• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Getlink aiming to double the number of destinations from London in ten years

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
9,151
I'm not sure the analogy really works :)
a) as discussed above, Eurostar don't actually own the depot - it's leased to them by the infrastructure maintainer
b) the lease and users of the depot are regulated by the ORR
The lease is spresumably so long it’s effectively ownership in this regard.
Id be getting my lawyers to look into whether they were offered a lease of less than the whole depot, and if not can they get a refund…..
Who will set the price the other operator has to pay EIC?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Fragezeichnen

Member
Joined
14 Jun 2021
Messages
382
Location
Somewhere
I am not sure why you are acting as if Eurostar is treated unfairly here.

It has always been clear that Eurostar would need to allow other operators to use the facility, subject to capacity, and it will have been a major part of the legal agreements they signed to lease the depot. There are documents going back several years setting out the procedure. The current investigation is only about exactly how much capacity there is.

The report makes it clear that the current situation at Temple Mills is so relaxed that some parts of the layout are not used at all, so it doesn't seem as if to allow any additional operator would cause a major inconvenience.

Who will set the price the other operator has to pay EIC?
The depot operator, so Eurostar.
 

signed

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2024
Messages
1,408
Location
Paris, France
So it’s a bit like the council telling you that you must let a neighbour park on your drive, even if it means you can’t park in the garage any more and have less flexibility.
Not that Eurostar wants to expand any, if they wanted they would have already ordered new stock to both replace 373s and expand
 

Trainbike46

Established Member
Joined
18 Sep 2021
Messages
3,164
Location
belfast
Not that Eurostar wants to expand any, if they wanted they would have already ordered new stock to both replace 373s and expand
Eurostar is reportedly in the process of ordering new stock, to replace the PBAs, PBKAs, 373s and to expand operations. Though it's been a while since I heard anything about how that is going.

Over the years the London to Amsterdam operation has expanded as well.

I suspect eurostar will expand, but also that one other operator will get granted access by the ORR. But that is only my outsider perspective!

The depot operator, so Eurostar.
Though presumably there will be rules regarding fair pricing?
 

signed

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2024
Messages
1,408
Location
Paris, France
Though it's been a while since I heard anything about how that is going.
Same, but in any case, no stock will be ready before 2030, beit from Alstom, Siemens or Hitachi

I suspect eurostar will expand, but also that one other operator will get granted access by the ORR. But that is only my outsider perspective!
There will not be enough room in STP to have both an expanded E* and a second operator
 

Trainbike46

Established Member
Joined
18 Sep 2021
Messages
3,164
Location
belfast
Same, but in any case, no stock will be ready before 2030, beit from Alstom, Siemens or Hitachi
That is true for both Eurostar and any competing operators.
There will not be enough room in STP to have both an expanded E* and a second operator
If the just under 5000 pax/per hour capacity that was stated as possible in the report earlier does happen, there will be enough space for both Eurostar expansion and a competing operation.

For example, 5 class 374s (or other trains with similar capacity), would give 4500 pax per hour, assuming every train fully sells out. That provides space for significant eurostar expansion and a second operator.
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
9,151
The report makes it clear that the current situation at Temple Mills is so relaxed that some parts of the layout are not used at all, so it doesn't seem as if to allow any additional operator would cause a major inconvenience.
I think it counts as inconvenient for the drivers not to have a nice indoor train to walk around but have to trek 400m to get to the cab!
Also if they are introducing new trains they will want a bit of space and flexibility, and if there are issues with the trains they don’t want their depot maxed out and have to negotiate with a rival to move stuff around.
 

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
14,945
Location
Bristol
Also if they are introducing new trains they will want a bit of space and flexibility, and if there are issues with the trains they don’t want their depot maxed out and have to negotiate with a rival to move stuff around.
Any new operator will also need a depot at the other end, and chances are they'll be able to find a bit more space on the continent than in Temple Mills.
 

williamn

Established Member
Joined
22 May 2008
Messages
1,357
Interesting that HS1 appears to be incentivising new routes, including using Ashford and Ebbsfleet:

"LSPH, formerly known as HS1 Ltd, said the “significant financial incentives” would lower costs for any and all additional international services, but with particular benefits for those calling at different stations or introducing new trains."

 

trei2k

Member
Joined
25 May 2010
Messages
178
There was a similar article in the FT:

Cross-Channel rail owner to offer incentives for new operators

The owner of the high-speed rail line from London to the Channel Tunnel has offered a price cut to encourage the launch of more international rail services to and from its London St Pancras terminus.

London St Pancras Highspeed (LSPH) unveiled several financial incentives on Friday available to any operator that launches rail services between London and mainland Europe.

Several groups in recent months have announced plans to launch services between London and the continent. Eurostar, the only existing operator, has had a monopoly on the services, which mostly link London to Paris and Brussels, since international passenger services started in 1994.

LSPH, formerly known as HS1, said the discounts would be available either to new entrants or to Eurostar if it launched new services.

Robert Sinclair, LSPH chief executive, said: “Never before in the history of high-speed rail in the UK have we seen this much interest in growth, and the potential for competition.”

Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group is among several operators contemplating the launch of services linking the UK and mainland Europe. Eurostar also has significant growth plans.

However, the new entrants face challenges, particularly the high costs of ordering trains and running on the high-speed tracks in the UK. LSPH charges about £7,600 per train journey in fees.

Sinclair said it was “fair to say” there were “significant barriers to entry” in the cross-Channel market.

“It’s not a cheap thing to do,” he said. “The growth incentive scheme is designed specifically to help operators reduce some of those costs and . . . get across those barriers to entry.”

Operators will be able to take advantage of the discounts any time until 2035. In the first of three discounted years, they will offer a maximum discount of 50 per cent on the “investment recovery charge” element of the operator’s charges. The discount will fall to 40 per cent in the second year and 30 per cent in the third.

The investment recovery charge accounts for about £4,000 of the total charges for each journey.

LSPH said the price cuts could save each train operator between £40mn and £60mn over the three years, depending on the nature of the services.

Operators could access the discounts by launching services or destinations or by investing in new trains. If Eurostar added one extra train daily between London and Paris, that service would qualify for discounted access. Equally, a new operator could also be given discounts on each of its routes, as they would all be classified as new.

“Our hope is that these interventions are going to drive growth, result in competition, and we could see 50 per cent or more increase in train services in the next few years,” Sinclair said.

This week, the potential Eurostar competitors were boosted after the UK’s rail regulator said there was space for rivals to access the company’s east London train depot.

Eurostar said it welcomed LSPH’s proposals, which are subject to a consultation that begins on Friday. The scheme is then set to come into operation on May 30.

“Eurostar welcomes any incentives which enable more sustainable international travel and support our plans to run more services,” it said.

Virgin Group also welcomed the plans. “London St Pancras Highspeed is working hard to unlock competition on the cross-Channel route and the new international growth incentive scheme is a welcome step in the right direction,” the company said.

I suspect this line is the most important one to focus on: "Operators could access the discounts by launching services or destinations or by investing in new trains. If Eurostar added one extra train daily between London and Paris, that service would qualify for discounted access. Equally, a new operator could also be given discounts on each of its routes, as they would all be classified as new."

My gut feeling is that Eurostar will probably take advantage of this by just running an extra service to Paris/Brussels/Amsterdam.
 

MatthewHutton

Member
Joined
17 Aug 2024
Messages
155
Location
Oxford
Eurostar show no sign of using that capacity or increasing provision to meet demand, choosing to raise prices instead.
Why should a competitor be blocked from challenging Eurostar, because the incumbent is flexing a monopoly position over the only UIC depot in the UK?
The thing is for an increase in capacity to be worthwhile you at least need to see more destinations served from Brussels and Lille - and also with agreement to hold trains for a late running Eurostar.

As it stands there is a huge burden on journey time of at least an hour and likely 90 minutes to cross Paris - and the list of destinations you can reasonably get to beyond Brussels is limited as you can only go to Cologne and Frankfurt direct from Brussels and need to change again to go anywhere else (and Frankfurt is very unreliable)

I am sure direct service from Lille to Spain, most likely that started in Amsterdam or Brussels would be profitable.
 

williamn

Established Member
Joined
22 May 2008
Messages
1,357
The thing is for an increase in capacity to be worthwhile you at least need to see more destinations served from Brussels and Lille - and also with agreement to hold trains for a late running Eurostar.

As it stands there is a huge burden on journey time of at least an hour and likely 90 minutes to cross Paris - and the list of destinations you can reasonably get to beyond Brussels is limited as you can only go to Cologne and Frankfurt direct from Brussels and need to change again to go anywhere else (and Frankfurt is very unreliable)

I am sure direct service from Lille to Spain, most likely that started in Amsterdam or Brussels would be profitable.
The amount of people prepared to change trains even with a good connection is always going to be small. Just look at Amsterdam - traffic only took off with direct trains despite previous easy connections.
 

MatthewHutton

Member
Joined
17 Aug 2024
Messages
155
Location
Oxford
I wouldn't bank on more than 1tpd being profitable over a route that long.
There are currently 41000 people a year who go by train from Britain to Spain as per the tourism statistics. Assuming you can get maybe another 80k from Britain with an easy Lille change and through service to Madrid and not just Barcelona, and maybe another 80k from the Low Countries who would get direct service without a change and I think you have something worthwhile.

Like yes you might only get a 1% market share, but Spain is very popular.

To get similar numbers to justify a daily Geneva service you would need a 20% market share for Switzerland, plus you would be competing with a train every two hours from Paris and not just one daily train to Barcelona with no onward trip possible that can be plausibly caught connecting from London.
 

RT4038

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2014
Messages
4,793
There are currently 41000 people a year who go by train from Britain to Spain as per the tourism statistics. Assuming you can get maybe another 80k from Britain with an easy Lille change and through service to Madrid and not just Barcelona, and maybe another 80k from the Low Countries who would get direct service without a change and I think you have something worthwhile.

Like yes you might only get a 1% market share, but Spain is very popular.

To get similar numbers to justify a daily Geneva service you would need a 20% market share for Switzerland, plus you would be competing with a train every two hours from Paris and not just one daily train to Barcelona with no onward trip possible that can be plausibly caught connecting from London.
I would question where exactly the tourism statistics have been derived from. That is an average of about 113 passengers per day. If they are to be taken at face value, they presumably split between 'via Barcelona' , those travelling to Northern Spain via Hendaye/Irun and a trickle by more convoluted routes including overnight. One train could not hope to cater for all of those 113 passengers requirements and certainly would not be able to serve 'via Barcelona' and the Northern Spain destinations. So perhaps there are 56 passengers per day that a through Lille-Madrid via Barcelona would cater conveniently for. Perhaps you could quadruple that number by more convenient service and adding Low countries traffic. Would that be enough for 'something worthwhile' (bearing in mind the enormous cost of running Amsterdam-Madrid) ? Doubt it.
 

ShadowKnight

Member
Joined
22 Oct 2019
Messages
176
Location
Liverpool
Changes are never "easy" in leisure travel. Which most UK to Spain travellers are.
Hence why there was the summer Eurostar service to the south of France with the Lille shuffle "change" on the UK direction of the journey.
I would suggest first looking at reinstating UK- Marseille etc. as a trial of a potential London - Barcelona service.

Or perhaps market a Barcelona service as part of a holiday package as the former Disneyland service. Or what ferry companies do as a mini cruise from the UK to Holland/France/Spain, where the journey is already part of the holiday.
 

Gag Halfrunt

Member
Joined
23 Jul 2019
Messages
723
Trenitalia have announced plans to run London-Paris trains from 2029 in partnership with Evolyn.


Snip:

The headline commitment – London-Paris in 2029 – looks eminently doable. Trenitalia already has a large fleet of Hitachi Frecciarossa 1000 trains that have been running in France since 2021, and are equipped with the TVM-430 signalling system used on LGV Nord in France, the Channel Tunnel and HS1 in the UK. Hitachi is currently in the middle of delivering the latest tranche of 30 of these trains, and there is an option for 10 more. Evacuation and fire safety for the Channel Tunnel are likely to prove to be no major headache, as Italy already has among the strictest fire safety rules for its railways in Europe.
 

Trainbike46

Established Member
Joined
18 Sep 2021
Messages
3,164
Location
belfast
The amount of people prepared to change trains even with a good connection is always going to be small. Just look at Amsterdam - traffic only took off with direct trains despite previous easy connections.
The service has gotten a lot better since the direct trains started running - It is much faster than it used to be, and tickets are cheaper than they were when it involved a connection.

Trenitalia have announced plans to run London-Paris trains from 2029 in partnership with Evolyn.


Snip:
That is great news! The chances of it actually happening just increased massively
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
8,060
Location
West Wiltshire
Trenitalia have announced plans to run London-Paris trains from 2029 in partnership with Evolyn.

Evolyn have been looking at it for 18 months (there was a big announcement October 2023) and there was even a thread on it.

A few days ago Alstom announced a €150m expansion of TGV production capacity, and Trenitalia has orders (and options) for multi-system Hitachi Frecciarossa 1000.

Sounds to me as if someone is placing orders for trains, partly speculatively, aiming to run them on certain routes, but probably with alternative routes as unannounced contingency.

It will probably take 4-5 years to get fleet in service, so there is clearly element of risk, delay the order whilst getting approval, but another newcomer might jump in first, or hold off, and risk factory capacity is unavailable short term so can't then meet planned introduction date.
 

TheWierdOne

Member
Joined
30 Oct 2020
Messages
86
Location
Leeds
Sounds to me as if someone is placing orders for trains, partly speculatively, aiming to run them on certain routes, but probably with alternative routes as unannounced contingency.
I’m not sure I’d call this speculative if Evolyn and the Cosmens have got on board. The press release talks about a one billion euro investment and a private firm/family is unlikely to invest that amount, or part of it, as a speculative venture.
 

Roast Veg

Established Member
Joined
28 Oct 2016
Messages
2,247
So the four open access bidders appear to be:
- Trenitalia/Evelyn
- Virgin
- Gemini (which has links to Allrail/Alliance)
- SBB
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
8,060
Location
West Wiltshire
I’m not sure I’d call this speculative if Evolyn and the Cosmens have got on board. The press release talks about a one billion euro investment and a private firm/family is unlikely to invest that amount, or part of it, as a speculative venture.
Actually I think you are right, they probably have number of variations with Paris-London as preferred choice. Clearly they will want to protect residual value of trains if this didn't work out mid and long term.

Evolyn have already done a lot of the work, although they seem to have had to go back to ORR on various points where ORR and Eurostar didn't seem to understand the legislation, and were suggesting different interpretations of the law . See attached letter (fairly long and legal format so not going to selectively quote bits)

 

TheWierdOne

Member
Joined
30 Oct 2020
Messages
86
Location
Leeds
So the four open access bidders appear to be:
- Trenitalia/Evelyn
- Virgin
- Gemini (which has links to Allrail/Alliance)
- SBB
SBB hasn’t submitted a formal bid as of writing, but they are in a relatively good position to do so as an established operator with experience of dealing with immigration and customs controls. So far all they’ve done is expressed a strong interest with backing from a couple of the French speaking cantons around Geneva and Lausanne.
 

Cloud Strife

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2014
Messages
2,331
There will not be enough room in STP to have both an expanded E* and a second operator

There's definitely enough room there, it just needs reconfiguring. Much of the current issues with STP is simply due to a very inefficient design that was pretty much based on the assumption that there would need to be large ticketing areas, a large arrivals area for passport control and customs, and a large departure lounge. The design was out of date when it opened, as the juxtaposed controls had already been implemented and very few passengers were buying tickets on-site.
 

signed

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2024
Messages
1,408
Location
Paris, France
it just needs reconfiguring.
As an outsider, I don't really see how that would happen.

Using the tracks-level space, from what I read, due to the listed nature of the station is a no-go


From the above map, there is nowhere really obvious to expand the Eurostar terminal (the same thing is true at Gare du Nord, but for other reasons).

You could maybe shrink the arrivals snake, but I doubt how you would use it since it's disconnected from the departure by both the ticket office and the taxi dropoff door
 

Cloud Strife

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2014
Messages
2,331
As an outsider, I don't really see how that would happen.

So, the first thing is that you eliminate the corridor between Pancras Road and the Eurostar Ticket Office, with check-in now placed between M&S and the current little currency exchange shop. You then place the Schengen entry controls behind the check-in desks, perhaps staggered two deep if there's really a need for it, although the EES should speed things up considerably and it probably won't be needed. The EES itself will need terminals, but these can be placed elsewhere in the station.

You then move international arrivals upstairs into the space currently used by The Betjeman Arms, so that arriving passengers are funnelled towards the interior of the building (where there's currently some collection point for luggage?) to go through any controls required. The exit is then on the other side of the current glass partition. By doing this, you avoid making any alterations to the track-level space, as you only need to direct people towards the interior of the station.

The taxi-drop off would be removed, with that entrance being only for business class passengers who will have their own entrance and passport control with direct access to the lounge. By doing this, you also open up the entire existing international arrivals area, and you could also tear out the escalators to provide even more space. By doing all this, you gain around 100% capacity over the current system without requiring any substantial remodelling, and you can also gain some more space by tearing out the shops next to the current international arrivals.

If you go even more radical and rip out everything between EL&N Café and WHSmith, you can easily gain seating space for several hundred passengers.

I suspect that this is pretty much their plan, as I can't see how else they'll get to 5000 passengers per hour.
 

Sir Felix Pole

Established Member
Joined
21 Oct 2012
Messages
1,316
Location
Wilmslow
One suggestion I believe is to repurpose the Betjeman Arms as an arrivals area and make use of the arch and carriage drive for exiting passengers. It certainly would give more of a sense of 'arrival'.
 

IanXC

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
6,488
Eurostar are the Depot Facility Owner, ie they lease the depot from London St Pancras High Speed (the concessionairre formerly known as HS1).

AIUI, only the Depot Facility Owner can perform maintenance at a depot they lease, so if the ORR do find that Eurostar have to provide capacity for maintenance of other operators’ trains at the depot, then those other operators will have to reach an agreement with Eurostar for the costs of the maintenance services provided, and arrangements for it. I will leave others to figure out how that might work in practice.

I don't think that's true.

As just one example, prior to the transfer of the depot facility owner from EMR to Northern, Neville Hill depot had 4 different organisations undertaking maintenance on the site.

East Midlands Railway
Northern Trains
Siemens
Hitachi

(Now reduced to 3 with the exit of EMR)
 

Top