(08/09/2012 11:07)Damien Wrote: [ -> ] (08/09/2012 10:31)66905 Wrote: [ -> ]Todays notes around Bolton Town Centre...
Damien, 40402 is still in service, on 562 to Withins.
The Scania's are out again, 60172 on the 519 and 60183 on the 533 - looks like First have won the tender to operate the service after de-registering it commercially. And 60161 was on the 501, which was my bus home. :-)
Eclipse Urbans - 66891 is another loan / transfer to Bolton, also on the 501 and 69201 has been repainted and is back in service, on the 575, but missing fleetname and 'flying f' vinyls.
John Eclipse Urban
66905
Thanks John
:-)
Sounds like the sticker pack for 69201 didn't arrive on time, for when painting was complete, I know that's happened a lot at Oldham Depot with the repaints, Bury's 37294/6/9 are examples of that.
(08/09/2012 10:31)66905 Wrote: [ -> ]60183 on the 533 - looks like First have won the tender to operate the service after de-registering it commercially.
John Eclipse Urban
66905
I've just explained this to my partner and he had the same idea as me.
This is pathetic, First de-register a service so that TfGM pick it up and then First take on the tender - which means First have further funding for the running of the service.
Now I may be wrong but this is the perfect example of swindling money out of the government. That's silly. They definitely shouldn't have been allowed to run the tender since they showed no interest in the route before funding.
(08/09/2012 13:57)P528LND Wrote: [ -> ] (08/09/2012 10:31)66905 Wrote: [ -> ]60183 on the 533 - looks like First have won the tender to operate the service after de-registering it commercially.
John Eclipse Urban
66905
I've just explained this to my partner and he had the same idea as me.
This is pathetic, First de-register a service so that TfGM pick it up and then First take on the tender - which means First have further funding for the running of the service.
Now I may be wrong but this is the perfect example of swindling money out of the government. That's silly. They definitely shouldn't have been allowed to run the tender since they showed no interest in the route before funding.
Even more so when it has ofter bus routes on all of its route with the 225,507,537 and 541
awful in Uppermill today with roadworks casuing buses to be late due to so much traffic one i got on 350 should have left at 11.55 came at 12.10 driver had to phone depot as he had a 387 at 12.45 was told to go out of service and just drop passangers of where they where going
i am sick of roadworks in saddleworth about 3rd time this year they have had the road up
The Scania's are out again, 60172 on the 519 and 60183 on the 533 - looks like First have won the tender to operate the service after de-registering it commercially. And 60161 was on the 501, which was my bus home. :-)
Eclipse Urbans - 66891 is another loan / transfer to Bolton, also on the 501 and 69201 has been repainted and is back in service, on the 575, but missing fleetname and 'flying f' vinyls.
John Eclipse Urban
66905
[/quote]
Also notice 60071 as well from Rock Ferry.
(08/09/2012 13:57)P528LND Wrote: [ -> ] (08/09/2012 10:31)66905 Wrote: [ -> ]60183 on the 533 - looks like First have won the tender to operate the service after de-registering it commercially.
John Eclipse Urban
66905
I've just explained this to my partner and he had the same idea as me.
This is pathetic, First de-register a service so that TfGM pick it up and then First take on the tender - which means First have further funding for the running of the service.
Now I may be wrong but this is the perfect example of swindling money out of the government. That's silly. They definitely shouldn't have been allowed to run the tender since they showed no interest in the route before funding.
The rules on tenders are very strict though as at the end of the day it's taxpayers money which is funding these subsidised services.
The local authority (TFGM in this case) must award the contract to the cheapest tender, regardless of whether they ran it commercially up until a week ago.
It might not be a tender, First may run it with a dominimus payment ( not sure on spelling) where they continue to run the service but receive a subsidy each month towards drivers wages etc.
To answer your query, Mayneway, its
de minimis as its a French term!
Anyway, back to topic, First have probably got it as it will have been awarded as a short-term emergency tender... its often in these cases where the incumbent gets it back as fewer operators will have submitted a bid or fewer alternative options will have been provided. D&G/SLT Chris may be able to provide better clarification on this!
Tenders are not necessarily awarded to the lowest bidder, as it is meant to go to the operator providing the best value. If you get an operator who submits a bid to run the basic requirement, but someone else submits a bid to provide an enhanced level of service (perhaps a couple of extra journeys or a small extension to a community facility such as a health centre or supermarket) for an extra £100, the authority may go for that bid instead. After all, this may mean more people using the service, resulting in a reduction in the "subsidy per head".
I wish someone will those at Blackburn how to paint the First livery. All the B7s that have been done there are coming back with bit between the cab window and the first salloon window painted white rather than leaving it black. This now breaks up the seamless look of the bonded windows!
Also, they are over painting the Wright "W" are the front rather than leaving that silver. Most annoying as those painted in house are being done correctly.
(08/09/2012 18:41)Nicholas Wrote: [ -> ]To answer your query, Mayneway, its de minimis as its a French term!
Thanks Nicholas, it's one of them words I can say perfectly, know exactly what it means but cant bloody spell it
I know exactly what you mean!