Defunct preserved railways

I'd be interested as to how they count their passengers, as that's almost our visiting numbers, and we're a lot bigger.

 

So would I, I don't know what their definition is but the figure is taken from their website.

 

Avon Valley benefits from it's location I think. I've always been disappointed with the Swindon and Cricklade...not sure why, it's just never felt "right" there

 

Well it is down to where the line is and the type of trade they are after, with the Avon Valley very close to Bristol and near Bath, so there is no dependent on tourists and a lot of punters will be "lets go down for a train ride this morning" etc. So a line like this will do well if the car park is clean and this also applies to toilets, coaches and engines. But if this line was more or less in the middle of nowhere they would only get a fraction on the visitors.

What I have heard the SDR relies on contract work on engine wheels etc to survive. Beautiful line but in the wrong place for lets pop down for the morning railway.

 

I would also imagine its relatively short length makes it attractive at Santa time and similar days aimed at the younger market. A short trip behind a steam engine and a visit to Santa before the children are bored and want to move on.
I've seen quite a few young children showing signs of boredom on the SVR when they are travelling the full length of the line.

 

That's one thing I've noticed about the BHR, the city location, short trip and cheap cost makes it part of a larger day out, for those people who maybe just want a ride on a steam train.

 

Discussions about the numbers of visitors to heritage railways are, in the end, a wast of time. First, as was mentioned earlier in this thread, different railways have different ways of counting; second, variations in the type of experience offered and the location make comparisons largely meaningless; third, the natural loyalty of members, volunteers and staff to their particular railway inevitably gives rise to exaggeration, which is easy to achieve as it is very difficult for the outsider to check, especially in the case of the smaller lines.

Some years ago I investigated the published visitor numbers of a number of railways. I was surprised to find that two of the smaller organisations, each fairly close to one another and, therefore, in competition, claimed to attract similar numbers to each other and, even more surprisingly, to some major HRs. Having visited both sites, I concluded that the claimed figures figures must be exaggerated, so I looked at their figures over the previous 10 years. Sure enough, they started off at an entirely believable level, but each year one would announce improved figures, then the other would trump them and so on until the whole thing became farcical.

A well-known heritage railway manager once gave me this advice in relation to HRs: Believe none of what you hear and only half of what you see!

 

In the end, long-term financial stability is what counts. Whether you achieve that on a "pile 'em high, flog 'em cheap" basis (which equates to lots of passengers, discounts to attract families, repeat visitors etc) or do it through appealing to a smaller number of more luxury visitors is basically a business decision of the railway: you can't really argue that a 150k pax railway is superior to a 75k railway if both keep running year after year.

The difficulty is accurately assessing long-term financial stability in a business that effectively has assets that have long lifetimes but high maintenance costs: spotting deferred maintenance to give an illusion of financial stability is very difficult. Indeed, deferred maintenance may even in some areas be sound business logic (for example, to maintain solvency through a temporary downturn provided there is a "catching up" when times become more propitious). The danger is when deferred maintenance becomes permanent, but it is a very grey area and very difficult to comment on in a genuinely informed way for about 99.9% of us here...

(And on the comment about the SDR: I have no idea whether it is true or not. But even if it is true, so what? I'd interpret a railway with a genuinely cash-generating maintenance business as being a good thing in diversifying the income stream, rather than the problem it was implied to be. There is no rule that says "income from fares good, all other income bad" that I am aware of!)

Tom

 

This came up when I was in the SDR workshop on Sat when helping to get a coach roof ready for painting. Remember the SDR got sold off as it was loosing money as the Dart Valley Railway Company didn't want subsidise it to keep it going.

I am not knocking the railway because of this, as more of pointing out that some railways are unable to get enough ticket money to keep the line open, and remember all the shops, restaurants etc could be helping to keep the railways open.

 

I never like speculation about the financial health of a preserved line - it can damage its standing unfairly. That said, I agree that ancillary activities are important in boosting revenue. I work in both booking office and shop at my local line, and find both equally busy.

John

 

Spot on

If you look at the SDR structure they actually have 3 businesses - catering, operating and engineering.

 

Some railways publish numbers of "Passenger Journeys" - where a return ticket counts as 2 - in order to flatter their numbers, but they do not make this clear. Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics!

 

One does not need to speculate about the SDR, its financials are on the CC website.

 

Show me a railway where that isn't the case! Given the fact that most volunteers get into railway preservation to, well, preserve railways, rather than run shops and cafes, there has to be a reason every railway you can think of goes to the expense and hassle of setting up a cafe, complying with food hygiene regs, etc etc - it's because they make money over and above their running costs, with which to subsidise the core activity of operating a railway using infrastructure and rolling stock that is inherently old fashioned, unreliable and expensive. Indeed, it is not only railways: find me a museum, art gallery or heritage attraction in any sector that doesn't have a shop and cafe.

Of course, the contrarian in me might note that, while few railways would survive without their cafe, equally the cafe would be dead in the water without the steady stream of hundreds of people per day visiting the railway! I think it is what in the natural world is called symbiosis ...

It's silly to criticise a railway because one part of its operating model subsidises another. You have to consider the financial viability of the whole model, and how it fits together: even if one profit centre is nominally subsidising another, it is likely neither would survive without each other. The cafe may subsidise the railway, but without the railway, there would be no customers in the cafe ...

Tom

 

Cc?

 

Add-on profit centres, such as cafes, shops, engineering services, etc., are a perfectly proper way for railways to enhance their profitability and ensure long-term viability. There is another factor, however, which also has an important bearing on visitor numbers; "entertainment" events. "Santas" were mentioned earlier, but these are now almost universal among railways and can be regarded as unexceptional. "Thomas the Tank Engine" often had a dramatic effect, both on visitor numbers and, in the early days, on financial returns. I would expect those railways which still do "TtTE" to enjoy considerably enhanced visitor numbers compared with those which do not, though whether they enjoy a proportionate enhancement of their profits is a moot point!

 

Charity Commission

 

Is it ?, can reach it from most places in Torbay and the South Devon coast within the hour.

 

Well here is a modern comparison, number of social media followers (free advertising, official pages only) for all operating heritage railways - its interesting reading...

1. Strathspey - 14,588
2. North Yorkshire Moors - 8,773
3. Bluebell - 8,447
4. Great Central - 7,544
5. Keighley & Worth Valley - 6,789
6. West Somerset - 6,134
7. Caledonian - 6,084
8. Dean Forest - 6,075
9. Bodmin & Wenford - 6,013
10. East Lancashire - 5,520
11. Severn Valley - 5,420
12. Llangollen - 5,249
13. Mid Hants - 5,003
14. Epping & Ongar - 4,559
15. Tanfield - 4,493
16. Didcot - 4,339
17. Barrow Hill Roundhouse - 3,863
18. Wensleydale - 3,486
19. Dartmouth - 3,468
20. Churnet Valley - 3,256
21. Spa Valley - 3,149
22. Bo’ness & Kenneil - 3,108
23. Chasewater - 3,104
24. Isle of Wight - 3,095
25. Foxfield - 2,990
26. Kent & East Sussex - 2,891
27. Ribble - 2,814
28. Mid Norfolk - 2,577
29. Great Central (N) - 2,553
30. South Devon - 2,263
31. Nene Valley - 2,146
32. Pontypool & Blaenavon - 2,081
33. Helston - 2,079
34. Downpatrick & County Down - 1,975
35. North Norfolk - 1,947
36. Gloustershire & Warwickshire - 1,907
37. Rocks by Rail - 1,824
38. Aln Valley - 1,814
39. Somerset & Dorset - 1,783
40. Swanage - 1,759
41. Ecclesbourne - 1,754
42. Derwent Valley - 1717
43. Midland (Butterley) - 1,679
44. Battlefield line - 1,665
45. Plym Valley - 1,626
46. East Kent - 1,591
47. East Somerset - 1,591
48. Lakeside & Haverthwaite - 1,396
49. Gwili - 1,305
50. Royal Deeside - 1,297
51. Avon Valley - 1,230
52. Swindon & Cricklade - 1,158
53. Whitwell & Reepham - 1,088
54. Stainmore - 1,042
55. Buckinghamshire rail centre - 1,036
56. Middleton - 1,006
57. Mid Suffolk - 981
58. Chinnor & Princess Risbrough - 934
59. East Anglian rail centre - 915
60. Peak Rail - 823
61. Northampton & Lamport - 799
62. Barry Tourist - 774
63. Embsay & Bolton Abbey - 745
64. Yeovil rail centre - 696
65. Colne Valley - 621
66. Eden Valley - 612
67. Cholsey & Wallingford - 543
68. Lavender Line - 541
69. Bowes - 535
70. Rushden, Higham & Wellingbrough - 530
71. North Tyneside - 489
72. Border Union - 459
73. Weardale - 415
74. Telford - 395
75. Cambrian Railways - 382
76. Kingdom of Fife - 352
77. Appleby & Frodingham - 291
78. Dartmoor - 259
79. Northampton Ironstone - 251
80. Keith & Dufftown - 250
81. Lincolnshire Wolds - 246
82. Elsecar - 158
83. Mangapps farm - 93
84. Bristol Harbour - 89
85. Bideford & Instow - 72
86. Tanat Valley - 71
87. Scottish Industrial rail centre - 38
88. Alderney - 17