Buses Bill

[rod_259]

RE: Buses Bill

(09/12/2016 16:52)Dentonian Wrote:  I think you've actually inadvertantly made two points you probably didn't want to!

Yes companies spend a fortune building their brand.
a. That money would be better spent on keeping fares lower, running more punctual/frequent services or (especially in the case of First) investing in more buses.
b. However you describe the "brand" ie. the company or the individual route, Operators have failed. Their individual names remain mud, even when they did perform well (eg. Stagecoach Manchester 1996-2013). And there is no point in branding buses for routes to the trendy Trafford Centre, and then running them through depressed south Tameside to Hattersley (at least 10611/4 now fully branded and on service 201 today).

Also, more personally to you I suspect; Buses should be run for people - whether its to give non motorists some quality of life, or to give motorists a realistic choice other than congesting our roads. They are not there primarily for the benefit of photographers or Art Students.

No,I didn't. Stagecoach, for example, is one of the most respected brands in the UK, according to surveys. Furthermore, the comment about 'art students' is fatuous as many enthusiasts like to see the variety of liveries.
Unlike London, there are no congestion charges proposed to sunsidise bus travel, as far as I know, so I think, once again, politicians running anything will result in a mess. Booze ups And breweries come to mind.
Finally despite all the left wing tripe, the quality of the fleets I has improved beyond belief so the companies have reasons to be proud of their brands.