How to Break a Monopoly in 40 Years 

"government monopolies do not benefit passengers…" "…but private ones do" - some guy in the British parliament, probably

If there would be one thing i want to see coming to Europe, is a unified system of buying a ticket that gets you from A to B without having to buy multiple different tickets from competing companies in different languages. Like when you buy a plane ticket, but then for rails. Like i want to travel from Amersfoort Schothorst to Alcoy Spain, i don't want to have to look up 7 different websites, buy 7 different tickets, reserve seats in 4 different languages. If i were to fly there, i'd fly directly from Amsterdam Schiphol Airport to Alicante Spain and take the train from there. If trains are to compete with planes, it needs to get simpler.

The service improvements you mention are very likely mandated in the tender and payed for by the subsidies regional governments pay to the operator. Also the network in the UK is also run by the state, after a series of accidents in the late 90ies.

It seems like long distance competition mostly works on fast lines of high demand. That's where you find Westbahn (Austria), RegioJet and Leo Express (Czechia). Likewise in Spain where you find international competitors only on the high speed lines. The problem here is if the private operators only do the "cherry picking" on those few lines, someone still has to provide service on less profitable lines, and that's usually the state-owned train operating company. People who happen to live on secondary mainlines also have an interest in good service, even if it doesn't make a profit. In the times of state railways it was a mixed calculation, profitable lines playing for those that made a loss. Now it seems the state has to make sure that regions get good service even if running trains there isn't that profitable.

I love these more in depth videos! I was just idly browsing wikipedia last night looking at a lot of this so it's nice to see a proper explanation of it all! I also love the general quality improvements over the last few years, keep it up!

Hi Thom, as always a very comprehensive overview of a rather complex topic - I fully agree that competition does generally provide for an improved customer focus in all aspects, especially in transport. Greater choices/options should result in improved customer service, as you identified that fast trains now compete with airlines in Europe - often being the preferred mode of transport not just on price. I particularly liked your role plays in which you demonstrated how the tender process usually operates (at least you even changed your caps & tops - the judge one with the towel was a classic). I hope your move to Washington DC all went well & that you no longer have to deal with the extreme cold/snow & ice of Grand Rapids & Chicago. As you know, Washington DC is also a major train passenger hub & I look forward to your in-depth analysis of the transit services. Proof yet again that trains are awesome.

I have been praying for years for a highspeed connection between Amsterdam-Utrecht-Eindhoven

As much as I am interested in how this is gonna work out in the future, I'm worried that it will become a tariff jungle. Don't forget the Dutch railway is operated more like a metronetwork, than high speed train network. The dutch network is very accessible where you hardly have to watch the schedule. With frequencies somewhere between 2 and 10x per hour on every route. In countries like Germany, Spain, Italy or France you are forced to buy tickets in advcanced, or pay very high prices. A spontaneous 90 minute trip in a IC/ICE in Germany will cost €60 (Hannover-Dortmund for example) one way. In the Netherlands you can the whole country in a IC for €25 one way. I feel like making a system where it would be beneficial for people to book in advance and compare different operators on different sites, it would backfire in a compact country like NL that people will just use their cars, as almost all the large cities are within a 90 minute drive of each other. The NL doesn't have long distance corridor where this model would work, such as Paris-Lyon or Frankfurt-Munich where driving would take double as long as the train and the ride is more than 3 hours.

Interesting video! Just one minor detail: railway track infrastructure in the UK, major termini and major interchange stations are maintained by Network Rail, a public company (after the huge failure of the private company Railtrack to provide minimum safety standards).

Good video overall, however I noticed the differentiation you made between privatization in the EU and UK was that "In the rest of the EU, the maintenence of tracks is the responsibility of a seperate company, and not the train operating company". This is the same in the UK! All physical infrastructure in the UK is managed by network rail, who are a government agency, not by individual TOCs. hope this helps!

God I'd love to see a no-transfers Amsterdam-Rome Frecciarossa service.

Great video.. I learnt so much.. Thanks..

More explainers like this please!!! Love your simple approach to explain this issue!!!

An excellent video Thom and very up-to-date. I can't wait for the Luik/Aken service to begin in December. I'll be FLIRTing between all three countries (BE/DE/NL) from my base in Valkenburg.

In Germany regional trains in a tender (so all regional trains) always have an integrated fare with other operators. The fares are set by a government agency that grants the contracts (different agencies for different regions). It only gets complicated if you leave the area of one agency and enter another.

The company A-C skit was awesome! Especially a company suing another 😂

I do agree with what you say about Japan because it's either JR or the private companies. Also it is tough to know for that train pass in the Netherlands you have to do it like the Clipper Card in the California Bay area

Arriva using ICE 3M totally make sense as 1. they're getting older and being replaced by the e320 ICEs and also the newer version of ICE 4 (XL) 2. ICE 3M has been long used on dutch - german routes, even NS had a fleet of them at some point

So used to seeing Arriva on regional/commuter services, if they get it approved, a service to Paris would be really cool to see! Designing the Frecciarossa for cross Europe services is paying off, spreading everywhere...

Call me old-fashioned, but I had rather had NS operating all lines in The Netherlands. Specifically, I really don't like the checkout/checkin required. That said, there's one specific cross-border line that I would love to see restored. It's the now non-existing direct connection between Eindhoven and Belgium (Eindhoven-Turnhout-Antwerpen).

Awesome video! Like awwwwwesome! Thanks for your hard work!

Thank you for your good and informative videos. Railway competition is a topic on which I have a changing option on, over the years. In the end my conclutions is, that a railway-system runs at it's best, when it is fully integrated. Tracks, vehicles and operation needs to be synchronised with at least interfaces as a possible. In the end, state owned European railways in the 80s where bad, because of the lack of goverment effort, not a lack of competition. In the end, you need a long running constant plan and the will to spent money for it to develope your train system, like Switzerland does since more than 40 years.

Thank you very much for this excellent and highly amusing video ! I agree with all that you say, especially about the possIbility of the Italian Frecciarossa trains running between Paris and Amsterdam. The Thalys service is pretty good, but their TGV based trains are showing their age. I do hope you are enjoying using the trains in the DC area, and hope you will report soon !

12:50, most UK tracks are owned and maintained by network rail, it's no different to ProRail, DB Netze, SBB Infra, or similar

Somehow Switzerland is working perfectly fine without this liberalisation on rails.... 🤔

Pretty well explained!

Coming from a poorer country, Trenitalia is shining in this new European landscape, turns out that they are quite a good operator, and very little local services in Italy were won by someone else (due to very tight budgets).

The explanation is excellent! You would be a good teacher.😀👍

I enjoyed that video👍👍

Why did UK privatisation fail? Poor trains, poor track and too cheap a service with rushed tenders, and government wanting to invest nothing; end result ~ 50 people dead with 3 train crashes - another British success story!

Another interesting case of NS vs franchising is the R-Net branding on the regional rail line from Gouda to Alphen aan den Rijn, which is operated by NS but the branding is as if R-Net were a separate regional company like Arriva or Keolis.

Loved the video. I needed a bit of humor. Their system sounds a bit like ours, except it is much more extensive with higher frequency, and they control most of the tracks. While Amtrak runs the Northeast Corridor and long distance routes, most other Amtrak services are state subsidized, such as the Empire Service which runs about a dozen trains a day each way between New York City and the state capital at Albany with some trains continuing on to Maine, Vermont, Montreal via the Adirondacks, and points West. In Western NY, there are only 4 trains per day in each direction, including one to Toronto, one to Chicago, and two to Niagara Falls, NY. Former member of Congress, the late Louise Slaughter, fought for more frequent, high speed service, but it seems to no longer be a priority, even with the increased funding available. And now, private companies are starting to take an interest in offering rail service in the U.S., including Brightline in Florida and Nevada/California. I wonder if foreign operators will take an interest here.

3:05 bruh not those clowns who hate hearing a foreign language 💀

UK experience makes me very wary of rail privatisation, but I have to admit I'm drooling of the thought of taking a Frecciarossa to Amsterdam

An explainer on TEN-T would make a nice companion piece.

I have a few points to add: - NS wanted to add Leeuwarden-Groningen to the main lines as well, as it was the only profitable line. However the government said no, the NS had to either retain all 7 of the northern diesel lines, or none of them. - Arriva also did ask to get the tender for the high speed line in 2013 stating that NS was not providing adequate service with the fyra debacle, however the NS managed to stop that. A shame if you ask me, we would have had ice's running between Brussels and Amsterdam by now (they said they needed 3-4 years to get ready, so that they could start running around 2017). - The main problem with the Thalys is there is only one other intercity between the Netherlands and Belgium, that the Benelux train, which is one hour slower, but essentially takes the same route between the Netherlands and Brussels (it stops in Breda and is reduced to an regional train in Belgium for some reason (causing much of the delay), but that is it). The result is that a lot of people going to Belgium take the Thalys as well, and the Thalys cannot handel all of that extra traffic.

And now we're in a position where a Flixbus to Limburg from Amsterdam is about half the price of a train ticket....

Your acting skills are amazing😂😂😂

In the case of Germany Austria and Switzerland it's still the National Railway operator that runs infrastructure for the railways. Austria ÖBB Infra Germany Deutsche Bahn Netze Switzerland SBB Infra

Meanwhile, in Germany: "Company A, you are the cheapest, we are legally required to pick you. You certainly won't cheap out on personel and only hire engineers who are fully trained to standards and won't behave like half-brained idiots, right? ... Right?"

As someone who frequently use the Brussels-Amsterdam line, I cant wait for new competitor agaisnt NS and Thalys. NS has doubled their prices over 5 years. Thalys has done some cool students fair offer but 90% of their tickets are still way overpriced on tha route (ranging from 50 to 100€.

Love the "judge" version of Thom 🙂 In Britain, Network Rail is the owner and maintainer of infrastruture (not sure about Wales and Scotland). But the bidding system is all screwed up with some areas granting exclusive passenger service on a line but in others, there is competition allowed. It is simpler in terms of interational trains as there is less "need to serve the local population" which national railways have traditioally served. In France, it is my understanding that competition is allowed in major routes, but not local routes where traffic isn't enough to make SNSF TER and Intercité profitable. So you'll see competition on high speed lines (with Trenitalia competing on Paris-Lyon for instance). International routes have seen "open access" for some time, even in Netherland with Nightjet doing overnight trains, and not European Sleeper having started Germany to Brussels via Amsterdam overnight services. German ICE trains make it to Paris and vice versa. Thalys was French-Belgian and made provided service in Netherlands. (I think it is part of Eurostar). PKP runs trains into many countries from Poland is is able to sell tickets from say Germany to a 3rd country. Same with ÖBB. However, they all have problems with Germany because the cost of runnng trains on the direct lines or usig the main stations is very high. Snälltåget run a train from Stockho;m to Berlin (as does SJ as well). ÖBB overnight trains can be quite complex with some cars going to Berlin, some to Frankfurt, some to Vienna, some to Budapest and some to Warsaw for instance and they can change locos a few times along the way. And of course, there was the famous Paris-Moscow overnight train that used RZD rolling stock but changed locos along the way (and bogies at Brest , Belarus) and then paid for transit through Poland, Germany and France. In France, they now seemed forced to open Paris transit for bidding. For instance Keolis won a tram contract over RATP. (BTW, the S is pronounced in Kéolis). And the RATP will soon have to bid to run its own Paris métro system. This may go beyond reasonable. I think there is a big difference etween privatizing train service and making tracks open access. It makes sense to have a government onwed passenger service to provide service in the country, and allow foreign operators to compete on certain lines. But when competition reduces profits from TGV operation, it means SNCF needs more subsidies to run local services. BTW, because of ÖBB's Nightjet,s success and birth of other overnight train services running into European capitals, the SNCF reversed its decision to abandon night trains a couple years ago and has refurbished old rolling stock and restarted services from Paris to Toulouse, Nice and in Briançon and I think another few places. The success of Nightjet as well as many PKP services is a wakeup call fopr SNCF. (NL may be too small for its local overnight services, but it could run them to Germany or Spain or other places if it had equipment). However, giving a license for local unprofitable services is not that wise as it emulates the failures of England's system. It is better to have the governmemt operate those srevices as it is a public service and it costs more to give subsidies to a company that must be profitable running an unprofitable service. When the provate operator has a contract to run X trains per day, it runs X trains per day and won't add more to cope with increased demand as they woudl then cease to be profitable since they lose money on each passenger with a fixed subsidy. But if the subsidy is per seated passenger, then there is more incentive to increase capacity when demand grows. BTW, Kéolis is partly owned by SNCF and Caisse de Dépôt du Québec, and the later also now owns 18% of Alstom, so expect Kéolis services to choose Alstom equipment from now on. (CDPQ help recapitalize Bombardier Transportation (which was split from nearly bankrupt Bombardier) ending with 30% ownership of it, but the investment came with conditions which forced Bombardier to sell its stake because it couldn't afford to keep it, so it was sold to Alstom and CDPQ converted its 30% ownership of BBD Transportation into 18% of Alstom). Kéolis has a number of comuter trai operation contracts around the world including USA, and Bombardier had many as well which are now Alstom contracts. Caisse de Dépôt has a stake in both so it will get interesting when Kéolis would bid against Alstom on such contracts.

A bit late but here’s how the Dutch Model could work here: The Northeast Corridor=Main Line Network Amtrak would keep the service via a no-bid contract but in exchange for that exclusivity, track and infrastructure would be transferred to a new USDOT. That infrastructure company would be responsible for restoring the 457-mile route back to acceptable shape, leaving Amtrak to exclusively focus on running trains. State-Supported Routes=Tender System For routes under 750 miles, the tender system will be used and applied to individual states, multistate compacts and California's Joint Powers Authorities. These routes would be put up for bid for contracts ranging anywhere from five to 10 years, and the commuter rail model could also be worth a look. Exceptions are states like Virginia, which has a 30-year contract with Amtrak. Long-Distance Routes=open access model The overnight trains should be handled via this model. In addition to the FRA's Long Distance Service Study being utilized, other companies would run overnight service on the track via intense negotiations and assuming full responsibility. NEC Challengers The open access model would also apply to any operator who wants to take on Amtrak on its most favorable region.

Well the Netherlands seems to be doing public transit by private operators really well. Kind of makes you wonder how you can use this to make trains better in a lot of places

The Netherlands need to have a singular payment card system similar to what Japan did with the Suica and Pasmo cards.

Its interesting to see how the privatisation and tendering out of regional lines has been succesful in the Netherlands, because in Denmark where I'm from its a VERY different story. The Danish rail sector was liberalised in 1998 and a tender soon after began to operate various secondary regional railways through Jutland. Several companies bid for the contracts, but low cost was a big part in the tender. Though not the lowest bid, Arriva won the contracts and took over a huge amount of the Jutlandian rail network, deploying at the time brand new Lint 41 trains on the routes... which were good with accessibility but in other ways a downgrade from the former, slightly older DSB rolling stock on parameters like comfort and capacity. But people werent unhappy. When stuff really went sour was in the late 2010's. In 2015, the previous left wing government had done a direct award of regional services in the north of Denmark from the State railways DSB to the regional transit agency, Nordjyske Jernbaner. They already owned and operated 2 former private railway branch lines in the area, as was the case with nearly all former private railway lines, not part of DSB. But now they'd operate the Mainline services too and were really succesful. However in 2015 a new right wing government would enter the frey, and do a retender. This time the price of the bid was extremely high, due to the parties wanting to spend as few taxes as possible, alligning with their party politics. One of the lines was the Svendborg line from Odense to Svendborg, which had been operated by DSB since 1949. Service was generally less reliable than desirable, but Arriva won the contract for it, and several other routes, as well as rewinning all but 1 line. However when Arriva entered service, everything went to shit! Arriva didnt invest in new rolling stock at all, instead taking over DSB's old fleet of branch line Siemens Desiro DMU's. 4 of these were sold in an agreement to Midtjyske Jernbaner, another regional authority owned agency who won the 1 line away from Arriva. However Arrivas reliability only became worse and worse and worse, with even more frequent cancellations, too low capacity, outdated trains, and service cutbacks! Midtjyske Jernbaner wasn't doing super well either. Arriva benefitted from having a large network, meaning on the line in question from Skjern to Holstebro, the operations would simply be an extension of another route. So trains from Aarhus to Skjern would simply continue from Skjern to Struer, where Arrivas main depot was at an hourly frequency. However with Midtjyske winning the line in isolaton, they had to cut back services to Holstebro, AND due to only receiving 4 trains, it meant they didnt have enough to maintain an hourly frequency with turnaround times. All of this resulting in a cut back and less reliable train service. And the authorities havent been interested in funding more either. Another hurdle here is ticket integration. We have a nationwide smartcard like the Dutch OV Chipkaard in the form of the Rejsekort (though the agency behind it for some stupid reason wants to replace it with a phone app). However for all other fares, private operators like Arriva have the problem of ticket integration since their tickets aren't integrated into the greater public transit agency. DSB has managed to do this in the east of Denmark where no lines have been tendered out, and where the trains generally are more well used. But in the west, neither DSB, nor Arriva, have been able to integrate their fares with the regional transit agencies. Nordjyske Jernbaner, who I mentioned before have integrated fares but thats because they're owned by the regional transit agency directly and managed by the Regional authority as a public service provider, not a private company. As for open access, its still in its infancy here but we have some. Most notably Snälltåget, who is owned by Transdev. Snälltåget, which runs open access in Sweden, runs a few night trains through Denmark, making a few stops here. The most notable of which being the Berlin Night Express from Malmö to Berlin, with through carriages from Berlin to Stockholm being attached to Snälltågets daytrains on this route. The biggest factor limiting open access operation here at the moment though is A: Lack of electrification on the mainlines, B: the high toll for crossing the Great Belt bridge, the only rail link between east and west in Denmark, and C: the long journey times to Germany. But 2 of these 3 problems will be fixed in the coming years via the electrification program and the Fehmarn tunnel. Along with this, SJ, the Swedish State railways, have repeatedly shown interest in operating open access on the Danish railways, and even tried once over 10 years ago with a service between Copenhagen and Odense, hoping to capture long distance commuters, and through travellers to Stockholm. However due to poor marketing and few departures, this service ended after only a few months. But the electrification to Aarhus, the 2nd largest city here, is planned to be operational in 2026-27, and a ton of intercity traffic happens between Aarhus and Copenhagen, which SJ and many others likely bang on. SJ has even made specifications to its new 250km/h trains to make them capable of operating in Denmark, and I bet they'll want to use them here once the conditions are right.

Ain't it possible for multiple companies to run on the main lines, to secure competition? Like it works in Aviation? Another concern is if the national companies are forced to take the least profitable lines, if there will be a requirement from the government that there have to be service for these

Awesome video!! Eurostar will not stop service to the Netherlands as a whole for an entire year, just not to Amsterdam. Rotterdam will still see multiple services a day to London and passengers travelling from Amsterdam can take alternative trains (Thalys for example) to Rotterdam or Brussels.

very in depth video! I was shocked as well by the announcement from arriva that they want to run highspeedrail to from Groningen to Paris!

the thing I like least about this style of privatization is the relatively short tenders potentially disincentivizing private companies from maintaining their networks towards the end of their time, and the semi-constant change that can result in. I feel like fully privatizing all the infrastructure that the private companies run on as they did in Japan could be beneficial if the routes are able to be profitable (with real estate ventures to help), but then again I am just a person on the internet who doesn't really understand national transport policy

Ummm, nobody ever said the Arriva service towards Paris was going to be 'high speed'.

Nice video, I love the judge hahaha

HaHaHa - i took part in a government tender and it went down exactly the way you portrayed it. Spot on.

I recently proposed to the european transport agency a new high speed line between Lille and Stuttgart, connecting Luxemburg and some smaller cities in between. Such a line, with target speeds up to 400Km/h would connect London St. Pancras and Stuttgart in 2:50h or to Munich in 4:20h. Nuremberg in less then 5h, Frankfurt city in 3:30h or Luxembourg in 2h. I believe such a project would drastically improve connectability betweeen Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Uk and Brussels. Any thoughts on that possibility?

I think the national network should stay as it is, seeing as it is more like a national metro/sbahn system than classic train lines. International/high speed rail might benefit from liberalization though, I'd love to see prices through the Chunnel lowered because of competition :)

I'd argue having government monopolies are much better for commuting. Because they can intergrate services with other public transport like buses and also usually the timetables are made to have good connections and here is an example I have. The Struer to Vejle line was privatised in 2020 and Arriva took over from DSB (except 4 trains a day) Back when DSB ran the line there was a 2 hourly train heading straight to Copenhagen and a 2 hourly service cutting short at Fredericia (which is a major rail interchange) Nowerdays most trains are ran between Struer and Vejle and you get a 4 minute connection to a train to Copenhagen which is still ran by DSB. Sadly because of this if the Arriva train arrives late the DSB train will not care and leave the Arriva passengers behind. Also no Arriva trains don't atleast continue to Fredericia (I suppose this is due to their trains capped at 120 kmph which is much slower than the line speed). So really privatization does not really work if you want a public transport network with good intergration with other parts of the network.

I'd like to see that's in America. I think competition in passenger rail in the US is needed.

Great video. I think it's great if the open-access operators can bring down prices, improve service and bring more people onto the rails over less efficient modes. I'll just be on the record saying I'd welcome Trenitalia and the Frecriarossa 1000 with open arms to the Northeast Corridor as an open access operator if it brought down ticket prices and improved service and wow do those trains look nice. It'll be interesting to see what Brightline has up their sleeeves in terms of WAS-BOS. The NEC has showed up on a map of corridors they want to run in the U.S, and I wonder if this would be a new build or operating on the Northeast Corridor as an open-access operator. I think the U.S. could really get better passenger and freight service if we created an infrastructure agency that maintained the tracks throughout the U.S. "Don't know what I'd call it," then work towards open access for freight and passenger breaking up the Class 1's monopolies, while putting policies in place that would also alllow for high quality regional, intercity and high speed passenger service and improvements for the long-run like full electrification of mainlines and the heavier used secondary lines.

Im all for it as long as all national operators use the OV chipcard system and my 40% off peak reduction will be valid on all lines. Better service is good but I dont want a hassle and have to think about which train, which ticket... things like that, enter a sort of suscription hell like the streaming services mess. That would seem a huge step back. I just want a serivce that works and that I dont have to think about. Just show up, tap in, wait and go. If the competing companies can manage to make that work and can operate under a single umbrella so to speak, im all for it.

You forgot to mention the Arriva Intercity train project from Nijmegen to Aachen vv. The non electrified parts of the route are being upgraded and electrified for more capacity. Not so long ago a sleeping line close to closure run by the state railway and now suffering severe capacity shortage. At last after 2 decades regional goverments cooperating with operators are now a big benefit for passengers. At first euhhh to say it mildly their were some serious problems-scandals (political/staff/unreliable equipment/coruption etc.etc.)

As I understand the Japanese system the former JR company was split into various passenger companies and one freight.The plan being to dish them out to the oligarchs and plutocrats but only a few companies are owned by the private sector most former JR companies remain state owned.A similar system totally failed in New Zealand.Another very similar system in Scotland, England and Wales is in the process of a long protracted failure.

It is a HUGE mistake to have the infrastructure seperated from operation. Might work fine on roads, but for railways, there's too much depending on the infrastructure design and availability. Half the Dutch network is offline for maintenance every weekend, and months on end during holidays, which is insane. But the monopoly that Prorail has end the fact that it doesn't serve passengers directly, means they (read: the government that own Prorail) can do it. the Netherlands desperately needs the Japanese system where infrastructure is owned by the main user, while other users are still allowed on the tracks.

As an east coast american, I struggle to avoid Norfolk Southern coming to mind every time you say NS lmao

Well now i know what could happen to these ICE3(M) sets that are supposed to be replaced with the new Velaro Neo Trains in December of 2024 haha

as someone living in belgium id really appreciate if i could go to the netherlands for an okay price and a journey that does not take 6 hours or is unreliable because of crappy rolling stock

I love the interest of all these different companies in expanding services to the netherlands, but I really dont understand why it seems like no one is interested in the Rotterdam-Eindhoven and Nijmegen-Roermond corridors which have massive ridership

I really like this video. I'd like to provide my two cents, however. You sum up many advantages that have come since the regional operators run the trains. These have however not been paid for by these companies, but by the provinces or the national government. There is no reason to think NS wouldn't have made use of speed increases or capacity upgrades. It's hard to compare the sum that the 'old' NS received for operating the entire network with the regional companies, but it's fair to say that overall, government investment in these lines has increased drastically. Of course, I would love to see the ETR1000 in the Netherlands. I am however skeptical, as this is not the first time competition on Amsterdam - Paris has been announced (the Italians have done it before with Thello), but I remain optimistic. In summary, as high speed lines are generally only built when there is a market for them, it makes sense that multiple companies compete. On the core network however, with the incredibly high frequencies, I'd be more cautious.

It's been cool to see this type of thing happening throughout Europe. Love to see competition in the high speed rail market. It makes them appear even more like airlines!

I think it's a good thing that NS will need to compete with other train operators on the international routes. On the Amsterdam to Bruxelles-Midi route NS has done a really bad job. The whole Fyra debacle made sure they wouldn't be running high speed trains for several years. Even though they didn't run high speed trains the ticket prices were still really high. And there are several more things, like the constant delays and cancellations and the fact that the trains stop at several smaller stations in Belgium causing longer travel times. NS and Thalys really need to improve their service and competition will drive them to improve their current and future services. Regarding the matter of competition on the hoofrailnet I think it definitely can be done and could improve service but they need to get rid of the need to check out and in when you switch rail operators. I also still have a few doubts about the private companies which now run the regional lines in the country. They definitely improved service on those lines but there is still quite a lot of room for improvement. The toilets on arriva trains are frequently out of order and the GTW Stadler trains they are running are getting outdated. There were reports that parts are failing a lot as the trains are getting older. The Qbuzz trains on the Geldermalsen-Dordrecht line are also old and still don't have toilets. Keolis also has it's issues. It commited fraud by signing secret contracts with bus manufacturers which led to the provinces to give it's concessions to different companies. But NS also has a lot of problems. Some are very similiar, like corruption. So I believe that the hoofdrailnet should be opened up to the private rail operators but the government needs to make sure that they don't repeat a lot of their mistakes and that service actually improves.

I tend to prefer tender options than open access options. This is because when there is competition, to be honest it starts get confusing for most of the people. In order to travel from one city to another you have to search throughout different web-sites to see which is the most competitive. Well, if the Government decides to provide a website that collects data from all companies, it's a different story...but in general I think that trains should not behave like airplanes: you should be able to go to the station, go to a ticket machine/office, get a ticket and go on the first train available, without any hassle of knowing WHOSE company is your train. I think train companies should be divided by areas and functions, without interfering with each other. For High Speed I am not sure myself! >_< The Dutch solution of giving main line services to a big corporation and secondary lines to smaller companies it's a great compromise in my opinion: the strength of a big corporation can handle the busy corridors, whilst the smaller companies can focus on delivering little projects. As for the international competition: I tend to be on the protectionism side but I am not against a foreign company doing its job IN THE country. Even if the rail company is from another country, it still has to run trains IN your country, provide salaries IN your country and in general do business in the country. You could argue that the managers and stake holders that live abroad will not directly provide benefits to the country, but is definitely a small percentage; but you could potentially also impose the formation of smaller local branches: for example you could tell Arriva to create Arriva NL with its own headquarter in The Netherlands.

3:05 I mean, you're explaining where NS came from, historically but also what the letters stand for, and then go on to contextualise what those dutch words mean in English. Imagine that part being like “NS stands for dutch railways, which starts with two completely different letters.”

The OV chipkaart isn't perfect. But it is just... so nice to use. I can use it ANYWHERE. Regardless of where I need to go and what provider I need to use. I never have to buy a ticket. Also, recently we've seen the ability to use phone apps or even your pincard to check in and check out, meaning the OV chipkaart will probably eventually become obsolete as it is fully integrated into the bankpass' abilities. My dream is that eventually, I can use my OV chipkaart or equivelant to travel anywhere in the EU because the system will be fully connected.

I prefer the Italian, French, Austrian and German model where the historical railway monopolist has become a group which owns the train operator, the track operator and so on. This has not blocked competition. What I do not understand is why the stations on the Netherlands are owned by NS Stations and not by Prorail.

Ahhhh yes, the GOOD NS!

11:13 the issue of rolling stock can be eliminated if the state owns the trains and leases them to the company winning to tender, Like Metronom in Germany, where the rolling stock is owned by LNVG, a company owned by the state of North Rhine-Westphalia.

If the Dutch system made it so that it had a single fare system you wouldn't need to do the tap out tap in thing

Trip back to memory lane (i.e 'omg i'm so old').

remember england whent down the same rout and then had to go back to national privitisation is a con

I wish that Canada could replicate what the Netherlands did to their rail system. ,

The name of the FS backed group QBZZZ smashed me as someone that uses FS daily but also some Arriva services

3:04 The commenter: ThIs Is EnGlIsH lAnD! wE sPeAk EnGlIsH!

Maastricht is where my favorite classical music artist is from.

NS isnt operating in Germany any more. Abellio Germany has gone out of business in 2021 due to losses, that NS did not want to compensate any more.

Hey Baltimore City is getting a new Light Rail system it will be called "Red Line"

why don't they do this in america? why doesn't brightline run the NE corridor or something

Interesting competitive times for European Train Services. Yet the Customer experience of booking and ticketing cross border and even cross regional services in EU has to improve. Wonder if EU will have to do some after work on this topic like open Data ticket access so that App Services can be created.

Another excellent and engaging report, Thom. Here in the UK the idea of privatisation was heavily promoted with the promise of competition and choice. Competing companies would keep ticket prices low. Alas, competition hasn't materialised with usually one train operating company running entire route networks. One newcomer, however, is Lumo on the north east route between London and Edinburgh which has been well received but services are limited to just five per day each direction. I hope more competitors will start operating, similar to the situation with the French railways.

Well explained indeed! Privatization does not work equally well in other countries, but the Dutch case makes a convincing argument for how it can work. Being Swiss I'm skeptical about the benefits it would bring us here. Some benefits of opening our tracks are evident tough: It's great to have TGVs, Railjet and ICE trains connecting Swiss cities with destinations in France, Austria and Germany, for example. I'd also welcome Frecciarossa trains heading up north trough the Gotthard and Simplon to Bern, Geneva and Zürich, but that will take a couple more years and a few technical adaptations, I fear.

If only the US set up an organization like prorail i feel like it would improve rail infrastructure and traffic control so much. It would be so much more fare. And yes while i think the private companies filling the gaps is a good thing i do think it's good that the main or biggest public rail provider being overseen or co ownerd by the government is a good thing. Without some of the changes the government had made public rail would not have been the same in the Netherlands at least for normal rail high speed rail is a different story and we will have to see in the future about that.

We never got high speed rail in California until the public voted a public system.

👋 Hi 0:49 Isn’t this law also one reason why the big 4 doubled the length of the trains- to block passenger trains in sidings instead of stopping freight in sidings…? 11:51 Aren’t the NS involved in Abellio ? Money is coming in, no? 18:03 Imagine a direct train Amsterdam-Brussels-Lille -Paris Marne la Vallée-Lyon St.Exupery-Torino-Milano - Roma…😛

The biggest mistake in the UK was probably getting rid of the state operator entirely, instead of forcing it to compete directly with private companies. This is how we differ from the rest of europe stricturally, and I'd srgue we're worse off for it.

O wat een zielepieten die lopen te klagen over een klein stukje uitleg in twee talen.

The US is distinctly different than most countries in the world have nationalized the railways. Only Amtrak is nationalized in this country. Of course other government agencies run trains. But still, in this country trains are basically private industry, which is not the case in most other countries.

Ariva is pronounced ariva both a's like a not ay, without rolling the r, the i like e, and a bit of emphasis on the v because as you said it's from England (Sunderland to be presice. my fellow Geordies make you're welcome to banter about it)

Still no trains through Zeeuws Vlaanderen though 😠

Very interesting information in this video. Very funny that piece of acting the process of the tender (?) (aanbesteding). Funny that judge with the towel on his head to simulate a wig! Will see what the developments will bring on or railnetwork. Today I found out that Arriva is only operating its international train from Heerlen to Aachen HBF, so at this time not from Maastricht via Valkenburg. When I want to go from Valkenburg I have to change at Heerlen. Hope they get the 3 county train working from the start of the new schedule in december 2023. One minor point: You have interesting video footage underlaying your story, but you begin to repeat the same videos over and over again. That begins to annoy me than. But otherwise great video.

Hi Thom, great explanatory video as always. I personally agree with all your opinions on the privatizations. IMHO monopolization and lack of competition are the sure recipe of much bigger problems than privatization and competition could ever cause. Also I hope the move to Washington, DC was good for you and your wife. Good luck at your new place and hope to see you visiting Chicago often enough to make new videos in the future.

Interesting explanation... But fare integration is absolutely crucial...without it, the experience is terrible.

The nonsense of privatisation, one state owned company competing in another country with another state owned company undercutting prices at the expense of their taxpayers. We've seen this with Abbelio ( a full owned daugter of state owned Dutch NS) in Scotland. A disaster, for consumers in Scotland as wel as the Dutch taxpayer who's going to pick up the bill. These so called "private "enterprises are delivering at best services in foreign countries, services that they don't deliver at home. Trains from Freciarossa ( a full daughter of Italian state owned railways) delivering better hi speed services than her parent company at home!! Same with Arriva ( German state owned railways). That is NOT real competition because when things go wrong the parent company picks up the bill and that is the German, Italian French..ect taxpayer. Further more private companies are only interested in the best routes the only ones that make money. Like Flix, only between big cities undercutting the "dumb"state owned railways. That is NOT in the best interest of the consumer because the small lines are the live lines for a liveable countryside, since you can't make a profit there these services will suffer unless the government subsidises the operator. Cutting away the profitable parts of the network a state owned operator is left with only "bleeders"so the taxpayer has to fork out even more money...