Finglands

[Fox]

RE: Finglands
Hardly surprising seeing as they're competing with the Manchester giant! "Losses for three years" Sees to sound when stagecoach took over Bullocks/Mayne and started low floor easy access magic bus services?

I believe MMU were giving out free Stagecoach yearly bus passes to those staying in the Daisy Bank Hall of residence this year which probably didn't exactly any help earnings on the university services

[126th street]

RE: Finglands

(30/12/2013 21:53)Polo Mint Wrote:  Privatisation of buses was a bad thing from day one, the same companies operate the same routes and are only challenged on tenders or routes in less dense areas. On the major bus corridors the same companies operate year in and year out.

Right, and so how is that any different from how things were pre-privatisation? There was nothing in the way of competition then, and it showed.

It might be good for enthusiasts to see regular changes of operator and livery but in the real world passengers want continuity year in, year out.

[Polo Mint]

RE: Finglands

(31/12/2013 11:42)126th street Wrote:  

(30/12/2013 21:53)Polo Mint Wrote:  Privatisation of buses was a bad thing from day one, the same companies operate the same routes and are only challenged on tenders or routes in less dense areas. On the major bus corridors the same companies operate year in and year out.

Right, and so how is that any different from how things were pre-privatisation? There was nothing in the way of competition then, and it showed.

It might be good for enthusiasts to see regular changes of operator and livery but in the real world passengers want continuity year in, year out.

It was different, because local authorities/councils ran the services. The money could be used to cross-subsidise services instead of tenders, and any money made could be invested back into the company instead of instead of lining peoples pockets in Perth or Aberdeen.

[CX06 EBK (Administrator)]

RE: Finglands
At the same time I think a lot of people are kidding themselves if they think if dereg never happened in 1986 that it wouldn't have happened since. If the government can offload crucial things such as energy companies into private hands then buses stood no chance.

[Polo Mint]

RE: Finglands
You have a point, I am surprised that the Queen hasn't been privatised.

The government, whether that be central or local, does not want to deal with unions and labour disputes that are coupled with state owned companies. They may also want to distance themselves from the permanent 're-structuring', cuts and job losses and the negative reputation it has.

A London style franchising system may be somewhat of a compromise, with the local PTE's (not politicians) controlling services, frequencies and so on with companies bidding for certain routes. Although if that were to happen it would happen the next step would be to operate the vehicles yourself rather than having a third party.

[126th street]

RE: Finglands

(31/12/2013 13:56)Polo Mint Wrote:  It was different, because local authorities/councils ran the services. The money could be used to cross-subsidise services instead of tenders, and any money made could be invested back into the company instead of instead of lining peoples pockets in Perth or Aberdeen.

History lesson: National Bus Company was nothing to do with local authorities or councils. It was largely a collection of independent, privately-owned bus companies that were purchased by the Government during the late '60s.

One benefit of privately-owned companies running buses is that they aren't tied to the outdated and vastly over-generous terms and conditions for staff that the publicly-owned bus operations were. It is exactly this issue which caused all the bother at Warrington last year, and had the union there not observed goings-on in Grangemouth at around the same time would undoubtedly still be doing so.

If such Ts&Cs were still in widespread use in the industry you would see a great deal fewer buses on the road than is the case.

[robertclark125]

RE: Finglands
Just a thought. Peter Shipp said, accorsding to a post on here, that they may close Finglands down if the deal is blocked. Surely if that happens, it could lead to Stagecoach providing replacement routes, and thus you have tie situation the OFT and CC would wish to avoid, an operator with a hugely dominant position?

[Southernsofty]

RE: Finglands

(01/01/2014 15:35)robertclark125 Wrote:  Just a thought. Peter Shipp said, accorsding to a post on here, that they may close Finglands down if the deal is blocked. Surely if that happens, it could lead to Stagecoach providing replacement routes, and thus you have tie situation the OFT and CC would wish to avoid, an operator with a hugely dominant position?

In the article (Coach & Bus week) Peter Shipp states "When we bought it in 1992 it was one of the top 10 most profitable companies pro rata to its size."
He goes on to blame UK North for wrecking the business.
Peter Shipps exact quote is -
"If we are unable to sell to First, we will be left with no choice but to close it down"

[dave4jackie]

RE: Finglands
Who has taken the coaches off finglands

[DVL418]

RE: Finglands

(01/01/2014 21:17)dave4jackie Wrote:  Who has taken the coaches off finglands

Bullocks of cheadle have already taken most of the coaches.

A bit rich of Shipp to blame UK North for Fnglands lack of profit.

UK North imploded no less than EIGHT years ago, so what has Shipp been playing at since?