50064C Report On-bus Survey Analysis of …©The TAS Partnership Limited December 15 50064C Report...

50064C Report – On-bus Survey Analysis of Thamesdown Swindon Network

Thamesdown 50064C December 15

Final

Quality Assurance

Document Management

Document Title

Name of File 50064C Report – On-bus Survey Analysis of Thamesdown

Swindon Network

Last Revision Saved On 16/12/2015 10:14:00

Version Final

Prepared by MR

Checked by SH

Approved by

Issue Date 10 December 2015

Copyright

The contents of this document are © copyright The TAS Partnership Limited, with the exceptions set out below. Reproduction in any form, in part or in whole, is expressly forbidden without the written consent of a Director of The TAS Partnership Limited.

Cartography derived from Ordnance Survey mapping is reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of HMSO under licence number WL6576 and is © Crown Copyright – all rights reserved.

Other Crown Copyright material, including census data and mapping, policy guidance and official reports, is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen’s Printer for Scotland under licence number C02W0002869.

The TAS Partnership Limited retains all right, title and interest, including copyright, in or to any of its

trademarks, methodologies, products, analyses, software and know-how including or arising out of this document, or used in connection with the preparation of this document. No licence under any copyright

is hereby granted or implied.

Freedom of Information Act 2000

The TAS Partnership Limited regards the daily and hourly rates that are charged to clients, and the terms of engagement under which any projects are undertaken, as trade secrets, and therefore exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.

The TAS Partnership Limited often uses commercially or personally sensitive data provided under confidentiality agreements by third parties to inform projects, and disclosure of this information could constitute an actionable breach of confidence. This detailed content is therefore likely to be exempt from disclosure under the Act.

Consequently, The TAS Partnership Limited will expect to be consulted before any content of this document is released under a Freedom of Information request.

Guildhall House

59-61 Guildhall Street

Preston PR1 3NU

Telephone: 01772 204988

Fax: 01772 562070

[email protected]

www.tas.uk.net

©The TAS Partnership Limited ▪ December 15

50064C Report – On-bus Survey Analysis of Thamesdown Swindon Network ▪ Contents ▪ 1

Contents

1 Introduction and Objectives ............................................................. 3

1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................ 3

1.2 Objectives ............................................................................................... 3

1.3 Our Approach .......................................................................................... 3

1.4 Report Structure ...................................................................................... 4

2 Survey Response, Findings and Analysis ............................................ 5

2.1 Thamesdown Swindon Network ................................................................. 5

2.2 Profile Data & Demographics ..................................................................... 6

2.3 Ticket Type ............................................................................................. 7

2.4 Journey Purpose ...................................................................................... 9

2.5 Frequency ............................................................................................. 10

2.6 Car Availability ...................................................................................... 13

2.7 Ratings on Journey Aspects ..................................................................... 14

2.8 Information ........................................................................................... 16

2.9 Smartcard Ticketing ............................................................................... 17

2.10 Top Three Priorities for Bus Services ...................................................... 18

2.11 Comparison with other services ............................................................. 19

2.12 Value for Money .................................................................................. 21

2.13 Ease of Getting a Seat ......................................................................... 21

2.14 Reasons for Increased/Decreased Use of Service ..................................... 21

2.15 Awareness of Thamesdown ................................................................... 22

2.16 Reason for Choosing the Bus Today ....................................................... 23

2.17 Improvements to Bus Service ............................................................... 24

2.18 Rating/recommendation of Thamesdown ................................................ 25

2.19 Comparison of Results with Previous Years ............................................. 27

3 Summary & Conclusions ................................................................. 30

3.1 Summary .............................................................................................. 30

3.2 Conclusions and Recommendations .......................................................... 32


50064C Report – On-bus Survey Analysis of Thamesdown Swindon Network ▪ Introduction and Objectives ▪ 3

1Introduction and Objectives 1

1.1 Introduction

1.1.1 The TAS Partnership Limited (TAS) has been commissioned by Thamesdown

Transport (TT) to undertake a survey of bus passengers in Swindon and gauge

levels of satisfaction with the company’s network of services. This report sets

out the results of the survey including the profile, ticket choice and journey

purpose of bus users in Swindon, their views on various aspects of the current

services and possible future improvements.

1.2 Objectives

1.2.1 Conduct an on-bus survey of customers on all services operated by TT in the

Swindon area.

1.3 Our Approach

1.3.1 On-bus surveys comprising questions provided by TT were distributed across

their Swindon network.

1.3.2 Between 21 and 25 September a total of 1,100 questionnaires were

distributed on ten routes. Different time periods and target numbers were

requested by TT for different routes, but surveying started at 0800 to capture

passengers during the morning peak.

1.3.3 The bus survey sought responses on:

ticket type used;

frequency of travel (journeys per week);

reasons for travel and for choosing to travel by bus:

source and usefulness of information;

smartcard use;

aspects of service most important to passengers; and

aspects of service that would encourage customers to use the bus more.

1.3.4 A total of 732 paper questionnaires were returned. This equates to a 67%

response rate – a hugely significant increase on the 2010 and 2011 response

rates of 12% and 24% respectively.


50064C Report – On-bus Survey Analysis of Thamesdown Swindon Network ▪ Introduction and Objectives ▪ 4

1.4 Report Structure

1.4.1 This report comprises four main sections:

Section 1 comprises this introduction.

Section 2 sets out the findings and analysis of the survey responses,

including a comparison of results, where possible, with surveys from

previous years.

Section 3 summarises our conclusions and provides recommendations on

how to build on the survey findings.


50064C Report – On-bus Survey Analysis of Thamesdown Swindon Network ▪ Survey Response, Findings and Analysis ▪ 5

2Survey Response, Findings and Analysis 2

2.1 Thamesdown Swindon Network

2.1.1 The survey was conducted on the following bus services:

1/1A Middleleaze - Fleming Way - Covingham

11 Bus Station - Haydon Wick

12 Blunsdon - St Andrews Ridge - Haydon Wick - Fleming Way - Great

Western Hospital

13/14 Haydon Wick - Fleming Way - Eldene/Liden

15 Haydon Wick - Oakhurst - Fleming Way - Middle Wichel

16 Fleming Way - Great Western Hospital

17 Penhill - Fleming Way - Park North

18 Fleming Way - Park South

19 Fleming Way - Shaw - Sparcells

22 Barnfield - Fleming Way – Okus

2.1.2 A total of 732 responses were collected across the ten routes. The individual

response rate for each is shown in Table 1 below, with the 13/14 producing a

much higher number of replies than the other routes.

Table 1: Response Rate by Route

Route Number Response Count Response Percentage

13/14 213 29%

12 94 13%

11 88 12%

17 76 10%

15 68 9%

16 67 9%

1 46 6%

22 42 6%

18 16 2%

19 11 2%

No Response 11 2%



Route Number Response Count Response Percentage

Grand Total: 732 100%

2.2 Profile Data & Demographics

2.2.1 Of the 632 respondents who identified their gender, two thirds were female.

TAS experience is that this distribution is typical.

Table 2: Gender (Q16)

Female Male Chose not to identify Total

415 217 100 732

57% 30% 14% 100%

Table 3: Age (Q17)

Under 16 16-24 25-34 35-44 45-59 60+ Not specified Total

16 154 113 83 87 143 26 622

3% 25% 18% 13% 14% 23% 4% 100%

2.2.2 The largest group of respondents (25%) are aged between 16 and 24, 23% 60

or older and 18% between 25 and 34, as illustrated in Figure A.



Figure A: Age Profile

2.3 Ticket Type

2.3.1 Table 4 below sets out the ticket types used by respondents on the day they

completed the survey. Unsurprisingly, concessionary travel passes were

the most popular ticket type (used by 25% of respondents), followed by

Day Rider tickets (22%) and Four Week Travel Passes (18%). Both

single tickets and weekly passes are used by 10% of respondents whilst 5%

have an annual pass. The least popular ticket is the 13 Week Travel Pass used

by only 2% of respondents.

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

16 to 24

60 and above

25 to 34

45 to 59

35 to 44

No Response

Under 16

25%

23%

18%

14%

13%

4%

3%



Table 4: Ticket Types on the Day of Travel

Ticket Type Number of Respondents Percentage of Respondents

Concessionary Pass 181 25%

Day Rider 161 22%

4 Week Travel Pass 133 18%

Single Ticket 76 10%

Week Travel Pass 72 10%

Annual Travel Pass 34 5%

Other 33 5%

No Response 28 4%

13 Week Travel Pass 13 2%

Family Day Rider 1 0%

Figure B: Ticket Types on the Day of Travel

2.3.2 Table 5 below shows that the majority of respondents (55%) found buying

their ticket very easy and a further 7% found it fairly easy. 11% said that they

found ticket purchase very difficult.

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

Family Day Rider

13 Week TravelPass

No Response

Other

Annual Travel Pass

Week Travel Pass

Single Ticket

4 Week Travel Pass

Day Rider

Concessionary Pass

0%

2%

4%

5%

5%

10%

10%

18%

22%

25%



Table 5: Ease of Ticket Purchase

Ease Rating (1 being the

easiest, 5 the hardest)

Number of Respondents Percentage of Respondents

1 401 55%

2 49 7%

3 24 3%

4 36 5%

5 81 11%

No Response 141 19%

2.4 Journey Purpose

2.4.1 Table 6 below shows that travel to and from work produces the most

journeys (27% of all trips). Travel to school or college (21%) and for

shopping purposes (20%) is also significant. Leisure was the least

popular reason for travel (6%).

Table 6: Journey Purpose

Main Reason for Journey Number of Respondents Percentage of Respondents

Work 230 27%

School/College 182 21%

Shopping 169 20%

Visiting Friends/Family 94 11%

Healthcare 74 9%

Other 62 7%

Leisure 49 6%



Figure C: Journey Purpose

2.5 Frequency

2.5.1 54% of respondents reported that they use the bus five or more times

a week, as shown in Table 7 below. 21% use the bus 3-4 times a week and

14% use the bus once or twice a week. Thus 89% of respondents are using

the bus at least once a week. 5% of respondents use the bus several days a

month and 3% less often.

27%

21%20%

11%

9%7%

6%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%



Table 7: Frequency of Bus Use

Frequency Number of Respondents Percentage of Respondents

5+ days a week 398 54%

3-4 days a week 152 21%

1-2 days a week 104 14%

2-3 days a month 33 5%

No Response 24 3%

Less often 21 3%

Figure D: Frequency of Bus Use

2.5.2 Table 8 illustrates the correlation between frequency of travel and journey

purpose. Work and shopping are the most popular journey purposes. Amongst

frequent users (5+ times a week), commuting is the most popular reason for

travel (34% of trips) followed by education (26%) and shopping (14%).

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

5+ days a week

3-4 days a week

1-2 days a week

2-3 days a month

No Response

Less often

54%

21%

14%

5%

3%

3%



Table 8: Correlation between Frequency of Use and Journey Purpose

Frequency of

Use

Education Shopping Visiting

Friends/

Family

Healthcare Leisure Work Other

5+ days a week 26% 14% 9% 7% 5% 34% 6%

3-4 days a week 19% 23% 16% 4% 5% 26% 6%

1-2 days a week 9% 37% 11% 11% 9% 11% 11%

2-3 days a month 12% 23% 12% 31% 8% 12% 4%

Less often 15% 19% 15% 19% 7% 7% 19%

2.5.3 Respondents were asked whether they use the bus less often than a year ago,

the same or more often. As Figure E shows, 52% of respondents said they use

the bus the same amount as a year ago, 35% more often and 13% less often.

Figure E: Bus Use – More, Less or Same?

2.5.4 The most common reason for reduced bus use is a greater use of car or taxi

(30%), as shown in Table 9. It should be noted that the question of why

respondents used the bus more, same or less and given a ‘more and less’

category for that reason was interpreted differently by different people. Some

read it as ‘I travel less so I use a different bus – more’; some as ‘I travel less

so I use a different bus – less’.

Use Bus Less Often

13%

Use Bus More Often

35%

Use Bus Same

52%



Table 9: Reasons for Respondents Using Bus Less

Reason for using bus

less

More Less

Need to make trip 16.7% 16.8%

Other 6.7% 12.1%

Use different bus 14.4% 16.8%

No change 10.0% 9.3%

Use car/taxi 30.0% 17.8%

Moved house 11.1% 14.0%

Moved job 11.1% 13.1%

100% 100%

2.5.5 The most popular reason for respondents increased bus use is a requirement

to make more trips (45%) on the same service while 17% said they used a

different service more. 31% of respondents said they used car/taxi less.

Table 10: Reasons for Respondents Using Bus More

Reason for using bus

more

More Less

Need to make trip 44.9% 5.5%

Other 5.3% 15.8%

Use different bus 16.5% 13.9%

No change 4.2% 9.1%

Use car/taxi 2.8% 30.9%

Moved house 13.3% 11.5%

Moved job 13.0% 13.3%

100% 100%

2.6 Car Availability

2.6.1 80% of respondents did not have a car available to them, compared to 71% in

2010.



Figure F: Car Availability

2.6.2 Of those who could have travelled by car but chose to use a TT bus service,

75% rated TT overall as ‘very good’ or ‘good’. Only 2% of respondents who did

not have a car available thought bus services were either ‘poor’ or ‘very poor’.

Table 11: Rating of Respondents with Access to a Car

Rating Percentage

Very Good 23%

Good 52%

Neither Good Nor Bad 8%

Poor 2%

Very poor 1%

No response 15%

2.7 Ratings on Journey Aspects

2.7.1 Respondents were asked yes/no questions relating to various aspects of the

bus journey they were making. Figure G shows that most respondents

answered positively about their experience. Between 612 (for friendliness

of driver) and 638 (for ease of payment and clear destination) respondents

Car Available(13.9%)

Car Not Available

(80.4%)

No Response (5.7%)



answered ‘yes’ on each aspect while only between 11 and 13 respondents

answered ‘no’ on each aspect.

Figure G: Questions about Journey Experience

2.7.2 Respondents were asked their views on whether their bus service has

improved over the last 12 months in five areas: punctuality, cleanliness,

frequency, friendliness of drivers and ease of use. In all areas at least 45% of

respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that there had been

improvement.

Table 12: Improvements over Last 12 Months

Improvements Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree

More frequent 10.2% 34.8% 37.8% 15.5% 1.7%

Easier to use 10.0% 35.9% 37.3% 14.9% 1.9%

Cleaner 10.1% 36.3% 35.8% 15.6% 2.1%

More punctual 9.5% 35.8% 37.3% 15.3% 2.2%

Drivers friendlier 10.3% 35.4% 37.6% 14.7% 2.1%



Figure H: Improvements over Last 12 Months

2.8 Information

2.8.1 Respondents were asked how they get their information about bus services

and whether or not they find it useful/reliable. The results show that

respondents still favour traditional over digital methods for obtaining their

information. The most common source (35% of respondents) is the bus

stop display and a further 27% get their information from the

timetable book. 15% consult a website, 13% use their mobile and 3%

consult each of the driver, fellow passengers or Traveline.



Table 13: Source of Information about Bus Services

Source of Information Number of Respondents Percentage of Respondents

Bus Stop 424 35%

Timetable 327 27%

Website - computer 187 15%

Mobile 161 13%

Driver 42 3%

Passengers 31 3%

Traveline 31 3%

Other 25 2%

Total: 1228 100%

2.8.2 86% of respondents said they found information either very or somewhat

useful, whilst only 6% of respondents said they found information ‘not often’

or ‘never’ useful/reliable.

Table 14: Usefulness/Reliability of Information

Did you find this information

useful/reliable?

Number of Respondents Percentage of

Respondents

Very Useful 364 50%

Somewhat useful 263 36%

No Response 60 8%

Not often useful 40 5%

Never Useful 5 1%

Total: 732 100%

2.9 Smartcard Ticketing

2.9.1 Respondents were asked if they have a smart card and, if so, what kind.

Firstly, it should be noted that Concessionary travel passes are always in

smartcard format. People using 1 week, 4 week, 13 week and annual travel

passes will also be using a TT (or occasionally Stagecoach) smart card. The

survey results showed that 44% of respondents were users of the TT

smart card whilst 2% said they had a Stagecoach smart card. In total 69%

of respondents said they were smart card users (TT, concessionary and

Stagecoach smart card holders); 26% said they didn’t have a smart card and

5% said they were not aware of smart cards.



Table 15: Smart Card Use/Type

Use/type of Smart card Number of Respondents Percentage of

Respondents

Have a Thamesdown smart card 308 44%

Not a smart card user 179 26%

Have a concessionary travel pass 157 23%

Not aware of smart card 34 5%

Have a Stagecoach smart card 15 2%

Total: 693 100%

2.10 Top Three Priorities for Bus Services

2.10.1 Respondents were asked to select from a list of 17 options the three aspects

most important to them. Table 16 lists the responses in declining order of

significance.

2.10.2 The more basic aspects of service – frequency, reliability and convenience –

take precedence over technological aspects with on-board Wi-Fi, having a

modern bus and USB charging points the three lowest priorities (except for the

‘other’ option). This ranking is in line with results that we have obtained

elsewhere. Clean buses and on-bus announcements are also popular.



Table 16: Top Three Priority Aspects of Bus Service

Top Three Priorities of Bus

Service

Number of Respondents Percentage of

Respondents

Frequent 241 33%

Reliable 239 33%

Convenient 233 32%

Clean 213 29%

Bus Stop Announcements 191 26%

Friendly Drivers 165 23%

Quick 139 19%

CCTV 119 16%

Comfortable Seating 109 15%

Easy Access 104 14%

Ability to Get Change 102 14%

Plenty of Seats 96 13%

Room for Prams/Buggies 83 11%

Wi-Fi on Board 80 11%

Modern Bus 53 7%

USB Charging Points 49 7%

Other 8 1%

2.11 Comparison with other services

2.11.1 Respondents were firstly asked how the service they were on compared with

others operated by TT. It should be noted that the service number entered

was often the one respondents on which were currently travelling rather than

the service they were comparing it against, but most of the time no service

number was given.

2.11.2 41% of respondents think that all TT services were about the same while 36%

believe that the service they use is either better or much better than the

others. Only 3% think that their route is worse or much worse than others

operated by TT.



Table 17: Comparison with Other Thamesdown Services

Comparison Rating Number of Respondents Percentage of Respondents

About the same 299 41%

Better 148 20%

Much Better 115 16%

Don’t Use Other Services 79 11%

No Response 68 9%

Worse 19 3%

Much Worse 4 1%

2.11.3 When asked to compare TT services to those of other bus companies the

largest group of respondents (34%) said that their quality is ‘about the same’.

A slightly smaller group (32%) think that TT’s services are better or much

better than those of other operators and only 4% think TT services are either

worse or much worse.

2.11.4 When asked to give reasons why they feel that TT is worse or much worse

than other companies the ‘no change’ policy was mentioned by eight

respondents and the fact that Stagecoach does give change by a further two.

Unfriendly drivers were also cited by two respondents. Buses being ‘far too

busy’ and ‘rarely on time’ were each mentioned once.

2.11.5 As to why TT is better or much better, five respondents cited frequency, four

mentioned punctuality and three cleaner buses whilst each of reliability,

cheaper service, newer buses and nicer seats were mentioned by two

respondents.

Table 18: Comparison with Other Bus Company Services

Comparison Rating Number of Respondents Percentage of

Respondents


Better 142 19%

Don’t Use Other Services 124 17%

Much better 95 13%

No response 89 12%

Worse 27 4%

Much worse 4 1%



2.12 Value for Money

2.12.1 51% of respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that the TT

service they were on represented value for money, although 18%

(17.6%) disagreed or strongly disagreed.

Table 19: Value for Money

Service is Value for Money Number of Respondents Percentage of

Respondents

Agree 263 36%

No Opinion 177 24%

Strongly Agree 113 15%

Disagree 112 15%

No Response 50 7%

Strongly Disagree 17 2%

732 100%

2.13 Ease of Getting a Seat

2.13.1 83% of respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that it was

generally easy to get a seat on the Thamesdown service they had used

during the survey. Only 11% disagreed or strongly disagreed.

Table 20: Ease of Getting a Seat

Generally Easy to Get a Seat Number of Respondents Percentage of

Respondents

Agree 477 65%

Strongly Agree 133 18%

Disagree 70 10%

No Response 43 6%

Strongly Disagree 9 1%

No Opinion 0 0%

732 100%

2.14 Reasons for Increased/Decreased Use of Service

2.14.1 TT included a further question on why respondents used the bus more or less,

listing alternative factors relating to the bus service. The most popular reason

for increased bus use was the route itself (60% of responses), its frequency

(30%) and its speed (19%). The quality of the vehicles and lack of Wi-Fi were



each given as reasons for using the bus less by 9% of respondents and whilst

speed and driver attitude were each cited by 8%.

Table 21: Reasons for Using the Bus More or Less

Reason for

Using Bus

More

Number of

Respondents

Percentage of

Respondents

(732)

Reason for

Using Bus

Less

Number of

Respondents

Percentage of

Respondents

(732)

Route 440 60% Vehicles 68 9%

Frequency 255 35% Wi-Fi 65 9%

Speed 142 19% Speed 62 8%

Wi-Fi 91 12% Driver 60 8%

Other 80 11% Frequency 37 5%

Vehicles 79 11% Other 35 5%

Driver 75 10% Route 25 3%

2.15 Awareness of Thamesdown

2.15.1 373 respondents answered the question relating to awareness of publicity

regarding TT in the last three months. The majority (76%) had heard nothing,

whilst in the 24% who had heard something most mentioned the cancellation

of service 20. Other subjects noted include the availability of discounted

tickets into London, that TT was making a loss (some citing a figure of around

£400,000 with several using this as the reason behind the withdrawal of

service 20) and negative traits in drivers.

2.15.2 Reasons cited by several respondents each included:

Fare changes/increases

Changes to bus times

Re-routing of service 18

Disruption from roadworks

Not giving change

Driver dealing with passenger/wheelchair conflict well

More buses added to a route

Increased frequency

Punctual buses

Deficit of £425,000



Some drivers have attitude

Bus fumes

2.15.3 Respondents identified approximately 45 factors they had heard of relating to

TT of which 20 were negative, 13 positive and 11 neutral. Positive factors cited

included: good drivers, good training, TT winning awards for quality and ‘best

service’. Negative factors included: creepy driver, people moaning about buses

being late and ‘Some drivers are forcing some customers to pay more to avoid

getting into trouble when its clear the due amout has bee paid’ (sic).

2.15.4 There is a clear message that more needs to be done on marketing and

promotion. 76% of all respondents had not heard of any Thamesdown

promotions in the last three months while only 8% said they had with

the remaining 16% submitting no response.

2.15.5 Respondents were asked to identify TT promotions in the last three months of

which they had heard. The results are contained in Table 22 and not all of

them constitute a promotion (two are actually negative attributes). The most

popular promotion identified by seven respondents was the Evening Rider

ticket followed by the Family Day Rider that was mentioned by four. Three

people had heard about TT’s trip offer to London.

Table 22: Awareness of Promotions in the Last Three Months

Promotion Identified Number of

Respondents

Percentage of

Respondents

Evening Rider 7 27%

An offer on family day rider prices 4 15%

London fares/trips 3 12%

Changes – more frequent buses now 2 8%

General information 2 8%

More buses on a route 2 8%

Long walk to bus stop 1 4%

Not trusted anymore because of cuts 1 4%

People told me 1 4%

Fare prices keep increasing 1 4%

Shuttle bus 1 4%

Time changes and stops 1 4%

2.16 Reason for Choosing the Bus Today

2.16.1 Respondents were asked to identify from a list of ten options the reason for

travelling by bus on the day of the survey, with the ability to select more than

one reason. Having a bus pass was the most popular reason (27%) with 20%



saying that the bus was more convenient and 15% having no other option.

Cost was also a significant factor – 11% said it was cheaper to use the bus

and 9% choose to travel by bus due to the cost of parking (the cost of fuel is

cited by only 3%).

Table 23: Reason for Using the Bus

Reason for Choosing Bus Number of Respondents Percentage of

Respondents

Have a bus pass 282 27%

More convenient 206 20%

No other option 156 15%

Cheaper to use bus 117 11%

Parking expensive 97 9%

Quicker on bus 92 9%

Other 46 4%

Cost of fuel 33 3%

Time to do other things on the bus 26 2%

1055 100%

2.17 Improvements to Bus Service

2.17.1 Respondents were asked to choose which of a list of 13 named improvements

they would most like to see to services in Swindon. The most popular are

the ability to give change (an issue that has arisen several times

throughout the survey) and more Sunday services, both chosen by 13% of

respondents. 10% said they would like to see more frequent daytime

services and better value for money (though it is hard to know how to offer

better value for money fares unless a linear reduction of price) and quicker

journey times were both chosen by 9%. Enhanced safety, better information

and easier to understand service/fares were the least requested

improvements. Basic elements such as clean buses and punctual services were

in the middle of the table.



Table 24: Improvements to Swindon Services

Areas of Improvement Number of

Respondents

Percentage of

Respondents

Giving change 256 13%

More Sunday services 251 13%

More frequent daytime services 207 10%

Better value for money fares 187 9%

Quicker journey times 182 9%

Drivers who are more helpful and polite 161 8%

More frequent evening services 144 7%

Improved punctuality and reliability 141 7%

Cleaner, tidier vehicles 138 7%

Earlier morning services 115 6%

Enhanced personal safety and security 80 4%

Better information about services 74 4%

Easier to understand service/fares 54 3%

Total: 1990 100%

2.18 Rating/recommendation of Thamesdown

2.18.1 Respondents were asked for an overall rating of TT ‘taking everything into

account’ and the results are positive with 61% of respondents feeling that TT

is ‘good’ and 28% that it is ‘very good’. Only 3% of respondents think that the

company is either ‘poor’ or ‘very poor’.

Table 25: Overall Rating of Thamesdown

Rating Number of Respondents Percentage of Respondents

Good 377 61%

Very good 172 28%

Neither good nor bad 56 9%

Poor 11 2%

Very poor 6 1%

Total 622 100%

2.18.2 Respondents were also asked if they would recommend TT to a friend. 80%

said that they would and only 5% said they wouldn’t (15% did not respond).



Table 26: Recommendation of Thamesdown to Friends

Recommend? Number of Respondents Percentage of Respondents

Recommend 584 80%

No Response 108 15%

Not Recommend 40 5%

Total: 732 100%

2.18.3 Finally, respondents were asked how they rated TT bus services compared to

one year ago. 42% of respondents believe that things are ‘about the same’,

32% better and 5% worse.

Table 27: Year Comparison of Thamesdown

Rating Compared to a

Year Ago

Number of Respondents Percentage of Respondents


Better 231 32%

No Response 103 14%

Not using at the time 53 7%

Worse 36 5%

Total: 732 100%

Figure I: Year Comparison of Thamesdown

42%

32%

14%

7%5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

About the

same

Better No Response Not using at

the time

Worse



2.19 Comparison of Results with Previous Years

2.19.1 The TAS Partnership carried out bus passenger surveys for TT between 2007

and 2011, allowing a means of comparison with 2015 figures. Due to the

nature of the questions requested for 2015, comparison with survey results for

these years is available for selected questions only. However, where available,

these give a good indication on trends and changes in the areas of journey

purpose, ticket type usage, priorities for improvement as well as ratings of

improvement.

Table 28: Journey Purpose Comparisons 2007 – 2015

Year Work Education Shopping Medical Visiting Leisure Other

2007 36% 2% 45% 4% 5% 8% 2%

2008 29% 6% 49% 6% 5% 3% 2%

2010 39% 8% 31% 10% 5% 7% 1%

2011 37% 11% 25% 10% 9% 6% 2%

2015 27% 21% 20% 9% 11% 6% 7%

Change since

2007 -9% +19% -25% +5% +6% -2% +5%

2.19.2 Travelling for education and to visit friends/family are two areas which have

attracted more journeys. The proportion of education-related travel has nearly

tripled in 2015 compared to five years ago, reaching 21% this year. Visiting

friends/family has doubled from a constant 5% between 2007 and 2010 to

11% in 2015.

2.19.3 Meanwhile journeys for leisure purposes has remained around the 6% mark

and the percentage of respondents travelling for medical purposes has hardly

changed compared to 2010 and 2011.

Table 29: Ticket Types on the Day of Travel

Year Single/ Return

Day Rider

Concessionary Pass

Weekly Pass

Month Pass

3-Month Pass

Annual Pass

Other

2007 11% 16% 43% 10% 10% 5% 2% 2%

2008 8% 13% 50% 8% 10% 5% 2% 4%

2010 10% 13% 45% 8% 12% 7% 2% 6%

2011 10% 17% 39% 10% 15% 3% 3% 3%

2015 11% 23% 26% 10% 19% 2% 5% 5%

Change since

2007

None +7% -17% None +9% -3% +3% +3%

2.19.4 Although the concessionary pass was still the most popularly used ticket in the

survey, the amount of people using it compared to other ticket types has



lessened greatly over the years – dropping from 45% in 2010 to 26% in 2015

- which is very good news from the revenue perspective.

2.19.5 Of the priced tickets, the day ticket remains the most popular option since

2007, followed by the month pass since 2008. Single/return tickets and

weekly passes also continue to be popular. However, it is worth noting that

the use of the weekly pass is not more popular than the monthly pass and TT

may want to consider further the relative ease of purchasing the monthly pass

rather than the weekly one.

2.19.6 Longer term tickets still attract a low take-up; whereas the 3-month pass has

decreased in use over the years – 5% in 2007 compared to 2% this year – use

of the annual pass has risen from 2% in 2007 to 5% this year which is

relatively encouraging.

Table 30: Trends in Possible Improvements 2007 – 2015

Improvements 2007 2008 2010 2011 2015 Change

since 2007

Quicker Journey Times 10% 15% 18% 17% 25% +15%

More Frequent Daytime Services 27% 21% 27% 23% 28% +1%

Earlier Morning Services 20% 21% 21% 21% 16% -4%

More Frequent Evening Services 35% 29% 31% 36% 20% -15%

More Sunday Services 62% 44% 48% 50% 34% -28%

Value for Money Fares 35% 25% 34% 34% 26% -9%

Punctuality & Reliability 22% 24% 21% 21% 19% -3%

Cleaner Vehicles 21% 21% 25% 26% 19% -2%

Better Information 17% 15% 12% 12% 10% -7%

More Helpful Drivers 31% 24% 30% 28% 22% -9%

Easy to Understand Services & Fares 13% 14% 9% 10% 7% -6%

Better Personal Security 30% 22% 17% 16% 11% -19%

2.19.7 A look at people’s views on what improvements in bus services they would

most like to see shows the most dramatic shifts in attitude since 2007 and TT

might want to look into why that has occurred. For example, the proportion

opting for ‘Quicker Journey Times’ was 10% in 2007 but 25% in 2015.

2.19.8 ‘More Sunday Services’ remains the number one priority though this figure has

lessened substantially – at roughly half the figure in 2007 (from 62% to 34%

in 2015) and 14 percentage points less than five years ago. It is important to

note that since 2007, there has been a big increase in the amount of Sunday

services.

2.19.9 Respondents still prize value for money for fares in their top three in 2015,

however, again, by a smaller proportion of people (35% in 2007 to 26% in



2015) which is good news. While ‘More Frequent Evening Services’ were also

in the top three, in 2015, it is ‘More Frequent Daytime Services’ which are

number two in order of priority.

2.19.10 Having helpful drivers is less of a priority is more helpful drivers (31% to

21%) – good news indicating that standards and customer service skills have

increased significantly. Also, fewer people prioritised personal security and

safety – decreasing from 30% in 2007 to 11% in 2015.

Table 31: Comparison of 12-month Ratings 2008 – 2015

Response 2008 2010 2011 2015 Change

since

2007

About the same 41% 59% 55% 42% +1%

Better now 43% 27% 28% 32% -11%

I did not previously travel by bus 6% 4% 9% 7% +1%

Worse now 9% 11% 8% 5% -4%

No response 1% 1% 0% 14% +13%

2.19.11 In response to the question of whether services have improved, worsened or

stayed the same compared to a year ago, the respondents who said ‘About the

Same’ remains high, however there has been an 11% decrease in those who

feel services are ‘Better Now’ in 2015. Equally, the proportion of respondents

who said services have worsened is much lower – halving from 11% five years

ago to 5% this year.


50064C Report – On-bus Survey Analysis of Thamesdown Swindon Network ▪ Summary & Conclusions ▪ 30

3Summary & Conclusions 3

3.1 Summary

3.1.1 Travelling to get to work (27%), travel to school/college (21%) and

shopping (20%) are the most popular reasons for using TT services.

3.1.2 89% of the 732 respondents use the bus at least once a week. 54% of

respondents use the bus five or more times a week, 21% three or four times a

week and 14% use the bus once or twice a week. 5% of respondents use the

bus several days a month and 3% less often.

3.1.3 Amongst frequent users (5+ times a week) work is the most popular reason

for travel (34% of trips) whilst visiting friends/family, healthcare, work and

‘other’ each accounted for 11% of trips.

3.1.4 52% of respondents say they use the bus the same amount as a year ago,

35% more often and 13% less. Increased use of car or taxi was the most

popular reason for using the bus less. 44% of those using the bus more did so

because of the need to make more trips.

3.1.5 25% of respondents use concessionary travel passes. The most popular tickets

purchased are the Day Rider ticket (22%) and Four Week Travel Pass

(18%). Annual passes (5%), 13-week passes (2%) and Family Day Rider

tickets (0%) are the least used tickets.

3.1.6 In total 69% of respondents said they were smart card users (either TT

(44%), concessionary or Stagecoach (2%) smart card holders). The balance

(23%) is less than the 25% who use concessionary travel passes so it would

seem that some concessionary pass holders are unaware that these are

smartcards. 26% said they didn’t have a smart card and 5% said they were

not aware of smart cards.

3.1.7 The majority of passengers are a captive audience in that they did not have

access to a car - 80% of respondents did not have a car available to

them, compared to 71% five years ago.

3.1.8 Of those who could have travelled by car but instead chose to use a TT bus

service, 75% rated TT overall as ‘very good’ or ‘good’. Only 2% of respondents

who did not have a car available thought bus services were either ‘poor’ or

‘very poor’.

3.1.9 Respondents were asked to identify the reason for travelling by bus on the day

of the survey from a list of ten options; having a bus pass was the most

popular reason cited by 27% of respondents while 20% said bus was

more convenient and 15% have no other option. Cost was also a

significant factor – 11% said it was cheaper to use the bus and 9% choose bus

because of the cost of parking though the cost of fuel was cited by only 3%.



3.1.10 Respondents still favour traditional methods of obtaining information (a

common finding in TAS surveys for other companies). 35% of respondents

get their information from the bus stop display – the most popular

source. 27% of respondents get their information from timetables and 15%

from a website. 86% of respondents said they found information either very or

somewhat useful; only 6% of respondents said they found information ‘not

often’ or ‘never’ useful/reliable.

3.1.11 Respondents were asked to choose their top three priorities from a list of 17

factors. Frequency, reliability, convenience, clean buses and bus stop

announcements were the most popular answers revealing the importance of

the more basic aspects service provision.

3.1.12 When asked to rate TT services compared with those of other bus companies,

34% said they were ‘about the same’ and 32% of respondents thought

TT’s services were better or much better than those of other

operators. Only 4% thought TT services were either worse or much worse.

3.1.13 51% people either agreed or strongly agreed that the TT service they

were on represented value for money while 31% disagreed or strongly

disagreed. 83% people either agreed or strongly agreed that it was generally

easy to get a seat on the TT service they had used during the survey; 11%

disagreed or strongly disagreed.

3.1.14 TT requested a further question on why respondents used the bus more or

less, listing factors relating to the bus service. The most popular reason for

using the bus more was the route itself (cited by 60% of respondents),

followed by frequency (30%) and speed (19%).

3.1.15 There is a clear message that TT needs to improve its brand awareness in

Swindon. 76% of 373 respondents said they had heard nothing about

TT in the last three months and 76% of all respondents had not heard

of any TT promotions in the last three months. The most popular

promotion (identified by just seven respondents) was the Evening Rider

ticket followed by the Family Day Rider mentioned by four people. Three

people had heard about TT’s trip offer to London.

3.1.16 The ability to give change is a recurring issue throughout the survey and a

reason given by eight respondents as to why they felt TT was worse or much

worse than other companies. When respondents are asked to select from

a list of improvements they would like TT to make it and more Sunday

services are both chosen 13% of respondents. 10% of respondents say they

would like to see more frequent daytime services.

3.1.17 Finally, when asked for an overall rating of TT 88% of respondents felt it was

either good or very good. Only 3% of respondents thought the company was

poor or very poor.



3.2 Conclusions and Recommendations

3.2.1 Overall the picture is a positive one: most respondents are using the bus very

or fairly frequently and only 13% are using the bus less than they did

previously. The main reason for reduced bus use is increased car or taxi use

so there is an opportunity to promote the advantages that bus has over car,

with cost and convenience being key reasons for taking the bus. Most

respondents also view the bus as good or very good.

3.2.2 80% of those surveyed do not have access to a car so the bus is an obvious

mode of travel. However, the fact that so many respondents have not heard

anything about TT or its promotions in the last three months means there is

room for improvement here. It is worth noting that respondents’ favour

traditional means such as the bus stop timetable display when obtaining

information on bus services.

3.2.3 Commuters and those travelling for education and shopping – the most

popular reasons for travel – could be targeted further. Day and weekly tickets

are more popular than the extended validity tickets, but more attractive offers

for commuters could increase take up of 13 week and annual passes. Frequent

shoppers will require a different form of ticketing and a carnet-style offer is

likely to be better suited to their needs.

3.2.4 Since respondents raised the issue of not getting change on buses throughout

the survey, reasons why drivers do not give change might be better explained.

Also, several respondents mentioned as an issue the cancellation of service 20

and care should be taken in handling the communication and implementation

of any future changes to service. The fact that some respondents heard of

frequency increases on other services as a result is a positive and should be

exploited.

50064C Report On-bus Survey Analysis of …©The TAS Partnership Limited December 15 50064C Report...

Documents

Transcript of 50064C Report On-bus Survey Analysis of …©The TAS Partnership Limited December 15 50064C Report...