SVR General Discussion

Can't help but think a return visit for free ticket is a bit much. 50% off or £10-15, maybe? Even 2 for 1 might be a better option.

 

The issue is this government seem hellbent on making everything worse, as they have done since 2010, and they aren't going anywhere until 2025.

Many Conversative MPs would happily sell off heritage stuff for a quick buck, and I hate it when heritage railways invite them to open things etc, but that is a story for another day.

 

If they are still doing that then they are really shooting themselves in the foot I think. Booking online should avoid the need to go somewhere to collect a ticket, unless there is the option to obtain an Edmondson one if you want as a souvenir. I think at Swanage you can book up to an hour before departure, and even that in this digital age is probably too far out for many.

 

On the Bluebell you have to collect a Edmondson ticket. They only exception was for Flying Scotsman where they scanned your online ticket at the barrier.

 

Can't disagree with you on the Government, however, some of the international factors should ease this year - energy for one should peak according to Martin Lewis around June / July, which should then have an impact on inflation.
I am not saying there will be a quick fix and everything will be rosey by 2024, indeed the UK economy has been stagnating since we left the EU, long before Covid and Russia (again a topic for another thread), but historically economies have always had periods of recession. The idea that the SVR is in terminal decline is OTT in my opinion, indeed it is in a much stronger position than some others.

 

If inflation eases, it doesn't mean prices will fall - just that they won't be rising so quickly!

High coal, diesel and utility costs probably need to be priced in as the new reality, not some spike that is going to come back down.

Tom

 

I don't have a problem with the online tickets being a bit cheaper. They were in 2022 and I didn't object to that. £25 vs £32 is a larger gap than some other railways (the GWSR's 2023 fares page gives just a 5% discount for pre-booking) but it's not completely absurd. However, offering return visits only to pre-bookers feels mean, and that turns a gap into a gaping chasm as I outlined in my post.

I agree with you on booking fees, though. They should be either included in the ticket price or, at the very least, highlighted upfront on the fares page. After all, there was once a time when ex-VAT prices were common even in consumer-focused PC ads, and happily those eventually disappeared. Only revealing the fees during the booking process is irritating at best. Sadly I can't tell you whether this still applies as if you go to the SVR's shiny new fares page here:

https://svr.co.uk/plan-your-visit/ticket-prices/

and click "Pre-Book Now", you are taken to a virtually blank page with no ticket-booking abilities but the cryptic message "NAN Undefined". There appears to be no way at all actually to book your tickets. Why was this page allowed to go live when it clearly hasn't been finished?

Finally, timetables. Again I'll use the GWSR as a comparison. Here is its 2023 page:

https://www.gwsr.com/planning_your_visit/visiting_gwsr/2023_Calendar_and_Timetables.html

A weekday in May (purple timetable) sees five and a bit full-line journeys each way, using two steam and one diesel locos. This is a better service than the SVR's May timetable for a significantly lower fare. I agree that we're not going to go back to 2019 levels of service any time soon, if ever. But here I'm not comparing with 2019, I'm comparing with *2023*. Yes, the SVR and the GWSR are different in various ways. But how many of these will the average prospective visitor care about when making a decision to visit or not?

 

Correct, I didn't say it did!

I agree, but if (& it is a big if) energy prices do start to fall back as predicted that will slow price rises, which can only help. This last year has been exceptional, energy prices have tripled for some, no one wishes to see a continuation of that. That has been the main driver of inflation as pretty much every commodity is linked to energy.
This is a year of huge uncertainty, next year whilst not being back to how things were, should at least be clearer. No business likes uncertainty, which this year has in bucket loads. By this point next year we will know if we are past the worst (or not) and hopefully can start planning a recovery.
My point is that I do not see the SVR's actions are a sign that it is in terminal decline, but that it is sensibly reacting to considerable uncertainty in the market and history tells us brighter times will be around the corner at some point.

 

Just on a nerdy point about booking fees: they may not be configurable by the SVR, but a function of the (outsourced) software they use for booking, i.e. the vendor may not give the option to charge the railway silently in the background.

Additionally, they would be charged per transaction, not per ticket, so aren't particularly easy to absorb into a ticket price. If for example your vendor of choice tickets-r-us.com adds a £1 booking fee, then a £25 ticket becomes £26 when booked online; but two tickets become £51 (2 * £25 + £1). So hiding the booking fee making the displayed price £26 wrong for those booking multiple tickets.

(I have a hunch there may also be some complexity around VAT - if the booking fee is liable for VAT but the ticket is zero rated, it just adds further accounting complexity if the railway wished instead to just display a single price, rather than ticket + additional booking fee).

Altogether, complex. I agree with you that the software should display up front the fact that a booking fee applies.

Tom

 

North end TTIs and guards are also a bit hard done by at the moment.

It partly allows the e-ticket to be checked off the system.

 

It's all here if anyone wants to see how the timetable has altered over the years. https://www.svrwiki.com/SVR_timetables

 

Fortunately we are not experiencing the consequences of past recessions when it was normal to have to have a thousand applications for every job vacancies!

 

Likewise. Though I prefer to pay £27 + £0 = £27


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Some of the services like Ticketsource and Eventbrite offer promoters the choice of absorbing or not, so it can be done. Ultimately, it’s a choice by promoters to maintain headline prices and pretend that actually purchasing isn’t part of their costs, rather than deal with it all properly which started with theatre/concert booking fees and has been normalised. VAT adds complexity but if the SVR’s able to cope with a mixed portfolio now, I can’t see why that should be a major issue, even if some of the input VAT is not reclaimable.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Im guessing, By people booking online and getting accurate forecast, it may mean you can run a pannier rather than a Pacific for example. It also means you can stock the shop with the right amount of perishable sandwiches, or put less wear on some coaching stock by having a shorter train. So there are real savings to be had.

 

Changes in fares and changes to timetables, but are any changes to shareholder benefits proposed?

 

I disagree that there is much saving to be had, because it misunderstands the real costs of owning a loco.

Firstly, just in operational terms: the savings to be made on a big loco (especially in coal) come from sensible rostering. If Tuesday, Wednesday and Saturday are busy, but Thursday and Friday look quiet, it would be a bad move to especially fire up a pannier and allow a Bulleid pacific to cool down for two days, only to swap them again at the weekend. Once a loco is hot - and especially a big loco - you want to keep it that way.

There is also a cost of shunting if, for example, you convert a 7 coach set to four coaches for the quiet Thursday and Friday, and then reform it for the weekend. That all adds cost.

The other issue with what you suggest is that it requires you always have two locos notionally operational to cover a single duty. Because the really high cost in steam locos is the overhauls, having that degree of flexibility inevitably means having more locos overhauled than you strictly need, which means more annual spend on loco overhauls. That would wipe out any slight savings on coal cost.

It would absolutely be worth looking at a seasonal pattern; for example, rostering a smaller loco in the shoulder seasons (while the big loco is having scheduled maintenance); then swap to the big loco for the peak (while the smaller one has scheduled maintenance). But you can't do that over short periods, because you get no logistical advantage of having locos out of use for very short periods (leats of all making a decision at 24 hours notice), so it essentially drives additional cost by requiring more locos available at any one time.

Tom

 

I have been a member and subsequent shareholder of the SVR since the late 1960s. I was a working member in those early days and the mantra was always that every penny earned had to be put towards the £25000 needed to acquire the permanent way and in the face of opposition from Shropshire County Council. Everything else was just nice to have. Many of those early pioneers are no longer with us but would be horrified to see what the Valley has
become today. For the last ten years or so I have felt that the Board have displayed a degree of arrogance in that it was felt that the members, shareholders and supporters would always come up with whatever money was needed. And we did!

The 2016 share off was the turning point in my view. After wasting tens of thousands of pounds on consultants to develop totally inappropriate
plans for Bridgnorth which were quite rightly subsequently scrapped we then have the Bridgnorth tea room saga. Yes its a lovely building but
at what cost? It got bogged down with delays and ran way over budget. Over a Million?? Who knows.

Did anyone on the Board ever ask the "What if" question and do some sensitivity analysis rather than assume that the money would always be there.
And of course the Covid pandemic hit which of course no one could have foreseen. So what do the Board do? Take on a £1.5m CIBL loan which was drawn
down in October 2020 with repayment required over 5 years starting in October 2021 requiring £28000 per month. I Emailed the GM outlining the folly
of taking on this loan and suggesting alternative actions. The Email was ignored. Why was this loan taken when the railway had secured the best part of £3m in grants and the Fight back fund.

We then had the infamous letter to shareholders regarding our benefits effectively accusing us of being freeloaders. Again I Emailed the GM pointing
out both factual errors in the letter as well as the general tone. I pointed out that I had literally donated thousands of pounds to the Valley in various
ways. Again the EMail was ignored. That was the turning point for me. Not one penny more will I contribute to the railway until a degree of openness
regarding the finances and the future realistic plans are shared. My support now goes to the various funds on the railway such as 82045, Erlstoke Manor etc.

So what is to be done? The elephant in the room is the debt levels. Look at these comparisons in the two years from 2019 to 2021.

Passenger numbers. 240000 in 2019. 122000 in 2021.
Turnover. £8.2m in 2019. £4.99m in 2021.
Full time employees. 86 in 2019. 87 in 2021. It actually increased to 95 in 2020!
Employee costs. £2.87m in 2019. £2.79m in 2021.
Debt. 464k in 2019. £1.82m in 2021.

So in the face of collapsing passenger numbers and turnover nothing was done to reduce employee costs.
These costs have to be reduced NOW by at least £1m if not more. I accept that we need full time employees for regulatory and safety roles
as well as some of our skilled workshop staff. But do we need an executive chef, visitor services manager, communications manager, etc.
I could go on. As for the debt. That needs to be reduced and fast. £28000 a month is unaffordable. So asset sales are needed. I will be
shot down in flames for this but is HAGLEY HALL needed? Would there be a buyer out there who would pay a high six figure number
for a newly overhauled loco with a ten year ticket? I have no idea. What about 45110. Stored somewhere under cover. Needs an overhaul which is not likely to be affordable for years if ever. Would there be a buyer? Messers Riley or Smith?? How much is it worth.
I consider the state of the company that serious that these things need to be investigated.

As for the proposed 2023 timetable I cannot believe that the Table B timetable up until June will be enforced over the Easter school
holidays or May Bank holidays etc. There is so much more I could say such as catering etc but I wont go there I have said enough.
I will finish by saying that the SVR has many, many strengths. Its volunteers, supporters locomotives and rolling stock. I really hope
the railway comes through this but radical changes are needed.

 

The new timetable does reduce the need for steam locos four is likely to be enough as the GWR operates with most years.
I do think the bridgenorth tea room does show failings as its not large enough to cope with demand most days have been to the railway if you compare this to croome park which has far more seating inside and outside.

 

https://www.svrlive.com/bljul22

From last year's AGM: Consultant Jonathan Durnin outlined the initial findings of the recent independent shareholder review. The review highlighted the importance of improving the relationship between the Railway and the shareholding community. Recommendations from the review included the production of a shareholders’ handbook, implementing photo ID, and taking an evidence-based approach to managing key event capacity. The review found that most shareholders invested in the Railway to support it, but that benefits were important. A full report is being produced, and the board will share the findings and recommendations with shareholders in due course, and report back on progress by the end of this year.

(My emphasis). Not heard anything since.