European Railway Rivalry: Who Will Dominate the High Speed Tracks?

[@petrhajduk9955]

I don't mind the competition, but EU should force an open ticketing interface to all of these operators so that the travelling experience is smooth. On top of that some EU ticket scheme where you can combine some different tickets from different companies together would be nice (albeit for a small extra fee) - the point would be to have extra guarantees in case you miss the connecting train due to delays etc.

[@judeseibel5909]

FR!! I think it should be based on the Dutch OV-Chipkaart system. Being American it was so crazy to me seeing how the Dutch got all of their public transport onto the same fare system.

[@B777LR]

Didn’t the EU just introduce a railway package that addresses that? Went into force last month.

[@ChristiaanHW]

@@judeseibel5909 exactly, and since the start of this year Dutchies can toss their OV-chipkaart in the trash and just use their bank (debit) card (or any device linked with your bank account, like smartwatch or smartphone) when they use public transport. the only thing in The Netherlands is that you can't directly go from one operator onto the next. you have to "check out" of the first and "check in" at the second. they should solve that and it's as perfect as it could be. and if we implement that EU wide and eventually maybe even Europe wide our public transit would be really convenient

[@ThibaultKreutzer]

oh yes, that would be sweet!

[@kernelpanic2887]

​@@judeseibel5909There's a couple of those, Switzerland is also centralised on one app, it's epic

[@TheMrChesi]

See a lot of people talking about DB in the comments, disregarding the fact that, right now, the company that has the best position in all 4 markets talked about is Trenitalia.

[@oldskoolmusicnostalgia]

If punctuality is a key criteria there is no way Trenitalia wins.

[@wienczysawbykowski1631]

@@oldskoolmusicnostalgia Any long-distance service in Europe currently wins with DB. Italian trains are more punctual.

[@wienczysawbykowski1631]

@@oldskoolmusicnostalgia Any long-distance service in Europe currently wins with DB. Italian trains are more punctual.

[@92thomasm]

Not to defend Trenitalia but as a user of both services there’s also no way DB wins in terms of punctuality

[@ElmarLecher]

germans love to hate on DB.

[@cx5307]

For me, it always seemed quite easy to connect two big cities like Madrid and Barcelona on a Friday afternoon and make a profit. It seems much harder to connect two smaller cities like León and Salamanca at midnight on a Wednesday. In a monopoly, a company could use the profit from one route to finance the other. In a free market, it would be a sensible decision to cut connections to smaller cities and limit service times. I don't know if this is really what we want.

[@michelangelobuonarroti4958]

But this is precisely why national rail operators are government owned. They will provide those services. Just having the competition on the most popular and easiest routes in the end is beneficial to the state operators too because it unearths demand for them to capture as well, as we can clearly see in examples like Italy with Italo or Spain with the recent liberalisation.

[@PtrkHrnk]

@@michelangelobuonarroti4958 But the next thing somebody say will be to cut the local services, because they make no profit...

[@jan-lukas]

​@@michelangelobuonarroti4958but if all rail services were state-owned the profitable routes can pay for the rest, like this the state has to pay for unprofitable ones while not making profit itself

[@michelangelobuonarroti4958]

@@PtrkHrnk No, no they won't. We're not in America. The routes are all set. They are decided a priori and by the government. The tenders are only then given out to private operators or the state railway company.

[@michelangelobuonarroti4958]

@@jan-lukas You misunderstand. That principle still applies. Having competition on the most popular routes in the end is beneficial to the state railway company too.

[@haisheauspforte1632]

As someone from Germany, I don't see International cooperation between state railways as hindering competition. It is just that they integrate fares and it is what makes many if the international rail services in Germany possible. DB cooperates with other state railways to run direct trains to all of its neighbors (and Intercity Service to all except Luxembourg) and I see that as a huge win. Without DB/SBB/Trenitalia cooperation, there probably wouldn't be direct trips from Germany to Italy, just like in the previous years

[@f.r.4329]

Auch mit Luxembourg gibt es eine IC Verbindung, nach Düsseldorf, die von der CFL betrieben wird mit der DB, aber die wird ab Koblenz zum RE bis Luxembourg. Even with Luxembourg there is an IC Route to Düsseldorf, that is operated by CFL with DB, but becomes a regional train at Koblenz.

[@1121494]

@@f.r.4329 Yeah, it is an RE with IC-code though. It's literally RE-rolling stock, not just the IC2 carpet-RE, literal RE in all but name and price.

[@AB-zl4nh]

You don't need to declare your identity.

[@Nitrox-.]

But let's be real, DB notoriously is "always late" and expensive considering the service they provide is rather basic. On top of that many important routes don't operate at high speed. If it was possible for other companies to launch a modern competitive model in an instant, they'd probably fall flat on their face. And they'd deserve it - competition is something that could finally force them to live in the present day instead of 10 years in the past. The lack of competition due to DBs (partially) state owned nature is what caused the current state of railway travel in Germany.

[@haisheauspforte1632]

@@Nitrox-. Big If. No other railway could just operate at higher speeds, because no private railway can just build some tracks like in the 18 hundreds. And operating high speed service on existing lines is extremely expensive too. Buying HSR rolling stock is extremely expensive. Getting better operations than DB is extremely difficult, because many of DBs problems come from the rail network and the other companies have to use it too. Also no matter how bad DB can be, it has still much more experience operating trains in Germany than any other company. Even if there was no state involvement in DB, it would be highly unlikely any other private company could replace it. DB already has all the trains, the staff and the experience to operate trains. Most problems causing DB to be late or cancel trains (track problems, passengers blocking doors, emergencies, brakedowns) could hardly get avoided by potential competitors

[@michaelangerer6965]

Iryo is also owned by Trenitalia, not only AirNostrum and Globaalvia.

[@itmartinwho]

It's owned 31% by AirNostrum and 45% by Trenitalia, after AirNostrum sold some of its shares months ago.

[@DerKatzeSonne]

Yeah, this video is full of wrong or at least misleading details. This is one example I spotted. Also no word about Flixtrain in Germany (and Sweden), Snälltåget in Sweden or Westbahn in Austria (going to Munich now and planning on expanding service to Stuttgart).

[@Lorre982]

The video is about hight speed trains, flix trein are not highspeed

[@mdhazeldine]

Air Nostrum having a stake in railways makes me wonder if we'll see Ryanrail and Easyrail brands appear anytime soon. If the budget airlines feel threatened by rail, I bet they will want to get in on the act.

[@B777LR]

I don’t think we will see Ryanair expand into the rail business for several reasons. They have a business model that relies on extreme cost cutting, moving equipment around to where they make more money and massive social dumping (enabled by constantly hopping over borders), which is much harder for rail operations. The fact they are an Irish company doesn’t exactly help. They are way out of touch with railways in general, both in terms of Ireland not really having any, and the simple geographical distance from the European railway networks. That having been said, I believe we will see more airlines move onto the rails. Air France-KLM made an attempt once and has begun partnering with some rail operators. Lufthansa is dipping its feet into the water with an increasingly extensive DB partnership. Eventually we will see a big one move over, and that could kick off a race between the bigger airlines.

[@_CaptainCookie]

Flixtrain already exists, so the bus market is definitely jumping on this

[@judeseibel5909]

@@B777LRIreland actually does have a pretty extensive rail network operated by Irish Rail, and so does Northern Ireland with NI Railways. Dublin also has DART commuter rail and Belfast also has commuter rail. Ryanair is just based in Ireland because companies aren’t taxed as heavily there as in other EU countries. I do agree that they will probably just stay in the aviation industry because a lot of their routes aren’t possible by rail.

[@mdhazeldine]

@@B777LR You make good points, but if the EU starts putting in regulations to ban or reduce short haul flights, you can bet the airlines are going to wake up and take a 2nd look at rail as a way to stop their business vanishing. Or they will move to a different continent! haha

[@B777LR]

@@mdhazeldine Maybe, but as someone who works in aviation, I have my doubts. Most airline managements don’t have the foresight to take such decisions, they are too conservative. I would not be surprised if a decision to enter the rail market is going to happen so late that other players have already established themselves so hard that airlines won’t stand a chance.

[@avientu1]

Just to clarify on your Spain facts. The Avlo brand by Renfe was actually supposed to be the first brand to be launched after liberalization, in April 2020, but got postponed because of COVID. So it wasn’t because Ouigo started to eat away Renfe’s market, it all happened way before that. And then both companies launched services in 2021 with a month’s difference, being Ouigo first.

[@abeonthehill166]

Oh Mierda ! Muchas Gracias !

[@jakobkoeth7739]

There is one very big Problem with this, that does not get talked about enough: What happens if one competitor defaults, who might be the only one currently operating a route? We had this with abellio (private regional operator) in Germany, and some towns got completely cut off from all connections. If you want railway traffic to succeed, you cannot allow for this to happen. Railway travel can only succeed in a major way, if you can depend on it. There needs to be a system, who takes over these operations. And who pays for that. You cannot have sevice cuts like this for multiple days. Same problem with strikes: We have to start treating railways as what they are: critical infrastructure. They can be privatised, but if you dont put in enough checks (by state authorities) at some point things will go really wrong

[@DenSoesygeHaj]

I Think you are confusing open access routes (which is what the video is talking about) and tenders which is what a abellio is competing in. Also abellio is not really a private company since it is owned by Nederlandse Spoorwegen (Dutch government)

[@PtrkHrnk]

@@DenSoesygeHaj True, but it's still part of the same EU's initiatives to increase short term profit over long-term sustainability.

[@TarikDaniel]

@@PtrkHrnk This might be true for long distance trains where basically every competitor can build their own schedule, but not for regional public transportation. There the government decides what service will be offered. When implemented correctly, it shouldn't make a difference of who facilitates the service.

[@PtrkHrnk]

@@TarikDaniel Open access long distance competition is acceptable, as long as it's assured that it doesn't lead to dumping prices or other uncompetitive behaviour. Most of the time assured is it not... Tendering of short-haul domestic routes is a no-go for me. First it's uncompetitive, because the incumbent has to obey stricter rules that private competitors (e. g. public procurement, disclosure of information). Other problems are cheapest bids leading to lower quality, worsen working conditions. There's disruption during transition, lack of long-term investment and planning, and not least the administrative burden and costs of the tendering process itself. It's not worth to focus on short-term savings and profit against long-term sustainability (both of the railway operations and the environment).

[@Malte_OJ]

Which cities in Germany were cut off from rail services because of Abellio's insolvency? Abellio was only active in regional transport, where all routes are put out to tender. If one operator goes bankrupt, another takes over. That was also the case with Abellio. In North Rhine-Westphalia, the routes were given to Deutsche Bahn and National Express in an emergency award. Of course, not everything went smoothly, but Abellio didn't shut down its operations from one day to the next, and after a short time everything was back to normal.

[@osasunaitor]

In this video's thumbnail you can see a French Ouigo, a German ICE, a French-Swiss TGV Lyria, a Swiss Giruno and an Italian Frecciarossa. As a Spaniard, I find it funny (and kinda sad) that we have the largest high speed network in Europe but we are always the forgotten ones

[@ainonainpg3d799]

That sounds like a skill issue to me 😂

[@gc.96]

Sadly privatization will lead to higher prices down the line when they force the state to sell the publicly owned company because corporations dont like to compete against the state.

[@AL5520]

Weather they cell the operators or not does not matter. The open access system works just like it works in the airline industry. The state is the one responsible for the infrastructure and the different companies compete using it by getting slots so, unless you claim that there is competition in the airline industry, there is no reason that privatizing the national operators will stop competition just like it didn't do it with airline companies.

[@gc.96]

@@AL5520 Over time these corporations consolidate through merger and acquisition, today there are large parts of america with only one or two airline available. But I hope I'm wrong, I do want trains to be cheaper so it becomes more accessible to a higher number of people.

[@ChristiaanHW]

@@gc.96 luckily we have anti-monopoly laws and watchdogs. if 2 (big) companies want to merge they have to ask permission and those watchdogs will look if the merged company wouldn't become to powerful in it's field of operation. like the Microsoft, Activision merger. so if 2 rail companies want to merge and the watchdogs of the involved countries (and the EU watchdog) conclude the resulting company would be to powerful. they either have to sell part of the company to a competitor or the merger gets blocked entirely.

[@gc.96]

@@ChristiaanHW True, I'm glad that America is finally enforcing anti trust laws after 40 years of letting corporations do whatever they wanted.

[@TheLikeys]

@@ChristiaanHW Yet the consolidation of the European aviation market is progressing. Lufthansa Group, Air France-KLM and Ryanair are taking over ever larger shares of the market. I would argue that the whole thing on the railways should be kept in mind after all

[@szymex22]

I’m not really sold on the private railway idea. These competitive services are only profitable on high speed lines, between big cities. Before the railways, at least in Poland, were split into different companies, cargo and profitable routes funded the local trains. The local trains are a lot of the time feeding the express routes. In a privatised railway market, the passengers from smaller cities are left out in favour of the big city ones. In poland, the railways were commercialised in 2000. It was implemented very badly and not cautiously like the other countries. The national railways PKP were split into companies. In my opinion, this was done very badly. There is PKP Intercity, POLREGIO, and most voivodeships have their own carrier, each with their own rolling stock. This has led to the crap that is the ticketing system, with each provider having their own stupid fares, you can’t just jump on another one’s train, even if your ticket was more expensive. In the year 2000, many local services were cut. It started with shutting down demand, by making the timetables hours the opposite of when people would like to travel. Then removing service and finally abandoning the railway line altogether. All in a quest to become more profitable. This also had the side effect of reducing passenger numbers on mainlines, as passengers would often change at junction stations and continue their journey on another train. So service was lowered again. In theory, we have open access. But the Railway Transport Administration (UTK) often rejects requests because of commercial viability (competition is not allowed if it will negatively affect government funded service), but often just 1% is enough to deny the open access. For the few cases where it is allowed, it’s mostly for PKP Intercity, or international services that don’t travel most of their way in Poland, or other services that never actually run any trains. Edit; I forgot to add, because of the separation, we have like 7 railway apps, each with some functionality new and some duplicated. I was surprised at how well the DB app worked when I was visiting Germany Meanwhile the GDDKa, the road administration, doesn’t need to make any profit and the road network is really high quality

[@AL5520]

This sounds like a bad local implementation and it depends on who you vote for in the local and national elections. Open access, that was discussed here, allows different operators to run train on long distance lines, To enable that the infrastructure of the rail lines and stations was separated from the national operator, some opted to just separate it to different division of the national rail - not a good way to go - while others completely separated the two, like Spain that has Renfe as one of the operators and Adif that is responsible for infrastructure. Spain has the most competitive system because the government made the process easy and fare, unlike France or Germany. As for the local services, those are open for tenders, not competition, so Île-de-France Mobility in Paris will open local networks for any company by releasing tender for regional and tram lines. This will be done in stages and every winner will operate the lines but the local authority will still be the one in-charge on the level of service and fare systems. Any change to your fare system is the fault of your local government. In many areas tenders exist for years now. In the Barcelona metropolitan area there are 48 operators but all work under the integrated tariff system and governed by the ATM. The EU rules did not create this, they just require now that any operator from any EU country can participate in those tenders as long as it meets the criteria.

[@szymex22]

@@AL5520 I know about tender services, we have some of them here too when the national carriers don’t have enough rolling stock, but the problem I mentioned persists. Small voivodeships do not have the funds to get a great service, which could have been funded at least in part by profitable services.

[@pandabar8309]

@@AL5520 So you would like to tell us that the Swiss railway is a bad local implementation?

[@Lodai974]

@@AL5520 Unfortunately this will only work on currently uncrowded HSLs and between major cities and in the short term. The SNCF in France had to give up train paths so that Trenitalia could come to Paris. In addition, the infrastructure toll is 30% of the actual price for Trenitalia (for 2 years I believe). This explains why travel via trenitalia is cheaper than by TGV. This will stop as soon as the company pays 100% of the real price. The HSL Paris-Lyon is already 100% saturated and it is the busiest axis in the country (Paris core of 15 million inhabitants towards the mountains or the sea). It is this saturation which allowed the appearance of the TGV Duplex. Currently we are modifying the signaling to switch to ERTMS2 to gain 2 paths per hour, but it is not enough to allow the transport of the request. So prices rise and only a rich caste (and who has time for it) will eventually be able to afford the trips.

[@eddys.3524]

In the UK one can see where privatization leads to : Higher prices, lower service to passengers and declining work conditions for the employees. Now in the UK Nationalization of the railways is high on the agenda.

[@Hastdupech8509]

Privatization should in fact stay in the HST market segment, which is actually what the UK lacks. In Italy it's been 11 years and we've only gotten lower fares, frequent services and a restoration of Trenitalia from a basically distrusted corrupt public company to a competitive miracle that's also been renovating passenger rail all over the country

[@guerreiro943]

Right, UK's situation was a disaster, not gonna disagree with that. But rail liberalization in Spain and Italy has been an overwhelming success. Better service, better frequency, cheaper tickets, etc. Nowadays you could literally take a high-speed train from Madrid to Barcelona for 7€.

[@frodolon]

@@Hastdupech8509 Privatization of HST would mean I couldn't be sure my city keeps HSR access in 5 or 10 years. Not wanting that. Especially since HSR access is a big factor when moving.

[@qtamomusic7620]

The way they did the privatization in the UK was crap. That was the problem, not the fact that it was privatized.

[@789know]

​@@qtamomusic7620many should simply look at how Japanese privatised their railway and see how it can be done better. UK etc just implement it very badly

[@simsportif]

The thing with open access is that the new operators all huddle alongside the most profitable routes to the detriment of the national operator, leading to them cutting down even more on regional or feeder routes and leading to an even worse transportation landscape for people living outside of the big cities/main corridors.

[@etbadaboum]

It has been reported in an article that SNCF will go in Italy to compete in order to cause Trenitalia problems and not expand abroad too much (meaning in France), such is the joy of open access in the EU...

[@unitedstatesoffugu]

13:59 I know it's easy to argue competition leads to cheaper fares for customers. On the other hand for example, you could get a 6.5h ICE-ride from Hamburg to Munich for some 20€ if you plan a bit ahead. But of course: the closer you book to the date of travelling, the higher are the prices you need to expect. But also: the same principle applies to markets with competitive services. And I have to say I do enjoy the monopoly in German high-speed train services. For customers, everything happens centralised on one platform and there is no need to research and compare offers by multiple providers. I use one of DBs discount programs and usually find fares between 15 and 30€, one way, paying 25% less

[@ainonainpg3d799]

Yeah that is sick. But plans have been made to make an app for all trains in the eu. And actually almost every major train company has agreen on using this new app if it comes out. That would be cool

[@speedi789]

I am just afraid that the privatization of the domestic rail market will see a huge jump in prices compared to what they are now in publicly owned systems. Especially for certain groups(Kids, students, elders,...)

[@speedi789]

especially for non high speed trais

[@gerohubner5101]

How do you get that notion? Private operations (in almost every market segment) are generally more cost efficient, flexible, and innovative than public (state operated) services. They can render significant profit to owners while even being cheaper than public operations. This has been proven for decades in many fields of play in Europe. Where are you from to still believe in state-operated public services, a real economic dinosaur?

[@mystray]

​@@gerohubner5101This has actually been disproven for decades across many fields in Europe.

[@giuliopatierno8848]

Never in the video railway privatization is mentioned, it is a phenomenon that in Europe happened only in England under Margareth Thatcher's rule that hasn't sparkled competition, but the creation of little line monopolies with higher ticket costs compared to state ownership. In this video he deals with railway liberalization and the creation of a competitive market where, as the service offered is practically the same, the only ground for confrontation is on price. As real world data proves, with the lower prices given by the need of convincing the end client of using one train operator in spite of another on the same line, the number of passengers rises with benefits for instance on the environment and road congestion. The true problem stands in the possible implementation of anti-competitive actions such as the creation of cartels where a group of societies would collectively rise prices to rise profits on the back of the collectivity, leading to a diminution of users and benefits for society. In Italy without the privately owned ITALO train operator high speed train prices would have been for sure higher. As they have been in Spain up until three years ago. On the other hand competition can be implemented only on rail lines where there's a demand that can be filled with the offer of many different services, for sure some regional railway lines wouldn't be positively affected by liberalization, as it would probably result in higher prices with lower services. The fact is that the state should keep control of the market and be market oriented, not business oriented, only with this base idea the system can work. Also it is important to notice that railway operators, as for instance iryo or Trenitalia france, although being publicly owned, they act as profit oriented private entities.

[@clemmct9154]

How about the electricity market ? And Highways in France ?

[@TheMannyx17]

Renfe also started offering services in France this summer and are expanding them by March 2024.

[@TwoWholeWorms]

Open access is great, as long as there are still publically-operated offering, but--that said--I really hope we see the Frecciarossa 1000s become more prevalent throughout Europe. They're by far the best trains currently operating within Spain (and I say this as an avid Patonista), but there's often so much tied up in rolling stock purchases that I fear will get in the way of this.

[@matsv201]

The issue is that the rail fee often don't cover the true cost. So it's reallt taxpayer that funds it

[@B777LR]

@@matsv201 But that’s the case with roads and quite often also aviation as well. Once everything is considered, mass transport via rail is the cheapest option by far.

[@matsv201]

@@B777LR that is a very common and very false statement. Extremely so. Roads at least in the EU is extremely profitable. We talking typically 200% profit. For airports its typically small local airports that is loss leaders while medium size international airport generally make profits.

[@B777LR]

@@matsv201 It’s not even close. Taxes and fees on cars and fuel doesn’t come close to covering the cost of infrastructure anywhere in the world, let alone investments in new infrastructure and side effects. The square meter price alone of a parking space Barcelona is over 55.000 eur for acquisition alone, not including anything else such as paving, connecting roads/facilities etc. Aviation is a lot more significant than just the airport at each end. Air traffic control, radio beacons and navigation aids, all the involved government agencies, not to mention the environmental costs. Who subsidises the lost property value as result of noise pollution for example?

[@matsv201]

@@B777LR you are dead wrong. Do the math and come back with numbers in stead of spekulation. Air traffic pays a accessfee for airtraffic controll. And its not like it's very expensive. One person can suport 12-15 planes over Europe and probobly 100 over the Atlantic. The envormental cost is not a true cost but a imaginary one, as long as its not payed in any way shape or form and you can't put a specific montera value on it. Its just a BS way to ad a imginary cost. Come back with numbers next time and leve guesses

[@hitardo]

For decades, the high demand and high profit routes have been subsidizing the low demand and low profit routes. This was possible due to all train routes being operated, managed, and maintained by Governamental entities. In this shift, towards a direct competition, we will affect that balance. One car argue that flights already do. But his is only true on medium routes (200 to 400 km). On shorter routes (100 to 200) people preferred to go by rail. By doing this, we might bring all of those passenger to train. However, the profits will be squeezed, to the point that no subsidizing of low demand and low profit routes is possible - as the private companies do not need to do so, forcing public entities to go on that strategy. Hence, leaving those low demand and low profit routes in a more precarious state. Therefore, I think you should be cautions!

[@costynas]

In Europe, most of the rail infrastructure (tracks, stations, etc) is state owned. This means that the state organizes tenders for private or state operators to run on certain routes. So the state can oblige the operators to also take up routes where a universal service is needed, as part of a tender package. So, if they want a high profit route, they will be obliged to also take up a route that generates losses.

[@Vaasref]

​@@costynas State owned means little when the EU forces them to apply liberalism. In France the fares just went up due to train operators having to pay to use the rail they used to own.

[@noefillon1749]

@@Vaasref SNCF Mobilités having to pay to use the infrastructure is only a shift on who pays what. If SNCF Mobilités didn't pay to use it, the network would have to be maintained anyway, by RFF/SNCF Réseau so indirectly the State and the national taxpayers. The central state has low interest in spending money in local infrastructure and we actually saw it as France (still the State, not a random private) has been spending a lot on long distance high speed infrastructure and lefting the local network to deteriorate, for several decades now. The other possibility to maintain the network, since SNCF was only one entity, was to increase the fares for the passenger's money to go to the network maintenance, so we get to the same problem. Now that SNCF Mobilités (or whatever train operator) pays for the use of the network, it has to impact it on the price of the service. It's then up to the regions to decide which part of it they want to make the REGIONAL taxpayers pay for and which part of it they want the users to pay for. It looks like a more logical management to me, but I could be wrong.

[@OmmerSyssel]

​@@noefillon1749an overlooked issue with financing of infrastructure are that roads and highways are financed by taxation, without being critised as inefficient or too expensive. While rail transport certainly needs to be cost efficient. Millions of polluting lorries are cramping European highways and villages based on that flawed logic...

[@noefillon1749]

@@OmmerSyssel Motorways in France are not finances by taxes... or not anymore which doesn't mean it was a good idea actually.

[@sambones1092]

In France we just passed a law to ban short haul flight routes when there is a high speed train alternative, I think it's fantastic

[@sambones1092]

@@Janko.1 Yes, at least other EU countries should

[@skurinski]

I think its terrible, taking away people's choice

[@KyrilPG]

There's one big issue with open competition within the two largest markets : France and Germany. The problem is saturation, which means new entrants will have to take a profitable route *away* *from* the legacy operator instead of competing *alongside* them and it seriously affects the fairness of the competition. If a legacy operator is deprived of some of its most profitable services to allow a competitor to run them instead, how is this fair? In Spain, each new operator added more trains and offered more seats. Operators competed *alongside* each other. It was possible because the lines were far from being saturated. It grew the market, it did not rob Peter to pay Paul... In France, certain high-speed lines see a train passing as low as every 3 minutes during peak hours. In Germany, trains are often delayed by saturation in the bottlenecks / stations on the network. There simply is no space available, or not enough, on the most heavily traveled and profitable routes in both France and Germany for new competitors to really enter the market. Spain having a standard gauge high-speed network separate from the legacy Iberian gauge network drastically reduced the number high-speed destinations, thus the number of trains running. While the French South-East high-speed line carries services from / to destinations from Switzerland to the East coast of Spain, leading to dozens and dozens of services using the same high-speed backbone line around the same time. It's different in Germany but the result is the same : free segments are a rarity. So, is it real competition, or fair, if it's robbing Peter to pay Paul? In both countries, the only way to really increase the number of trains / seats, would be to build entirely new lines / to double them. I'm all for competition, increase in service and seat offering. But there's a physical reality in certain countries that is hard to overcome.

[@MrAlagos]

It can only be considered "robbing" if countries don't truly implement the legislation and recommendations from the EU. If they do, the railway owning company is fully and truly separated by the service operator company or companies, and thus the first should only look for the best and most efficient way to manage the network; if this includes a different allocation for train slots and operator fees in a way that improves the connections and the profitability, that's what it should do. If that takes away slots from the incumbent, traditionally State-owned operator it wouldn't by "robbing" but only improving.

[@KyrilPG]

@@MrAlagos Yeah it would be robbing, in the sense of robbing one to pay another. In France, the infrastructure and operator are separate, and yet the problem is exactly as I mentioned it. When there's not a single slot left on a high-speed line at a high demand time, any new entrant will de facto deprive the legacy operator from one or several of its most profitable routes to give it to another operator. There's no place in this world where this would be considered fair competition. It is purely robbing one operator to force introduce another one. When OuiGo or Iryo entered the Spanish market, it did not require Renfe to stop operating several services. The new operators scheduled trains in the available slots *alongside* the legacy operator. Not instead of Renfe. Just like when a new cellphone operator enters a given market, it gets its own antennas or piggyback a previously existing cell network and gets a new range of phone numbers but does NOT require the communications agency to forcefully take clients or phone numbers from an existing operator and give them to a new one. New operators compete on their offer and clients have more choice, with more phone numbers. That's not possible in a fair manner in France or Germany as it will require an authority to rob occupied and profitable slots from the legacy operators and give them to new ones. That is the problem. If slots are not occupied, then it's fine, like in Spain. But it's not fair to effectively dismantle and reduce the offer of a legacy operator to forcefully make room for a new one. That's not fair and open competition. Especially if the newcomer has preferential treatment, like having to pay reduced fees as a welcome bonus, then that's even more unfair competition.

[@KyrilPG]

@@MrAlagos I forgot one important bit in my much too long reply : Given that in France, the most profitable routes run on the busiest and most saturated lines and schedules, any new operator will have to take away a train slot from the current operator as I've already explained. Which is not fair competition. But, and it is a HUGE but, it will also probably reduce the number of seats available. On the most profitable and peak hours routes, SNCF runs double length, double decker TGV's with 1300 seats, and in 2024 up to 1480 seats (TGV M). None of the current operators in Europe have trains of such capacity. If I recall correctly, the maximum capacity of some 400m single deck trains is about 900 seats. And I think it is absolutely terrible to replace a 1300 or 1480 seat train by a 800 or 900 seat train, eliminating up to almost 600 seats in the process, just for the sake of competition. Especially when there's no slots available. It would be utterly stupid to reduce the number of seats available in order to force unfair competition. Right now, the network infrastructure manager is studying the upgrade and conversion of the busiest and most saturated lines to GoA2+ automation, allowing train separation of 2 minutes or less (currently the busiest lines have a train up to every 3 minutes each way during peak hours). It would be a version of the NExTEO system that is currently being tested on the central trunk of RER line E as part of the major Western extension of the line. It is a CBTC system where a centralized computer in constant communication with all trains, automatically pilots all of them, adjusting separation and speed on the fly up to 140kph. They should technically be capable of 44 trains per hour, like the highest frequency automated lines of the Paris metro. The idea would be to adapt this system to high-speed lines and operating speeds of 300, 320 and possibly more. This system would offer a 20 to 25% increase in capacity for the lines, allowing other operators to enter the market but will require them to have trains equipped with the technology and with tech specifications compatible with the system and its requirements. It was very simple in Spain where high-speed lines had plenty of capacity left for competing operators to run trains a few minutes before or after Renfe's trains. Each new operator brought train schedules with more seats. It's a whole different world in France or Germany where lines are packed to the brim.

[@OmmerSyssel]

Typical German NIMBY approach to anything new, makes railway improvements even more complicated, if not impossible. Influential Car Lobby unmentioned ...

[@KyrilPG]

@@OmmerSyssel What are you referring to that you think is typical German NIMBY ?

[@lokibau]

watching this from a frecciarossa train speeding through italy like a boss

[@rocketman1058]

this was a very cool one, thanks!

[@RailwayNetworks]

Great question and an even better answer you gave us through the video... thanks for a well covered topic... 😉👍

[@RailwaysExplained]

Thank you! 🙂

[@benjaminmaas4108]

between germany and italy is austria and switzerland, neither of which have high speed lines. most of the west of austria and all of switzerland does not even have 200 kmh lines. so to compete in the other market you have to accept crawling across the alps.

[@OmmerSyssel]

It isn't worth the investment or practically realistic running high speed trains on shorter distances.

[@etbadaboum]

Germany has decided long ago not to invest in such infrastructure

[@diamondjolt]

Wish we could get railway connections from France to Ireland :( plus a nationwide railway (including areas like donegal)

[@paulthiel5145]

Sounds like you need an extra tunnel for that first 😂

[@charlo90952]

There are proposals for a tunnel between Ireland and the mainland.

[@paulthiel5145]

@@charlo90952 good luck with that one. Never going to happen I'm afraid.

[@charlo90952]

@@paulthiel5145 Never say never. These kinds of projects are becoming more and more ambitious. It will happen one day, maybe 50 years in the future. The Chinese railway under construction to Tibet has 500 miles of tunnels at an altitude over 10,000 feet. If you can do that certainly you can tunnel under the Irish sea.

[@paulthiel5145]

@@charlo90952 yes you can. But in Ireland nobody is going to pay for it...

[@sorin_channel]

Meanwhile Romania: what are railways?

[@stephandrube8658]

@sorin_channel: Mocanita in Valea Vaserului….

[@etbadaboum]

NTV Italo is apparently being sold to logistics company MSC

[@butikimbo9595]

Hopefuly this rivalry ends up in a propper end to end european rail connection to start an Air vs Rail competition that only exist between Central Europe nations. Thank you for sharing the video.

[@georgekarnezis4311]

Honestly great sponsorship. I use Harting connectors in industrial control applications. Strong reliable user friendly allowing our projects to be easily installed at customer locations.

[@PtrkHrnk]

Right? Let's now all go get the industrial connectors!

[@timelessori]

trenitalia and now renfe operating in france can get smaller priced because they have temporary discounts on network’s usage. it is a 2-years long discount and trenitalia is currently negotiating for a 3rd one, while sncf does not have any form of discount. also, as mentioned in other comments, going on the paris-lyon line actually isn’t an increase in the number of services but rather a change of operator. trenitalia runs 4 trains a day on this line that sncf had to give up to them… that is some weird thing happening that i am not a fan of…

[@sachatrin2981]

good things to mention indeed!

[@IamTheHolypumpkin]

I recently noticed some Trenitalia train in Frankfurt Hauptbahnhof. Now I want to travel to Milan because it’s a convenient non stop ride. From there more Train as far as I can before getting inconvenient. Maybe I will reach Sicilia. Idk I didn’t do any research beyond looking at the departure Bord and noticing a train runs to Milan.

[@MrAlagos]

Those are EuroCity and have existed for a long time, Trenitalia, SBB and DB are now working on a different tipe of service that would utilize the high speed railways of the three countries.

[@DarioCastellarin]

From Milan you can travel on high-speed trains as far south as Salerno, then you'd have to switch to conventional trains. Trains to Sicily are ferried over the Messina Strait, which is quite the experience!

[@Videshideshbhakt]

The 2021 mandate is already seeing effect in Berlin, a regualr Berlin-Hamburd ICE (The tier 1 train, take around 1 hour 50 mins) is around €45 one way if booked 2 weeks in advance, and IC (Tier 2, takes 2 hours 15 min) is around €35 Euro, now with Flix train that takes 2.5 hours, the fares are €11! Thats quite a bit of difference in price!

[@ibuzz1337]

I just booked a Mannheim-Bremen ICE for 12euros 4 days before travel. 45 for Berlin Hamburg is way way way high. I travelled in January from Bremen - Hamburg - Berlin for 9 euros booking a day before. I guess I was just lucky lol.

[@zenja42]

I would still like to get "state owned, non profit" carrier, because more regulations & subsatisation would bring down prices and create better service with better work enviroments for the employees.

[@tiagozadra4307]

Quite the opposite actually. More regulation definitely leads to higher prices and subsidies can lead to higher prices

[@unitedstatesoffugu]

@@tiagozadra4307 Not true entirely: Germanys DB is 100% state-owned, has the monopoly on HSR and they have had cheap fares on offer for decades now. In the more recent past, because of political strategies, they seemed to have increased the share of low priced ticket options. They also hired almost 27.000 new staff in 2022. side notes: DB has one private competitor on national long-distance service as well as one on international level: Thalys. The other neighbouring (also state-owned (?)) international carriers (SNCF, NS, DSB, PKP, ČD, ÖBB, SBB, and apparently Trenitalia soon) also have some services to major cities close to their borders.

[@tiagozadra4307]

@@unitedstatesoffugu DB has a poorer service at a substantially higher price compared to its italian counterparts (in HSR at least). Munich to Berlin costs roughly 40-60% more than Rome to Milan, distance is pretty much the same. Also to say that Thalys is a competitor to DB is a big overstatement, Thalys only serves 6 or 7 cities in Germany, all are close to the Belgian and Dutch borders. None of these cities are in the top 3 largest German cities. DB has no real competitor, unlike Italy's Trenitalia which competes with Italo.

[@unitedstatesoffugu]

@@tiagozadra4307 so i compared prices for munich>berlin with DB and for rome>milan with both italo and frecciarossa. travel date would be september 18. departure after 9am. DB from 47,50€, italo from 45,90€, frecciarossa from 37,90€. ~20% difference. id say median prices for this date are 55-60€ for trenitalia, around 60€ for italo and 65-70€ for DB. i know thalys is a minor competitor for DB, thats why i mentioned it as a side note. but they do serve a metropolitan region with more than 10m people and the cities it calls at are home to a combined 3.65m.. with cologne being the largest, 1.1m, 4th in germany. every so often i get the impression that people just want to hate DB for whatever reasons, but i think the products they offer, especially if you’re using one of their discount subscriptions, are reasonable priced. especially if you book in advance and are flexible with times.

[@giacintoboccia9386]

12:10 Iryo is owned by Air Nostrum and Trenitalia.

[@lours6993]

Rail cannot operate successfully on market forces alone. Guaranteed levels of service require strong regulation and at least a public-private hybrid model. These are the only way to sustain service across both profitable and unprofitable, but necessary, lines and travel times.

[@etbadaboum]

One video I'd love to see is how new technology being implemented can reduce infrastructure building and maintenance costs and also rolling stock maintenance expenses, with ERTMS for the former and sensors detecting and even predicting future maintenance sessions, for example, for the latter.

[@Marcyl13x]

Hello from the future, the tickts from Paris and Milan are now around 70-140 euros instead of 150-170 euros :)

[@philthai99]

I don't mind competition but privatization will increase train fares as compared with the public owned rail systems.

[@simondahl5437]

Why would that be the case?

[@FA-tp3pq]

Ouigo (France) in Spain is downgrading the High Speed Service, second hand trains, many breakdowns …,, Renfe and Iryo (Italy) are much better.

[@sambones1092]

Cheaper is less quality, shocking lol

[@moviestuffandso]

Germany has the Flixtrain: Operated by the travelbus company Flixbus, they have extended their network from just the Cologne-Hamburg route to almost Germany-wide. They offer prices far below Deutsche Bahn, but also comfort levels relativ to those prices. Their rolling stock is older, less convinient, they are a bit slower and overall not as nice as the IC or ICE. BUT, seeing as they are way cheaper, they have seen remarkable success

[@BenBethelAZ]

What a fantastic video! Please consider making videos that help to get new high speed rail service to other cities and countries by delivering the potential profitability.

[@ClariNerd]

I'm pretty sure the winner will take a long time to be decided, but we all know who the loser will always be: Americans with driving anxiety.

[@trainspottingtech23]

I couldn't agree more! 😏🤝

[@JimBones1990]

It all goes thru CONgress.

[@nathanargo2487]

You should have mentionned the 'alliance' between SNCF and DB, and the collaboration of sncf with the swiss operator (Lyria), and the collaboration of SNCF with other operator (thalys -> Eurostar)

[@AndreaIppolitoIppo]

Trenitalia is all over the place 👍🏻

[@francescotrombetta8548]

@@d.m.5510 it doesn't.

[@XMarkxyz]

Isn't Iryo also controlled by Trenitalia? Did something change?

[@kimlaursen8224]

How difficult is it to change electrification in European countries🇪🇺 to standardize and harmonize the market, and secure international train travel🚄? - is it difficult and expensive, or will it be a manageable task?

[@AL5520]

It is difficult but it is possible and they are working towards it. There are also simple technical solutions to overcome this. the main barrier is the unification of the rules and creating one Eu authority that handles the whole authorization process. Now, if you want to operate in different countries you need to separately authorize your rolling stock and staff in order to operate in each country which is a long process especially when a country, like France, uses it to hinder competition. Technical differences can pose a problem but can be resolved. The EU is working to homogenize all systems on the main lines and helps different countries financially to replace old system with standardized ones, especially the move to standard gauge and to the European Train Control System (ETCS). That said, there are ore and more locomotives and multiple units that support different electric systems, safety and signaling systems and gauge change. In Spain we use them for years as our national system uses Iberian gauge and 3000kv while our high speed system uses standard gauge and 25,000kv. We have trains that can change gauge on the fly by passing a special apparatus that changes the gauge of each bogie while it passes through it. With broader gauges, like the Iberian or Russian ones, you can also add a third rail to allow bot standard and broad gauge train run on the same line, which is much cheaper than completely replacing the rails and rolling stock (or, at least, the bogies) to standard gauge.

[@kimlaursen8224]

@@AL5520 Thanks for the reply. So it isn’t just putting the existing electrification infrastructure on another voltage? You need to adjust them, or even replace them?

[@PtrkHrnk]

@@kimlaursen8224 You'd need to rebuild the entire system from power generation, the railside equipment, wires, catenaries, poles, to the rolling stock...

[@Lorre982]

​@@PtrkHrnkit is more easy nowadays to built locomotive whit politension system

[@PtrkHrnk]

@@Lorre982 Yes... see my points from previous comment as going form the most to the least difficult.

[@allanhoustoneditor]

It would be great to see more competition in Germany, but isn't the problem capacity? Even if you add more operators - Flixtrain is one low-cost alternative that has squeezed it's way into the market - they will all suffer the same and worse punctuality issues that DB does because the German rail network doesn't have the extra capacity to add more services. Maybe there is space on some select routes but the main ones of Berlin/Frankfurt/Stuttgart/Munich etc are pretty oversubscribed. Fortunately they are trying to fix some of these issues by building new track and overhauling station alignment etc, but it could be at least 10 years before we see a big improvement. (Opinions based on watching youtube transport channels - happy to be proven wrong).

[@OmmerSyssel]

NIMBY and bureaucracy obsessed Germans hinders any relevant improvement of their long outdated society! 🙈😴

[@АлександрКузнецов-н7д]

And there's always the problem that many of German's main stations are simply one-end, as Frankfurt, for example, and changing it would cost all too much and take at least five-six years. The solution which I see would be restructuring the railway net between the minor stations in big cities, for ex. in Frankfurt - between Frankfurt Hbf. and Frankfurt-Süd, in Berlin - between Berlin Hbf. and Berlin-Südkreuz etc. That would also require the new connections through the cities, but it would also solve (at least partially) the problem of "bottleneck" in Germany's main cities.

[@Inkyminkyzizwoz]

I don't think rail operators need to compete with each other. Instead, rail travel in general should be competing with other methods, such as road and air

[@jermainetrainallen6416]

Great vid. Very informative as per usual. It's very interesting to see how foreign operators are running services in other countries but I think increased choics of service for passengers forces operators to increase the quality of the servoce as well as to keep costs low. The rise of low cost services is started to take place here in the UK as well with the introduction of 'Lumo' services on the East Coast Mainline from London to Edinburgh. Hopefully, others countries can learn from this too. Keep up the good work👍

[@etbadaboum]

UK is definitively the counter-case for competition in the rail sector

[@Yaeko275]

Regarding Germany: You can already get HSR Tickets for 20-30€ from DB, so any additional company would have a quite hard time to compete based on low prices only.

[@klx-y]

uk train are the most ridiculously expensive in the world and treniitalia hold a huge percentage of them

[@Lorre982]

Since the frecciarosssa1000 is operating in Italy France Spain and in 2026 connect Milan to Munich (Austria and Germany), for a total of 5 country. The true european train

[@benjibatch]

On a completely unrelated note, Now that we will be able to control ticket prices in Cities Skylines 2 we can make our own competing rail companies

[@PtrkHrnk]

Imagine if you had competitors in Transport Fever 2. The only challenge there is managing cash-flow in early game...

[@1234smileface]

I hope RENFE can operate routes in France and Italy

[@GianUbertoLauri]

1) ETR1000 is a common but incorrect way to call the Frecciarossa 1000 (commercial brand) train. As an ETR the train is the ETR400, a number smaller than the train it is meant to replace, the ETR500. 2) French TGV are not equipped yet with ERMTS/ETCS of a level suitable for traveling on Italian HS lines. I suppose it is because this device is costly and would be used on a small part of the journey. I also suppose that this will change in the future.

[@jandron94]

Same issue with KVB devices to be used on the French side, expensive and scarce distribution to foreign operators like Frecciarossa. Business models are opaque for mere outsiders like us.

[@GianUbertoLauri]

@@jandron94 Frecciarossa, as far as I know, runs on the very same rails after Turin, and has only the 45 minute advantage bound to the use of the HS line from Milan to Turin. The different station is not this big issue unless you arrive from Paris and want to go further (i.e. like those who arrive at Bercy and want to continue to St. Pancras

[@moussa2949]

but on the train on the front and back parts its written etr 1000 so he wasnt wrong

[@bonaz11]

"Family name: ETR 1000 (IT), Serie 109 (ES), commercial Frecciarossa 1000" wikipedia. They just changed it's name from ETR 400 to ETR 1000.

[@GianUbertoLauri]

@@bonaz11 when the wrong name is used enough time, it gets the right name for those who do not understand which authority rules what. This set of person sadly includes some Wikipedia authors, who, like you, do not accept the evidence of official papers an rely on writings of people with no authority whatsoever about some issues. Trenitalia can choose whatever commercial brand they want, but the class name is ruled by ANSFISA, see previous comments. The builder name was Zefiro V350… I need some time to tell what happened to generate this confusion.

[@FlameKeeperPt]

In Portugal they are building high speed rail… in Iberian gauge!!! Because they want the national company to monopolise these lines 😡😡😡

[@michaelguerin56]

Thank you. Interesting update.

[@eduardoromerovaquero3191]

Truth is that only the Spanish market has been liberalized, meaning there are 3 operators in different lines. On the other hand the French government, due to pressures from SNCF, has been very reluctant and only allowed the mentioned line managed by TrenItalia. While other markets such as Germany or Poland have been warned by the Commission for failing to comply with certain aspects of the new regulations regarding liberalization. So as with other sectors in the EU, liberalization takes it time, because Governments don’t wants to see their huge public companies facing competition and maybe even losing more money.

[@sambones1092]

All I know is that since EDF has competitors, electricity is more expensive...so I like national companies.

[@lolopmb1248]

@@sambones1092 but it's due to EDF finance their competitor they have to pay their competitor to stole their clients. That's completly insane. Shame of politics who accepted it.

[@etbadaboum]

@@lolopmb1248 Thanks the EU!

[@etbadaboum]

Paris-Lyon line is saturated so any new intrants has to take the place of double-decker trains from SNCF with huge capacity to a single-floor train with much less so the line overall has less capacity, it's insane, stupid competition!

[@etbadaboum]

Ouigo Spain also has routes from Madrid to Malaga, Sevilla, Alicante and Valencia.

[@eminemeatingmmswithotherem5879]

I think this Swedish originally model only works in Northern Europe. The division of railway in Greece for instance was catastrophic

[@Schroinx]

How is the freight privatization going?

[@RailwaysExplained]

In 2022 private rail companies or subsidiaries of large holdings that act like a private company account for a majority of the European rail freight market, with a market share of 51%. This is in comparison to the public sector - the national historic incumbents in a country linked to a holding company.

[@PtrkHrnk]

Terrible as always. Profitable contracts going to private companies, while unprofitable ones like single-car shipments and supply of critical infrastructure are left for the national carriers...

[@Schroinx]

@@RailwaysExplained Thanks. In EU there is also a target to move more freigh from road to rail. Our freight rail works differently, than in the US. Partly because we have some river traffic, esp from Rotterdam harbour, following the Rheine through Ruhr and to Schweitzerland. But it has been compromised by low water levels last summer, so they had to move more to rail. Rubber tries and batteries/overhead lines on roads are in-efficient when it comes to moving freight longer distances, compared to already electrified rail on steel wheels, and then battery for last mile. Today the cost effective limit for rail freight is 300 km, but with increased prices for co2 and congestion/road pricing for trucks, this will decrease. Also the EUs t-ent network is pushing to invest in cross border connections, to strengthen international freight (and passengers). Could be that EUs freight on rails could be a topic for a new video. Links below in separate boxes, as else it thinks I am spamming. 1/6

[@Schroinx]

2/ Differences between the US and EU. kzbin.info/www/bejne/b6HSeqCImql5m7s

[@Schroinx]

4/ The Dutch tried to devel the Betuweroute for double stacking of containers, but the Germans did not do it on their side and now it faces congestion already. And that is partly what is going wrong with freight in EU today, as the companies think in their small boxes and national solutions. By not developing the route on the German side, it makes Hamburg more competitive than Rotterdam, so the German infrastructure manager had no incentive to invest in the German side of the Betuweroute. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betuweroute

[@CedricGniewek]

13:40 Well, it's the same for international trains between France and Germany. SNCF and DB are not competing for those trains, they have an agreement.

[@etbadaboum]

But in this case they run a common service. An anti-collusion agreement means they both agree not to eat each other's lunch, which can be considered anti-competitive and illegal. I suppose the CJEU will looking into it.

[@HiPublicTransportSystem]

looking forward to the future❤

[@AB-zl4nh]

What about the Eurotunnel. The Eurostar high speed rail company has a monopoly on the London to Paris/Brussels service.

[@gazwj]

Feel like a follow up on how the British rail system is an absolute mess with very little competition on routes causing prices to sky rocket

[@margaretjones777]

There's not much competition on any rail route in any country. As the article explains, the EU is pursuing almost exactly the same approach as the UK - i.e. keeping the track and infrastructure in public ownership, whilst allowing private companies to compete for access. Contrary to what you might think, until the Covid pandemic the UK's railways had the third highest average speed in Europe, the highest levels of usage, the best safety record and the lowest debt. The UK might not have the fastest trains, but it is a small and densely-packed country, so ultra-high top speeds have less impact on overall journey-time than they do in a larger country like France. In any event, the average speed of journeys on many continental high-speed networks is far lower than you'd expect because of the extensive legacy sections at either end of the dedicated track. Nor are all "high speed" services anything like as fast as the flagship TGV routes. Many German and Italian services, for example, top out at 140 mph, which is only marginally faster than speeds on the UK main lines, and very much slower than HS1, let alone the (frankly ludicrous) proposed speed of HS2. As for ticket prices; it all depends who's paying. If governments set a high tariff, the cost will be borne by rail users, which might or might not be you; if they set a low tariff, then the cost will be borne by the taxpayer, which will certainly be you. Italian Railways (for example) are fairly cheap to use; however (according to a 2021 Brussels Report) they have cost the Italian taxpayer more than 480,000,000,000 Euros since 1993, a truly staggering sum that accounts for almost 20% of Italy's National Debt, itself a monstrous 160% of GDP, one of the highest in the developed world and the principal reason why Italy has grown by only a quarter as much as the UK during the last thirty years. All in all, the UK's railways are doing better than you think.

[@gazwj]

@@margaretjones777 Yeah my argument has very little to do with the high speed train availability in the UK, whilst i feel we should have it to key city destination hubs its not really the issue i have with the British system The key take away of comparison from that video is the increase in usage because its a viable system in those countries, in Britain its really not great, particularly in the north where the trans pennine route had half its trains cancelled in the period leading up to being taken under government control Cost and reliability are the reasons the UK rail is struggling from a passenger point of view, the businesses might be doing great but the cost of using the train for anything more than a short local service is just unreasonable but most routes in the north in particular theres very little choice you have 1 operators, so what incentive do they have to actually improve services and offer lower fares 🤷🏼‍♂️ (exception being leeds/york to london where there can be 2/3 options for operator) but that route is consistently cheaper than its west coat main line counterparts

[@margaretjones777]

@@gazwj You're right that the quality of UK rail services depends upon where you live, but this is true of all countries. There are some pretty crap services in France and Spain, and I know this because I've been on them. UK rail usage is in fact one of the highest in Europe; however it has struggled to recover after Covid, partly because of industrial action, but mainly because (more than in any other European country) UK workers have switched to home-working, especially in the major conurbations where jobs are concentrated in desk-bound service industries. Even so, rail usage remains high by international standards. That said, I agree that the UK's railways should be far more vertically integrated, with a proper long-term investment plan and a central "guiding mind", much as has been suggested by the Williams Review. Some thoughtful improvements to the existing network, especially in the North and Midlands, would also be extremely welcome. We can but hope.

[@etbadaboum]

UK mixes liberalization with monopoly (so high prices but business is happy) and too little investment, a terrible situation

[@ouicertes9764]

This idea might be great in theory but I've had several trains stop at a station or before a cross because a "foreign" train wasn't on the right schedule because of miscommunication. There is only 1 railway to share. Centralized model is far more efficient, just have to make it europe wide, but that's not for a very very long time. What happens when we reach the peak low cost airlines model, the less space, weird departure time from far away secondary train stations? This is not a plus for quality of service.

[@Malik_Sylvus]

France is a natural geographical hub in western Europe, Spanish, Italians or Germans wish they could use freely the french railway network so they want more liberalization for that. But I think it's not the aim of France because SNCF is linked directly to main high-speed train network in western Europe.

[@etbadaboum]

The Paris-Lyon HSL is currently saturated so any new train circulating takes one TGV off and since TGV on that line uses double-decker train to have higher densities and competitors do not (SNCF is the only one using it precisely because of that line!) then the capacity on the line is reduced! So if other European countries through the EU wants to have more capacity, finance the Paris-Orléans-Clermont Ferrand-Lyon line which can double the legacy line.

[@rogercasoliva1571]

Renfe will Start operations this summer in france

[@Absolute8350]

Iryo in Spain is 55% Air Nostrum and 45% Trenitalia

[@jasonzervos]

13:14 a small mistake. You said 73€ instead of 37€

[@oadka]

There's still a long way to go for trains to truly compete with point to point offerings of airlines.....and the situation in Germany doesn't look good in terms of high speed rail competition.

[@mstrmren]

Deutsche Bahn might not be close to offering the best product, but I think their market position as the second largest logistics company of the world, (after Deutsche Post of course) is able to secure them the top spot in the European rail market for the coming years. Especially now that they want to launch highspeed service under the ARRIVA brand as well.

[@ce1834]

that and their high speed trains are the best in Europe imo though.... punctuality less so...

[@mstrmren]

@@ce1834 Yes! DB has the hard best product I have experienced in Europe. The only thing they need to work on is expanding capacity so less delays occur.

[@toboterxp8155]

I doubt that long term any company could compete with the DB in Germany, it's just too large to compete with. If you just compare revenue, DB made 56 billion euros last year, SNCF made 34. By extension, Germany is much more spread out than most European countries, meaning a small passenger railway that wants to operate the most profitable routes in Germany would need multiple maintainance centers and such, since some of the routes probably don't share stops. It's not lik France, where all roads lead to Paris.

[@toboterxp8155]

@@mstrmren I mean, they're doing that rn, which ironically means more delays since rail lines need closing to be serviced. But at least according to them in a few years it'll pay off handsomely.

[@paolocarpi4769]

"Deutsche Bahn might not be close to offering the best product, but I think their market position as the second largest logistics company of the world, (after Deutsche Post of course) is able to secure them the top spot in the European rail market for the coming years." And which is the advantage for German passengers, paying more for something not close to the best product?

[@sadness3337]

13:15 small error, you said €73 but the screen showed €37

[@RailwaysExplained]

37€ is correct

[@sadness3337]

@@RailwaysExplained aight

[@javiermartingonzalez4759]

Germany buy 80 trains to Spain (Renfe) the most higer contract in Europ

[@Allwin-lz6yj]

we know one thing for sure it wont be the UK

[@pakrailofficial1062]

Amazing

[@RailwaysExplained]

Thanks

[@jfmezei]

Congrats on getting a relevant sponsor that is seriious in railway industry. Shame you didn'T mention the many overnight services that now span europe, npt just ÖBB's Nighthet, but also PKP and in the past RZD that did Paris-Moscow via Germany and Poland using open access for it. ÖBB in particular has spurred railways that had abandonned ov ernight trains such as SCNF to scramble to restart their former eruces and patch uyp their old sleeping cars to stake their claim before ÖBB taks the market from them on local routes. (and there was the new Berlin-Amsterdam-Bruxelles overnight train that just started (I think European Sleeper). (And Snältaget in Sweden that reaches Berlin).

[@etbadaboum]

It was focused on high speed trains but that'd be great to have such a video

[@Ginkoman2]

Siemens Velaro will dominate the Tracks

[@rafifgalih56]

(Europian High Speed Line) and split it to the countries that it is coorporated with

[@dawydd8421]

37:73;) took iryo two weeks ago was impressive

[@evo3s75]

13:16 I guess that's a small reading error xD "73 Euro's", shows 37 Euro's

[@tigershark2328]

THIS! THIS IS HOW YOU PRIVATISE RAIL! Not the franchise system we had in the UK...

[@rafifgalih56]

I think europe must create the EHSL

[@ZRHTrainspotter]

Trenitalia and italo the best in the world ❤

[@pandabar8309]

"Prioritisze the need of travellers". This open market only will improve the main lines where private investors can earn money. Travellers have to get to and from the big railway stations. In many countries tracks are also used by regional and commuter trains. More long haul trains means less space on tracks and rail yards for regional trains and worse connections for travellers that need to go beyond big stations. Don't compare Germany or Switzerland with France, Spain and Italy. Those three countries have awful regional trains and, many regional trains in those countries operate only 3-4 times a day. It is easier to promote and open point-to-point routes, when you don't operate a full network of infrastructure even to small stations. Opening the market will make travel on attractive point-to-point routes more affordable, but will make the whole network worse and more expensive to oerate.

[@MrAlagos]

Dedicated high speed networks and dedicated high speed stations (or platforms or extensions) separate high speed long distance traffic from slower regional traffic. More lines and more stations add capacity, which is always a good thing in a railway network. I don't know why you would put Germany and Switzerland together regarding railways, any German person would laugh at you for doing so. Since high speed railways have been build and operated in Italy the improvements to the traditional railways, stations and rolling stock has been massive, it's night and day. Trenitalia makes massive profits from the high speed service and over the course of the years that money has been reinvested in the older railways. Without high speed railway (which in Italy has meant 10 years of market competition) we would have seen the same derelict trains for many more years and no new infrastructure projects.

[@Fly0High]

Exactly what was to be expected from Germany: to disregard regulations that don't suit its "family owned" (i.e. old money)'s companies with no repercussion from its executive arm - Brussels.

[@jandron94]

They play their cards and keep only to rules that benefit them not foreign interests. The more weight you have in the playground the more leverage you have.

[@Hukkinen]

Maybe the infrastructure capacity is the limit in Germany.. Can the amount of passengers still rise?

[@markdickson3820]

Lol, it’s a competition of a sort I suppose but man, it’s an eu state style heavy handed competition. They’re all state backed railway operators with varying degrees of private competition. To be clear, it may be that rail is one of those rare instances that it cannot be left to the private sector. But let’s not kid ourselves, it can be that state intervention can work for the common good but it can also kill our competitiveness in Europe. As it stands, I’m happy for the various state networks to battle it out at least, that token ‘free market’ will likely help but it once again demonstrates that eu is just an economic system that is different - for good or bad is an endless debate.

[@mattevans4377]

I thought the idea was to amalgamate everything under the EU? Since they are helping to fund new lines to better connect nations together.

[@Patrick-on2ty]

trenitalia...No cleaning personal in long distance Service....very f..k up toiletts after a few hours

[@lucaspublictransport995]

14:00 I do not agree with this. France and Spain does not have a "railway system". They have "railway connections" instead. There are no integrated fares and timetables. Having a cooperation between Trenitalia and DB will enable passengers to book trough-tickets via both operators, for travels such as Ingolstadt-Novara. In France and Spain, there are very few cases when you can use the public transport system as a single product.

[@namadon4twin]

Ah yes competition and freemarket has always worked with railways. 1 year later: railway companies start to close down smaller, not profitable routes. nIcE jOb eU, veRy gOod IdeA 👏 Contoversial Idea: Subsidise Railway Infrastructure more. Hmmmmmmm 🤔

[@simondahl5437]

Once again, people fail to listen to what is actually being said. Nobody is advocating for a removal of public operators that operate less lucrative routes. They can and will still exist even if the more lucrative lines are open to competition.

[@groucho1080p]

in italy privatelh owned train companies work at the Same level of trenitalia, its doable

[@pakrailofficial1062]

Make a video on Pakistan railway

[@willhovell9019]

It makes you realise how far rail in Britain has fallen behind the rest of Europe. We can't even get on with HS2, linking Birmingham , Leeds and Manchester with London, let alone H3, 4 &5 to Scotland Wales and Bristol. Hope that this competition provides opportunities for train manufacturers from Spain, France, Italy and Hitachi and Alstrom Derby. The growing near monopoly of German Siemens is a great worry. To Transport for London's shame they have just ordered Underground trains from Siemens Germany and Austria, with a pathetic low tech screwdriver operation in Yorkshire. Siemens should be investigated by the European Competition authority. To have such a company that extensively used slave and forced labour in the early 1940s operating in such a way, is distastful to many of us.

[@inbb510]

Public opposition to HS2 doesn't help matters

[@jackf1841]

A video about European high speed rail without even mentioning Eurostar? LOL

[@jeremiahreilly9739]

I love traveling by train throughout Europe. Starting in Switzerland, I've travelled to or from Edinburgh, London, Paris, Amersterdam, Berlin, Frankfurt, Milan, Rome, and Palermo in Sicily! I want my travel to be comfortable and convenient. I worry a bit about the "low cost airline model" of train travel. I don't want to save a few euro. I want to eat a nice meal or enjoy an espresso.

[@aalan4296]

It will be a duopoly of one French operator and one German operator.

[@marcomagrin7611]

Nah Trenitalia is better than Deutsche Bahn

[@darksars3622]

Skip da ad 1:30

[@FortuneZer0]

Stadler Rail

[@maximdull337]

What about Flixtrain? The competitor is a cheap alternative to DB and even expands to India now XD

[@DerKatzeSonne]

Technically this video is about "high speed trains". Probably he chose that to exclude Flixtrain or Westbahn. Still, I think that's a bit misleading tbh.