West Yorkshire Takes Control Of Their Buses.

[Resident 1,195]

3 hours ago, Organgrinder said:

Not when it comes first before the customer.   It's in the name  "bus service".

You realise that without profit, whether the service is public or private owned, there's no money for investment in new vehicles, infrastructure and the like? 

If you are literally breaking even or making a loss every financial year then eventually things are going to need replacing. With what money would you suggest pays for those replacements? 

[Organgrinder 1,946]

9 minutes ago, Resident said:

You realise that without profit, whether the service is public or private owned, there's no money for investment in new vehicles, infrastructure and the like? 

If you are literally breaking even or making a loss every financial year then eventually things are going to need replacing. With what money would you suggest pays for those replacements? 

I never said it shouldn't make a profit  -  no business should be operating on it's uppers.

I'm stating that profits should be used for the benefit of the customers,   re-Investment in new stock etc always need to take place,  but the money should not  go into private pockets.

 

[melthebell 864]

18 minutes ago, Resident said:

You realise that without profit, whether the service is public or private owned, there's no money for investment in new vehicles, infrastructure and the like? 

If you are literally breaking even or making a loss every financial year then eventually things are going to need replacing. With what money would you suggest pays for those replacements? 

The point being missed is where the profit goes, like more and more into shareholders and directors pockets and less and less into the service, which gradually deteriates

[RollingJ 2,055]

1 hour ago, Organgrinder said:

Who pays for them now ?

For those run as commercial services - the passengers - and to as mall extent the government, via the B.S.O.G

[RollingJ 2,055]

40 minutes ago, melthebell said:

The point being missed is where the profit goes, like more and more into shareholders and directors pockets and less and less into the service, which gradually deteriates

If the services are used, so the operator makes sufficient after costs - and they are ongoing - they will invest in newer stock earlier in a vehicles 'lifetime' than if they were running the service on a shoestring.

The passenger loads on many services in Sheffield/Rotherham/Doncaster (i.e.  the South Yorkshire area) do not have the passenger loadings/returns to make it viable to be investing in new rolling stock.

[El Cid 221]

5 hours ago, RollingJ said:

Who pays for these bus services?

They don't run all by themselves.

In West Yorkshire I believe they will be run like the rail service, except run well 

The Mayor will consult and agree the routes, then the bus companies will tender for the routes.

So there could be little or massive change, depending on the terms and conditions of the tenders.

There could be a maximum fare of £2 or £5, if the Mayor has enough money, the fares could be free.

 

Or the Mayor could buy xxx number of buses and employ staff, but I think that is unlikely.

 

Which option do you think will work best?

[RollingJ 2,055]

1 minute ago, El Cid said:

In West Yorkshire I believe they will be run like the rail service, except run well 

The Mayor will consult and agree the routes, then the bus companies will tender for the routes.

So there could be little or massive change, depending on the terms and conditions of the tenders.

There could be a maximum fare of £2 or £5, if the Mayor has enough money, the fares could be free.

 

Or the Mayor could buy xxx number of buses and employ staff, but I think that is unlikely.

 

Which option do you think will work best?

So, without going into too much detail, unless 'the mayor' gets a massive injection of cash (from where?) up goes everyone's Community Charge to pay for it - providing of course s/he can get operators to tender for the services.

[melthebell 864]

2 hours ago, RollingJ said:

If the services are used, so the operator makes sufficient after costs - and they are ongoing - they will invest in newer stock earlier in a vehicles 'lifetime' than if they were running the service on a shoestring.

The passenger loads on many services in Sheffield/Rotherham/Doncaster (i.e.  the South Yorkshire area) do not have the passenger loadings/returns to make it viable to be investing in new rolling stock.

No they don't, that should be how it works, but it's not how it works, like most services they cut cut cut, and pocket as much as they can in bonuses

[Mr Bloke 1,445]

Hmmm...

Am I missing something here?

All this seems to assume that the bus companies will be falling over themselves to tender for any route that 'the mayor' thinks is a good idea.

But the bus companies will still be privately owned and still have shareholders to 'look after'.

So surely, any route that is not viable will just not be tendered for...
... or will only be tendered for by the 'sole proprietor' types who will have older vehicles and fewer overheads?

Won't the larger companies just take their modern busses elsewhere?

[RollingJ 2,055]

4 minutes ago, Mr Bloke said:

Hmmm...

Am I missing something here?

All this seems to assume that the bus companies will be falling over themselves to tender for any route that 'the mayor' thinks is a good idea.

But the bus companies will still be privately owned and still have shareholders to 'look after'.

So surely, any route that is not viable will just not be tendered for...
... or will only be tendered for by the 'sole proprietor' types who will have older vehicles and fewer overheads?

Won't the larger companies just take their modern busses elsewhere?

Yep! Or use the oldest stock they can get away with.

Edited March 15 by RollingJ

[El Cid 221]

4 hours ago, Mr Bloke said:

All this seems to assume that the bus companies will be falling over themselves to tender for any route that 'the mayor' thinks is a good idea.

But the bus companies will still be privately owned and still have shareholders to 'look after'.

So surely, any route that is not viable will just not be tendered for...
... or will only be tendered for by the 'sole proprietor' types who will have older vehicles and fewer overheads?

Won't the larger companies just take their modern busses elsewhere?

There is no easy solution, you are not far wrong.

I hope that methodically working out the best routes, will improve efficiency.

The local authority will still be able to bid for routes. I drive a minibus for a local authority, they have around 90 minibuses.

Some routes in recent times have gone from single deckers to minibuses, so local authority minibuses is an option.