local authority to stump up some cash.
Not necessarily. If TFWM actually get round to delivering the promised 'bonfire of tickets' that should already be in place by now, that might well suffice !
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/bus-fares-simplified-bonfire-bus-25232888
Quote from: metrocity on February 09, 2023, 09:10:03 PMNot necessarily. If TFWM actually get round to delivering the promised 'bonfire of tickets' that should already be in place by now, that might well suffice !
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/bus-fares-simplified-bonfire-bus-25232888
I've noticed the Dudley area tendered routes that Diamond have taken over from NX, don't carry the same number of passengers they did when operated by NX.
The NX 28 Halesowen end was busier than Diamond's 142A.
NX 11A was busier than Diamond's 25 Merry Hill end currently is too.
Quote from: metrocity on February 09, 2023, 09:10:03 PMNot necessarily. If TFWM actually get round to delivering the promised 'bonfire of tickets' that should already be in place by now, that might well suffice !
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/bus-fares-simplified-bonfire-bus-25232888
But what % of passengers currently are inconvenienced by this so called 'array of ticket options?'
I'd guess a very low % indeed, the majority use only NX services so wouldn't notice any change and the small % of users needing cross operator tickets is likely not sufficient to justify such a move.
How would this be funded? NX aren't going to just accept losing revenue from losing the independence of promoting their own tickets where 100% revenue goes to them. With cross operator tickets, even if the passenger only used 1 operator's services, then that operator would NOT receive the full 100% revenue paid by the passenger as only a certain % goes to the each operator - even if they got 95% it still wouldn't match the 100% revenue that the operator gets now.
I get that the smaller companies want a bigger slice of the financial pie, but ultimately this has to come from increased government subsidy for bus operators, not infeasible brain fart ideas like this.
What will ultimately happen if this gets brought in will be that operators will expect the same income as present so the day ticket prices will have to rise to pay for this. This doesn't benefit passengers in a time of increased costs pretty much everywhere at the moment, if anything the government should be looking at ways to subsidise reduced fares in the long term.
Quote from: the trainbasher on February 09, 2023, 08:50:52 PMAs mentioned by Simon Dunn in the Rotala Management thread, service 226 is set to be withdrawn alongside services 45 (I assume it is the Walsall 45) and 002.
https://www.diamondbuses.com/news/45_002_226-services/
Wow, I didn't think I'd ever see the 002 being withdrawn completely. Cut back to Merry Hill - Halesowen maybe but altogether...?
The thing is, if operators keep withdrawing routes, then its going to get to the point where TfWM are going to say no to funding them, which means that:
a) other routes will lose patronage, especially where passengers use them to connect to other services, and
b) areas are going have big gaps where there is no bus service provision, thus leaving people who cannot/do not drive stranded, and thus increase rates of isolation - especially where there are high numbers of the elderly and disabled.
The 226, for example, serves 3 town centres, the one of the WM areas main hospitals, a number of schools and a major employment centre. It is a service that has been running in a near similar form along the Dudley-Kingswinford-Merry Hill routing since at least the 90s (with only changes in the 00s to run via Wordsley Hospital (when it was the 264/5 and 274/5), and then later to run direct to Dudley from Russells Hall Hospital, and in 2023 when it started serving Wall Heath).
The 002 serves 2 town centres, a University, a major employment centre and a number of schools. It has run in a similar form since the 90s (with only minor changes over the years, from when Ludlows ran it)
Now if they are getting withdrawn, and there is a possibility that it may not get subsidised by the WMCA, then what chances do other routes in the Dudley area have? And if it does get subsidised, then another area could end up losing out on a bus service because of the need to balance the TfWM subsidised bus budget
Would these cuts happen under a TfL style bus network? Maybe not methinks
Quote from: the trainbasher on February 09, 2023, 09:47:19 PMThe thing is, if operators keep withdrawing routes, then its going to get to the point where TfWM are going to say no to funding them, which means that:
a) other routes will lose patronage, especially where passengers use them to connect to other services, and
b) areas are going have big gaps where there is no bus service provision, thus leaving people who cannot/do not drive stranded, and thus increase rates of isolation - especially where there are high numbers of the elderly and disabled.
The 226, for example, serves 3 town centres, the one of the WM areas main hospitals, a number of schools and a major employment centre. It is a service that has been running in a near similar form along the Dudley-Kingswinford-Merry Hill routing since at least the 90s (with only changes in the 00s to run via Wordsley Hospital (when it was the 264/5 and 274/5), and then later to run direct to Dudley from Russells Hall Hospital, and in 2023 when it started serving Wall Heath).
The 002 serves 2 town centres, a University, a major employment centre and a number of schools. It has run in a similar form since the 90s (with only minor changes over the years, from when Ludlows ran it)
Now if they are getting withdrawn, and there is a possibility that it may not get subsidised by the WMCA, then what chances do other routes in the Dudley area have? And if it does get subsidised, then another area could end up losing out on a bus service because of the need to balance the TfWM subsidised bus budget
Would these cuts happen under a TfL style bus network? Maybe not methinks
If there were ever a compelling argument for franchising...
Quote from: MasterPlan on February 09, 2023, 09:39:41 PMWow, I didn't think I'd ever see the 002 being withdrawn completely. Cut back to Merry Hill - Halesowen maybe but altogether...?
The Halesowen - Bartley Green link seems to still have the 202 still, so seems to be quite a heavy reduction from 4bph to 1bph for that section to.
Again the issue with the 002 is reliability. Unfortunately drivers are incapable of sticking to timetable schedules as of late. The amount of 002s I've seen in 2s or running NIS to get back ontime it's ridiculous.
I know a lot of good drivers have moved onto better things as can expected, but the drivers on routes now really do need some form of monitoring and training. It's not acceptable
Quote from: Trident 4194 on February 09, 2023, 10:14:29 PMAgain the issue with the 002 is reliability. Unfortunately drivers are incapable of sticking to timetable schedules as of late. The amount of 002s I've seen in 2s or running NIS to get back ontime it's ridiculous.
I know a lot of good drivers have moved onto better things as can expected, but the drivers on routes now really do need some form of monitoring and training. It's not acceptable
Maybe they're getting stuck in traffic congestion or at roadworks somewhere causing the bus to be late. Hardly the drivers fault if that's the case, which I expect is highly likely.
I find it hard to believe they are all "deliberately running late" as you seem to put it.
Quote from: Straightlines on February 09, 2023, 10:02:48 PMIf there were ever a compelling argument for franchising...
How exactly would franchising solve the underlying problem here - less passenger and increasing costs?!?
Anyone who thinks the London model is something to aspire to needs their head looking at. All it does is throw increasingly large amounts of money into a never ending hole without ever actually addressing any of the real problems facing the bus industry in the long term.
As passengers or people working within the industry, we all see things in a rose tinted way. I wish we could go back to one operator running everything in the region but it's not realistic. Non-bus users will not be happy having to pay increasingly high tax subsidies to support bus routes that clearly passengers do not use as frequently as they did.
Franchising looks like it works on already profitable routes as the passengers are already there. Poor performing routes won't suddenly gain massive numbers of new passengers just because they are franchised, all that is happening is tax payers are subsidising the needs of an increasingly few individuals who want every route to remain operational. The financial reality of this country does not allow endless subsidies in this way and it won't help.
Clever, Joined up thinking is what is needed and not just looking at a London system that looks great on the surface but has massive financial issues under it!
Quote from: MasterPlan on February 09, 2023, 09:39:41 PMWow, I didn't think I'd ever see the 002 being withdrawn completely. Cut back to Merry Hill - Halesowen maybe but altogether...?
I'm also shocked by the withdrawal of the 002. A long-standing established service that until recently ran every 15 minutes. They've been very open about the reasons in that press release, but to go from this frequency to withdrawn within a few months....well that's some demise.
Quote from: the trainbasher on February 09, 2023, 09:47:19 PMThe thing is, if operators keep withdrawing routes, then its going to get to the point where TfWM are going to say no to funding them, which means that:
a) other routes will lose patronage, especially where passengers use them to connect to other services, and
b) areas are going have big gaps where there is no bus service provision, thus leaving people who cannot/do not drive stranded, and thus increase rates of isolation - especially where there are high numbers of the elderly and disabled.
The 226, for example, serves 3 town centres, the one of the WM areas main hospitals, a number of schools and a major employment centre. It is a service that has been running in a near similar form along the Dudley-Kingswinford-Merry Hill routing since at least the 90s (with only changes in the 00s to run via Wordsley Hospital (when it was the 264/5 and 274/5), and then later to run direct to Dudley from Russells Hall Hospital, and in 2023 when it started serving Wall Heath).
The 002 serves 2 town centres, a University, a major employment centre and a number of schools. It has run in a similar form since the 90s (with only minor changes over the years, from when Ludlows ran it)
Now if they are getting withdrawn, and there is a possibility that it may not get subsidised by the WMCA, then what chances do other routes in the Dudley area have? And if it does get subsidised, then another area could end up losing out on a bus service because of the need to balance the TfWM subsidised bus budget
Would these cuts happen under a TfL style bus network? Maybe not methinks
There clearly aren't the numbers using the 002, 45 or 226, otherwise they wouldn't be facing withdrawals...
Would you really want TfWM being in charge of all WM Bus Services under franchising, given how well they managed & implemented the Jan 1st changes ? It will cost the WM taxpayer a fortune to implement franchising & provide/retain routes carrying fresh air.
As for no cuts under a TfL style bus network, the 271 has just been cut despite significant requests to save it during public consultation.
Having the 002 terminate at Weoley Castle doesn't do it any favours, there aren't many routes left that customers can connect with there than say somewhere like Northfield which has connections going all over. TfWM's Cashpoint is ready to pay out, lets just hope the plan doesn't backfire and the cash doesn't end up going to Rugby by mistake, Miller St will be needing a broadband speed boost!
QuoteThere clearly aren't the numbers using the 002, 45 or 226, otherwise they wouldn't be facing withdrawals...
Would you really want TfWM being in charge of all WM Bus Services under franchising, given how well they managed & implemented the Jan 1st changes ? It will cost the WM taxpayer a fortune to implement franchising & provide/retain routes carrying fresh air.
As for no cuts under a TfL style bus network, the 271 has just been cut despite significant requests to save it during public consultation.
Well, how come it was sustainable for Diamond to carry buses full of empty air on the 226 10 years ago with bargain basement return fares when they decided to compete against Hansons then if they can't make it sustainable now?
At least, under a franchise model, the franchising authority have to consult the public when changes are made, and they answer to both councillors and the public. Under the current model operators can cut what they want, when they want (as long as they give the appropriate notice) and only answer to the shareholders.
I would have the 002 terminate at field lane Bartley green.
Quote from: j789 on February 09, 2023, 10:28:16 PMHow exactly would franchising solve the underlying problem here - less passenger and increasing costs?!?
Anyone who thinks the London model is something to aspire to needs their head looking at.
Simple. It would stop operators (like the aforementioned) dictating what routes operate and instead would take a holistic view on the entire network.
Whilst the London model has some flaws, what model do you want to aspire to? The dying carcass that is Worcesters bus network!?
Quote from: Trident 4194 on February 09, 2023, 10:14:29 PMAgain the issue with the 002 is reliability. Unfortunately drivers are incapable of sticking to timetable schedules as of late. The amount of 002s I've seen in 2s or running NIS to get back ontime it's ridiculous.
I know a lot of good drivers have moved onto better things as can expected, but the drivers on routes now really do need some form of monitoring and training. It's not acceptable
It also doesn't help the crap buses Diamond use on the 002 either when most of them on a daily basis break down! When I worked for Diamond in 2018 the ONLY buses that were suppose to be used on the route were the 68 plate Streetlites and I know these were purchased for use but not exclusively on the 002 then all of a sudden those Streetlites one by one started being used on other routes and the crap Volvo's (etc) were then being used on the route instead
Quote from: winston on February 09, 2023, 10:51:25 PMWould you really want TfWM being in charge of all WM Bus Services under franchising, given how well they managed & implemented the Jan 1st changes ?
Not on their current performance! At the moment the notion of a bus network seems to have been lost. Over five weeks after the changes there are no maps, even online. And publicity about new services is limited to bus stop departure lists - which isn't going to catch the eye.
Quote from: Mike K on February 09, 2023, 10:29:52 PMI'm also shocked by the withdrawal of the 002. A long-standing established service that until recently ran every 15 minutes. They've been very open about the reasons in that press release, but to go from this frequency to withdrawn within a few months....well that's some demise.
I am too shocked about the 002 given that it recently ran at a 15 minute frequency.
Given the 002 is the quickest route between Halesowen and Merry Hill and is a long established service I am surprised by this. I would have thought a reduction to every 30 mins and cut the Sunday service would have been tried first before being withdrawn all together.
Quote from: Straightlines on February 09, 2023, 11:13:58 PMSimple. It would stop operators (like the aforementioned) dictating what routes operate and instead would take a holistic view on the entire network.
Whilst the London model has some flaws, what model do you want to aspire to? The dying carcass that is Worcesters bus network!?
How can you compare Worcester and the West Midlands? Worcester has suffered because of many factors, particularly a mostly unsupportive council who clearly don't see buses as a viable transport solution - they got rid of their own operated park and ride for goodness sake!
The West Midlands scene is no where near this level of decay, when was the last time a Birmingham trunk route got withdrawn? NX provide pretty much all of them and the only issues there are lack of drivers not cutting services - franchising won't solve that so there will be no difference.
The services being cut are the peripheral routes not serving Birmingham, it's unfortunate but, like in smaller places like Worcester, if the passenger numbers aren't there any more, unless you are advocating throwing endless money away on unsustainable routes, there is going to be a continued rationalisation of the network on such routes. But it isn't the trunk routes that are affected currently so why franchise these as they operate fine as they are (bar the driver shortages mentioned above)?
Franchising is not the answer to anything bus related, it's a very expensive short term fix that won't solve any of the issues the industry faces. It's also ironic those advocating it are often those also moaning about the profit margins of private bus companies and how they want to return to the days of nationalisation. If anything, the opposite will happen and more tax payer money will be wasted.
Quote from: hlliwmai on February 09, 2023, 11:15:42 PMIt also doesn't help the crap buses Diamond use on the 002 either when most of them on a daily basis break down! When I worked for Diamond in 2018 the ONLY buses that were suppose to be used on the route were the 68 plate Streetlites and I know these were purchased for use but not exclusively on the 002 then all of a sudden those Streetlites one by one started being used on other routes and the crap Volvo's (etc) were then being used on the route instead
Management must have heard you. Look at all these streetlites on the 002 today!
Quote from: Straightlines on February 09, 2023, 10:02:48 PMIf there were ever a compelling argument for franchising...
And franchising will be cost effective? I mean you do realise that franchises are funded from the same pot of money as currently used for subsidised routes. The main difference is that operators are normally forced to operate the services for up to 10 years even if they're losing money.
Quote from: Rachvince53 on February 10, 2023, 10:47:21 AMAnd franchising will be cost effective? I mean you do realise that franchises are funded from the same pot of money as currently used for subsidised routes. The main difference is that operators are normally forced to operate the services for up to 10 years even if they're losing money.
Cost effective to whom?
My main concern is that we need a usable bus network in the West Midlands, and not one where we have 2-3 dominant legacy operators that can suddenly decide that large areas or communities no longer have local bus services to access Education or Employment opportunities. (with the subsequent hope then that the local authority will put these routes out to tender).
The commercial local bus model is over.
QuoteHow can you compare Worcester and the West Midlands? Worcester has suffered because of many factors, particularly a mostly unsupportive council who clearly don't see buses as a viable transport solution - they got rid of their own operated park and ride for goodness sake!
The West Midlands scene is no where near this level of decay, when was the last time a Birmingham trunk route got withdrawn? NX provide pretty much all of them and the only issues there are lack of drivers not cutting services - franchising won't solve that so there will be no difference.
The services being cut are the peripheral routes not serving Birmingham, it's unfortunate but, like in smaller places like Worcester, if the passenger numbers aren't there any more, unless you are advocating throwing endless money away on unsustainable routes, there is going to be a continued rationalisation of the network on such routes. But it isn't the trunk routes that are affected currently so why franchise these as they operate fine as they are (bar the driver shortages mentioned above)?
Franchising is not the answer to anything bus related, it's a very expensive short term fix that won't solve any of the issues the industry faces. It's also ironic those advocating it are often those also moaning about the profit margins of private bus companies and how they want to return to the days of nationalisation. If anything, the opposite will happen and more tax payer money will be wasted.
So effectively what you are saying is that it is alright for Birmingham to have a bus service, but residents of Dudley, Sandwell and Walsall, who come under the same Combined Authority and have a combined population similar than Birmingham, can have cuts?
Franchising in both Manchester and London have attracted more operators bidding for routes than the current commercial/subsidised network in the WM area. I mean, some routes in the last WM tender round had only 1 bidder - whereas in the Franchise round for Manchester, even operators who have no operations there have been bidding for bus services.
Quote from: the trainbasher on February 10, 2023, 12:00:08 PMSo effectively what you are saying is that it is alright for Birmingham to have a bus service, but residents of Dudley, Sandwell and Walsall, who come under the same Combined Authority and have a combined population similar than Birmingham, can have cuts?
Franchising in both Manchester and London have attracted more operators bidding for routes than the current commercial/subsidised network in the WM area. I mean, some routes in the last WM tender round had only 1 bidder - whereas in the Franchise round for Manchester, even operators who have no operations there have been bidding for bus services.
Quote from: the trainbasher on February 10, 2023, 12:00:08 PMSo effectively what you are saying is that it is alright for Birmingham to have a bus service, but residents of Dudley, Sandwell and Walsall, who come under the same Combined Authority and have a combined population similar than Birmingham, can have cuts?
Franchising in both Manchester and London have attracted more operators bidding for routes than the current commercial/subsidised network in the WM area. I mean, some routes in the last WM tender round had only 1 bidder - whereas in the Franchise round for Manchester, even operators who have no operations there have been bidding for bus services.
I think to describe the 002, 226 and 45 as 'peripheral routes not serving Birmingham' kind of shows his PLC driven mentality. In fact, I'm not sure what whether they serve or not serve Birmingham has to do with it at all!
This looks serious?
https://www.diamondbuses.com/news/45_002_226-services/
09 February 2023
Diamond Bus are currently reviewing the viability of our Commercial Services operating in the West Midlands County.
Commercial Services are the services which we operate without any level of subsidy. They are funded purely on the income through our ticket sales, the income received though accepting network cards (such as nBus and nNetwork) and National Concessionary Passes.
Unfortunately, all our Commercial Services are loss-making in the TfWM area.
Since COVID we have been working in partnership with Transport for West Midlands (TfWM) in the hope that these services would recover. Since the end of August 2022 we have continued to sustain losses. The decline in viability of these routes is linked to the escalation in labour and operating costs and the lack of income growth. In January 2023, service revisions were put in place to try and align the income and expenditure of these routes and improve their viability.
This alignment has subsequently failed, and Diamond Bus has now reluctantly taken the decision to cancel our 45, 002 and 226 services from 15th April 2023.
Through our partnership discussions, the long-established position was that 'Low Fare Zone' ticketing would be phased out and all fares would align to a consistent rate across the whole West Midlands region. In simple terms we were advised that the Sandwell & Dudley Low Fare Zone £3 Day Ticket would align to the current West Midlands £4 Day Ticket.
This is now expected not to happen, which means these services will continue to lose money. Diamond Bus, has therefore been left with no choice but to deregister these heavily loss-making services.
Diamond will continue to work with TfWM, as they assess options to maintain service provision in those areas affected by these withdrawals and we will keep passengers updated with further details over the coming weeks.
Yeah, it's been posted in the Diamond Tividale thread where there's a discussion about it
Sorry - didn't see it.
Best to close this then?
Quote from: the trainbasher on February 10, 2023, 12:00:08 PMSo effectively what you are saying is that it is alright for Birmingham to have a bus service, but residents of Dudley, Sandwell and Walsall, who come under the same Combined Authority and have a combined population similar than Birmingham, can have cuts?
Franchising in both Manchester and London have attracted more operators bidding for routes than the current commercial/subsidised network in the WM area. I mean, some routes in the last WM tender round had only 1 bidder - whereas in the Franchise round for Manchester, even operators who have no operations there have been bidding for bus services.
No that is not what I am saying at all! Clearly you missed the underlying message of that post.
What I am saying is that those advocating franchising as this amazing solution to all bus industry ills completely ignore the fact that the current status quo is absolutely fine regarding the main trunk routes in the West Midlands (accepting current driver shortages as mentioned in my post).
What these 'franchise' promoters are saying is that it will protect the periphal routes that are less profit making - that is the point I made not that non-Birmingham areas shouldn't have a good service. However, what is true is that tax payers shouldn't have to foot a never ending bill for services that are now loss making and unsustainable.
What you are suggesting is that every route should be saved because of some fanciful notion that it was sustainable in the past. Times change sadly and we need to look at things realistically. Ultimately, as harsh as it sounds, why should the majority have to subsidise through increased taxes the minority using these routes (whose numbers are clearly reducing year on year hence the reason for commercial withdrawal).
Sadly some people do not live in the real world when it comes to long term financial planning. Franchising would just kick the can down the road a few more years without solving the underlying problem of lack of government investment in the bus industry. The ultimate outcome would be the same but massive amounts of tax payer money would have been wasted over those extra years trying to keep routes alive that just can't survive now.
Quote from: Straightlines on February 10, 2023, 12:12:45 PMI think to describe the 002, 226 and 45 as 'peripheral routes not serving Birmingham' kind of shows his PLC driven mentality. In fact, I'm not sure what whether they serve or not serve Birmingham has to do with it at all!
No living in the real world not the la la land of enthusiasts! As for focusing on routes serving Birmingham, the reason why they are not in danger of withdrawal is because they still have enough passengers to support them commercially even if they are 20% less than pre-COVID days. That is a commercial reality - serving major population centres along fairly fast trunk routes adds extra protection for operators as the profit margins on those are generally far higher than other services. You'll notice Diamond aren't changing their 16 and 50 services despite these having competition on yet routes like the 002 with little competition are at risk because of what I explain above.
It is true that peripheral routes, particularly those convoluted routes serving many places like the 002, are more at risk as they don't have the commercial margins to lose 20% of passengers and still be sustainable, whereas trunk city routes still do. It's not really that difficult to see this reality surely!
Quote from: j789 on February 10, 2023, 05:34:49 PMNo living in the real world not the la la land of enthusiasts! As for focusing on routes serving Birmingham, the reason why they are not in danger of withdrawal is because they still have enough passengers to support them commercially even if they are 20% less than pre-COVID days. That is a commercial reality - serving major population centres along fairly fast trunk routes adds extra protection for operators as the profit margins on those are generally far higher than other services. You'll notice Diamond aren't changing their 16 and 50 services despite these having competition on yet routes like the 002 with little competition are at risk because of what I explain above.
It is true that peripheral routes, particularly those convoluted routes serving many places like the 002, are more at risk as they don't have the commercial margins to lose 20% of passengers and still be sustainable, whereas trunk city routes still do. It's not really that difficult to see this reality surely!
You should get a job at Summer Drain !
Quote from: metrocity on February 10, 2023, 05:41:21 PMYou should get a job at Summer Drain !
To try and make this easy to understand. Roughly, depending upon bus/ Mellor/ Single/ Double/ Age of Asset, hours of operation, type of vehicle, etc we need to earn around £50 per hour for a bus service.
With the fares at £3 for a Day Ticket, concessionary fares reimbursement at less than £1, NBus reimbursement around £1, and fares so low, the average yield per passenger is around £1 per passenger. For a bus to earn £50 per hour (this has escalated as a result of labour cost increases (make up over 50% of our cost), fuel, and inflation across our sector), and then you have passenger numbers which are on like for like routes around 85%
Do you see the services we have deregistered carrying 50 people per average per hour?
In my opinion this is why we are seeing a lot of deregistration's in the Low Fare Zone areas.
Simon
Franchising
This would be at least 5 years down the road, the crisis the industry is in is now, a solution needs to be found now. If we go franchise what do we do in the interim to stabilise the Network.
People who advocate franchising always state TFL success, have we forgotten the vast amounts of taxpayers money that TFL has gobbled up so far compared to what the rest of England has had for the fully deregulated model. Also the average walking distance to a bus in London is well over the 400m that we enjoy in the West Midlands. So is TFL something we should aspire to?
Several people predicted over a year ago the reality we are now facing, fare elasticity models snap when you lower the fare to the point where you physically cannot get enough passengers on the bus due to capacity to make the bus break even.
QuoteHaving the 002 terminate at Weoley Castle doesn't do it any favours, there aren't many routes left that customers can connect with there than say somewhere like Northfield which has connections going all over.
I'm not disagreeing with you, but I do think it is worth mentioning that there is still the X21, which doesn't serve Northfield.
I can't help thinking we've gone off target on this thread. However, I continue that. Losing the 45 is very sad for me as it is the 1st bus I used alone as a kid. In those days the 401/402 still went through Caldmore to Delves school (in 1990 no problem sending a 10 year old to junior school alone on a bus).
As has been said on many threads over many years, it is very easy to lose passengers, very difficult to get them back. My friends parents, back in the mid 1970s, used to get the bus from Shelfield (Walsall) to the Walsall game, another bus to Brum for meal and theatre show and back to Shelfield on the 158/258 (I wasn't born then so route number???). The route suffered from anti social behaviour on a Saturday evening. The last occasion one woman attacked another with a broken glass bottle. Blood and glass everywhere. More than 45 years later, they have never ever once caught a bus as a result. Now with their free pass, they drive to Tame Bridge to get the train to Brum. They never use the 9 or 10 or the 997.
The hey day for NX (& Diamond?) in Walsall was arguably 2015. Brand new platinum's racing to Brum using the underpasses and flyovers, for example people flocking out of the Park Hall estate- people who can afford expensive new cars etc preferring to use a new bus on the X51 that got them to the centre with a frequent timetable. Relatively new single deckers running the local and black country routes. The only problem is, how many people did NX lose from buses 10 years earlier. Around 2005, Metrobuses with no heating (I remember one snowy journey on a 394 where the snow had piled up with no heating to melt it) bought prior to deregulation of the buses in the 1980s, well before Nat Ex had even bought the WM franchise. Walsall I would argue has never recovered from that nadir, people lost then were lost forever. The 10 still commands a 30 minute service in the evening whilst all around it evening routes were cut, cut and cut again. However any chance for success given it hasn't seen any new buses for almost 40 years on the route (I know it got 12-18 month hand me downs for a time from the 37 [now 4] back in April 2010 after an area review) seems highly remote. Until recently, my local route Diamonds 35/35A. The only problem was it was also Arriva Wednesfield's route before it. OOPS.
Fares being the problem? Just catch a Stagecoach in the Lake District and tell me high fares lead to failure. Poor service, poor quality stock and anti social behaviour together with constant cutting and changing and reducing of buses out of core hours. A success story, the 404 as was. My parents route were Black Diamond deluxe buses competed against a "new" 6 minute frequency from NX that had no intention of buying new buses for a Black Country route at that time. Too few examples of that, too many of the let downs.
Quote from: j789 on February 10, 2023, 05:34:49 PMNo living in the real world not the la la land of enthusiasts! As for focusing on routes serving Birmingham, the reason why they are not in danger of withdrawal is because they still have enough passengers to support them commercially even if they are 20% less than pre-COVID days. That is a commercial reality - serving major population centres along fairly fast trunk routes adds extra protection for operators as the profit margins on those are generally far higher than other services. You'll notice Diamond aren't changing their 16 and 50 services despite these having competition on yet routes like the 002 with little competition are at risk because of what I explain above.
It is true that peripheral routes, particularly those convoluted routes serving many places like the 002, are more at risk as they don't have the commercial margins to lose 20% of passengers and still be sustainable, whereas trunk city routes still do. It's not really that difficult to see this reality surely!
Your constant argument about Birmingham trunk routes is fairly irrelevant given that Diamond have stated 'Unfortunately, all our Commercial Services are loss-making in the TfWM area.' In fact, I'd argue some Birmingham trunk routes are more susceptible to passenger losses due to commuters now working from home on many days of the week.The reality is if Diamond withdraw their loss making 16/50, there will not be a tender for them. I'm sure they will be hoping replacement tenders are procured for some of the 002, 45 and 226 given the lack of bidders of late!Perhaps I am in the 'la la land of enthusiasts' as you say, but it is probably more of an accurate view than having done a few trips into Birmingham up the Bristol Road a few years ago!
Quote from: Straightlines on February 10, 2023, 08:56:16 PMYour constant argument about Birmingham trunk routes is fairly irrelevant given that Diamond have stated 'Unfortunately, all our Commercial Services are loss-making in the TfWM area.' In fact, I'd argue some Birmingham trunk routes are more susceptible to passenger losses due to commuters now working from home on many days of the week.
The reality is if Diamond withdraw their loss making 16/50, there will not be a tender for them. I'm sure they will be hoping replacement tenders are procured for some of the 002, 45 and 226 given the lack of bidders of late!
Perhaps I am in the 'la la land of enthusiasts' as you say, but it is probably more of an accurate view than having done a few trips into Birmingham up the Bristol Road a few years ago!
You really do show a complete lack of understanding of the underlying issues here in those statements - you have no acknowledgment that it is years of government incompetence and underfunding of the bus industry that has led to this grim reality we are all facing currently.
Trust me no larger transport company wants to have to resort to running routes under tender compared to running them commercially - it is financial suicide in the long run, just look at how many of the smaller companies in the West Midlands, who mostly were running tendered services, over recent years have either gone under or been taken over. That is the reality of the situation that you seem to want to ignore. Look what happened with IGo as a prime example of what predominately tendered operation can lead to financially.
Profitable commercial operation allows the operator to try new things and build future growth. Tendered routes do not provide that as there is always the risk a few years later that another company gets the tender - why risk trying anything new on those routes when your company likely won't see any benefit in future years? Whereas running them commercially the operator is more likely to try new things, use better vehicles, etc.
You seem to suggest companies like Diamond withdraw services Willy nilly as they want tender funding. However, surely you can see that operating the routes commercially is much better for the company long term so this really is last resort stuff. Post-COVID, you'd be hard pressed to find any larger bus company who hasn't been forced to either withdraw or significantly change their service offerings. Ironically, the short term cost to government of increasing bus subsidies by guaranteeing operators a set amount for every route they operate (so that withdrawals like these can be prevented and operators could actually start meaningful planning for the future without the financial burdens they currently face) would actually be far less than the costs associated with having to tender routes.
Take your aim at the government and its lack of bus funding, not immature pops at people highlighting the operating reality in 2023.
I totally understand were diamond are coming from , the 002 my partner relies on this to get to work getting it from Halesowen to Bartley green , were we connect with 18 , I no there is the 202 but this in only hourly , it can take a hour to do this journey at the best of times I presume it will mean in the near future 9 0r x10 to bearwood then the 11 to selly oak , and then either the 61 or 63 to Northfield,
Quote from: Bus127us on February 11, 2023, 04:36:00 PMI totally understand were diamond are coming from , the 002 my partner relies on this to get to work getting it from Halesowen to Bartley green , were we connect with 18 , I no there is the 202 but this in only hourly , it can take a hour to do this journey at the best of times I presume it will mean in the near future 9 0r x10 to bearwood then the 11 to selly oak , and then either the 61 or 63 to Northfield,
Without the 002. there's also the 19 and 20 option it appears as well as the 18 and 202 one.
Quote from: 2206 on February 11, 2023, 05:40:52 PMWithout the 002. there's also the 19 and 20 option it appears as well as the 18 and 202 one.
19 to Harborne and 76 to Northfield is another option.
Caught the 13:22 202 as far as Bartley green today and the solo 20870 was carrying at least 15-20 passengers from Halesowen
Would now be a time to radically think the basis of the 45. Especially with the 2 major operators in the area both giving up on a route that in relatively recent times pre Covid had 12 buses an hour between Walsall and Yew Tree (8 from NX, 4 from Diamond).
How about a 16B/16Y, Rather than run the buses from Walsall, Yew Tree to West Brom, run them as extensions of the 16 to/from Birmingham instead, through Yew Tree to Walsall along the current 45 route? I can't see the point of subsidies to cover what must be a failing route given very recent history but some sort of service is needed. The West Brom side of the 45 route is covered anyway from lots of sources. Want a connection from Yew Tree estate itself to West Brom, messing about by amalgamating the 66 & 67 with some route changes (or just extending the 66) could offer an hourly shopping link.
Probably a stupid idea but surely so is offering a worse version of the same failing route via subsidies (the extension of the 16 would be covered by subsidy I would have thought, the other 2 already are).
The 45 is an important route, especially as it serves Walsall FC. Now, on matchdays, single deckers can't cope as it's absolutely rammed now as suspected the passenger numbers must be much lower on non matchdays, but surely the money they make on matchdays are not enough to keep the route going into the minuses
Quote from: WalsallBuses2007 on February 11, 2023, 10:34:27 PMThe 45 is an important route, especially as it serves Walsall FC. Now, on matchdays, single deckers can't cope as it's absolutely rammed now as suspected the passenger numbers must be much lower on non matchdays, but surely the money they make on matchdays are not enough to keep the route going into the minuses
Half a dozen full buses once a fortnight is hardly a big earner
Quote from: Budgie on February 11, 2023, 09:26:30 PMWould now be a time to radically think the basis of the 45. Especially with the 2 major operators in the area both giving up on a route that in relatively recent times pre Covid had 12 buses an hour between Walsall and Yew Tree (8 from NX, 4 from Diamond).
How about a 16B/16Y, Rather than run the buses from Walsall, Yew Tree to West Brom, run them as extensions of the 16 to/from Birmingham instead, through Yew Tree to Walsall along the current 45 route? I can't see the point of subsidies to cover what must be a failing route given very recent history but some sort of service is needed. The West Brom side of the 45 route is covered anyway from lots of sources. Want a connection from Yew Tree estate itself to West Brom, messing about by amalgamating the 66 & 67 with some route changes (or just extending the 66) could offer an hourly shopping link.
Probably a stupid idea but surely so is offering a worse version of the same failing route via subsidies (the extension of the 16 would be covered by subsidy I would have thought, the other 2 already are).
What about adding it to the 4 group of services somehow & extending it on from West Bromwich elsewhere?
Quote from: Tony on February 11, 2023, 10:57:56 PMHalf a dozen full buses once a fortnight is hardly a big earner
Why did nx used to use deckers on it?
Quote from: Trident 4194 on February 12, 2023, 05:45:57 AMWhy did nx used to use deckers on it?
It may have interworked with another service.
@Westy What sort of extensions were you thinking could work for the people of Palfrey, Yew Tree and Stone Cross? I don't know what they could be but if there are then of course Yes. My mates in Yew Tree could well take their little one to the Zoo in Dudley if the bus from outside their house went there,but a summer trip every year or so wouldn't sustain a bus service.
Birmingham is where the jobs, shops and entertainment are plus offers a base for travelling much wider. Bescot and Tame Bridge stations offer a link already of course but one of the biggest problems when public transport goes wrong is the lack of an easy alternative. Plus in my mates cases, you have to get a youngster to the station and back (when they are tired and grumpy). Diamond and NX can't run a service based on when the trains are in full meltdown mode but the subsidising authority should be considering integrated transport. Lots of train and bus routes run side by side, complementing each other.
Quote from: Budgie on February 12, 2023, 11:36:26 AM@Westy What sort of extensions were you thinking could work for the people of Palfrey, Yew Tree and Stone Cross? I don't know what they could be but if there are then of course Yes. My mates in Yew Tree could well take their little one to the Zoo in Dudley if the bus from outside their house went there,but a summer trip every year or so wouldn't sustain a bus service.
Birmingham is where the jobs, shops and entertainment are plus offers a base for travelling much wider. Bescot and Tame Bridge stations offer a link already of course but one of the biggest problems when public transport goes wrong is the lack of an easy alternative. Plus in my mates cases, you have to get a youngster to the station and back (when they are tired and grumpy). Diamond and NX can't run a service based on when the trains are in full meltdown mode but the subsidising authority should be considering integrated transport. Lots of train and bus routes run side by side, complementing each other.
If not linking them back with the 42/43, which are mainly the modern equivalents of what the 401/402/405 used to be, then what about alternate / certain journeys on the 4 group being rerouted via Palfrey & Yew Tree, giving those areas links to Blackheath/ Merry Hill/ Halesowen/Hayley Green instead?
Then again Walsall to Brum via Palfrey, Yew Tree(Would you include the Charlemont - Stone Cross double run?) & the rest of the 16 route - Maybe!
None of these routes are used end to end in one go surely?
Take the NX 25 in Wolverhampton for example, surely no one in their right mind would do the whole route in one go, when you have the 4 between Wolves & i54 up the Stafford Road etc.
There's probably lots of routes in the system that just link areas together & are not the quickest end to end.
Walsall to Wolverhampton, you'd use a 529, not a 9 or 69 for example.
It's a shame about the 45, it does mirror off most the 4 and other services but leaving the Yew Tree without any service won't go down to well. Isnt it possible to have the 401E or something like the old 305 back just so the estate isn't left without a service? Can't see the elderly there being too happy that the estate is going to be unserved and a fairly long walk to the 4.
401e was ran for ages in compertion with 45 nx & nx come off 45 diamond now running it & not paying yet was paying when 401e & nxbus 45 was running
Quote from: Simon Dunn on February 10, 2023, 06:01:21 PMTo try and make this easy to understand. Roughly, depending upon bus/ Mellor/ Single/ Double/ Age of Asset, hours of operation, type of vehicle, etc we need to earn around £50 per hour for a bus service.
With the fares at £3 for a Day Ticket, concessionary fares reimbursement at less than £1, NBus reimbursement around £1, and fares so low, the average yield per passenger is around £1 per passenger. For a bus to earn £50 per hour (this has escalated as a result of labour cost increases (make up over 50% of our cost), fuel, and inflation across our sector), and then you have passenger numbers which are on like for like routes around 85%
Do you see the services we have deregistered carrying 50 people per average per hour?
In my opinion this is why we are seeing a lot of deregistration's in the Low Fare Zone areas.
Thanks for that explanation, you've pretty much confirmed what I have suspected for some time.
TfWM have insisted (and promised) that fares will not increase until 2025, while bus operators face increased operating costs.
As a result of these increased costs, services that were previously 'borderline' are now simply 'unviable', if the same number of passengers are paying less (in 'real terms') for their travel.
Every other business has been forced to increase their prices, to offset their increased operating costs. Apart from bus companies, who are expected to NOT increase their prices in line with inflation etc.
I get the whole idea that TfWM/government want to help with the "cost of living crisis" by reducing/freezing fares in order to attract passengers back onto the buses. But such funding will only go so far, its no surprise in the last couple of years that we've seen smaller independent bus operators either collapse (ie Thandi) or just give up and sell out (Claribels, Johnsons etc).
There will have to be some kind of trade-off made somewhere, either bus fares will have to increase, or more commercial services will be 'lost' or substantially reduced.
Quote from: Steveminor on February 10, 2023, 06:52:52 PMFranchising
This would be at least 5 years down the road, the crisis the industry is in is now, a solution needs to be found now. If we go franchise what do we do in the interim to stabilise the Network.
People who advocate franchising always state TFL success, have we forgotten the vast amounts of taxpayers money that TFL has gobbled up so far compared to what the rest of England has had for the fully deregulated model. Also the average walking distance to a bus in London is well over the 400m that we enjoy in the West Midlands. So is TFL something we should aspire to?
Several people predicted over a year ago the reality we are now facing, fare elasticity models snap when you lower the fare to the point where you physically cannot get enough passengers on the bus due to capacity to make the bus break even.
Franchising will happen sooner than you think, I suspect.
I don't think it is the answer to the problems currently being faced.
However, the problems currently being faced will be used as a good argument 'in favour' of such a model being introduced. Dwindle down the number of operators, until all that is left to bid on the franchises are the 'big corporate' bus groups.
I realise, we're probably starting to go off topic here, so if it ends up being split, fair enough, but I'd rather see the context kept together for now, but anyway, when was the last major fare increase in the area(The one that happened at the start of the year normally!)?
I'm thinking in the mid 10's.
If we had kept the annual increase, instead of freezing every year since, would we be in this situation, with or without the pandemic to account?
Are we now (excuse the language) 'having our **** handed to us on a plate'?
Sure, it's been nice no major fare increases for the past few years, but surely deep down, we knew this couldn't last forever.
It'll be interesting to see how big the future increase might be.
@Westy I think we could have made it work with the fare freeze to some extent, what is becoming a major issue is the LFZs where fares are now too cheap and making services unviable, if you look at where the network has contracted the most it's in these areas. What is needed is a realignment of the fates in the LFZs to bring them into line with the fare structure in the rest of the network. There is no point having brilliantly cheap fares if there are no buses.
@Stu It is not a quick process to start a franchised network, look how long it has taken Tfgm, by which time the network will be in complete tatters as most of the tfwm staff will be too busy working on it to effectively run the network that's operating now.
If it then does come in & then subsequently fails to deliver the results that politicians and public want, well what then, how do we get out of the mess then.
If you are at the bottom of a hole the last thing you need is an excavator to try and dig your way out "guys we need to dig up"
Quote from: Westy on February 12, 2023, 05:49:03 PMI realise, we're probably starting to go off topic here, so if it ends up being split, fair enough, but I'd rather see the context kept together for now, but anyway, when was the last major fare increase in the area(The one that happened at the start of the year normally!)?
I'm thinking in the mid 10's.
If we had kept the annual increase, instead of freezing every year since, would we be in this situation, with or without the pandemic to account?
Are we now (excuse the language) 'having our **** handed to us on a plate'?
Sure, it's been nice no major fare increases for the past few years, but surely deep down, we knew this couldn't last forever.
It'll be interesting to see how big the future increase might be.
Well if the answer being suggested here is to massively increase fares that will ONLY lead to even less passengers using the bus.
In an ideal world, if the current 80-85% passenger levels compared to pre-COVID were maintained alongside a 20% increase in fares (and also subsequent higher reimbursement from concessionary passes), then you could argue that would offset the passenger loss. Sadly of course, in reality what would happen with such a fare rise would be another loss of 10% or more passengers which would again make the service unviable leading to a further fare hike.
Fare hikes lead to a vicious circle that would speed up route withdrawals, not slow them down.
The money extra bus companies need to run their services should not come from current passengers having to pay more, it should come from central government with increased subsidies to operators. This is the ONLY solution that will work long term, fare increases in this time of financial hardship would be an absolute disaster for the industry.
Quote from: j789 on February 12, 2023, 07:01:10 PMWell if the answer being suggested here is to massively increase fares that will ONLY lead to even less passengers using the bus.
I'm not suggesting there should be any 'massive' increase in fares, but a realistic 'modest' increase might help matters.
Quote from: j789 on February 12, 2023, 07:01:10 PMThe money extra bus companies need to run their services should not come from current passengers having to pay more, it should come from central government with increased subsidies to operators. This is the ONLY solution that will work long term, fare increases in this time of financial hardship would be an absolute disaster for the industry.
During the Covid pandemic, the government did its level best to discourage and dissuade people from using buses because they were 'unsafe' and that people "might die".
That kind of messaging is quite damaging, admittedly, however I don't think increased subsidies are any kind of viable long-term solution, and while the Government is partly responsible for this mess, I don't think that using public taxpayers money to support private commercial enterprise is a good viable long-term solution.
@j789 Whilst I agree with what you are saying about central government funding, how do you deal with the big elephants in the room. Namely, whilst NX, Diamond and Chaserider would probably put funding to good use, others would simply increase management bonuses and shareholder payments whilst paying lip service to route improvements/protection they would use to justify said payments.
Secondly, central government interferene. If the political news is to be believed today, central government are restricting pots of monies to councils for certain things unless they agree to the Civil Service policy of how to clear chewing gum from Park Benches. I would not want such micro management of the bus industry, even if it wasn't privatised.
Thirdly if we have private firms receiving public money, the return should be innovation and not less of the same failed routes. I suggested an extension to the 16,
@Westy has made some other good suggestions. How do you ensure that so routes such as the 45, 002 and 226 can live on?
Quote from: Budgie on February 12, 2023, 07:42:20 PM@j789 Whilst I agree with what you are saying about central government funding, how do you deal with the big elephants in the room. Namely, whilst NX, Diamond and Chaserider would probably put funding to good use, others would simply increase management bonuses and shareholder payments whilst paying lip service to route improvements/protection they would use to justify said payments.
Secondly, central government interferene. If the political news is to be believed today, central government are restricting pots of monies to councils for certain things unless they agree to the Civil Service policy of how to clear chewing gum from Park Benches. I would not want such micro management of the bus industry, even if it wasn't privatised.
Thirdly if we have private firms receiving public money, the return should be innovation and not less of the same failed routes. I suggested an extension to the 16, @Westy has made some other good suggestions. How do you ensure that so routes such as the 45, 002 and 226 can live on?
Interesting points you make here from my previous comments. I'd suggest any subsidy should come with stringent conditions that the current level of service must be maintained as a minimum.
The subsidy would cover the running costs to make the service break even, not necessarily profitable, eg the company would not lose money operating the service but may not make much of a profit either. This is a 'halfway house' solution that operators would need to accept. Share holders probably wouldn't be in favour be for 'the greater good' I'd hope most operators would see the short term need for this over the next few years.
No company is perfect but it would be an easy system to police from s government perspective. Paying a set amount per service would ensure any private company profiteering was kept to a minimum whilst at the same time helping those same companies not have to have so much commercial risk in their operations- that is a win win situation in my eyes compared to the alternative of doing nothing except hiking fares and withdrawing services.
I have shared Stu's article from his website onto the Walsall Chit Chat & Natter Facebook page & so far predictably the comments have been along the lines of 'Surprised' & 'We need a bus on the Yew Tree' !
@Stu - Do you think we need a split off, at this point? Post 1817 would be a good place to start.
Quote from: Stu on February 12, 2023, 07:33:51 PMI'm not suggesting there should be any 'massive' increase in fares, but a realistic 'modest' increase might help matters.
During the Covid pandemic, the government did its level best to discourage and dissuade people from using buses because they were 'unsafe' and that people "might die".
That kind of messaging is quite damaging, admittedly, however I don't think increased subsidies are any kind of viable long-term solution, and while the Government is partly responsible for this mess, I don't think that using public taxpayers money to support private commercial enterprise is a good viable long-term solution.
That messaging put out during COVID is the exact(!!!) reason why the government should put these subsidies in place. Even the service decreases in 1986 caused by de-regulation didn't have the same negative impact as what has happened since 2020. The government owes this industry big time.
All the criticism of NX, Diamond, etc for withdrawing services should be redirected to the politicians who created this situation - they could have handled things so much better and without the negatives now associated with bus (and to a lesser extent train) travel. Those passengers may well be lost forever despite what innovations operators try.
I know it doesn't sit well with some people bailing out private companies, but I think the context those companies operate in needs to be fairly weighed up. The bus industry is in trouble and it is only with public financial help that things can at least start to get back on track.
Quote from: j789 on February 12, 2023, 08:37:44 PMInteresting points you make here from my previous comments. I'd suggest any subsidy should come with stringent conditions that the current level of service must be maintained as a minimum.
The subsidy would cover the running costs to make the service break even, not necessarily profitable, eg the company would not lose money operating the service but may not make much of a profit either. This is a 'halfway house' solution that operators would need to accept. Share holders probably wouldn't be in favour be for 'the greater good' I'd hope most operators would see the short term need for this over the next few years.
No company is perfect but it would be an easy system to police from s government perspective. Paying a set amount per service would ensure any private company profiteering was kept to a minimum whilst at the same time helping those same companies not have to have so much commercial risk in their operations- that is a win win situation in my eyes compared to the alternative of doing nothing except hiking fares and withdrawing services.
Am I right in thinking that this is what the Covid Bus Service Support Grant did, and (to a lesser extent) the Bus Recovery Grant is doing until the end of March?
Quote from: Justin Tyme on February 12, 2023, 08:53:30 PMAm I right in thinking that this is what the Covid Bus Service Support Grant did, and (to a lesser extent) the Bus Recovery Grant is doing until the end of March?
Yes pretty much very similar to that idea, it's just that there shouldn't be a 'end' date to it, it should run for as long as necessary for the industry to get back on its feet. March 2023 is certainly far too soon for this help to be ending.
Quote from: Westy on February 12, 2023, 05:49:03 PMI realise, we're probably starting to go off topic here, so if it ends up being split, fair enough, but I'd rather see the context kept together for now, but anyway, when was the last major fare increase in the area(The one that happened at the start of the year normally!)?
I'm thinking in the mid 10's.
If we had kept the annual increase, instead of freezing every year since, would we be in this situation, with or without the pandemic to account?
Are we now (excuse the language) 'having our **** handed to us on a plate'?
Sure, it's been nice no major fare increases for the past few years, but surely deep down, we knew this couldn't last forever.
It'll be interesting to see how big the future increase might be.
You are correct. Ignoring the current £2 fares scheme which while handy is more of a gimmick, fares have risen just about everywhere else as far as I know. Had fares gone up then perhaps companies wouldn't be in the position many find themselves in. As the saying goes, hindsight is a wonderful thing.
It appears Diamond won't be running the following services after this date, 002; 45; 226.
Quote from: Sandy Lane on February 10, 2023, 02:24:14 PMSorry - didn't see it.
Best to close this then?
I didn't see it on here but if there are multiple service changes on this day surely it is better to discuss under the west Midlands general topic.
Image if stagecoach goes for the 45 service from Walsall to West Bromwich
Wonder if stagecoach will take them on :rolleyes: :grin:
I would assume the 226 would go straight to tender as the evening and Sunday part already is so passes TFWM criteria? Maybe hourly though?
Didn't see the benefit of 226 going to Wall Heath, I'm sure the numerous 205 and 15E extensions by NX were requested by locals and not used.
002 has a decent chunk of route where it is the only service so would it be saved too?
Quote from: bususer12 on February 13, 2023, 06:59:35 PM002 has a decent chunk of route where it is the only service
All of it seems to have other services.
Colley Gate all the way through to Howley Grange Road has the 9.
Bartley Green to Halesowen has the 202.
Weoley Castle to Bartley Green has the X21 albeit via Gregory Avenue.
Lyde Green the 18 and the remaing section into Merry Hill the X10.
There only appears to be only 3 odd stops on the whole route where its the only service, which I wouldn't consider to be a decent chunk.
Quote from: Ginger66 on February 13, 2023, 06:42:07 PMI didn't see it on here but if there are multiple service changes on this day surely it is better to discuss under the west Midlands general topic.
Image if stagecoach goes for the 45 service from Walsall to West Bromwich
If they don't sort out a depot for round here asap, more of what's happening currently will happen!
Quote from: monkeyjoe on February 13, 2023, 06:52:09 PMWonder if stagecoach will take them on :rolleyes: :grin:
Stagecoach Midlands
#walsall-Westbrom Due to unforseen circumstances the following service won't be in operation today Monday 17/04/23
45 West Bromwich - Walsall
04:30; 05:10
45Walsall - West Bromwich
05:10;
We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused
Quote from: Westy on February 13, 2023, 07:14:34 PMIf they don't sort out a depot for round here asap, more of what's happening currently will happen!
Didn't Arriva have a satalite depot in the Hill Top area of West Bromwich.
QuoteStagecoach Midlands
#walsall-Westbrom Due to unforseen circumstances the following service won't be in operation today Monday 17/04/23
45 West Bromwich - Walsall
04:30; 05:10
45Walsall - West Bromwich
05:10;
We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused
Probably taken them on and has a driver issue already
Quote from: Ginger66 on February 13, 2023, 06:33:26 PMIt appears Diamond won't be running the following services after this date, 002; 45; 226.
The evening and Sunday services on the 226 (which operate under contract as 226A) will presumably remain with Diamond as they only got the contract renewed in January.
Quote from: bususer12 on February 13, 2023, 06:59:35 PMI would assume the 226 would go straight to tender as the evening and Sunday part already is so passes TFWM criteria? Maybe hourly though?
Didn't see the benefit of 226 going to Wall Heath, I'm sure the numerous 205 and 15E extensions by NX were requested by locals and not used.
002 has a decent chunk of route where it is the only service so would it be saved too?
The evening and Sunday is already tendered...to Diamond. As for the 15E and 205 extension, you are correct in saying it was little used.
How can they have a driver issue already the service doesnt start for another 2 months so i have no idea why they are apologizing. Those journeys ran this morning by Diamond
Quote from: cris 99 on February 13, 2023, 09:33:54 PMHow can they have a driver issue already the service doesnt start for another 2 months so i have no idea why they are apologizing. Those journeys ran this morning by Diamond
That isn't to be taken literally. There is at present nothing to say Stagecoach will ever run this service, let alone start in 2 months time. Possible Diamond will retain it to.
It is however pointing out the recent cancellations on their existing network.
I'm just wondering if Diamond are in financial trouble because:
They didn't participate in the £2 bus fare cap
They've deregistered the 45, 226 and 002 due to being non viable
I wouldn't be surprised if the slim down as a result or even go under
Quote from: Steve3229vp on February 14, 2023, 05:47:29 PMI'm just wondering if Diamond are in financial trouble because:
They didn't participate in the £2 bus fare cap
They've deregistered the 45, 226 and 002 due to being non viable
I wouldn't be surprised if the slim down as a result or even go under
Having taken on numerous contracts last month, I think it's unlikely they will go under. However I do see them cutting more commercial work in the West Midlands.
Quote from: Rachvince53 on February 14, 2023, 05:49:57 PMHaving taken on numerous contracts last month, I think it's unlikely they will go under. However I do see them cutting more commercial work in the West Midlands.
What else do they run commercially in the TFWM area. I assume the 16A and 50 as well as the WM Bus routes 31/32/40/42. Is there anything else? X11 to Burton possibly to?
Quote from: Steve3229vp on February 14, 2023, 05:47:29 PMI'm just wondering if Diamond are in financial trouble because:
They didn't participate in the £2 bus fare cap
They've deregistered the 45, 226 and 002 due to being non viable
I wouldn't be surprised if the slim down as a result or even go under
Diamond are hardly in financial trouble, when parent Rotala Plc are currently in the process of dishing out up to £10 million to shareholders from the sale of Bolton Depot via an Open Offer share buy back at 55p / share. That price was at a significant premium to the market price before being announced.
Diamond didn't participate in the £2 bus fare cap as they didn't consider it would be worth their while.
Quote from: 2206 on February 14, 2023, 06:09:13 PMWhat else do they run commercially in the TFWM area. I assume the 16A and 50 as well as the WM Bus routes 31/32/40/42. Is there anything else? X11 to Burton possibly to?
You are correct, all the services you mention including the X11 are commercially operated. Also commercially operated is the 125 to Bridgnorth and certain journeys on the 76 to Tamworth.
Quote from: 2206 on February 14, 2023, 06:09:13 PMWhat else do they run commercially in the TFWM area. I assume the 16A and 50 as well as the WM Bus routes 31/32/40/42. Is there anything else? X11 to Burton possibly to?
The 4 / 4H too
The 125 is a Shropshire County Council tender.
I catch the 40 and have used both Diamond and NX buses and have noticed when I catch the 5:25 Wednesbury to West Bromwich from Friar Park at 5:36 the bus is empty and only usually carriers about 4 passengers.
Quote from: MW on February 14, 2023, 07:10:26 PMThe 125 is a Shropshire County Council tender.
Not according to VOSA.
Quote from: monkeyjoe on February 13, 2023, 06:52:09 PMWonder if stagecoach will take them on :rolleyes: :grin:
I definitely would feel sorry for the passengers if Stagecoach take them them :evil: :grin:.
https://www.expressandstar.com/news/local-hubs/walsall/2023/02/15/calls-made-for-transport-chiefs-to-intervene-and-save-at-risk-diamond-bus-service/
There's a petition, folks!
Quote from: MW on February 14, 2023, 09:30:49 PMThey've been closed since 2014.
Well Vehicle Operator Licensing.gov.uk then.
Quote from: Westy on February 15, 2023, 11:00:24 AMhttps://www.expressandstar.com/news/local-hubs/walsall/2023/02/15/calls-made-for-transport-chiefs-to-intervene-and-save-at-risk-diamond-bus-service/
There's a petition, folks!
And under 100 people have signed it...
Quote from: Westy on February 15, 2023, 04:10:42 PM160 now!
Wow! Based on Simon's comments, the 45 service currently needs 50 people per hour average using it to make it viable....
Quote from: winston on February 15, 2023, 04:38:34 PMWow! Based on Simon's comments, the 45 service currently needs 50 people per hour average using it to make it viable....
And with 6 buses on there to provide a 20 min service on a 2 hour round trip that's 300 passengers per hour, multiple by 12 hours for the main 7 till 7 service, then half as most people will make a journey each way, that's 1,800 people to make it viable
What I'm curious to understand is how a commercially run service with a 20 minute frequency, 30 mins up until around 9pm, 30 mins on a Sunday, is suddenly axed due to it not being viable. I have no bus industry knowledge, so this is a question more than an observation, but more ordinarily wouldn't other alternatives to significantly reduce vehicle requirements and hours be explored first? Reduced frequency, later start, earlier finish, remove the Sunday service etc. Or possibly curtail or split the route, e.g. West Brom to Charlemont Farm, and Walsall to Yew Tree.
I'm not that familiar with the area but West Brom to Charlemont Farm always used to have a reasonable service in the past, as part of the 448 or the 408. Walsall to Yew Tree has also always had a reasonable service as far as I know.
I understand the issues, lack of revenue and cost pressures etc and if there's no alternative then so be it. But to axe daily and reasonably frequent commercial services overnight seems quite unprecedented.
Quote from: Mike K on February 15, 2023, 06:30:18 PMWhat I'm curious to understand is how a commercially run service with a 20 minute frequency, 30 mins up until around 9pm, 30 mins on a Sunday, is suddenly axed due to it not being viable. I have no bus industry knowledge, so this is a question more than an observation, but more ordinarily wouldn't other alternatives to significantly reduce vehicle requirements and hours be explored first? Reduced frequency, later start, earlier finish, remove the Sunday service etc. Or possibly curtail or split the route, e.g. West Brom to Charlemont Farm, and Walsall to Yew Tree.
I'm not that familiar with the area but West Brom to Charlemont Farm always used to have a reasonable service in the past, as part of the 448 or the 408. Walsall to Yew Tree has also always had a reasonable service as far as I know.
I understand the issues, lack of revenue and cost pressures etc and if there's no alternative then so be it. But to axe daily and reasonably frequent commercial services overnight seems quite unprecedented.
I interpret the intended withdrawals of these routes rather than routes where they compete (4/16) as a political statement about the Low fare zones.
I can't see how these routes ran hourly instead if they were really loss making wouldn't be profitable and keeps their assets working.
The chips are down and either there is a unlikely climbdown over LFZ by TFWM (I take this issue is the LFZ Nbus rather than Nxs offerings) Game on and maybe a smaller operator such as Kev's can capitalize
Can't see Kevs doing it, too much dead mileage. And yes I know Stagecoach have dead mileage with their new routes but they have the ability to absorb it.
Maybe we might see D&G come in as a replacement *hears shudders from those who use Cannock routes*
Technically D&G have ran routes in the WM area before (as D&G, not Midland)
Quote from: the trainbasher on February 15, 2023, 09:26:40 PMMaybe we might see D&G come in as a replacement *hears shudders from those who use Cannock routes*
Technically D&G have ran routes in the WM area before (as D&G, not Midland)
Chaserider running in the West Midlands I very much like that idea but apart from the obvious what routes could they operate
I do wonder whether the 1st January changes have actually changed the bus services for the better or not.
Certainly the 142/A seems to run between Halesowen and Stourbridge with very few people on it, the Stourbridge to Merry Hill bit seems to be rather better although still not brilliant loadings. Sundays the 142s I see (runs pasr my flat) are mostly empty, was this a really good idea from TfWM? Surely the best idea, imo, would be to withdraw the 142A, the 7 could cover Springfield Avenue once an hour. Continue the 142 hourly and reduce the Merry Hill section to hourly. Withdraw the Sunday service.
Same as the new 25 service, had some time to kill last week and caught a 25 between Dudley and Stourbridge and across the whole journey there were only 9 passengers including myself. Once again limit the 25 to hourly which should help.
Can't comment on the 45, but have seen both the 002 and 226 carrying more passengers than these services.
QuoteI do wonder whether the 1st January changes have actually changed the bus services for the better or not.
Certainly the 142/A seems to run between Halesowen and Stourbridge with very few people on it, the Stourbridge to Merry Hill bit seems to be rather better although still not brilliant loadings. Sundays the 142s I see (runs pasr my flat) are mostly empty, was this a really good idea from TfWM? Surely the best idea, imo, would be to withdraw the 142A, the 7 could cover Springfield Avenue once an hour. Continue the 142 hourly and reduce the Merry Hill section to hourly. Withdraw the Sunday service.
Same as the new 25 service, had some time to kill last week and caught a 25 between Dudley and Stourbridge and across the whole journey there were only 9 passengers including myself. Once again limit the 25 to hourly which should help.
The 25, 142 and 142A service uplifts are being part paid for by BSIP (Bus Service Improvement Plan) money
Quote from: the trainbasher on February 15, 2023, 10:28:50 PMThe 25, 142 and 142A service uplifts are being part paid for by BSIP (Bus Service Improvement Plan) money
and to be frank, what an awful waste of money!
There's another online petition to save the 226 being promoted on the Kingswinford Facebook page, wonder how many of the 451 people signing it use the 226....🤔
SAVE THE 226 BUS SERVICE
https://www.change.org/p/save-the-226-bus-service?source_location=search
Quote from: winston on February 16, 2023, 10:36:21 AMThere's another online petition to save the 226 being promoted on the Kingswinford Facebook page, wonder how many of the 451 people signing it use the 226....🤔
SAVE THE 226 BUS SERVICE
https://www.change.org/p/save-the-226-bus-service?source_location=search
It's like you are in denial that people actually use these services!
Quote from: Straightlines on February 16, 2023, 10:44:13 AMIt's like you are in denial that people actually use these services!
Of course people use the service, but I see the loadings on the 226, do you?
Quote from: winston on February 16, 2023, 11:06:19 AMOf course people use the service, but I see the loadings on the 226, do you?
Indeed I do! Given the Evening and Sundays already meet the criteria for subsidy, it will be interesting to see TfWMs response!
Quote from: Straightlines on February 16, 2023, 11:47:28 AMIndeed I do! Given the Evening and Sundays already meet the criteria for subsidy, it will be interesting to see TfWMs response!
It's a political statement by Diamond to force TfWM's hand to finally implement the 'Bonfire of Tickets' and remove the Low Fare Zones, originally it was meant to happen in January, but it just keeps geting putting back & back...
There's also still the question mark over the Covid BRG which is currently due to cease end of March, the Welsh Goverment have announceed they're extending their Covid BES by an initial further 3 months from March, hopefully, the UK Government will follow suit !
Quote from: Straightlines on February 16, 2023, 10:44:13 AMIt's like you are in denial that people actually use these services!
Well 483 certainly do, according to the petition (says he with tongue wedged firmly in cheek!).
EDIT: 501 now as at 12.59hrs ;D
Winston's got a 'fan', I notice!
Quote from: winston on February 16, 2023, 10:36:21 AMThere's another online petition to save the 226 being promoted on the Kingswinford Facebook page, wonder how many of the 451 people signing it use the 226....🤔
SAVE THE 226 BUS SERVICE
https://www.change.org/p/save-the-226-bus-service?source_location=search
The problem with these petitions is that they can easily be shared, and people will often just sign them, because someone has asked them to.
Reading through some of the comments there, anyone would think there are no other bus services in Dudley!
Quote from: Stu on February 16, 2023, 06:58:32 PMThe problem with these petitions is that they can easily be shared, and people will often just sign them, because someone has asked them to.
Reading through some of the comments there, anyone would think there are no other bus services in Dudley!
Exactly.
One wonders if the petition asked if people would be happier to pay on their Council Tax to help pay for TfWM to subsidise more services if they would then be so quick to sign!
The UK Government have today announced that the Bus Recovery Grant has been extended for a further 3 months until 30th June, whether that has any bearing on Diamond's decision to fully withdraw the 002, 45 & 226 from 15th April remains to be seen. It's the £3 Dudley & Sandwell local daysaver ticket that is the bigger issue:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/2-bus-fare-cap-to-be-extended-and-bus-services-protected-with-new-funding
It has its own TfWM information page (https://www.tfwm.org.uk/plan-your-journey/ways-to-travel/buses-in-the-west-midlands/upcoming-bus-service-changes/proposed-changes-to-diamond-services-002-45-and-226-from-15-april/) now and the lovely Brum Mail are having a field day with articles:
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/black-country/bus-passengers-hit-three-main-26227772
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/sadness-popular-city-bus-route-26227476
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/black-country/diamond-bus-route-45-axe-26283264
Diamond can't have taken the decision lightly. Have these routes always underperformed (NX pulled off the 45 at the end of last year, right?) and were propped up by other services, or has passenger numbers dramatically declined?
Quote from: ellspurs on February 21, 2023, 05:39:35 PMDiamond can't have taken the decision lightly. Have these routes always underperformed (NX pulled off the 45 at the end of last year, right?) and were propped up by other services, or has passenger numbers dramatically declined?
It is my opinion that it is a combination of several factors:
1) passenger numbers not fully recovering following the pandemic lockdowns
2) increased operating costs - staff pay increases, fuel and energy price rises, plus other cost increases
3) fare/ticket price freezes being imposed by TfWM
Three years ago, a bus service regularly carrying a certain number of passengers might have been reasonably profitable, however in the current climate, if that service is still carrying the same amount of passengers, who are still paying the same fares as three years ago, BUT the cost of operating that service has increased, then the service can easily become loss-making.
I didn't think of it that way. Even if the passenger numbers were sustained, because the costs have increased, the passenger numbers would either have needed to increase or they paid more.
It's a far cry from the days that the (then) Birmingham Coach Company was running buses a few minutes in front of the incumbent operator Ludlows on the 002, in the battle for customers on the route.
This happened on other routes too, including the 004 Harborne to Merry Hill.
How times change.
Quote from: ellspurs on February 21, 2023, 06:39:44 PMI didn't think of it that way. Even if the passenger numbers were sustained, because the costs have increased, the passenger numbers would either have needed to increase or they paid more.
To me, it's simple business economics. I never went to university so I don't have any degree in 'business management' or anything like that, but I've worked for enough businesses - both successful and failed - to have an understanding of how this all works.
I remember being exasperated reading news stories last year from small business owners struggling with energy price increases. There was one lady, a hairdresser, complaining to the local media about how she was struggling to pay her electricity bills at her salon, but she didn't want to increase the prices she charged her clients.
Now while that is a pretty noble gesture, unfortunately it doesn't make for a successful business model, if you fail to increase the price of your services offered, as your own costs of providing that service increase as well.
Sometimes you have to 'let the market decide' - perhaps most of your clientele are happy to pay the increased price, but you'll lose some customers in the process - but ultimately you have to do what you need to do in order to keep your business viable.
Same principle applies to bus services, perhaps there are other options that Diamond could have taken, such as reducing service frequencies to match passenger demand, which would have reduced operating costs and perhaps kept these services operationally 'viable'.
It concerns me though the 'level of expectation' that the Government should step in and provide funding, because then that becomes the first step towards 'bus franchising' via the back-door.
Quote from: Mike K on February 21, 2023, 06:45:32 PMIt's a far cry from the days that the (then) Birmingham Coach Company was running buses a few minutes in front of the incumbent operator Ludlows on the 002, in the battle for customers on the route.
This happened on other routes too, including the 004 Harborne to Merry Hill.
How times change.
Ironically, certain elements of this situation are not that different to those crazy days of competing on marginal routes. Both operators were losing money running together on that route, just like it appears Diamond are now, hence possible withdrawal. Unfortunately, the aim of BCC was pretty much to either drive Ludlows out of business and take the routes or swallow them up as a merger. It worked a few years later with the buyout but the 004/007 particularly were already on their way out by then.
Quote from: Stu on February 21, 2023, 08:47:10 PMTo me, it's simple business economics. I never went to university so I don't have any degree in 'business management' or anything like that, but I've worked for enough businesses - both successful and failed - to have an understanding of how this all works.
I remember being exasperated reading news stories last year from small business owners struggling with energy price increases. There was one lady, a hairdresser, complaining to the local media about how she was struggling to pay her electricity bills at her salon, but she didn't want to increase the prices she charged her clients.
Now while that is a pretty noble gesture, unfortunately it doesn't make for a successful business model, if you fail to increase the price of your services offered, as your own costs of providing that service increase as well.
Sometimes you have to 'let the market decide' - perhaps most of your clientele are happy to pay the increased price, but you'll lose some customers in the process - but ultimately you have to do what you need to do in order to keep your business viable.
Same principle applies to bus services, perhaps there are other options that Diamond could have taken, such as reducing service frequencies to match passenger demand, which would have reduced operating costs and perhaps kept these services operationally 'viable'.
It concerns me though the 'level of expectation' that the Government should step in and provide funding, because then that becomes the first step towards 'bus franchising' via the back-door.
I agree with most of your points but not the final paragraph. The industry needs a period of financial stability for the next 2-3 years, where companies do not need to take undue commercial risks, but equally can continue to provide the level of service that is there currently.
Hopefully, as long as there are no other massive set backs similar to that caused by COVID, passengers numbers should start to edge back up over that 2-3 year period. This would ensure that once funding did cease (or at least reduce) after those 3 or so years, passenger numbers would be more stable and better able to support more routes commercially than the current situation allows.
This year, or even next, is far too soon for financial support to be pulled. It needs a sensible longer term plan that would maximise benefits for passengers, give operator's increased confidence for the future, and also mean that more routes can continue to be run commercially in the future so less long term expense to the tax payer. Win win win in my opinion!
CEO's will be SWOT analysis alot more will have meetings with board and possibly share holders on how they can proceed as a viable company.
Strengths:
Weakness:
Opportunities: Sell part of your business to another operator or off load routes that are no longer viable
Threats: Passengers not running as per normal, higher fuel price, competitor operating same route, another lockdown
Latest announcement that main change to 002 and 226 is reduction in weekend service levels. 45 still withdrawn
Judgement has been casted onto the 45 (Withdrawn unless TfWM steps in), 226 (wall heath loop dropped, hourly on Saturdays, 226A renumbered back to 226) 002 (Sundays withdrawn) 4/4H (Sundays withdrawn)
https://www.diamondbuses.com/news/45_002_226-services/
Quote from: BK63 YWP on March 08, 2023, 08:41:31 PMJudgement has been casted onto the 45 (Withdrawn unless TfWM steps in), 226 (wall heath loop dropped, hourly on Saturdays, 226A renumbered back to 226) 002 (Sundays withdrawn) 4/4H (Sundays withdrawn)
https://www.diamondbuses.com/news/45_002_226-services/
Great news regarding the 002.
I don't know who runs the Diamond West Midlands Facebook page, but I tip my hat to them for this response to a post made by Edgbaston MP Preet Gill:
Screenshot 2023-03-10 at 18-52-58 Facebook.png
Screenshot 2023-03-10 at 18-53-15 Facebook.png
Quote from: Stu on March 10, 2023, 06:54:18 PMI don't know who runs the Diamond West Midlands Facebook page, but I tip my hat to them for this response to a post made by Edgbaston MP Preet Gill:
[url="https://wmbusphotos.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;attach=4143;type=preview;file"]Screenshot 2023-03-10 at 18-52-58 Facebook.png[/url]
[url="https://wmbusphotos.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;attach=4145;type=preview;file"]Screenshot 2023-03-10 at 18-53-15 Facebook.png[/url]
That's a Bob Baker comment if ever I saw it typical snide remarks nothing changes with him
I do wonder why withdrawal of the Sunday service wasn't suggested initially rather than complete withdrawal of the 002.
Diamond's 002 also starts and finishes much later than Ludlows ever did.
Quote from: hlliwmai on March 10, 2023, 07:50:46 PMThat's a Bob Baker comment if ever I saw it typical snide remarks nothing changes with him
Straight to the point though. Well said by Diamond.
To be fair, the way the politician wrote their post, you'd think there was an election coming up - cynical, moi? :smiley:
Quote from: Stu on March 10, 2023, 06:54:18 PMI don't know who runs the Diamond West Midlands Facebook page, but I tip my hathem for this response to a post made by Edgbaston MP Preet Gill:[url="https://wmbusphotos.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;attach=4143;type=preview;file"]Screenshot 2023-[/url]
[url="https://wmbusphotos.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;attach=4145;type=preview;file"]Screenshot 2023-03-10 at 18-53-15 Facebook.png[/url]
Fair play for putting a politician in their place for claiming the credit, but it does beg the question, has it only just dawned on them, having previously made the draconian decision to withdraw the entire service, that it's the Sunday service that's a big contributor to making it unprofitable?
"Reviewed the detail in granular form and have identified Sundays as a major contribution towards the ongoing losses".
Surely that should be bleeding obvious to them long before they reached the conclusion that the 002 was no longer a viable service? It can't be rocket science.
It makes them look incompetent.
Quote from: Mike K on March 11, 2023, 12:49:30 AMFair play for putting a politician in their place for claiming the credit, but it does beg the question, has it only just dawned on them, having previously made the draconian decision to withdraw the entire service, that it's the Sunday service that's a big contributor to making it unprofitable?
"Reviewed the detail in granular form and have identified Sundays as a major contribution towards the ongoing losses".
Surely that should be bleeding obvious to them long before they reached the conclusion that the 002 was no longer a viable service? It can't be rocket science.
It makes them look incompetent.
The revision was based upon two points. The TfWM EHP plan as drafted has now gone through a redraft, it is not final and the redraft is not acceptable, but we are mindful of allowing this more time.
Simon
It might be just me, but it does seem that Streetlites have been used a lot more regularly on the 002 since the initial announcement to withdraw the service.
Quote from: MasterPlan on March 11, 2023, 07:45:20 PMIt might be just me, but it does seem that Streetlites have been used a lot more regularly on the 002 since the initial announcement to withdraw the service.
Eligible for a BSOG as it's commercial and at a higher rate as they're LEB certified perhaps? Reduces the operating cost. Perhaps that's why.
Quote from: MW on March 11, 2023, 08:13:03 PMEligible for a BSOG as it's commercial and at a higher rate as they're LEB certified perhaps? Reduces the operating cost. Perhaps that's why.
I'm not familiar with those acronyms but yes I guessed it was something to do with them being more cost-effective and therefore attempting to make it more viable.
Quote from: MasterPlan on March 12, 2023, 12:56:23 PMI'm not familiar with those acronyms but yes I guessed it was something to do with them being more cost-effective and therefore attempting to make it more viable.
BSOG - Bus Service Operator Grant, LEB - Low Emissions Bus.
Just been looking at the TfWM page regarding the changes:
https://www.tfwm.org.uk/plan-your-journey/ways-to-travel/buses-in-the-west-midlands/upcoming-bus-service-changes/proposed-changes-to-diamond-services-002-45-226-and-4h-from-15-april/
Couple of things here I'd like to comment on:
Regarding the 4H:
QuoteFrom 15 April 2023, Diamond Bus will be withdrawing Sunday services on this route.
We are now looking at an alternative way to operate this service on Sundays at a lower frequency.
Would that be worthwhile? NX already operate the 4 and 4M between Walsall and Blackheath on Sunday, and part of the 4H between Halesowen and Hayley Green.
Regarding the 45:
QuoteThis service was profitable and well used during 2022, therefore we believe there is still enough demand to support it.
TfWM are now working to secure the funding and the bus operator so that this service can continue beyond 15 April 2023.
Well if that's the case, according to TfWM, it makes you wonder why NX decided to give up, and now Diamond want to do the same.
But the thing is that times change, operating costs increase, and especially with fares being frozen as they are, once-profitable services can soon become loss-making.
Quote from: Stu on March 15, 2023, 07:29:49 PMJust been looking at the TfWM page regarding the changes:
https://www.tfwm.org.uk/plan-your-journey/ways-to-travel/buses-in-the-west-midlands/upcoming-bus-service-changes/proposed-changes-to-diamond-services-002-45-226-and-4h-from-15-april/
Couple of things here I'd like to comment on:
Regarding the 4H:Would that be worthwhile? NX already operate the 4 and 4M between Walsall and Blackheath on Sunday, and part of the 4H between Halesowen and Hayley Green.
Regarding the 45:Well if that's the case, according to TfWM, it makes you wonder why NX decided to give up, and now Diamond want to do the same.
But the thing is that times change, operating costs increase, and especially with fares being frozen as they are, once-profitable services can soon become loss-making.
Exactly that, especially the routes in the low fare zones
Routes 45 & 002 have now gone out to tender. (2 options for each services).
Edit: 45 is Monday to Sunday; 002 is Sundays only.
Whilst coming home tonight one solution for part of the 45 route would be to divert to 40 so from Holyhead Road it goes round Charlemont Farm then back up to Stone Cross then normal line of route to Wednesbury and vice versa heading to West Bromwich.
Maybe the 45 could stay with a route change, not going through Charlemont but as the 401/3 did, run straight to Stone Cross, then along Hollyhedge Road, as another poster mentioned, reroute one of the 40s to go through Charlemont and then straight up to Stone Cross and then down Hall Green Road, and call that variation the 40A.
Yew Tree has always to my knowledge been a estate that relied on the route pre COVID, obviously I can't say how it's used now as I live in Handsworth and drive so rarely use buses.
The 002 I do have recent knowledge of the route as my husband drives for Diamond and part of his rota is that route as he works the Merry Hill rota.
When I have caught it with him driving (by the way I always pay for the journeys either cash or by tapping my debit card at Merry Hill and tapping off at Weoley Castle then vice versa on the return journey) the route has been quite well used, but there aren't many passengers who get on in Weoley Castle who go all the way to Merry Hill, a lot get off in Halesowen and then you get other passengers from Halesowen going to Merry Hill.
About timekeeping, there is a lot of pinch points on the route where drivers will lose time, narrow roads where schools are and a lot of roadworks. Manor Way has been especially difficult the past few months. Drivers don't like running late or having to run dead to a certain point and then resume service, they want to provide a service to their passengers, it's difficult when you get stuck in traffic jams and start to run late. My husband will come home feeling miserable because he has been late one trip and hasn't been able to catch up. It's a mentally demanding job.
Hopefully something can be sorted out for the 45 as the other two routes have been sorted out and maybe the Government should provide more help for transport services post COVID.
Surely any changes to Partnership routes have to happen to both operators, not just the one?
Any ideas on the bromford 25?
Quote from: PinkBus on March 23, 2023, 05:34:40 AMMaybe the 45 could stay with a route change, not going through Charlemont but as the 401/3 did, run straight to Stone Cross, then along Hollyhedge Road, as another poster mentioned, reroute one of the 40s to go through Charlemont and then straight up to Stone Cross and then down Hall Green Road, and call that variation the 40A.
Yew Tree has always to my knowledge been a estate that relied on the route pre COVID, obviously I can't say how it's used now as I live in Handsworth and drive so rarely use buses.
The 002 I do have recent knowledge of the route as my husband drives for Diamond and part of his rota is that route as he works the Merry Hill rota.
When I have caught it with him driving (by the way I always pay for the journeys either cash or by tapping my debit card at Merry Hill and tapping off at Weoley Castle then vice versa on the return journey) the route has been quite well used, but there aren't many passengers who get on in Weoley Castle who go all the way to Merry Hill, a lot get off in Halesowen and then you get other passengers from Halesowen going to Merry Hill.
About timekeeping, there is a lot of pinch points on the route where drivers will lose time, narrow roads where schools are and a lot of roadworks. Manor Way has been especially difficult the past few months. Drivers don't like running late or having to run dead to a certain point and then resume service, they want to provide a service to their passengers, it's difficult when you get stuck in traffic jams and start to run late. My husband will come home feeling miserable because he has been late one trip and hasn't been able to catch up. It's a mentally demanding job.
Hopefully something can be sorted out for the 45 as the other two routes have been sorted out and maybe the Government should provide more help for transport services post COVID.
TfWM have issued tenders for the 45 Operating Daily Option 1 = 30min frequency, Option 2= 20min frequency
Also tenders have been issued for 4H Sundays & 002 Sundays
Quote from: monkeyjoe on March 24, 2023, 04:19:19 PMAny ideas on the bromford 25?
TfWM has issued a tender for the 25 & 600 on the same tender.
Diamond 45 and 002 to remain unchanged until October 2023.
NXWM will operate a hourly Sunday service on the 4H between Walsall and Hayley Green until October 2023.
Proposed changes to Diamond services 002, 45, 226 and 4H from 15 April | Transport for West Midlands (tfwm.org.uk) (https://www.tfwm.org.uk/plan-your-journey/ways-to-travel/buses-in-the-west-midlands/upcoming-bus-service-changes/proposed-changes-to-diamond-services-002-45-226-and-4h-from-15-april/)
Anyone know what's going to happen to the 25? As it is tendered service and part of the route will need to be covered by another route?
Quote from: Jack D on April 06, 2023, 09:24:48 PMAnyone know what's going to happen to the 25? As it is tendered service and part of the route will need to be covered by another route?
According to TFWM no change to route and timetable. To be operated by a new operator which is to be announced on the TFWM website in the coming days.
Quote from: 2206 on April 06, 2023, 09:28:40 PMAccording to TFWM no change to route and timetable. To be operated by a new operator which is to be announced on the TFWM website in the coming days.
Where can you see this information?
Quote from: 2206 on April 05, 2023, 03:15:42 PMDiamond 45 and 002 to remain unchanged until October 2023.
NXWM will operate a hourly Sunday service on the 4H between Walsall and Hayley Green until October 2023.
Proposed changes to Diamond services 002, 45, 226 and 4H from 15 April | Transport for West Midlands (tfwm.org.uk) (https://www.tfwm.org.uk/plan-your-journey/ways-to-travel/buses-in-the-west-midlands/upcoming-bus-service-changes/proposed-changes-to-diamond-services-002-45-226-and-4h-from-15-april/)
226 will retain its 30 min frequency Mon-Fri but reduced to hourly on Saturdays. Service will follow the previous route (currently numbered 226A) omitting Wall Heath.
Any news on the 25?
Sorry, unable to find any mention of a replacement.
Quote from: Jack D on April 12, 2023, 10:54:19 AMAny news on the 25?
Still on comms by tfwm, if these changes are due Monday. Pretty poor show by them, have they lost the plot?
Quote from: monkeyjoe on April 15, 2023, 10:03:07 AMStill on comms by tfwm, if these changes are due Monday. Pretty poor show by them, have they lost the plot?
Solus will be taking over the 25 and 600 from Monday, according to a local councillor:
https://wmbusphotos.com/forum/index.php?msg=312259
Interesting so if he announced back in March and still not on tfwm website that's even worse. Thanks for sharing but no idea what tfwm are playing at?
Quote from: monkeyjoe on April 15, 2023, 12:11:18 PMInteresting so if he announced back in March and still not on tfwm website that's even worse. Thanks for sharing but no idea what tfwm are playing at?
The post is dated April 9th.
That March screenshot comes from the Diamond website.
Even if it is still time to announce it and stick on their site.
This is the TfWM we are talking about.
Having reduced the frequency of the 226, from 19th June 2023 further changes are being made. Service 226 will no longer serve Ashwood Park but run direct along Cot Lane during the daytime Mon-Sat. Evenings and Sundays will continue the current route but be renumbered 226A.