Route Development | Network Expansion & New Services

0 Vote(s) - 0 Average

14,218

29 Dec 2021, 4:40 pm #13

(29 Dec 2021, 2:47 pm)Dan It is so much more difficult to get a business case to stack up to introduce a brand new service. It is easier to add to the existing network, either diverting or extending an existing service, to try and capitalise on areas of potential demand.

In very simple numbers it costs around £100k to add 1 PVR to a service. It is clear to see why operators (not just Go North East) rarely add additional buses to the network, and aim to have such new ventures (partly) funded, even if it's just short-term kick-start funding.

That said, there have been a few changes to the network over the last few years:

X1 extended beyond Easington Lane to Peterlee and Dalton Park, enabling through links from Washington to these areas.

X5/X15 extended beyond Consett to Shotley Bridge to provide a through link to Durham - with the view that this would become commercially viable and ran commercially once S106 funding ran out.

X21 extended beyond Bishop Auckland to Tindale Crescent and then West Auckland - initially as a partial replacement for service 18, but developed further since.

4 diverted via Follingsby Park to serve the new Amazon FC.

10B extended from Prudhoe Station to Tyneview Retail Park.

21 diverted via Arnison Centre and extended beyond Durham to Brandon

It's sad that you weren't able to think of any of these - arguably Go North East has done a lot more than other operators in the area, although Stagecoach's extension of service 22 to Cobalt (initially received kick-start funding from Cobalt, I understand) and introduction of service X24 deserve a mention. Clearly in a post-Covid world, service 22 probably isn't commercially viable anymore, with the number of people actually working in the office at Cobalt. Similarly the X24 was predominantly used by ENCTS users and they are some of the biggest customer base not returning to buses very quickly, and it is highly likely that ENCTS payments are likely to be heavily reduced next year to fund the Metro.

Whilst short-notice cancellations have not helped the development of the X1, I think Go North East has capitalised on the poor operation of Arriva in Durham with services 21 and X21. Anecdotally I have heard customers comment on the 'posher buses' and cheaper fares on the Go North East services.

It's interesting to see that the extension of an existing route (replacing one in the case of the 18/X21 or reinstating part of a historic route in the case of the 21/X46) is viewed as a new route.
They're positives. But not sure they're a new route.

I can see why an operator would look to do something on the cheap by adding a vehicle or two to the PVR and extending a route to open up new connections - rather than creating a new route in its entirity, but is that part of the issue and why we've seen a steady decline in the almost 40 years since de-reg?

It's almost like a mantra of introducing something as cost effective as possible, is the only answer or option and that the entrepreneureal ideology of speculating to accumulating, has gone out of the window. Because 'it's easier'.

We used to see the patter about 'experimental service being withdrawn' and whilst it was always a shame to see a route withdrawn after a quite insignificant period of time, at least the routes were introduced and given a try.

'Illegitimis non carborundum'

Andreos1