Great British Railways: Branding options?

[Sad Sprinter]

Ministers are understood to have learnt from Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham, who repainted the city’s buses yellow when he brought in Transport for London-style franchised services in 2023. Sources claimed that patronage increased almost overnight once Burnham changed the colour."

This is exactly why I’m in favour of an expansion of the London Overground. It may be awkward from a policy perspective but it’s clearly the best decision for the city and its people.

 

[physics34]

This is exactly why I’m in favour of an expansion of the London Overground. It may be awkward from a policy perspective but it’s clearly the best decision for the city and its people.

Yep. People want clear and professional, not Arty and confused.

Although, I have to say the Bee yellow livery is horrible

 

[BrakeCoach]

This is exactly why I’m in favour of an expansion of the London Overground. It may be awkward from a policy perspective but it’s clearly the best decision for the city and its people.

Expanding the Overground would make a more comprehensive suburban/commuter service. Akin to the S-Bahns in Germany and the "JR lines" in Tokyo.

 

[Sun Chariot]

Expanding the Overground would make a more comprehensive suburban/commuter service. Akin to the S-Bahns in Germany and the "JR lines" in Tokyo.

How wide before the  London element of London Overground becomes nonsensical?

Network Southeast's brand was broad and it only seemed a bit askew on its services into Somerset and Devon.
(Loco escapees notwithstanding - I photographed NSE liveried 47573 at Chester and 86401 at Glasgow Central)

 

[Mikey C]

And London own branding isn't consistent anyway, with the Underground, Overground, Elizabeth Line, DLR and Tramlink all having their own colour schemes.

It would be odd for such a distinct and well known service like Thameslink to not continue with a separate livery and branding when the Elizabeth Line does.

 

[vuzzeho]

I don't think it'll all become LO or NSE. I think they'll probably do a more location-neutral brand (just Network?) so they can use it for commuter trains in regions that aren't London. Also, would sound more modern.

 

[BrakeCoach]

I don't think it'll all become LO or NSE. I think they'll probably do a more location-neutral brand (just Network?) so they can use it for commuter trains in regions that aren't London. Also, would sound more modern.

Network Metro perhaps?

 

[Meerkat]

It makes sense for some form of Intercity and Network Southeast to be revived.

Why?
The London commuter operators are big enough not to need an overall organisation/brand - they serve their areas and should be branded accordingly.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

As somebody said upthread maybe Network SouthEast is better than the Overground because at least you won’t get the whole we don’t want TfL running services in Kent problem. But as a Londoner the Overground is a really strong brand and I’m not sure bottling up its expansion in favour of another brand is really a good idea.

Why?
The London commuter operators are big enough not to need an overall organisation/brand - they serve their areas and should be branded accordingly.

NSE is a better brand than anything going right now I think. Southern, Chiltern, South Eastern are probably one of the better ones but the rest are lame, lame, lame. Plus it would make sense to have one large organisation that can oversee strategy for the entire region.

 

[Meerkat]

NSE is a better brand than anything going right now I think. Southern, Chiltern, South Eastern are probably one of the better ones but the rest are lame, lame, lame. Plus it would make sense to have one large organisation that can oversee strategy for the entire region.

I don’t see how any of the brands are worse than NSE, which is just a mush together of different things.
The commuter TOCs are big enough to be individual, and more linked to their regions (useful for service information).
Why does the region need a strategy? The only relevant strategic decisions should be taken higher up.

 

[BrakeCoach]

Why?
The London commuter operators are big enough not to need an overall organisation/brand - they serve their areas and should be branded accordingly.

Which is what NSE did with their lines. Route maps had different routes/regions marked separately, and each of them even had different branding.

 

[Dr Day]

As a user, the key thing I want from the livery is a quick sense check, possibly rushing onto a platform at the last minute, that the train standing there is likely to be the one I want. I can see it’s a train, so I don’t want branding to tell me that, but I do want differentiation between the fast one to London, the fast one to Birmingham/Exeter and beyond and the stopper to Severn Beach. Ideally inside as well as outside the train, and colour schemes matching those on route maps, such as LUL.

I still expect some form of express and slower service ticket validity differential to exist post GBR, which will be clearer to communicate with different colour trains rather than everything looking the same.

And if for resource efficiencies more stock does interwork, perhaps some clever temporary branding solution could be developed eg large coloured LED screens that change to reflect the service that unit is working.

 

[Meerkat]

Which is what NSE did with their lines. Route maps had different routes/regions marked separately, and each of them even had different branding.

That adds confusion and mess.
”This is the Network South East Anglia Line service…..”
I really don’t see the gain of having a NSE brand. It’s a huge and varied area, and basing brands around terminals makes sense.
The original NSE was created as a breakout from a bigger brand - a different process for a different purpose than merging a load of well known brands in to something larger.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That adds confusion and mess.
”This is the Network South East Anglia Line service…..”
I really don’t see the gain of having a NSE brand. It’s a huge and varied area, and basing brands around terminals makes sense.
The original NSE was created as a breakout from a bigger brand - a different process for a different purpose than merging a load of well known brands in to something larger.

I loved the family of brands NSE used. Would love to see that idea back. Both local feel and feel of being part of a bigger whole.

One way of doing it is to have a familiar branding/livery layout that is done in different colours, e.g. the Regional Railways PTE liveries (which were the standard Regional Railways livery minus the striped device with the bodyside stripes in different colours per the relevant Passenger Transport Executive's scheme) or Stagecoach Beachball which had a few colour variants.

 

[vuzzeho]

I loved the family of brands NSE used. Would love to see that idea back. Both local feel and feel of being part of a bigger whole.

I completely agree. Having a bigger 'commuter' brand then sub-brands based on regions/termini makes a lot of sense.

 

[Meerkat]

I completely agree. Having a bigger 'commuter' brand then sub-brands based on regions/termini makes a lot of sense.

Why does it make sense? Cleaner just to have the brands we have now; NSE would add nothing.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why does it make sense? Cleaner just to have the brands we have now; NSE would add nothing.

The brands we have now are a poor fit if we're selling it as one network, in particular when it comes to intercity routes which really should be under one brand, ideally InterCity.

Also several of the brands are utterly poisoned, most notably Avanti West Coast whose reputation is somewhere down in the sewers to go with their approximately 50% punctuality statistic.

 

[ScottGallagher]

The brands we have now are a poor fit if we're selling it as one network, in particular when it comes to intercity routes which really should be under one brand, ideally InterCity.

Also several of the brands are utterly poisoned, most notably Avanti West Coast whose reputation is somewhere down in the sewers to go with their approximately 50% punctuality statistic.

Thank God it's not 2004 where the whole thing could have been called 'one' had this been the pathway then.

Interesting to see if c2c stays long term, as C2C by GBR just sounds odd.

 

[Bald Rick]

That adds confusion and mess.
”This is the Network South East Anglia Line service…..”

”This is the Network South East (North West) service to Crewe….”

 

[65477]

Thank God it's not 2004 where the whole thing could have been called 'one' had this been the pathway then.

I never understood why the One name was derided when First was accepted. I read at the time the ONE stood for Operated by National Express and was intended as a brand for all their franchises.

 

[eldomtom2]

That adds confusion and mess.
”This is the Network South East Anglia Line service…..”

But, for instance, London Underground announcements don't go "This is a London Underground District Line service to...".

 

[Mikey C]

Thank God it's not 2004 where the whole thing could have been called 'one' had this been the pathway then.

Interesting to see if c2c stays long term, as C2C by GBR just sounds odd.

C2C is a somewhat artificial brand, without any clear geographical reference, so I can't see it being kept. LTS would have been a more neutral name under GBR.

 

[ScottGallagher]

I never understood why the One name was derided when First was accepted. I read at the time the ONE stood for Operated by National Express and was intended as a brand for all their franchises.

As I recall it was an umbrella brand when WAGN ,Anglia and First Great Eastern franchises were merged making one operator at Liverpool Street, initially the sub brands were kept but not for long.

 

[Meerkat]

The brands we have now are a poor fit if we're selling it as one network, in particular when it comes to intercity routes which really should be under one brand, ideally InterCity.

Also several of the brands are utterly poisoned, most notably Avanti West Coast whose reputation is somewhere down in the sewers to go with their approximately 50% punctuality statistic.

I don’t see the point of selling it as one network, other than the double arrow. Only reason would be Labour making a political point.
Have just one brand and in the future a terrible WCML will poison the whole brand, magnified by a hostile media.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don’t see the point of selling it as one network, other than the double arrow. Only reason would be Labour making a political point.
Have just one brand and in the future a terrible WCML will poison the whole brand, magnified by a hostile media.

If we're not going to sell it as one network, what exactly is the point of changing anything? Might as well just keep the TOCs separate.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Today's paradox is that the "underperforming" arms-length NHS in England is being integrated with the government Department of Health, so that ministers can take the important decisions, freeing up resource for the front line.
That's the exact opposite of what is happening in rail, where arms-length GBR is being formed so that minsters don't have to get involved in the minutiae of day-to-day management.
The former harks back to the abolition of the SRA in 2004 when the DfT/Treasury took exception to the decisions and funding of the SRA (in collusion with the ORR).

It's said that Scotland and Wales never separated their NHS from government, so won't face being integrated.
Nevertheless, for rail, Transport Scotland and TfW (the WG body, not the TOC) must be somewhat nervous about the new policy of downsizing the quangos.

 

[Bletchleyite]

GBR is more like an NHS trust - an actual operator, not an intermediate QuANGO. It will directly operate rail services.

 

[Meerkat]

If we're not going to sell it as one network, what exactly is the point of changing anything? Might as well just keep the TOCs separate.

Better co-ordination. Maybe a bit like VAG run their car brands, or JLR.
The network can be represented by the double arrow. They are trains, obviously trains, I don’t see the need for a less effective brand just to say “these are trains”

Today's paradox is that the "underperforming" arms-length NHS in England is being integrated with the government Department of Health, so that ministers can take the important decisions, freeing up resource for the front line.
That's the exact opposite of what is happening in rail, where arms-length GBR is being formed so that minsters don't have to get involved in the minutiae of day-to-day management.

Maybe that’s why GBR is taking so long - the politicians/CS are holding it up whilst they decide how much power to release. May as well keep it as DfT and TOC like delivery units.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Maybe that’s why GBR is taking so long - the politicians/CS are holding it up whilst they decide how much power to release. May as well keep it as DfT and TOC like delivery units.

Then the railway will remain fragmented and we basically end up having no benefits from the whole thing. The benefit is vertical and horizontal integration - to coin a brand - one railway . Without that we might as well just stick a load more TOCs out to tender and leave it the way it was.

 

[Mikey C]

A few months ago, after missing the last train back to London from Leeds (due to a failed connection) I had a real problem finding the right person to talk to, between the 3 operators at the station and Network Rail. That's exactly the sort of confusion and duplication that should be removed.

Which doesn't automatically mean that the separate branding for the different services should also go, or at least completely go.