Merseytravel Timetable Changes

[iMarkeh]

RE: Merseytravel Timetable Changes

(03/11/2018 21:51)mrd97 Wrote:  Totally agree with this. 83/83A should run as a Circular again, with a Saturday services on 83 (via Greasby). Hourly on both should be a PVR of 3 (same as now with 83A) 22 should return to its old route via Irby and Mill Hill Road, which would give Merseytravel an extra bus to play with. Perhaps the 82 could extend to Heswall to give a (needed) half hourly service between Heswal and West Kirby. 84/85 should be reinstated, pvr of two buses, perhaps bypassing Poulton Lancelyn so Thornton Hough and Raby could also be served. 73 looks a decent route, but now Town Lane and Kings Lane have no bus at all, and for the elderly, it’s a long walk to either end of the road to catch a bus. A suggestion could be the 77 could run as a Circular to and from Birkenhead, Via Town Lane and Kings Lane. I think the PVR would be very similar to what we have now. Another issue is the 38 timetable is very confusing, especially the evening service, at inconsistent frequencies, this has been the case since last year, however

The 22 is commercial. No funding from Merseytravel so it wouldn't matter. Plus, when I suggested this to Stagecoach, the Neston Councillor went ape insisting that Neston - Arrowe Park Hospital it a vital link.... (despite having links to Clatterbridge). 83A is also commercial so it's upto Arriva what they do with it.

(03/11/2018 22:12)CKC 312L Wrote:  It is not necessarily cheaper to shrink a route when you can combine two routes and still save money For example the 38 by and large is a commercial route the only part and I maybe wrong that at present gets any form of subsidy is the extension from Croft Retail Park to Mill Park and that is because it is almost a direct replacement for the 145/146/286 and 418/419 routes changed or cut in the Wirral Bus review

The 38 is a bad example for my point. Say A2B have 2 buses spare which they can use. They aren't going to bid for a 5 bus route. They would however be able to bid for a 2 bus route. The savings would be made by smaller companies generally offering lower prices meaning there are bigger savings. If Stagecoach want 100k per bus and A2B want 80k per bus per year, when you thing, taking 2 buses off Stagecoach and giving them to A2B would involve a saving of 40k per year. Secondly, the 84/85 started around 9am meaning that a school could safely be linked onto the tender thus reducing the tender cost even more. All 5 buses on the 16/17 are out by 7.30am so they can't do school buses on top like currently.

Generally, I think a route with a PVR of 1 will cost the same as the 38 extension. There shouldn't be much, if any, difference in cost based on Stagecoach running both. However putting routes out to tender could get people putting in low bids. Stagecoach might win lots of tenders but the lower the PVR, the less they win as they are good with getting lots of buses quickly. Something which small companies can't do.