North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

Video on Youtube showing the scaffolding that is now in place on the bridge (not my video, just thought it might be of interest).

 

The latest Moors Line has arrived, I've only had a quick look through but I did notice a 'DID YOU KNOW' comment stating "Every year, Bridge 42 carries an impressive 250,000 passengers across its span." I recall on here, mention being made previously that passenger figures appear to be a closely guarded secret, so maybe this is the closest we are going to get to them?

I was, perhaps wrongly in some people's eyes, amused that while there is mention of the Internal Communications and Engagement Awards which Moors Line has been 'shortlisted' for (and I use the inverted commas deliberately), elsewhere there is a correction to the previous Moors Line, where it appears they got the title of the King wrong. And there's an interesting picture of a Still boiler on page 59! Best Internal Communications?

 

250,000 paying pax, or 125,ooo paying pax twice?

 

Crane in action at the bridge today I understand. Certainly the fair weather should help.

Jon

 

No signs of any of the propping yet, though. (Which all rests, per the circulated drawings, on 4 piers in the riverbed.) I wonder how long it will take to put that all in, once they get going on it?

Noel

 

The crane is there to lower the heavy timbers that will form the foundations for the propping. I can see that there will be logistics problems in having too many large vehicles in the village at the level crossing so I guess it will be a case of get the crane set up then bring in the first lorry once everything is ready to drop them in. Even getting the crane into position is not going to be a five minute job.

 

It's not a Stills boiler; its TTO 43654. Can't you read?

I note that, when Moors Line was first re-vamped a couple of years ago, the names of the paid editorial team that replaced volunteer editor John Hunt was proudly mentioned on the back page. They are now all anonymous. I wonder why?

 

It's interesting that in the last two sets (and possibly more - I didn't look) of NYMR Trust accounts, there is a the identical statement:

"The Trust's Heritage Railway Service is the busiest in Britain, carrying prior to the Covid downturn up to 300,000 passengers over a total or more than 60,000 train miles each year."

(My emphasis).
​

Now, there is no compulsion on the railway to publish its visitor numbers in the annual report. But this does sound a bit disingenuous, as though the railway is simulaneously trying to make out it is still at heart a 300,000 passenger per year attraction, while also putting in the comment about Covid to explain why it isn;t there at the moment, to an undisclosed extent. No doubt trading conditions changed significantly since then, but when all is said and done, it was 6 years ago: at some point, you have to look at how you are doing now.

Looking at the most recent PLC accounts, the income from "Railway Operations" is £4.3m (2024/25 figures, the most recent available, but I think realistically covering calendar year 2024). In the absence of any other clarification, I assume that figure is primarily fare income. If the "250,000 passengers" figure is correct, then it makes the income per passenger around £17: a long way from the headline fare of £50. One assumes that, amongst others, children travelling on "kids for a quid" deals are counted as full passengers, but even there, a 2+2 family paying around £100 is still in effect paying £25 per person. So either the 250k figure is inflated, or considerable numbers of people are travelling at a discount - probably a bit of both. It is difficult to make comparisons with other railways because comparable figures aren't easily available, but a fare income per passenger of 1/3 of the headline feels rather low, even accepting that considerable numbers (for example children, coach parties etc) will inevitably be travelling at something of a discount.

That's actually a good point (the relevance of which has just dawned on me!) If "250,000 passengers passing over Bridge 42" is actually 125,000 making the double journey, it makes the fare income more explicable, but is a particularly deceptive way of reporting the passenger numbers, and would be disguising a calamitous loss from the pre-Covid figure. In the FY 2019/20 accounts, the last set pre-Covid, the annual report includes the statement "we provide around 300,000 visitors every year with the opportunity to experience and learn about the history and development of railways" - which is pretty unequivocal that it is the number of people, not journeys.

Tom

 

Surely the gradual move towards online bookings should be at least sustaining fare revenue? If passengers are paying in advance, even with an online discount, the railway is guaranteed the income. Compared with people walking past booking offices and not having tickets checked by non-existent Ticket Inspectors.

 

For many years heritage railways had to report their visitor numbers and other statistics to the Railway Inspectorate. Eventually the HRA was tasked with doing this and provided collated information to the ORR as it had become. Since the death of Bill Hillier, who used to do it for the HRA, this seems to have fallen by the wayside. Visitor numbers was seen as a better parameter than the traditional passenger journeys that the pre-nationalisation and even pre-grouping railways were required to submit. If the NYMR are now quoting passenger journeys then I suggest that their visitor numbers have very much fallen behind in recent times and they are significantly less than other leading railways.
Whichever way you look at it, though, the bandied numbers don’t gel with the published accounts, as Tom has also suggested. The NYMR approach to information sharing compares very badly with that of Johnny at the SpVR.

 

Perhaps the HRA might be persuaded to introduce a new annual award for "The most bare-faced positive manipulation of dodgy data", with the first winners likely go to the NYMR for" their consistent misleading statements of passenger numbers"?