Given that Stagecoach have started to dip their toe in North Tyneside, could there be scope for them to move into other areas?
(20 Apr 2022, 10:24 am)L469 YVK wrote [ -> ]Given that Stagecoach have started to dip their toe in North Tyneside, could there be scope for them to move into other areas?
I was wondering this myself specifically to North Tyneside expansion.
Whether it's the 22 extension, the stuff from South of the river or the 317 - it looks like they're exploiting gaps across North Tyneside.
It will be interesting to see how it progresses.
At the moment, I can't see them expanding in to other areas.
The scholars/workers stuff they're picking up seems to be organised well with minimal dead mileage.
I'd argue outlying areas such as Durham, Washington and Gateshead (the areas they've expanded in to with the contracted work) are more than adequately covered commercially.
Unless they're thinking outside the box and come up with something unique or different, I can't see anything new happening.
(20 Apr 2022, 10:30 am)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]I was wondering this myself specifically to North Tyneside expansion.
Whether it's the 22 extension, the stuff from South of the river or the 317 - it looks like they're exploiting gaps across North Tyneside.
It will be interesting to see how it progresses.
At the moment, I can't see them expanding in to other areas.
The scholars/workers stuff they're picking up seems to be organised well with minimal dead mileage.
I'd argue outlying areas such as Durham, Washington and Gateshead (the areas they've expanded in to with the contracted work) are more than adequately covered commercially.
Unless they're thinking outside the box and come up with something unique or different, I can't see anything new happening.
With the exception of the 22, I don't think Stagecoach are 'exploiting gaps across North Tyneside' as you claim.
The 317 is a Nexus contract, as are the 10/11 between Jarrow and North Shields. All Stagecoach have done is submitted a bid for tender and won - much like GCT have done in other areas. When they decide to offer a commercial service east of Cobalt/Silverlink, that's when you can judge the merits of their so-called expansion (and let's not forget, the extension of the 1 has already been pulled).
I have a feeling unless things change they might get parts (other half to Arriva, Nexus or Riverside) or all of the North Tyneside network from GNE, whether that is formally or informally. Percy Main can't possibly be making money with 3 bus routes having a scrap fight along the Coast Road, one fighting with numerous Stagecoach and Arriva services through Gosforth, another fighting with the 22/306/317 and the 41/41A.
Not to mention the BSIP which is supposedly be coming into place with makes the 309, Q3 and 1 arguably redundant as they just duplicate services of more frequent or similar services (308, 30/31/35/43/44/45/46, 22/306/Metro)
(20 Apr 2022, 11:25 am)Storx wrote [ -> ]I have a feeling unless things change they might get parts (other half to Arriva, Nexus or Riverside) or all of the North Tyneside network from GNE, whether that is formally or informally. Percy Main can't possibly be making money with 3 bus routes having a scrap fight along the Coast Road, one fighting with numerous Stagecoach and Arriva services through Gosforth, another fighting with the 22/306/317 and the 41/41A.
Not to mention the BSIP which is supposedly be coming into place with makes the 309, Q3 and 1 arguably redundant as they just duplicate services of more frequent or similar services (308, 30/31/35/43/44/45/46, 22/306/Metro)
Arguably there's a greater case for Arriva to bin the 308 as the 309 provides more useful links to Cobalt if people ever return to the office on a full-time basis.
As far as I can see, there are only four bus stops (in either direction) on Billy Mill Lane which would be affected by withdrawal as the 308 is duplicated by the 306 between the end of the Coast Road and Newcastle, and the 309 more or less everywhere else.
As much as fantasy bus booking irritates me, if you keep the 310 as it is but rerouting the service away from High Farm; divert the 309 down the Silverlink then route it direct via Coast Road omitting Battle Hill Drive; have the 306 operate direct via Coast Road omitting Battle Hill Drive; and keep the 311 the way it is; that will go some way to regulating the Coast Road services under any partnership agreement.
(20 Apr 2022, 11:51 am)MurdnunoC wrote [ -> ]Arguably there's a greater case for Arriva to bin the 308 as the 309 provides more useful links to Cobalt if people ever return to the office on a full-time basis.
As far as I can see, there are only four bus stops (in either direction) on Billy Mill Lane which would be affected by withdrawal as the 308 is duplicated by the 306 between the end of the Coast Road and Newcastle, and the 309 more or less everywhere else.
As much as fantasy bus booking irritates me, if you keep the 310 as it is but rerouting the service away from High Farm; divert the 309 down the Silverlink then route it direct via Coast Road omitting Battle Hill Drive; have the 306 operate direct via Coast Road omitting Battle Hill Drive; and keep the 311 the way it is; that will go some way to regulating the Coast Road services under any partnership agreement.
Aye I see what your saying there, problem then is St Thomas Moore, it's a popular stop for kids connecting to it from pretty much all over on the 308 which would need replaced in some form or another.
Wonder if there's a case for merging the 306/310 and using the 1 to pick up other areas instead. The 306 is arguably the much weaker service and there's questions whether most the people should be on there in the first place with the Metro and the new interchange at North Shields, is there really any need for the 'quick' service going there.
Something like that for the 306/310 -
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/55.00913...c2!1m0!3e0
and then this for the 1 -
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/55.01389...ce!1m0!3e0 with potentially the 19 running via Meadowell, it's dead as it is the way it goes, might aswell try something with it.
It leaves everywhere pretty much with a service, not to mention there's the Metro for Meadowell and Tynemouth anyway. If you terminated the 309 at Whitley then arguably there's only duplication on the short section between Whitley Bay and New York (maybe the 309 could serve Monkseaton instead either as they have an absolutely abysmal service with only an hourly W1 for some areas). Southern areas public transport is pretty much unusable.
(20 Apr 2022, 12:47 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]Aye I see what your saying there, problem then is St Thomas Moore, it's a popular stop for kids connecting to it from pretty much all over on the 308 which would need replaced in some form or another.
Appreciate you're always going to get stragglers coming in and out during the day and, perhaps, after the school day ends, but the 'problem' only really exists for an hour in the morning, and an hour in the afternoon each school day. I know it's not always possible to accommodate the travel needs of each individual student, but the school knows where the majority of students are travelling to/from, and should be working with the local authority and Nexus to provide adequate transport to those places. If this achievable, then any disruption caused should be minimal.
(20 Apr 2022, 11:16 am)MurdnunoC wrote [ -> ]With the exception of the 22, I don't think Stagecoach are 'exploiting gaps across North Tyneside' as you claim.
The 317 is a Nexus contract, as are the 10/11 between Jarrow and North Shields. All Stagecoach have done is submitted a bid for tender and won - much like GCT have done in other areas. When they decide to offer a commercial service east of Cobalt/Silverlink, that's when you can judge the merits of their so-called expansion (and let's not forget, the extension of the 1 has already been pulled).
Didn't the 10/11 operate to Cobalt commercially?
Appreciate they're using funding now, but there's obviously a reason they're working to bid in these areas and I can't see it being anything other than getting a foot in the door and seeing what's out there.
Exploiting the gaps left by GNE deciding to do whatever it is they're doing with Percy Main and the North Tyneside network.
The 317 and 10/11 wouldn't exist in their current guises otherwise.
If the rest of any expansion in North Tyneside is funded, then they're still exploiting gaps.
(20 Apr 2022, 2:33 pm)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]Didn't the 10/11 operate to Cobalt commercially?
Appreciate they're using funding now, but there's obviously a reason they're working to bid in these areas and I can't see it being anything other than getting a foot in the door and seeing what's out there.
Exploiting the gaps left by GNE deciding to do whatever it is they're doing with Percy Main and the North Tyneside network.
The 317 and 10/11 wouldn't exist in their current guises otherwise.
If the rest of any expansion in North Tyneside is funded, then they're still exploiting gaps.
The 10/11 were funded by Cobalt when they operated peak-time services. They weren't well-used so funding was withdrawn - as were the services when the money dried up. I've also found out since my last post that both the 1 and 22 were funded by Cobalt too. The funding was pulled for the 1 and so was the extension. The 22 must be doing alright as it is still currently funded, but the extension was a result of funding, not because Stagecoach decided to exploit any gaps by operating anything commercially.
If Nexus decide to pull funding for both the 10/11 and 317, and Stagecoach decide to cancel each service as a result, which gaps are Stagecoach exploiting then? Gaps aren't currently being exploited, they are being plugged.
(20 Apr 2022, 2:55 pm)MurdnunoC wrote [ -> ]The 10/11 were funded by Cobalt when they operated peak-time services. They weren't well-used so funding was withdrawn - as were the services when the money dried up. I've also found out since my last post that both the 1 and 22 were funded by Cobalt too. The funding was pulled for the 1 and so was the extension. The 22 must be doing alright as it is still currently funded, but the extension was a result of funding, not because Stagecoach decided to exploit any gaps by operating anything commercially.
If Nexus decide to pull funding for both the 10/11 and 317, and Stagecoach decide to cancel each service as a result, which gaps are Stagecoach exploiting then? Gaps aren't currently being exploited, they are being plugged.
Has eezypeazy hacked your account? Splitting more hairs than he/she ever did here!
Gonna be chatting about battleship grey Solo's and magic money trees next
Seriously though. I think they're going to take advantage of the gaps which are there (exploited or plugged). Build a foundation based on funded stuff and if numbers are there to exploit, I think they will snap them up.
It goes without saying that funding takes away (or at least reduces) the commercial risk - so if they can have that safety net, I'm sure they will use it.
(20 Apr 2022, 4:20 pm)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]Has eezypeazy hacked your account? Splitting more hairs than he/she ever did here!
Gonna be chatting about battleship grey Solo's and magic money trees next
Seriously though. I think they're going to take advantage of the gaps which are there (exploited or plugged). Build a foundation based on funded stuff and if numbers are there to exploit, I think they will snap them up.
It goes without saying that funding takes away (or at least reduces) the commercial risk - so if they can have that safety net, I'm sure they will use it.
I'm not trying to split hairs, I just think it's a little hyperbolic to suggest Stagecoach are exploiting gaps in the market when, in reality, they're being paid to supply services under tender. We don't talk about how GCT (or GNE/ANE [insert operator here] for that matter) are exploiting gaps when offering tendered services even though, strictly speaking, they have done the same thing in the past (to give a GNE example, the 239 Sedgefield-Easington service; or the 59 Wheatley Hill-Arnsion Centre) even when venturing outside of their usual territory.
I hope Stagecoach do take advantage of whatever there is to gain on North Tyneside, however, as we've seen with cancellations of services to/from Cobalt, I suspect they'll run a mile rather than take on any commercial risk in an area where their presence is, at most, marginal.
With the 317 they need to get some vehicles that more suitable to the route as those MAN E300's are to big given there large rear overhang. I used the service this afternoon from Royal Quays to Wallsend and got stuck a part of Holy Cross due to badly parked cars, the first one we got through albeit narrowly but the second one a few mins later the driver just about got through to her credit but if she turned any further to the right she would've hit a parked car then also risked hitting others on the opposite side of the road.
I helped the driver by knocking on doors to find out whose car it was and for them to move, first said it was not their car, some 10 mins later they came back out to say it was their sisters car after disturbing a number of their neighbours, safe to say they were not impressed nor was the driver which resulted in the service being 20 minutes late into Wallsend the subsequent journey from Wallsend being cancelled with the driver being instructed to return to the depot.
From what I have seen online traffic around Whitley Bay was quite bad this afternoon and badly parked cars did not help so I would think it was not worth the risk of further late running and the driver exceeding their driving hours.
In terms of passenger usage the bus was almost full when I got on and there was a few fare paying passengers however there was an equal number of concessionary pass holders getting on as well, in terms of the route their is nothing wrong with it, it just needed allocated smaller Euro 6 Buses which will either have to be bought new or sourced from elsewhere otherwise the issues documented above will continue on a daily basis, only other solution would be to have the route serve main roads through the estate but the near stops seem some distance away so you are then risking losing passengers also.
What is the popularity of encouraging bus cuts ?
(20 Apr 2022, 4:38 pm)MurdnunoC wrote [ -> ]I hope Stagecoach do take advantage of whatever there is to gain on North Tyneside, however, as we've seen with cancellations of services to/from Cobalt, I suspect they'll run a mile rather than take on any commercial risk in an area where their presence is, at most, marginal.
I'd agree they'd run a mile previously but given the state of things in North Tyneside at the moment, Stagecoach could make their presence felt.
The 22 in theory could be further extended. 3x per hour to Northumberland Park and 3x per hour extended to Whitley Bay via New York Road, Rake Lane and could even serve Marden? Or.......dip toe into serving Preston Grange and giving more direct links from Malvern Road to other places?
(20 Apr 2022, 11:25 am)Storx wrote [ -> ]I have a feeling unless things change they might get parts (other half to Arriva, Nexus or Riverside) or all of the North Tyneside network from GNE, whether that is formally or informally. Percy Main can't possibly be making money with 3 bus routes having a scrap fight along the Coast Road, one fighting with numerous Stagecoach and Arriva services through Gosforth, another fighting with the 22/306/317 and the 41/41A.
Not to mention the BSIP which is supposedly be coming into place with makes the 309, Q3 and 1 arguably redundant as they just duplicate services of more frequent or similar services (308, 30/31/35/43/44/45/46, 22/306/Metro)
I don't know where you get that the Q3 is redundant as a service, yes there is some overlap with SNE services to Wallsend , which in my opinion is over saturated, but the popularity of the Ouseburn and quayside area means this service should remain in place. Having used it quite a lot myself I found it more convenient than the equivalent SNE services . I appreciate GNE have probably dropped the wallsend leg "citing " non profitability, but it is probably lack of connectivity in N tyneside which shouldn't be a reason to curtail for those that used the service between Wallsend and St Peters basin . Once again from my perspective its GNE jumping at the first sign of funding running out, but plenty of money for new vehicles and constant livery changes!
(21 Apr 2022, 3:00 pm)atlantean560 wrote [ -> ]I don't know where you get that the Q3 is redundant as a service, yes there is some overlap with SNE services to Wallsend , which in my opinion is over saturated, but the popularity of the Ouseburn and quayside area means this service should remain in place. Having used it quite a lot myself I found it more convenient than the equivalent SNE services . I appreciate GNE have probably dropped the wallsend leg "citing " non profitability, but it is probably lack of connectivity in N tyneside which shouldn't be a reason to curtail for those that used the service between Wallsend and St Peters basin . Once again from my perspective its GNE jumping at the first sign of funding running out, but plenty of money for new vehicles and constant livery changes!
I agree,the Q3 used to be popular even to Wallsend,but when most of the services were axed,thats when it started to struggle to Wallsend,ive suggested before to re-route the 12 since its now the same as the 40 from Welbeck Road,but others say extend the 18,thing is,the 18 used to go to Wallsend,then it was curtailed at Walker Bus Terminal,it was at the same time as it stopped serving Forest Hall
(21 Apr 2022, 3:00 pm)atlantean560 wrote [ -> ]I don't know where you get that the Q3 is redundant as a service, yes there is some overlap with SNE services to Wallsend , which in my opinion is over saturated, but the popularity of the Ouseburn and quayside area means this service should remain in place. Having used it quite a lot myself I found it more convenient than the equivalent SNE services . I appreciate GNE have probably dropped the wallsend leg "citing " non profitability, but it is probably lack of connectivity in N tyneside which shouldn't be a reason to curtail for those that used the service between Wallsend and St Peters basin . Once again from my perspective its GNE jumping at the first sign of funding running out, but plenty of money for new vehicles and constant livery changes!
Sorry I didn't make that clear I was talking about the other end of the route there the Blue House -> Great Park section of the route rather than the other side. It could easily be ran by Riverside the other side of the route, not sure how commercially viable it would be mind but agreed it should exist though mind.
(20 Apr 2022, 12:47 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]Aye I see what your saying there, problem then is St Thomas Moore, it's a popular stop for kids connecting to it from pretty much all over on the 308 which would need replaced in some form or another.
Wonder if there's a case for merging the 306/310 and using the 1 to pick up other areas instead. The 306 is arguably the much weaker service and there's questions whether most the people should be on there in the first place with the Metro and the new interchange at North Shields, is there really any need for the 'quick' service going there.
Something like that for the 306/310 - https://www.google.com/maps/dir/55.00913...c2!1m0!3e0
and then this for the 1 - https://www.google.com/maps/dir/55.01389...ce!1m0!3e0 with potentially the 19 running via Meadowell, it's dead as it is the way it goes, might aswell try something with it.
It leaves everywhere pretty much with a service, not to mention there's the Metro for Meadowell and Tynemouth anyway. If you terminated the 309 at Whitley then arguably there's only duplication on the short section between Whitley Bay and New York (maybe the 309 could serve Monkseaton instead either as they have an absolutely abysmal service with only an hourly W1 for some areas). Southern areas public transport is pretty much unusable.
For the Coast Road to sort it out, it could go:
- 306 every 20 minutes
- 308 every 20 minutes*
- 310 every 20 minutes and via Cobalt rather than Middle Engine Lane
- 22 every 20 minutes to Cobalt & N.Land Park
- 22A every 20 minutes to Hadrian Park
* As for the 308, better coordination between the 308 & 54 at Whitley Bay & Rake Lane to fill the gap left by the 309.
Perhaps Stagecoach's aim of going for tenders outside their 'territory' is a good strategy in the long run as they now run 22, 10/11 & 54 (Eve & Sun) into N. Tyneside.
Maybe in the long run they will extend current services into NT such as the 1,12, 38, 40 etc... with the same mind frame as originally extending the 22 (which has paid off). If they continue to gain tenders they will be the major operator because of the amount of tenders in NT.
I think this has little impact on passengers as well because of the ticket acceptance for the 54.
A tender they should go for when up for renewal would be the 342 as it's mainly in Stagecoach area besides the northern section.
(21 Apr 2022, 6:26 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]Sorry I didn't make that clear I was talking about the other end of the route there the Blue House -> Great Park section of the route rather than the other side. It could easily be ran by Riverside the other side of the route, not sure how commercially viable it would be mind but agreed it should exist though mind.
The Q3 is run by Riverside now.
(31 Oct 2022, 8:59 am)RMF1254 wrote [ -> ]The Q3 is run by Riverside now.
That was April :p