West Midlands Bus Partnership to End

[the trainbasher]

One side effect of this is it reduces the "value" validity further.

Over the past few years that ticket hasn't been value for money (at one stage you could do Kingswinford to Bloxwich or Weoley to Walsall on it)

[Steveminor]

Diamond saver tickets are now cheaper

[mikestone]

It seems to me that pulling out runs the risk of TfWM taking the line that if operators won't co-operate voluntarily we will go down the franchise route?

[j789]

It seems to me that pulling out runs the risk of TfWM taking the line that if operators won't co-operate voluntarily we will go down the franchise route?

I don't see much evidence that franchising offers any significant benefits, look at what has happened to London over recent years with falling passenger numbers and cut backs. Likewise, the legal ramifications would be huge if they tried to force off companies from a route they have been on for many decades. The compensation if the company won against the authority would be huge.

A much better idea (and one NWM should be instigating) is to scrap monopoly laws and allow one company to run all services under the conditions that having that privilege meant they had to run all services including loss making ones. Get rid of those rules about not allowing cross subsidy from profitable routes and allow this to happen to make a large network financially viable long term. The company running the services would have no risk of competition so more investment long term and passengers would have the reassurance that routes wouldn't be cut because of the legal agreements in place.

NXWM would need to be allowed to purchase Diamond's possessions in the West Midlands (plus Redditch and Kidderminster as useful bolt ons) so diamond could invest more in the northwest region. Maybe Claribels too. The other little companies competing on West Midlands routes don't exactly offer anything NXWM don't already on routes so could be easily compensated and removed. As for the larger groups competing across county borders, route partnerships could be made with Arriva on the 110, First on the 144 (or NXWM just  but Worcester garage) and Stagecoach on Coventry services.

This may be very wishful thinking but having this sort of one operator system would be far more beneficial to all concerned than franchising which would lead to a race to the bottom in standards as companies are forced to cut costs to compete on contract prices.

[2206]

Maybe Claribels too. The other little companies competing on West Midlands routes don't exactly offer anything NXWM don't already on routes so could be easily compensated and removed.

Claribels don't really offer anything NX already do on the 94 really.
NX run the 55/94 routes at every 4 minutes City Centre - Ward End. Claribels are every 18 minutes and have cut back the rest of the comercial network in recent years so 94 runs at the reduced frequency and the Chelmsley to Solihull/Ward End - Chelmsley via Shard End corridors are NX only.
Most of the routes Claribels and Evergreen run are the tendered routes, I would think they are tendered because they are loss making, so NX might not want to run them at a loss anyway I guess?

[Steve3229vp]

I don't see much evidence that franchising offers any significant benefits, look at what has happened to London over recent years with falling passenger numbers and cut backs. Likewise, the legal ramifications would be huge if they tried to force off companies from a route they have been on for many decades. The compensation if the company won against the authority would be huge.

A much better idea (and one NWM should be instigating) is to scrap monopoly laws and allow one company to run all services under the conditions that having that privilege meant they had to run all services including loss making ones. Get rid of those rules about not allowing cross subsidy from profitable routes and allow this to happen to make a large network financially viable long term. The company running the services would have no risk of competition so more investment long term and passengers would have the reassurance that routes wouldn't be cut because of the legal agreements in place.

NXWM would need to be allowed to purchase Diamond's possessions in the West Midlands (plus Redditch and Kidderminster as useful bolt ons) so diamond could invest more in the northwest region. Maybe Claribels too. The other little companies competing on West Midlands routes don't exactly offer anything NXWM don't already on routes so could be easily compensated and removed. As for the larger groups competing across county borders, route partnerships could be made with Arriva on the 110, First on the 144 (or NXWM just  but Worcester garage) and Stagecoach on Coventry services.

This may be very wishful thinking but having this sort of one operator system would be far more beneficial to all concerned than franchising which would lead to a race to the bottom in standards as companies are forced to cut costs to compete on contract prices.

Or maybe NX and Diamond negotiating running bus routes wholly, e.g Diamonds 4 and 4H to swap with NX 12/12A. This is only a theory because I know some people wouldn't want to be stuck with Diamond doing all there service 12/12A and some Diamond passengers won't like being stuck with NX on their 4/4H. Bus passes would have to be universal as well.

[Steveminor]

Having only one commercial operator would break CMA rules cant just do that in a commercialised economy as ours. Lots of smaller operators do bring value to the network I.e I.e Claribels & diamond 75 services banga 530 service diamond 002 service.


I am not averse to franchising the network as any potential profit risks for operators would be underwritten by the franchise agreements. This could lead to a whole wealth of opportunities for different cohorts of society. Cant see tfwm having the funding to do this.

The best way is via the e.p however the LTAs & operators have to work in "partnership" to do this & must treat ALL operators equally.

[j789]

Most of the routes Claribels and Evergreen run are the tendered routes, I would think they are tendered because they are loss making, so NX might not want to run them at a loss anyway I guess?

In my suggestion above I mentioned that scrapping the rules about cross subsidy of loss making routes by profitable ones so that the one operator would operate everything. They couldn't pick or choose routes like now. However, this would still be a positive situation for the operator as Overall, this would still be a profitable enterprise for the one company and far better for passengers having to only deal with one operator.

[j789]

The best way is via the e.p however the LTAs & operators have to work in "partnership" to do this & must treat ALL operators equally.

Fairness is important however it isn't possible to treat the large company in exactly the same way as the small one. For example, NXWM have built up their large network over a long period of time and this should have far more influence over the future network than operators only running a few services. You can't really say that they should be treated the same as it's not realistic.

Otherwise any cow boy (of which there have been a fair few historically in the west Mids) could start running one bus on any route and demand they have an equal right to bidding to operator the route because they should be treated the same. It's not realistic to expect that, it must be done in relation to the size of the current network being run.

[Steveminor]

I meant all operators should have an equal say in how e.p & network move forward & how QAs are formed  At present one operator has such a dominant position that their needs and requirements are put first potentially to the detriment of others.

Take the failure of the current partnership routes

[j789]

I meant all operators should have an equal say in how e.p & network move forward & how QAs are formed  At present one operator has such a dominant position that their needs and requirements are put first potentially to the detriment of others.

Take the failure of the current partnership routes

I would use the same argument though. Why should smaller operators have the same day as the largest one? They haven't invested anything near what the larger operator has done and the risk to them is much smaller financially (although I acknowledge scaling also presents risks to smaller operators). I just don't see how anyone can think it's going to be an acceptable situation where the current largest operator has to sacrifice most for the suggested changes where the smaller operators have most to gain. It's just not a realistic expectation for Diamond or whoever to be on the same terms with NWM as NXWM.

[Westy]

Surely it's only NX that could only do the 'entire' network anyway?

NX has several garages in the area, while realistically Diamond only has one.

There's no way Diamond could run every single WM area bus from Tividale!

(Unless you were expecting NX employees to be TUPE'd to Diamond. Would Diamond employees be expected to be TUPE'd to NX?

Based on Diamond's accquisition of Arriva Wednesfield business & the sale of Arriva Cannock to D&G, if that's how it worked!)

[Simon Dunn]

Surely it's only NX that could only do the 'entire' network anyway?

NX has several garages in the area, while realistically Diamond only has one.

There's no way Diamond could run every single WM area bus from Tividale!

(Unless you were expecting NX employees to be TUPE'd to Diamond. Would Diamond employees be expected to be TUPE'd to NX?

Based on Diamond's accquisition of Arriva Wednesfield business & the sale of Arriva Cannock to D&G, if that's how it worked!)

All

Both Franchising and EHP set out legal provisions to protect the interests of "small" operators.  So any singular operator objective would breach the Bus Services Act, CMA desire and ultimately would never in the current framework get through the relevant tests.

From a Diamond Bus perspective, the key issue to resolve the problems in the market is Ticketing.  We have suggested a number of structures to address this, supported by a leading Transport Economist paper.  The easiest way and I believe has support within TfWM is to create one fare structure and cross operator ticketing through NBus, removing any other Multi Operator Journey options.   In the first instance NBus fares should reduce to the level offered by National Express.   

In return there should be more governance on operators.  I am sure there are many areas this could and should cover.  However, investment, qualify standards, service frequency immediately jump out.

This is a relatively simple change that will deliver a better, fairer market.  An agreement could happen in weeks, not years.  If something along these lines doesn't happen, I cannot see any Partnership Option being approved and ultimately there is no way that TfWM can move forward and address its market issues (a requirement of ongoing funding through the DfT without Franchising).  In every Franchise scheme, the desire in line again with CMA competition rules is to have no operator larger than 25% market share.

We are heading for interesting times.



Simon

[2206]

I believe has support within TfWM is to create one fare structure and cross operator ticketing through NBus, removing any other Multi Operator Journey options.   In the first instance NBus fares should reduce to the level offered by National Express.   

Thats a good idea, I guess it would be good if it could be expanded to cover the small number of areas the NX bus pass currently covers outside of the NWM pass area as well. Coleshill and Water Orton on the X70, etc.
And also as well as having passes/ day tickets priced the same, they should have all single fares priced at the same price, so there is no difference between different operators across the region, including £1 concessionary fare ticket in regards to Claribels.
Could even get rid of the giving change on some operators in regards to cash fares and have an exact cash fare & contactless policy across the entire network for uniformity and faster boarding times.

[Simon Dunn]

Thats a good idea, I guess it would be good if it could be expanded to cover the small number of areas the NX bus pass currently covers outside of the NWM pass area as well. Coleshill and Water Orton on the X70, etc.
And also as well as having passes/ day tickets priced the same, they should have all single fares priced at the same price, so there is no difference between different operators across the region, including £1 concessionary fare ticket in regards to Claribels.
Could even get rid of the giving change on some operators in regards to cash fares and have an exact cash fare & contactless policy across the entire network for uniformity and faster boarding times.

It would be political difficult to breach the West Midlands boundaries.  That being said the NBus does currently span outside the West Midlands.  What I have set out is our principal position, the finer detail would need to be discussed.