Centrebus

[Omnidekkalover]

To be fair to them they seem to operate some busier Interurban routes such as the 8 between melton and Loughborough and the TP between derby and Buxton

 

[Deerfold]

They seem to operate around Leicester with minimum passengers and it has been like that for years and i noticed the same in Grantham recently. Is Luton the same? How do they make any money, surely not off council grants alone?

They seem to have quite a nice contract with the University.

 

[Edvid]

Is Luton the same?

The 17/17A (my local route) is well used at peak times, at least on the Stopsley/Wigmore 'circular' portion. Generally speaking, subsidised town routes in Luton were rare until the BSIP scheme came along.

 

[Dwarfer1979]

They seem to operate around Leicester with minimum passengers and it has been like that for years and i noticed the same in Grantham recently. Is Luton the same? How do they make any money, surely not off council grants alone?

A combination of a few good commercial services (the 22 in Leicester, 10 in Luton & 199 at High Peak for instance are hardly minimal passenger routes), a number of more marginal commercial routes that the big groups have given up or have been developed by Centrebus (20 in Leicester, 17's in Luton & 1's in Grantham) around a core of council contracts alongside a number of works and other private contracts (University of Leicester, Leicester Hospitals, Amazon & other works/education contracts). Similar to other like operators who developed in the early/mid 00's, Centrebus have just lasted longer than many. It's not going to give you the profit margins a big group company but it is a sound business model.

 

[Robertj21a]

They seem to operate around Leicester with minimum passengers and it has been like that for years and i noticed the same in Grantham recently. Is Luton the same? How do they make any money, surely not off council grants alone?

Not sure I agree with that. Many commercial routes are quite busy (possibly not where you see them?) and Centrebus does a lot of contract work that the Council(s) require.

 

[Deerfold]

To be fair to them they seem to operate some busier Interurban routes such as the 8 between melton and Loughborough and the TP between derby and Buxton

Though the TP has been cut back in both distance and operating hours since High Peak took over the route.

 

[Simon75]

Om surprised Centrebus South is still going as it seems isolated from the rest the of the company in the East Midlands

 

[Robertj21a]

Om surprised Centrebus South is still going as it seems isolated from the rest the of the company in the East Midlands

Centrebus isn't just South and North (+ part of High Peak), it also trades as Chaserider and D+G.

 

[joieman]

Centrebus isn't just South and North (+ part of High Peak), it also trades as Chaserider and D+G.

But those are mostly in the Midlands, so their Luton operations are still fairly isolated from the group's other operations.

On the one hand, Centrebus Holdings in Yorkshire did eventually get sold to Arriva. But on the other hand, having a depot isolated from the others doesn't necessarily make a difference in day-to-day operations.

 

[Trainman40083]

But those are mostly in the Midlands, so their Luton operations are still fairly isolated from the group's other operations.

On the one hand, Centrebus Holdings in Yorkshire did eventually get sold to Arriva. But on the other hand, having a depot isolated from the others doesn't necessarily make a difference in day-to-day operations.

Wasn't the Yorkshire operation once a joint Centrebus /Arriva operation.

 

[SSmith2009]

Wasn't the Yorkshire operation once a joint Centrebus /Arriva operation.

Yes with the Hinckley based operations of Arriva Midlands being taken over by them in 2008.

 

[Dwarfer1979]

But those are mostly in the Midlands, so their Luton operations are still fairly isolated from the group's other operations.

On the one hand, Centrebus Holdings in Yorkshire did eventually get sold to Arriva. But on the other hand, having a depot isolated from the others doesn't necessarily make a difference in day-to-day operations.

With the Motorway driving time from Leicester to Luton isn't much different from driving from Leicester to Grantham (allowing that my motorway driving speed is somewhat faster than my single-carriageway driving speed so I may be quicker to Luton than others but you don't have to go through something like Melton on the motorway) so it isn't as isolated as it may look. It is a hell of a lot easier to get to Luton than Buxton though now High Peak can call on support from D&G at Longton (Stoke) which is a similar distance as Leicester to Luton in travel time rather than relying on Head Office in Leicester.

Centrebus is a fairly flat organisation so as long as the depot is big enough to support a full depot level infrastructure, which Luton is, then it doesn't need other depots around to assist it to make it a viable part of the business as long as it isn't too far from Head Office in driving time (and that would probably be south of London before such an issue arose).

 

[joieman]

With the Motorway driving time from Leicester to Luton isn't much different from driving from Leicester to Grantham (allowing that my motorway driving speed is somewhat faster than my single-carriageway driving speed so I may be quicker to Luton than others but you don't have to go through something like Melton on the motorway) so it isn't as isolated as it may look. It is a hell of a lot easier to get to Luton than Buxton though now High Peak can call on support from D&G at Longton (Stoke) which is a similar distance as Leicester to Luton in travel time rather than relying on Head Office in Leicester.

Centrebus is a fairly flat organisation so as long as the depot is big enough to support a full depot level infrastructure, which Luton is, then it doesn't need other depots around to assist it to make it a viable part of the business as long as it isn't too far from Head Office in driving time (and that would probably be south of London before such an issue arose).

And in practice, transfers seem to be remarkably swift. IIRC 328 was in service in Loughborough just two days after moving from Luton, and one of the Eclipse 2s was in service in Cannock one day and Leicester the next.

 

[Simon75]

High Peak must do well for Wellglade/Centrebus has its still a jointly owned company

 

[Omnidekkalover]

Anyone know why the LC prefix scheme was chosen by LCC as opposed to normal numbering for subsidised routes I.e the 747 to LC7 or 8 to LC8

 

[sharpley]

Anyone know why the LC prefix scheme was chosen by LCC as opposed to normal numbering for subsidised routes I.e the 747 to LC7 or 8 to LC8

The local town services for Melton were reorganised as MC1 through to MC5 (Melton Connect, replacing the old 14 / 15 town services) at the same time as the LC numbers were introduced as well.

 

[ACBest]

The council did it to give them a bit of local identity, in the same way that the neighbouring county of Rutland have almost everything prefixed R.

Originally, the desire was to have everything prefixed LCC, but this was revised to LC after discussions - however, Central Connect’s Bottesford to Melton Mowbray peak-time service operates as LCC2 as per the original tender spec.

 

[joieman]

The council did it to give them a bit of local identity, in the same way that the neighbouring county of Rutland have almost everything prefixed R.

Originally, the desire was to have everything prefixed LCC, but this was revised to LC after discussions - however, Central Connect’s Bottesford to Melton Mowbray peak-time service operates as LCC2 as per the original tender spec.

So what would they do for Loughborough, given that Loughborough also starts with L? I thought it could be C for Charnwood, but not only is that probably a bit too broad of an area for Loughborough town services, but it may become irrelevant anyway given that the government wants to do away with the boroughs and districts.

I'm also slightly surprised the 154 didn't get renumbered.

 

[ACBest]

So what would they do for Loughborough, given that Loughborough also starts with L? I thought it could be C for Charnwood, but not only is that probably a bit too broad of an area for Loughborough town services, but it may become irrelevant anyway given that the government wants to do away with the boroughs and districts.

I'm also slightly surprised the 154 didn't get renumbered.

Unable to comment on the first bit - but the 154 isn’t a tendered service, hence it not being re-numbered.

 

[Dwarfer1979]

Unable to comment on the first bit - but the 154 isn’t a tendered service, hence it not being re-numbered.

It was fully tendered for a bit but switched to mostly commercial in March with some council deminimis funding so was no longer part of the tendered renumbering

Anyone know why the LC prefix scheme was chosen by LCC as opposed to normal numbering for subsidised routes I.e the 747 to LC7 or 8 to LC8

I'm not sure anyone outside Leicestershire County Council understands their reasoning but it appears to be something they are very committed to even against the strong preferences of the operators.

Originally, the desire was to have everything prefixed LCC, but this was revised to LC after discussions - however, Central Connect’s Bottesford to Melton Mowbray peak-time service operates as LCC2 as per the original tender spec.

It was pointed out to the council that 4 digit route numbers produce complications to various systems but 5 digit route numbers (such as the LC10 would have been) couldn't be accommodated at all so as a compromise to stick with LC given this is part of a larger scheme. Not sure anyone has noticed that even Leicestershire's own real time signs can only display 3 digit route numbers so the LC10 shows as 'LC1' then switches to '0' on the sign which is hardly a model of clarity for passengers looking for their bus.