Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Feb 21, 9:05*am, "Willms" wrote:
Am Sat, 20 Feb 2010 21:14:50 UTC, *schrieb Andy *
auf uk.railway :

con ces sion aire *(kn-ssh-n r):

The holder or operator of a concession.

LOROL are the concessionaire of the concession awarded by TfL. DfT
have handed over their role to TfL, LO is a concession rather than a
franchise due to the differing arrangements regarding service levels
and revenue.

* DfT has conceded the exploitation of a part of the railway network
around London to TfL. "The concession" is both the contractual
relationship of the conceding party (DfT) and the concessionaire (TfL)
and also the resource with is object of the concession.


No, there is no consession. DfT have ceded the their role to TfL.

* Paul Corfield mostly describes correctly what a concession is:
namely where the concessionaire bears the commercial risk of
exploiting the resource conceded by the concession and as the
concession (see e.g. the contracts about the Channel Tunnel at the
IGC's website). A mining company may get a concession to exploit a
given mineral resource (including fluid minerals like petroleum).


Check again, that is only one interpretation of concession.

* But then he describes LOROL as the concessionaire, although it is
TfL and not LOROL which bears the commercial risk of exploiting the
concession, and where it is TfL which sets the fares etc etc. LOROL is
the contractor to operate the London Overground network for TfL, but
not the concessionaire.


Try again when you've asked a professor of English about the use of
the word.

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Feb 21, 10:32*am, Mizter T wrote:
On Feb 21, 9:26*am, Roland Perry wrote:





remarked:

"The all lines rover is NOT valid for travel on Eurostar, Heathrow
Express, TfL Underground, Docklands Light Railway and Croydon Tramlink,
private railways (except Ffestiniog Railway) or on any shipping
service."

Which is a rather London-Centric view, and perhaps it's not valid on the
Sheffield/Nottingham/Manchester trams either.

Why do you say that? If a line is not in the exception list the rover is
valid, surely?

a) Are those trams "National Rail lines" [probably not, but then neither
* * *is the Croydon one].
b) Are they on the map [no].

Croydon Tramlink might have a case for inclusion as part of it used to
be a BR/NR line - but that's also the case with Metrolink in
Manchester of course.

If think that the validity is to be read in conjunction with the map.
This has all the valid routes on it, except in the Greater London
area, where much of the detail is missing, hence the list of
exceptions.

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

In message
, at
02:32:57 on Sun, 21 Feb 2010, Mizter T remarked:
"The all lines rover is NOT valid for travel on Eurostar, Heathrow
Express, TfL Underground, Docklands Light Railway and Croydon Tramlink,
private railways (except Ffestiniog Railway) or on any shipping
service."

Which is a rather London-Centric view, and perhaps it's not valid on the
Sheffield/Nottingham/Manchester trams either.

Why do you say that? If a line is not in the exception list the rover is
valid, surely?

a) Are those trams "National Rail lines" [probably not, but then neither
* * *is the Croydon one].
b) Are they on the map [no].

Croydon Tramlink might have a case for inclusion as part of it used to
be a BR/NR line - but that's also the case with Metrolink in
Manchester of course.

And also the Nottingham tram (parts use the same trackbed as the "Robin
Hood Line").
--
Roland Perry

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 16:35:46 +0100, "Willms"
wrote:

No, there is no consession. DfT have ceded the their role to TfL.

Which is the concession. You use yourself the word "cede".

You are wrong in assigning the same meanings to the words. They come
from different Latin roots: concedere, 'to concede' and cedere, 'to
yield'.

The Oxford English Dictionary has four meanings of concession:
n., 1 a thing conceded. 2 a reduction in price for a certain category
of person. 3 the right to use land or other property for a specified
purpose, granted by a government or other controlling body. 4 a
commercial operation set up within the premises of a larger concern.

to cede means to 'give up (power or territory)'. [OED again]

In the context of this discussion, the above statement is correct
(despite the dodgy spelling). DfT have ceded their powers to TfL.
TfL have then granted rights [as concession: meaning 3] under that
power.

I think you should concede[1] now that the native English speakers in
this group do know what they are talking about (some of the time).

[1] v., finally admit or agree that something is true.

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Feb 21, 3:35*pm, "Willms" wrote:
Am Sun, 21 Feb 2010 12:04:37 UTC, *schrieb Andy *
auf uk.railway :

No, there is no consession. DfT have ceded the their role to TfL.

* Which is the concession. You use yourself the word "cede". And DfT
did not give the "North London Rail Concession" as they call it, as a
gift to TfL, ceding all rights forever, handing over property, but
they ceded only a concession to TfL, to exploit (or use it, if you
think that the former word has something pejorative to it) the
concession for their purposes and (maybe within certain limits) as it
pleases TfL.


Try and remember that English is not the logical language that German
is. The word concession has many possible meanings and you seem to be
homing in on just one of them for your pedantic arguments. All the
franchises could legitimately be called concessions, but that is not
the word that DfT has chosen.

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 04:53:11 -0800 (PST), Mizter T
wrote:

TfL seem to regard LO as a kind of metro network - as the LO name
suggests, sort of an overground equivalent to the Underground. And
ultimately TfL are free to show interchanges on in-carriage Tube
diagrams however they please.

I think, ELL excepted, that its closest analogy is Merseyrail - or a
German S-Bahn, which is part of the main national network but
usually[1] not treated as such because of its standalone nature.

[1] DB through ticketing exists onto most or all of the DB-run
S-Bahnen, for instance, though I'd think few will actually use it.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 04:58:29 -0800 (PST), Mizter T
wrote:

Though I understand that the operator of the Merseyrail Electrics,
Serco-Nedrailways (or is it now Serco-Abellio?), takes the revenue
risk - though I think the PTE may have taken it under the previous
arrangement when the concession (or possibly still a franchise back
then) was in the hands of MTL then Arriva (via a takeover).

Correct. The change to the arrangement was apparently because the old
arrangement didn't give Arriva much incentive to keep fare-dodging
down, nor particularly to promote its services.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 23:38:33 -0800 (PST), Mizter T
wrote:

Dunno. My guess is that it will be accepted, but not because it has to
be, instead simply because TfL decide it might as well be, given that
it'll be valid on the rest of the LO network

Not an uncommon approach - English national concessionary passes are
accepted on the UCOC X5 from Oxford to Cambridge throughout, even
though I'm not entirely sure that all of it is registered as local bus
routes (though some of it certainly is).

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

In article ,
(Neil Williams) wrote:

On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 23:38:33 -0800 (PST), Mizter T
wrote:

Dunno. My guess is that it will be accepted, but not because it has to
be, instead simply because TfL decide it might as well be, given that
it'll be valid on the rest of the LO network

Not an uncommon approach - English national concessionary passes are
accepted on the UCOC X5 from Oxford to Cambridge throughout, even
though I'm not entirely sure that all of it is registered as local bus
routes (though some of it certainly is).

I thought the reason bus passes were accepted all the way now was because
it had all been registered as a stage service. They were only accepted
East of St Neots at one time when that was the only stage bit, or so I
understood.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Feb 21, 7:51*pm, (Neil Williams)
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 04:53:11 -0800 (PST), Mizter T
wrote:
TfL seem to regard LO as a kind of metro network - as the LO name
suggests, sort of an overground equivalent to the Underground. And
ultimately TfL are free to show interchanges on in-carriage Tube
diagrams however they please.

I think, ELL excepted, that its closest analogy is Merseyrail - or a
German S-Bahn, which is part of the main national network but
usually[1] not treated as such because of its standalone nature.

An S-Bahn of which a portion is also a crucial rail freight route in
the context of the national railway (NLL and WLL). Genuinely curious
as to how many S-Bahns in Germany find themselves in similar positions?

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Feb 22, 1:23*am, Mizter T wrote:

On Feb 21, 7:51*pm, (Neil Williams)
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 04:53:11 -0800 (PST), Mizter T
wrote:
TfL seem to regard LO as a kind of metro network - as the LO name
suggests, sort of an overground equivalent to the Underground. And
ultimately TfL are free to show interchanges on in-carriage Tube
diagrams however they please.

I think, ELL excepted, that its closest analogy is Merseyrail - or a
German S-Bahn, which is part of the main national network but
usually[1] not treated as such because of its standalone nature.

An S-Bahn of which a portion is also a crucial rail freight route in
the context of the national railway (NLL and WLL). Genuinely curious
as to how many S-Bahns in Germany find themselves in similar positions?

^^^
S-Bahnen is what I should have written, of course!

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 07:42:14 +0100, "Willms"
wrote:

No, they have made an operating contract with LOROL, while the way
of usage of the concession ceded by DfT to TfL is specified by the
concessionaire, namely TfL. LOROL does not have the entrepreneurial
freedom to use the resource ceded by DfT to TfL according to their own
plans. The plans are made by the concessionaire TfL and are quite
rigid in regard to the limits in which LOROL has to operate in.

You think that then. Several people, including me, disagree.

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 20:24:27 +0100, "Willms"
wrote:

Am Sat, 20 Feb 2010 12:41:01 UTC, schrieb Paul Corfield
auf uk.railway :

It is part of National Rail, but TfL has the franchise for whatever
number of years.

Not quite correct. TfL have been given the powers to let and manage the
concession for the Overground network. LOROL are the concessionaire who
operate the service for TfL and have to meet the requirements and
standards set by TfL.

which is a wrong use of the English language...

[snip load of old ******** delivered from Germany]

Whatever Mr Pedant. Remind what country you were born in and what your
native language is? How many errors have you made on this group in
dealing with what the rest of us (born and raised in the UK

..... and other English-speaking countries, too Ahem ) understand
as the English language?
--
Paul C

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:02:05 +0100, "Willms"
wrote:

... and that LOROL can set the fares for the lines it operates?

Not relevant.

In what respect can LOROL freely decide how the service is run and
presented and what control do they have about their ticket revenue?

According to the original press release:
Services will be run by London Overground Rail Operations Ltd (LOROL),
a joint venture of MTR and LaingRail, who will operate trains and
stations under the new London Overground concession. Responsibility
for track and signals will remain with Network Rail.

Under the terms of the contract with LOROL TfL will take 90% of the
revenue from the concession for reinvestment in the capitals transport
network, leaving 10% for LOROL as part of an incentive to run the
railway to the highest standards.

http://www.mayorwatch.co.uk/london-o...unches/2007858

They think it's a concession, to operate trains and stations in return
for 10% of revenue. The ability to set fares is not relevant - the
incentive is to run services efficiently; the better they achieve
this, the more revenue it generates.

It's described elsewhere as "a unique, tightly managed contract".

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Sun, 21 Feb 2010, Ivor The Engine wrote:

On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 16:35:46 +0100, "Willms"
wrote:

No, there is no consession. DfT have ceded the their role to TfL.

Which is the concession. You use yourself the word "cede".

You are wrong in assigning the same meanings to the words. They come
from different Latin roots: concedere, 'to concede' and cedere, 'to
yield'.

The Oxford English Dictionary has four meanings of concession:
n., 1 a thing conceded. 2 a reduction in price for a certain category
of person. 3 the right to use land or other property for a specified
purpose, granted by a government or other controlling body. 4 a
commercial operation set up within the premises of a larger concern.

to cede means to 'give up (power or territory)'. [OED again]

In the context of this discussion, the above statement is correct
(despite the dodgy spelling). DfT have ceded their powers to TfL.
TfL have then granted rights [as concession: meaning 3] under that
power.

I think you should concede[1] now that the native English speakers in
this group do know what they are talking about (some of the time).

I certainly look forward to the cession of this session.

tom

--
this place would be a paradise tomorrow if every department had a
supervisor with a sub-machine gun

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

New banner up at Canada Water station this morning, proudly carrying
the LU roundel and the NR double arrow, but no sign of the L.
Overground roundel. Crazy stuff, not least because, as has been
pointed out earlier in this thread, Rotherhithe and Surrey Quays carry
just the overground roundel and no NR arrows.

Incidentally, I managed to grab a peek into Surrey Quays overground
station at the weekend, and grabbed this footage:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlUFCcXZy-8

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On 23 Feb, 10:20, Pale Fox wrote:
New banner up at Canada Water station this morning, proudly carrying
the LU roundel and the NR double arrow, but no sign of the L.
Overground roundel. Crazy stuff, not least because, as has been
pointed out earlier in this thread, Rotherhithe and Surrey Quays carry
just the overground roundel and no NR arrows.


Isn't that because Canada Water is a London Underground station. There
is a similar lack of London Overground roundels at the stations
between Queens Park and Harrow & Wealdstone run by the Bakerloo.

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

"Andy" wrote in message
...
On 23 Feb, 10:20, Pale Fox wrote:
New banner up at Canada Water station this morning, proudly carrying
the LU roundel and the NR double arrow, but no sign of the L.
Overground roundel. Crazy stuff, not least because, as has been
pointed out earlier in this thread, Rotherhithe and Surrey Quays carry
just the overground roundel and no NR arrows.


Isn't that because Canada Water is a London Underground station. There
is a similar lack of London Overground roundels at the stations
between Queens Park and Harrow & Wealdstone run by the Bakerloo.

According to their own publications, Canada Water should have LO (orange)
roundels on the ELL platforms, as they are only used by LO trains. The LU
managed stations on the DC should only have LU (red) roundels as both LU &
LO trains run through the same platforms.

Somewhere outside Canada Water station there should be some sort of
interchange signage that includes the LO roundel, but AIUI this doesn't
necessarily have to appear alongside the main station sign if it doesn't
work architecturally...

Paul S

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Feb 23, 10:20*am, Pale Fox
wrote:
New banner up at Canada Water station this morning, proudly carrying
the LU roundel and the NR double arrow, but no sign of the L.
Overground roundel. Crazy stuff, not least because, as has been
pointed out earlier in this thread, Rotherhithe and Surrey Quays carry
just the overground roundel and no NR arrows.

I went past Canada Water a few days ago - the 'banner' in question was
a temporary canvas cover for the totem/ flag sign, I assume it's there
to cover up the new and permanent totem signage which shows the orange
LO roundel - and whoever designed the temporary arrangement didn't
really think about it before they erroneously added the NR symbol.

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 11:12:17 +0100, "Willms"
wrote:

I still hold that this usage contradicts the worldwide understanding of what a
concession is

Fine. Except we are talking about English usage, in England. Still.

Is London Overground part of National Rail
 

On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 08:49:05 +0100, "Willms"
wrote:

Am Sat, 27 Feb 2010 21:06:59 UTC, schrieb Ivor The Engine
auf uk.railway :

I still hold that this usage contradicts the worldwide understanding of what a
concession is

Fine. Except we are talking about English usage, in England. Still.

My scope is not so limited.

And even there I do have my doubts.

Your scope might be wider but WRT to an arrangement made under English
Law between two English entities, any foreign interpretation which
varies from the English one will have as much relevance as the price
of fish.