|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 14, 2017 17:54:04 GMT
The Big Lemon - they could run their Solar-powered Solos on the K1 through the Sunray Estate  ... or maybe they'd prefer the 462 to Limes Farm. I see what you did there lol. |
|
|
|
Post by Dillon95 on Aug 14, 2017 18:05:37 GMT
How about Nu Venture?
|
|
|
|
Post by sid on Aug 14, 2017 19:47:26 GMT
A bit too far I would think? |
|
|
|
Post by Dillon95 on Aug 14, 2017 21:09:16 GMT
A bit too far I would think? It's only half an hour down the M20 from TFL territory, I don't think it's too far fetched. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Aug 14, 2017 21:38:55 GMT
I wonder if they have sufficient financial standing to meet TfL's requirements to get on the contractor list. I'm not saying they're dodgy just that smaller operators reliant largely on council contracted work tend to work on thin margins and don't have millions in the bank. I also wonder if these smaller operators are geared up to run almost 18 hours a day, 7 days a week in almost all cases on the TfL network. Many of their existing CC services are off peak M-F and possibly Saturday and the entire staffing, maintenance and HQ set up will be centred on that. Ratcheting up to cover TfL work would most likely be a significant step change for smaller firms. Note how Sullivans only recently advertised for someone to run a mini I-Bus room for them as they took on more and more regular, non schools, TfL work. Choosing when to cover the step up in cost will make a big difference in what tenders are costed at and the likelihood of winning them for a small operator. The big boys have their overheads covered across a large portfolio of routes so taking on one route is unlikely to cause significant issues other than driver recruitment / retention. |
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Aug 15, 2017 0:04:53 GMT
A bit too far I would think? Ahhhhhh Sid, you let me get away with Southern Transit   Only put it as a laugh really, I know the chap that owns it and he is pretty passionate about London vehicles. Ideally they would be on the lookout for a route with a PVR of 3, so as to get 17386, 17400 and 17406 Tridents back out on the road (though they now have their old fleet numbers as TA386, TA400 and TA406 back again)......well, wishful thinking I suspect but for Stagecoach TA fans these are regularly used on the 3 route (Horsham - Shoreham www.southerntransit.co.uk/route-3.html ), and I joined (ex) 17406 on it's trip to the MOT centre a while back Interesting point snoggle about TfL liking a company with a good bit of financial backing, suppose it makes sense, give some fly-by-night a load of tender money and they disappear into the sun  , makes you realise Sullivan's have put a lot of hard work and done a lot of homework over the years, a lot of people don't take small operators *as* seriously as the big ones, but you've got to be doing something right to get into the TfL arena EDIT: If you click on that Southern Transit link you'll see a different TA - TA1 - but not the one at Brooklands......it's the Connex TA1 which has lived in Upper Beeding for a good while now...... |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 15, 2017 0:57:22 GMT
A bit too far I would think? Ahhhhhh Sid, you let me get away with Southern Transit Only put it as a laugh really, I know the chap that owns it and he is pretty passionate about London vehicles. Ideally they would be on the lookout for a route with a PVR of 3, so as to get 17386, 17400 and 17406 Tridents back out on the road (though they now have their old fleet numbers as TA386, TA400 and TA406 back again)......well, wishful thinking I suspect but for Stagecoach TA fans these are regularly used on the 3 route (Horsham - Shoreham www.southerntransit.co.uk/route-3.html ), and I joined (ex) 17406 on it's trip to the MOT centre a while back Interesting point snoggle about TfL liking a company with a good bit of financial backing, suppose it makes sense, give some fly-by-night a load of tender money and they disappear into the sun , makes you realise Sullivan's have put a lot of hard work and done a lot of homework over the years, a lot of people don't take small operators *as* seriously as the big ones, but you've got to be doing something right to get into the TfL arena EDIT: If you click on that Southern Transit link you'll see a different TA - TA1 - but not the one at Brooklands......it's the Connex TA1 which has lived in Upper Beeding for a good while now...... Is Connex TA1 still with them - always loved the fact it had similar blinds for Southern Transit's 3 to what it had for the 3 in South London  |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 15, 2017 0:59:12 GMT
I wonder if they have sufficient financial standing to meet TfL's requirements to get on the contractor list. I'm not saying they're dodgy just that smaller operators reliant largely on council contracted work tend to work on thin margins and don't have millions in the bank. I also wonder if these smaller operators are geared up to run almost 18 hours a day, 7 days a week in almost all cases on the TfL network. Many of their existing CC services are off peak M-F and possibly Saturday and the entire staffing, maintenance and HQ set up will be centred on that. Ratcheting up to cover TfL work would most likely be a significant step change for smaller firms. Note how Sullivans only recently advertised for someone to run a mini I-Bus room for them as they took on more and more regular, non schools, TfL work. Choosing when to cover the step up in cost will make a big difference in what tenders are costed at and the likelihood of winning them for a small operator. The big boys have their overheads covered across a large portfolio of routes so taking on one route is unlikely to cause significant issues other than driver recruitment / retention. This is why I think many of the suggestions made in this thread are very unlikely to ever get on the TfL preferred operator list bar the examples that are similar to Ensignbus. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Aug 15, 2017 9:48:01 GMT
Interesting point snoggle about TfL liking a company with a good bit of financial backing, suppose it makes sense, give some fly-by-night a load of tender money and they disappear into the sun , makes you realise Sullivan's have put a lot of hard work and done a lot of homework over the years, a lot of people don't take small operators *as* seriously as the big ones, but you've got to be doing something right to get into the TfL arena It's not about "fly by night" operators. It's more about most TfL work being on a scale that many small independents would be unfamiliar with and may genuinely struggle to resource. Who wants to be based in mid Kent and have light journeys back at 0100 in the morning and then have to get home after that? Obviously some people who drive for London operators do do that but that is their personal choice. However an operator based in mid Kent may really struggle to recruit reliable people who'd work those hours for presumably not a huge sum of money. The other factor is that if performance is poor then TfL will reduce contract payments. If the operation is run on thin margins and low capitalisation then a few periods of below par operation may cause real financial issues for an operator. I think I am right in saying that many of the operator failures in London have been the result of not being able to resource the operation properly leading to poor day to day running which then triggered financial problems or TfL cancelling contracts. And that was years ago when TfL's requirements were simpler and there was less to go wrong than there is today. Sullivans have seemingly taken a long and slow approach to taking on TfL work. They have had their own disappointments along the way with, IIRC, something of a "falling out" with TfL over the loss of the 383. As I have said before I think something has changed at Sullivans given the scale of TfL work they are now taking on but I am sure this has been properly considered. I'd not be surprised if there was something of a pause after the 299 to allow the operation to stabilise and get performance up to where it needs to be before anything else is taken on. We have had too many examples in the past of small operations expanding too fast and coming a cropper or being bought up by the big boys to reduce competition. I think Mr Sullivan knows his London Buses history. |
|
|
|
Post by Dillon95 on Aug 15, 2017 10:29:50 GMT
Southdown PSV is another one, maybe they could dip their toes in with Croydon or Sutton.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Aug 15, 2017 19:10:19 GMT
Is Connex TA1 still with them - always loved the fact it had similar blinds for Southern Transit's 3 to what it had for the 3 in South London Asked the question Mr. V and yes it is, and keeping the South London theme, I've been told AVL1 is there now too. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 15, 2017 19:29:46 GMT
Is Connex TA1 still with them - always loved the fact it had similar blinds for Southern Transit's 3 to what it had for the 3 in South London Asked the question Mr. V and yes it is, and keeping the South London theme, I've been told AVL1 is there now too. Nice one, thanks for that - AVL1 is another bus from my local area that they have. |
|
|
|
Post by RandomBusesGirl on Aug 15, 2017 19:39:39 GMT
Ahh, I'm late, but I see I'm not the only one who wants Ensigns to man up... In fact almost every time I see their bus I say, 'Ensign should just get their [three letters] to London'  Am I right in thinking Capital Citybus was linked to Ensigns back in the day before First made the grab for it? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2017 19:45:20 GMT
Ahh, I'm late, but I see I'm not the only one who wants Ensigns to man up... In fact almost every time I see their bus I say, 'Ensign should just get their [three letters] to London' Am I right in thinking Capital Citybus was linked to Ensigns back in the day before First made the grab for it? Yes - brief history from Wiki below Also as a result of deregulation, in the mid 1980s Ensignbus expanded into tendered London Buses work in East London. Starting with one or two routes, Ensignbus gained a network of routes, using several second hand vehicles and batches of new vehicles: 8 1989 built Alexander bodied Leyland Olympian double-deckers 5 1989 built Northern Counties bodied Leyland Olympian double-deckers 16 1988 built MCW Metrobus double-deckers[8] In July 1989, it purchased the business of Frontrunner South East from Stagecoach East Midlands with route 248 and 252.[9] In December 1990 Ensignbus sold its London tendered bus services to Hong Kong company Citybus with the Dagenham depot and 87 buses. It was rebranded as Ensign Citybus and then Capital Citybus.[10] Ensignbus briefly re-entered London tendered service[when?], taking over routes 324 and 348 from First Capital who had bought Capital Citybus. Routes 325 and 509 were later added. before once again selling its London services in December 1999, this time to Town & Country Buses.[2] |
|
|
|
Post by redexpress on Aug 15, 2017 20:31:27 GMT
Ahh, I'm late, but I see I'm not the only one who wants Ensigns to man up... In fact almost every time I see their bus I say, 'Ensign should just get their [three letters] to London' Am I right in thinking Capital Citybus was linked to Ensigns back in the day before First made the grab for it? Yes - brief history from Wiki below Also as a result of deregulation, in the mid 1980s Ensignbus expanded into tendered London Buses work in East London. Starting with one or two routes, Ensignbus gained a network of routes, using several second hand vehicles and batches of new vehicles: 8 1989 built Alexander bodied Leyland Olympian double-deckers 5 1989 built Northern Counties bodied Leyland Olympian double-deckers 16 1988 built MCW Metrobus double-deckers[8] In July 1989, it purchased the business of Frontrunner South East from Stagecoach East Midlands with route 248 and 252.[9] In December 1990 Ensignbus sold its London tendered bus services to Hong Kong company Citybus with the Dagenham depot and 87 buses. It was rebranded as Ensign Citybus and then Capital Citybus.[10] Ensignbus briefly re-entered London tendered service[when?], taking over routes 324 and 348 from First Capital who had bought Capital Citybus. Routes 325 and 509 were later added. before once again selling its London services in December 1999, this time to Town & Country Buses.[2] That last paragraph isn't quite correct - the routes mentioned were commercial, not tendered London ones. Ensign haven't run tendered London services (other than rail and emergency work) since they sold to Citybus back in 1990. |
|
... or maybe they'd prefer the 462 to Limes Farm.
, makes you realise Sullivan's have put a lot of hard work and done a lot of homework over the years, a lot of people don't take small operators *as* seriously as the big ones, but you've got to be doing something right to get into the TfL arena 
