(21 Nov 2019, 7:58 pm)Andreos1 wrote Have your 'friends' who studied business or accounting worked out how much they're currently subsidising these private operators through their tax contributions?
Whether it be though PTE subsidies or the BSOG (and other) uplifts or support towards apps, ticket machines, WiFi which the operators are receiving, they're paying for the service whether they use it or not. 
If they do use the service, then in effect they're paying twice. 
That ticket you mention suddenly doesn't look at attractive does it? 

I've no idea how and why you think that an alternative wouldn't have any of the touches you mention either. 
Why wouldn't they?

Considering these subsidies/grants you mention are considerably less than the operating cost of a bus company, they're paying considerably less through their tax contributions than if it were nationalised.

Now granted if it were nationalised the profits would then go back to the government rather than to the shareholders, reducing the affect those subsidies have overall, but then you have to consider the fact that there would be no more income from any passengers under the age of 25 which would drastically reduce turnover. 

If you look at most of the routes that have the high spec buses (21, X21, 309/310, X9/X10), what is one thing they all have in common? Competition
If the bus companies were nationalised, do you honestly believe that they would spend the extra to buy high spec buses because I don't! The reason these routes have high spec buses is to try and 'steal' passengers from competing services, and why would they do that when all services are run by the same 'company'?