(11 Dec 2021, 8:50 am)Andreos1 wrote Because it's about the passengers perhaps?
Unsure of the difference in promoting non-GNE services to/from Team Valley, but not this or the 86.
I was quite impressed at the work done to include mention of secured services off the Valley (93/94 timetable I think. Can't see why it wouldn't be the case here. Historic or not.
Surely it’s down to Arriva to promote the evening journeys on the 86, in the same way that Go North East promote the evening journeys operated by Gateshead Central Taxis on their daytime services?
I disagree with Go North East being the responsible party for promoting connections to Sedgefield on a service they no longer operate - because they no longer wished to operate it - which also sat completely outside of the main network, and was used by incredibly few people. Again this feels more like an area usually served by Arriva, who would be best promoting this service, if not of course the County Council who procured the service in the first instance.
Agree it was a huge positive for Go North East to further promote services they do not operate to Team Valley - but the huge difference with Team Valley is that the 93/94 are the only services to run through there during the day, and the 92 (for example, whose timetable is included in this guide) operates through areas which are predominantly served by Go North East buses during the day.
It’s also a huge positive to see printed material for services like the 33/33A, and indeed most of the services in areas such as Peterlee and Hexham, where the services are not commercially operated and despite the time, effort and cost of this printed material not being factored into Go North East’s original bid price. I suspect most operators (and businesses in general) wouldn’t incur cost they really don’t need to incur.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk