Re: West Coast Mainline Deal Ditched : Wed Oct 03, 2012 12:11 pm  

jonny the leyther wrote:

Really? Even people who work on the railways know that when they were private it was a joke. Virgin Trains rival Japan and Germany on punctuation, run at a profit and have 98% customer satisfaction.

Why would you want to change that?

Back in the "bad old days" poor old Peter Parker had to run a railway with very low investment from the government.
He always said that if he was allowed to raise money in the same way that any company could, he could revitalise BR without the need to privatise.
Successive flavours of government wouldn't allow it.

Then it got privatised and loads of investment flooded in, in the form of subsidies, that could just as easily have been provided to BR without the need for loads of it to flow straight out again in the form of dividends and "profit".

Re: West Coast Mainline Deal Ditched : Wed Oct 03, 2012 12:24 pm  

On ticketing, the three months thing is wonderful – if you can book that far in advance. But I cannot often do that, so end up paying an incredibly varied range of prices. Crazy. Robinson mentioned the French system – it's the only one outside of the UK that I've now had fairly extensive experience of travelling on, and it's brilliant. Although I would say that the local services are also good and every bit as valuable as the big ones. If you're interested, there's a little bit here about the effect of maintaining such small, local lines – and indeed, how it's funded.

On ticketing, the three months thing is wonderful – if you can book that far in advance. But I cannot often do that, so end up paying an incredibly varied range of prices. Crazy. Robinson mentioned the French system – it's the only one outside of the UK that I've now had fairly extensive experience of travelling on, and it's brilliant. Although I would say that the local services are also good and every bit as valuable as the big ones. If you're interested, there's a little bit here about the effect of maintaining such small, local lines – and indeed, how it's funded.

Re: West Coast Mainline Deal Ditched : Wed Oct 03, 2012 1:12 pm  

I always thought, perhaps wrongly, that privatisation was introduced to allow for competition, and therefore customer choice. It was a surprise therefore to me that railways were privatised, as it's pretty impossible for competition on a route that is fixed on steel rails (all this praise for Virgin makes me think I'd love to use their trains between Sheffield and London, but I can't as East Midlands trains have the monopoly on that). A flawed model from the start for me and time to take back railway ownership.

[DaveO]

Re: West Coast Mainline Deal Ditched : Wed Oct 03, 2012 2:36 pm  

Chris28 wrote:

I always thought, perhaps wrongly, that privatisation was introduced to allow for competition, and therefore customer choice. It was a surprise therefore to me that railways were privatised, as it's pretty impossible for competition on a route that is fixed on steel rails (all this praise for Virgin makes me think I'd love to use their trains between Sheffield and London, but I can't as East Midlands trains have the monopoly on that). A flawed model from the start for me and time to take back railway ownership.

It was rushed through by John major as well as he didn't think they would get it done before they lost the next election. He freely admits this himself. It was done for ideological reasons, not to give us choice.

The same is true with the utilities. While we can switch providers unlike with rail where we are stuck with the local franchisee the utilities are in effect a cartel whatever anyone says about the regulators powers.

Re: West Coast Mainline Deal Ditched : Wed Oct 03, 2012 4:51 pm  

Chris28 wrote:

I always thought, perhaps wrongly, that privatisation was introduced to allow for competition, and therefore customer choice. It was a surprise therefore to me that railways were privatised, as it's pretty impossible for competition on a route that is fixed on steel rails (all this praise for Virgin makes me think I'd love to use their trains between Sheffield and London, but I can't as East Midlands trains have the monopoly on that). A flawed model from the start for me and time to take back railway ownership.

Quite.
The London underground never made real profits when in private hands with different lines owned by different companies, and provided a much better transport system when eventually it was all linked up.
Competition and "the market" isn't always the best solution.

Re: West Coast Mainline Deal Ditched : Wed Oct 03, 2012 10:29 pm  

El Barbudo wrote:

Back in the "bad old days" poor old Peter Parker had to run a railway with very low investment from the government.
He always said that if he was allowed to raise money in the same way that any company could, he could revitalise BR without the need to privatise.
Successive flavours of government wouldn't allow it.

Then it got privatised and loads of investment flooded in, in the form of subsidies, that could just as easily have been provided to BR without the need for loads of it to flow straight out again in the form of dividends and "profit".

So what you're saying is, privatisation worked because it induced investment?

Not really an argument against my point that.

Re: West Coast Mainline Deal Ditched : Thu Oct 04, 2012 6:35 am  

jonny the leyther wrote:

So what you're saying is, privatisation worked because it induced investment?

Not really an argument against my point that.

Not really, I read it as the same results could have been achieved if BR had been allowed to raise funds in the same way the privatised rail companies did.

Re: West Coast Mainline Deal Ditched : Thu Oct 04, 2012 8:41 am  

But how would the BR lads get hammered in the Railway clubs if people wanted to make the railways work?

[John_D]

Re: West Coast Mainline Deal Ditched : Thu Oct 04, 2012 8:50 am  

Big Graeme wrote:

Not really, I read it as the same results could have been achieved if BR had been allowed to raise funds in the same way the privatised rail companies did.

Like Deutche Bahn have been, you mean?


Anyway, you get £20m for failing to win a franchise bid, so I'm off to jots some numbers down on this post-it and submit it when the Great Western franchise comes up

Re: West Coast Mainline Deal Ditched : Thu Oct 04, 2012 9:07 am  

jonny the leyther wrote:

But how would the BR lads get hammered in the Railway clubs if people wanted to make the railways work?

Yes. You're right.

In the olden days, not a single train ever actually ran or ran on time and, if it did, it was driven by a drunk, while the on-board staff were also three sheets to the wind or seriously hung over.