(27 Feb 2025, 1:28 pm)Storx wrote ah no arguments on the hypocrisy point, I was just talking about the general point really.

Happy to be corrected though but aren't the franchises working the opposite way round though ie. the tax payer / LA pays the operator the run the buses and they take the fares rather than the opposite way around, which is less risky - basically how these tenders work anyway. I know there's reports that the franchising has cost £135m to setup in Manchester which is an awful lot of money and that's a few years ago aswell.

Personally I hate the tranche system where they buy depots and vehicles out, it's a horrid waste of money and would rather they do it the TFL way and force the operators to deal with that sort of stuff and do the tendering route by route. The vast majority of the North East has multiple operators in an area so there's enough competition around. I'm not sure what we're exactly gaining by franchising it out when we provide the fleet, depot, timetables, fare structure, branding and so on. What exactly are the private operators doing...? Not to mention it effectively puts all independents out of business.

There are a couple of ways of doing it. 

The way you've suggested, which seems flawed on so many levels. 

Or, the bidder pays to run the services in a specific area, keeping the fares. 
This seems to benefit both parties and is far less of a risk to the Taxpayer.
It also means we don't see subsidised routes and the network can be designed for the people who use them.

https://www.centreforcities.org/publicat.../#benefits

https://bidstats.uk/tenders/2024/W21/823198066