Login | Register
SearchMy Stuff
My ProfileMy PreferencesMy Mates RSS Feed
1 2
4 5 ... 14 15
Reply to Topic
Author Discussion

speedyguy

2,197 posts

90 months

[news] 
Wednesday 15th August 2012 quote quote all
Jasandjules said:
It will be same s**t, different name on the wall.
I'm assuming an awful lot of the extra ticket/tax money will be wasted on painting and rebranding trains, station kiosks, uniforms etc, reminds me of how the Jobcentres were rebranded from green to blue then green, another wonderful waste of taxpayers money frown

plasticpig

9,303 posts

112 months

[news] 
Wednesday 15th August 2012 quote quote all
Can Virgin Trains keep their trains if they want to and not transfer them? How would First Group operate without trains?

miniman

17,206 posts

149 months

[news] 
Wednesday 15th August 2012 quote quote all
plasticpig said:
Can Virgin Trains keep their trains if they want to and not transfer them? How would First Group operate without trains?
The trains are leased.

tonker

47,226 posts

135 months

[news] 
Wednesday 15th August 2012 quote quote all
plasticpig said:
Can Virgin Trains keep their trains if they want to and not transfer them? How would First Group operate without trains?
it will be condition of the franchise that they be transferred to the incoming franchisee, and whoever owns them, be it Porterbrook or whomever faceless bank it is, will just collect some fees for arranging it.


steviegunn

949 posts

71 months

[news] 
Wednesday 15th August 2012 quote quote all
toppstuff said:
Not being hard enough on them as far as I am concerned.

Now, of course, they own a lot of businesses. It may be that they run a perfectly decent Scottish bus service.

The railway company they have run connecting London to the West of England is something that has been a part of my life for more many years. As far as that business is concerned, they deserve all the criticism they get and more. Which is why it is so surprising that they get awarded with another rail service to cynically run , abuse their monopoly, only to probably give it up early in a few years time having milked as much as they can out of it.
Nope, not in Aberdeen (where they started) they don't, it's unreliable, hideously expensive and dirty.
Advertisement

TallbutBuxomly

12,254 posts

103 months

[news] 
Wednesday 15th August 2012 quote quote all
Not sure if anyone has seen or heard about the fact that the gov fudged the figures released and they bid 1-1.5billion more than claimed meaning they bid around 6.5-7.5billion.

Richard Branson has stated that he cannot see how they could possibly make money on that bid. My guess however is that they plan on raising prices to the absolute max on all the most used routes and reducing them massively on the least used routes.

They will also shed stloads of jobs.

RB is also apparently considering requesting a parliamentary review. My money says that someone in gov has taken a massive bribe.

TBH there seems to be a long running grudge within the UK gov against RB and his business affairs.I confess to being a bit of a fan of his as he seems to understand that business is not all about profit for shareholders its also about providing a good service something almost no other company understands.

Virgin Airways were successful due to this attitude and gave British Airways a hiding as they were so far behind even though they tried very hard to make VA fail.

Camelot were awarded the lottery even though bransons bid was a better deal iirc and there are probably other things.


sirtyro

1,174 posts

85 months

[news] 
Wednesday 15th August 2012 quote quote all
Podie said:
Isn't Coventry a London Midland station?
London Midland stop their but its owned by Virgin. I like Birmingham to London on Virgin but will now be using Leamington Spa to London Marylebone only £25 return, great service, nice trains and free wifi. Chiltern are the best railway in the country.

Negative Creep

13,131 posts

114 months

[news] 
Thursday 16th August 2012 quote quote all
I hope you all "like" foreign call centres where staff are paid 50p an hour

rich1231

16,965 posts

147 months

[news] 
Thursday 16th August 2012 quote quote all
TallbutBuxomly said:
Not sure if anyone has seen or heard about the fact that the gov fudged the figures released and they bid 1-1.5billion more than claimed meaning they bid around 6.5-7.5billion.

Richard Branson has stated that he cannot see how they could possibly make money on that bid. My guess however is that they plan on raising prices to the absolute max on all the most used routes and reducing them massively on the least used routes.

They will also shed stloads of jobs.

RB is also apparently considering requesting a parliamentary review. My money says that someone in gov has taken a massive bribe.

TBH there seems to be a long running grudge within the UK gov against RB and his business affairs.I confess to being a bit of a fan of his as he seems to understand that business is not all about profit for shareholders its also about providing a good service something almost no other company understands.

Virgin Airways were successful due to this attitude and gave British Airways a hiding as they were so far behind even though they tried very hard to make VA fail.

Camelot were awarded the lottery even though bransons bid was a better deal iirc and there are probably other things.
You have not worked for anything Virgin have you?

Stu R

20,840 posts

102 months

[news] 
Thursday 16th August 2012 quote quote all
Interesting comments from Branson regarding First Great Western handing the contract back 3 years early at huge expense to the taxpayer, and hinting that there's probably a similar tactic at play here looking at the way the bid has been structured etc.

No doubt to be taken with a huge pinch of salt, and the usual caveats apply wherever RB and Virgin's PR grandstanding ala concorde etc are mentioned aside, it does seem like they've made an offer the government couldn't refuse and they can't fulfil if what he says is even partially correct in this article / video http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19276504

It does have a massive whiff of sour grapes about it after being given a bloody nose, but given the state of the companies who've previously outbid Virgin, I can see why.

GavinPearson

5,478 posts

138 months

[news] 
Thursday 16th August 2012 quote quote all
I've seen all the comments by Branson and it is all sour grapes.

Anybody who has ever bid on anything with a time limit, only to lose gets bidder's remorse. I bid for a watch on e-bay once that I really wanted, only to realise that after somebody else won that I would have actually bid 25% more than I did. So when a government tells companies to bid the best they can they really mean it and in the end the winners are the taxpayer and the company who paid what they consider to be a good deal with an opportunity to make a good profit.

The people who use the train service may like it, and if they don't they can use other transport methods. The market will figure this one out.



TallbutBuxomly

12,254 posts

103 months

[news] 
Thursday 16th August 2012 quote quote all
GavinPearson said:
I've seen all the comments by Branson and it is all sour grapes.

Anybody who has ever bid on anything with a time limit, only to lose gets bidder's remorse. I bid for a watch on e-bay once that I really wanted, only to realise that after somebody else won that I would have actually bid 25% more than I did. So when a government tells companies to bid the best they can they really mean it and in the end the winners are the taxpayer and the company who paid what they consider to be a good deal with an opportunity to make a good profit.

The people who use the train service may like it, and if they don't they can use other transport methods. The market will figure this one out.
How do you figure that. If someone doesn't drive but regularly uses the service they have no option but to continue to do so.

tonker

47,226 posts

135 months

[news] 
Thursday 16th August 2012 quote quote all
Has anyone here ever done business with a Branson company. I have, half a dozen times now. Not once has it been a 'pleasant transaction' - they're always trying to work an angle, nothing is ever taken at face value and, generally, they are just bloody hard work.

DJRC

22,270 posts

123 months

[news] 
Thursday 16th August 2012 quote quote all
GavinPearson said:
I've seen all the comments by Branson and it is all sour grapes.

Anybody who has ever bid on anything with a time limit, only to lose gets bidder's remorse. I bid for a watch on e-bay once that I really wanted, only to realise that after somebody else won that I would have actually bid 25% more than I did. So when a government tells companies to bid the best they can they really mean it and in the end the winners are the taxpayer and the company who paid what they consider to be a good deal with an opportunity to make a good profit.

The people who use the train service may like it, and if they don't they can use other transport methods. The market will figure this one out.
Er, but that all that means is that the company which won the bid and now has to deliver discovers that its product isnt wanted/viable. So they walk from the contract and hand the keys back to the govt. Which is exactly what has been said.

The worry is that the company which has won the contract has paid too much and will not be able to deliver on the terms of the contract. As someone who uses the WCM and as a taxpayer...that irritates me!

Podie

41,680 posts

162 months

[news] 
Thursday 16th August 2012 quote quote all
TallbutBuxomly said:
GavinPearson said:
The people who use the train service may like it, and if they don't they can use other transport methods. The market will figure this one out.
How do you figure that. If someone doesn't drive but regularly uses the service they have no option but to continue to do so.
Agreed. Train commuters rarely have a viable alternative.

I live in the Midlands, and commute daily to London's West End.

Driving takes far longer than the train...

GavinPearson

5,478 posts

138 months

[news] 
Thursday 16th August 2012 quote quote all
TallbutBuxomly said:
GavinPearson said:
The people who use the train service may like it, and if they don't they can use other transport methods. The market will figure this one out.
How do you figure that. If someone doesn't drive but regularly uses the service they have no option but to continue to do so.
They could use a coach service for example.

Now that option might be less expensive, but be less convenient, take a little longer, but it is nevertheless an option.

Fittster

16,172 posts

100 months

[news] 
Thursday 16th August 2012 quote quote all
Podie said:
Agreed. Train commuters rarely have a viable alternative.

I live in the Midlands, and commute daily to London's West End.

Driving takes far longer than the train...
Chiltern line? Cheaper than Virgin and only 8 minutes slower from Brum.

GavinPearson

5,478 posts

138 months

[news] 
Thursday 16th August 2012 quote quote all
DJRC said:
Er, but that all that means is that the company which won the bid and now has to deliver discovers that its product isnt wanted/viable. So they walk from the contract and hand the keys back to the govt. Which is exactly what has been said.

The worry is that the company which has won the contract has paid too much and will not be able to deliver on the terms of the contract. As someone who uses the WCM and as a taxpayer...that irritates me!
I think there is a very simple answer to this - any company that can't deliver is automatically taken into bankruptcy, government gets all of their assets, the company should be required to hand back all of their franchises (as they are now bankrupt), any corporation that comes from the now bankrupt company be excluded for the next 30 years from any further bidding, and the same should apply to their management.

Fittster

16,172 posts

100 months

[news] 
Thursday 16th August 2012 quote quote all
GavinPearson said:
I think there is a very simple answer to this - any company that can't deliver is automatically taken into bankruptcy, government gets all of their assets, the company should be required to hand back all of their franchises (as they are now bankrupt), any corporation that comes from the now bankrupt company be excluded for the next 30 years from any further bidding, and the same should apply to their management.
So now all companies face a massive risk, bid very low and the taxpayer gets very little money for the franchise. Is that really a win?

Apache

38,937 posts

171 months

[news] 
Thursday 16th August 2012 quote quote all
GavinPearson said:
I've seen all the comments by Branson and it is all sour grapes.

Anybody who has ever bid on anything with a time limit, only to lose gets bidder's remorse. I bid for a watch on e-bay once that I really wanted, only to realise that after somebody else won that I would have actually bid 25% more than I did. So when a government tells companies to bid the best they can they really mean it and in the end the winners are the taxpayer and the company who paid what they consider to be a good deal with an opportunity to make a good profit.

The people who use the train service may like it, and if they don't they can use other transport methods. The market will figure this one out.
I heard that the previous 3 bids they had won were hopelessly unrealistic. Don't know if it's true or not. As for using a coach? I had to do that once and lost my job because they were so unreliable.
1 2
4 5 ... 14 15
Reply to Topic