RMweb Gold chris p bacon Posted August 31, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 31, 2012 I seem to remember back in the 80's when the TV franchises were let that SRB threatened or started legal action as Virgin were not given one, then when he lost the lotto bid he threatened litigation again, He did mange to get lots of Joe public on his side by trotting out the "it's for charity" spiel while ignoring the fact that Camelots bid was cheaper to operate than Virgins. Personally I blame Mike Oldfield for SRB if Tubular Bells hadn't sold so well i don't think we would have to suffer him...... Just a thought.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BB17005 Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 I suppose if SRB is really unhappy he could take his Pendolinos, fit wings to them and use them on the propsed Manchester/Heathrow route I'm sure he would if he could . They are owned by Angel Trains , a ROSCO formerly owned by RBS.All he ever did was pay leasing costs for them. The public seem to have an idea that he put in the investment, simply not true.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold chris p bacon Posted August 31, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 31, 2012 I suppose if SRB is really unhappy he could take his Pendolinos, fit wings to them and use them on the propsed Manchester/Heathrow route So much for all his "Virgin is an Eco company" clap trap, when it proposes internal short distance flights. Considering how long it takes to get flight slots at Heathrow, Virgin either planned this long ago in direct competition to their own possible succesfull bid, or he's talking knee jerk c**p as a bad loser...........I know what I think.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmsforever Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 It looks increasingly that the Virgin brand has become waffle and petulance at the loss of the WCML lets see what First are proposing ,I for one will apreciate their catering if it is the same as GW and if times are cut ,all the better .The line north of the border always seems to be noted for lack of trains,there seems a possibility of new services from northern towns to Scotland as freight only comes out to play at night they would not be a problem.Also everytime I go north the M74 always looks empty of traffic and yet Scottish MSP,s constantly demand more links to the rest of the nation.Perhaps First will get Alstom to stop the loo,s ponging and also stop the luggage racks ratteling ,the interiors really need to be refreshed urgently as they look dingy now.As for liveries,a srikingly dynamic one will emphasise a new begining and an improvement over an increasingly dated one.One last thing I have noted is that Virgin is increasingly a name on a product now and not a substancial company so maybe First could offer Beardie a deal with his name on the trains for a nice fat fee,all his fans would be happy then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 Considering how long it takes to get flight slots at Heathrow, Virgin either planned this long ago in direct competition to their own possible succesfull bid.......... As already pointed out earlier in this thread, these flights (by an entirely different company who happen to share the Virgin branding) are absolutely nothing to do with the WCML, losing the bid or competition for the WCML rail service. They were known about as far back as April or May this year. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xerces Fobe2 Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 I seem to remember back in the 80's when the TV franchises were let that SRB threatened or started legal action as Virgin were not given one, then when he lost the lotto bid he threatened litigation again, He did mange to get lots of Joe public on his side by trotting out the "it's for charity" spiel while ignoring the fact that Camelots bid was cheaper to operate than Virgins. .. Just a thought.. The TV franchises was another Government inspired blundering success - with Carlton getting nearly all of them either directly or by acquisition of the incumbent franchise holder. I think we might well see first attempt to do the same thing with the railways although at might take them a long time to achieve, Think of that - the ticket gates of hell on every station from Wick - Penzance and sardines in every train! XF Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted August 31, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 31, 2012 /i saw this tonight and for some reason it seem symbolic of SRB - full of hot air. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted August 31, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 31, 2012 /i saw this tonight and for some reason it seem symbolic of SRB - full of hot air. You're lucky - there's one of those in that livery to be seen quite often round here and flying rather low when there isn't the right kind of ambient air temperature for it to get enough lift. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Bus Driver Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 Privytisation is not a typo when I use it - it means exactly what it says! Some of the comments now are interesting firstly the implication that TUPE will protect staff - well all it does it get them across to the new owner with the same conditions as they had under the previous owner, and that's your lot. After that the new owner can do exactly what almost every new franchisee has done up to now and alter the conditions of service, issue new contracts (almost invariably on a 'take it or leave' basis), and otherwise carry on as they see fit. This is no different from - for example - the way Virgin behaved when they got the WCML franchise; in this respect they're no more knights in shining armour than some of the others and they were definitely worse than some of the others. Having had some experience of Virgin's rail interests I must admit to having a fairly low opinion of them 'inside the fence' - the bearded one is all bread & circus, the only difficulty being that far too many people 'outside the fence' believe him to be something else. For those who haven't been through it changes of ownership invariably means change, invariably means cost-cutting, and invariably means getting used to new bosses and their ways - some of which can be very unsettling. This can happen almost every time a franchise is altered or re-let and while we had almost annual reorganisations on BR at least the Conditions of Service were relatively stable. Cramming in seats is not necessarily franchisee policy but is driven by DafT and a penny pinching Treasury. It may well be done in different ways - and some of them are abysmal but don't overlook who is behind it all. I'm not at all sure about First getting the WCML franchise and I think Beast has summed it up admirably - 'time will tell', one way or t'other. The only thing you can guarantee is that yet again the 'design' firms and paint and vinyl manufacturers are likely to be the biggest beneficiaries. The beardy one just sells his name. The rest of it is Slavecoach, who run the actual trains and supply the staff. They just wear Virgin uniforms on board a Virgin liveried train. The one who probably provided most of the business idea was most likely Sir Soapy... Working in the bus industry if I see the word "First" I tend to back away and maintain eye contact until I'm safely out the door. Grabbing holy water and a stake and mallet on my way there. Terrible company. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted August 31, 2012 Share Posted August 31, 2012 "Meet the new Boss; Same as the old Boss" Best, Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xerces Fobe2 Posted September 1, 2012 Share Posted September 1, 2012 "Meet the new Boss; Same as the old Boss" Best, Pete. The Government will get fooled again! XF Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted September 1, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 1, 2012 Im familiar with that concept Pete, I managed to work for 5 "different" TOCs in 4 years - and I only moved the once! Quite common alas - my last 'big railway' employer went through more changes of ownership/company structure than I could count although it made almost no difference to the job until the last lot got their feet firmly under the table. After I departed that scene I went to work on an occasional basis for signal engineering company which only underwent one change of ownership and two changes of organisational structure in my 5 years with them (and I clocked up a second pension albeit not a large one by any measure but who cares if all it does is pay the car tax. But some of the people I worked with in that set-up had worked for even more 'owners' than you Mickey - just by sitting in the same desk for about 8 years and they all finished up almost back where they started when NR took them over an additional in-house design office . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold TheSignalEngineer Posted September 1, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 1, 2012 Speaking with one of my former colleagues recently, after going from BR through several different firms and ending with NR, his part of that company is apparently being set up as a "Business Unit". He said the briefing to staff was from the same scriptwriter as one he heard in BR about 20 years ago. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eggesford box Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 A cheap jibe I know and not to be taken as part of the serious discussion on the franchise, but... I did have to smile last night watching a rerun of Mock the Week when Frankie Boyle commented , 'can you have faith in a man who tries to fly around the world in a hot air balloon when he owns an airline!' Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmsforever Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 In the Mail today ,First told to ignore Virgin and get on with planning their services etc ,sanity seems to be returning court judgement on Weds so we will see plenty of Beardie that day. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted September 2, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 2, 2012 In the Mail today ,First told to ignore Virgin and get on with planning their services etc ,sanity seems to be returning court judgement on Weds so we will see plenty of Beardie that day. Ah - fits in nicely with the first day of a week away from the 'net, limited access to the daily 'papers (if any), and quite possibly little or no tv reception. Exactly what the doctor ordered if that bloke is going to be blathering around the media and revving up his accolytes and disciples. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete_mcfarlane Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 I found this on the Telegraph's website. It gives some details of Virgin's legal claim - what they are claiming in court seems to be substantially different from the arguments that the Branson PR machine have been using in the press. The legal case seems to be based on the Government allegedly using different criteria to assess the two bids. It argues that Ms Greening unfairly “assessed FirstGroup’s bid by reference to a much less exacting standard of risk-mitigation... and has done so without any explanation or justification”. Virgin Rail also points out that since Ms Greening announced her decision on Aug 15, she has “repeatedly” refused to answer its questions on why it lost a bid that cost the company £14m. I'm not sure how the second point is relevant to the actual contract decision. As for the £14m, well tough. They entered the bidding process knowing that it was non-refundable if they lost. I predict that Virgin, will lose. And then appeal. And appeal again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted September 2, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 2, 2012 I found this on the Telegraph's website. It gives some details of Virgin's legal claim - what they are claiming in court seems to be substantially different from the arguments that the Branson PR machine have been using in the press. The legal case seems to be based on the Government allegedly using different criteria to assess the two bids. I'm not sure how the second point is relevant to the actual contract decision. As for the £14m, well tough. They entered the bidding process knowing that it was non-refundable if they lost. I predict that Virgin, will lose. And then appeal. And appeal again. What they are claiming also seems to be rather different from what is set out in the procurement process as published by DfT in May last year - surely what they should be seeking to dispute, if anything, is non-compliance with that process (to which they presumably signed-up as they knew their bid would be judged in accordance with it)? http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/intercity-west-coast-franchise/draft-invitation-to-tender-railway-franchise-procurement-process.pdf Of course they might well be claiming something else because they know they won't win on an issue of non-compliance? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xerces Fobe2 Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 I read that first group is currently somewhat financially stretched and as much as i do not like Beardies whinging, he might be correct, in that we may see another National Express ECML type scenario. If this does come to pass I think that this will spell the death of the currently ludicrous franchising process, with luck! XF Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frobisher Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 I predict that Virgin, will lose. And then appeal. And appeal again. Because of course the legal system works like that... not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Bus Driver Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 I read that first group is currently somewhat financially stretched and as much as i do not like Beardies whinging, he might be correct, in that we may see another National Express ECML type scenario. If this does come to pass I think that this will spell the death of the currently ludicrous franchising process, with luck! XF I'd agree, and I would go so far as to say that if Worst do get the franchise and all the reviews and appeals say it's right and they do screw it up, then Beardy will have the right to say "I told you so" to Justine Greening and the DaFT in general Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmsforever Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 As usual the lawyers will make a fortune and DAFT will be ignoring everyone as usual,who actualy is in charge of DAFT it cant be head of hockey Greening? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete_mcfarlane Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 What they are claiming also seems to be rather different from what is set out in the procurement process as published by DfT in May last year - surely what they should be seeking to dispute, if anything, is non-compliance with that process (to which they presumably signed-up as they knew their bid would be judged in accordance with it)? http://assets.dft.go...ent-process.pdf Of course they might well be claiming something else because they know they won't win on an issue of non-compliance? Paragraph 39 around commercial confidentiality is interesting. The intention is presumably to stop the kind of lobbying that Branson has undertaken over the last two weeks. The stuff on risk is in paragraph 23 - which states that the DfT will assess the risk of the bidder not delivering, and disqualify the bidder or seek further guaranties if it looks too risky. However there's nothing in there to say that they'll pick the bid with the lowest risk, or assess risk in different ways for different bids. The section on seeking extra guarantees may explain what is going on with First's bid. It looks like a mechanism to allow the DfT to pick a financially risky bid if it looks like it may deliver the best value, but with some extra guarantees in place to "reduce the risk on public finances to an acceptable level". Did somebody mention in a previous post that First's bond is a lot bigger than Virgin's? Perhaps this explains why. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xerces Fobe2 Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Justine Greening less than a years experience in transport affairs - I bet the majority ot RMweb members are far more clued up than she is on railways! The privatisation of the UK railways is ongoing disaster with no end in sight with an endless cast of incompetent and inexperienced people running the show - Why not get Modern Railway Magazine team to run it Roger Ford and Alan Williams would shake things up! XF Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jjb1970 Posted September 2, 2012 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 2, 2012 I think everybody here knows that the Secretary of State is a figure head for the civil servants who do the real work (destruction), they may take big policy decisions and question recommendations but does anybody think Justine Greening reviews rail franchise bids? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.