ECML franchise fails .... again....

[Coryton]

I suspect that this is why Virgin are able to sell their branding. From what I can observe, railway branding is generally a total failure. The “Big Four” are long since forgotten by the public; apart from the LNER having bright green locos called Flying Scotsman, and the Great Western having dark green locos and going to Dawlish, where they brave raging seas and crumbling seawalls like corvettes escorting Atlantic convoys, that’s pretty much the sum of popular recollection.

 

Stagecoach are hardly a name to conjure with, buses these days being mostly the transport-of-Choice of shouty teenagers, unemployed single mothers with huge collapsible baby buggies, and pensioners. The shiftworkers at the vast on-line warehouses out on the ringroad have no viable bus service. Tesco have a bus island, lost amid the vast carpark; most of the other supermarkets don’t. My daughter-in-law could travel to work by bus, working regular hours on a single route, but wouldn’t consider it. Oscar Wilde’s aphorism about “travelling on omnibuses after the age of thirty” seems to be widely demonstrated.

 

What’s left? Commuters seem mostly oblivious to the subtly changing kaleidoscope of generic names, applied to crowded trains in liveries reminiscent of soft drink cans, and nobody else cares at all. My son-in-law uses ECML daily and can’t name the franchise, although he DOES sometimes use the expression “WAGN train” as a generic term denoting “commuter multiple unit” despite the actual franchise of that name being long gone.

 

There is a general perception that the railways are propped up by the State, at public expense, so that French and German taxpayers might profit, and a select coterie of tax evaders might not be inconvenienced. The State in some little-understood way, controls the allocation of franchises, which appear to have little basis in commercial reality. Most people never encounter unions in their daily life, which appear to exist largely for the purpose of protecting someone else’s job by interfering with daily travel.

 

I wouldn’t want the job of selling the railways, in their present incarnation, to the public...

 

I think you'll find that the Southern "brand" is very well known by those who use their services - and probably quite a few who no longer do.

 

I've never been convinced by the saying "There's no such thing as bad publicity"

[caradoc]

Before I retired from the railway in 2016 we would still, occasionally, get calls from external agencies asking if we were British Rail, so at least one railway brand lives on in the public memory !

[rockershovel]

I think you'll find that the Southern "brand" is very well known by those who use their services - and probably quite a few who no longer do.

 

I've never been convinced by the saying "There's no such thing as bad publicity"

As someone else has already pointed out, railways are commoditised mass transport. Provide people with an essential service with no real alternative, at an affordable cost, and there’s your market, right there. Note that “affordable” isn’t a synonym for “attractive”; I grudged every penny I spent on commuting, but the alternatives were less attractive for a range of reasons, and I always found the money from income.

 

“Southern” is an interesting case, because the name goes back to pre-nationalisation days via BR Southern Region, as does the nature of the service provided - a (mostly) electrified mass commuter railway. I certainly agree that the more continuity, the better the recognition.

 

I suspect that the multiple brand-names on ECML have actually been counter-productive, in that there is the competition from an obviously superior service (Virgin HST) which within quite recent memory, was undifferentiated in cost and ticket availability. I rather suspect that the loss of goodwill among commuters resulting from the differentiation of the service, combined with failure to attract brand loyalty to the revolving door of franchise names and the well-publicised political and commercial problems of the successive franchises, are probably insoluble in marketing terms.

 

Once customer goodwill is lost, goodwill to management goes with it. Once customers perceive that they are being overcharged for an inferior service, then there is no goodwill for the idea that making a profit is acceptable. Add in the general belief that the railways were formerly nationalised - a vague, but easily envisaged concept - and there’s another dead horse available for flogging.

 

I could easily be persuaded that the underlying logic of the use of the Virgin branding and red livery, is to dissociate the long-distance High Speed Train operation and its users, from the irreconcilable discontent among the commuters, particularly the Peterborough and Huntingdon traffic.

Edited February 18, 2018 by rockershovel

[Coryton]

As someone else has already pointed out, railways are commoditised mass transport. Provide people with an essential service with no real alternative, at an affordable cost, and there’s your market, right there. Note that “affordable” isn’t a synonym for “attractive”; I grudged every penny I spent on commuting, but the alternatives were less attractive for a range of reasons, and I always found the money from income.

 

“Southern” is an interesting case, because the name goes back to pre-nationalisation days via BR Southern Region, as does the nature of the service provided - a (mostly) electrified mass commuter railway. I certainly agree that the more continuity, the better the recognition.

 

I wasn't thinking of people with long memories of the Southern Railway, I was thinking of the extent to which Southern has been in the headlines.

 

While no doubt there were some people complaining of "British Rail" going on strike there has been plenty of media coverage and the company name was widely used. I think just about everybody - no matter how much they might not normally pay attention - who uses their trains knows the company name now.

[rockershovel]

I wasn't thinking of people with long memories of the Southern Railway, I was thinking of the extent to which Southern has been in the headlines.

 

While no doubt there were some people complaining of "British Rail" going on strike there has been plenty of media coverage and the company name was widely used. I think just about everybody - no matter how much they might not normally pay attention - who uses their trains knows the company name now.

I wasn’t just thinking of the Southern Railway - didn’t BR also use the term “Southern Region” and keep the green livery?