Along with the presentation on Tamaki Dr at Wednesday’s AT board meeting there is also the regular board report which details many of different aspects of what is happening in the organisation and as usual it gives quite a few interesting insights.
The biggest thing in the PT section is about the redesign of the bus network, something long overdue.
Public Transport Network Plan (PTNP) review:
- Work has commenced on a review of the public transport network structure and public transport service design principles. This is documented in the Public Transport Network Plan 2006 – 2016 (PTNP) and will result in an updated PTNP.
- The PTNP will define a new connected and integrated network for public transport in Auckland of:
- Rapid Transit Network (RTN) of electrified and modern rail services and Busway services
- A connected network of high frequency bus services along key arterial road corridors, supporting and integrating with the RTN – 15 minute worst case frequency seven days a week between 7am and 7pm – plus some high frequency ferry services
- Secondary routes of lesser frequency ferry and local feeder bus services connecting to the RTN and high frequency bus network, school bus services and peak only services.
- The main benefits of the new PTNP will be to simplify the network, remove the “spaghetti” A-B bus routes, remove duplication of services and provide high frequency services that are convenient and reliable. This in turn will create resource efficiency „savings‟ that can be used to focus bus resources where the demand and congestion relief is most needed – on key arterial corridors.
- The updated PTNP will be presented to the Board in May prior to broader consultation in June. The updated PTNP will form part of the Regional Public Transport Plan (RPTP) that is also under review for consultation in June. The RPTP is the statutory public transport plan required by the Public Transport Management Act 2008 and will form the public transport component of the Integrated Transport Plan.
Bus service reviews:
- The PTNP will set the network structure to enable a three year program of review and implementation of bus service redesigns across the whole of the Auckland region, between mid-2012 and mid-2015. This will redesign all bus services in line with the PTNP.
- The two key enabling factors to allow this process to commence and succeed, in addition to finalising the PTNP, are:
- Integrated ticketing, that will permit simple service transfers and connections across the new connected network from a fare payment perspective, rather than requiring different tickets for different modes and operators; and
- PTOM (Public Transport Operating Model), that will establish a fully contracted service delivery framework that will avoid operators restricting service redesigns as previously experienced, permit AT to implement service redesigns and facilitate service performance specification and management across all services, which is not currently possible with the existing mix of contracted and commercial services.
- Integrated ticketing is due to be implemented in late 2012 across all modes and services and PTOM will transition all services to a contracted environment across three procurement phases in mid-2012, mid-2013 and mid-2014.
- Bus service redesigns and implementation of the PTNP will be undertaken over 2012 to 2014/15 to maximise the patronage potential of new EMU operation from 2013/14 and integrated ticketing.
- Bus service reviews are already underway for Hibiscus Coast, Manukau and Botany and Great South Road.
PTOM (Public Transport Operating Model):
- Final components of the new bus PTOM contracts are being finalised including the risk, reward and incentive regime and the performance management regime prior to issue of template contracts to the industry for consultation in mid-April.
- Initial procurement round of contract tender followed by contract negotiations is targeted for end July, subject to the time required to complete the above consultation.
There are quite a few really positive things in here, it sounds like we will finally start working towards having a proper, integrated public transport system and that should go quite some way to helping us to achieve the targets that are being set (they were agreed to the other day). In a lot of ways you could say that much of the work in the last few years has been enabling works to allow better things to go in and now that they are starting to get done we can really move forward. Just think in 3-4 years time we will have an electrified rail network with brand new trains running on them, integrated ticketing and a bus network that both integrates with the rail network while also having quite a decent number of high quality, high frequency routes. Public transport will be almost unrecognisable from what it was a few years ago.
Still with buses there are a few other bits of news:
- Trials are commencing on key routes for the potential future introduction of double decker buses on high frequency and high demand routes. First double deckers may enter service in late 2012 subject to PTOM contract renegotiations.
- Cash machines have been installed at Albany, Constellation, Smales Farm and Akoranga Busway Stations to enhance customer amenity
For rail we now have officially have a new date for the opening of the Manukau line and station.
The timetable for the introduction of revenue rail services for the first time to Manukau on the Manukau Branch Line has been completed. The service will commence at a three train per hour peak and one train per hour off-peak frequency, with first day of operation on Sunday 15 April 2012.
I’m a bit disappointed that there will only be one train per hour in the off peak as it will make it hard for the line to truly be the interchange station that it was promised to be. I have also heard other disappointing things about the new rail timetable but will hold off on saying anything until it is officially announced.
Moving on through the report there is some interesting things mentioned about parking. A census of parking in the CBD has been undertaken and it showed that there are 3417 on street car parks in the CBD of which 2600 are pay and display with the rest things like loading zones etc. What is interesting is that the total number has actually reduced by 843 since the last survey in 2007, a loss of 20% and most of that has happened with little complaint from the public which goes to prove that if you do it slowly people don’t notice and just adjust to the change. What’s more 292 have disappeared in just a year which has come from:
- -135 spaces in Wynyard Quarter (due to Jellicoe St upgrade)
- -113 spaces due to the Street Scape Project on Fort, Darby and Elliott Streets
- -30 spaces due to the increased number of bus stops implemented
- -14 spaces due to the Art Gallery Upgrade
What does concern me though is that the author of the report is obviously concerned with the revenue impact of this, they claim that the loss of the 843 car parks equates to about $2.7m worth of revenue per year while they also project that the planned loss of car parks on other streets over the next 3 years would lead to the loss of another $740k per year. My concern is that we could see a shift in policy with the priority of making money off carparks becoming more important than the liveability of the CBD, which has improved immensely in the last few years.
Lastly for this post is the progress on integrated ticketing, the report says this about it:
- The project is now moving into the next stage of rollout with preparatory activity for this stage being well advanced. The Limited Functionality Pilot (LFP2) will be a closed trial, involving an invited audience, and will focus on field testing commuter related aspects of the system & processes. This will begin with around 100 participants growing to around 2000 by June 2012. This phase will provide insight into some further aspects of the future integrated ticketing system. The data collected and lessons learned from the Pilot will be used to help assist the transition into the full implementation of HOP later in the year.
- Installation of validator equipment at remaining ferry wharves will resume from mid-March
- The first shipment of VRD (Vending/Reload devices) and electronic gates has now arrived in Auckland.
- In parallel with the Limited Functionality Pilot (LFP2) rollout, work is progressing for the CORE system go-live mid-2012.
- Public support for HOP on NZBus has grown again in the past month, with active users of the HOP smartcard rising now in excess of 110,000
For rail and ferry users, things will really start getting interesting when the vending machine and ticket gates start being installed.
Processing...
Yay for double deckers, I do hope the trials are positive and they decide to bring them in. That is a very exciting piece of news snuck in there.
I used to write off the idea as infeasible due to our low clearances on overpasses (4.25m), but most of the busiest routes don’t actually have such constraints now that I think about it. Unfortunately the busway is probably out, but routes like Dominion Rd, Mt Eden Rd, Tamaki Drive, Great North Rd etc should be fine. Actually I think Symonds St and Mt Eden Rd are designated as the special over-height route out of the port for very tall freight items.
The great thing about double deckers is that unlike articulated buses they only take up as much room at stops as regular buses, and are just as easy to drive around corners and city streets.
Also there is the potential of them providing the best of both worlds when it comes to seating vs. hop-on-hop-off standing capacity. You can simply have the top deck full of seating (say 40 places), while the lower deck only has maybe only 20 longitudinal seats but plenty of grab handles and standing room, plus wheelchair circulation space of course and maybe room to swing some luggage around. All up you might get 60 seated + 60 standing in the same footprint as a regular double axle bus.
Plus they’d have a certain element of the ‘wow factor’ that makes light rail and fancy metros popular. That combined with the much overdue bus network redesign could create a whole new image for buses in Auckland. Fancy that, shortly we may have a basically brand new rail system with a brand new bus network -including some flash double deckers-, all integrated with a single electronic card system. Things are starting to shape up in a very promising fashion!
7pm finish of frequent bus routes is pretty weak. What is the frequency after that? Random?
And what is with hourly service on the Manukau Branch off peak? No point in building it at that frequency. A one station branch is pretty debatable at the best of times.
While the b.line routes end their decent frequencies at 7pm, and don’t include weekends in the “guarantee”, the Outer Link bus runs every 15 minutes throughout its entire operating span, seven days a week. My hope is that becomes the standard. Many busy routes that serve a lot of uni students (Sandringham Road in particular comes to mind) have services that are stupidly crowded up until 9pm or sometimes even later during the week.
Report says the new frequent routes are to be frequent 7 days @15minute headways, just until 7pm.
Yes that sounds a bit funny, for an proper “frequent all the time” network you’d expect it to go through to eleven or midnight. A lot of people are still at work at 7pm, let alone finished their shopping/dining/entertainment/studies etc.
re: PT Changes/PTOM and maybe one day double deckers.
So when is AT actually going to grasp the nettle properly, and take over the whole shebang and start running the bulk of the bus services directly (again)?
As I see it the only way long term that you will maintain a workable/integrated model for PT as a whole is if AT (or another CCO) owns/runs the buses like the old ARA did until the National Government of the day forced them to sell the bus operation off (to what became eventually, NZBUS).
Otherwise, what incentive do operators like NZBUS have with implementing double deckers or Integrated ticketing or timetable integration? – with DDs they have to buy a new (expensive) bus, when the old bendy buses could be got for less and yet carry similar numbers. Its not NZBUS who care that one bendy bus takes up two normal bus places at lights or bus stops – all they actually care about is maximising returns for their shareholders – not the Auckland public.
And one way to do that is to keep the existing clapped out diesel gulping fleet in service for as long as possible to maximise the investment they have made in “solving” Auckland PT issues.
Don’t forget the whole electronic ticketing/Snapper/HOP debacle and the current competing with trains/ferrys etc service arrangement came about due to Infratil/NZBUS/Stagecoach or whatever they were called/are now called/will be called next week/month/year – going off and doing their own thing whether or not it makes any sense for the PT user of the Auckland region as a whole.
I’m sure if you dig deep enough you’ll find that the big bus operators are the ones still plumping for the keeping of the stage based payment system with intermode transfer “fees” – as they get the most money that way for the least effort.
Also the only way that the public will accept they have a working integrated ticketing system where you have zones not stages and can go anywhere within these zones in a set time for a flat fare no matter how many modes are used to do so. This the only way you can encourage seamless transfer between modes of transport (bus to train) or commutes like bus/ferry/train/bus commutes occur without ripping people off. And seamless transfers at no cost to the PT user is what AT requires to make their grand plan work right?
If you have integrated bus and train services, you don’t need have the gazillions of buses you have now all running their own little spaghetti routes to/from Britomart/Manukau etc, instead these buses can now mainly do proper local “loop” delivering people to/from the nearest transport hub (bus/train station). From there people can then transfer (at no more cost!) to the fast and frequent services that get them closer to where they need to be.
So instead of having 4 or 5 (or 10 or 20) buses in a long loop going from Botany to Britomart of wherever which has a round trip of say 90 minutes, those buses do local feeder circuits. Then you run the fast double Decker b.line buses from there to Britomart (until the train gets that far out). Makes sense to me.
But you won’t get there with the current operators controlling the buses. They’ll do what they did so well with Snapper, argue with AT as long as possible, sulk and refuse to talk when it doesn’t go their way, when they eventually lose, go to court, argue about the facts, complain to as many government ministers as who will listen, and generally throw all their toys out of the cot until they get their own way.
And if all that doesn’t end up in tears and after a long frustrating delay eventually with AT owning and running the bus services I’ll eat all my old HOP/Snapper/Stagecoach electronic payment cards.
Basically AT needs to grow up and tell the bus guys now – that from now on its our way or the highway – end of story, no ifs buts or maybes.
If you don’t like it. Get lost.
RE: the integrated ticketing on trains/ferries, presumably they will still have fare paid checking on the services to verify those on board have paid their fare or part fare/have tagged on if they are using HOP.
So, if you have a HOP card and “tagged on” how can you prove to a checker you have paid/tagged on – do they scan your pass to see where you got on the network to verify you’ve actually “payed”/will have paid a fare when you tag off?
Presumably they will have barriers to entry/exit at each station like they do overseas so that you have to scan onto the system to get entry to the station platform, then do the same to leave – or are they going to have the current “wander in and out” system they have now and randomly check the tickets on the train?
All the HOP scanners I’ve seen in place at train stations seem to be stand alone devices near the entry/exit from the platform at train stations. For which you will wave your HOP card past as you walk on/off the station – a kind of voluntary system at best I’d say.
I look forward to the day when we have a proper PT system that works, but I feel its going to be quite a ways off knowing the vested interests at play here.
I may be pleasantly surprised, but nothing about Auckland PT has every managed that in all the time I’ve lived here.
To answer a few points.
Current legislation prevents AT from owning and running bus services themselves. With PTOM AT will set the routes along with the full timetable for them and contact them out so they will have more control than now.
One if the concessions the bus companies got was longer contracts so that they had a bit more certainty to invest in new equipment. I think that new equipment might actually be a requirement. Also AT will have incentives in the contracts for meeting things like patronage targets, service levels etc. so that should keep NZ Bus happy.
Once the contracts are fully rolled out it would take the bus companies out if the equation on the fare setting.
For integrated trains there will only be gates at Britomart and Newmarket initially. As most trips start or end there then people would be penalised if they didn’t tag on/off at the other end. Same thing with the ferries and my understanding is only the downtown terminal will have gates. They will also be some staff on the trains that will have hand held machines to do random checks.
“Otherwise, what incentive do operators like NZBUS have with implementing double deckers or Integrated ticketing or timetable integration?”
Double deckers = increase patronage capacity per driver. Staffing costs are a huge proportion of marginal bus operating costs. Using double deckers on busy routes means they will more or less double the number of passengers carried per driver. So they effectively cut operating costs per passenger and therefore increase profitability.
Integrated ticketing + timetable integration = vastly improved utilisation, i.e. more people carried in the same number of buses by filling up empty seats and cutting out dead running and unproductive counter-peak sections of routes. Again that goes straight to the bottom line, more fares for the same operating costs.
“with DDs they have to buy a new (expensive) bus, when the old bendy buses could be got for less and yet carry similar numbers. Its not NZBUS who care that one bendy bus takes up two normal bus places at lights or bus stops – all they actually care about is maximising returns for their shareholders – not the Auckland public.”
I’m not sure if they are allowed to run old bendies due to minimum standards in the contract, so it would be a case of new bendies vs. new double deckers. A bus only lasts a decade or so, so every year they need to replace about 10% of their fleet regardless. Somewhere someone has decided DDs might make more sense for the new purchases.
Congestion at stops does impact upon bus operations, that means more time and more buses to move the same number of people, again that constrains the number of passengers/fares per driver and per bus. If they can cut say 5% off the trip time on the Dominion Rd run, they could run the same frequency with maybe one or two less buses on the road. Or in other words if using bendies slowed up the route by 5$, they’d need to buy two more buses and employ two more drivers just to meet the same service.
It doesn’t sound like there has been any laws introduced to force the operators to consider double deckers, so that implies they are willingly trialling them because they think it makes financial sense.
Or three. The current bendy buses are all K-reg, which puts them in the very early 1980s. My first car was an NZ-built 1981 model, registration KA7976. Some of the other buses are P-reg, putting them around 1990. There is no indication whatsoever that NZ Bus is renewing 10% (or any) of its fleet every year, because if it was the oldest bus in service would be about an AV-reg.
If I’m not mistaken there is a moratorium on adding new bendies to the fleet, so the existing ones are indeed old dungers from the early 80s that have been held on to primarily just for a couple of peak runs each a day. But they are an exception because new articulated haven’t been allowed for decades.
The normal fleet used on all day operations is much younger and turned over after about a decade, give or take a few years.
Anyway the point is that operators do buy new buses at regular intervals so there isn’t anything particularly difficult about working double deckers or new articulateds into the fleet over time.
Hmm,
I don’t see any double deckers on the road today except for ones like old UK Routemasters used for Party Transports and tourist buses.
So, why don’t we have fleets of them if they’re so much better than the current single decker models and new bendy buses aren’t allowed anymore?
Don’t get me wrong, I’d be the first to use ’em if they had some on my routes but I think theres more to this lack than meets the eye.
The report mentions NZTA plan to revoke six sections of state highway in Auckland, which AT will take over responsibility for. Does anyone know what these are?
@geoff they will be talking about roads that were highways like hobsonville rd that when a new motorway is built the old road gets put into ATs hands to maintain.
I realise that, but other than SH18 and SH20, what are the other four?
I think some of it is around Grafton Gully next to Grafton Rd – I there NZTA plan to lift the motorway designation on small no longer useful pieces.
I hope they can lift the motorway designation on Wellesley St East (the motorway over bridge). Right now it is actually illegal to cycle between Wellesley St and the Domain or Hospital, and it is illegal for them to provide a footpath or cycleway on that piece of bridge too.
Yay for double-decker buses! Hope they’re the new hybrid diesel/electric ones that they have running in Edinburgh and London. Good work NZ Bus; good work Auckland Transport.
If AT is worried about loss of parking revenue perhaps they should follow San Fran and price based on demand.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/16/us/program-aims-to-make-the-streets-of-san-francisco-easier-to-park-on.html?_r=1
As well as the excitment factor of catching a double decker bus, there is also the impression they create about Auckland being serious about public transport. If public transport wasn’t being used by over 100000 of us every day, there would be no need for high capacity (to the point of being relatively uncommon) buses. I think this might make a big difference to the perception that “Aucklanders don’t use public transport”
7 pm is far too early a cut off, ideally it should go until 11.30 pm at night 7 days a week. Here in Brisbane we can have full buses at 9pm at night! 9pm at bare minimum.
If you want to get people of of cars, you need PT to be available whenever. Don’t skimp!
BUZ http://www.thredbo-conference-series.org/downloads/thredbo10_papers/thredbo10-themeA-Warren.pdf
One train an hour off peak to Manuka is PANTS!
It is bad enough that the newly extended London Overgound East London Line goes down from a five minute to a ten minute frequency on its core section (Dalston Junction to Surrey Quays) after about 22.00hrs.
Couple of points and an invitation.
We are indeed working on the introduction of Double Deckers (inclusive of Hybrid/Electrics) as we move through our Fleet replacement program. These would most likely be ADL manufactured and assembled in NZ at Kiwi. There is a nine month lead time from Order placement to being in service. At present we have 100 new ADL Enviro 200 no in service in Akl with another 136 in production with delivery phased between now and Mar 2013. This reperesents approx 30% of current fleet in Akl being replaced. (653) at an investment of circa $100m. A further 16O are pencilled in the forward plan.
For Greg N, we are NZ BUS not Stagecoach. Stagecoach were the previous owners of this business and we have since our purchase been investing heavily in Fleet, Training – Customer Service, Health and Safety, Facilities and the capability competency of our people. All things that were in a less than satisfactory state when we took control. Kind of amusing that you dont consider that we are focussed on the customer /s or growth in PT and only interested in maximising returns for our shareholders. Suggest you might want to look at our website or view the presentation I gavce recently at the Infratil Investor Day a video of which is available on the Infratil site.
Obviously in the absence of fact some will fill the vacuum with assumptions that may or may not be correct. Therefore I extend an invitation to those who are interested to meet with myself and my team to have a look at my business, understand the history from our persepective, where we are at today and what we are focussing on moving forward.
If you are interested in attending please forward your contact details to Jayne Collins my PA jayne.collins@nzbus.co.nz and I will arrange session at our new onehunga facility in the 28th March between 3.30pm-5pm. Please rsvp by 23rd March to allow Jayne to cater for the numbers given we have limited space available.
Regards
Zane
Hi Zane, great to have your input here and thanks for the opportunity to find out more. We look forward to more interaction with NZBus and all other stakeholders in the transport field.
Hi Zane,
Its good to hear from NZ Bus and I too hope we hear more from you and NZ Bus going forward.
Please don’t take any offence at my earlier comments or these ones below.
They are intended to inspire thoughts and create actions that result in a better PT system for all.
First up I know who NZ Bus is and who owns them. My comments equating NZ Bus with Stagecoach were tongue in cheek.
But you do have to realise that in most peoples minds NZBus = Infratil and (via association ) Stagecoach – even though it was a few years since NZ Bus took over the Stagecoach operation – you’d be well aware I hope that the old Stagecoach PT days leave long memories that have a bitter taste in a lot of mouths.
So to some, yes, the leopard may have changed spots (to NZ Bus/Metro livery) but you are still the biggest bus/PT operator in Auckland and get will a lot of stick as a result of that fact. Past service disruptions due to management lock out of staff over their work to rule comes to mind here as a recent example.
So to some, some of the stick is possibly justified. But perhaps not all the stick though 😉
As for “Stagecoach were the previous owners of this business and we have since our purchase been investing heavily in Fleet, Training – Customer Service, Health and Safety, Facilities and the capability competency of our people. All things that were in a less than satisfactory state when we took control. Kind of amusing that you dont consider that we are focussed on the customer /s or growth in PT and only interested in maximising returns for our shareholders”
Well, you *DO* work for a private company with shareholders/Investors (as do I) and the main purpose for companies with this structure, *IS* to make acceptable (to the shareholder) returns for those shareholders. This is the same model the current government is pursuing with the partial privatisation of the power companies, and is the same thinking that is behind that, as was the original sell off of the Yellow Bus operation.
Certainly the things you talk about are ways to make and retain such returns (over the medium to longer term) – so while those things you mention may appear to be the end for you and NZ Bus, I can assure you that they are the means to an end as far as your investors/Shareholders would see it.
And no I am not a employee, direct shareholder or Investor in NZ Bus or Infratil or any competitors (my Kiwisaver scheme might well be invested in those though).
I would agree with your comment “All things that were in a less than satisfactory state when we took control”, things were in a somewhat better state when Yellow bus was sold to Stagecoach. But in some cases, the second change of owner (to NZ Bus) produced little outward sign anything had changed from the Stagecoach run it down and rip off the customer days for quite some time – except eventually a change of colour of paint on outside of the buses out my way.
I still see the same old bendy buses around, and a few of the buses I see/pass/and sometimes use on a day to day basis still are ones that are a decade old or older judging by the number plates. Yes there are new buses around too, but in a visible/tangible sense, it does appear that sometimes little has actually changed over the years since the Stagecoach departed.
And yes I have used Yellow Bus, Stagecoach and NZ Bus services over the years and I also ensure that I “let the bus go first” at when they are pulling out of bus stops (or blocked bus lanes) in front of me when possible.
Moving on – I am sure that you’d agree with me that a fantastic PT system is more than just other courteous road users, the provision of flash new buses/trains or knowledgeable/courteous/safe drivers/staff (despite these being very welcome changes for the better). Nor is it just about offering some form of electronic payment such as using the HOP branded Snapper cards as you can do now on NZ Bus services.
And in that vein I point out that to me and the public in general (and perhaps others here in this forum although I don’t speak for them) – that the perception out there in PT land is that the current “HOP”/Snapper card SNAFU, the need for another card and bus reader changeover this year, and the fact that Integrated ticket system in Auckland is (light) years behind where it was planned to be by now/should be right now – is considered to have been mostly – if not solely – caused by Infratil/NZ Bus and their insistence on Snapper being included as part of the Integrated ticketing landscape in Auckland.
And all this despite an open tender/selection process, contracts awarded to Thales and the NZ Courts declaring Infratil/Snapper et al had no rights to complain over that process years ago.
Rightly or wrongly thats the impression out there. The whole Snapper debacle (which is what it is) taints NZ Bus and its owner Infratil, to this day in Auckland in the mind of many of the PT users – me included.
So as a result of this past historic (and some would say hysteric) behaviour by Infratil/NZ Bus – not Stagecoach) there is a lot of “Snapper” and other related baggage associated with NZ Bus as a PT operator that needs to get thrown off the PT bus/train/ferry before it can move forward to a new future.
As well, we also hear and read from AT meeting agendas that the proposed continuation of a fare stage based system with limited transfer capability instead of fare zones under the Integrated ticketing system is being driven in part (if not in full) by the need for the existing PT operators (of which NZ Bus is the largest) to not lose (too much) revenue in doing so.
If NZ Bus doesn’t agree with this half way approach by AT, then thats great, lets hear publicly the approach NZ Bus wants to take then.
What is the NZ Bus position on this situation?
There may be others here who cannot speak up and ask for this but I can, and am asking for a response.
And besides that, I’d want to know that and also ask to see that NZ Bus is on board with the concept of working hand in hand with rail and ferry operators, not competing with them at every instance as has been done previously and is still done in places, even now.
Indeed it should be the case that AT and NZ Bus should act as the “big boys” in the room, lead by example and make sure to demonstrate to all that the future of PT in Auckland is cross-modal co-operation, with integrated ticketing using fare zones, free transfers between modes, with timetables and services to match the integration of ticketing and that its delivered sooner than later.
The end result here being that this proves to all doubters that NZ Bus believes the future of PT for both users and operators is in fact growing the PT pie for everyone, not trying just to maximise its own share regardless.
And lastly, even if what I say is considered outrageous and incorrect/out of order by all who read this – and everyone else but me is deliriously happy with the status quo in PT and the marvelous increase in PT users, profits, NZ Bus modern bus PT offerings etc.
Then someone tell me why is AT moving to a PTOM model over the next few years? Just because they can/are required to by law?
Surely, this shows that AT at least (and even the government if PTOM is legislated to occur), believe the time of change in Auckland PT from that what went before is upon us.
Now, having said all that Zane, it is good to hear that your are moving forward with new hybrid buses and/or Double Deckers – hopefully only if they are indeed workable and appropriate for Auckland PT. I also appreciate the offer of a first hand look at your operations.
I am just not sure if I will be able to take you up on this offer next week though due to pressing commitments.
Lastly I am very interested in what you and NZ Bus have to say [and do] so keep on posting here for the rest of the folks here sakes.
As there have been no RSVP to my invitation to meet with myself and my team on Wednesday 28th March , I have deferred this meeting.
I will reissue an invitation in the not too distant future at which point there may be more ability for those who are interested to attend.
Warm Regards
Zane