Greyhound seats and fleet questions

Advertise with us
shop deals on amazon
Shop deals on ebay
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.
A few things wrong here. Greyhound actually does have ticket kiosks at major stations, where one can print out Will Call tickets. Also, if the customer had trouble printing the ticket from his e-mail, why didn't he go to the library and print it out there?

They wouldn't have to purchase another ticket, as the original ticket would have been saved in his e-mail on a PDF attachment. That is how Greyhound sends Print at Home tickets.

Also, a photo is no evidence. Greyhound actually allows their agents to look up a ticket and print them at the terminal, given that the passenger looks up his original ticket PDF file and displays it to the agent along with ID and credit card. That's because you failed to print the PDF file at home.

But instead of looking up the PDF file, John Doyle decided to show the agent a photo of his tickets.

With Will Call tickets, you only need to display credit card.
 
Swad, I think you don't understand Greyhound's problems, because your preferences are often perpendicular to the average person. Greyhound has three problems: a demand problem, an image problem, and a management problem, and especially a financial problem.

Demand problem: The fact of the matter is, there is not much demand for bus travel outside a very few select corridors. Why? People drive or fly. You mention that this bus or that bus are nearly full or even sometimes sell out. Great. Swadian, Greyhound has a mere 1200 busses. Assuming a likely generous seat utilization assumption of one person per day, Greyhound carries at most about... what? 48,000 passengers a day? Amtrak's pathetic little fleet carries nearly 90,000 people a day. And the airlines? They carry nearly 3 MILLION people a day. Greyhound, the largest gorilla in the room of intercity bus transit, essentially a monopoly, has a full capacity to carry about 1.3% of the airlines. So seriously, there is very little demand for intercity bus, and while it is increasing, you'd need it to increase an order of magnitude to even receive the byline "relevant".

Image problem: Forget about the G4500s. They weren't in service in the early 80's when Steve Martin and John Candy lampooned the heck out of intercity busses. Greyhound and even National Trailways had an image problem even then. People think that busses are ridden by the lowest order of Americans. And sorry, John, while not everybody who rides Greyhound fits that description, the vast majority of them do. And people believe that solidly, and stubbornly, even if it wasn't true. I'm a staunch transit advocate, not rail transit, all types, and *I* believe it. They don't like busses, they don't like Greyhound, and there is very little other than a total name change, a massive luxurying up, and a brand new fleet of busses from a known luxury brand (say, Volvo or Mercedes) that is going to change that. Ever.

Management problem: You mentioned the new timetable in the other thread. The management at Greyhound let a map go out on their watch that looks like it was put together by a bunch of idiots who don't even know state capitals. For god sakes. If an employee of mine at my company did something that unprofessional, I wouldn't fire them. First, I would flog them. And then I would have them drawn and quartered. And then I would fire them. And then I would fire the moron who hired them, which would probably be me, regrettably. I would have my wife run my business if I ever hired somebody that stupid and gave them a job to do of that public a nature. Because I would obviously be almost as stupid. Nuff said.

Financial problem: Look at their bus fleet. They are "rebuilding" a crappy bus that has a terrible reputation, and abysmal MTBF. They are not replacing it. Despite the fact that when it comes to intercity bus curb appeal is practically everything. Why are they doing this? Not because the G4500 is a good bus, trust me. And they are not expanding their fleet despite what all you bus "experts" keep telling me is a hugely tight fleet. Why? BECAUSE THEY CAN NEITHER PAY FOR THE BUSSES IN CASH, NOR GET A CREDIT LINE TO FINANCE THEM! They have a huge financial problem. They've been having it for decades.

Greyhound's likelihood to be in business in 10 years time is quite frankly lower than the chance of having the Long Distance trains running. Bad finances, bad image, low demand, and a bunch of intellectually disabled wasps running the bloody thing. Not a chance in hell.
 
I think the future of buses is things like Megs Bus and Bolt( Greyhound) but honestly don't see how they can make money with what they charge,hence they won't stay in busines since the Government won't bail them out and only Gamblers and Governments continue to pour money down a rat hole!!
 
Well, $10-20 Seattle-Vancouver doesn't sound like a money loser to me. The X3-45 that Bolt uses gets an average 342.5 PMPG when filled to 50 passengers. That $1 ticket is only for attention.

Right now Greyhound probably makes more than Bolt because they don't charge such low fares. And Greyhound ridership is going up and up so I don't see any reason why they would go bankrupt anytime soon.

Even if they depend on the poor to make money, it's better than not making money. And the poor is usually not as mean as the rich.
 
Greyhound doesn't make money, at least in the US. According to FirstGroup last year they lost $350k on revenues of $560 million. So they broke even.

With margins like that you'd think they were in retail or something.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Actually, according to First Group's Annual Report and Accounts 2014 (http://www.firstgroupplc.com/~/media/Files/F/Firstgroup-Plc/indexed-pdfs/firstgroup-annual-report-2014.pdf), Greyhound accounted for 9% of First's revenue, but 16% of their profits.

Greyhound has one of First's highest profit margins, at 7.4%, on part with First Transit, even though Greyhound has only 7,500 employees, the lowest of First's divisions, and only 7% of total First employees.

Of Greyhound's revenue, passengers accounted for 80%, Package Express 8%, Food Services 2%, Charter 1%, and Other 9%.

Operating profits were $73,200,000.

Revenue was $990,600,000.

Greyhound OTP is at 89.3%, slightly lower than the 91.4% of FY2013. Timing is done to a 15-minute standard.

Poor whether caused slightly reduced revenue, profits, and OTP compared to 2013. Overall, profits increased significantly since 2009.

79% of passengers rode Greyhound US, 21% Greyhound Canada.

48% rode 1-200 miles, 34% 201-450 miles, 13% 451-1000 miles, and 5% over 1,000 miles.

Greyhound's next goals are to introduce a completely new IT program and return Greyhound Canada to "sustained profitability". It appears that GLC earns money in the summer and loses money in the winter, hence their lack of money to purchase new units.

Other goals are to further increase amenities on the coaches, including Greyhound BLUE, and heavy growth of Greyhound Express/Limited, which has resulted in 10% ridership growth on routes that received such service.

The US intercity bus industry has grown every year since 2006. Currently, it is the fastest-growing mode of transport in the US.

Greyhound's customer base is about 11 million people, who are "regular Greyhound riders". Even though these passengers travel by other modes 75% of the time, they still ride Greyhound multiple times a year and make the bulk of Greyhound ridership.

Greyhound opened or is about to open new terminals in Seattle, Baltimore, and Miami.

Greyhound's combined US and Canada fleet is about 1,700 coaches.

Greyhound continues to follow their "all or nothing" investment pattern, focusing on fleet investment.

Greyhound will increase the routes offering Greyhound BLUE by the end of 2014.

Greyhound's medium-term profit margin target is 12%.

My own take on Greyhound:

Greyhound's reputation was very bad in the 1980s due to a series of violent strikes. This got worse in the 1990s after a bankruptcy and the selling or 102A3 units in exchange for less-comfortable MC-12 machines, despite the latter's high reliability. They hit an all-time reputation low in 2004 after the G4500 debacle.

However, the stripped of large segments of the network allowed Greyhound to relegate the G4500's to reserve service until they were rebuilt. The G4500, now rebuilt, is an excellent coach for passengers, and I know because I have ridden it, and I made a travelogue on it which I have posted as well. The driver also gave a positive review compared to the new D4505 coaches. Anyone who has not ridden or driven the Blue G4500 should not make any comments on it.

In fact, anyone that hasn't even ridden Greyhound in the past five years should not jump to conclusions about anything.
 
Swadian Hardcore said:
A few things wrong here. Greyhound actually does have ticket kiosks at major stations, where one can print out Will Call tickets. Also, if the customer had trouble printing the ticket from his e-mail, why didn't he go to the library and print it out there?

They wouldn't have to purchase another ticket, as the original ticket would have been saved in his e-mail on a PDF attachment. That is how Greyhound sends Print at Home tickets.

Also, a photo is no evidence. Greyhound actually allows their agents to look up a ticket and print them at the terminal, given that the passenger looks up his original ticket PDF file and displays it to the agent along with ID and credit card. That's because you failed to print the PDF file at home.

But instead of looking up the PDF file, John Doyle decided to show the agent a photo of his tickets.

With Will Call tickets, you only need to display credit card.
Click to expand...
I think we can all agree Greyhound's print at home ticket system is seriously flawed.
Here's the rules lifted from Greyhound's website:

Print at Home tickets MUST be printed by the passenger prior to travel. Ticket displayed on smartphones cannot be accepted. Customers without the ticket printout will be required to purchase another ticket prior to boarding the bus. Tickets will not be refunded due to printing issues.
Click to expand...
Where in there do you see that an agent can "look up a ticket and print them at the terminal, given that the passenger looks up his original ticket PDF file and displays it to the agent along with ID and credit card"?
I actually see a policy that states the exact opposite of that. From my reading of that it sounds like if you don't have your ticket printed, you have to buy another. That's a moronic policy.

Oh and the fact that kiosks can only print out will call tickets but not print at home tickets? That's moronic too.

Regardless of the minute details of this case... It was an opportunity for Greyhound to have provided exceptional customer service... but they failed. With the simple act of looking up and re-printing this persons ticket he could have walked away happy... but instead he's become a "never again" customer who posted an angry message online. But hey! Greyhound made a few extra bucks at his expense. That's good for the long-term bottom line right?

I'm sure there are thousands of examples out there like this one.

If you really want to be a true advocate for Greyhound... be an advocate for making the experience great for every customer and don't make excuses for the company when they fall short of that expectation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That may be the policy, but if the agent is nice enough, he can do it. One time I was at Greyhound Oakland, and the guy in front (or was it behind?) of me had a ticket displayed on his smartphone, his ID, and his credit card. The agent printed out his ticket for him.

However, he did not exactly tell me whether he had a Print at Home ticket or a Will Call ticket, and I'm not sure exactly what was on his smartphone. So I don't know if this is the same situation or not.

But, it's possible, though Print at Home is still flawed. I disagree that it is "seriously" flawed though, because with the kinds of computer and printer availability these days, John Doyle could have printed his ticket at the library or elsewhere. These days, it is so easy for a passenger to print out a ticket prior to travel, that not being able to print out a Print at Home ticket should not be a good excuse for any passenger.

Making excuses for Greyhound wouldn't benefit me, so I'm just saying that, while Print at Home is not perfect, I've used it a few times with success, sure it may be "flawed" but it's not "seriously flawed".

It's a PDF document, it's there to stay in your e-mail anywhere you access your e-mail. With the amount of public computers and printers out there these days, how hard can it be to do that?

Their policy may be bad, but at least they have the policy and followed it. The passenger did not read the policy before booking, either. Better than doing something not backed up by a policy.

I guess in the end, Greyhound's biggest problems at its policies like this and the photography ban. Unfortunately, Greyhound management ha a few great guys (Dave Leach, Myron Watkins, Bill Blankenship) and doesn't seem to have much good other guys. All three guys that seem competent are knowledgeable about buses and bus operations, not about customer service.

Sure, Watkins is in charge of Customer Experience but he seems more interested in introducing new amenities on buses, getting rid of overbooking, and improving the comfort of buses, instead of doing anything about other stuff. Not sure what to say about this "all or noting."

As for the lower levels, I've found the drivers to be the best, everyone else is totally unreliable, form ticket agents, to baggage handlers. Even the drivers have a "all or nothing" system where some drivers are great and other are horrible. But most are great.

The horrible drivers are the extra board drivers that usually drive short-haul high-density routes. The LD drivers have more regular rotations and much higher pay, so they are much nicer to passengers.

All that being said, Greyhound has said they are working on revamping the booking system, which will eventually sort out these problems. Possibly at the direction of Myron Watkins.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Last edited by a moderator:
Swadian Hardcore said:
A Greyhound driver recently posted his favorite bus to drive, an unlikely candidate, I must say, but he said this was his favorite: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mbernero/12314620533/sizes/h/.

That model is very rare in Greyhound's fleet and is currently listed for sale because they are only 40 feet long which would cause overbooking when probably all of the other coaches are 45 feet long.

Another example looks like this: https://www.flickr.com/photos/27884592@N07/4740453005/sizes/l.
Click to expand...
Somehow, I was expecting a photo of the one (3074), behind the one focused in the second link....... ;)
 
I told you it was going to be unexpected! But yeah, that Shorty actually has decent seats, albeit very old seats: https://www.flickr.com/photos/24917258@N05/14502405427/in/faves-95851032@N07/.

They are listed for sale on First's website, the non-lift-equipped ones will go first. They still have some resale value despite raking up over 1,200,000 miles. I bet Greyhound would have rebuilt them if they wouldn't cause overbooking due to their shorter length.

I saw this surprising shot of two Americanos units at Greyhound San Diego: https://www.flickr.com/photos/10677920@N05/15236434251.

They are both white and lift-equipped. One is a G4500, and the other is a 102DL3.

The G4500 is in surprisingly good shape for an Americanos G.

Here's Greyhound Canada White G4500 #1240 with NO wheelchair lift: https://www.flickr.com/photos/wenspics_-_wpt/2380183298/sizes/l. I thought they all had lifts! Well now, that #1240 is getting retired!
 
I'm always amused when I see pictures of Greyhound Canada buses pulling trailers. Does anyone know the story behind why Greyhound Express has become so successful that they needed to add trailers to buses and operate truck routes?
 
You mean Greyhound Package Express? Very simple, people in small rural towns, back in the old days (1930s), started giving packages to passing bus drivers for delivery to the next town at a small charge. Then it grew into an organized business and now you have it.

Greyhound Canada pulls trailers on remote routes to deliver much-needed supplies in the same way that VIA Rail delivers supplied on remote train routes.

Edit: More bus seats conforming to the latest regulations, National Seating 4210AB10 and 4210SB10. The National 4210 was the bestseller for years after deregulation increased the share of the charter market, but has fallen out of favor due to the Amaya A210 and Torino G/G Plus. However, National continues to claim that their comfort in unmatched and the best in the industry.

The National 4210 was never ordered by Greyhound. The 4210, being designed for 102" coaches, could not be installed on the MC-12 or MC-9SP.

National 4210AB10 brochure: http://www.cvgrp.com/Literature/NS.1002.pdf.

National 4210SB10 brochure: http://www.cvgrp.com/Literature/NS.1006.pdf.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sure miss those National's....our pre-2009 Prevost's have those.....very comfortable...far superior to those miserable seats that came in the 2009 models...
 
How about those Nationals vs the old and new Amayas? Greyhound's old coaches have the old Amayas, new coaches have those miserable American Premiers, of course. Peter Pan's and Martz's new coaches have the new Amaya A210. Don't know if you're ever ridden those.

Academy's new J4500's have Amaya Torino G Plus. Ever ridden those? Their E's have Amaya Torino VIP, I think. That seat is out of the US market now, no "containment".
 
I guessed it was something like that. Compared to the US, Canada likely has a lot more rural areas that aren't served by other carriers.

It's neat that Greyhound has found such a lucrative business in shipping.

Fun story... for years my old TV station had a shipping contract with Greyhound Package Express. They used to use buses to send film and later tapes between Fresno, Bakersfield, LA, Sacramento and San Francisco. For decades it was the only way to get footage from other markets (without using planes) and even after the invention of satellite news gathering it remained popular for less critical video. Of course now most of our non critical transmission is done over the internet.
 
Yeah, I remember those old octagonal shaped metal shipping container's for the movies.....they were pretty hefty...

Greyhound carried but a shadow of what they used to in GPX in the states. They don't really seem to aggressively market it to its full potential....

It seems almost, as if they begrudgingly "accommodate" those that still use the service, rather than look to turn it into a real money-maker.

They do have a unique advantage over carrier's like UPS and FEDEX....they can in many cases offer same-day service, can carry larger items like automobile doors, bumper's, etc.
 
They currently have Package Express as 8% of the revenue, on GTE, where I also posted the annual report, people have said it used to be 15% the revenue. Still, it could be worse, just look at that charter revenue, 1%! I bet charter revenue used to be much higher in the days before small charter operators with low-cost localized operations.
 
Do those numbers include Greyhound US and Greyhound Canada? I imagine that Greyhound Package Express is a larger source of revenue north of the border.
 
Greyhound has never really gone all out for the charter business. Their expenses were higher than what small charter companies could manage. Greyhound always made sure to take care of their line run business first, and then take a few charter's here and there. Notable exception's were large-scale operation's such as providing shuttle services for Olympic's, major convention's and the like...

Deregulation has also opened up the charter market considerably....

When I was dispatching for Continental Trailways in Denver, from 1974 to 1979, we dominated the line and charter routes out of our Denver hub. Our General Manager fought hard to keep us that way....On a Saturday morning during the height of the ski season, we handled about 100 or more charters! About divided evenly between all day ski charter's for local groups, and one way ski charter's for groups going to or from Stapleton Airport....and that in additon to all of our line runs radiating out in all directions from Denver...
 
Those numbers are in the First Group Annual Report, I'm sure it includes both GLI and GLC. The numbers on the discussion board? Well, they're just thrown out by enthusiasts, but it probably was 15% somewhere. GLC used to not have any trailers, they introduced them in the early 1990's apparently with some of the later 102C3's. Before that, they used "cargo combos" like the special-spec 96A3 to deliver remote shipments.

Here's a Cargo Combo 96A3 rather beat-up: http://www.kevinsbusrail.com/greyhound/a-c/gry_797-4.jpg.

Note the "SCENICRUISER" lettering.

After all, both are put under "Greyhound" and the section also says there will be an effort to "return Greyhound Canada to sustained profitability".
 
Yeah I've often been surprised by how many BoltBus units are sitting at the gates in Portland. I think it's because they do some housekeeping on the busses at the station (general cleaning and refueling). I'm guessing some of this work can only be done up at the gates and not elsewhere in the lot. It's a nice advertisement for the BoltBus service but as you probably know these buses operate from a curbside stop further south in downtown Portland.
 
Looks like they blew the cover for BoltBus. I don't understand how come Greyhound's D4505's have that thick black trim abov ethe window line. Looks like they have double trim while the current D4500CL/CT have single trim. Then it looks like they painted an added thick black stripe all the way to the top above the double black trim.

They didn't do such "decoration" for the DL3, Blue G, or X3-45.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top