DragonEast
Member
- Joined
- 6 Sep 2016
- Messages
- 266
It’s something that can be levelled at the major operators. First can be highlighted as can various Stagecoach OpCos but what of Arriva cutting in the Midlands (selling Burton and Wednesfield, closing Stafford, general cutting back in Cannock) and the North East, vacating mid Wales, declining in the Shires?
Phil Stockley writes in Buses and I’ve a lot of time for his views. He states buses aren’t in an existential crisis; I’m not so certain as internet shopping, a fundamental challenge with an underfunded concessionary scheme and an unequal battle with the private car threaten the existence of buses at the margins. It’s an issue across the country.
I tend to agree with Stockley. Superficially everyone is doing the same, and yes is suffering. But often the services in decline are matched by improvements elsewhere locally. A good example in The Shires where on a trunk route suffering with everything you've mentioned Arriva have carefully rearranged it to improve services/frequencies and off peak and evening services specifically. That's hardly giving up. They're also picking up routes from failed local operators. On their similar service, First seem stuck in the mud (as discussed here). I suspect what lies behind it is the longstanding resource famine, and hence my reference to TINA (the acronym, I thought, for "there is no alternative"), and sorry for the crude reference but I think FirstBus are trying to keep the wolf from the door (=starving). Stagecoach East have evident problems, but again one can see light at the end of the tunnel even in the hostile bus territory of the fens and south midlands, suffering economically. The new operators seem to be investing in Manchester. You often quote West of England at me, but from what I read everything isn't rosy (at least from a passenger perspective) and aren't they ceding trunk routes to Stagecoach, admitting a lack of resources to do the job they'd like?
You once asked me why First couldn't transfer their Eastern Counties "initiative" south of Dedham? Well, why not? In the absence of an answer, could I suggest it's because they have resource (management, operationally and fleet) to run either Eastern Counties or Essex, but not both. So they both suffer, and one more than the other. Inevitable; but who'd want to buy either? It's a question I can't answer, despite trying for long enough. They're stuck, which is why I once used the word "stuffed". I think it mirrors the position elsewhere throughout the country. When others consolidated in better times, First didn't (or couldn't). So they entered the bad times in a poor position. Isn't that the fable of the good and poor farmer?
EDIT 2: Though as long as the Competition Commission stay quiet - and why not after all Cambridge City is virtually a Stagecoach monopoly - then perhaps Eastern Counties is an ideal buy for someone; a walk-in bus company with no difficult councils or Mayor to deal with. Accepting the offer is the hard bit, but perhaps David can help there. And even if pigs do start to fly and First have a change of mind, I suspect there are hardly great prospects for growth in Norfolk and Suffolk, except perhaps for another incumbent. Essex, I suspect, is another story; maybe better long-term prospects but with a big headache, or rather one headache after another. Who wants that? I'm sure it's not alone amongst the First OpCos!
With the other companies I'm sometimes impressed by the actions of their regional and national management. With First I'm not even sure what that is, exactly. From what I can see locally the various "bits" are hardly on speaking terms, though that's nothing new (and probably predates First - though doesn't that say something about the quality of corporate management too?)
So I don't think the First bus problem is a recent development solely "caused" by current (hopefully temporary) market conditions affecting everyone - though I don't see anything to magically improve the economy despite anyone's hopes. I think it's a long term issue which they lack the will (and the resource) to tackle. Hence why I think they "have to" get shot of it. I found it interesting they talk of a lack of synergy, I always thought that for a successful business it found synergy, even in apparently disparate businesses; it wasn't something handed down like manna from heaven. To me, bluntly, if you can't find synergy, it's because you lack the will do do so. Nothing wrong with that, just get shot of it. Do you have any alternative?
Last edited: