Do railtour operations need a unified voice ?

Re: Railway Touring Company

I wonder if this role of an over-arching non-self interested umbrella organisation is one the HRA ought to be looking at? I would think many of the loco owners are members, though I doubt many of the tour operators are?

 

Re: Railway Touring Company

The difference is that some people realise they are posting on an internet forum and some people think that it will actually change things. What category do you fall into?

 

Re: Railway Touring Company

I mis-took the tone. The problem is, for these steam operations to be sustainable the general public (and the general public with the disposable income) must be satisfied with the product. Those who understand and will put up with the way things are are in a shrinking minority. When I take my Dad on a railtour we always book First Class as he finds standard uncomfortable, getting old, bad back etc. £250 for a day out and a cup of tepid tea served each way is massive anyway and then if the coach isnt heated its a bad day out.

 

Re: Railway Touring Company

You describe the situation very well brasso1, and I really do not know why others on here find this really very simple argument so difficult to grasp.

Or is it more a case of "there's none so blind as those that will not see" !

 

Re: Railway Touring Company

I don't accept the two are unconnected.

As has been speculated already, those with the power to change things both read and participate on this forum, so even if it seems unlikely, there is at least some chance that if you bang on the door loud and long enough, the light could dawn, and someone might hear !

 

Re: Railway Touring Company

We went through all this last year and one very prominent member of the railtour industry who posts on this forum completely rubbished such ideas. Can't see anything changing!

 

We did go through this last year, perhaps it's just an annual thing:

http://railways.national-preservati...727-umbrella-organisation-mainline-steam.html

 

Re: Railway Touring Company

 

Yep - and what changed - precisely nowt. The operators may or may not read this stuff, but half a dozen voices on here isn't going to pull much weight if tours are still selling well.

 

Err it's got worse?

 

Quite possibly - which kind of puts paid to the 'operators read this forum and take note' theory. One or two maybe, but not the majority I'd say.

 

Re: Railway Touring Company

Define "prominent" please !

I'd also be tempted to say, "well he would say that wouldn't he"

 

and there in lies the problem. Ignore the Voice of Customer at your peril.

 

Re: Railway Touring Company

If Bob Meanley isn't a prominent member of the railtour industry than I don't know who is...!

 

Re: Railway Touring Company

 

Re: Railway Touring Company

Maybe you should have given him a name in the first place so that people knew who you were talking about ?

Anyway, like I said, he is part of the "current scene" so of course he is going to rubbish any new ideas. Think !

 

Re: Railway Touring Company

Although I don't often support the way Bob Meanley posts on here - sometimes too aggressive - he works from a substantially different business model of owning what they run and not overloading the locos.

 

Re ADB’s post - # 60 - TBF Issues - Proposals – Conclusion – Summary agreed
ADB Response Headers –
1 Business Strategy Business Context and History
2 Business Case Potential Revenue Stream
3 Design Business Specification
4 Implemenation Delivery
5 Operation Resilience
6 Improvement The Way Forward
Second coming of steam is now over forty years old – that’s an entire career, and it isn’t going away. It is not a casual business. With 395 lines of entry on UK SteamInfo at £60k per train revenue – that’s a £25m per annum business.
1 Business Context
The steam business arose from a passion in the minds of preservationists that there was a desire and a market for steam on the Main Line. In 1972 Bulmers broke the mould. In 1975 S & D 150 showcased steam on the main line. In 1984 British Rail Inter City saw the revenue potential and returned BR managed steam to the main line
The 1993 Railways Act that delivered us into the modern mad world, provided for TOCs to have rights of access to the Network. Network Rail have a legal obligation to keep the network fit for access and use – but you wouldn’t know it at times.
The modern concept of railtouring was born, pushing the envelope – some would say – to breaking point. . Railtours have always been known as CrankExes and the disdain in certain quarters of the industry remains to this day. It is as wrong now as it has always been. The railway exists to carry the traffic offering, not to do just what it would like to. There is the perennial tension.
Railtours provide good revenue to the industry – 400 or so paths in the steam world alone – double that across the entire sector? That’s around £4m in track access charges – small beer – NOT. Route availability and timings must be better recorded and communicated in support. This is an aspect of the industry that needs proper stewardship whether NP thinks so or not!
As an aside - Yesterday’s inability to move 6233 stems directly from NR internal problems. The section at Leeds which would have provided this are all being made redundant next month and the job moved to Milton Keynes where recruits new to the industry will provide timings – improving management – in your dreams!
The business has a credible past. It can have a credible future too.

2 Business Case and Revenue Stream
400 Steam paths – Round about £24m at retail prices – Add in VSOE and diesel, liner and other charters. This is a £50m per annum business – with no-one steering it overall – Madness! To suggest that an industry with this revenue potential and of this complexity just rolls on under its own momentum with no commonality, agreed standards etc, just defies belief. And to suggest that one TOC represents the entire activity – absolutely not!
To suggest that this is a revenue stream not worth pursuing and doomed to fail after surviving forty years in the “new world” is just untenable. I’ll have it if you won’t!
There is more than sufficient revenue from this market to justify dedicated management jointly betweenNR, the TOC’s and the promoters
3 Business Specification
I take full responsibility for the WCRC/RTC tie up. After my own debacle with the latter I found myself breakfasting with Mr Shuttleworth one day. I commented on their relationship and the result was a discussion about combining RTC’s gricer aspirations with WCRC’s proven delivery capability. The rest, as they say, is history.
The problem now is that you can’t separate the two. WCRC turn out motive power that does the job all over the country – but theirs and other rolling stock isn’t up there alongside the power. They won’t love me for saying it – but it’s the truth. I got fried for a full day on a Riviera set last year – but I have frozen in the dark on a West Coast set too.
This year RTC seem to have gone for gold when others have been more circumspect, and without checking that the locos are out there to haul their proposed trains. Looking through the windows of their trains does not give cause for optimism. The market does NOT want day/night endurance expeditions. Judging from the dining loadings that I saw last week – they don’t want no choice menus either.
Tours must be better planned, advertised, resourced and delivered or the promoters are putting their own rear ends in a sling. Its not me saying that – its consumer statute law. As for meetings costing thousands - would you rather have the cost of failure and every party to the business losing the revenue stream? I say again – What a Counsel of Despair!
4 Delivery
Its a lot more than costs. A lot more. Today’s customers demand quality. Railtours may carry 400,000 passengers a year – that means sixty five and a half million aren’t travelling. Get into that wider market and the future becomes far more assured. That brings in communication, promotion and listening.
Only the churlish would criticise either the TOC or support crews. The technical and operational turn out underpinning tours is excellent It would be difficult to better it. But the show is let down by a lack of clean warm watered stock on the day.
Look at the set used three days a week at the moment – it needs a damned good scrub!
Timings that make travel – and connections – a pleasure, and not a chore are long overdue. Stewards who wear a friendly and not a contemptuous face and announcements that are audible and understandable – particularly when things go awry. Stewards who vanish when things get sticky are no use to anyone.
In summary – Up the game where there are immediate and visible causes for concern
5 Resilience
We aren’t talking about on the day failures – that can screw the best laid plans. And we are NOT talking about reserve locos crewed and in steam on the day either – are you reading boys? But we are a long way short of anything that could be described as “best planning” today
Advertising must be overhauled and provide something that resembles what will actually happen on the day. I’m sorry to say it – but a certain promoter wins the gold medal in this class by a country mile. Why do it? It’s just unnecessary.
Motive power must be planned with resilience, and not risk, in mind. Locos that are in ticket should be the prime resource, and locos under overhaul, merely suggestions. 60009 only came on stream days before it was needed – too close for comfort. Pools must comprise locos with a ticket for the route in question, or what is the point? Calls on support crews must be realistic and safe.
PMR, SD and VT don’t indulge in promising the moon. There is no need for it, and the result is far fewer dissatisfied clients at the end of the day.
Prudent planning is not an unattainable goal – Its a principal plank of good business
6 Improvement
The method of setting up a tour is byzantine – a promoter can only approach NR via a TOC which from that point on has the promoter by the gonads. What a ridiculous system! Why can’t promoters get an amber light from NR and then seek tenders to operate from TOCs? Competitive and far more market orientated.
No-one is seeking any reduction in operator numbers – in fact – the more the merrier in the interests of variety! And where has anyone suggested a return to the days of Ward or merely selling to enthusiasts – that is commercial suicide!

The importsant things that do need attention are :-

Passengers need to know times and routes when they book NR don’t seem to think so – the first item on the agenda


NR/TOCs/Promoters must meet and communicate as equals NR is not some kind of God.

Promoters can then advertise and sell with the confidence that their supplier is part of the production line, not a spanner in the works

The chances of it happening – snowball in Hell. The reception from the trainspotter community – shock horror and ridicule – but it is one business compatible way forward, and that is a damn sight better than where we are today

 

Having read Bob's post from September 2011, (I wasn't a member then), I understand and agree with what he is saying about a "SLOA 2" which if I understand it correctly, wouldn't be compatible with the current set up since privatisation as it was essentially an extension of BR which as we all know, doesn't exist anymore.

That said, I would also like to refer members to Frank's subsequent response which while accepting Bob's specific points about the role of a SLOA type "umbrella" organisation to oversee the scene as a whole, makes the point that there is still an issue seeking a solution, i.e. we have tour promoters making promises they can't, (and possibly know), they can't keep.

There is also the point that VT operate a somewhat different business model than the rest in that they own their locomotives and rolling stock thus removing at least two pieces from quite a complex jigsaw.

In short, some kind of regulatory body is needed to ensure long term interest and survival. How that is put together is up to those involved quite frankly, but I'm fairly sure of one thing. If Bob is right that there are significant factions inside the current senior railway top brass that would like to see steam off the mainline, the promoters, TOCS etc better get their act together sooner or later otherwise the regulation will be done for them, and none of us want that.

 

I'm not why it's needed. If there are companies that are behaving badly or inappropriately then the market will move away from them to competitors who can offer what the customer is wanting. Why should successful operators have any interest in setting up an regulator when they do not suffer from the problems that other companies are perceived to? The regulator is the consumer who will choose where to spend his/her money on the operators who can deliver what they offer.

If all companies selling railtours offered a terrible service to the consumer then perhaps there would be a need for some kind of overseeing power to ensure that the industry can survive but why should WCRC, VT, Steam Dreams etc give away the businesses that they have worked hard to develop since 1994?