[Closed] When the train companies go bust...

trains are good. The blood-sucking scum that run them are pirates and robbers. We all believed Thatcher when she told us how much better the trains would be, cheaper, cleaner, on time, when they privatised BR, didn't we?

(OK, BR was hanging too....)

You forget the decades of underinvestment in rail in the UK which have left us in this position with the difficulty of adding additional capacity in an environment where zero incidents are considered mandatory.

Virgintrains seems to be coming up with £67, for travelling up Sat and coming back Sun.

True, we have wasted an opportunity that the great Victorian engineers built by spending on roads instead of rail.

Tell you what though, I'd much rather have this conversation over a pint or two of beer 😉

You forget the decades of underinvestment in rail in the UK

In it's last year of full operation (1993-4) British Rail received a £2 billion subsidy from the government. And that was because they were pumping money into BR in preparation for privatisation.

In 1989-90 before the final decision to privatise had been made, BR received only £1 billion.

Today the government pours about £5 billion a year into the network.

So the private rail companies now cost the tax payer 5 times more than BR did.

Why would Thatcher have cared anyway? She never had to travel anywhere by train anyway. And she mustuv made a bloody fortune from privatisation, the conniving sneaky thieving bitch.

Please die, Maggie. Please.

There's no point blaming Thatcher for everything RudeBoy. She would have done nothing had she not had, the support of a substantial minority of the British electorate.

A lot of people chose to believe the 'market always knows best' economic gobbledygook which she spouted, so she was able to do what she did. No one was forced to vote Tory, and had they not done so, she wouldn't have done anything.

It's still all her fault. And anyone who voted Tory.

Once in power, she definitely din't act in the interests of the British people, no matter how the brainwashed fools who supported her may argue.

Nasty Thatcher. Now, it costs a fortune to travel by train, while she gets helicopters everywhere, and private health care. And free money.

No wonder her husbind was an alkie...

the big question -
Thatcher's grave: dancer or pisser?

Dance, get pissed, piss on grave.

When I am Presidente, I shall have a discotheque built on her grave. That way, she can finally bring some joy, to peoples' lives.

RB - that's a bit nasty about Dennis.
...but in terms of underinvestment in rail it wasn't only the Tories. Read Christian Wolmar for a good background.

Once in power, she definitely din't act in the interests of the British people, no matter how the brainwashed fools who supported her may argue.

No she didn't act in the interests of the British people. She acted in the interests of the class which she married into - the super rich. And she wasn't much bothered if they were British, American, South African or any other nationality, as long as they were rich capitalists, she would serve their best interests. The British working classes, miners, car workers, steel workers, etc, could kiss her ar5e as far as she was concerned.

And I can't denounce her for that, after all, sticking up for my class and serving it's best interests is [i]exactly[/i] what I try and do.

You can't dismiss Thatcher's supporters as 'brainwashed' RudeBoy. The information on which I base my opinions is as much available to them, as it is to me. They are however wrong.

She also despised the very people who voted for her... the middle classes.

Thatcher's grave: dancer or pisser?

Truly not worth the effort to demonstrate such dislike for that woman.

Of course Thatcher didn't have anything to do with rail privatisation, but why let facts get in the way of a good rant?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privatisation_of_British_Rail

the very people who voted for her... the middle classes.

The voters who tilted it in her favour where actually the the C2s.

It was the "prosperous Midlands" which swung from Labour to Tory in '79 and gave Thatcher her majority. Her appeal to 'personal greed' struck a particularly strong chord with them - they were doing very nicely thank you, and wanted [i]more[/i], specially those council houses at give way bargain basement prices.

Of course the irony of it all is, that it was the those very people the skilled manual workers in engineering who ended up being truly shafted by Thatcher.

Of course Thatcher didn't have anything to do with rail privatisation

Thatcher had everything to do with rail privatisation. Firstly it was her that brought privatisation onto the agenda - if gas, electricity, etc had not been privatised, then the railways certainly wouldn't have been.

Rail privatisation always presented itself as a particularly difficult problem, and Thatcher made several failed attempts to privatise rail before being sacked by her party and the issue was being resolved by her successor.

......and Neil Kinnock was such a better alternative

support of a substantial [b]minority[/b] of the British electorate

sticking up for my class and serving it's best interests is exactly what I try and do.

economic gobbledygook

Well 'boom' has ended, in quite a spectacular manner too. Lucky those red rosette wearing gibbons in government have plenty of national debt to throw at the people they really care about though, Thatcher's old pals in finance.

If the rail companies do go bust then the economy will be even more FUBARed: Millions unable to get to work on a daily basis.

East Coast have tried to hand the keys back, and the story is that the DfT (after swearing blind that they wouldn't do it) have put them on a letter agreement. This effectively ensures the trains keep running but on a 'cost plus' basis.

Cue the floodgates opening for all the other struggling* franchise operators to go banging on the door.

*why are they struggling? Because the franchising process has rewarded those who offer the DfT the greatest income stream, whilst due to the short timescales of an 8 year franchise offers no opportunity to work up any kind of long-term investment business case.Now the economic situation is not all 'grow,grow, grow', these operators who forecast major growth (and an economy able to support increasing revenue) cannot make their payments back to the DfT.

Broken system? Sure, but who's going to sort it out?

Bah.

Anybody else think it's a bizarre set up when the operating companies don't own any of the key assests (the tracks, the stations & the trains)? Bonkers, bonkers, bonkers.

Not really Cheeseyfeet. I work for the worlds largest logistics company, who don't own the majority of the aircraft they operate, nor the airfields they operate from, nor the airlanes and flight slots they have to fly in. Ownership of the infrastructure is not essential to operating a good service,it just requires the right motivation for doing so. Unfortunately in order to get companies to take on the burden of operating our creaking, massively under-invested network (hugely under the Tories and significantly under Labour) the penalties for poor performance have to be light or easily avoidable in order not to frighten off operators. Of course the flip side is that nationalised railways have even less motivation to provide a good service as penalties for poor performance only hurt the people imposing them and therefore would be unlikely to be used.

Disagree. Aircraft & airports, etc are a different kettle of fish as aircraft can go anywhere and multiple airlines, etc use routes & airports etc. Trains can only go where the track is. as for the rolling stock. Investment companies own the trains and lease them to operators for a profit. Surely cheaper for the end customer if this profit element is removed?

Anyway, I'd just be grateful if I could actually use the train when I want. Every sodding weekend we have engineering works. If I wanted to travel by somne shitty 60 year old double decker, I'd have gone to a bus museum. Ever tried getting a bike on a bus?

Cheesyfeet "Ever tried getting a bike on a bus? "
Love that short downhill section on the stairs? 🙂

All - ignoring all the political bits (I am too ignorant of such matters to contribute anything useful!) some advice on booking train tickets:

1) Don't use thetrainline.com
2) Use one of the service provider's own sites, most of the them (namely southwesttrains.co.uk Flaperon - which will do you tickets from Exeter) don't charge a booking fee or a fee for using any kind of card (credit/debit/birthday)to pay

Fully agree on how pants Trains have become. Virgin really stuffed the whole lot by bringing in those ghey little XC trains which are too small, and have (even in 1st class) the least comfortable armrests I have ever seen/felt.

Flaperon, I feel your pain - we used to live in Leeds and still visit often (from Exeter), it is a mission of a drive even when the roads are empty and if the trains were any good or even just cheaper - we'd probably use them.

[i]Investment companies own the trains and lease them to operators for a profit. Surely cheaper for the end customer if this profit element is removed?[/i]

Except that the operators do not have the millions of pounds needed to pay for new rolling stock, nor, given they are franchised, is it in anyone's interests that they own multi-million pound assets with 30+ year lives.

I think people seriously underestimate how much better, on average, the train service is than only 3 or 4 years ago.

book loads of separate tickets. go from manchester to birmingham, then birmingham to cheltenham, cheltenham to bristol, bristol to exeter.

just on bristol to manchester that saved me £45 last week. (£118 open return down to £73). it's perfectly legit as long as your train stops at those stations. you don't have to get off or anything.

on teh other hand this administration seems to have really got the hang of privatising profits and nationalising debt...

as for the OP - have you looked at flights?
the train back from the beer festival a couple of weeks ago was free. trains are great. bit of a bummer the station is so far from my house, but i suppose it gave me a chance to sober up a bit. 🙂

Return ticket Reading to derby, booked a few weeks in advance. £35

If i want to do the same journey but calling in on a friend in Leicster on the way £100!
All because that devition means going through london.

£35 was stomachable as thats what it would cost to fill a car with petrol. But there comes a point where I'm drawing the line. By the time I've taken an afternoon/morning of work for traveling I'm looking at paying £200, car would have been £30 return in petrol, wouldn't smell of piss, vomit, shit, or those horrible virgin microwave bacon and cheese paninis (which must be the worlds most ungodly smell) and wouldn't have a screeming kid next to me.

Part privatisation is the key IMO, look at the NHS, few years back a friend had to wait for a knee arthroscopy, about 6-8months. When it was my turn it took two months, and i had the choice of about three hospitals trying to convince me to go to them.

Either that or let the train compnies opperate any line they like (within reason), and let the cheepest, least piss soaked train win!

I take my bike on the bus every week and have no car. It is the only way for me to get to the woods. I can either put the bike under the bus or they have bike holders at the back of the bus. I do live in Sweden though. All the buses and trains are nationalised but maybe run by private companies. This means the prices and timetables/Discounts and timetables are standardised.

Forget Fatcha. For a lot of people in the UK trains stopped being a viable alternative to cars with the production of the Beeching Report and the subsequent wave of branch line and station closures.

It's still all her fault. And anyone who voted Tory.

I vote Tory. Probably always will. (Apart from loca council elections, the Lib-Dems do a good job round us. I might vote for them if I though they could do a better job as a government though) I've seen what Labour governments do to this country. They screw it up. They spend money they haven't got, then someone else has to come along and try to sort it out, then THEY get the blame for it. History isn't currently repeating itself, it's regurgitating.

Edit - Oh yeah, I'm from Nottinghamshire. We knew the striking miners were on to a looser as well.

I don't think many of you understand quite how complex rail operations are. I've been involved in a project which is looking to run a new half hour service in a fairly busy part of the country, this service won't be coming into operation until 2013 or 2014, but even so the project is having trouble getting the slots.

Two nights in a Manchester Holiday Inn: £54, and that includes free car parking and breakfast. Result.

Actualy, I blame Thatcher, Major, Blair and Brown

Thatcher - for being so shortsighted mole's were extending their sympathy
Major - for finishing off Thatchers work
Blair - for doing fek all but break promises for 10 years
Brown - for continuing Thatchers gradd tradition of helping the rich, in the vain belief that this will trickle down and benifit everyone.

PP - If that post doesn't draw them out nothing will.

If you want to be in Leeds or Manchester so much why did you move to Exeter?

I vote Tory

Well, it's your fault, then. And Sooty's. And Flashfart's. And Stoner's.

Trouble with politics is, by the time people get to Parliament, they've forgotten what it is they're actually there for, as they're all too busy lining their own nests.

I spose at least the Tories don't pretend to be doing anything but that, mind.

Well said AdamM and aP!

Much of the improvement seen over the last 3 years came about from careful planning and examination of best operating practices that started 5+ years ago, once the industry recognised that the highly confrontational mechanisms that were put in place to mimick a competitive ecomony were b*ll*cks and the best way to improve the service was to work together.

Anyone who thinks they can solve the issues of the rail industry in a couple of paragraphs is dreaming.

Personally, I think longer franchises (say 15 years with an option to extend to 20?) Will immediately begin an improvement process - although the public may have to wait a couple of years to see the benefit. Longer franchises lead to better business cases for decent investment, cheaper for the industry as a whole (owning groups will spend up to £10m per bid to secure a franchise) and less 'churn'.

As for cost, there are always cheap options available (megabus fares, advance ticketting etc) although you have to be flexible about travel times, just as it is with the airlinesn if you travel at peak times then you'll have to pay for it. Plenty do as the services are packed during the peak hours.

RB - Have you just accused me of voting Tory? Just because I don't fall over myself singing the praises of the current form of socialist opposition in the UK nor its recent forms doesn't mean I vote blue. Try being a little less presumptious occassionally.

big_n_daft .....

[i]"like the current labour administration"[/i]

Yes, just like the current labour administration. What's the point you're trying to make - that Thatcher [i]didn't[/i] come to power because she had the support of a substantial minority of the British electorate ?

[i]"which class is that? the left wing intelligensia class? the Derek Hatton class, the class? the Arthur Scargill class?"[/i]

What a stupid question. And why in inclusion Hatton, Heffer, and Scargill in the question - was it suppose to suggest some sort of political negativity in speaking up for ordinary people ?

Since you appear baffled about who's interests concern me, let me spell it out to you. My concern is first and foremost, for improvements and gains for the ordinary working classes. By that I mean the whole range of social classes, ranging from the unskilled labouring classes, to the more affluent middle classes. Basically all those who sell their skills and labours. Undoubtedly some social classes require more urgent improvements than others, as we live today in a society with a substantially high level of inequity. I am particularly concerned with the 'productive classes' which create this nation's material wealth, and unlike Thatcher I am hugely unconcerned with the plight of the super rich. If you want me to pick a name from your list I am more than happy to be associated with Eric Heffer, as I doubt whether much more than a fag paper separated me from him politically. Furthermore me and him were of the same trade and in the same union. Plus, despite being elected to parliament he never forgot where he came from and acted in whichever way he felt was best in the interests of ordinary people. I hope that answers your question.

BTW - my comment about not denouncing Thatcher for serving the class which she married into, was an attempt to try and move the blame away from her, and onto the shoulders of those who were gullible enough to vote for her despite the fact that she clearly shafted them. As it was them, that allowed her to do what she did.

[i]economic gobbledygook
ah... "the end of boom and bust!"[/i]

Yes, just like Gordon Brown's nonsense about ending boom and bust.

I have always been mystified in understanding just what Gordon Brown felt he had done to justified his proclamation that he had ended 'boom and bust'. As far as I can figure out, the only significant thing which Gordon Brown has done in that area, was to give the Bank of England it's independence to set interests rates - did he [i]really[/i] think that was sufficient to re-write the script concerning the inevitability of capitalism ? 😯 And he certainly didn't do anything to end 'booms'. all bubbles eventually burst, although when Karl Marx first pointed this out it was dismissed as nonsense. Of course slowly but surely this truth has become generally accepted, why even Stoner now talks of the 'cyclical nature of the markets'. And it amuses me somewhat to hear some right-wingers trying to put a positive slant on this process by referring to it simply as 'the markets re-adjusting' - which makes a recession not sound that bad at all, doesn't it ? ! Clever as he might be, Gordon Brown was never going to prove that he is smarter than Karl Marx.

.

RudeBoy .... I don't know how you're in a position to know which way Stoner votes - I certainly find him a bit of a political enigma. He appears to combine a strong belief in crude capitalism with a surprising open mindedness and sophisticated attitude which accepts that it doesn't necessarily provide all the answers 😕

I never said anyone voted Tory (apart from Poddy), I just said it was their fault, the country is in a mess. Nowt wrong with that, is there?

TBH, there's not a great deal of sense in my statement anyway, so I'm surprised anyone has taken any notice of it, really.

I can't be bothered with all these political arguments anymore, as we're all talking shite, and doing ****-all to actually sort anything out.

As for 'Socialism'. Sooty; you won't get that, by voting Labour. They've forgotten what it means.

Politics in this country is bollocks. What we need is a revolution.

With me as Presidente. I'd get the ****ing railways running propply again; no shirking or dodgy spenses claims on my watch.

I'd have Thatcher encased in that clear hard plastic stuff you used to get, to make bits of jewellery or whatever, and kept in a vault in the Tower (which would be my home), so's little children would be reminded of the horrors of Thatcherism.

I'd have Stoner and Flashy doing donkey rides for tourists, on Blackpool beach.

The World would be a better place, under me.

An interesting fact is that most of the rolling stock in the UK is actually owned by the big banks and leased to the train operating companys...and we all know what has happened to the big banks recently! As a result we will see further cost cutting, profit maximising and under investment in the rail industry for some time to come. Net result being poor service at high cost for the end user.

I worked for a Co supplying seating and interiors for the rail industry that has recently gone bust due to contracts being cancelled left right and center. The rail operators are full of people with the same BR mindset, they are unbelievably wasteful and inefficient. I'd ditch my car if rail could be relied upon, sadly that seems to be a long way off!

Trains are awesome.
the best form of transport after the bicycle, and when used in conjunction with the bicycle, perfect.

however the operators are indeed blood suckers.

a 16 hr, 700 mile trip in russia, is roughly a fiver i understand

for 100 quid from derby to exeter (as i looked at the other day).. Ide want a vietnamese sandwich for the duration of the trip!

european trains are cheap, efficient, NEVER late (ime), clean and tidy.

When i'm King, ill rip all the current rail lines, claim back all the abandonded rail lines, and give the network to someone like beardy branson, or one of the european companies, and get them to re-sort it, in the european standard.

I would love to go by train, but a choice between a 100 quid ticket on a smelly chewing gum seat, on a late train, and 20 quid in fuel is no choice at all.

back in the day, weren't all the rail companies privately run, they were later nationalised, so surely re-privatising them just takes it round full circle?

surely re-privatising them just takes it round full circle?

Not really, because 'back in the day' the railways were the only realistic form of fast and efficient transport.
Since there are now other viable and more popular means of transport, they no longer have the same role.
If you want to form a 'full circle' I suggest scrapping them would be the solution.

Being facetious I could say "great more rails to trails and we can all ride them free of charge".

However, reading the partisan rants in this thread it is easy to get caught up with the pointy finger brigade. Reality, as always is much greyer than we like to think, no government behaves altruistically based upon collective need (Marxism is an impractical ideal) but they do serve whomsoever they see as their master at the time. Being old enough to remember an economy held to ransom by large and powerful unions (powercuts, lightening strikes, flying pickets, etc) most people wanted someone to reign them in - up pops a grocer's daughter from Grantham.

The phrase "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" was epitomised by some of the policies and actions of the Tories in the Thatcher years and this has been repeated by Blair.

Irrespective of political persuasion, no party has ever had the welfare of the masses at its heart and you are deluded of you think otherwise. The current "Labour" government would be unrecognisable to its founding fathers and much of its actions abhorrent to them.

We have no choice, we have to elect one group of muppets over another, each has its positives and each has its foibles, it's all damage limitation and decades upon decades of neglect, under investment and closure of the railways will take the same, plus vast investment to rectify.

I love using the train but they seem to make it harder and harder for me to do so - fares, lack of facilites, inability to carry more than one bike, etc, etc.

no party has ever had the welfare of the masses at its heart

So how ffs, did all the great 20th century reforms [i]which actually benefited[/i] the welfare of the masses occur then ?

From the National Health Service to the Open University, from the Health & Safety at Work Act to the Race Discrimination Act, from comprehensive education to equal pay for women... etc. etc.
How was the Welfare State [i]itself[/i] introduced ?

Well actually I'll answer that question for you - through intense pressure from the organised 'masses' ie : the trade unions.

And often passed by somewhat reluctant Labour governments with tiny majorities and/or very little time.

In the case of the National Health Service, it was created at a time when Britain was in deep recession (the last time Britain faced such bleak economic prospects as it faces today, was in 1946)

For the last 12 years Britain has had Labour governments which have had unlimited time to change society and with majorities to die for. But Britain has also had weak trade unions which have been unable to exert any pressure, and ......... surprise surprise .... no great reforms in the interests of the masses have occurred.

In fact, the ordinary British people have been well and truly shafted by a bunch of self-servicing, cheating, lying, and fraudulent charlatans.

they're cheap if you book in advance (like a month)if theres 2 people going, trains get expensive. if three people want a spur of the moment trip, hire a car.

if three people want a spur of the moment trip, hire a car.

Although it is worth knowing, that on many trains, you can get a 'groupsave' ticket, which makes it cheaper if there are 3 or 4 of you travelling together (I think it is roughly 3 or 4 people for the price of 2). It appears to be kept pretty secret, I only found out about it when we happened to get a friendly ticket collector who sold us one.

Joe

TBH, there's not a great deal of sense in my statement anyway, so I'm surprised anyone has taken any notice of it, really.

Good thread this. For the life of me I can't remember the last time I took a train. I [i]think[/i] it was in 1976. Nowadays, if I'm travelling on my own I take a coach. From Chippenham, Wilts, where I live it's 100 miles or so to London and a N/Express coach is around £19, then I use the Toob. To drive, that's half a tank of diesel, around 20 squids, then prolly another £10-15 in Kings Mall, Hammersmith for parking, so the coach wins every time. If I'm going up with a mate, then costs are halved, so car wins, as he lives out in the country. Last I heard a return to Lahndun was around £50-60!
Stuff that!
Also, trains just don't run useful timetables; if I wanted to catch a train for a gig in Bristol, the last one usually leaves at 10.30pm. Gigs usually finish around 10.30-11. With a fifteen/twenty minute walk. Really handy, that. 🙁

There's some rather misguided views on here certainly, I'm not getting into the politics, but some of the stuff about the rail industry is interesting.

Why do people think a European style system would be good for us? Take France, ok they have the TGV network, which links their key cities. The rest of their network is fairly pants, our connectivity and service frequency pisses all over the vast majority of other countries! The Swiss have the right idea, their network is excellent, but they don't have any high speed services or really any long distance services. You just can't apply what works abroad to the UK.

And going back a bit, why on earth would it be better if the TOCs owned the infrastructure!? Then you'd have a system like the US where freight operators own all the track, and sell the usage rights to the other operators. Can you imagine if DB Schenker or Freightliner 'owned' the West Coast Main Line, used up all the premium paths and then gave Virgin West Coast, Arriva Cross Country etc etc what was left, you'd never run a decent passenger service!

It's often worth trying slightly different journeys, frinstance the edinburgh-london services often run cross country from Glasgow first. The edinburgh-london cheap fares book out fast, the glasgow-london ones don't, so I often book the longer journey for half as much. But this could occasionally give you some grief in the stations. Likewise, booking a journey in 2 legs- I was going somewhere that involved a stop-off in York. If I booked both legs together it was about £120, if I booked both legs seperately it was about £50!

You could fly from Exeter to Manchester for about £98(cheaper if you can be a bit more flexible).

Let us not forget that GNER, went bust and handed back the trainset that is known as ECML, and the National Express took over , thwe bus company, then surprise surprise, they handed back the train set, its now basicly been nationalised by the government, until some other company can be bribed to take it over, and lots of new money and work for the prionters and sign writers not to mention the banks, strangely a lot of the staff stay the same.

You'd have to be a moron to lose the Ops guys.
Like I've said before the biggest difference between us and Europe in terms of rail is that we didn't bomb the **** out of it in the early 40s and the Americans didn't pay to fix it up again. So we still have Edwardian infrastructure and 5 decades of no investment.