Messages

So it seems it is pretty simple really - if you catch the bus outside the West Mids area into the county you'd be given a Daysaver+ valid only on NX (as is the situation now so no change for those passengers).

Anyone catching the bus on a NX bus within the West Mids get an Nbus day ticket no matter where they travel to, including cross boundary services. Those tickets would then be accepted by NX in those other counties for return journeys back to the West Mids.

So really it is only passengers currently outside the West Midlands that will need this alternative ticket - a very small % in the grand scheme of things.

The only issue I could see would be whether an Nbus issued by another operator would be accepted by NX for a journey starting outside the West Midlands boundary. I would assume it would be though otherwise that would be more confusing.

Whilst there are obvious complications with these tickets I don't think the issue will be as large as people seem to be imagining.

Currently, passengers outside the west Mids boundary can purchase a NX Daysaver that can be used on all their buses but not on other companies in the West Midlands. They would need to them buy another ticket should they wish to use another operator's services.

This situation is however surely not changing with the Daysaver+. That still allows passengers outside the West Midlands access to all the NX bus network as it does now. These passengers won't notice the difference therefore (apart from the 50p increase over the current day ticket price).

I think very few current passengers in those areas would have any confusion about being able to use that ticket on any operator's services. They can't now snd they can't in the future - no change.

Yes it would be easier for there to be one day ticket for ease but it is well known that journeys outside the West Midlands are generally less well subsidised than within the county so it is understandable for operators to want to have restrictions on usage in those areas. Ultimately, £4.50 on the Daysaver + goes to NX whereas if they sold a Nbus ticket a % would go elsewhere. The difference may well make these cross county services financial viable so passenger do benefit in that way.

I just don't think many people are going to be a confused by this as really the situation for current passengers has not changed with these tickets.

I've seen it happen I've been on the bus I've seen them !!

I wish I had the time to sit on bus routes end to end all day checking to see if they are running 2 minutes early.

Perhaps get yourself a job as a route manager if you feel the service is really that bad where 'every' bus is running early (which it obviously isn't!)

Quite a few drivers have been leaving early everywhere probably because Walsall garage don't ever call them in there obviously not strict not fair on passengers who miss bus and have to wait 20 minutes for following 4m

'Everywhere!'

Have you been stood at every bus stop along the route then to actually witness this happening or are you looking at a computer screen that you know doesn't always show 100% accurate data?

Absolutely ridiculous statement.

Propaganda??? what inane rubbish you speak. Just because I don't think certain companies are great (this opinion formed over many years influenced by many colleagues telling me the reality of life in 'said' companies!) it doesn't mean it's propaganda just because you've got a different viewpoint.

I'm pretty sure you started at NXWM, then Diamond, now Landflight (probably others). You have anti-NX beliefs because no doubt things didn't go to plan for you there. I don't spout nonsense about your 'propaganda', it's your genuine opinion which is fair enough, but this is mine so fair enough too.

The same point applies though to contracted services - they are contracted for a reason because they aren't commercially feasible. Not enough passengers so it stands to reason they will sell far fewer day passes anyway to make your argument more than a moot point. 

I was under the impression that operators had to pay any additional revenue obtained in service, over the total subsidy value, back to the authority so I am happy to be corrected on this if this is not the case. Obviously, if it was the case then it wouldn't make any difference to these companies what they received back for day passes, they'd be guaranteed the overall subsidy value anyhow.

There's nothing like facts and this post is nothing like facts...

Please add some facts to your response then to disprove what I said. Provide an extended list of fully commercially operated routes run by companies other than the big 4 mentioned. Your response would suggest there must be loads so I look forward to this information 👍

Wrong. As usual.

Typically inept response! Like to tell me what all these commercially run routes by smaller companies are? GO AHEAD ...

And before you start quoting Banga routes and similar, READ what I wrote - I said they 'mostly operate contracted services' which they do.

I will wait for your long list of West Midlands commercial routes run by companies other than those I mentioned (NXWM/Rotala/Stagecoach/Arriva).

?????????????

Presumably the operator issuing the ticket keeps £4 ish? I wonder how the rest is distributed,especially to smaller operators who don't issue many currently?

If you take out NXWM, Rotala, Stagecoach and Arriva from the West Mids operating territory then there are very few commercially operated services by other companies - these smaller companies mostly operate contracted services for Centro where the company doesn't keep the money so it doesn't matter what you mention for them.

Also, clearly the companies involved will have costed this out to make it worthwhile for them otherwise they wouldn't be doing this in the first place.

Saw a salt road branded bus on the M5! Do drivers use that route back to garage routinely or?

Yes it is the quickest route to and from Worcester for buses starting or finishing at Catshill on the 144. This is a fairly recent trend though (say last 4-5 years) as drivers were previously banned from doing this and had to run via the A38 instead. There must be a decent wage and fuel saving via the motorway too as journey time is about 20 minutes compared with 35 'minutes via the A38 route.

The S45 school route starting from Alvechurch also uses the M5 and M42 to get to/from where it starts/finishes.

NX Currently use 3 methods

Some buses are owned

Some buses are leased (Some Scanias and some E400s).

New Electrics are on a service provision agreement similar to how the leasing companies rent trains to TOCs

Have NXWM purchased outright any buses previously leased before?

So it looks like 6887 which was supposed to do the 16:20 X21 to Bartley Green was taken away to do a 97 to Chemlsey Wood instead. I am curious as to what the thought process is behind a decision like that.

Could be there was 1 spare driver available for this bus who was not route trained on the x21 but could run an otherwise missing 97 so that got run instead.

Plenty of scenarios possible, clearly not good if you want an x21 but the driver shortage is not over yet so unfortunately things like this will continue.

I had a great think before posting about this topic.

The leasing of buses is a good idea.
(1) if god forbid NXWM went bus, debt recovery would have to happen.  As newer buses are leased this would not be accountable as stock to offset any possible debt.
(2) if leasing company was to go bust there's could be a possibility NX could by the buses that they leased on the cheap.

I think there are other reasons but the top two are key reasons why leasing is good.

This is a bit overly simplistic. Pros of leasing include reduced initial financial outlay for new vehicles and leasing can include vehicle maintenance costs too. Good for some companies particularly those running contract services of a set duration as the bus can just be returned to the leader should the company lose the contract.

Cons though are that over the 20 year expected life of a bus, like the Tridents have done at NXWM, the leasing costs would have been significantly higher leasing for those 20 years instead of purchasing. Yes it is likely that over those 20 years the leased vehicle could have been updated so newer vehicles would be used however the extra costs would still be significant. Good maintenance, like NXWM have, mean that one vehicle can have an extended life.

Another con is the base cost of the bus when factoring in route running costs. This does depend on the profitability of routes, but generally after about 10 years of ownership, the bus will have repaid its cost price so any time after that the bus no longer is actually 'costing' the company anything (accept ongoing maintenance costs). Therefore, the running costs of these buses on routes would be reduced compared to if they had leased the vehicles where the leasing costs would still remain after 10 years. That is why marginal routes often use older vehicles like this to lower costs.

Also, outright purchase does not necessarily mean the company paying £300000 for a bus in one go to own it. Like car finance deals, this can be paid over a number of years rather than in one go so costs can be more manageable that way.

The government haven't said anything about increasing bus fares.

This just means that from November, the max fare cap rises to £2.50. It only applies to single journey fares, not returns.

Bus fares are expected to remain frozen until 2025, so all this means is that the price of a single ticket will revert back to £2.40. Therefore the fare capping scheme effectively ends in the West Midlands.

Unless of course the increase in paying passenger numbers from this scheme makes it viable to keep the fares at a flat £2. This probably isn't feasible for long distance or rural routes but urban areas could/should allow this hopefully.

Except they won't... it will just kick the problem down the road and the begging bowl will come out in 2024 instead...

Well would you rather those projected 15-20% of route cuts were made now then rather than giving it another 18 month to at least make some of them financially viable?

Also, this scheme has led to passenger increases, ask any major operator (by some accounts some areas quite significantly too). These returning/new passengers may just make those borderline services viable in the future. It's worth a shot as there is no alternative except large cuts in service which benefits no one.

As has been discussed before, this is a good, common sense move that will now give operators the opportunity to plan ahead for the next couple of years with at least one cost pressure taken care of.

Hopefully, many operators will also take the chance, in November this year, to rebuild good faith with the public after the issues of missing trips and unreliability, etc, by keeping their fares at £2 beyond that date - that would generate very good publicity and increase chances of maintaining passenger number increases.