(23 Apr 2023, 2:46 pm)Adrian wrote With the 84/85, you can reach the Galleries or Concord within 10-12 minutes from the furthest points, which I'd say is still a good option for those travelling locally. It's the other services, in particular the 50, where the customers are punished. A lack of 'out of the box thinking' (as they'd say) with how to deal with Ayton has made travel between Chester-le-Street and Washington ridiculous. Hopefully now that the 8 is back, it can be revised to at least not serve Rickleton during the day.

I largely agree with what you're saying on the first point, but GNE have won the work because they've put forward the most economically advantageous bid in the tender process. It also means, that in an area dominated by one operator, you have ticket acceptance across the board. Something that was supposed to happen with the 82/82A, but I don't think a lot of drivers were aware of it and it certainly wasn't publicised. 

It's also worth pointing out that there are some independent operators that have a lot of public contracts for running bus services, but up to now have taken zero commercial risk in the market. In my opinion this is just as bad, as it contributes nothing back in to the network.

I've always said whats the point of companies like GCT running services, especially services like the 342 which probably have less passengers than the 42/42A, or the 19. 

But I wonder whether GNE would run the 8 from Stanley to Teal Farm (around 1 hour) on evenings and Sundays it would increase the PVR to 2, but it would stop changeovers at CLS.

But yeah i think the 50 hast to be changed it takes ages removing it from Rickleton would allow further layover time in Durham and Shields as it can struggle with reliability.

(23 Apr 2023, 2:46 pm)Adrian wrote It's also worth pointing out that there are some independent operators that have a lot of public contracts for running bus services, but up to now have taken zero commercial risk in the market. In my opinion this is just as bad, as it contributes nothing back in to the network.

Have to disagree with that one mind. They're just small companies doing a bit of a side business making money for a local independent firm which might top up another area of their business so it's sustainable. You just have to look at Scarlett Band which when they lost the Park & Ride contracts went out of business and they did used to try and run some stuff commercially.

It's better than the suits getting money from the tax payer to run services which they don't want to run for whatever reason. If they're happy with that then why aren't they open to every service being the same... as they don't half kick off a fuss every time it's suggested. You can't take from one hand and then not want the same with other routes which actually make money which could be used to fund these services.

Not to mention if any independent dared to run a service competing then the toys come out the pram and the likes of Magic Bus turns up and if they did find a service which did make money then the Big 3 would be onto it like a leech.

(23 Apr 2023, 7:12 pm)Storx wrote Have to disagree with that one mind. They're just small companies doing a bit of a side business making money for a local independent firm which might top up another area of their business so it's sustainable. You just have to look at Scarlett Band which when they lost the Park & Ride contracts went out of business and they did used to try and run some stuff commercially.

It's better than the suits getting money from the tax payer to run services which they don't want to run for whatever reason. If they're happy with that then why aren't they open to every service being the same... as they don't half kick off a fuss every time it's suggested. You can't take from one hand and then not want the same with other routes which actually make money which could be used to fund these services.

Not to mention if any independent dared to run a service competing then the toys come out the pram and the likes of Magic Bus turns up and if they did find a service which did make money then the Big 3 would be onto it like a leech.

Don't know the ins and outs with this one for sure, but I'm presuming that it was because it was a substantial proportion of their business. It's not sustainable in any industry to put all your eggs in one basket like that, as the business is at risk if you lose the work. With some smaller operators solely relying on public sector work, without building their own commercial operation up, it presents a massive risk. Nexus could decide not to run all their contracts at the next round of renewals, then someone like GCT would have a load of drivers with no work.

I've always felt that part of an economically advantageous bid, an operator should be able to present that their work would have an added or wider community benefit than just running the contract to the bare minimum spec. There's no incentive for them to grow the operation or perform well, which has an overall negative impact on bus users across the board.

(23 Apr 2023, 7:50 pm)Adrian wrote Don't know the ins and outs with this one for sure, but I'm presuming that it was because it was a substantial proportion of their business. It's not sustainable in any industry to put all your eggs in one basket like that, as the business is at risk if you lose the work. With some smaller operators solely relying on public sector work, without building their own commercial operation up, it presents a massive risk. Nexus could decide not to run all their contracts at the next round of renewals, then someone like GCT would have a load of drivers with no work.

I've always felt that part of an economically advantageous bid, an operator should be able to present that their work would have an added or wider community benefit than just running the contract to the bare minimum spec. There's no incentive for them to grow the operation or perform well, which has an overall negative impact on bus users across the board.

Aye fair points about it being a risky way to do business but suppose they can feel that they can keep the work, it's a risk worth taking. Mind it's not one I'd take.

The whole system is broken let's be honest as these contracts shouldn't exist at all, especially the sort of routes out for tender nowadays like the 317, 342, 82 etc. It doesn't help that the LA's are skint because of austerity either which means they can't afford to do anything better and to make it worse banned from creating their own bus companies which imo would be cheaper in the long run.

I feel for independents at times since the big boys control everything but if they dare attack them then all hell breaks loose like the 192 Corridor in Manchester bus wars in the 00's which didn't end well or the absolute dog fighting at Scarborough on the open top buses (not sure it's as bad nowadays since GoAhead took it over mind). At the same time though they can just leave communities stranded, take a contract over and then play the old look at what we're doing aren't we nice messaging which is so ironic.

The system needs to change imo, since the tax payer shouldn't be funding suits to run buses badly which is just the worst for everyone and is pretty much where we are nowadays whether it's contracts, BSOG or Covid grants etc. Sadly I wouldn't have much more confidence in the unelected lot running NECA or whatever the name is the week either mind.

(23 Apr 2023, 8:34 pm)Storx wrote Aye fair points about it being a risky way to do business but suppose they can feel that they can keep the work, it's a risk worth taking. Mind it's not one I'd take.

The whole system is broken let's be honest as these contracts shouldn't exist at all, especially the sort of routes out for tender nowadays like the 317, 342, 82 etc. It doesn't help that the LA's are skint because of austerity either which means they can't afford to do anything better and to make it worse banned from creating their own bus companies which imo would be cheaper in the long run.

I feel for independents at times since the big boys control everything but if they dare attack them then all hell breaks loose like the 192 Corridor in Manchester bus wars in the 00's which didn't end well or the absolute dog fighting at Scarborough on the open top buses (not sure it's as bad nowadays since GoAhead took it over mind). At the same time though they can just leave communities stranded, take a contract over and then play the old look at what we're doing aren't we nice messaging which is so ironic.

The system needs to change imo, since the tax payer shouldn't be funding suits to run buses badly which is just the worst for everyone and is pretty much where we are nowadays whether it's contracts, BSOG or Covid grants etc. Sadly I wouldn't have much more confidence in the unelected lot running NECA or whatever the name is the week either mind.

I am very surprised the 317 is still tendered - its a pretty busy service at most times of the day. I do wonder that if Stagecoach lost the contract, they would take it on commercially at least in the daytime.

GCT do run taxis, as well. Similar for Phoenix who have taxis in Blyth and Durham (they took over Pratts, at some point). I'm sure they're not the only dual taxi/bus companies in the region.

Similarly, Scarlet band did and many others do the contracts alongside their coaching business. I should think that, in the current climate, running secured services represents some predictable income

(23 Apr 2023, 8:54 pm)Thomas12 wrote I am very surprised the 317 is still tendered - its a pretty busy service at most times of the day. I do wonder that if Stagecoach lost the contract, they would take it on commercially at least in the daytime.

Give it time till the big wigs at gne complain and want it. Its annoying when gne withdrawn a service cause it doesn't make them money. Take the 11 for an example. They got rid of it cause it made no money so nexus introduced the 317 by Stagecoach. Stagecoach make money on that service now gne probably want it back. I hope the 317 is kept by Stagecoach as they have ran it better and a reliable service. Same could be said about GCT running the 19. Gne had that service running late so many times yet gct seem to have it running on time (at least from what I've seen). They will screw the 82. Jh make a profit so gne want to dib in it. Jh were fine at running the 82. Give it a few weeks till u see the 82 running late. Allocated something completely daft or they cancel it

I don't think you can blame GNE for the 19's reliability issue.

(23 Apr 2023, 9:17 pm)Unber43 wrote I don't think you can blame GNE for the 19's reliability issue.

The 19 by gne was ran to 20 to 40 to an hour late half the time. The 19 by gct has been ran fine bar once where it ran an hour late. I'm in no way blaming I just don't see how gct can keep a time running properly to gne running it late 90% of the time

(23 Apr 2023, 8:54 pm)Thomas12 wrote I am very surprised the 317 is still tendered - its a pretty busy service at most times of the day. I do wonder that if Stagecoach lost the contract, they would take it on commercially at least in the daytime.

Aye be interesting mind if they did. Guess we'd only know though if they lost it and they take it on during the grace period. It compliments the 22 in the Howdon area aswell and makes the 1 pretty much redundant for most people who live round there, unless they hate Stagecoach for whatever reason.

(23 Apr 2023, 9:20 pm)Busu284 wrote The 19 by gne was ran to 20 to 40 to an hour late half the time. The 19 by gct has been ran fine bar once where it ran an hour late. I'm in no way blaming I just don't see how gct can keep a time running properly to gne running it late 90% of the time

11 was another that was always late, even going back to the days of it being the 17

(23 Apr 2023, 5:59 pm)citaro5284 wrote Has it not got anything to do with the 4 way traffic lights on Saltmeadows Road and the roadworks?

That's funny, doesn't the 93/94 have to contend with the same set of lights yet I don't see the reliability of those services being impacted.

Could that be due to the 15 mins they've got at Gateshead?

(23 Apr 2023, 10:55 pm)Storx wrote Aye be interesting mind if they did. Guess we'd only know though if they lost it and they take it on during the grace period. It compliments the 22 in the Howdon area aswell and makes the 1 pretty much redundant for most people who live round there, unless they hate Stagecoach for whatever reason.

In theory, the 1 could be broken up into different sections:

- 22A - covers the section of the 1 between Byker and Wallsend (via Appletree Gardens)

- 22/22A split - 22 still to Cobalt & Silverlink every 20 minutes. 22A to North Shields (and maybe Tynemouth) every 20 minutes

- 57 & 57A extended to North Shields via 306 route but serves Tynemouth Road rather than Linskill Terrace

- 306 does the current 1 route between Tynemouth & Whitley Bay >>> much better during the evenings and gets rid of the wasted layover in Tynemouth

- 97 re-instated as was

Also.......if GNE won a bid (maybe joint with Arriva) to electrify the 307 & 309, would GNE justify a new depot in North Tyneside unless a brand new 'depot in depot' was built and maybe shared with Arriva, noting that Arriva if they won the 306 & 308 as part of that bid....would also have the 43/44/45 & 47 to account for? Maybe with GNE also having the Q3, somewhere around Sandy Lane (as previously rumoured for Arriva) could be the perfect location for both operators.

Arriva maybe won't be as dominant in Blyth in future years, so not too far from Cramlington and even Killingworth for changeovers & reliefs.

GNE would change the Q3 in Great Park and for simplicity, could do remote reliefs for both the 307 & 309 in High Farm (via Sandy Lane > NT Council Offices > Forest Hall > Whitley Road > Station Road).

(24 Apr 2023, 8:52 pm)L469 YVK wrote In theory, the 1 could be broken up into different sections:

- 22A - covers the section of the 1 between Byker and Wallsend (via Appletree Gardens)

- 22/22A split - 22 still to Cobalt & Silverlink every 20 minutes. 22A to North Shields (and maybe Tynemouth) every 20 minutes

- 57 & 57A extended to North Shields via 306 route but serves Tynemouth Road rather than Linskill Terrace

- 306 does the current 1 route between Tynemouth & Whitley Bay >>> much better during the evenings and gets rid of the wasted layover in Tynemouth

- 97 re-instated as was

Also.......if GNE won a bid (maybe joint with Arriva) to electrify the 307 & 309, would GNE justify a new depot in North Tyneside unless a brand new 'depot in depot' was built and maybe shared with Arriva, noting that Arriva if they won the 306 & 308 as part of that bid....would also have the 43/44/45 & 47 to account for? Maybe with GNE also having the Q3, somewhere around Sandy Lane (as previously rumoured for Arriva) could be the perfect location for both operators.

Arriva maybe won't be as dominant in Blyth in future years, so not too far from Cramlington and even Killingworth for changeovers & reliefs.

GNE would change the Q3 in Great Park and for simplicity, could do remote reliefs for both the 307 & 309 in High Farm (via Sandy Lane > NT Council Offices > Forest Hall > Whitley Road > Station Road).

Non of that makes any sense & would kill each route especially the 306/57/57A part. That would make people on Linskill Terrace lose a bus & Tynemouth Road for some reason gain a bus every 10 minutes of which it doesn't need. 

Idk why people have this idea withdrawn or changing the 1 is gonna be good foe some reason. The 1 is a profitable service which gets many people on board. The 1 is a asset to North Tyneside. Think about it. U withdrawn the 1. Metro passengers are screwed. Most the people who use the 1 to get to Newcastle are screwed & so are many people getting home. The 1 is a good service of which many people use. The withdrawal of the 97 has in some way boosted passengers numbers on the 1 from what I've been seeing. Journeys in the morning after 7am have been busy & decekrs have had really good loading. Non of what u say about splitting the 1 up would be a good idea

57/57A to North Shields via thr 306 route would just kill it

Making the 306 go to Whitley Bay on an evening instead of having the long layover in Tynemouth is daft as all hell. I've been in the 306 lates many many of times. And the bus is empty by the time the service passes North Shields so why send an empty service to Whitley Bay

(24 Apr 2023, 9:40 pm)Busu284 wrote Non of that makes any sense & would kill each route especially the 306/57/57A part. That would make people on Linskill Terrace lose a bus & Tynemouth Road for some reason gain a bus every 10 minutes of which it doesn't need. 

Idk why people have this idea withdrawn or changing the 1 is gonna be good foe some reason. The 1 is a profitable service which gets many people on board. The 1 is a asset to North Tyneside. Think about it. U withdrawn the 1. Metro passengers are screwed. Most the people who use the 1 to get to Newcastle are screwed & so are many people getting home. The 1 is a good service of which many people use. The withdrawal of the 97 has in some way boosted passengers numbers on the 1 from what I've been seeing. Journeys in the morning after 7am have been busy & decekrs have had really good loading. Non of what u say about splitting the 1 up would be a good idea

57/57A to North Shields via thr 306 route would just kill it

Making the 306 go to Whitley Bay on an evening instead of having the long layover in Tynemouth is daft as all hell. I've been in the 306 lates many many of times. And the bus is empty by the time the service passes North Shields so why send an empty service to Whitley Bay

In fairness it's not the worst idea in the world and we don't usually agree about things. The 1 isn't profitable as it's subsidised by the tax payer in the evening.

The 1 just duplicates the 22 between Howdon and Newcastle and offers nothing of value bar the one street. If the 22A was done like mentioned above and extended to Whitley Bay via the 1 route instead then there's loss of service at all. It's just reducing an over crowded corridor from 9 buses an hour to 6 buses, the Coast still has it's 3 buses an hour - it's basically just renumbering the 1 to 22A.

The 57/57A to Tynemouth via the 306 route (doesn't need to go further) wouldn't be the worst idea and would give links from up this way down the Coast which is a complete pain in the arse right now. I could see especially in the Summer it being quite popular for days out to the beach etc. I'd be tempted to say extend it to North Shields via the Fish Quay aswell and scrap the 19 going down there. Would give Tynemouth <> Fish Quay / Ferry <> North Shields links that don't exist.

Personally I'd terminate the 306 back at Tynemouth, replaced by the 57/57A. The 22A would be a corridor I'd also explore for a nightbus aswell since it duplicates the Metro and could be popular imo.