"Trains are a rich man's toy" says Transport Minister.

Killerkebab · 14 Sep 2011 at 12:21

englishpremier said:
It's all to do with the romans. Hence no grid structure in the UK. Many roads and rail lines follow old roman roads. Other countries have got over it. In Germany it very easy to get trains without going through Berlin.

Other countries mange a decent rail service. We suck compared our European neighbours. Of course they many have government owned services. We sold ours.

Germany is a slightly different example. Historically, France was centred on Paris. More or less nothing could happen in the country if someone in Paris hadn't decided on it first. It meant all transport links led to Paris, all infrastructure starts in Paris and all government is centred on Paris.
To a lesser extent, the same has happened in Britain with London. Britain is a smaller place than France, so you don't feel the downsides too much. I got a train from Marseille to Toulouse, and it would almost have been quicker to go to Paris first. Almost :eek:

Germany on the other hand, hasn't been a unified country for that long. Cities like Frankfurt and Stuttgart are almost as important as Berlin and Hamburg. Their government and infrastructure isn't centralised (and for a federal government, it shouldn't be I guess) and so you get the feeling their world doesn't revolve around their capital.

feedtheram · 14 Sep 2011 at 12:40

You need to be careful about profit in this industry. The first priority must always be safety. Look at what happened with Railtrack...lots of companies suddenly trying to make money and maximise profits - but rather than improving efficiency they cut corners and left the network in a right old state leading to several major incidents.

feedtheram · 14 Sep 2011 at 12:42

Oh and most of my delays are caused by cable theft or suicide - which can hardly be prevented.

Although harsher penalties for cable theft could help - plus more regulation of the scrap metal industry (like thats going to happen!!!)

Energize · 14 Sep 2011 at 15:13

Firestar_3x said:
Based on the Crewe to Euston route i used to do i don't agree, took no time to get to London, i was served breakfast in the mornings and evening meal plus wine on the way back, means i get home happy and relaxed, you simply can't put a cost on that, great service imho.

Nice if you're route is like that however if I were to travel first class it would cost me 5x as much and I could probably get a taxi there for that price.

Firestar_3x said:
It addresses the fact it's quicker and from a business point of view me being able to work while i travel saves the company money so yes it cheaper. My point was you simply can't put a price on arriving either to or from your destination relaxed and in a good frame of mind.

Great, but I'm not a company, nor are most people travelling I imagine.

Amp34 · 14 Sep 2011 at 15:30

Taken from http://worksmart.org.uk/company/ I've not got time to do all operators:

First Greater Western Ltd: £-12,514,000.00
First Capital Connect Ltd: £-957,000.00
London and Birmingham Railway Ltd (London Midland): £2,613,000.00
CrossCountry Trains Ltd: £2,180,000.00
East Midlands Trains Ltd: £3,139,000.00
Merseyrail Electrics 2002 Ltd: £9,351,000.00
Arriva Trains Wales Ltd: £14,065,000.00
London & South Eastern Railway Limited (Southeastern): £22,538,000.00
Northern Rail Ltd: £29,928,000.00
First/Kelios Transpennine Express Ltd: £38,577,000.00
West Coast Trains Ltd (Virgin): £104,548,000.00

East Coast Main Line Company Ltd: Not Available

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=48672

Interesting figures (if they are correct). So what was the argument about train companies making a profit? Some do, some don't and other than Virgin, and the two northern ones profits are tiny!

Anyone know what Southwest Trains' profit was last year? If so that would complete the set for those I use... No wonder I have no problem with my service, hardly any seem to actually make any profit!

First Greater Western Ltd: £-12,514,000.00
First Capital Connect Ltd: £-957,000.00
CrossCountry Trains Ltd: £2,180,000.00

EDIT: And if they are only making those profits as private companies (when private companies are generally suggested to be those with a greater efficiency) then how would nationalising help? A few million on hundreds of millions of £ turnover is really not going to reduce ticket prices...

Glaucus · 14 Sep 2011 at 15:33

FGW need to be "sacked" anyway, they course so many delays. They are nearly always at the top of delays.

And it's a travesty what happened to virgin, best railway company and they give it to arriva and with a billion£ loan.

Amp34 · 14 Sep 2011 at 15:34

I think of the few dozen journeys with FGW I have only been on one delayed train. :confused:

That is their crosscountry service from Paddington though.

Energize · 14 Sep 2011 at 15:40

Amp34 said:
http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=48672

Interesting figures (if they are correct). So what was the argument about train companies making a profit? Some do, some don't and other than Virgin, and the two northern ones profits are tiny!

It's hardly a surprise that Arriva make so much money compared to the others given the terrible quality of their trains, lack of service, and extortionate fares! Saying that though Virgin are the best trains I've used and they are cheap in comparison.

jas72 · 14 Sep 2011 at 16:16

Ok I'll jump on this rail fare rant in saying that I wanted to book a trip to Edinburgh this summer from just south of St. Andrews and the price was around 70 quid (not to bad really) however the amount of different fare types and selections was laughable.

Also the websites weren't good at getting you the cheapest deal.

There were also special offers on the go for family day's out etc. but all in all it ended up just too complicated to be bothered with.

Amp34 · 14 Sep 2011 at 16:22

£70?

It's around £110 from london to Edinburgh!

Xordium · 14 Sep 2011 at 16:25

Well as someone who uses the trains a lot there is a big difference between the companies - for me getting from London to Birmingham then Chiltern and London Midland are well priced, clean and quick - Virgin overpriced poorly cleaned less legroom and journey times that are rather akin to internet services - advertise the best possible time and rarely get even close. Also the journeys are never honestly advertised as the best price for the fastest route when you go on the websites and enquire at the train stations - that also adds to the costs.

[TW]Fox · 14 Sep 2011 at 17:08

Amp34 said:
EDIT: And if they are only making those profits as private companies (when private companies are generally suggested to be those with a greater efficiency) then how would nationalising help? A few million on hundreds of millions of £ turnover is really not going to reduce ticket prices...

I will refer you again to my example of Intercity back when it was a British Rail sector. It was profitable (And you'll note the most profitable TOC now is a franchise of the former Intercity West Coast) and this profit was used to subsidise the unprofitable services.

If you add up all the profits of the TOC's you will find it cancels out the loss making ones. Not that this means the railways are cost neutral to run - far from it - there are huge subsidies on top but those figures nicely illustrate my point.

robgmun · 14 Sep 2011 at 17:21

maustin said:
Well as someone who uses the trains a lot there is a big difference between the companies - for me getting from London to Birmingham then Chiltern and London Midland are well priced, clean and quick - Virgin overpriced poorly cleaned less legroom and journey times that are rather akin to internet services - advertise the best possible time and rarely get even close. Also the journeys are never honestly advertised as the best price for the fastest route when you go on the websites and enquire at the train stations - that also adds to the costs.

Going to have to disagree with you there! I travel London-Birmingham most weekends. Chiltern and London Midland are basic and can have server delays. The travel time is not much faster then National express coaches. Virgin is spaceous, clean and there in 1hr 25mins

ikillbears · 14 Sep 2011 at 17:42

I've always found Virgin to be pretty good. only travelled with them a handful of time though but they were nice and pleasant. FGW can be absolute buggers. Quite often late.

one thing to add about the state of our railways as well. Is that its so old and a mess. In europe all the lines got bombed to nothingness so i imagine when they were rebuilt it was better equipped or something ? of course i could be completely and utterly wrong

Xordium · 14 Sep 2011 at 18:08

robgmun said:
Going to have to disagree with you there! I travel London-Birmingham most weekends. Chiltern and London Midland are basic and can have server delays. The travel time is not much faster then National express coaches. Virgin is spaceous, clean and there in 1hr 25mins

Well I am guessing you are on about a Saturday there as on Sundays Virgin take around 2 hrs for most of the day. I find going via Lichfield is far quicker than going through the doghole that is New St - I can do Holborn to my house in North Birmingham door to door in 1hr 15 mins of a weekday.