Post by ReclinerPost by Roland PerryPost by ReclinerPost by ReclinerPost by Roland PerryPost by ReclinerPost by Roland PerryPost by ReclinerPost by Roland PerryPost by John LevinePost by M***@dastardlyhq.comI never realised HEx even had paddington check-in.
It's more post-Lockerbie (December 88) thing. And not clear
why the bags checked in at Paddington were that much more of a
loophole than those checked in at a different Heathrow
terminal to the one you were flying from.
More likely there weren't enough people using it to be worth
Another consideration is that by having check-in desks at
Paddington, pressure would be relieved from the ones at
Heathrow, which quite likely at the time were struggling to meet demand.
Post by John LevineThe CAT in Vienna, which is much like HeX, premium express
that is not much faster than the local service on the same
still lets you check in at its city terminal. The one thing
that makes it somewhat attractive is that you can drop your
evening for an early morning flight.
Use of "airport express" services is largely about marketing,
performance. Something I'm sure I don't want to debate for
the umpteenth time with a usual suspect here. They don't
understand, and never will.
Make your mind up: you've previously told us how much better
HEx was, now you say it's not much better in reality, and it's
that makes them so.
Oh dear, despite (or was it *because*) I said I didn't want to debate
it, up pops Mr Mole.
Anyway, it's better because people perceive it to be better than sharing
a train with drunks and pickpockets. I've said that many times before,
and will continue to do so. The "marketing", which you clearly can't
understand, despite it staring you in the face, is the branding.
Post by ReclinerPost by Roland PerryThey are seen by the public as insulated from the local urban
services which are likely to be populated with drunks,
pick-pockets, baggage snatchers, urine soaked people who
haven't had a bath for weeks, and so on. In two capital cities
I visited when globe-trotting, my employer insisted I didn't
use the local transit system (and paid for door to door limos)
Yes, I can think of several cities like that. But London isn't one of them.
International travellers don't know that. They have "one size fits all"
rule.
Post by ReclinerSo a visitor arrives at Paddington on HEx. Then what are they
supposed to do?
The original plan was to get taxi the last couple of miles. Much cheaper
than a taxi all the way from Heathrow. Yes, the rank is now a bit
further away, Notwork Rail shooting themselves in the foot yet again.
So you're telling us that the opening of the EL shouldn't have
significantly reduced HEx usage compared to, say, 2018/19?
No, I wasn't telling you that.
Post by ReclinerHave you actually looked at the data?
No, but if you provide a cite (or even better post a summary) I'll read
it.
This chart shows HEx's failure to produce a modal shift from taxis to rail
in the years before Covid. In fact, HEx+HCon had a declining share in the
decade before Covid (and it wasn't HCon that was shrinking), while taxis
had a growing share. So HEx has been facilitating a modal shift from rail
to taxis.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/303808/transportation-to-heathrow-a
irport-used-in-the-uk/
That's behind a paywall. (And yes I did try opening a "Basic" account).
Post by ReclinerPost by ReclinerFortunately, the Tube, despite being filled with 'drunks, pick-pockets,
baggage snatchers, and urine soaked people who haven't had a bath for
weeks', was far more successful, and grew its share. From carrying about
50% more passengers than HEx, it grew to about double the number (mainly
because of the decline in HEx, rather than its own growth).
It's not about "share", it's the absolute number of taxis (hackneys and
private hire) cabs taken of the roads.
You keep trotting out that theory, but it simply isn't true.
I keep trotting it out because it *is* true. I was a shareholder at the
time, and it was covered extensively in their annual reports. It gets a
little tiresome you keep trotting out a denial.
Post by ReclinerThe Heathrow rail (ie, HEx+HCon) share of ground transport
was only 8% in 2019, so perhaps HEx was 6-7%. Taxis and mini cabs were 32% and the Tube 20%.
For the second or third time (and that only this week) the *share* is
utterly irrelevant. What matters is the absolute size of the on-going
modal shift from taxi to HEx.
Post by ReclinerNow, with the switch of all HCon and a lot of HEx to the Liz, the HEx
modal share is probably less than 5%. Even if all its remaining
passengers switched to taxis, nobody would notice (except HAL, which
would make money from the drop-off fees, rather than losing money on HEx).
We'll discuss the loss-making below.
Post by ReclinerAs I said, the taxi and minicab share has gone up over the years (28%
in 2012 to 32% in 2019, and the rail share has gone down (11% to 8%),
tanks to how unattractive HEx was. So, it was driving passengers from
rail to road. It's achieved the exact opposite of what you claim
Modal shift fallacy again. And thanks for expanding on the data behind
the paywall, that always helps whoever's argument it supports. But what
we need are the absolute numbers (see below).
And it's ridiculous to claim HEx is "driving passengers away", what's
possibly wearing off is the price differential with taxis (much great
share of cheaper minicabs vs black cabs) and inflation in airfares
meaning the add-on cost of a taxi is less of an issue.
Post by Recliner(inevitably, without ever checking the data).
I spot check it from time to time, thanks.
Post by ReclinerPost by Roland PerryPost by ReclinerPost by ReclinerIn the first two years after Covid, the airport public transport share
fell, for obvious reasons, but it's now recovered — except for HEx, which
continues to fall. HEx volumes are down about 30% from the pre-Covid peak
and falling, compared to about 10% average decline for other rail services
(apart from the booming Liz). Meanwhile, the longer, more frequent, higher
capacity Elizabeth Line trains leave the airport packed.
So it seems that airport travellers are far more savvy than you give them
credit for.
It's not about being "Savvy". There was widespread misapprehension about
the role of HEx, which was never to compete with the much cheaper tube,
but to give a premium service to people who would otherwise use a taxi
(in order to reduce pollution and congestion on the M4 corridor and the
airport itself). And it rapidly succeeded in meeting all its performance
targets in that respect.
So why are its passengers defecting in droves, first to cabs, and now
to the Liz? Its journeys declined by 12% in the first quarter of this
year, compared to a year earlier.
I've given a plausible reason for a drift to taxis, above. We don't know
how much the increase of the Liz is due to other factors, like a
reduction in bus, private car, former Heathrow Connect etc,
Post by Reclinerhttps://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/media/15nga1q4/passenger-rail-usage-jan-ma
r-2024.pdf
Or, if you prefer to go further back, HEx had 6.4m passengers in
2017/18, which was down to just 4.5m in 2023/24, its
lowest in many years (apart from the two Covid years). They're down to
1m in the first quarter of 2024 compared to the
peak of 1.6m in the same quarter in 2018, a decline of 38%. The
business is simply fading away.
https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/statistics/usage/passenger-rail-usage/tabl
e-1223-passenger-journeys-by-operator/
Post by Roland PerryPost by ReclinerPost by ReclinerI wonder how much longer HAL can keep pouring money down the HEx drain?
What sort of financial deficit is HAL having to subsidise, currently?
The most recent accounts for Heathrow Express Operating Company Limited
were for 2022, before the Liz had an impact, when it made a profit of
£19.1m after tax.
OK, so as recently as that, still making a decent profit.
Post by ReclinerThe Covid-impacted 2021 had a loss of £(17.4)m after tax.
As you keep telling us, Covid was an exceptional period.
Post by ReclinerIn 2019, the last year before Covid, it made a profit after tax of
£30m. In the year of its peak usage, 2018, it made a profit after tax
of £34.3m.
Making a decent profit, as well as reducing the number of taxis on the
M4. Win-win.
Post by ReclinerLooking at 2019's revenue of £118.4m, that's likely to be down to
around £82m with the drop in usage, while operating costs have
probably risen from £84m to around £100m, so I estimate that the
annual losses before tax are probably £15-20m now.
Even if it gets as bad as that, it still supports the environmental
credentials of the airport, which very important in the "Third runway"
project.
Post by ReclinerPost by Roland PerryPost by ReclinerOf course, if HAL puts HEx out of its misery, and the EL fills the small
gap with four extra services per hour,
It'll struggle to fill the gap for travellers with a "No city metro"
rule.
There's obviously very few of those, perhaps about 1% of the Heathrow passengers.
Why is it "obvious", do you have any surveys which support that point of
view. I find it difficult to believe that only 20% of HEx passengers are
paying the extra because they are prepared to pay the extra just to get
a faster train than the tube, which they would happy to use otherwise.
I'd expect it to be more 80:20 the other way round: 80% would die rather
than use any metro, and 20% confident road warriors who want a faster
trip.
Post by ReclinerPost by Roland PerrySo they'll be back in cabs.
No, the much greater capacity of the Liz is likely to move many
passengers from cabs to rail. Switching four services per hour from the
unpopular, little-used HEx to the far more useful and popular Liz gives
a big increase in capacity and an improved frequency at almost all
stops, and makes the rail option much more attractive overall.
That's your opinion, but it's someone disjoint from the viability of HEx
as a stand-alone service.
Post by ReclinerSo the best way to get a modal shift from cabs to rail is to shut HEx,
and let TfL run four extra EL Heathrow services per hour.
Is there any evidence the capacity constraints of EL is putting off
passengers?
--
Roland Perry