NXWM service changes 15th Nov

[karl724223]

You know the old saying
     USE IT OR LOSE IT

[Solo1]

why haven't  nx bus timed 129 & 141 from merry hill  to be a bus every 15 from Merry Hill  to brum

[karl724223]

why haven't  nx bus timed 129 & 141 from merry hill  to be a bus every 15 from Merry Hill  to brum

129 still timed in with the 127/128 
Should have been renumbered 139 imo
Come Monday morning where you going driver
Merry hill
But your the 129 to west brom
Not any more

[Sh4318]

You know the old saying
     USE IT OR LOSE IT

The 444 was used, very much so.

[winston]

The 444 was used, very much so.

If it was used that much/was profitable to operate, it would still be here now

[Sh4318]

why haven't  nx bus timed 129 & 141 from merry hill  to be a bus every 15 from Merry Hill  to brum

The 141 already has a co-ordinated frequency with the 241. It's around the year mark since the 241 was extended to Merry Hill wasn't it? Going off the previous Old Hill/Cradley Heath changes, this is progress

If it was used that much/was profitable to operate, it would still be here now

Would it? There are plenty of examples that can disagree with that. If you're going to basically re-create the 444, why miss out half of the roads it served?

[winston]

Would it? There are plenty of examples that can disagree with that. If you're going to basically re-create the 444, why miss out half of the roads it served?

Just because routes carry passengers, doesn't make them profitable to operate.

[Sh4318]

Just because routes carry passengers, doesn't make them profitable to operate.

We have no idea whether the 444 was profitable or not, I'll point to the strange withdrawal and re-introduction of part of the 289. I'm just going off the links that the 50A/50C provide compared to the 444, which are no more than links that we already have in the area

[Mike K]

why haven't  nx bus timed 129 & 141 from merry hill  to be a bus every 15 from Merry Hill  to brum

The timings from Birmingham are 15 minute intervals but in reality not that many people will use them end to end, the 129 in particular. With different end to end journey times, inter-working etc co-ordinating timings from both terminus points is unlikely to be workable.

[winston]

We have no idea whether the 444 was profitable or not, I'll point to the strange withdrawal and re-introduction of part of the 289. I'm just going off the links that the 50A/50C provide compared to the 444, which are no more than links that we already have in the area

The point I'm trying to make is, if the 444 had of made a decent profit, it would still be around today in the same format. The fact that it was withdrawn with bits tagged on to other routes suggest it wasn't.

[Sh4318]

The point I'm trying to make is, if the 444 had of made a decent profit, it would still be around today in the same format. The fact that it was withdrawn with bits tagged on to other routes suggest it wasn't.

We'll have to agree to disagree, I've seen examples where this was not the case. In general, I'm just not happy about these changes

[winston]

We'll have to agree to disagree, I've seen examples where this was not the case. In general, I'm just not happy about these changes

Unless you have access to the figures, I don't see how you can state that.

Any change will always inconvenience someone, you can't please everyone all of the time, you have to aim to please the majority

[s94]

I don't agree that the 129 should go up quarry bank high street. In particular because they already have a bus to Birmingham there. Surely it would be better to target a different area like saltwells and environs who don't have that (and some don't have direct connections to cradley Heath rail station) such a service. Going via here for example is just as quick as via the high street.

[Sh4318]

Unless you have access to the figures, I don't see how you can state that.

Any change will always inconvenience someone, you can't please everyone all of the time, you have to aim to please the majority

That argument can be used in both ways. I agree, and I do really feel inconvenienced, looking at the changes, they have really been geared towards providing Warley, George with a better service, while stripping Londonderry of their's, that's just the way I see it.

I don't agree that the 129 should go up quarry bank high street. In particular because they already have a bus to Birmingham there. Surely it would be better to target a different area like saltwells and environs who don't have that (and some don't have direct connections to cradley Heath rail station) such a service. Going via here for example is just as quick as via the high street.

I agree with you there. I don't believe Quarry Bank needs a 4 buses an hour to Birmingham.

[winston]

That argument can be used in both ways. I agree, and I do really feel inconvenienced, looking at the changes, they have really been geared towards providing Warley, George with a better service, while stripping Londonderry of their's, that's just the way I see it.

I'm going off the fact that is you were a bus company with a route that made healthy profits would you then go and withdraw it & tag bits on to other routes. The tagging bits on to other routes is usually designed to continue to provide a service to those areas but by stripping out the costs of providing a designated service such as the 444.

Your looking at the changes from your own point of view and how they will affect you, there may well be far more people in the Warley area set to benefit form the changes. Loading data will have been analysed before the changes & routing were approved.

I guess the travelling public will vote with their feet come Monday, it will be interesting to see how they are / aren't accepted