Hey I ride Greyhound too!!!

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

steamtrain6868

Train Attendant
Joined
Mar 22, 2011
Messages
98
Bus Travel was nicer in the 1970s--Drivers were nice and they would transfer your luggage for you. There were more back country off freeway road routes like thru the New England and the west on the US Route systewn

1.Like having one pass that covers Greyhound and Amtrak and synchronized schedules

2. Better Bus Safety Standards---If Buses were built to FRA Sfatey Standerds having a bus split in two would not have happed last week

3. More Dedicated HOV and truck lanes.

4. Special Pull off lanes on the freeway to rapid load and unload buses instead of going miles into and out of town.

5. More Intermodal rail/bus Terminals---Cleaner terminals and food service that does not engage in highway robbery

6 We need nicer drivers and ticket agents--- The Regional bus companys like New York Trailways and Vermont Transit were nice to me but Peter Pan and Greyhound custumer service suck.

7. Megabus is doing a nice job
 
While this post should probably be moved to the non-rail transportation forum, I will say that I think you hit the nail on the head with #7. I don't see a lot of hope for Greyhound - their public perception is terrible and their customer service is pretty bad too. Megabus and Bolt Bus are the future of bus travel and I think they will only continue to expand. I don't see a lot of benefit in investing in additional HOV/bus lanes, though, for intercity travel. Enough federal money goes into highways each year. I think a smarter move would be to implement measures to cut congestion than building additional roadway.

I don't think we need better bus safety standards, either. As someone who has been in a bus accident, drives buses occasionally and has dealt with the aftermath of a major interstate bus accident (different from the one I was in as a passenger), I can attest that in almost all crashes, the bus structure does an excellent job of absorbing the impact.

Short of eliminating all the side windows on the bus (how horrible would that be?) you're not going to have changed the outcome of the NY State crash much, because the signpost ended up cutting through the weakest point of the bus frame - where the windows were. Instead, there needs to be greater enforcement of driver safety standards.

Also, I think busses unloading in the downtown areas are a benefit, not an issue, unless you're in a city that has absolutely excellent public transit.
 
The Double Deckers used by Megabus look pretty interesting, almost reminding me of the classic Greyhound SceniCruisers - now that was a bus! I thought I read or heard somewhere Megabus got flushed out of Chicago Union and forced to hike up the street. Since they duplicate much of Amtrak's schedule, I can see why.
 
Greyhound has or had a system of stations with facilities. Megabus is a parasite, setting up their stops near facilities that are provided by others.
I don't disagree with you, though I think that's a somewhat separate issue. I think Boston sets a good example, having built a public intercity bus station, then requiring all buses to use it. I don't think it makes a tremendous amount of sense to require each bus company to maintain their own station - I think the model of collectively owned stations that are served to multiple providers makes a lot of sense.
 
I'd be kinda interested in what Greyhound does in the next few years, they were recently bought by First Transport which runs allot of Transportation services in the UK.

peter
 
The Double Deckers used by Megabus look pretty interesting, almost reminding me of the classic Greyhound SceniCruisers - now that was a bus! I thought I read or heard somewhere Megabus got flushed out of Chicago Union and forced to hike up the street. Since they duplicate much of Amtrak's schedule, I can see why.
You may recall the Scenicruisr thing was brought up recently on this forum. We may have both made reference to it.
 
A month ago my stepdaughter was very homesick. She just wanted to see some family so I trekked to Chicago for one night (on Amtrak) and we put her on Mega Bus. We looked at the OTP of the Empire Builder and it had been terrible. I wanted to cash in some AGR points but the OTP just wasn't looking good. We also priced Amtrak and the buckets for coach must have been at the most expensive. So we looked at Mega Bus and it was $50 RT from MSP, she was dropped off a block from CUS (totally agree about the parasite comment George) and I arrived on the CZ the exact same time she was arriving on Mega Bus. She was in tears but was so grateful to see her stepdad. Mega Bus worked for her so I'm glad it was around to provide us with a way of meeting up. Her bus was late the next day when going back to MSP and I almost booked her on the EB, but right when the decision was going to be made, the bus came around the corner.
 
We need a good, interconnected system of trains and buses in order to get people used to the idea that there's more to transportation than driving and flying.

California is a great example of how the two modes feed each other. Cities that have both and use both modes well for local transit also show how it can be done.

This is particularly important given the push for high-speed rail. A high-speed rail service between cities with large population will do reasonably well, but in many cases you still need some kind of network feeding it. Without a lot of conventional rail available in some of these corridors, buses could provide the missing link, at least as a stopgap until better rail could be built.
 
I think they need to remove or de-incentive (spelling?) bus routes that can adequately be served by rail transit. Obviously, every city in America can't have rail service (yet) so that's where the buses can fill in. I actually like the idea of not having to pull into downtown at every city except where the route goes through it anyways. Perhaps some sort of protected pull-out in the center median of a freeway under/above bridges with level boarding.

As to the crash standards, if they built buses to the same level as the FRA standards, the buses would leave nothing but a long continuous pothole behind its wheels and would utterly demolish everything else on the road.
 
The difference behind bus travel in the 1970's and today is primarily due to the demolishment of the old Interstate Commerce Commission and the advent of deregulation.

Regulation meant that motor carriers had to obtain a certificate of public convenience and necessity to be granted a franchise to operate on a particular route. Once established, they had to apply for permission to raise fares or cut schedules, since they were protected against competition on their routes. That did not mean there was no competition--if another carrier could prove that there was inadequate service or other good reasons at hearings, the ICC could award two or even more carriers to operate on different routes, sometimes with local traffic restrictions over segments.

That system worked effectively for over forty years, with a fairly stable network, and a decent level of service for what was the low-cost mode of public transportation.

Carriers would have to provide sevice on money losing branch routes by means of cross-subsidation with their profitable main routes.

Greyhound built a very nice international network (USA and Canada), with excellent schedules, and state-of-the-art buses, and very substantial terminals. Being a Greyhound driver was considered to be the most prestigious, (and highest paying), professional driving occupation. Their standards were very high, indeed.

All that changed drastically with deregulation. New cut-rate carriers as mentioned, starting up operations from street corners, with very low fares, little overhead, questionable maintenance and operator standards. They cherry-picked the best traffic routes, with no obligation to provide service elsewhere. As a result, the "legacy carriers", to borrow some airline terminology, suffered, with their higher operating expenses. In order to survive, they were forced to start cutting back and sinking to a level of service that would have the founders of the industry 'rolling over in their graves'.
 
I'd be kinda interested in what Greyhound does in the next few years, they were recently bought by First Transport which runs allot of Transportation services in the UK.

peter
I too.

Ever since the old Greyhound Corporation started diversifying in 1962 into non-transportation subsidiaries, the busline has suffered. They took a lot of the profit from the bus operations, and instead of re-investing it to improved the line, they instead diverted it to what they perceived as better profit potential. Perhaps good for corporate bottom-line, but after a while, the busline began to suffer from neglect, until the point where it was 'spun-off' from the original corporation.

Greyhound went through some very turbulent times in the last twenty years.

While FirstGroup did indeed acquire Greyhound, it was not by choice. They were really after Greyhounds recent parent company Laidlaw, and Greyhound came along with it.

I will say one thing...after a long period of no new bus purchases, FirstGroup did provide relief with the Prevost X3's, and now new MCI D4505's. Sorely needed, as the fleet was frankly, an embarrassment.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think they need to remove or de-incentive (spelling?) bus routes that can adequately be served by rail transit. Obviously, every city in America can't have rail service (yet) so that's where the buses can fill in. I actually like the idea of not having to pull into downtown at every city except where the route goes through it anyways. Perhaps some sort of protected pull-out in the center median of a freeway under/above bridges with level boarding.
One way to discourage any kind of mass transportation is by making people board in the middle of a freeway. Anyone who has ever walked over or under a freeway knows what an absolute, inviting joy that is (not!). Anyone who has ever boarded a CTA train on one of the freeway median routes has also experienced the joy of having cars speeding by 30 or 40 feet from you.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bus Travel was nicer in the 1970s--Drivers were nice and they would transfer your luggage for you. There were more back country off freeway road routes like thru the New England and the west on the US Route systewn

1.Like having one pass that covers Greyhound and Amtrak and synchronized schedules

2. Better Bus Safety Standards---If Buses were built to FRA Sfatey Standerds having a bus split in two would not have happed last week

3. More Dedicated HOV and truck lanes.

4. Special Pull off lanes on the freeway to rapid load and unload buses instead of going miles into and out of town.

5. More Intermodal rail/bus Terminals---Cleaner terminals and food service that does not engage in highway robbery

6 We need nicer drivers and ticket agents--- The Regional bus companys like New York Trailways and Vermont Transit were nice to me but Peter Pan and Greyhound custumer service suck.

7. Megabus is doing a nice job
Greyhound is a large and very successful corporation, and their customer service towards their important and profitable customers is excellent. Me being one of them.

I run a safety equipment business, and do what I call middle level wholesale operations. I probably provide Greyhound with about $1200 a month in business.

The problem you are having with seeing this is realizing what business Greyhound is in. They are not in the passenger business, they are in the freight business. Passenger service pays for the operation of the bus, and freight handles the profit. It costs me about half as much to load a half pallet worth of goods onto a Greyhound bus than it does to pay a trucking company to do it. All I have to do is drive a van load of goods to Newark, and Greyhound does the rest for me- including unloading it from my van.

They take it, weigh it, measure it, load it onto a bus, and send me a bill every month in the mail. They even handle local delivery to my customers. I probably give them about a third of my shipping business. The rest is UPS. Yet about 85% of my shipping expenses are paid to UPS. I wish more of my clients were in places served by Greyhound, quite frankly.
 
Bus Travel was nicer in the 1970s--Drivers were nice and they would transfer your luggage for you. There were more back country off freeway road routes like thru the New England and the west on the US Route systewn

1.Like having one pass that covers Greyhound and Amtrak and synchronized schedules

2. Better Bus Safety Standards---If Buses were built to FRA Sfatey Standerds having a bus split in two would not have happed last week

3. More Dedicated HOV and truck lanes.

4. Special Pull off lanes on the freeway to rapid load and unload buses instead of going miles into and out of town.

5. More Intermodal rail/bus Terminals---Cleaner terminals and food service that does not engage in highway robbery

6 We need nicer drivers and ticket agents--- The Regional bus companys like New York Trailways and Vermont Transit were nice to me but Peter Pan and Greyhound custumer service suck.

7. Megabus is doing a nice job
Greyhound is a large and very successful corporation, and their customer service towards their important and profitable customers is excellent. Me being one of them.

I run a safety equipment business, and do what I call middle level wholesale operations. I probably provide Greyhound with about $1200 a month in business.

The problem you are having with seeing this is realizing what business Greyhound is in. They are not in the passenger business, they are in the freight business. Passenger service pays for the operation of the bus, and freight handles the profit. It costs me about half as much to load a half pallet worth of goods onto a Greyhound bus than it does to pay a trucking company to do it. All I have to do is drive a van load of goods to Newark, and Greyhound does the rest for me- including unloading it from my van.

They take it, weigh it, measure it, load it onto a bus, and send me a bill every month in the mail. They even handle local delivery to my customers. I probably give them about a third of my shipping business. The rest is UPS. Yet about 85% of my shipping expenses are paid to UPS. I wish more of my clients were in places served by Greyhound, quite frankly.
I am glad to read about at least one happy customer.

Regarding GPX...while it is a nice additional source of revenue, it comprises much less revenue than it did back in its heyday of the '60's and '70's. At that time the old Railway Express Agency was slowly sinking into oblivion, and the intercity bus picked up a lot of the slack.

So much so, that 'combo' buses were created from aging Scenicruisers that with their unique 10 wheel design, could carry a lot of weight. They installed a sliding side door in the right rear, and used belt-loaders at major terminals. A bulkhead was installed, and some had 13 seats removed, others 25. Even with these running on some regular schedules, during the period leading up to Christmas, regular buses were loaded with nothing but express filling the seats and aisles to alleviate the backlog.

Along came Federal Express, and expanded services from UPS and other express carriers dedicated to the business, and the bus express business started to decline. Now that the route network has shrunk severly, it is even less.

One big advantage of bus express is that in many cases, you can have same day service.
 
What has really come up in the past years is the Trailways network. These are bus systems that are very localized and took over routes that Greyhound abandoned. They all seem to have a very high standard of service, new busses, and free wifi. Greyhound in the USA is more of a ticketing agency now that will routed you on multiple agencies bus routes.
 
The Trailway's network fell apart. They, like Greyhound, used to have a central booking headquarters if you will. Last I knew, that was long gone. Perhaps the individual companies are doing much better these days, I honestly don't know. But I don't think that Trailways in general is an up and coming company.
 
The Trailway's network fell apart. They, like Greyhound, used to have a central booking headquarters if you will. Last I knew, that was long gone. Perhaps the individual companies are doing much better these days, I honestly don't know. But I don't think that Trailways in general is an up and coming company.
The old National Trailways Bus System, effectively ended at least as a viable line carrier when its largest member, Continental Trailways, was purchased by Greyhound after it almost went under.

Today, only a handful of line operators still belong to that system, and actually are in revenue sharing pools with Greyhound.

The system has reinvented themself into just another trade association of independent smaller operators, some only involved in charters and tours with no line runs at all. They join primarily to exploit what's left of the Trailways name that is familiar to many potential customers, for marketing purposes. They want to be perceived as a 'bigger' operation than they are in reality. Perhaps just a 'ma and pa' owning a couple of buses.
 
Megabus and Boltbus will either eventually have to raise prices or go out of business. They both have experienced multiple safety violation citations, they are annoying their host cities by creating "stations" where there wasn't meant to be one, creating traffic jams both on the road and on the sidewalk, the professionalism and training of their drivers is in question...

How much longer till the cities tell these bus operators that they have to either use the terminal or get out?

Here in Pittsburgh, Megabus set up shop across the street from the brand new Greyhound terminal, in a "no stopping" zone. I'm particularly bitter about this one because it is right outside of my office... so now I have to wade through a bunch of people just to get to my front door.

Apparently, Megabus riders were hanging out in the bus terminal and taking up space for the Greyhound (and other carriers) riders.

Megabus was told to move and now they pick up and drop off 3 blocks away under the convention center. While that is an improvement for traffic control reasons, I don't see the convention center being too happy with that as their main entrance is right there.

They are really a test of wills.... how much can a company abuse their customers in exchange for low prices.

Megabus and BoltBus - The New Class of Low Class.
 
Megabus and Boltbus will either eventually have to raise prices or go out of business. They both have experienced multiple safety violation citations, they are annoying their host cities by creating "stations" where there wasn't meant to be one, creating traffic jams both on the road and on the sidewalk, the professionalism and training of their drivers is in question...

How much longer till the cities tell these bus operators that they have to either use the terminal or get out?

Here in Pittsburgh, Megabus set up shop across the street from the brand new Greyhound terminal, in a "no stopping" zone. I'm particularly bitter about this one because it is right outside of my office... so now I have to wade through a bunch of people just to get to my front door.

Apparently, Megabus riders were hanging out in the bus terminal and taking up space for the Greyhound (and other carriers) riders.

Megabus was told to move and now they pick up and drop off 3 blocks away under the convention center. While that is an improvement for traffic control reasons, I don't see the convention center being too happy with that as their main entrance is right there.

They are really a test of wills.... how much can a company abuse their customers in exchange for low prices.

Megabus and BoltBus - The New Class of Low Class.
Agree with the concerns of Megabus (and evidently BoltBus, not as familiar with their operation) and their lack of city terminals.

I'm curious how Boston went about forcing such operators to use South Station bus terminal. Is this a model other cities could follow? (I suppose it helped that Boston has a central bus terminal used by multiple bus operators, not individual stations only used by Greyhound or Burlington Trailways or whatever.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Isn't BoltBus part of Greyhound? If so I don't see why Greyhound would have issues with it using their terminals & such.

peter
I did not realize that. Looked it up, and according to wikipedia (not the most reliable of souces, I realize) it is a 50/50 venture between Greyhound Lines and Peter Pan Bus Lines.

Megabus would still be an issue though, even if BoltBus is not.
 
Back
Top