# New Luxury DC-New York Bus Service



## Anderson (Mar 28, 2014)

http://inthecapital.streetwise.co/2014/03/27/new-luxury-bus-offering-first-class-service-from-dc-to-nyc/

I will grant that it is actually only a set of vans (which likely dropped the startup costs into the range of a few hundred thousand dollars), but it's interesting to see an effort being made for something nicer in the region. As a thought, the increasingly high fares on the NEC can't help but play a role here (since the non-advance purchase fare WAS-NYP is now $84)...which suggests that this is a harbinger of things to come.

The biggest drawback would seem to be the lack of certain *ahem* "facilities" onboard.

In line with this, does anyone know what the yield for a full Megabus or Bolt Bus is, roughly?


----------



## Eyegor (Mar 28, 2014)

I applaud the effort of this start up but I'm not sure about the business model. I think that unless they can keep the seats full both ways the majority of the time, it will go broke. I'm not sure even averaging 50% capacity would do it. Of course, I'm not an economics expert either so what do I know. Hope they succeed.


----------



## jerichowhiskey (Mar 28, 2014)

With an eight seat configuration, it seems they are primarily looking for business groups taking a trip on it.


----------



## afigg (Mar 28, 2014)

The Greater Greater Washington blog linked to a WBJ article with more info on the luxury van service: D.C. restaurateur wants to treat you like royalty on your bus trip to NYC. The buses/vans cost $120K each; "Amenities include DirecTV, WiFi and complimentary refreshments." The guy behind this is planning a Tysons Corner to NYC service. Which may be more viable as even with Silver Line Metro service to Union Station, a van leaving directly from Tysons is more competitive against Amtrak with trip times to NYC. OTOH, with no rest rooms on board, I would think a pit stop in southern NJ would be necessary and that adds to the driving time.

I wonder if the economics of a van with only 8 seats will work even at $90, as the cost of mileage, tolls, and a driver are spread over only 8 seats. The $90 may be an low intro rate to try to build a customer base.

The posts on the GGW blog for the March 26 daily round-up got into how the van could possibly compete with Amtrak, complaints about Amtrak NEC prices, Amtrak capacity, and so on. I mostly stayed out of it.  The luxury van, increasing discount bus services, and Amtrak growing NEC ridership even with ever higher ticket prices show the growing demand for transit options between the major cities of the Northeast over driving or flying.


----------



## MikefromCrete (Mar 28, 2014)

Eight people crammed into a van doesn't seem like "luxury" to me.


----------



## afigg (Mar 28, 2014)

MikefromCrete said:


> Eight people crammed into a van doesn't seem like "luxury" to me.


The van is a Mercedes which is either a big van or small bus depending on what the definition is. Look at the photo of the interior. The reclining seats with leg rests are not crammed together.


----------



## MrFSS (Mar 28, 2014)




----------



## railiner (Mar 28, 2014)

Anderson said:


> http://inthecapital.streetwise.co/2014/03/27/new-luxury-bus-offering-first-class-service-from-dc-to-nyc/
> 
> I will grant that it is actually only a set of vans (which likely dropped the startup costs into the range of a few hundred thousand dollars), but it's interesting to see an effort being made for something nicer in the region. As a thought, the increasingly high fares on the NEC can't help but play a role here (since the non-advance purchase fare WAS-NYP is now $84)...which suggests that this is a harbinger of things to come.
> 
> ...


As for yield, the Bolt Bus has around fifty seats. The double deck Megabus has 84 seats (although I am not sure if they can legally load all of those account weight restrictions.

And the yield would also depend on the total of the fares charged, as Bolt and Megabuses business model, starts at "a buck" and goes up progressively as the schedule fills up.

The arcticle has a link to another 'luxury' service, using full size coaches, but with only 33 seats arranged two and one....

If I was shopping for an upscale bus experience, I would try that rather than the Sprinter van service. Besides having the restroom, the bus is going to be a safer vehicle to travel in than the vans.

New York/Boston also has luxury bus service. One, run by 'LimoLiner', even has an attendant on board to serve snacks and beverages.....


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Mar 28, 2014)

Sprinters have a decent safety record... As one would expect of a Mercedes-Benz product.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Mar 28, 2014)

Mercedes-Benz does make some of the worst full-size buses around. Their Citaro is reputed to have more fires than a G4500 and they also have a partnership with Dina, who made the G4500 anyway. So I would expect Mercedes buses to have a high chance of fire. The Marcopolo Multego displays the Mercedes logo while they get fried on the highways depsite usually having seats. Mercedes cars are a whole different story.

Don't like these vans, their cabin looks too small. Gimme a MCI full-size bus any day over a Mercedes shuttle. $120,000 isn't even that much for a shuttle, that's about average price for a shuttle. MCI full-size buses cost $500,000. I don't care how big the seats are, I would rather ride a bigger bus.

If you have to money, just ride Amtrak, or if not, ride Greyhound or BoltBus. Don't ride Megabus because their cabins are just as small as this one, all double-deck buses have small cabins.

Vamoose Gold and a lot of the other "luxury" buses are overrated, they use those frigging fiberglass H3-45 which are hated on the bus-fan sites. Greyhound Canada tried them and now they're all scrapped. Fiberglass buses smell really bad if you run them a lot, and they're slow on the highway, they drive like JB Hunt trucks.


----------



## railiner (Mar 28, 2014)

I am not specifically knocking the Sprinter's...just that in general, one is safer riding in a large bus than in a van.

Being in a larger vehicle is inherently safer in an accident. And professional, commercially licensed driver's of buses are generally trained and monitored to a higher level than van driver's.....


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Mar 29, 2014)

railiner said:


> I am not specifically knocking the Sprinter's...just that in general, one is safer riding in a large bus than in a van.
> 
> Being in a larger vehicle is inherently safer in an accident. And professional, commercially licensed driver's of buses are generally trained and monitored to a higher level than van driver's.....


Do Sprinter drivers require CDL's? I mean, I guess Sprinters are still in Mercedes' "zone", but they do make some shamefully bad buses. Lots of Brits laughed at Mercedes after their Citaro Artics burned repeatedly in London and got retired.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Mar 29, 2014)

Mercedes is the largest bus manufacturer in the world, as well as the largest truck manufacturer. The Sprinter has taken the commercial van business in this country by storm despite the

Vastly higher price. And I believe to carry more than 5 passengers for money requires a CDL.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Mar 29, 2014)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Mercedes is the largest bus manufacturer in the world, as well as the largest truck manufacturer. The Sprinter has taken the commercial van business in this country by storm despite the
> 
> Vastly higher price. And I believe to carry more than 5 passengers for money requires a CDL.


I thought Volvo was the largest bus manufacturer. Still, Mercedes full-size buses are no match for MCI D-series integrals. Mercedes vehicles are body-on-chassis, they hold up worse than a Dina or Van Hool. Just because Mercedes makes lots of buses doesn't mean they make good buses. Mercedes, Irizar, Scania, Yaxing, and King Long all make horribly bad buses. But then again, the Sprinter is not a bus, it's a van. MAN./Neoplan actually make decent products.

And an integral is also more expensive than body-on-chassis.

For your information, a CDL is required to operate a vehicle carrying 16 or more passengers. Thus a Sprinter does not need a CDL.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Mar 30, 2014)

It varies by state what's required for a CDL, actually. There's a federal minimum, but states can be more strict. I know because I have a CDL, although not a passenger.

Mercedes Setra buses are not body on frame, nor are several others. The Sprinter is body on frame. Body on frame is not inherently inferior, depending on what you use the vehicle for.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Mar 30, 2014)

Green Maned Lion said:


> It varies by state what's required for a CDL, actually. There's a federal minimum, but states can be more strict. I know because I have a CDL, although not a passenger.
> 
> Mercedes Setra buses are not body on frame, nor are several others. The Sprinter is body on frame. Body on frame is not inherently inferior, depending on what you use the vehicle for.


I know the Setra and O405 are not body-on-frame. Frankly, the O405 isn't too bad for a transit bus, but with a top speed of 50 mph, it's useless for intercity work. The Setra is a horrible bus and hated by drivers, ask anyone who has driven them, they will tell you it's as bad as a Dina. Plus it still has trouble over 65 mph.

I know body-on-chassis isn't always bad, as you said, it depends on what you use it for. It's bad for intercity buses. Greyhound Australia (not connected to Greyhound Lines) has been suffering all kinds of problems ever since they switched from using integrals to body-on-chassis buses. They use Scania Irizar units, try making them run two million miles. Even Van Hool is better than Scania or Irizar.

The worst bus I've ever taken was a Yaxing running in China. That was a "luxury bus".


----------

