Diamond Bus Service Changes 15th April 2023

[j789]

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.

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.

[j789]

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.

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!

[Ginger66]

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 

[bususer12]

Latest announcement that main change to 002 and 226 is reduction in weekend service levels. 45 still withdrawn 

[BK63 YWP]

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/

[MasterPlan]

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/

Great news regarding the 002.

[Stu]

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:

You cannot view this attachment. 

You cannot view this attachment.

[hlliwmai]

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:

You cannot view this attachment.

You cannot view this attachment.

That's a Bob Baker comment if ever I saw it typical snide remarks nothing changes with him

[sonic84]

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.

[MW]

That'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.

[the trainbasher]

To be fair, the way the politician wrote their post, you'd think there was an election coming up - cynical, moi? 

[Mike K]

I 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:You cannot view this attachment.

You cannot view this attachment.

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. 

[Simon Dunn]

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.

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

[MasterPlan]

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.

[MW]

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.

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.