(21/09/2021 20:37)Busway_Bob Wrote: [ -> ]Save the X1 Bus, sign the petition
https://www.change.org/p/mike-amesbury-m...fDPO8lydLk
I don't understand this though- over 700 people have signed the petition If those 700 people all used the service then it wouldn't be getting withdrawn. Reading through some of the comments - there's a fair few "I used this bus for hospital appointments". You can't justify running a service because somebody uses it a few times per year to go to the hospital!
A similar situation with service 492/495 on the Wirral. A petition gained around 2000 signatures (I'm told) to reinstate evening and Sunday services. They introduced a reduced version with the intention of upping it if numbers showed potential. It carries fresh air. Where are the 2000 people who said they needed that bus, when in reality only 3 people a trip actually use it?
Just to clarify, I understand why people would want these buses, and that for some people it is their only option to get from a to b. This is exactly why routes like these should be subsidised and the run for profit system is flawed. The whole industry needs shaking up and funding properly to provide the service it should do. Look at the amount of Merseytravel tendered routes we have lost in the last 10 years,a lot of them fairly well used. Buses arnt to connect people anymore, they're just to keep shareholders happy. - Comment not aimed at MP by the way!
(22/09/2021 09:21)L401CJF Wrote: [ -> ]I don't understand this though- over 700 people have signed the petition If those 700 people all used the service then it wouldn't be getting withdrawn. Reading through some of the comments - there's a fair few "I used this bus for hospital appointments". You can't justify running a service because somebody uses it a few times per year to go to the hospital!
A similar situation with service 492/495 on the Wirral. A petition gained around 2000 signatures (I'm told) to reinstate evening and Sunday services. They introduced a reduced version with the intention of upping it if numbers showed potential. It carries fresh air. Where are the 2000 people who said they needed that bus, when in reality only 3 people a trip actually use it?
Passenger numbers are only one of the reasons why it’s been cancelled apparently. But yet again it begs the question with the X1 having a history of anti social behaviour and low passenger numbers, hence it being tendered to Arriva, why did MP take it on commercially??
(22/09/2021 09:28)Mayneway Wrote: [ -> ]Passenger numbers are only one of the reasons why it’s been cancelled apparently. But yet again it begs the question with the X1 having a history of anti social behaviour and low passenger numbers, hence it being tendered to Arriva, why did MP take it on commercially??
Yet again, as mentioned above in previous posts, it is probably because they though they could try and make something of it, with the govt funding in place, hoping it would pick up enough so that when the funding ceased it would be somewht viable. However it hasn't worked out that way.
It's a business mate, business take risks, sometimes they work out, and sometimes they don't. In this case it doesn't appear to have the desired results. Similarly to Transdev who tried doing the ZAP from Manchester to Leeds. They know the M62 is terribly unreliable, they know there's a quicker train, so why even try it? It's a risk and unforunately somtimes things "hit the fan". Bringing the route round the busway has picked up extra passengers, which shows that Arriva was missing out on some potential there. However it still isn't enought to make it commercially viable with extra funding being unavailable for it to continue to build up.
(22/09/2021 10:04)thomasl1231 Wrote: [ -> ]Yet again, as mentioned above in previous posts, it is probably because they though they could try and make something of it, with the govt funding in place, hoping it would pick up enough so that when the funding ceased it would be somewht viable. However it hasn't worked out that way.
It's a business mate, business take risks, sometimes they work out, and sometimes they don't. In this case it doesn't appear to have the desired results. Similarly to Transdev who tried doing the ZAP from Manchester to Leeds. They know the M62 is terribly unreliable, they know there's a quicker train, so why even try it? It's a risk and unforunately somtimes things "hit the fan". Bringing the route round the busway has picked up extra passengers, which shows that Arriva was missing out on some potential there. However it still isn't enought to make it commercially viable with extra funding being unavailable for it to continue to build up.
It’s nothing like Transdev’s Zap. That was a route set up from scratch so it was always going to ‘sink or swim’.
Arriva ran the X1 on tender. They were paid a set price to run it. Arriva are not daft. If they had thought they could make more money running it commercially they would have done instead of subbing it out to MP.
Yes they could have made it work but when you look at their Twitter page and the constant daily lists of excuses as to why services weren’t running its no wonder passenger numbers dropped and didn’t rise.
(22/09/2021 11:30)Mayneway Wrote: [ -> ]It’s nothing like Transdev’s Zap. That was a route set up from scratch so it was always going to ‘sink or swim’.
Arriva ran the X1 on tender. They were paid a set price to run it. Arriva are not daft. If they had thought they could make more money running it commercially they would have done instead of subbing it out to MP.
Yes they could have made it work but when you look at their Twitter page and the constant daily lists of excuses as to why services weren’t running its no wonder passenger numbers dropped and didn’t rise.
That was just a relatively recent example I could think of, does not entirely fit but is somewhat relatable.
The problem is at the end of the day Arriva wanted rid of the route, it had become unprofitable...if you actually go on the buses and speak to the regular passengers, like I have done myself driving said buses, you will learn that they are mostly under the impression that Arriva were trying to get rid of the route. They will tell you that it used to be very busy and I indeed saw that myself a few years ago, standing loads etc, however with lots of timetable changes and very irregular frequency (every 40 mins??) this drove passengers away to alternatives. That isn't just something I've made up, that is the opinions and views of the passengers that actually use the service.
*agreed breakdowns etc on 1 hour frequency doesn't help things, certainly wouldn't want to wait 2 hours for a bus myself lol
(22/09/2021 11:42)thomasl1231 Wrote: [ -> ]That was just a relatively recent example I could think of, does not entirely fit but is somewhat relatable.
The problem is at the end of the day Arriva wanted rid of the route, it had become unprofitable...if you actually go on the buses and speak to the regular passengers, like I have done myself driving said buses, you will learn that they are mostly under the impression that Arriva were trying to get rid of the route. They will tell you that it used to be very busy and I indeed saw that myself a few years ago, standing loads etc, however with lots of timetable changes and very irregular frequency (every 40 mins??) this drove passengers away to alternatives. That isn't just something I've made up, that is the opinions and views of the passengers that actually use the service.
*agreed breakdowns etc on 1 hour frequency doesn't help things, certainly wouldn't want to wait 2 hours for a bus myself lol
I was under the impression it was tendered to Arriva and Arriva sub contracted it to MP until the end of the tender because of a shortage of drivers. The tender was awarded to Warringtons own buses, but MP registered it commercially cancelling out the subsidised service, 9 months later they withdraw it leaving passengers wondering if it’s going to be tendered out again.
(21/09/2021 12:27)iMarkeh Wrote: [ -> ]The old timetable only did to the hospital though don't forget. It's only more recently that it went on the busway full time. That seems to be when the issues started a bit more with vandalism. Least that is when it became more noticeable on social media.
Question is whether they lost more passengers through the reduced frequency than they gained through the all-day extension, or whether the extension increased ticket sales but they couldn't pay for the disruption caused by vandalism.
(22/09/2021 12:57)knutstransport Wrote: [ -> ]Question is whether they lost more passengers through the reduced frequency than they gained through the all-day extension, or whether the extension increased ticket sales but they couldn't pay for the disruption caused by vandalism.
Passenger numbers increased after reducing frequency