(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.