http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: Rail drives First Group profits en Sun, 31 May 2026 16:57:40 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=4366#post-46152 Thu, 10 Nov 2011 17:35:17 +0000 Stepdoh 46152@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>In france the railways are owned by Réseau Ferré de France, which then subcontracts the running to SNCF. Actually just a legal way of french govt taking on the debt of SNCF and giving them a clean operating sheet. Silly really. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=4366#post-46151 Thu, 10 Nov 2011 17:32:35 +0000 Morningsider 46151@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>kaputnik - that'll be "Council Directive 91/440/EEC of 29 July 1991 on the development of the Community's railways". </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=4366#post-46150 Thu, 10 Nov 2011 17:25:51 +0000 kaputnik 46150@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Abellionglia? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=4366#post-46149 Thu, 10 Nov 2011 17:21:52 +0000 Stepdoh 46149@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Oh don't worry, Nederlandse Spoorwegen have their oar in, they part own Northern Rail and Merseyrail. Under the stupid name Abellio.</p> <p>Aand, and this ties every single disparate thread up beautifully they're going to run National Express Anglia franchise. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=4366#post-46147 Thu, 10 Nov 2011 17:08:27 +0000 kaputnik 46147@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@morningsider The ironing is delicious! I'm not sure if they are involved in running anything yet, but I know the Danish and Dutch nationalised (or semi-nationalised) rail operators have been sniffing around British franchises.</p> <p>Perhaps you can confirm, but is there not an EU regulation that stipulates the separation of all rail operators into at the very least the infrastructure and train operation company segments - even for the nationalised operators. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=4366#post-46146 Thu, 10 Nov 2011 17:02:53 +0000 Morningsider 46146@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Kaputnik - Arriva UK does have another name: Deutsche Bahn. Govia is part owned by SNCF. So in a way we do have some government owned rail services - just not our own government. Interestingly, it also means the UK taxpayer pays a subsidy to the nationalised German rail operator. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=4366#post-46144 Thu, 10 Nov 2011 16:56:43 +0000 Stepdoh 46144@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Not to condone it in any way, but think the made up names are a mixture of 'all the sensible names are taken' or unprotectable and making things internationally pronounceable, hence why we end up with vaguely esperantine Consignia, Arriva et al.</p> <p>Also why Jif is Called Cif now, cos certain contries it would be yeeef.</p> <p>Off topic, but apparently drug companies are running out of names as they all want X and Zs in the names are people think they are zippy and effective. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=4366#post-46138 Thu, 10 Nov 2011 16:36:42 +0000 kaputnik 46138@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@Stepdoh - I'm a big fan of the concept of companies being named after what they do, rather than some hideous non-word dreamed up by PR and marketting bods. Pan-european multinationals are particularly bad at this, as obviously they don't want anything that makes sense in one particular language so they just make up something that's nonsense in all languages! Veolia is a prime example. Or QinetiQ. Arriva and Govia are only slightly less contemptible, at least they sound vaguely like English words vaguely related to what they are meant to go. Sooner or later your Arriva train will arrive somewhere or another and your Govia bus will certainly go via a number of stops.</p> <p>Fact of the day - it's called "Bacofoil" in the UK, not because you bake stuff with it, but because it was the brand originally developed by the British Aluminium Company. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=4366#post-46133 Thu, 10 Nov 2011 16:06:48 +0000 Stepdoh 46133@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>And why don't they just use the name 'Directly Operated Railways' it's amezzin.</p> <p>We could have 'Rack and Pinion Steered Buses' and 'Arms length managed Bank' (ALMB for short) 'Transmitted sound radio' </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=4366#post-46132 Thu, 10 Nov 2011 15:45:33 +0000 Morningsider 46132@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>kaputnik - Sea Continers didn't lose the East Coast franchise to NX. The UK Department for Transport stripped GNER of its East Coast franchise in December 2006 as Sea Containers had fallen into financial difficulty and couldn't guarantee to make franchise payments to the UK Government. The DfT then entered into a management agreement with GNER to run the service until a new franchising exercise could be completed. </p> <p>Detils: <a href="http://www.wired-gov.net/wg/wg-news-1.nsf/0/A7BB92DA355DAA4A802572AB004BE0AA?OpenDocument" rel="nofollow">http://www.wired-gov.net/wg/wg-news-1.nsf/0/A7BB92DA355DAA4A802572AB004BE0AA?OpenDocument</a></p> <p>This franchising exercise was won by NX - which itself ended up handing the franchise back. Responsibility for operating the service was given to East Coast Trains, owned by Directly Operated Railways which is owned by the DfT acting in its capacity of operator of last resort. Honestly, you would think this was complicated... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=4366#post-46130 Thu, 10 Nov 2011 15:23:55 +0000 Stepdoh 46130@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Apart from the rubbish transliterations of the signs into comedy gaelic Cair Dhòmhnaill I think they did a great job with the scotrail branding, and they just get to change to door decals when/if First ever lose to contract.</p> <p>As I said in another train/bike thread, the more subdued interiors are a million times better than the wacky colour schemes that strathclyde transport used to order. </p> <p>Can we have peach with orange and light blue highlights, then green and maroon seats please? Kthxbai. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=4366#post-46128 Thu, 10 Nov 2011 15:04:07 +0000 kaputnik 46128@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Just to be fastidious - Sea Containers lost the GNER franchise to National Express, who re-branded it NXEC, spent a lot of money on painting the trains silver and then realised they'd promised far too much to HMT so managed to walk away from the deal. Of course if they found they had been offering far too little and were raking it in, they wouldn't have been pro-active in handing that "extra" profit over...</p> <p>I think they looked at also stripping NX of its Anglia franchise as some sort of penalty, but the way the train operating companies set up their franchises from a corporate point of view meant that legally there was little connection between the 2, despite the common naming and branding and parent company. I believe the whole NX company at the time was vastly over-leveraged and had spent too much of other people's money expanding too fast.</p> <p>In principle if private companies can run a railway cheaper and more efficiently and offer a better service than a state monolith can, I don't think a lot of people would have a problem with that. However what we have ended up with is a lot of route monopolies run by 4 or 5 huge transport conglomerates (Stagecoach, First, Arriva, Go-ahead and a few foreign ones) who go chasing franchises every couple of years offering more for less and then fail to deliver. Unsatisfactory all round. As for the exercise in re-painting and re-vinyling the trains every few years (not to mention the station signage and the stripes on the lamp posts amongst other things!), one of the upsides of Transport Scotland getting involved in the running of the ScotRail franchise was to decide on a corporate identity for the whole network and to stick to it. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=4366#post-46127 Thu, 10 Nov 2011 14:58:15 +0000 Morningsider 46127@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>DaveC - and that's the beauty of rail franchising. Companies accept low profits as they are effectively guaranteed profits. Some franchise agreements contain arrangements which effectively guarantee company profits even if passenger numbers and ticket revenues fall. In the very unlikely event of things going wrong the fanchise holder simply hands back the keys (see National Experss East Coast) - perhaps paying some derisory "fine" for doing so.</p> <p>Obviously, if you really want to see companies make money out of privatised rail then you might want to look at Angel Trains, Evesholt and Porterbrook - who own all the rolling stock and lease it to the franchise holders. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=4366#post-46124 Thu, 10 Nov 2011 14:41:41 +0000 crowriver 46124@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>I thought all rail companies were making a loss there days? </em></p> <p>Their argument would be that they would have made a loss, had it not been for the subsidy.</p> <p>IIRC the only franchise that makes a profit from operations is the East Coast mainline service. No operating subsidy required.* Maybe Gatwick Express too?</p> <p>* - Though of course the infrastructure (ie. train tracks, signals, etc. is heavily subsidised. The only reason Sea Containers/GNER gave up East Coast was because they were paying an unsustainably huge fee to HM Treasury for the privilege of running the railway's cash cow. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=4366#post-46123 Thu, 10 Nov 2011 14:35:17 +0000 DaveC 46123@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>How can a subsidised company make a profit? I thought all rail companies were making a loss there days? Surely the Tax payer should be given a return on their subsidy investment (and I don't mean tax)?</p> <p>Dave C </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=4366#post-46112 Thu, 10 Nov 2011 14:00:41 +0000 crowriver 46112@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>Turning a 2.6% profit on revenues of £3.2bn hardly speaks volumes for the company's efficiency!</em></p> <p>Yes it is rather modest in context, I thought so too. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=4366#post-46052 Thu, 10 Nov 2011 10:42:56 +0000 kaputnik 46052@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>oh and if I read again it is "the rail Division" that has given £55.7m profits - AS well as ScotRail, first own the following franchises (First Capital Connect · First Great Western, First Hull Trains, First TransPennine Express (55%) and Heathrow Connect). Turning a 2.6% profit on revenues of £3.2bn hardly speaks volumes for the company's efficiency! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=4366#post-46037 Thu, 10 Nov 2011 09:08:00 +0000 crowriver 46037@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Sorry, the 700 million (or a bit less) is for rail services in Scotland, including payments to Network Rail, etc. Scotrail gets about half, not including payments for concessionary travel, smartcard schemes, etc. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=4366#post-46020 Wed, 09 Nov 2011 23:28:05 +0000 kaputnik 46020@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>so it could have been £635.5m then </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=4366#post-46019 Wed, 09 Nov 2011 23:26:55 +0000 crowriver 46019@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The franchise payment is about 700 million, if I remember correctly. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=4366#post-46014 Wed, 09 Nov 2011 22:14:42 +0000 kaputnik 46014@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Anyone know what ScotRail's subsidy is from Transport Scotland? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=4366#post-45985 Wed, 09 Nov 2011 17:06:47 +0000 DaveC 45985@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>What is more eye watering is how much these firms pay in tax. Its something like &lt;10% on average, as I found out during a recent end of year meeting at work. Hardley goes near what the average employee pays in tax, and its all legal. Its a bit like you saying you were unemployed last year so can write off you're last years potential income against this years tax burden!! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=4366#post-45983 Wed, 09 Nov 2011 17:00:29 +0000 crowriver 45983@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"Aberdeen transport firm First Group has announced a rise in sales and profits in the six months to the end of September. The group said revenues had increased by more than 3% to £3.2bn and adjusted profit before tax was up 9% to £84.5m. First Group said there had been strong growth in its UK rail division which delivered £55.7m in profit."</p> <p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-15654551" rel="nofollow">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-15654551</a></p> <p>Hardly surprising. Rail fares are eye-wateringly high, unless you book about a month in advance, use a student/family/OAP railcard etc. </p>