West Somerset Railway General Discussion

Thanks. That is better. Again, happy to be corrected if I've got my sums wrong or missed something obvious.

@16 days = 5018.81 per day
@62.5 = 80 family tickets
= 320 people
= 160 people per train average.

 

The recent situation on the SVR has been similar with loadings being at best "variable".

Having recently crewed on the WSR it is clear that there is a tidal element to individual train loadings but the WSR is not unique in that respect.

 

Some more rough maths assuming each train is 7 coaches long and seats 48 per coach, that's a loading of 160/336, so still less than half full on average. (Of course, this is oversimplified rough maths, and shouldn't be used as a final picture!)

 

Covid reductions in capacity?

I guess the bottomline is whether averaging approx 320 passengers per day in June are good passenger numbers and whether ticket income averaging £5018 per day is enough of a return.

 

This is true, Social Distancing was still a legal requirement in June...

 

Clearly the model of (market related) steaming fees is not sustainable long term without top up finance and/or free skilled labour.
But then heritage railways in general are not sustainable long term on the basis of just the farebox.

There are some things which would help though such as:
1. more volunteer support particularly of the skilled/experienced type. Unfortunately far from expanding this seems to be dwindling. Perhaps footplate "entitlement" should be more closely linked to served workshop time.
2. amalgamation of owning groups so that small fleets of similar locos can be operated. That reduces the effects of inflation where say 2 locos earnings can be immediately ploughed back into the overhaul of a third one. There is limited point in money being locked away "rotting" through the effects of inflation for up to 10 years in building society accounts as is perhaps inevitable for single loco owning groups.
3. concentrating on a fleet of like types where spares are common across classes reducing the stores costs and increasing availability. GW & BR std locos offer a distinct advantage here. One off new builds of lost obscure classes do not.
4. sharing of patterns for new parts & initiatives to batch produce items - again certain types as mentioned above have distinct advantages here.

There is already much friendly cooperation amongst owning groups, probably more than is realised.

 

The point of the original post was that should the appeal not thrive the published accounts did seem to leave room for further borrowing: I do take on board @The Dainton Banker 's comments on lending.

I'm not sure of the mechanics but a general charge to the bank doesn't in itself mean a company can't raise other loans against assets, viz.

Charge code 0101 0188 0005
Created 20 August 2019
Status Outstanding
Persons entitled Lloyds Bank PLC
Brief description All of the company's freehold and leasehold property, plant… [the "general lien over most, if not all, of the company's assets"]

Subsequently:
Charge code 0101 0188 0007
Created 30 September 2020
Status Outstanding
Persons entitled West Somerset Railway Association
(2 Mk 1s)

Also:
"Included in rolling stock are assets held under finance leases.." (notes 10 and 21 to the accounts, from memory £55k secured against a manor.)

FWIW I thought the PLC chairman's note was a good one, with the added comment that the PLC doesn't seem to be great at carrying a theme (messages that it mightn't survive to doing well in a short time).

Patrick

 

I agree, I thought it was a step change improvement in communications. But I disagree with your last brickbat. That isn't how I read it. I see the message as, June was good, but there is still a lot to do.
Ian C

 

I would really hope so... But seeing as the letter seems particularly to refer to the May/June period I'm still very concerned that any work was still needed on the compliance systems after the better part of a year long layoff from operations. It's down to that question of trust again I'm afraid.

 

If we want to see the survival of the WSR as an operating steam heritage railway - as most of us claim- then even if we have a mistrust for the current management, we ought to praise the fact that the line has managed to operate profitably last month, rather than immediately seek to criticise.
Yes, they probably ballsed 2020 by being pessimistic about the potential earnings available.
Yes, they are still some people who have done things we aren't happy about.
But still, I do want to see the WSR survive and thrive- so well done to ALL staff, volunteers, managers. Let's hope August brings even greater success

 

A fixed and floating charge (debenture) means that all assets are pledged to the Bank as security. The Bank can give permission for certain assets to be pledged to someone else as security against another debt. The problem with debt is that it has to be paid back (+interest normally) and can be 'called in' (ie repayment on demand) if the Bank considers it necessary - even if a loan is for a fixed term. Got to keep the Bank happy and make profits to service the debt!

 

That's very rough arithmetic, but I suspect that your answers are in the right ball-park. I enjoyed a couple of trips during June/July on BL to BA trains. From memory, I think these were 6-coach formations with 3 TSOs, SK, BSO & RMB, but someone may be able to correct me if that's not right. The open coaches were arranged with 4-seat bookings on one side and 2-seat bookings on the other side, so giving max 75% occupancy (i.e. 48 out of 64 TSO seats available for use). On the trains that I used, most but not all bays were in use. Many passengers left the train at WT rather than go on to BA.

The service has now been extended to DS with bus on to MH and involves 2 train-sets providing 3 return journeys. So additional passengers will be needed to cover the costs of the second train-set and of the bus operation.

 

I thought that JJP's statement was just pure "spin".

It might have had the right tone, for it's audience, but the gloss just doesn't doesn't wash. Sort of what I call "Noddy" grasp of accountancy.

 

I really don’t like to be negative, but why is it I feel the same way?
Anything coming out of Minehead I tend to take with a rather large pinch of salt.

 

Its the lack of trust, What should be good news, Will always be questioned, because, of the toxicity of those managing the railway, One minute, the railway is in dire financial need, then next, OH, we have found a large amount down one of the cushions, and things are not so bad, Its the mixed messaging,
As for the Audience, who is the Audience ? , is it people who might want to donate, or is it the faithful in whom eyes the board can do no wrong, again, the message seems to be, for donators, it's really dire, we need your money, and for the supporters , look we are really doing a good job, don't throw us off our lofty tower,
Or am i just Cynical? Again, its the structures that have evolved over time, that have lead to no accountability for those who control the railway, and the same can be said of the WSRHT, A far to cosy relationship with the PLC board, a lack or and frankly hostile reaction to change, where it threatens the clique as shown over the WSR 6 , or is it 4?
PS: I have just been informed that the letter was meant for Working Members and supporters only ,

 

Another thing at which the the Plc is poor IMHO, namely making clear the distribution target for its correspondence. I get stuff by e-mail where it is hard, if not impossible, to tell whether it is intended for shareholders and/or volunteers and/or public consumption. Given that it has appeared on wsr.org.uk then I would have assumed the latter.

 

That's the problem with the "donate or the railway will go under" approach as opposed to the "donate to make this particular project happen" one.

 

So who exactly are the select few that are classed as supporters?

 

The news item on wsr.org.uk was clearly titled "Letter to staff and volunteers" - the person who copied the body text of the news item omitted the title.

After gaining permission, and in the spirit of openness, I added the letter to wsr.org.uk for all to see and I'm sure most people understood its audience.

Given you know perfectly well where this letter was published (you quoted from it on NP long before it appeared on wsr.org.uk) , I'm sure you know exactly its original audience, so no need for you to make assumptions

The letter was not addressed to "supporters". Another NP error.

Steve
wsr.org.uk

 

Nope. I advised you that the letter was addressed to "staff and volunteers" - not your invented "working members and supporters only"

Steve
wsr.org.uk