"Real" Routemasters to retire?
That well known news source, the Steve Wright Show on Radio 2, has just said
that the Routemasters are going to be retired. Is that true? |
"Real" Routemasters to retire?
On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 16:55:28 -0000, "Graham Harrison"
wrote: Is that true? I believe the heritage 9 is going to cut costs, though I thought the 11 was staying. Neil -- Neil Williams. Use neil before the at to reply. |
"Real" Routemasters to retire?
|
"Real" Routemasters to retire?
On 14/02/2014 17:07, Neil Williams wrote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 16:55:28 -0000, "Graham Harrison" wrote: Is that true? I believe the heritage 9 is going to cut costs, though I thought the 11 was staying. Neil What about the 15? |
"Real" Routemasters to retire?
In article ,
(Paul Corfield) wrote: On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 16:25:43 -0600, wrote: Those are gross costs with no account of fare income? Yes but that's irrelevant in London as all the revenue goes to TfL. The bus network is subsidised to the tune of £440m per annum. There is no revenue apportionment to route level in London and 99% of revenue is collected off bus anyway. There is also disproportionate (relative to rail) use of concessions on the buses (child travel, income support, jobseekers discounts). I guess TfL could take a view as to the level of off bus revenue to be attributed to each route by analysing Oyster card data but I am not aware that it does this as any sort of routine activity. If it does do that analysis it has never published the data to show what routes might be "profitable". It was the intention many years ago that there would be route level apportionment of off bus ticketing and concessionary permit use when the government had prescribed a regime of Net Cost Contracting. The Mayor and TfL pretty quickly killed off that regime once they were responsible for the buses. Yes, I understand the network is far too complex to allocate revenue at all fully. I was only thinking of something cruder presumably gained from survey data, to tell TfL how much revenue is attracted by the RM routes. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
"Real" Routemasters to retire?
wrote:
In article , (Paul Corfield) wrote: On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 16:25:43 -0600, wrote: Those are gross costs with no account of fare income? Yes but that's irrelevant in London as all the revenue goes to TfL. The bus network is subsidised to the tune of £440m per annum. There is no revenue apportionment to route level in London and 99% of revenue is collected off bus anyway. There is also disproportionate (relative to rail) use of concessions on the buses (child travel, income support, jobseekers discounts). I guess TfL could take a view as to the level of off bus revenue to be attributed to each route by analysing Oyster card data but I am not aware that it does this as any sort of routine activity. If it does do that analysis it has never published the data to show what routes might be "profitable". It was the intention many years ago that there would be route level apportionment of off bus ticketing and concessionary permit use when the government had prescribed a regime of Net Cost Contracting. The Mayor and TfL pretty quickly killed off that regime once they were responsible for the buses. Yes, I understand the network is far too complex to allocate revenue at all fully. I was only thinking of something cruder presumably gained from survey data, to tell TfL how much revenue is attracted by the RM routes. Probably very little. Maybe better to contract a private tour company to run officially licensed RM tourist routes. |
"Real" Routemasters to retire?
In article
, (Recliner) wrote: wrote: In article , (Paul Corfield) wrote: On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 16:25:43 -0600, wrote: Those are gross costs with no account of fare income? Yes but that's irrelevant in London as all the revenue goes to TfL. The bus network is subsidised to the tune of £440m per annum. There is no revenue apportionment to route level in London and 99% of revenue is collected off bus anyway. There is also disproportionate (relative to rail) use of concessions on the buses (child travel, income support, jobseekers discounts). I guess TfL could take a view as to the level of off bus revenue to be attributed to each route by analysing Oyster card data but I am not aware that it does this as any sort of routine activity. If it does do that analysis it has never published the data to show what routes might be "profitable". It was the intention many years ago that there would be route level apportionment of off bus ticketing and concessionary permit use when the government had prescribed a regime of Net Cost Contracting. The Mayor and TfL pretty quickly killed off that regime once they were responsible for the buses. Yes, I understand the network is far too complex to allocate revenue at all fully. I was only thinking of something cruder presumably gained from survey data, to tell TfL how much revenue is attracted by the RM routes. Probably very little. Maybe better to contract a private tour company to run officially licensed RM tourist routes. At separate fares like the sightseeing tour buses? -- Colin Rosenstiel |
"Real" Routemasters to retire?
wrote:
In article , (Recliner) wrote: wrote: In article , (Paul Corfield) wrote: On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 16:25:43 -0600, wrote: Those are gross costs with no account of fare income? Yes but that's irrelevant in London as all the revenue goes to TfL. The bus network is subsidised to the tune of £440m per annum. There is no revenue apportionment to route level in London and 99% of revenue is collected off bus anyway. There is also disproportionate (relative to rail) use of concessions on the buses (child travel, income support, jobseekers discounts). I guess TfL could take a view as to the level of off bus revenue to be attributed to each route by analysing Oyster card data but I am not aware that it does this as any sort of routine activity. If it does do that analysis it has never published the data to show what routes might be "profitable". It was the intention many years ago that there would be route level apportionment of off bus ticketing and concessionary permit use when the government had prescribed a regime of Net Cost Contracting. The Mayor and TfL pretty quickly killed off that regime once they were responsible for the buses. Yes, I understand the network is far too complex to allocate revenue at all fully. I was only thinking of something cruder presumably gained from survey data, to tell TfL how much revenue is attracted by the RM routes. Probably very little. Maybe better to contract a private tour company to run officially licensed RM tourist routes. At separate fares like the sightseeing tour buses? Yes |
"Real" Routemasters to retire?
|
"Real" Routemasters to retire?
On Fri, 14 Feb 2014 21:21:50 +0000, "
wrote: What about the 15? Sorry, meant the 15. Neil -- Neil Williams. Use neil before the at to reply. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 03:01 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk