(06 Jul 2014, 8:23 pm)Dan wrote I know - aureolin had to do that himself for GNE's service changes in a post above, which is why I pointed out ANE do it too.
Like I say, it's unfortunate that bus operators don't list their service changes out in full, but I guess if there's a whole list of 'this is being axed, 'this is being axed', 'this is being axed', and, oh.. 'this is being axed too'... Doesn't make the operator look too good.
Customers who don't even travel by those buses could notice that, and end up fearing the worst for their local services too - perhaps even commenting on this on Social Media. I'm inclined to suggest that most customers won't actually think of their local bus service as contributing to a business' success or demise - and I doubt some people would realise that if a service is not profitable, there's only so many times it can be self-subsidised before it has to be cut.
Just one suggestion why they don't list the service changes out in full, especially when it comes to services being withdrawn... Mightn't be correct!
I'll not get into the argument about the reasons services are cut, as that really wasn't the intention of my original post. I wanted to highlight, that in my opinion, any operator not publishing full changes of service cuts to services is dishonest. A cut is a commercial decision, and those that make the decision should have shoulders broad enough to deal with any potential consequences.
As a customer I would be peeved if one of the services being cut was the service I used on a daily basis for work. At the same time, I'd be even more peeved if it was being cut and it wasn't blatantly obvious from the information provided. This information used to be provided until not so long ago, because I remember X1 changes being published detailing individual journeys that would no longer run, as my partner at the time was affected.
Like I say though. Not about the decision itself or the reasons behind it, but more so the way the message has been communicated.