Local bus usage figures for 15/16 published

[Mayneway]

RE: Local bus usage figures for 15/16 published

(16/06/2017 11:07)Dentonian Wrote:  Come on, you know better than to trot out this Tory Candidate rubbish. TFGM have been ordered to cut the the Subsidy for "socially necessary" buses by 6% year on year. Given that there would be an outcry if School bus services were cut, that effectively means 10%+ for "mainstream" services. The reason subsidised services take a hit is because every other aspect of TFGMC spending, except cutting staff costs is "protected". OK, there is one other exception, and that is Concessionary Rail fares, but can you imagine the outcry if they were removed...........
And as I AM SICK TO THE BACK TEETH of telling you and other critics of TFGM (note, I didn't add the "C" there), why don't you contact your local TFGMC member? I'm not going to start listing names of all 33 in GM, but in your case, think of a Dublin coastal suburb which I recall is famous for some excellent restaurants

Simple because the tfgmc members are a waste of time. They don't understand what bus users want or need and that is the real problem here.
When they first started slashing evening services myself and others tried to have our say and were basically told to bigger off. They didn't want to listen to what bus users actually thought might work better. They did it all behind closed doors which really annoys me.
I'm not here just to criticise tfgm like I have said stagecoach are just as bad, Carnt really comment on first as I don't use their services that often.

Perhaps we should do an experiment Dentionan. Try emailing our local tfgmc councillor and see how long I takes for a reply.

The figures speak for themselves. Tfgm are failing!

[Mayneway]

RE: Local bus usage figures for 15/16 published

(16/06/2017 19:18)Dentonian Wrote:  Is there a "C" missing from your last sentence, or have you just completely undermined the whole of the rest of your Reply?

No I haven't undermined anything but I'm not surprised at the figures and perhaps, just perhaps Dentionan you took off your rose tinted spectacles and lay down your staff pass, you might actually see how poor things have got away from the 203!

[wirralbus]

RE: Local bus usage figures for 15/16 published
Well Merseytravel is now actually going through a cost cutting exercise at the moment , its dolled up as a Bus Service Review.

[knutstransport]

RE: Local bus usage figures for 15/16 published

(17/06/2017 08:02)wirralbus Wrote:  Well Merseytravel is now actually going through a cost cutting exercise at the moment , its dolled up as a Bus Service Review.

So are Cheshire East. Lancashire have already done one.

[knutstransport]

RE: Local bus usage figures for 15/16 published

(15/06/2017 19:14)Dentonian Wrote:  Keep up! I've just checked past figures, and 225 million was the patronage in 2003/4! It dropped by about 6 million the following year, but stabilised over the latter half of the 'noughties and into the 2010s. However, more recent estimates from TFGM vary between 206 & 210 million depending on who you believe, but I do recall an outside source recently claiming it had dropped below £200 million.

The DfT figures (from the link in the original post) are:
09/10 220.4m
10/11 216.7m
11/12 205.9m
12/13 208.5m
13/14 216m
14/15 213m
15/16 204.9m

[Bevan Price]

RE: Local bus usage figures for 15/16 published
I think that buses are increasingly unable to compete with cars because, in many locations, they are simply too slow. Things are not helped by many councils & highway authorities, e.g.

1. Far too many traffic lights at minor road junctions, often poorly phased, causing maximum possible delay to traffic (including buses) in every direction.

2. Blighting bus routes with things like road humps, raised junctions, chicanes, etc., all of which make buses even slower - and the humps create a bumpy, unpleasant ride for passengers.

The bus companies are not free from blame. Continually changing timetables & frequencies is unhelpful for passengers - a stable, reliable timetable helps to retain passengers. That may not matter too much for some shoppers, but it can be unhelpful for anyone using one bus to connect with a train, or another bus, especially if it stops them using public transport to get to/from work. .

Also, because lightly used services to villages & small estates have been withdrawn, trunk routes have often been diverted, meandering around indirect road layouts, and substantially increasing journey times for passengers travelling the full route. I don't know the solution to this problem; one way might be to run most buses by the "most direct" route, and send only a few buses via the "meandering diversions".

Away from busy trunk routes, some timetables seem devised more for operational convenience than to attract passengers. If service changes make it impossible to get to & from work, people will have to seek alternative transport, e.g. a car. And having got the car, these people will probably also stop using buses for leisure purposes on "non-work" days.

[knutstransport]

RE: Local bus usage figures for 15/16 published

(19/06/2017 21:26)Bevan Price Wrote:  Away from busy trunk routes, some timetables seem devised more for operational convenience than to attract passengers.

That definitely seems to be the case with the 27, 99 and 289 routes in Cheshire East.

Quote:If service changes make it impossible to get to & from work, people will have to seek alternative transport, e.g. a car. And having got the car, these people will probably also stop using buses for leisure purposes on "non-work" days.

Even those without cars are more likely to choose to go to places accessible by rail for leisure trips over ones only accessible by bus if bus services are cut back to 2 hourly or less frequencies.

[wirralbus]

RE: Local bus usage figures for 15/16 published
Once services start going 2 hourly , its usually the slippery slope to withdrawal , as less and less passengers start using them.

So you get to a point where regular services get all the passengers and infrequent continually lose passengers.

[Gateacre]

RE: Local bus usage figures for 15/16 published
Regarding the figures quoted for Bus Usuage:
Several forms of multi-journey tickets are still paper versions which are shown to the driver upon entry.
Are these boardings actually recorded? I think many are not and therefore usuage could well be under-stated.

Does anyone have further information on this possible recording error?

[knutstransport]

RE: Local bus usage figures for 15/16 published

(25/06/2017 20:32)Dentonian Wrote:  Not if being car-less means having to add the cost of a taxi to get to/from the Train Station

You keep making that same point but rail usage is going up while bus routes are being cut back and bus usage is going down.