(28 Jul 2014, 4:48 pm)NEBCD Malarkey wrote Would of been The Galleries Bus Station Manager/Supervisor, to be honest I thought the white was part of the Dashboard with the way it was positioned from a Distance when I took my Photo, Hadn't realized it was Paper with 37/73 on it, My Bad, I'll blame my poor eye sight and the fact I am still recovering from Eye Surgery.

I would never have noticed the sheet of paper either it was only because the driver got out of his seat at Concord and picked up the sheet of paper and swapped it with another sheet. I had to walk right up to the windscreen to read it, anyone waiting at a bus stop would have no chance of seeing the paper.

Surely Nexus have to take some responsibility for checking these companies have requirements

This is Compass allover again

And people wonder why folk are wary of QC

(28 Jul 2014, 3:46 pm)NEBCD Malarkey wrote They are a Taxi Company, probably don't have a clue about Operations as a Bus Company, hence the above, there just small fish in a massive pond in reality, while I hope they can turn things around with more New Vehicles coming in soon, whenever that maybe, but if continues to be like this then it'll backfire big style on GCT I think.

Just out of Curiosity how much would the fine be for a non compliant vehicle with a Destination Screen which doesn't work either.

They know exactly what they've bid for as they've won the tender and signed the contract. It's their responsibility to ensure a contractually compliant service is ran.

It's probably an idea to drop an email to customerservices@nexus.org.uk if you see any non-compliant workings. Nexus have to take some responsibility here and it's important that such figures are recorded.

(28 Jul 2014, 7:02 pm)aureolin wrote They know exactly what they've bid for as they've won the tender and signed the contract. It's their responsibility to ensure a contractually compliant service is ran.

It's probably an idea to drop an email to customerservices@nexus.org.uk if you see any non-compliant workings. Nexus have to take some responsibility here and it's important that such figures are recorded.

To be fair to GCT here, there's something flawed.

If I want a job done in my house I get quotes. But I don't award the job of repointing brickwork on my entire house to the company with 1 man and a mini grinder...its just common bloody sense

(28 Jul 2014, 8:37 pm)gtom wrote To be fair to GCT here, there's something flawed.

If I want a job done in my house I get quotes. But I don't award the job of repointing brickwork on my entire house to the company with 1 man and a mini grinder...its just common bloody sense

But at the same time, Nexus' hands are tied to an extent. Because the contract is of a value where it has to go through European procurement (i.e. via the OJEU), the "lowest cost" or "most economically advantageous tender" has to be chosen. In my view, the former is always going to be the one coming in to play, as the latter is open to massive interpretation. Stagecoach could provide an all singing dancing whistling service, but if it's going to cost them 1k more a month than GCT can provide for a basic (but compliant) service, then we all know who's going to get it.

That's my understanding anyway?

(28 Jul 2014, 8:41 pm)aureolin wrote But at the same time, Nexus' hands are tied to an extent. Because the contract is of a value where it has to go through European procurement (i.e. via the OJEU), the "lowest cost" or "most economically advantageous tender" has to be chosen. In my view, the former is always going to be the one coming in to play, as the latter is open to massive interpretation. Stagecoach could provide an all singing dancing whistling service, but if it's going to cost them 1k more a month than GCT can provide for a basic (but compliant) service, then we all know who's going to get it.

That's my understanding anyway?

Mine too, as common sense has no play here.

There is technically nothing to stop GCT bidding and winning the 21 contract if QCS appears....that is frankly terrifying

(28 Jul 2014, 8:43 pm)gtom wrote Mine too, as common sense has no play here.

There is technically nothing to stop GCT bidding and winning the 21 contract if QCS appears....that is frankly terrifying

Every 7-8 minutes between Newcastle and Chester-le-Street as a Bluebird only operation!

(28 Jul 2014, 8:43 pm)gtom wrote Mine too, as common sense has no play here.

There is technically nothing to stop GCT bidding and winning the 21 contract if QCS appears....that is frankly terrifying

Although the size of the contracts positively prevent that from happening you'd argue, because the operators would have to bid a hell of a lot for that size tender. I doubt any independents would sniff at them alone, unless they formed a 'coalition' as I think the QCS allows for.

I wonder if the value of the contract, exceeds the punishment?

So in theory, GCT and others still make a profit, despite the fines they incur.

(28 Jul 2014, 9:16 pm)Andreos Constantopolous wrote I wonder if the value of the contract, exceeds the punishment?

So in theory, GCT and others still make a profit, despite the fines they incur.

Depends how it's laid out I guess. A lot of government tenders are going down the lines of performance related bonuses, so the bidder would essentially look to them as a top up. Guess we won't know unless we had vision of the specific tenders.

There are ways and means these smaller firms can put in cheaper bids and win as many contracts as they like (providing they have a sufficient number of buses)... I think we're all aware of GCT's fleet of 20 licensed vehicles actually exceeding that number, and this is just for starters... I am positive the main course and dessert would be much more worrying.

Little unfair on the big boys really, especially when they're having to take some of these services on commercially because they don't want to lose them - likely to be making a loss in the process. I know I'm going to be alone in thinking the latter statement.


On a side note, do we think Nexus actually acknowledges all non compliant workings on their tendered services? They certainly haven't got eyes everywhere to see buses going around with the wrong destinations (or no destinations), and we've seen that data turned into official parties might not always be 100% accurate in recent weeks with regards to Arriva's Volvo B5LHs.

Nexus must acknowledge the issues if it gets bad. Purely basing that on Compass being booted off the 23 and the associated high level meetings

(28 Jul 2014, 9:25 pm)Dan wrote There are ways and means these smaller firms can put in cheaper bids and win as many contracts as they like (providing they have a sufficient number of buses)... I think we're all aware of GCT's fleet of 20 licensed vehicles actually exceeding that number, and this is just for starters... I am positive the main course and dessert would be much more worrying.

Little unfair on the big boys really, especially when they're having to take some of these services on commercially because they don't want to lose them - likely to be making a loss in the process. I know I'm going to be alone in thinking the latter statement.

I can honestly say I'm gutted that there'll be less champagne and caviar around the shareholders dinner tables this Xmas...

(28 Jul 2014, 9:31 pm)aureolin wrote I can honestly say I'm gutted that there'll be less champagne and caviar around the shareholders dinner tables this Xmas...

Or alternatively fewer new buses being purchased, less money going into new technology such as Wi-Fi etc...

Depends which way you look at it.

(28 Jul 2014, 9:38 pm)Dan wrote Or alternatively fewer new buses being purchased, less money going into new technology such as Wi-Fi etc...

Depends which way you look at it.

Or they could change the proportions slightly - so that whilst the caviar and champagne isn't as prevalent, the investment in customer perks are increased

(28 Jul 2014, 10:00 pm)Andreos Constantopolous wrote Or they could change the proportions slightly - so that whilst the caviar and champagne isn't as prevalent, the investment in customer perks are increased

After 100 new buses last year, I think some of us ought to re-assess our opinions about Go North East's shareholders! From where I'm standing, the shareholders certainly wouldn't have had much caviar and champagne last Christmas!

We all know there's going to be a continued flow of investment (into what is often high quality vehicles opposed to light-weight vehicles which don't deliver as good a passenger experience) over the next two years, amassing to quite a large amount of investment back into the company over a three-year period.

Commendable? I certainly think it is.

Clearly, this won't be able to continue if Go North East's profits aren't as high - and the same can be said about Arriva too, with regards to contracts (excluding SNE given that they largely avoid them, it seems..)

(28 Jul 2014, 10:04 pm)Dan wrote After 100 new buses last year, I think some of us ought to re-assess our opinions about Go North East's shareholders! From where I'm standing, the shareholders certainly wouldn't have had much caviar and champagne last Christmas!

We all know there's going to be a continued flow of investment (into what is often high quality vehicles opposed to light-weight vehicles which don't deliver as good a passenger experience) over the next two years, amassing to quite a large amount of investment back into the company over a three-year period.

Commendable? I certainly think it is.

Clearly, this won't be able to continue if Go North East's profits aren't as high - and the same can be said about Arriva too, with regards to contracts (excluding SNE given that they largely avoid them, it seems..)

Champagne flavoured caviar was possibly order of the day!
Money was spent replacing assets and because of the need to gain additional investment to pay for these purchases - dividends were not only greater than in years gone by, there were more shareholders to satisfy.
The money leaving the company to these shareholders generally increases year on year.

Investment in assets or customer perks, doesn't always increase.

http://www.go-ahead.com/ir/shareholderin...d_cal.aspx

Once you invite shareholders into a company, they naturally want their investment to increase year on year.
Sometimes, a company will need additional shareholders to help the company move onto the next level and help appease the first lot.
It gets to the stage, where the second lot need appeasing after things start to stagnate - so an additional batch are asked to come on board and the cycle continues.
In the meantime, passengers are asked to contribute that little bit more, year on year - based on the grounds fuel costs are increasing - yet overall profits continue to increase, revenue increases and fuel costs decrease (£1m less in 2015 compared to 2014 as it stands) and the (local anyway) fleet decreases in size.

I am not going to suggest some of us re-assess our opinions on Go ahead's shareholders.
I will leave it up to each individual to decide.

Although I fully expected the above (despite the anonymity, we can all read you like a book, Andreos!)... What was that about a positive being turned into a negative....?

When we get you saying something positive about one of the big three, we'll have to be taking screenshots just so we can keep looking back at the post so we don't lose our sanity until the same month next year when you might do it again!

(29 Jul 2014, 5:04 am)Dan wrote Although I fully expected the above (despite the anonymity, we can all read you like a book, Andreos!)... What was that about a positive being turned into a negative....?

When we get you saying something positive about one of the big three, we'll have to be taking screenshots just so we can keep looking back at the post so we don't lose our sanity until the same month next year when you might do it again!

Not sure where my negativity was like Daniel - just an explanation of how plc's work :s

I actually turned your negative into a positive if you read it again

(29 Jul 2014, 7:18 am)Andreos Constantopolous wrote Not sure where my negativity was like Daniel - just an explanation of how plc's work :s

I actually turned your negative into a positive if you read it again

The usual 'higher prices but lower fuel costs' statement was you being positive?

My only negative post was in response to aureolin, which suggested to retain the same amount of champagne and caviar for shareholders (or, as in your explanation, an increased amount), the company would not invest as much into new technology, as they're operating loss-making services commercially as a result of unfair bids put in by smaller firms..!

(28 Jul 2014, 10:31 pm)Andreos Constantopolous wrote Champagne flavoured caviar was possibly order of the day!
Money was spent replacing assets and because of the need to gain additional investment to pay for these purchases - dividends were not only greater than in years gone by, there were more shareholders to satisfy.
The money leaving the company to these shareholders generally increases year on year.

Investment in assets or customer perks, doesn't always increase.

http://www.go-ahead.com/ir/shareholderin...d_cal.aspx

Once you invite shareholders into a company, they naturally want their investment to increase year on year.
Sometimes, a company will need additional shareholders to help the company move onto the next level and help appease the first lot.
It gets to the stage, where the second lot need appeasing after things start to stagnate - so an additional batch are asked to come on board and the cycle continues.
In the meantime, passengers are asked to contribute that little bit more, year on year - based on the grounds fuel costs are increasing - yet overall profits continue to increase, revenue increases and fuel costs decrease (£1m less in 2015 compared to 2014 as it stands) and the (local anyway) fleet decreases in size.

I am not going to suggest some of us re-assess our opinions on Go ahead's shareholders.
I will leave it up to each individual to decide.

Ahh, ignorance is bliss, isn't it?

Many of the shareholders in the transport groups are pension funds - they need cash dividends to pay out pensions. And I don't know many caviar-eating, champagne-swilling pensioners - do you?

Dipping in to profits is like dipping into your grannies' purse when she's not looking, so you can have 50p for extra sweeties that you haven't earned.

But I'm sure Andreos knows best....

(29 Jul 2014, 7:24 am)Dan wrote The usual 'higher prices but lower fuel costs' statement was you being positive?

My only negative post was in response to aureolin, which suggested to retain the same amount of champagne and caviar for shareholders (or, as in your explanation, an increased amount), the company would not invest as much into new technology, as they're operating loss-making services commercially as a result of unfair bids put in by smaller firms..!

My comment was more sarcastic than anything. It wasn't intended to bring up a further debate about people's difference in views. It's healthy that we have such a wide range of views on here, but we shouldn't deem what are traditionally socialist (or Marxist) views, to be negative.

I didn't make any suggestion about reinvestment. That's an operational decision, and often depends on the rate of depreciation accounted for. The comment was more a 'Poor them. They've chosen to operate a service below their target profit margin'. Which it should be noted that Nexus didn't have them a gun to their head to force them to do so. It's a deregulated market and they can operate what they want to as things stand.

Local authorities (whether we agree or disagree) are expected to pick up the pieces where commercial operators can't run (what they deem not to be) a viable service. In this instance Nexus have done just that, and complied wiyh all relevant legislation when going out to tender. GCT in this instance have submitted either the lowest cost of most economically advantageous tender, and therefore won. That's the rules.

I think it's unfair to suggest that smaller firms have put unfair bids in. They'll have done what everyone else has done, and put in a bid (or quote if you like) based on what they can operate the service for. If others aren't competing with the bids of smaller firms, then they need to review their operation and make sure they're competitive in future. That's if they want to continue to go for government tenders that is. They may decide it's not for them.

There was a streetlite on 515/558.

Drove past Gateshead Central Taxis Yard on Stoneygate Lane in Felling. At a rough count there is around 15 to 20 vehicles parked in it this evening (Tues) at around 2140.

(29 Jul 2014, 5:18 pm)danpick wrote There was a streetlite on 515/558.

did you get the reg of it

(30 Jul 2014, 10:20 am)jaimz13 wrote did you get the reg of it

No sadly as it was from a distance in ASDA Boldon.

(29 Jul 2014, 8:07 am)eezypeazy wrote Ahh, ignorance is bliss, isn't it?

Many of the shareholders in the transport groups are pension funds - they need cash dividends to pay out pensions. And I don't know many caviar-eating, champagne-swilling pensioners - do you?

Dipping in to profits is like dipping into your grannies' purse when she's not looking, so you can have 50p for extra sweeties that you haven't earned.

But I'm sure Andreos knows best....

Have you been sniffing out the left wing posts again eezypeazy?

Of course, 'many' of the shares are owned by pension funds. You have mentioned that a few times now.
'Many' of the shares are also owned by individuals/families too.
Some of those are totally independent of the company, some are held by employees or the families of employees past.

All of the data, is available on the shareholder website (http://www.go-ahead.com/ir/shareholderin...lysis.aspx)
Whether you choose to look, read or acknowledge that is another thing - but the figures and percentages are all there in black and white.

Hey, if me looking, reading and acknowledging those facts make me right - well there you go!

(30 Jul 2014, 7:35 pm)AIG20 wrote The registration of this vehicle is "MX60 BXD".

Image below owned by "Richard Tiplady" of the Northern Road Transport Trust Facebook Group.

Previously with Stanley Travel up until about a Month ago.

SR Demo is on 37/73
Versa is on 558
Standard Solo also on 37/73

I Assume this will mean the Streetlite is on the 515

(31 Jul 2014, 10:54 am)NEBCD Malarkey wrote SR Demo is on 37/73
Versa is on 558
Standard Solo also on 37/73

I Assume this will mean the Streetlite is on the 515

515 & 558 interwork so you should see the Streetlite on both services.