(24 Mar 2024, 9:29 pm)nova347 wrote [ -> ]Probably because DCC is harsher than Nexus would be my guess.
I would actually say it’s the other way around. Nexus is usually a lot stricter on adhering to contract compliance (indeed have recently recruited for, and appointed, a Bus Contract Manager position).
In my view, it is probably more a case of different rotas - drivers on Durham work being more disciplined than those in North Tyneside. To mobilise the contracts for today, GCT would need to recruit c.15 extra drivers, which, in a pool of recruiting existing PCV drivers only, is actually quite difficult to achieve (so they probably are a bit slap dash on quality standards).
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
(25 Mar 2024, 6:42 am)Dan wrote [ -> ]I would actually say it’s the other way around. Nexus is usually a lot stricter on adhering to contract compliance (indeed have recently recruited for, and appointed, a Bus Contract Manager position).
In my view, it is probably more a case of different rotas - drivers on Durham work being more disciplined than those in North Tyneside. To mobilise the contracts for today, GCT would need to recruit c.15 extra drivers, which, in a pool of recruiting existing PCV drivers only, is actually quite difficult to achieve (so they probably are a bit slap dash on quality standards).
Some of those DCC contracts that GCT hold are a bit more difficult to cut corners on, especially the way some of those routes are fairly direct.
May need to find a few further drivers to facilitate Sunday operation of the PR1 in Durham from April 7th.
Any boards missing today as I doubt GCT will have recruited 15 drivers, but PR1 i think will be ran purely on drivers wanting to do overtime
Tonight 351 service (2128 from Haymarket) Destination display states it's off to Whitley Bay via Holystone and stops next to a 308/309 stop (sigh)
On a positive note there was one passenger on board!
Nexus have probably played a blinder here.
Shuffle off the contract to the most cost effective bidder who doesn’t do a fabulous job for the mainly twirlys, enthusiasts and kids who use the service and they go elsewhere.
Launch a consultation citing low numbers and end up cutting the service before the problems hand over to Angel Bus network. Genius
(25 Mar 2024, 10:43 pm)Ambassador wrote [ -> ]Nexus have probably played a blinder here.
Shuffle off the contract to the most cost effective bidder who doesn’t do a fabulous job for the mainly twirlys, enthusiasts and kids who use the service and they go elsewhere.
Launch a consultation citing low numbers and end up cutting the service before the problems hand over to Angel Bus network. Genius
To be fair, as far as I'm aware, they ran every service today and pretty much on time aswell across the board.
It's a much better show than the operator, who used to run the (3)51, who had 4 hour gaps on the 308 and 2 hour gaps on the X22 today.
But i've said it before GCT will never, ever, ever made a bus service profitable.
(25 Mar 2024, 11:40 pm)Unber43 wrote [ -> ]But i've said it before GCT will never, ever, ever made a bus service profitable.
Their latest accounts would argue that point
Though in reality, true public service shouldn’t ever make a profit
(26 Mar 2024, 12:36 am)Ambassador wrote [ -> ]Their latest accounts would argue that point
Though in reality, true public service shouldn’t ever make a profit
I think Unber43’s point was probably that the subsidised services ran by Gateshead Central will never see passenger growth to allow them to no longer be subsidised.
As GCT have no commercial bus services, it is clear they have no intention of growing patronage on them. Arguably on a Minimum Cost contract, they have no reason to attempt to do so.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
(26 Mar 2024, 8:14 am)Dan wrote [ -> ]I think Unber43’s point was probably that the subsidised services ran by Gateshead Central will never see passenger growth to allow them to no longer be subsidised.
As GCT have no commercial bus services, it is clear they have no intention of growing patronage on them. Arguably on a Minimum Cost contract, they have no reason to attempt to do so.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You could compare the impact they had with GNE and the 96 or 97.
Without them winning the contract, that service would have never become commercially successful overnight.
Conversely, you could look at GNE's decision making on the 71 and GCT having to step in and save the day.
PB1099280/159 Cancelled (Short notice)
CENTRAL TAXIS GATESHEAD LTD
Route: Gladstone Street, Roker to Doxford Tech Park, Sunderland via Fulwel, Southwick, Red House, Town End, Hastings Hill, Thornley Close
Service number: 594
Service type: Normal Stopping
Effective date: 11 May 2024
(03 Apr 2024, 10:01 pm)Michael wrote [ -> ]PB1099280/159 Cancelled (Short notice)
CENTRAL TAXIS GATESHEAD LTD
Route: Gladstone Street, Roker to Doxford Tech Park, Sunderland via Fulwel, Southwick, Red House, Town End, Hastings Hill, Thornley Close
Service number: 594
Service type: Normal Stopping
Effective date: 11 May 2024
Oh that's interesting, wonder who will get this? They've have had this since it merged from 592/93 , will be interesting to see another company operate this
(03 Apr 2024, 10:01 pm)Michael wrote [ -> ]PB1099280/159 Cancelled (Short notice)
CENTRAL TAXIS GATESHEAD LTD
Route: Gladstone Street, Roker to Doxford Tech Park, Sunderland via Fulwel, Southwick, Red House, Town End, Hastings Hill, Thornley Close
Service number: 594
Service type: Normal Stopping
Effective date: 11 May 2024
594 contract awarded to Stagecoach.
(04 Apr 2024, 7:20 am)GuyParkRoyal wrote [ -> ]594 contract awarded to Stagecoach.
Wonder which service they'll work it around?
The 19 seemed to be run without destination displays today. I saw two white enviros with A4 paper destinations in the window.
Impossible to read as they soar past you
(04 Apr 2024, 9:16 pm)Ambassador wrote [ -> ]The 19 seemed to be run without destination displays today. I saw two white enviros with A4 paper destinations in the window.
Impossible to read as they soar past you
It's YX72 ONF running on the 19 with paper destinations (saw it yesterday as well).
So, I don’t know if there’s some sort of link with Arriva at the moment, got the 359 the other week, ticket printed on Arriva paper. Got the 342 the other night, driver in full Arriva uniform, is there just driver shortages?!
Anyone else has similar?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
(08 Apr 2024, 4:32 pm)Wellsey18 wrote [ -> ]So, I don’t know if there’s some sort of link with Arriva at the moment, got the 359 the other week, ticket printed on Arriva paper. Got the 342 the other night, driver in full Arriva uniform, is there just driver shortages?!
Anyone else has similar?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes there have been drivers in Arriva uniform driving 342 for quite some time but my impression is they’re ex Arriva drivers who’ve kept the uniform. Haven’t got an Arriva ticket yet though
(08 Apr 2024, 4:32 pm)Wellsey18 wrote [ -> ]So, I don’t know if there’s some sort of link with Arriva at the moment, got the 359 the other week, ticket printed on Arriva paper. Got the 342 the other night, driver in full Arriva uniform, is there just driver shortages?!
Anyone else has similar?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I understand a former Go North East manager, who became a driver at Arriva Jesmond, has recently started at Gateshead Central Taxis as a manager and recruited a number of ex-Arriva drivers.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
(08 Apr 2024, 5:10 pm)Coastliner700 wrote [ -> ]Yes there have been drivers in Arriva uniform driving 342 for quite some time but my impression is they’re ex Arriva drivers who’ve kept the uniform. Haven’t got an Arriva ticket yet though
I'm surprised GCT are allowing the drivers to wear another bus companies uniform. I'd be surprised if Arriva were happy if they found out as well. Especially considering the amount of complaints there seems to be about GCT from the public (not forum complaints). Arriva already get enough without taking them for other companies.