|
|
Post by snoggle on Oct 25, 2017 10:17:16 GMT
Looks like Citymapper are delving into demand responsive services in St Albans with a CM81 service. www.intalink.org.uk/uploads/publications/1502.pdfOriginally due to start 6 November but delayed because the App needs some more development. Again with Impact Group responsible for the actual operation. |
|
|
|
Post by redexpress on Oct 25, 2017 12:52:39 GMT
Looks like Citymapper are delving into demand responsive services in St Albans with a CM81 service. www.intalink.org.uk/uploads/publications/1502.pdfOriginally due to start 6 November but delayed because the App needs some more development. Again with Impact Group responsible for the actual operation. Interesting that the area stretches all the way to London Colney. On that corridor they'll be in competition with Metroline's 84 and Uno's 602/658, who already provide 7bph between them. Citymapper will have more of an advantage away from the main bus corridors though - there are plenty of residential bits of St Albans that don't have a particularly frequent service. Running until 2300 also gives them a big advantage. Of course existing bus users are not necessarily Citymapper's main target - I suspect they're going more for the taxi / Uber market. I wonder how much resource they will need to provide adequate coverage. |
|
|
|
Post by stuckonthe486 on Feb 20, 2018 8:02:33 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 20, 2018 22:53:40 GMT
medium.com/citymapper/bad-bus-part-2-3-e22f8824d3b8They have now actually published their "part 2" which is basically a long whinge about nasty TfL (but not mentioned by name) enforcing regulations, slagging off how buses intrinsically work and have done for decades and moaning about the "backwardness" of bus operators. I have to say that I expected this sort of "tech b*ll*cks" from Citymapper who just want to have their own way and basically the consequences for everyone else can go hang. That is no way to run buses in London or anywhere else to be honest. Their criticism of other bus companies just says to me that they have no idea what is going on elsewhere in the UK where there is some genuinely good practice and innovation. They seem to believe all everyone wants is to press a button on an app and wait for a "magic carpet" bus to turn up to whisk people to whereever they want to go. Sorry but transport networks serving millions and millions of people do not and cannot work on that basis. Go and look at the utter chaos of unregulated "taxi based" buses in Russia, Africa, parts of SE Asia or South America and then come and persuade me that we want that in London. As I think everyone on here agrees things could be better in London on a wide range of hard (performance, bus speeds) and soft (bus design, comfort, extra on vehicle facilities) measures BUT London still has an affordable fare level, a comprehensive network that mostly runs early til late 7 days a week and which fits around other public transport services rather than ignoring them. Seems Citymapper are going to have another go at running something in London - we must wait for part 3 to see what that is and what challenges lie in waiting for TfL.
|
|
|
|
Post by ServerKing on Feb 20, 2018 23:12:30 GMT
medium.com/citymapper/bad-bus-part-2-3-e22f8824d3b8They have now actually published their "part 2" which is basically a long whinge about nasty TfL (but not mentioned by name) enforcing regulations, slagging off how buses intrinsically work and have done for decades and moaning about the "backwardness" of bus operators. I have to say that I expected this sort of "tech b*ll*cks" from Citymapper who just want to have their own way and basically the consequences for everyone else can go hang. That is no way to run buses in London or anywhere else to be honest. Their criticism of other bus companies just says to me that they have no idea what is going on elsewhere in the UK where there is some genuinely good practice and innovation. They seem to believe all everyone wants is to press a button on an app and wait for a "magic carpet" bus to turn up to whisk people to whereever they want to go. Sorry but transport networks serving millions and millions of people do not and cannot work on that basis. Go and look at the utter chaos of unregulated "taxi based" buses in Russia, Africa, parts of SE Asia or South America and then come and persuade me that we want that in London. As I think everyone on here agrees things could be better in London on a wide range of hard (performance, bus speeds) and soft (bus design, comfort, extra on vehicle facilities) measures BUT London still has an affordable fare level, a comprehensive network that mostly runs early til late 7 days a week and which fits around other public transport services rather than ignoring them. Seems Citymapper are going to have another go at running something in London - we must wait for part 3 to see what that is and what challenges lie in waiting for TfL. It is what they call in Ghana a "Tro-Tro", a minibus anyone can set up, no regulation that will go as quickly as it arrived. They shouldn't bite the hand that feeds them, cussing off TfL who granted them the licence for their "bus" isn't the best start. It is "Tech Bollox". I would rather a Mercedes to myself and call Addison Lee... a Sprinter van crammed with hipsters on acid of an evening sounds hell to me. You may even have to let several "real buses" go while waiting for one of their vans to turn up which is ironic  |
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Feb 20, 2018 23:21:26 GMT
medium.com/citymapper/bad-bus-part-2-3-e22f8824d3b8They have now actually published their "part 2" which is basically a long whinge about nasty TfL (but not mentioned by name) enforcing regulations, slagging off how buses intrinsically work and have done for decades and moaning about the "backwardness" of bus operators. I have to say that I expected this sort of "tech b*ll*cks" from Citymapper who just want to have their own way and basically the consequences for everyone else can go hang. That is no way to run buses in London or anywhere else to be honest. Their criticism of other bus companies just says to me that they have no idea what is going on elsewhere in the UK where there is some genuinely good practice and innovation. They seem to believe all everyone wants is to press a button on an app and wait for a "magic carpet" bus to turn up to whisk people to whereever they want to go. Sorry but transport networks serving millions and millions of people do not and cannot work on that basis. Go and look at the utter chaos of unregulated "taxi based" buses in Russia, Africa, parts of SE Asia or South America and then come and persuade me that we want that in London. As I think everyone on here agrees things could be better in London on a wide range of hard (performance, bus speeds) and soft (bus design, comfort, extra on vehicle facilities) measures BUT London still has an affordable fare level, a comprehensive network that mostly runs early til late 7 days a week and which fits around other public transport services rather than ignoring them. Seems Citymapper are going to have another go at running something in London - we must wait for part 3 to see what that is and what challenges lie in waiting for TfL. The over-matey blurb Citymapper use on the App Store when updating their increasingly bloated product makes my teeth itch. And if they think bus regulations were last updated in 1981, they need better lawyers. I look forward to their first chat with the Traffic Commissioners. That said, the boundaries between buses, taxis and private hire vehicles are now so blurred that some sort of reform is needed. But it will take a lot of skill to navigate through what's there already. It'll be interesting to see what they propose, and whether it's just another over-hyped dial-a-ride. Remember AMOS... |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 20, 2018 23:47:32 GMT
The over-matey blurb Citymapper use on the App Store when updating their increasingly bloated product makes my teeth itch. And if they think bus regulations were last updated in 1981, they need better lawyers. I look forward to their first chat with the Traffic Commissioners. That said, the boundaries between buses, taxis and private hire vehicles are now so blurred that some sort of reform is needed. But it will take a lot of skill to navigate through what's there already. It'll be interesting to see what they propose, and whether it's just another over-hyped dial-a-ride. Remember AMOS... Well the distinction is being deliberately blurred by insurgent businesses like Uber who have their own reasons (seeking a monopoly and the future profits that go with it) for taking the line they do and using decidedly dodgy tactics to undermine regulators across the world. The simple fact is that they cannot be allowed to win regardless of how many "bright young things" really *lurve* Uber. One day they might realise that regulations are more important than being able to get home at 3am after too many drugs and kebabs in Shoreditch (pardon my stereotyping). The problem with trying to shift regulations at the moment is that it will be like opening Pandora's Box and the tech insurgents will just use any debate about regulation as a way of spotting more gaps to design their next venture around. The only regulatory aspects that need sorting, and by that I mean tightening, is where public safety is demonstrably at risk from new entrants / new business models. To be honest I couldn't give a d*mn if Citymapper are a bit "upset" that their geewhizzy concepts have been halted by a regulatory brick wall or some bureaucracy. It is their responsibility to properly research the market into which they are entering and then learn to live within its confines and that includes any downside risk from not being able to snap your fingers to get a change agreed. To use some decidely selective statistics in their blog to basically write off their entire bus industry is an insult to people's intelligence but, of course, the gullible will swallow all that whole without taking pause and thinking the issues through. As you say there is little that is new here - lots of people have tried to dabble in the London bus market over many decades and few have managed to survive alongside the LU / LRT / TfL "monster". |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2018 6:32:40 GMT
If I was them, I would be looking in the suburbs and create a useful route as opposed to clinging to the hipster areas.
There are lots of places on fringes of London where they could trial demand responsive operations for example.
This sort of write up on the link contains some interesting points, but has been written up by a geek
|
|
|
|
Post by busman on Feb 21, 2018 12:36:36 GMT
I love innovation, but some of these tech firms come across as just being people who want instant gratification and throw their toys out of the pram if things don’t go their way. They seem to have a flagrant disregard for authority and it almost seems that they feel authority should serve their own interests rather than that of the communities, cities and countries they wish to operate in. CityMapper would like you to believe that they are only trying to help, but the cold hard facts are that they have analysed the market and think there is money to be made. They have investors to pay back and this is an opportunity for them. Regulations are a barrier to cheap entry and impose strict conditions on business. CityMapper won’t concede that regulations are primarily there to serve the public interest. It really irks me to see companies whinge like this in public. It really does nothing to build relations with regulators. Anyway rant over, the cat is out of the bag now, it’s a concept similar to BB1: www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/feb/21/citymapper-launches-bus-taxi-hybrid-smart-ride-london-transit-app“Exclusive: transit app firm says new service has stops like a bus, is bookable like a cab and runs on a network like a tube train“ The bull that some tech companies spout is laughable 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 |
|
|
|
Post by Green Kitten on Feb 21, 2018 15:30:26 GMT
Bit flawed how they're patting themselves on the back for how they spent less money on advertisement. Citymapper is a brand name in journey planners, most people I know know of the app and use it. If one opens up the app and there is a notification within the screen letting them know of the new service, some of these people might remember and try it out when they need to. If I opened up a bus company called Green Kitten buses and didn't promote the service through local bus stops and local advertising, I wouldn't get very far; I'd have to rely on word of mouth.
They run the service at a fraction of the cost of what a normal bus operator would. But this is a private company choosing where they want to operate, where they can avoid the problems a traditional company may need to face. Besides, they still needed Tower Transit for the timetabling and bus operations side of the project! 
The busmoji is cute enough but is it really that groundbreaking? You could just read the stop name which is pretty much the same thing.
I'm interested to see what they've thought of in part 3. I'll be more convinced if they focus on places other than hipster areas (and the city). It might be a party at night, but it's a different ballgame during the day. And as for minibuses - I've never seen a W4 full of happy people. 
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 22, 2018 0:29:26 GMT
I love innovation, but some of these tech firms come across as just being people who want instant gratification and throw their toys out of the pram if things don’t go their way. They seem to have a flagrant disregard for authority and it almost seems that they feel authority should serve their own interests rather than that of the communities, cities and countries they wish to operate in. CityMapper would like you to believe that they are only trying to help, but the cold hard facts are that they have analysed the market and think there is money to be made. They have investors to pay back and this is an opportunity for them. Regulations are a barrier to cheap entry and impose strict conditions on business. CityMapper won’t concede that regulations are primarily there to serve the public interest. It really irks me to see companies whinge like this in public. It really does nothing to build relations with regulators. Anyway rant over, the cat is out of the bag now, it’s a concept similar to BB1: www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/feb/21/citymapper-launches-bus-taxi-hybrid-smart-ride-london-transit-app“Exclusive: transit app firm says new service has stops like a bus, is bookable like a cab and runs on a network like a tube train“ The bull that some tech companies spout is laughable 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 I agree with you about their language and also their intentions. Have to say their "new" concept is of no interest to me and I suspect they are seriously underestimating how some parts of London will react to small minibuses running unpredictably down "roads that normal buses can't fit down". TfL knows all too well what happens - can't wait for Citymapper to have similar encounters with the angry mobs in posh parts of inner London and tranquil bits of suburbia that only want *their* cars on *their* streets. Here's hoping they incur the wrath of Hampstead and Highgate - they won't have a clue what's hit them.  |
|
|
|
Post by stuckonthe486 on Feb 22, 2018 1:04:00 GMT
"runs on a network like a tube train"
some hacks really are as thick as mince.
|
|
|
|
Post by ServerKing on Feb 22, 2018 5:07:36 GMT
The over-matey blurb Citymapper use on the App Store when updating their increasingly bloated product makes my teeth itch. And if they think bus regulations were last updated in 1981, they need better lawyers. I look forward to their first chat with the Traffic Commissioners. That said, the boundaries between buses, taxis and private hire vehicles are now so blurred that some sort of reform is needed. But it will take a lot of skill to navigate through what's there already. It'll be interesting to see what they propose, and whether it's just another over-hyped dial-a-ride. Remember AMOS... Well the distinction is being deliberately blurred by insurgent businesses like Uber who have their own reasons (seeking a monopoly and the future profits that go with it) for taking the line they do and using decidedly dodgy tactics to undermine regulators across the world. The simple fact is that they cannot be allowed to win regardless of how many "bright young things" really *lurve* Uber. One day they might realise that regulations are more important than being able to get home at 3am after too many drugs and kebabs in Shoreditch How dare you! We don't have kebab shops in Shoreditch. It's Authentic Street Food  Last week TfL were again under scruitiny for allowing another cycle scheme to pop up wherever they like in West London. I think it's called MoBike. Greyish bikes with orange spokes. Its the manner they litter the pavements. I think TfL are giving away licenses like candy and every start up is given a chance without proper consideration. We don't have the organization or stability of the previous Mayors. If Citymapper start using regular buses it's going to get quite messy. Is this the beginnings of deregulation as the cupboard is bare? |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Feb 22, 2018 5:29:29 GMT
"runs on a network like a tube train" some hacks really are as thick as mince. Really? The quote appears to have come from the company. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 22, 2018 8:58:34 GMT
Last week TfL were again under scruitiny for allowing another cycle scheme to pop up wherever they like in West London. I think it's called MoBike. Greyish bikes with orange spokes. Its the manner they litter the pavements. I think TfL are giving away licenses like candy and every start up is given a chance without proper consideration. We don't have the organization or stability of the previous Mayors. If Citymapper start using regular buses it's going to get quite messy. Is this the beginnings of deregulation as the cupboard is bare? These cycle hire schemes are not the responsibility of TfL as I understand it. They are subject to control by individual borough councils - we have one in Waltham Forest at the moment. Of course some operators have just dumped bikes on pavements without even asking which has caused significant problems. I think Citymapper would love deregulation to some extent *but* they also don't like all the other regulations about buses themselves and all the management overhead. They want no distinctions between private hire, minibuses and larger buses so they can do what they like at minimum cost and minimum overhead. The other implication is, of course, minimal safety related costs and minimal control over their impact on the road network and congestion. As I said before it's a great big "wah wah wah, nasty regulator, stomp stomp we want our own way and we want it now" from Citymapper. That just makes them pathetic in my view. If they are allowed to "run wild" then it's just Uber in another form and the main bus service just gets screwed even more from congestion problems. |
|
