Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Viking Chat => Topic started by: Cantley Rover on May 16, 2018, 01:07:49 pm
-
It will be interesting to see if the news that the East Coat main line being taken back into state ownership affects Rover's sponsorship deal.
-
Ooops . Anyone got a black marker pen .
-
Will it affect the discounts we currently get through the DNA card on train tickets?
-
I'd have thought Virgin would be only too glad to be rid of something that was a massive lossmaker for them.
-
Isn't Virgin a minority shareholder to Stagecoach. Sure I read somewhere it was 90/10 in favour of Stagecoach
-
Virgin Rail still operates in other regions. would expect them to be under a contract with DRFC so can,t see them pulling the plug.
-
This only relates to the ownership of the track, it doesn't affect what services run on them.
-
This only relates to the ownership of the track, it doesn't affect what services run on them.
Wrong. It's the train operating company. In this case Stagecoach/Virgin.
-
This only relates to the ownership of the track, it doesn't affect what services run on them.
The timetable will be the same. A different firm will be running the service and you'll gradually see less and less virgin stuff on trains. Hopefully they'll start with our shirts!
-
This only relates to the ownership of the track, it doesn't affect what services run on them.
As discussed in another thread Glyn, I'm not sure that's quite correct.
I don't believe Train operating companies (i.e. Virgin and Stagecoach) own the track. The track is owned by Network Rail, who franchise out the operation of train services to the Train operating companies.
Virgin Rail still operates in other regions. would expect them to be under a contract with DRFC so can,t see them pulling the plug.
They might not be able to pull the plug (unless DRFC consent), but if they are only operating train franchises in the West of the country I can't see the sponsorship deal holding as much benefit for them as it currently does.
-
Virgin operate a number of ex-Cross Country non-ECML services through Doncaster.
-
Virgin operate a number of ex-Cross Country non-ECML services through Doncaster.
That's not the case. Arriva own the cross country franchise!
-
The key to our sponsorship deal will be wether it was inclusively with virgin trains. If so they will have to honour that sponsorship agreement. If the deal was with Vtec/stagecoach then that's another matter entirely and could prove be a huge disappointment for the club
-
If Virgin do pull out of the deal it could leave a hole to fill in the budget, Rovers may have to recut their cloth so to speak
COYR
-
When you take into account how much it costs for a ticket to London and the fact that unless you book you end up sat on the floor in the space between carriages because they are always full,it's hard to fathom how they can lose so much money..!!
Whoever worked out what subsidiary they could afford to pay to secure the franchise in the first place must have been on the wacky backy..lol
-
WC, the mind boggles even more when you consider that there was hell to pay in the press when Virgin took over the east coast route, because it had been run at a substantial profit by a previous nationalised group, putting millions into the exchequer.
The fact that it was being privatised again was brought up in parliament by labour questioning the loss to the state, and being handed to a private company if I remember correctly.
Virgin thought they were going to make a fortune, from memory the state owned company had made £50 million profit I think, going straight to the exchequer
-
So why not take all the rail operating companies into state ownership and all the profits could help pay for the NHS? I think I know the answer. I'll get my coat.
-
So why not take all the rail operating companies into state ownership and all the profits could help pay for the NHS? I think I know the answer. I'll get my coat.
Like Labour was planning.
-
Another fine mess the policy of privatisation got us into Stanley. Excessive salaries being paid to executives from the public purse who oversea failure. But that's fine according to the Conservatives, who want encourage private enterprise despite it being shown previously that the franchise can be run more cost effectively back in public ownership. Just as in the awarding of public sector contracts to companies like Carillon, it's tantamount to misapropriation of public funds and those who are supposed to safeguard the public interest, the auditors, are in it too!
Rant over!
-
So why not take all the rail operating companies into state ownership and all the profits could help pay for the NHS? I think I know the answer. I'll get my coat.
Like Labour was planning.
Not quite. Labour's plan was to not renew any franchises but to then take them into state control.
-
I read somewhere that Virgin/Stagecoach have paid £1 billion to the exchequer so far in the contract out of a total £3.3 billion that was bid in the first place. On this basis they are streets ahead of the state owned arrangement although clearly the amount bid was unsustainable!!
-
All of the Rail Infrastructure is owned by Network Rail, the operating services wether Passenger or freight are contracted out but policed by Network Rail and the ORR, if any TOC or FROC is deemed to be failing in its contract then steps are taken to enforce the company’s to comply or in the case of East Coast take the contract from them and state run until a new contract can be bid on. The TOC’s and FROC’s pay rent to Network Rail in order to use the routes, this money then forms the finance for Network Rail to maintain the infrastructure. The fact that the government gives this rent money to the train companies makes the whole thing a farce. The passenger trains are all leased not owned so the price hikes every year are for profit not to create a better railway
-
.............waits for BST to turn up.. :whistle:
-
All of the Rail Infrastructure is owned by Network Rail, the operating services wether Passenger or freight are contracted out but policed by Network Rail and the ORR, if any TOC or FROC is deemed to be failing in its contract then steps are taken to enforce the company’s to comply or in the case of East Coast take the contract from them and state run until a new contract can be bid on. The TOC’s and FROC’s pay rent to Network Rail in order to use the routes, this money then forms the finance for Network Rail to maintain the infrastructure. The fact that the government gives this rent money to the train companies makes the whole thing a farce. The passenger trains are all leased not owned so the price hikes every year are for profit not to create a better railway
This is a pretty good summary - although Network Rail is financed primarily by direct grants from government, rather than track access charges from TOCs/FROCs.
Also, not all rail franchises receive subsidy from the government. The East Coast franchise is one of these ‘negative subsidy’ franchises where it is assessed to be profitable and require the successful operator of that franchise to pay a premium to the state. What has happened is that successive operators have overbid on that payment and been unable to realise what they promised - money has been made, but not enough to keep paying back the government. At least some part of this is that there are a number of non-franchise services on that route (Grand Central and Hull Trains) that do not have to pay the negative subsidy (only standard track access charges) so have been able to develop a business model that takes passengers away from the East Coast franchise.
The net result of all this is that Doncaster to London is probably the best served and most competitive long-distance route in the UK - for which we are lucky. Try getting London to Manchester on anything other than Virgin West Coast!
-
The track access charges form part of the grants to Network Rail
-
All of the Rail Infrastructure is owned by Network Rail, the operating services wether Passenger or freight are contracted out but policed by Network Rail and the ORR, if any TOC or FROC is deemed to be failing in its contract then steps are taken to enforce the company’s to comply or in the case of East Coast take the contract from them and state run until a new contract can be bid on. The TOC’s and FROC’s pay rent to Network Rail in order to use the routes, this money then forms the finance for Network Rail to maintain the infrastructure. The fact that the government gives this rent money to the train companies makes the whole thing a farce. The passenger trains are all leased not owned so the price hikes every year are for profit not to create a better railway
This is a pretty good summary - although Network Rail is financed primarily by direct grants from government, rather than track access charges from TOCs/FROCs.
Also, not all rail franchises receive subsidy from the government. The East Coast franchise is one of these ‘negative subsidy’ franchises where it is assessed to be profitable and require the successful operator of that franchise to pay a premium to the state. What has happened is that successive operators have overbid on that payment and been unable to realise what they promised - money has been made, but not enough to keep paying back the government. At least some part of this is that there are a number of non-franchise services on that route (Grand Central and Hull Trains) that do not have to pay the negative subsidy (only standard track access charges) so have been able to develop a business model that takes passengers away from the East Coast franchise.
The net result of all this is that Doncaster to London is probably the best served and most competitive long-distance route in the UK - for which we are lucky. Try getting London to Manchester on anything other than Virgin West Coast!
It is a pretty good summary apart from there is a difference between toc'sand "foc's". Toc's are franchises which bid to operate certain lines for a period of time. This is not the case with foc's, they are normal companies that you or I could set up and bid to pull freight. If the freight companies aren't achieving what they are contracted to then they will lose the contract and another freight company will bid to pull the service. There is no influence from government freight companies win or lose work!
-
An insider tells me that the new company will be putting its name on the shirts.