North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

If you have read all my posts (or even some of them!) I think you will conclude that I'm not one of those advocating no change in the way the NYMR does things, although I'm frequently accused of it by "someone" in his posts! It is not the case aat all, and nor do I wish to advocate the NYMR metamorphosing into a theme park. At present, a lot of its customers park their cars and buy tickets at Pickering, take the train to Whitby, spend the day there and then ride the train back to Pickering in the evening. How can that not be defined as using the railway as a Park and ride venue, and to what extent are they benefitting from the Trust's charitable aims? If those charitable aims were "to provide a train ride on aging carriages that one can see in virtually any county in the UK, pulled by engines that are also fairly ubiquitous" then yes it is succeeding admirably, but imho as the aims are phrased in wider terms we should then be offering rather more in experiences for most visitors. We cannot persuade people to break their journeys at intermediate stations, but we really should be persuading them to do so by offering a two-day ticket so that they can do a second visit in a different way, as well as making that visit more attractive with additional offering across the range of interests for a family. For example, when the sale of Carters Steam Fair was announced a few years ago, I suggested applying to the HLF to buy it for the NYMR we have the staff to maintain it and I'm sure a home could have been found for it, but that's just an idea and I'm sure there are plenty of alternatives. As we're now big on conservation at the NYMR, it seems, how about a crayfish hatchery to repopulate local streams and rivers, that people to visit and learn from? How about a Birds of Prey or Owl sanctuary on site? I don't think there are any local ones (though someone will now pop up and prove me wrong, but if that's the case the NYMR's visitor numbers should make any existing ones keen to work in collaboration with the railway) The possibilities are endless but need someone with the imagination vision to develop them. Heritage (or preserved, if you prefer!) railways have limited appeal to families as they stand, we really need to broaden that appeal.

 

I didn’t have you in mind as not wanting any change. You would fall into the majority category I was describing. That if we need to develop, now where’s the direction. I agree with you that there are managements that display very little imagination or drive. There are boards that look entirely to those managers for strategy, having appointed managers not leaders.

 

As a child, I remember visiting Buckfastleigh when the butterfly farm was there. Others views will differ, but my memories are that it leaned the railway towards "theme park" - even as it also helped with diversification and appealing to a wider audience.

Beamish has often been raised in discussion as an example of good museum/attraction practice. I'd suggest that one of the key features of Beamish is that it is absolutely clear about what it is for, and sets its activities with those purposes very firmly in mind. That means that people visit Beamish because its a museum, not despite being one.

I'd suggest that the answer to the challenge of how you interest people in more than a ride behind a steam engine to the seaside (and, bluntly, that's a large part of how NYMR do fill those trains because otherwise people would save 3 hours and £40/head by driving direct to Whitby) lies in gently embracing the history of the railway and it's rolling stock, including that of the Mk1s. Like most heritage railways, my experience is not that there's a problem getting the horse to drink, but that the horse has to want to look for the heritage in the first place.

 

This is an old argument. One of the dictionary definitions of 'preservation' is "maintain (something) in its original or existing state". So in many ways it is quite the opposite of dynamic, as to make use of it is to add wear and tear and therefore not going to keep it in it's current condition. Restoring something so that you can wear it out again is certainly not 'preserving' it. Hence most organisations and people started using the term 'heritage'.

 

I have always listed suggestions and ideas rather than demands! I do think though, that with the railway looking to emphasise its conservation aspirations there is scope there for educational displays with local relevance in that category. If tastefully done I don't think they would come across as theme park-ish. I also think that "working museum" displays combined with a craft centre could be successful if arrange somewhat like Beamish, rather than a cloned copy.

It's always going to be difficult to engage people on a train with much more than their immediate surroundings if they don't actually get off it between the termini, so the challenge is really to induce them to do that, and as it is going to be difficult to do that during their planned trip to the seaside, we really need to persuade them to return for a second visit to come and explore more, perhaps at a discount for the return visit.

To me, the real problem is that the SMT at the NYMR don't show any signs of having listened to anything that they are being told or having suggested to them, much less any positive exploratory action on anything suggested.

 

There is not a railway in the country that does a good job of placing itself in context and providing a window to the past in the way that Beamish, Blists Hill or the Black Country Museums do. This is (to me) both a great shame and a potential opportunity.

 

The selling the railway as a visitor attraction in itself and encouraging secondary spend in its shops and catering also becomes more difficult when the timetable is reduced ,especially on diner days .
Who would want to spend more than an hour looking around Goathland or Pickering stations before continuing their journey for example .
Then there’s the lack of secondary spend from walkers if one way tickets not being sold .

 

God, so do I… there was an out of control child trying to stamp on the flutterbyes… it was traumatic.

 

I think secondary spend, though welcome, is far from a panacea. Especially at NYMR where alternative venues are plentiful.

 

https://kesr.org.uk/behind-the-scenes-experience/

15 dates at present, £160 per person, looks like 7 places available per day. £16,800 potential income and the only real outlay is the food for lunch. If they all sell out that's a decent 5 figure sum for very little effort, and a good way of filling seats on quieter services.

 

Hence why the repeat visits ticket was such a no brainer when for many the only secondary spend was Pickering car park (if used it ).
Beamish etc tie you in for the day re pub ,ice creams ,food etc ..

 

Secondary spend is always a tricky issue, especially in places like Pickering where the NYMR's offering is limited in capacity and there are numerous alternatives (although the fact that they seem to thrive makes it odd that the NYMR'could not do the same with its Mulberries facility and a fairly captive audience!). That's why I favour the idea of strengthening Grosmont's attraction as a visitor destination by developing the rear of the shed site (the Bellwood Centre proposed location) and trying to make it into an attraction in its own right with a decent-sized cafe where there are little or no alternatives! What the NYMR doesn't seem to have at present is a development plan for anything but workshops, even though it has the land at the New Bridge pig farm site for workshop developments. Discussions, thoughts and ideas for developments cost little or nothing till one tries to build them - what's stopping those starting now?

 

Every little does help and yes an almost "free £16k or more is not to be sniffed at. But it is aimed very much at the enthusiast it seems, so may not meet the desire to get of the general public there. It even uses the words
"Do you know a Heritage Railway enthusiast?"

 

I agree, but would caution that care needs to be taken to identify what is the locomotive, and what the tender. Otherwise, you risk getting a Leader - an awful lot of heat, but not necessarily much motion.

 

I've been quiet for a day or so. A 400 mile road trip up the NYMR does somewhat restrict use of key board! I'd agree that the opportunity is to emulate the recreation of a way of life. It's all to easy to focus on thre physical stuff but for both visitors and volunteers a focus on preserving a way of life that would otherwise have disappeared is clearly beneficial. There are limits. A world in which a railway can face six figure liabilities for a fall from height, despite haviong safety systems in place, of for distress caused to a vistor with a protected characteristic because of a stupid remark made be an employee or volunteer, is far removed from life as it used to be. Perhaps it flags up a critical feature which is the by and large heritage railway leadership will be focussed on ensuring the financial viablity of the business, whether it's company or a charity. Indeed that is the primary duty of directors and trustees. On the other hand the members and volunteers tend to take financial suvival for granted and are more interested in preserving a vibrant busy railway on which they can enjoy their hobby as part of a community of like minded people . As already highlighted its vital that leadership doesn't concentrate solely on the securing the financial future of the railway. It must remember the need to nurture that community spirit as well. Encouraging volunteers to "live the part" in the way they dress and interact with visitors may be an important part of that.
Other recent posts have highlighted the benefits or otherwise of charitable status. The entity that owns the NYMR has been a charity since 1973. It's only fairly recently that has enabled recovery of Gift Aid on fares. I'm surprised by the suggestion it hasn't worked. Over £400k annual net benefit looks like success to me! Of course to generate that sort of benefit means the model must be the apex charity one. There are good examples of support charities but Gift Aid on fares is not possible on that situation. They tend to work well where the operating entity is profitable. Reflecting the interests of the charity's members the charitable objects are often specific to investment in things like locos , rolling stock and buildings. They tend to be geared to support of projects. especially nice ones! Problems can appear if the operating entity is in financial trouble. If it doesn't have enough funds then whether cash is needed for nice to haves or mundane things like paying the rates or the wage bill really makes little difference as to its solvency. It's entorely forseeable in such circumstances that a support charity with objects that are too specific would be unable to save the operating entity even though it could confortably afford to do so.
Whether or not they're wondering about emulating other successful visitor attractions the leadership of many heritage railway organistions are grappling with how to adapt to fundamental change. The business model that Tom Rolt envisaged all those years ago has worked well but there's clear evidence that it's now under severe strain. Essentially it involved volunteers giving their time and enthusiasm free to enjoy running a railway funded primarily by the visting public. That model no longer works for many . While labour costs can be an issue by far and away the biggest challenge is the cost of keeping essential infrastructure in a condition where the railway can operate. The costs of doing that have soared. £500k to replace a mile of track; between two and three million pounds to rebuild a bridge. The headache goes on and on particularly where the cushion of long term public investment on infrastructure during BR days has deflated The growing realisation is that many heritage railways are not sustainable out of the fare box. Put another way if all they are is just a traditionally operated heritage railway many don't have a future. There are lots of suggestions as to how to improve their financial performance but in most cases they invlve tinkering with the orginal concept of what a heritage railway is. It's not as suggested that management aren't listening to ideas. It's more that those are so wedded to what heritage railways have traditionally been that management just don't agree they are the answer. Survival is going to depend for many on finding completely new profitable activities. The SVR example of hiring out the railway for storage and training is a good example of the lateral thinking required.
One unpalatable question is whether, if the opportunity to enjoy volunteering is no longer being adequately sustanined by the fare paying public, can it continue in its present form? That raises spectres that I'd prefer not to think about but it doesn't mean that they may not come to haunt the movement if the Tom Rolt model really is unsustainable.

 

I agree. This would involve narrowing the range of rolling stock and locos to a time period for it to work. No place for your Cl 37/50/40/45 etc if you are trying to be a steam railway set in the 1930s-40s. But it would provide something of a USP.

 

If Gift Aid generated £400k of net benefit on the annual pass model, I fail to understand why it is necessary to change to the surcharge with vouchers model.

More generally, I'm disappointed at the focus on members' interest in projects over the institution - my sense as an armchair member in various places is that general appeals are also successful, and members deeply invested in "their" railways. The responses to current challenges at the SVR is an example.

All of which keeps me coming back to the sense that nurturing that source of cash and sacrificial labour - the membership, current and future - is a key lever and one that I just don't hear in what's written. When I say that of what a committed volunteer writes, I do so in mourning.

 

The comment about members'interest in projects was in respect of support charities. It's not unusual to see an attitude of "I'll give to this or that project but I'll be damned if I'll see my donation being spent of staff wages". That can be replicated in the charitable objects of a support charity meaning that even though the operating company might be facing extinction because it couldn't pay the wage bill the charity wouild be unable to help.

 

£400k of Gift Aid is only a success if the pricing strategy hasn’t dissuaded a similar amount or more of other fares. The fact that the current incarnation of the scheme is being dropped after only a year (?) suggests to me that the upsides haven’t compensated for the downs. If it were a success, why are you changing it?

I think for a heritage railway, that model is just impossible to price. To my eyes, the NYMR ended up with a ticket price that in perceived value is very high if you only do one trip, but almost ridiculously cheap if you see it as an annual pass. It’s worth noting that where other lines have instituted a more traditional annual pass type ticket, it has typically been five or more times the regular one-day price. A £40 day rover or a £250 annual pass would seem more appropriate - but wouldn’t fit the GA model.

Tom