This is impossible. The definition of time will simply change to prevent it. It is like if a Swiss train were to be delayed: all of the clocks in the world would wait for it to make sure it was on time. The universe itself would slow down to accommodate it.
Transport FOR London came about in an era of rebranding exercises, all intended to use nuanced emphasis. Eg. Department of Education became Department FOR Education, Department of Transport became Department FOR Transport. The marketing types and spinners wanted the emphasis on positive and supportive words and imagery such as the New Labour rose and the Conservative oak tree.
The Department for Education (2010) had previously been called Department for Children, Schools & Families (2007), before that Department for Education & Skills (2001), Department for Education & Employment (1995) and Department for Education (1992). Prior to that, it had had nearly 30 years as Department _of_ Education & Science. So the use of "for" pre-dates New Labour by several years ... and the current incarnation with "for" was brought in at a time when in reality it became the Department _against_ Education under Michael Gove 😡
'Of' implies something solid and concrete - 'Houses of Parliament,' 'Hearts of Oak' - whereas 'For' implies an aim - 'fit for scrap' or 'money for old rope'. Don't blame us, we're only for it not of it!
@@stevieinselbyVery good point. London Transport flows fine and has pedigree, people understand it and still wood. For other places however it can sound a bit corporate - Transport Scotland would sound like freight haulage business! In Wales they followed the formula - Transport for Wales and I think it's fine
Over the years there have been proposals for a mass transit service between Portsmouth and Southampton. One of the proposed names that didn't get past the consultants' drawing board was South Hampshire Integrated Transit :)
The best example of this is in Switzerland's Italian speaking canton, Ticino. Without the grammatical correctness it's public transport operator is basically: Ferrovia Autobus Region Ticino. It's initials are okay in Italian, less so in English.
Good that someone was on the alert there. It's easy to miss potential combinations. The Cheltenham Literature Festival accidentally gained somewhat unwanted notoriety a few years ago (an abbreviation rather than an acronym).
@@thomasburke2683 Autolinee (bus routes) rather than Autobus, but thankfully that doesn't invalidate the joke. The Italian part of the company is the entirely unamusing SSIF (Società Subalpina Imprese Ferroviarie - Society of Subalpine railway companies, or something like that), and the Swiss company could have been AFRT (Autolinee e ferrovie Regionali Ticinesi) which leads me to suspect that the Swiss have deliberately chosen the title they did *because* the acronym is amusing in English. It's the sort of thing the Swiss do. ;)
While I also found 'London Transport' more euphonious, Transport for London' did become a sort of template and now there are also organisations like 'Transport for Scotland', 'Transport for the North', 'Transport for the West Midlands' etc. (but the English hate uniformity so the naming convention has not become universal - eg 'Midlands Connect')
Not British but I believe names like "Scottish Transport" or "Northern Transport" or "West Midlands Transport" have better rings to it then "Transport For X Place"
We in Ireland also copied this with Transport For Ireland or TFI. Though it is a brand name, the authority is called the National Transport Authority or NTA.
I'm with you on this one Jago. To me "Transport for London" sounds like they are planning to build some kind of giant wagon, load London onto the back of it, and cart it away to a new location. It's the sort of scheme that the monster raving loony party would love. But ultimately, it's just a bit silly.
Hello Jago, I’m with you on the name “London Transport” it is iconic, and well loved by people of a certain age, me. All the changes of name are good business for sign-writers (do they still exist?) but London Transport was a good intergrated public transport system for the capital. In 1942, a Spitfire bore the London Transport name and logo being funded by contributions by LT staff, a second Spitfire followed also bearing the LT roundel followed nine months later. London Transport (TfL) is the only civilian group to have the honour of laying a wreath at the Cenotaph and The London Transport Old Comrades Association march alongside the armed forces in the annual Remembrance Sunday parade.
Geoff Marshall recently made a video on the Isle of Wight-based company that makes a lot of TfL signage. They've also made signs for the Paris Metro (now there's a much more elegant name for a transport system)
The reason that London Transport marches with the veterans at the Cenotaph on Remembrance Sunday is that a number of London General Omnibus Company bus drivers volunteered to drive their buses loaded with soldiers to the battlefields of Flanders and France. LGOC was absorbed into the LPTB.
Hear, hear; its London Transport for me, but interesting history. Two of my uncles were bus drivers for LT. and it was simply referred to as Transport (in Gravesend). Amusing detail: Uncle George was huge and would steady the wheel with his paunch to temporarily free his hands, whilst Dave was skinny and would just thrust his knee between the spokes!.
At last! Someone agrees with me. I could never see the point of dropping London Transport. Short, snappy and self explanatory. Thank you for the excellent summary of London's transport history. I'm sure it has helped enlighten many of your viewers of the crazy politicking which the transport system has had inflicted on it over the decades.
In the case of the NYC metropolitan area, it's the MTA, short for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority. Of course, it's not the only transit group to use MTA as their acronym as the Maryland Transit Administration uses it too as well as the fact Metropolitan Transit Authority was once the name of the MBTA in Boston. However, it makes up for it with its logo. It used to be an M logo with two different shades of blue until they changed it to a blue circle with the MTA initials written in perspective, like they were rushing by like a train. And MTA wasn't always its name! When the NY government took over the LIRR in 1965, they charted the Metropolitan Commuter Transportation Authority or MCTA. That same year, the government took over the New Haven Line. In 1966, the NYC government proposed merging the subway with the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, something Robert Moses of course opposed. In May 1967, the government allowed the MCTA to oversee the mass transit policies of the metro area's different transit systems. The unification agreement took place the following March, with the MCTA taking over the operations of the LIRR, subway, TBTA, New Haven commuter services, New York Central commuter services, and the Staten Island Rapid Transit Railway. And finally in 1968, after releasing a master plan for the future of NYC transit, they ditched the Commuter part of the acronym to form the MTA of today.
Part of what is uncomfortable(?) about Transport for London is that it's word order isn't typical English. In English, the typical order is Modifier + Noun. The transit system is the Noun here "Transport" and which transport is it? London's as opposed to Liverpool's. That's why it's the London Underground, the Toronto Subway, Heathrow Airport, etc. We don't generally say things like: the Underground of London, the Subway of Toronto, or the Airport of Heathrow. Other languages, like French, have the opposide order of words, so we get le Métro de Paris or Aéroport international Montréal-Dorval. I don't know if the UK was trying to sound more continental or whatever, but it does sound somewhat wrong to English ears.
Is this something that has changed over time? Because I can think of a few types of thing that do it the other way around, for example universities (University of [Place]), titles (Duke of [Place]) and of course the City of London itself. But all of these are old names rather than modern things. Maybe the marketers who came up with Transport for London wanted to align it with the City of London and hark back to a previous era.
I am so used it being "London transport" that I have failed to notice this "Transport for London" thing when ever I visit London, and the word order is more Swedish or German.
To me it sounds somewhat like a slogan, a demand or a plea. Something to be followed by an exclamation mark and chanted by people participating in what Suella Braverman would no doubt categorise as a "hate march". "What do we want?" "Transport for London!" "When do we want it?" "Once we no longer have to switch from Upper Case initials to Lower Case ones and back again!" Now there's a chant that rolls off the tongue!
It's only a small step from this sort of thing to horrors like when they tried to rename the well established single-make car racing series, Formula Renault, "World Series by Renault". It's a slippery slope!
Good video Jago. What a waste of time all these reorganisations end up being. The people who push these changes often say it is "progress", but progress implies improvement. Yet it never seems to improve anything, quite the opposite usually.
You are correct. Rebranding is just the parasitic marketing industry's way of demonstrating "progress" when what we actually want and need is reliability and stability.
I think the name change came about as TFL doesn’t now just deal with trains and buses they manage the main trunk road network inside the M25 as well, they are responsible for its upkeep and also co-ordinating all the roadworks that are carried out on these roads.
My son and his wife both work for TFL. It covers not just public transport but now roads , taxis, water transport and pedestrianisation too so it's not just a re-branding of public transport formerly provided by London Transport hence the name change.
You should try "Transport for West Midlands" which is a real mouthful. It's abbreviation, TFWM which, at six syllables, is also too much. I hope to encourage the use of the phonetic acronym "Tufwum", which is not as stupid as it sounds; we used to have WMPTE (West Midlands Passenger Transport Executive), which was locally referred to as "Wumpty".
I liked "Wumpty" and if I recall correctly, even the PTE itself recognised it's general acceptance by using it in its publicity from time to time. I think there was even a character called "Wumpty" at sone point. I seem to recall a poster at the bus museum at Wythall showing him/ her extolling the virtues.of some saver ticket or other. But yes, "Tufwum" is a close second. Good luck with getting it acknowledged.
@@dancedecker Yes, he was a Mr Men style character in a peaked hat. Think they also have a Wumpty cuddly toy on display at Wyrhall. Great place to visit when you have a bus obsessed toddler nephew.
@@dancedecker Correct. The PTE brought in Wumpty as people were still calling the buses the Corporation (based on the previous town and city coucils who ran them - Birmingham Corporation, Dudley Corporation etc. - my Nan was one of them even in the WMT era). A few years after deregulation, WMPTE regranded themselves as Centro, then Network West Midlands and now TfWM. Not forgetting the other pointless rebrand of the former bus operations from original private name West Midlands Travel (which is still the official company name as per the operator licence) to Travel West Midlands! Now branded National Express West Midlands and National Express Coventry.
Thanks for the sanity check. Several years ago I returned to London after a long time away, and it was as though London Transport had never existed. Everything said TFL, and I got myself corrected a couple of times. I made a mental note to try to figure out why I had made this mistake, and then like all of my mental notes, that one was quickly forgotten. Next time I get back (if ever) I owe you one.
@@bangerbangerbro IIRC, once I said something about going to the London Transport website. A two-second search would have cleared that up, but where's the fun in that when they could correct me instead? A few days ago I said something about Dunkin Donuts, and the person I was talking to said she also liked Dunkin. Yeah, they rebranded, I forgot, whatever.
"Transport for London" - a managerial service that you owe your money and soul to "London Transport" - a reliable institution that exists, and will always exist, to help you get around London
Its funny as I see it as completely opposite. I work in marketing and have worked on naming on many things ( Not sure if that works for or against me here) Transport for London puts the emphasis on the people of the city. Our service, our Transport for you the people of the city. London Transport is just descriptive. It doesn't really say anything other than what it is. Wether or not thats a good or bad thing I guess depends on your perspective. But I can see why they changed it and personally I like TfL
@@Komrav But London Transport became a well known thing. CocaCola and Volkswagen didn't change their names despite the reasons behind those names originally, 'Cocaine cola' and Hitler's 'people's car' respectively.
Politicians and bureaucrats eh? In my time I have seen the same organisations renamed countless times but always basically doing the same thing. Near where I live there is a major military camp that has gone from being CAD, through BAD and COD to BOD, though possibly not in that order. A=ammunition, O=ordnance, so they store stuff that goes bang. (Whilst looking this up I find they've changed yet again to DM or Defence Munitions). I long ago decided the reason for these constant name and acronym changes was that the politicos had shares in printing and sign writing companies who would appear to be the main beneficiaries of this practice.
Recently, I've been watching lots of videos of Indian Railways and was astonished to see that they use the London Underground bullseye for their station signs. I prefer LT to TFL but, as you say, it's a minor detail - your video detailed 100 years of bureaucracy and how politicians can never leave well alone; the worst example being when Thatcher decided to wind the transport clock back to the 1920s and undo 60 years of progress towards integrated transport.
Well, this video was worth having just for the explanation of all the ownership changes. let alone anything else. However TfL spreads its tentacles far beyond Greater London. So an advantage of the name is that it doesn't annoy people in Croydon (Tramlink) or the Home Counties who protest "We are NOT London!" while enjoying some of the benefits. And yes, that includes me; on the Hertford East branch, we can now use Oyster and contactless cards and I was surprised to discover recently that they can be significantly cheaper than any National Rail fare available from a ticket machine, sometimes even with a railcard. Though the pricing system can sometimes be opaque (or incorrect), and TfL's complaints system is not terribly clear.
I don't buy your Croydon argument -- actually, I think you have it exactly backwards. "London Transport" is just the name of a company. Sure, it's based in London, but it could provide transport anywhere, just like the British Broadcasting Corporation is based in Britain but broadcasts throughout the world. On the other hand, "Transport for London" is exclusive and says, "Sorry, Croydon, but this transport is for London. You are not London, so get your own buses."
@@beeble2003 Depends how one sees it I guess. It's a problem with any title that includes "London", but I feel TfL (or the full title) is less "in your face" than London Transport where it's stated explicitly as the first word. It even feels a bit strange in the Home Counties that our "local" TV network is BBC London.
@@MrSmith1984 Well, it's true that Croydon is a London borough, but it has a different feel in many ways; it was a county borough in Surrey before getting absorbed, has a distinct centre with high-rise buildings, and feels in many ways like an outer satellite town like Watford. And the council had enough autonomy to go bankrupt ...
London Regional Transport (LRT) was also the start of various bus routes being put out to tender by various companies, resulting in the myriad of operators managing the system today.
TfL is not the same organisation as London Transport. OK as the video points out that has been true a number of times and it was never seen as important before. The key is that all those organisations kept responsibility for essentially the same thing: *public* transport in London. TfL has much, much more responsibility. It controls most of the main roads in London. It controls Taxis (which I stand to be corrected, but I think were licenced by a separate body before). It runs at least some of the bike schemes. Basically it is responsible for "transport* in London, not just public transport. With that, I can see why the organisation wants to emphasise it is just not another re-incarnation of "London Transport".
Working in West London at the time, one of the the first 'improvements' by TFL that I noticed was where the buses in Ealing used to be able to pull in to a section cutaway into the pavements so that traffic remained free flowing. I saw that these pull-ins were starting to be filled in, meaning that when buses now stopped to pick up passengers, they HELD UP THE TRAFFIC. What a great start by TFL.
Although planners have more or less valid reasons for such a step. Firstly, with buses stopping farther away there now is more space for people to stand on the pavement or even enough space for a waiting shelter. Secondly, if a pedestrian wants to cross the street before the bus (e.g. to catch a tight connection on the other side of the road), the person can do so, while having to worry less about cars that are overtaking the bus, which would be hidden behind the bus. And thirdly, if the bus keeps the cars behind it, it means that the bus is the first vehicle after a gap that reaches the next junction, which makes it easier and faster for the bus to cross that junction and so a faster and more stable timetable is possible. Well, at least that is what I have learned, when I took lessons for planning such things.
@@davidchilds9590 Well, adding (in the worst case) a few minutes of travel time for car users to improve bus driving is not the same as banning cars outright...
You're right, and I think it needs another rebranding. Something snappy. I recommend: _"Central London Integrated Transport."_ That's a name I'd happily ride on. I would want to see a "Central London Integrated Transport" logo above every tunnel I enter on the tube.
Jago I totally agree with you: I was born in July 1974, when nearly all Underground trains and buses had the London Transport insignia transfers; this branding should have been continued with.
London Transport is so much better. It’s like everything has to be dumbed down for people everywhere now. Or made softer if you will. I might have mentioned my 17 year career as a Stockholm bus driver and traffic supervisor and my year long stint as an underground train driver here. For some of the years I worked as a supervisor some days and as a driver some days and. Uniforms back then were proper looking with shirt tie pants black shoes, vest and a jacket. We also had winter and summer pants and jackets as well as various hats, usually with a flat top and shiny visor in the front, like a military dress uniform of sorts. We also had rank shown with stripes on our uniforms for all supervisor roles. 1-3 silver stripes on the cuffs of the jacket. So I had double uniform jackets. One for driving use and one for supervisor duties. In the office and depot this didn’t really make a difference but out in the field it was important to know who was in charge. Especially for police ambulance or fire fighters that might come to an accident for instance. The stripes were clearly visible and they got the right man or woman to talk to without having to ask around. We also then had cars with sirens and blue flashing lights like a police car as supervisors to get to accidents or threatening situations fast. So what does this have to do with this video? Well just as the change in name for London Transport to a more soft name uniforms have eroded to tennis shirts and cargo pants. Stripes for rank is long gone and so are the sirens.. all this for a softer touch. It could be offensive to have rank on staff since it’s not the military. It it had a clear purpose and that is gone now. I like the more orderly stylish days of before. Therefore I also prefer the name London Transport. I don’t live in England and maybe not even entitled to an opinion in the matter anymore.. I’ve been in and out of London since 1978 so for me it’s also always been London Transport. And I still refer to it as such.
"Transport for London" isn't "soft", what are you on about? TFL is a clunkier and IMO harder to understand name than London Transport, so I don't get how it sounds soft or dumbed down to you. I don't think softness is a bad thing tbh
@@ThomasBomb45 Well I get it that you don’t agree. But London transport is a less explanatory name. Most of us know what it is regardless. Transport for London is a more explanatory name. Like they had to change it because people didn’t understand London Transport. It’s a testament to the times we live in now in my opinion
@@driver288, great comments about regimentation ..( now replaced by `please press button for information`! ) ha... As for the name TFL I think it is simply to *include* Overground Rail? which was previously not the case in the eyes of Joe public
Jago I've just disgorged a couple of factoids 1. From memory, I believe the LT/TFL times were blessed by reign of Ken Livingstone. Anyway, it came to pass that Ken had a habit of adopting people he came upon and liked and finding jobs for them. These were an esoteric group, and the majority of employees Ken had control over were at LT. It's rumoured that people would arrived there's, with a note signed by Ken, and have to be fitted in to the organisation one way or another, preferably where they'd do the least damage. Factoid 2. When electronic display boards were first introduced on the underground showing the time of arrival of the next train, it proved difficult to achieve that goal because of the very nature of train operations could be unpredictable. Eventually the problem was resolved by the expedient roll out of the 90 second minute, a genius invention of a lovely lady called Maureen
I'm also with you on this one Jago. I prefer London Transport. My guess is that TfL suggests a more inclusive public transport system and one that serves rather than one that dictates (although I have a feeling it's actually the other way round...). One thing that has remained since 2000 is the iconic LT roundel and that is a HUGE plus. They could very easily had a complete rebrand with new logos / symbols / emblems, call them what you will. Anyway, thanks again for an entertaining but educational video. Keep up the good work.
I'd argue that "Transport for London" is much less inclusive. I'm not from London, so Transport for London isn't for me. London Transport is just the transport that happens in London, for whoever happens to be there at the time. And, actually, the shift to TfL coincides with a whole bunch of things that are quite exclusionary towards people from outside London. For example, when Oyster Cards came in as a pre-paid service, it was awkward for non-Londoners to get one, and even once you got it, it was tying up money in a card that only got used a couple of times a year. TfL made _huge_ amounts of money (in the hundreds of millions of pounts, as I recall) from people loading money onto Oyster Cards and then losing them or moving far enough away from London that they never used the card again. Now, they're stopping travelcards, which used to be very useful for non-Londoners who arrived in London by train.
Another great video, thank you. Our family history group are discussing this month the movement of our ancestors from central areas of London to the outer areas, through the late Victorian era and early 20th century. Your videos give us so much information on just what made that possible.
Dear Jago You are not alone! i also resent TFL in place of solid RELIABLE!!! London Transport (when they had booking offices and bus ticket machines etc).
Many thanks for that - and yes, I did enjoy it. Specifically I'm glad to learn the sequence of events which has led to what seems to be the weakness in today's position - the disconnect between London buses and the Underground/Overground. Like many other evils it appears to have originated from the Thatcher government's obsession with privatising everything, and the perceived necessity for fragmenting things in the process of doing that. The disconnect is not total - thank heaven - but it shows in the attitudes of the people who run the buses, which is similar in many ways to the private bus companies; in two respects particularly: (1) the assumption that each route should be evaluated on its own, and not as part of a network (of buses, trains, trams etc.) - this leads to ridiculous variations in frequencies, for example in the new SuperLoop, which is an excellent thing in itself, but would be so much better with standard frequencies, making journeys involving a change much easier. And (2) a terrible record in publicity at bus stops - for example details re services disrupted by roadworks, and details of cross-border bus services provided by non-TfL organisations. Perhaps a solution would be to copy the improvement in British Rail under managers like Chris Green, who oversaw the creatiion of the single network 'Network South-East'. So, let the people who know how to repair, garage, fuel, staff etc. buses carry on doing that, but give the public facing aspects of the whole bus/underground/tram etc. network to a separate agency (maybe 'London Transport' again) whose job would be to ensure decent connecting services, consistent publicity and wayfinding signs, and standard frequencies. At the same time, why not give all the suburban main line trains over to them. It is ridiculous that if your local station is (e.g.) Chessington, Hampton Court, Strawberry Hill or Winchmore Hill, your service is half-hourly, while any underground line within Greater London gets at least 6 and possibly 10 services per hour.
Well that was a lot easier to follow than I expected - thank you. Of couse here in Wales / Cymru with the collapse of the private operator we have now copied London and have Transport for Wales / Trafnidiaeth Cymru which hardly anyone, that is an ordinary member of the public, shortens to TfW or TC .
Having lived in London many years ago and enjoyed the public transportation there, I would definitely jump at the chance to live there again, were that ever to become possible. I think you are very lucky to have what you have and wouldn’t care what they decide to call it, lol.
Dynamic and Exciting! I've seen pavement manholes (I am that interesting) with TfL written on them. The f is in italics. One of the reasons transport was taken off the GLC would have been their Fares Fair campaign, cheap transport fares. Happy Sunday, I'm still asleep
hi jago. since you brought up this subject, for me the wording of transport for london somehow makes me think london did not have any sort of transport system and are on the verge in introducing such a system to london whereas london transport speaks for itself
I really hope you see this Mr Hazzard. This channel, to me, is one of the best on TH-cam in its genre. It’s informative, easy to watch, entertaining and lighthearted. You educate your viewers, in more ways than one. You’ve taught us why and how London is the way it is. Most importantly, you have made some of my journeys quicker, easier and more interesting just based on the things you’ve included in your videos. I appreciate you and your channel Jago. Keep up the good work!
Hello Jago, I completely agree with you - I do not like Transport for London because I prefer London Transport and I do not understand the reason for changing the name from London Transport to Transport for London. Have you noticed that central government at the Houses of Parliament have changed department names in the same way - take the Department of Education, this has been changed to Department for Education. Best wishes and take care. Kind regards, Peter Skuce. St Albans. Hertfordshire.
My first transport job in London was for London Transport, based at 55 Broadway back in 1995, then we merged with London Underground Limited in 1997 and scrapped London Transport, then as you say, at the end of the millennium along came TfL…..When ever anyone asked me who I worked for, I also prefer to say London Underground rather than TfL, because I prefer the LUL Roundel…….😊
Jago you're right! Transport for London is horrible because it puts the words in the order that the French would put them rather than proper Anglo-Saxon LondonTransport. For example they have OTAN instead of NATO
More marriages fail due to inconsequential little things (say an annoying habit) that eventually become such huge issues they cause a relationship to fail than huge things like infidelity. So we forgive you for having petty reasons for not liking 'Transport for London'...
Yeah it's quite odd that people will argue for the privatization of public infrastructure. But then if you ask whether they include roads, their response is like "OH GOD NO WHAT ARE YOU INSANE?!" I think people often base their transport policy on a general ideological leaning towards individualism or collectivism. Rather than pragmatic civil engineering matters.
@@andybrice2711 I'm reminded of how the Indiana Toll Road was sold off to an Australian-Spanish joint venture that demonstrated the clear superiority of private enterprise over government control by failing to make a profit and declaring bankruptcy six year later.
I visited London for the first time last year and fell in love with the Tube. Someday, I would like to work at TfL in some way. Personally, I just think the name Transport for London is just a more modern version of London Transport.
As I recall, when London Regional Transport was created they tried replacing the "London Transport" branding but gave up because there was a lot of opposition to the name change. When Transport for London was created it was stated that the new name was just for some corporate uses, and the "London Transport" branding would be kept for most public uses, then slowly replaced it anyway.
Dear Duke, I dislike tfl immensely, but maybe for a different reason. My mainline train used to leave the metropolis and not stop until way outside of the M25. Then a few years ago, every train had to stop, at tfls demand, at every station within the M25 confines ( on my particular route) . Rammed trains, slower journey times, undesirables boarding. Thanks tfl, the gift that keeps on giving.
Quite puzzled where that would be, because service patterns on most lines don't seem to have been greatly altered by TfL, except where they have introduced useful new services with increased frequency like the Overground. A few oddities, like the stations between Norwood Junction and New Cross Gate have lost their direct trains to London termini, and the Hertford North line is a tedious all-stations trip (but had not had expresses for years anyway). Sutton and Dorking were understandably aggrieved in the 1980s when the Bognor/Portsmouth expresses were diverted via Gatwick.
Thanks for another interesting video. I appreciate you using the full name, rather than TFL, as hearing initials like that here in Melbourne Australia, it could be easily mistaken as a new form of football. We already have he AFL and VFL here, which are connected with football. Love the train and light rail views included on this video. Well done.
One of the best videos on you tube I have ever seen. One day I wish to sit in a pub and buy you a pint. Or is that sit in a public house and buy you a schooner. Wonderful simply wonderful. I don't live in the UK and live where the transport can't even run the underground correctly in the first city in the USA to have an underground. But, thank you for all the work you do in these videos, maybe one in why the Heathrow express is the most expensive train journey in the world? And why they shut down without warning and I have to take a $130 (pound sign) cab to heathrow to get home?
As a German, I prefer "Transport for London" over "London Transport". I agree with you that London Transport sounds more elegant than Transport for London when spoken out loud. However, I quite like the abbreviated version "TfL". In Germany, many municipal transport operators (BVG, MVG, VAG, SSB, AVG, rnv, etc.) or fare associations (VBB, hvv, MVV, VRN, VRS, etc.) have three-letter abbreviations, so it just feels natural to have a three-letter code for London as well.
Interesting video Jago. 👍 Although, on this occasion, I didn't watch it! I was busy in the kitchen and simply listened to it! 🙂 Much like we used to do in the olden days! 😁👍
I believe TFL also accquired responsibility for streets and Taxi and Private Hire licencing, and used the roundel and bar as their logo in these areas.
Taxi enforcement is definitely a TFL role, I did a joint operation with them and their warrant cards have the roundal in the middle Think it's blue for enforcement & red for revenue
This is the single most British thing I've seen all week. At heart a random arbitrary moan about something completely trivial. I'm not sure it should be making me feel a bit of national pride, but it does.
Well we wouldn’t have wanted those consultants to miss out on their fees as part of that 00s rebrand! I think an interesting topic related to your video is the move from the original public corporation structure of the LPTB to the nationalised one. I personally think the former was actually more effective and prevented any real interference from the politicians of the day.
'Well we wouldn’t have wanted those consultants to miss out on their fees ...' for re-ordering London and transport and then inserting the for in the middle. 😂😂😂
Growing up out Philadelphia Pennsylvania, the bus and trolley service going into the city was Red Arrow. In the late 60s (I believe), all the the regional services were combined into SEPTA (Southeastern Pennsylvania Transit Authority). I never liked that acronym because it sounds like SEPTIC. 😂
I do not really have an opinion on what name is better, but I should say that Geoff Marshall's pronunciation of TFL made me believe for a long time that the company was called 'Tierfell'
Your reasons are entirely correct and justified. "TfL" is just another sign of the decadence of the modern age and like so many things these days (spring in March, panini as a singular, everything about young people) it is just wrong.
It's funny because here in Ireland we've completely stolen this brand for ourselves. Bus Éireann (bus), Iarnród Éireann (train), Bus Átha Cliath (buses in Dublin) and some other companies now form the TFI brand - Transport for Ireland. It's the consumer facing brand for public transport in Ireland.
I was wondering of anyone commented about us shamelessly stealing the TfL name. I like having a singular name for everything but i don't understand why they didn't use the existing Córas Imopair Éireann (CIÉ) especially considering its in our own language!
I'm with you on this, Jago. I don't understand why such organisations must change their names to meaningless collections of letters. A prime example is the travel agents Tui. It used to be Thomson and I think that's a fine name. Now it's Toowie? Twee? Bring back London Transport- it's simpler and everyone knows what it does!
I get it. "Transport for London" sounds a bit too much like a name made up by marketeers. London Transport was much more to the point: I am pretty sure no one was wondering what their business was.
Yeah rebranding with a "service-for" timbre. That said, TfL being 3-letters works well as an acronym tbh as the video mentions. Equally worth mentioning is just how many more people are using TfL and some sort of massive combination of transport and coordination and planning is logistical necessity given Mass Immigration more or less kicked off post-1995 from Major's "No more than 50,000 pa." speech to today's officially 600,000 p.a. and unofficially swelling as high as 2-3 million. If one remembers the service at the wee hours in London in 2000 and compares today you can see a massive increase in use during such hours which is a useful comparison of observation. Throw in enormous crowds for football matches of protest marches (150-300,000 this week-end) and TfL seems a very important organization to "keep London running".
I think a lot of transport executives changed name during the 00's. In Manchester we got the shiny new Transport for Greater Manchester, which was a bit of an improvement over Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive. Though saying GMPTE rolls off the tongue a little better than TfGM.
I Agree. the old London Transport was set in stone, emblazoned on all the lovely old buses and tube trains. You even saw the initials LT on old signal boxes and railway infrastructure. It was timeless and elegant, known the whole world over, like an old friend, tirelessly and efficiently moving the people of London from a to b. Then some morons sat round a table having a pointless meeting decided to change it for no reason whatsoever without the consent of Londoners, probably because they thought LT wasn't quite trendy enough for them. It reminds me when the same thing happened with Royal Mail and they changed it to 'Consignia' for heavens sake. Following a massive outcry, they had to change it back. I wish the same thing would happen to TFL but I doubt it ever will.
Back in my north London school days we always enjoyed referring to it in reverse as "Tropsnart Nodnol". It had a rhythmic quality to it which I always assumed was the main reason for changing its name.
I agree, London Transport sounds way better. Transport for London sounds like something they would call it in former British colonies where the level of English knowledge isn't that high. I appreciate that you use the full names for us international viewers, it sometimes gets a bit confusing when some youtubers use the abbreviations for different train companies without explaining what full name is, making me have to google.
I'm surprised there hasn't been a push to change the name to "Thames Valley" or "Capitol" or "London Metro," or the like. In the States, local municipalities get snooty about a regional agency having a name that excludes them. Consequently, "Metro" or "Regional" is often slotted in or referenced some way. For example: "San Diego Metropolitan Transit System" (SDMTS) for San Diego, CA, and "Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority" (MBTA, or "The T" in and around Boston, MA), Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority" (WMATA) for Washington, D.C., and "Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority" (SEPTA), for Philadelphia, PA. There are also a surprising number of agencies that dispense with any geographic reference, like the "Metropolitan Transportation Authority" (MTA) in New York City, and "Metropolitan Transit Commission" in Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN.
"A big 6 wheeler, scarlet painted, Transport for London, diesel engined, 97 horsepower omnibus." just doesn't scan very well does it? Pass along the car please....
What I don't like about Transport for London is far worse, Jay. I don't like the fact when TfL won the franchises for some BR lines within London, they systematically went about rebranding all BR stations with the LT roundel. Whilst BR stations had gone through various franchises since privatisation in 1993, none of the previous franchises had ever replaced the BR Double Arrow logo. This is important, because under privatisation, it was agreed that the BR Double Arrow logo would be retained FOREVER as a means of informing passengers that BR tickets were valid at these stations. This is why new stations, such as Tweedbank, have BR Double Arrow logos, even though they were opened well after BR was but a memory. I am sure the retention of the BR Double Arrow logo is a legal requirement under the Railways Act 1993 or similar. So Boris Johnson, as London Mayor, and head of TfL acted illegally. At many stations, the former NSE branding was also lost at this time removing the historical link to the past. Much missed.
B*ll*cks ! It is a franchise just like WAGN, One, and all the other cr@p. Network Rail own the stations, which are leased to the TOC, and maintain the track and signalling etc. This is exactly my point. When they stick up their LT roundels everywhere, people think like you do.
@@highpath4776 London Overground might not be a franchise (as far as I know, it has a more permanent status than other TOCs), but is still a constituent part of the national rail network, in exactly the same way as Merseyrail. Though it is even less of a discrete system since many LO routes share tracks with other TOCs unlike Merseyrail which hardly overlaps the main network. Therefore the double arrow logo should still be displayed.
Great video thanks. I agree that I don't like the 'Transport for London' name. It may not be, but does feel like the sort of name that some marketing agency would come up with to make the name of and organisation feel more dynamic and customer focused.
I'm very much "on board" with you there, Jago. It was an unnecessary confusion to rename a body everyone knew and (at times) appreciated, and which basically stayed exactly the same - adding the W & C line to the remit isn't going to butter anybody's parsnips. Neither is franchising the bus/tram routes out to private operators rather than providing them oneself. To the passenger, a bus is a bus is a bus. Just so long as they don't turn up 15 minutes late in threes.
To me, it's a difference in perception based on the phrasing: "London Transport" not only tells you exactly what the organization does, but the simple matter-of-fact tone associated with that name instantly tells you that this is a government organization that is to be taken seriously and respected. "Transport for London" feels too friendly, like some sort of Millennial corporate PR doublespeak meant to put a happy face on a group that may not be that well organized, and experience has shown actually often backfires with people distrusting organizations with friendlier names like this and taking them less seriously. It's Professional vs Casual, to put it in simple terms.
I think we should all call it TTfN. If you are of a certain age, it will raise a chuckle. When I worked briefly for Bristol Omnibus (a magnificent name) in the 70s, we had an unofficial acronym: MTW or Make Them Walk. Mind you, we had a scarily powerful union at the time and didn't tolerate any nonsense from management - or indeed the passengers. I recall at least two wildcat walkouts following attacks on our Indian conductors. Happy days....
A clear example of how politics work. Confusion where it was completely unnecessary. I'm with you Jago, London Transport it should be.
me too... :-)
example of how ANGLO politics work.
Yeah, maybe, but the abbreviation TfL somehow sounds nicer and more unique than LT
A classic case of the politico's putting the goal posts on castors so they can make them point in any direction they choose!
It keeps a few useless, incompetent and otherwise unemployable people in their non-jobs. As long as they know the right person...
One day Jago will release a video at 11.55am on a Sunday and everyone will have their concept of time altered forever
...and start the video "good evening"
yes, Its like the well known saying : At the end of the day its 11:59 p.m.
This is impossible. The definition of time will simply change to prevent it. It is like if a Swiss train were to be delayed: all of the clocks in the world would wait for it to make sure it was on time. The universe itself would slow down to accommodate it.
If you don't like TFL, fear not, I would happily take over everything and put it under the UERL brand.
🤣
Just call it "Yerkes".
@jacksons1010 That's our new alcohol brand, as with so many people drinking when they hear my name, I though it time to start Yerkes beer.
LOL, why think sir
😂
Transport FOR London came about in an era of rebranding exercises, all intended to use nuanced emphasis. Eg. Department of Education became Department FOR Education, Department of Transport became Department FOR Transport. The marketing types and spinners wanted the emphasis on positive and supportive words and imagery such as the New Labour rose and the Conservative oak tree.
The Department for Education (2010) had previously been called Department for Children, Schools & Families (2007), before that Department for Education & Skills (2001), Department for Education & Employment (1995) and Department for Education (1992). Prior to that, it had had nearly 30 years as Department _of_ Education & Science. So the use of "for" pre-dates New Labour by several years ... and the current incarnation with "for" was brought in at a time when in reality it became the Department _against_ Education under Michael Gove 😡
Thanks for your great comment on *TUBE FOR YOU.*
After some years of experience we all know rebranding is good for consultants and rarely improves the company.
'Of' implies something solid and concrete - 'Houses of Parliament,' 'Hearts of Oak' - whereas 'For' implies an aim - 'fit for scrap' or 'money for old rope'. Don't blame us, we're only for it not of it!
@@stevieinselbyVery good point.
London Transport flows fine and has pedigree, people understand it and still wood. For other places however it can sound a bit corporate - Transport Scotland would sound like freight haulage business!
In Wales they followed the formula - Transport for Wales and I think it's fine
Over the years there have been proposals for a mass transit service between Portsmouth and Southampton. One of the proposed names that didn't get past the consultants' drawing board was South Hampshire Integrated Transit :)
😂😂😂
The best example of this is in Switzerland's Italian speaking canton, Ticino. Without the grammatical correctness it's public transport operator is basically:
Ferrovia Autobus Region Ticino.
It's initials are okay in Italian, less so in English.
Good that someone was on the alert there. It's easy to miss potential combinations. The Cheltenham Literature Festival accidentally gained somewhat unwanted notoriety a few years ago (an abbreviation rather than an acronym).
@@thomasburke2683 Autolinee (bus routes) rather than Autobus, but thankfully that doesn't invalidate the joke.
The Italian part of the company is the entirely unamusing SSIF (Società Subalpina Imprese Ferroviarie - Society of Subalpine railway companies, or something like that), and the Swiss company could have been AFRT (Autolinee e ferrovie Regionali Ticinesi) which leads me to suspect that the Swiss have deliberately chosen the title they did *because* the acronym is amusing in English.
It's the sort of thing the Swiss do. ;)
@@thomasburke2683see also, the Italian name for Swiss Federal Railways. Ferrovie federali svizzere, FFS
It always sounded a marketing gimmick to me. It's a wonder they didn't put the F facing backwards like Toys Я Us 😂
🤣🤣🤣🤣agree completely
I thought they did that because of the Russian letter Ya/Ja which is a backward R , and it made their name distinct and "Interesting"
I believe they wanted to make it look like a child had written it. @@michaelstirling3029
@@michaelstirling3029 ..and managed instead to be both ignorant and condescending/patronizing at the same time
🤣
While I also found 'London Transport' more euphonious, Transport for London' did become a sort of template and now there are also organisations like 'Transport for Scotland', 'Transport for the North', 'Transport for the West Midlands' etc. (but the English hate uniformity so the naming convention has not become universal - eg 'Midlands Connect')
Not British but I believe names like "Scottish Transport" or "Northern Transport" or "West Midlands Transport" have better rings to it then "Transport For X Place"
I could add "Transport for New South Wales" and "Transport for Wales" Now that could be confusing...
Well at least Midland Connect was a good example of de-CENTRO-isation.
There's also Transport for Ireland
We in Ireland also copied this with Transport For Ireland or TFI. Though it is a brand name, the authority is called the National Transport Authority or NTA.
I'm with you on this one Jago. To me "Transport for London" sounds like they are planning to build some kind of giant wagon, load London onto the back of it, and cart it away to a new location. It's the sort of scheme that the monster raving loony party would love. But ultimately, it's just a bit silly.
Not a bad idea
Nah, that's too expensive. There's no way the Tories would support it.
Hello Jago, I’m with you on the name “London Transport” it is iconic, and well loved by people of a certain age, me. All the changes of name are good business for sign-writers (do they still exist?) but London Transport was a good intergrated public transport system for the capital. In 1942, a Spitfire bore the London Transport name and logo being funded by contributions by LT staff, a second Spitfire followed also bearing the LT roundel followed nine months later. London Transport (TfL) is the only civilian group to have the honour of laying a wreath at the Cenotaph and The London Transport Old Comrades Association march alongside the armed forces in the annual Remembrance Sunday parade.
That should be a video...
Geoff Marshall recently made a video on the Isle of Wight-based company that makes a lot of TfL signage. They've also made signs for the Paris Metro (now there's a much more elegant name for a transport system)
The reason that London Transport marches with the veterans at the Cenotaph on Remembrance Sunday is that a number of London General Omnibus Company bus drivers volunteered to drive their buses loaded with soldiers to the battlefields of Flanders and France.
LGOC was absorbed into the LPTB.
Hear, hear; its London Transport for me, but interesting history. Two of my uncles were bus drivers for LT. and it was simply referred to as Transport (in Gravesend). Amusing detail: Uncle George was huge and would steady the wheel with his paunch to temporarily free his hands, whilst Dave was skinny and would just thrust his knee between the spokes!.
Loving your newer slightly slower voice over pacing. Before it felt rushed and stressed,now it fits with the visuals. Please keep it up!
Indeed. I wish John over at Auto Shenanigans would take note. A slower pace would certainly improve his otherwise excellent output.
A bus to Slough having a huge banner saying "Cabaret" on it is truly life imitating art.
At last! Someone agrees with me. I could never see the point of dropping London Transport. Short, snappy and self explanatory.
Thank you for the excellent summary of London's transport history. I'm sure it has helped enlighten many of your viewers of the crazy politicking which the transport system has had inflicted on it over the decades.
In the case of the NYC metropolitan area, it's the MTA, short for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority. Of course, it's not the only transit group to use MTA as their acronym as the Maryland Transit Administration uses it too as well as the fact Metropolitan Transit Authority was once the name of the MBTA in Boston. However, it makes up for it with its logo. It used to be an M logo with two different shades of blue until they changed it to a blue circle with the MTA initials written in perspective, like they were rushing by like a train. And MTA wasn't always its name! When the NY government took over the LIRR in 1965, they charted the Metropolitan Commuter Transportation Authority or MCTA.
That same year, the government took over the New Haven Line. In 1966, the NYC government proposed merging the subway with the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, something Robert Moses of course opposed. In May 1967, the government allowed the MCTA to oversee the mass transit policies of the metro area's different transit systems. The unification agreement took place the following March, with the MCTA taking over the operations of the LIRR, subway, TBTA, New Haven commuter services, New York Central commuter services, and the Staten Island Rapid Transit Railway. And finally in 1968, after releasing a master plan for the future of NYC transit, they ditched the Commuter part of the acronym to form the MTA of today.
Part of what is uncomfortable(?) about Transport for London is that it's word order isn't typical English. In English, the typical order is Modifier + Noun. The transit system is the Noun here "Transport" and which transport is it? London's as opposed to Liverpool's. That's why it's the London Underground, the Toronto Subway, Heathrow Airport, etc. We don't generally say things like: the Underground of London, the Subway of Toronto, or the Airport of Heathrow. Other languages, like French, have the opposide order of words, so we get le Métro de Paris or Aéroport international Montréal-Dorval. I don't know if the UK was trying to sound more continental or whatever, but it does sound somewhat wrong to English ears.
Is this something that has changed over time?
Because I can think of a few types of thing that do it the other way around, for example universities (University of [Place]), titles (Duke of [Place]) and of course the City of London itself. But all of these are old names rather than modern things. Maybe the marketers who came up with Transport for London wanted to align it with the City of London and hark back to a previous era.
@@bluemountain4181 They changed of to for, which seems nicer, but only native speakers understand the difference.
I am so used it being "London transport" that I have failed to notice this "Transport for London" thing when ever I visit London, and the word order is more Swedish or German.
To me it sounds somewhat like a slogan, a demand or a plea. Something to be followed by an exclamation mark and chanted by people participating in what Suella Braverman would no doubt categorise as a "hate march". "What do we want?" "Transport for London!" "When do we want it?" "Once we no longer have to switch from Upper Case initials to Lower Case ones and back again!" Now there's a chant that rolls off the tongue!
It's only a small step from this sort of thing to horrors like when they tried to rename the well established single-make car racing series, Formula Renault, "World Series by Renault".
It's a slippery slope!
Every great video starts with “A few people in the comments section…” 😂
Good video Jago. What a waste of time all these reorganisations end up being. The people who push these changes often say it is "progress", but progress implies improvement. Yet it never seems to improve anything, quite the opposite usually.
You are correct. Rebranding is just the parasitic marketing industry's way of demonstrating "progress" when what we actually want and need is reliability and stability.
Just think of how much money was spent printing up new office letterheads and such.
Exactly right. How much does all this stupid re-branding cost us?
brilliant. if only more people sharing petty personal opinions could be so direct and transparent. thank you sir
From one weak willed person to another, I see you. You’re not alone lol
I think the name change came about as TFL doesn’t now just deal with trains and buses they manage the main trunk road network inside the M25 as well, they are responsible for its upkeep and also co-ordinating all the roadworks that are carried out on these roads.
True. But what are roads for if they aren't for transporting things?
@@rogink
Making money through ridiculous and unnecessary restrictions being implemented and creating "fines"...
OK, but did you change your name last time you gained a few duties at work?
indeed, this is a change from before ....
My son and his wife both work for TFL. It covers not just public transport but now roads , taxis, water transport and pedestrianisation too so it's not just a re-branding of public transport formerly provided by London Transport hence the name change.
Yes I for removing unnecessary 'for's in titles, let London Transport stand proud. Short concise and exactly on point.
Pointless videos are exactly what we need on a Sunday afternoon.....my head does hurt now though. So many changes!! Bloody politics.
You should try "Transport for West Midlands" which is a real mouthful.
It's abbreviation, TFWM which, at six syllables, is also too much.
I hope to encourage the use of the phonetic acronym "Tufwum", which is not as stupid as it sounds; we used to have WMPTE (West Midlands Passenger Transport Executive), which was locally referred to as "Wumpty".
😂😂😂 Brilliant I am not the only one then
I liked "Wumpty" and if I recall correctly, even the PTE itself recognised it's general acceptance by using it in its publicity from time to time.
I think there was even a character called "Wumpty" at sone point. I seem to recall a poster at the bus museum at Wythall showing him/ her extolling the virtues.of some saver ticket or other.
But yes, "Tufwum" is a close second. Good luck with getting it acknowledged.
@@dancedecker Yes, he was a Mr Men style character in a peaked hat. Think they also have a Wumpty cuddly toy on display at Wyrhall. Great place to visit when you have a bus obsessed toddler nephew.
@@dancedecker Correct. The PTE brought in Wumpty as people were still calling the buses the Corporation (based on the previous town and city coucils who ran them - Birmingham Corporation, Dudley Corporation etc. - my Nan was one of them even in the WMT era). A few years after deregulation, WMPTE regranded themselves as Centro, then Network West Midlands and now TfWM. Not forgetting the other pointless rebrand of the former bus operations from original private name West Midlands Travel (which is still the official company name as per the operator licence) to Travel West Midlands! Now branded National Express West Midlands and National Express Coventry.
@@andyt2510 And their parent company, National Express have renamed themselves "Mobico", which sounds more like a chain of petrol stations.
Thanks for the sanity check. Several years ago I returned to London after a long time away, and it was as though London Transport had never existed. Everything said TFL, and I got myself corrected a couple of times. I made a mental note to try to figure out why I had made this mistake, and then like all of my mental notes, that one was quickly forgotten.
Next time I get back (if ever) I owe you one.
Me too. Foreign country.
Hang on, people were actually pedantic enough to correct you if you called it London Transport?
@@bangerbangerbro IIRC, once I said something about going to the London Transport website. A two-second search would have cleared that up, but where's the fun in that when they could correct me instead?
A few days ago I said something about Dunkin Donuts, and the person I was talking to said she also liked Dunkin. Yeah, they rebranded, I forgot, whatever.
@@marley7145 Hahaha
"Transport for London" - a managerial service that you owe your money and soul to
"London Transport" - a reliable institution that exists, and will always exist, to help you get around London
Its funny as I see it as completely opposite. I work in marketing and have worked on naming on many things ( Not sure if that works for or against me here)
Transport for London puts the emphasis on the people of the city. Our service, our Transport for you the people of the city.
London Transport is just descriptive. It doesn't really say anything other than what it is.
Wether or not thats a good or bad thing I guess depends on your perspective. But I can see why they changed it and personally I like TfL
@@Komrav that's exactly why it sounds patronizing: 'It's for you. Because you need it. You can't afford private helicopters. Peasant'.
@@Komrav But London Transport became a well known thing. CocaCola and Volkswagen didn't change their names despite the reasons behind those names originally, 'Cocaine cola' and Hitler's 'people's car' respectively.
'Transporter for London' would be a hugely dynamic mayoral campaign for Jason Statham \m/
Yeah. Could also renaming some joint the 'Statham Line' 😂
Politicians and bureaucrats eh? In my time I have seen the same organisations renamed countless times but always basically doing the same thing. Near where I live there is a major military camp that has gone from being CAD, through BAD and COD to BOD, though possibly not in that order. A=ammunition, O=ordnance, so they store stuff that goes bang. (Whilst looking this up I find they've changed yet again to DM or Defence Munitions). I long ago decided the reason for these constant name and acronym changes was that the politicos had shares in printing and sign writing companies who would appear to be the main beneficiaries of this practice.
The NHS likes doing this as well.😂
A better motto for them, "Transport for London, every journey monetized."
So many companies seem obliged to add a superfluous tag line now. Maybe they'll use it 😂
London Transport is what I grew up with and still call it today. Much to the annoyance of many TfL employees I speak to.
Recently, I've been watching lots of videos of Indian Railways and was astonished to see that they use the London Underground bullseye for their station signs. I prefer LT to TFL but, as you say, it's a minor detail - your video detailed 100 years of bureaucracy and how politicians can never leave well alone; the worst example being when Thatcher decided to wind the transport clock back to the 1920s and undo 60 years of progress towards integrated transport.
Right-wing political parties should NOT be called conservative BUT should be labeled Recessive.
That’s a quirk of being ruled by the British, Indian Railways never bothered to change the signage haha
Well, this video was worth having just for the explanation of all the ownership changes. let alone anything else. However TfL spreads its tentacles far beyond Greater London. So an advantage of the name is that it doesn't annoy people in Croydon (Tramlink) or the Home Counties who protest "We are NOT London!" while enjoying some of the benefits. And yes, that includes me; on the Hertford East branch, we can now use Oyster and contactless cards and I was surprised to discover recently that they can be significantly cheaper than any National Rail fare available from a ticket machine, sometimes even with a railcard. Though the pricing system can sometimes be opaque (or incorrect), and TfL's complaints system is not terribly clear.
I don't buy your Croydon argument -- actually, I think you have it exactly backwards. "London Transport" is just the name of a company. Sure, it's based in London, but it could provide transport anywhere, just like the British Broadcasting Corporation is based in Britain but broadcasts throughout the world. On the other hand, "Transport for London" is exclusive and says, "Sorry, Croydon, but this transport is for London. You are not London, so get your own buses."
@@beeble2003
Well...Croydon is actually part of London, no matter how much local pride they have.
@@MrSmith1984 Sure; the extra-M25 parts of the Metropolitan Line would be a better example.
@@beeble2003 Depends how one sees it I guess. It's a problem with any title that includes "London", but I feel TfL (or the full title) is less "in your face" than London Transport where it's stated explicitly as the first word. It even feels a bit strange in the Home Counties that our "local" TV network is BBC London.
@@MrSmith1984 Well, it's true that Croydon is a London borough, but it has a different feel in many ways; it was a county borough in Surrey before getting absorbed, has a distinct centre with high-rise buildings, and feels in many ways like an outer satellite town like Watford. And the council had enough autonomy to go bankrupt ...
It became London Regional Transport first LRT , which was when it went wrong in my view .
London Regional Transport (LRT) was also the start of various bus routes being put out to tender by various companies, resulting in the myriad of operators managing the system today.
I'm with you on this one. There was nothing wrong with London Transport. Who knows, it might change back again.
TfL is not the same organisation as London Transport. OK as the video points out that has been true a number of times and it was never seen as important before. The key is that all those organisations kept responsibility for essentially the same thing: *public* transport in London. TfL has much, much more responsibility. It controls most of the main roads in London. It controls Taxis (which I stand to be corrected, but I think were licenced by a separate body before). It runs at least some of the bike schemes. Basically it is responsible for "transport* in London, not just public transport. With that, I can see why the organisation wants to emphasise it is just not another re-incarnation of "London Transport".
@@johnforrest695 I'm aware that the organisation is different, I was referring only to the name.
You know what. Even though you didn't try to convince me, I'm convinced. London Transport is the better name.
And what does it say on that place in Covent Garden?
Why yes, it's the LONDON TRANSPORT Museum.
@@RoyCousins Needs rebranding. The Transport Museum for London.
(£5m. invoice on way).
Working in West London at the time, one of the the first 'improvements' by TFL that I noticed was where the buses in Ealing used to be able to pull in to a section cutaway into the pavements so that traffic remained free flowing. I saw that these pull-ins were starting to be filled in, meaning that when buses now stopped to pick up passengers, they HELD UP THE TRAFFIC. What a great start by TFL.
Yeah that’s a new standard. Makes a noticeable improvement to bus reliability and times.
Although planners have more or less valid reasons for such a step.
Firstly, with buses stopping farther away there now is more space for people to stand on the pavement or even enough space for a waiting shelter.
Secondly, if a pedestrian wants to cross the street before the bus (e.g. to catch a tight connection on the other side of the road), the person can do so, while having to worry less about cars that are overtaking the bus, which would be hidden behind the bus.
And thirdly, if the bus keeps the cars behind it, it means that the bus is the first vehicle after a gap that reaches the next junction, which makes it easier and faster for the bus to cross that junction and so a faster and more stable timetable is possible.
Well, at least that is what I have learned, when I took lessons for planning such things.
Next year, there will be no cars in London any more - problem solved!
@@davidchilds9590 Well, adding (in the worst case) a few minutes of travel time for car users to improve bus driving is not the same as banning cars outright...
You're right, and I think it needs another rebranding. Something snappy. I recommend: _"Central London Integrated Transport."_
That's a name I'd happily ride on. I would want to see a "Central London Integrated Transport" logo above every tunnel I enter on the tube.
Should be quite stimulating 🤣
Followed by Outer Regional Intensive Service.
Jago I totally agree with you: I was born in July 1974, when nearly all Underground trains and buses had the London Transport insignia transfers; this branding should have been continued with.
London Transport is so much better. It’s like everything has to be dumbed down for people everywhere now. Or made softer if you will. I might have mentioned my 17 year career as a Stockholm bus driver and traffic supervisor and my year long stint as an underground train driver here. For some of the years I worked as a supervisor some days and as a driver some days and. Uniforms back then were proper looking with shirt tie pants black shoes, vest and a jacket. We also had winter and summer pants and jackets as well as various hats, usually with a flat top and shiny visor in the front, like a military dress uniform of sorts. We also had rank shown with stripes on our uniforms for all supervisor roles. 1-3 silver stripes on the cuffs of the jacket. So I had double uniform jackets. One for driving use and one for supervisor duties. In the office and depot this didn’t really make a difference but out in the field it was important to know who was in charge. Especially for police ambulance or fire fighters that might come to an accident for instance. The stripes were clearly visible and they got the right man or woman to talk to without having to ask around. We also then had cars with sirens and blue flashing lights like a police car as supervisors to get to accidents or threatening situations fast.
So what does this have to do with this video? Well just as the change in name for London Transport to a more soft name uniforms have eroded to tennis shirts and cargo pants. Stripes for rank is long gone and so are the sirens.. all this for a softer touch. It could be offensive to have rank on staff since it’s not the military. It it had a clear purpose and that is gone now. I like the more orderly stylish days of before. Therefore I also prefer the name London Transport.
I don’t live in England and maybe not even entitled to an opinion in the matter anymore.. I’ve been in and out of London since 1978 so for me it’s also always been London Transport. And I still refer to it as such.
I agree with you,
"Transport for London" isn't "soft", what are you on about?
TFL is a clunkier and IMO harder to understand name than London Transport, so I don't get how it sounds soft or dumbed down to you. I don't think softness is a bad thing tbh
@@ThomasBomb45 Well I get it that you don’t agree. But London transport is a less explanatory name. Most of us know what it is regardless. Transport for London is a more explanatory name. Like they had to change it because people didn’t understand London Transport. It’s a testament to the times we live in now in my opinion
@@driver288, great comments about regimentation ..( now replaced by `please press button for information`! ) ha... As for the name TFL I think it is simply to *include* Overground Rail? which was previously not the case in the eyes of Joe public
Jago I've just disgorged a couple of factoids 1. From memory, I believe the LT/TFL times were blessed by reign of Ken Livingstone. Anyway, it came to pass that Ken had a habit of adopting people he came upon and liked and finding jobs for them. These were an esoteric group, and the majority of employees Ken had control over were at LT. It's rumoured that people would arrived there's, with a note signed by Ken, and have to be fitted in to the organisation one way or another, preferably where they'd do the least damage.
Factoid 2. When electronic display boards were first introduced on the underground showing the time of arrival of the next train, it proved difficult to achieve that goal because of the very nature of train operations could be unpredictable. Eventually the problem was resolved by the expedient roll out of the 90 second minute, a genius invention of a lovely lady called Maureen
I am always impressed how many details you are able to provide! Love it :)
Excellent as always. Can't wait for your take on Marples/Beeching. Villainy and Stupidity all in one.
I'm also with you on this one Jago. I prefer London Transport. My guess is that TfL suggests a more inclusive public transport system and one that serves rather than one that dictates (although I have a feeling it's actually the other way round...).
One thing that has remained since 2000 is the iconic LT roundel and that is a HUGE plus. They could very easily had a complete rebrand with new logos / symbols / emblems, call them what you will.
Anyway, thanks again for an entertaining but educational video. Keep up the good work.
I'd argue that "Transport for London" is much less inclusive. I'm not from London, so Transport for London isn't for me. London Transport is just the transport that happens in London, for whoever happens to be there at the time.
And, actually, the shift to TfL coincides with a whole bunch of things that are quite exclusionary towards people from outside London. For example, when Oyster Cards came in as a pre-paid service, it was awkward for non-Londoners to get one, and even once you got it, it was tying up money in a card that only got used a couple of times a year. TfL made _huge_ amounts of money (in the hundreds of millions of pounts, as I recall) from people loading money onto Oyster Cards and then losing them or moving far enough away from London that they never used the card again. Now, they're stopping travelcards, which used to be very useful for non-Londoners who arrived in London by train.
I dislike TFL on principle. I feel Londoners should be contained in London, and not permitted to escape into the countryside.
Another great video, thank you.
Our family history group are discussing this month the movement of our ancestors from central areas of London to the outer areas, through the late Victorian era and early 20th century. Your videos give us so much information on just what made that possible.
Good morning! Jago. Hope your feeling better, mate.
It's a cold mate
Dear Jago You are not alone! i also resent TFL in place of solid RELIABLE!!! London Transport (when they had booking offices and bus ticket machines etc).
Many thanks for that - and yes, I did enjoy it. Specifically I'm glad to learn the sequence of events which has led to what seems to be the weakness in today's position - the disconnect between London buses and the Underground/Overground. Like many other evils it appears to have originated from the Thatcher government's obsession with privatising everything, and the perceived necessity for fragmenting things in the process of doing that.
The disconnect is not total - thank heaven - but it shows in the attitudes of the people who run the buses, which is similar in many ways to the private bus companies; in two respects particularly: (1) the assumption that each route should be evaluated on its own, and not as part of a network (of buses, trains, trams etc.) - this leads to ridiculous variations in frequencies, for example in the new SuperLoop, which is an excellent thing in itself, but would be so much better with standard frequencies, making journeys involving a change much easier. And (2) a terrible record in publicity at bus stops - for example details re services disrupted by roadworks, and details of cross-border bus services provided by non-TfL organisations.
Perhaps a solution would be to copy the improvement in British Rail under managers like Chris Green, who oversaw the creatiion of the single network 'Network South-East'. So, let the people who know how to repair, garage, fuel, staff etc. buses carry on doing that, but give the public facing aspects of the whole bus/underground/tram etc. network to a separate agency (maybe 'London Transport' again) whose job would be to ensure decent connecting services, consistent publicity and wayfinding signs, and standard frequencies. At the same time, why not give all the suburban main line trains over to them. It is ridiculous that if your local station is (e.g.) Chessington, Hampton Court, Strawberry Hill or Winchmore Hill, your service is half-hourly, while any underground line within Greater London gets at least 6 and possibly 10 services per hour.
Well that was a lot easier to follow than I expected - thank you. Of couse here in Wales / Cymru with the collapse of the private operator we have now copied London and have Transport for Wales / Trafnidiaeth Cymru which hardly anyone, that is an ordinary member of the public, shortens to TfW or TC .
Having lived in London many years ago and enjoyed the public transportation there, I would definitely jump at the chance to live there again, were that ever to become possible. I think you are very lucky to have what you have and wouldn’t care what they decide to call it, lol.
Many years ago is very different to now
Dynamic and Exciting! I've seen pavement manholes (I am that interesting) with TfL written on them. The f is in italics. One of the reasons transport was taken off the GLC would have been their Fares Fair campaign, cheap transport fares. Happy Sunday, I'm still asleep
What proportion of the audience is from outside the UK, just wondering?
Greetings from Denmark!
Greetings from France !
Greetings from Stockport.
Greetings from Springfield 😊😊
Greetings from the US
hi jago. since you brought up this subject, for me the wording of transport for london somehow makes me think london did not have any sort of transport system and are on the verge in introducing such a system to london whereas london transport speaks for itself
I really hope you see this Mr Hazzard. This channel, to me, is one of the best on TH-cam in its genre. It’s informative, easy to watch, entertaining and lighthearted. You educate your viewers, in more ways than one. You’ve taught us why and how London is the way it is. Most importantly, you have made some of my journeys quicker, easier and more interesting just based on the things you’ve included in your videos. I appreciate you and your channel Jago. Keep up the good work!
Hello Jago, I completely agree with you - I do not like Transport for London because I prefer London Transport and I do not understand the reason for changing the name from London Transport to Transport for London. Have you noticed that central government at the Houses of Parliament have changed department names in the same way - take the Department of Education, this has been changed to Department for Education.
Best wishes and take care. Kind regards, Peter Skuce. St Albans. Hertfordshire.
It should of stayed London Transport but politicians meddling far too much in what they do not use. Thank you for saying it Jago
should have*
@@mfaizsyahmicoudda shoudda woudda 😂
My first transport job in London was for London Transport, based at 55 Broadway back in 1995, then we merged with London Underground Limited in 1997 and scrapped London Transport, then as you say, at the end of the millennium along came TfL…..When ever anyone asked me who I worked for, I also prefer to say London Underground rather than TfL, because I prefer the LUL Roundel…….😊
Jago you're right! Transport for London is horrible because it puts the words in the order that the French would put them rather than proper Anglo-Saxon LondonTransport. For example they have OTAN instead of NATO
That's the best reason I've heard so far for putting it back to LT. 😉
Vive la difference!
With you on this Jago. I liken it to "Team GB" or Team anything really.....
Yet more Nu Labour rebranding of things for the sake of getting someone's cousin/wife/rent boy a big pile of graphic design work.
Team GB, Transport Scotland.... Just feels Americanised and backwards and MAKES ME FEEL ILL
Too right! @@D_B_Cooper
More marriages fail due to inconsequential little things (say an annoying habit) that eventually become such huge issues they cause a relationship to fail than huge things like infidelity. So we forgive you for having petty reasons for not liking 'Transport for London'...
You think Jago will divorce trains?
Noooo. That's a major thing....@@CarolineFord1
Belated congratulations on reaching (over) 200,000 subscribers sir, well earned and deserved.
Cheers!
Now, imagine a world where everyone has to pay per use of roads and streets.
Yeah it's quite odd that people will argue for the privatization of public infrastructure. But then if you ask whether they include roads, their response is like "OH GOD NO WHAT ARE YOU INSANE?!"
I think people often base their transport policy on a general ideological leaning towards individualism or collectivism. Rather than pragmatic civil engineering matters.
@@andybrice2711 I'm reminded of how the Indiana Toll Road was sold off to an Australian-Spanish joint venture that demonstrated the clear superiority of private enterprise over government control by failing to make a profit and declaring bankruptcy six year later.
Haha, what could possibly go wrong with a scheme like that?
We do, its where a good chunk of your tax goes
@@CAMSLAYER13 That's not "pay per use". Except on toll-bridges and congestion charging zones.
I visited London for the first time last year and fell in love with the Tube. Someday, I would like to work at TfL in some way. Personally, I just think the name Transport for London is just a more modern version of London Transport.
If it became Transport Of London, they could call it the TOY!
OK, you've convinced me. I, too, remember London Transport, but had no problem with Transport for London, but now I get it. Another great video!
As I recall, when London Regional Transport was created they tried replacing the "London Transport" branding but gave up because there was a lot of opposition to the name change. When Transport for London was created it was stated that the new name was just for some corporate uses, and the "London Transport" branding would be kept for most public uses, then slowly replaced it anyway.
Thank you for an in-depth historical review, Jago... Much of it seems like yet another example of on-going Government Idiocy.
Dear Duke, I dislike tfl immensely, but maybe for a different reason.
My mainline train used to leave the metropolis and not stop until way outside of the M25.
Then a few years ago, every train had to stop, at tfls demand, at every station within the M25 confines ( on my particular route) .
Rammed trains, slower journey times, undesirables boarding.
Thanks tfl, the gift that keeps on giving.
Quite puzzled where that would be, because service patterns on most lines don't seem to have been greatly altered by TfL, except where they have introduced useful new services with increased frequency like the Overground. A few oddities, like the stations between Norwood Junction and New Cross Gate have lost their direct trains to London termini, and the Hertford North line is a tedious all-stations trip (but had not had expresses for years anyway). Sutton and Dorking were understandably aggrieved in the 1980s when the Bognor/Portsmouth expresses were diverted via Gatwick.
Thanks for another interesting video. I appreciate you using the full name, rather than TFL, as hearing initials like that here in Melbourne Australia, it could be easily mistaken as a new form of football. We already have he AFL and VFL here, which are connected with football. Love the train and light rail views included on this video. Well done.
Indeed. TFL = Tasmanian Football League
Ireland brought in TFI…which annoys me more because it makes me wish it was TFL
One of the best videos on you tube I have ever seen. One day I wish to sit in a pub and buy you a pint. Or is that sit in a public house and buy you a schooner. Wonderful simply wonderful. I don't live in the UK and live where the transport can't even run the underground correctly in the first city in the USA to have an underground. But, thank you for all the work you do in these videos, maybe one in why the Heathrow express is the most expensive train journey in the world? And why they shut down without warning and I have to take a $130 (pound sign) cab to heathrow to get home?
As a German, I prefer "Transport for London" over "London Transport". I agree with you that London Transport sounds more elegant than Transport for London when spoken out loud. However, I quite like the abbreviated version "TfL". In Germany, many municipal transport operators (BVG, MVG, VAG, SSB, AVG, rnv, etc.) or fare associations (VBB, hvv, MVV, VRN, VRS, etc.) have three-letter abbreviations, so it just feels natural to have a three-letter code for London as well.
CIÉ
@@OscarOSullivanThough IÉ is only two letters. The North has Translink and NIR, though.
What does it feel like to need a translation app for all these abbreviations? Good grief that's worse than the Morse Code...
@@qwertyTRiG No CIÉ since 1945 has been responsible for nationalised public transport
8:01 the sign in the top right corner Off UP....What four letter word could preceed both? 🤔 😂
Transport For London sounds like a company that either builds london buses exclusively or a company like Uber, Lyft that only operates within London.
Interesting video Jago. 👍
Although, on this occasion, I didn't watch it!
I was busy in the kitchen and simply listened to it! 🙂
Much like we used to do in the olden days! 😁👍
Jago every time the name was changed a shed load of money was wasted which could have been used on the actual transport infrastructure.
I believe TFL also accquired responsibility for streets and Taxi and Private Hire licencing, and used the roundel and bar as their logo in these areas.
Taxi enforcement is definitely a TFL role, I did a joint operation with them and their warrant cards have the roundal in the middle
Think it's blue for enforcement & red for revenue
This is the single most British thing I've seen all week. At heart a random arbitrary moan about something completely trivial. I'm not sure it should be making me feel a bit of national pride, but it does.
Well we wouldn’t have wanted those consultants to miss out on their fees as part of that 00s rebrand!
I think an interesting topic related to your video is the move from the original public corporation structure of the LPTB to the nationalised one. I personally think the former was actually more effective and prevented any real interference from the politicians of the day.
'Well we wouldn’t have wanted those consultants to miss out on their fees ...' for re-ordering London and transport and then inserting the for in the middle. 😂😂😂
Growing up out Philadelphia Pennsylvania, the bus and trolley service going into the city was Red Arrow. In the late 60s (I believe), all the the regional services were combined into SEPTA (Southeastern Pennsylvania Transit Authority). I never liked that acronym because it sounds like SEPTIC. 😂
Plural of Septum?
I do not really have an opinion on what name is better, but I should say that Geoff Marshall's pronunciation of TFL made me believe for a long time that the company was called 'Tierfell'
Your reasons are entirely correct and justified. "TfL" is just another sign of the decadence of the modern age and like so many things these days (spring in March, panini as a singular, everything about young people) it is just wrong.
It's funny because here in Ireland we've completely stolen this brand for ourselves. Bus Éireann (bus), Iarnród Éireann (train), Bus Átha Cliath (buses in Dublin) and some other companies now form the TFI brand - Transport for Ireland. It's the consumer facing brand for public transport in Ireland.
I was wondering of anyone commented about us shamelessly stealing the TfL name. I like having a singular name for everything but i don't understand why they didn't use the existing Córas Imopair Éireann (CIÉ) especially considering its in our own language!
I'm with you on this, Jago. I don't understand why such organisations must change their names to meaningless collections of letters. A prime example is the travel agents Tui. It used to be Thomson and I think that's a fine name. Now it's Toowie? Twee?
Bring back London Transport- it's simpler and everyone knows what it does!
Oyster card carrying West Midlander here! (I have family in London).
Love your videos!
I get it. "Transport for London" sounds a bit too much like a name made up by marketeers. London Transport was much more to the point: I am pretty sure no one was wondering what their business was.
Yeah rebranding with a "service-for" timbre. That said, TfL being 3-letters works well as an acronym tbh as the video mentions.
Equally worth mentioning is just how many more people are using TfL and some sort of massive combination of transport and coordination and planning is logistical necessity given Mass Immigration more or less kicked off post-1995 from Major's "No more than 50,000 pa." speech to today's officially 600,000 p.a. and unofficially swelling as high as 2-3 million. If one remembers the service at the wee hours in London in 2000 and compares today you can see a massive increase in use during such hours which is a useful comparison of observation.
Throw in enormous crowds for football matches of protest marches (150-300,000 this week-end) and TfL seems a very important organization to "keep London running".
I think a lot of transport executives changed name during the 00's. In Manchester we got the shiny new Transport for Greater Manchester, which was a bit of an improvement over Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive. Though saying GMPTE rolls off the tongue a little better than TfGM.
I Agree. the old London Transport was set in stone, emblazoned on all the lovely old buses and tube trains. You even saw the initials LT on old signal boxes and railway infrastructure. It was timeless and elegant, known the whole world over, like an old friend, tirelessly and efficiently moving the people of London from a to b. Then some morons sat round a table having a pointless meeting decided to change it for no reason whatsoever without the consent of Londoners, probably because they thought LT wasn't quite trendy enough for them. It reminds me when the same thing happened with Royal Mail and they changed it to 'Consignia' for heavens sake. Following a massive outcry, they had to change it back. I wish the same thing would happen to TFL but I doubt it ever will.
In Victoria, Australia, we had the Mines Department, then it became Dept of Minerals and Energy. Years later it became Dept of Energy and Minerals.
After listening to all that I think they should change the name to what is actually is - "A Dog's Breakfast"
"A Breakfast For Dogs"
In Canada there are public transportation bodies like Translink (Metro Vancouver), Toronto Transit Commission, Edmonton Transit Service etc.
The "See it. Say it. Sorted!" just gets on my nerves every time they repeat it.
It's starting to annoy me too, and that takes some doing.
Back in my north London school days we always enjoyed referring to it in reverse as "Tropsnart Nodnol". It had a rhythmic quality to it which I always assumed was the main reason for changing its name.
I agree, London Transport sounds way better. Transport for London sounds like something they would call it in former British colonies where the level of English knowledge isn't that high. I appreciate that you use the full names for us international viewers, it sometimes gets a bit confusing when some youtubers use the abbreviations for different train companies without explaining what full name is, making me have to google.
I'm surprised there hasn't been a push to change the name to "Thames Valley" or "Capitol" or "London Metro," or the like.
In the States, local municipalities get snooty about a regional agency having a name that excludes them. Consequently, "Metro" or "Regional" is often slotted in or referenced some way. For example: "San Diego Metropolitan Transit System" (SDMTS) for San Diego, CA, and "Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority" (MBTA, or "The T" in and around Boston, MA), Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority" (WMATA) for Washington, D.C., and "Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority" (SEPTA), for Philadelphia, PA.
There are also a surprising number of agencies that dispense with any geographic reference, like the "Metropolitan Transportation Authority" (MTA) in New York City, and "Metropolitan Transit Commission" in Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN.
"A big 6 wheeler, scarlet painted, Transport for London, diesel engined, 97 horsepower omnibus." just doesn't scan very well does it? Pass along the car please....
What I don't like about Transport for London is far worse, Jay. I don't like the fact when TfL won the franchises for some BR lines within London, they systematically went about rebranding all BR stations with the LT roundel. Whilst BR stations had gone through various franchises since privatisation in 1993, none of the previous franchises had ever replaced the BR Double Arrow logo. This is important, because under privatisation, it was agreed that the BR Double Arrow logo would be retained FOREVER as a means of informing passengers that BR tickets were valid at these stations. This is why new stations, such as Tweedbank, have BR Double Arrow logos, even though they were opened well after BR was but a memory. I am sure the retention of the BR Double Arrow logo is a legal requirement under the Railways Act 1993 or similar. So Boris Johnson, as London Mayor, and head of TfL acted illegally. At many stations, the former NSE branding was also lost at this time removing the historical link to the past. Much missed.
TfL dont have a franchise, it was a full transfer of stations permanently.
B*ll*cks ! It is a franchise just like WAGN, One, and all the other cr@p. Network Rail own the stations, which are leased to the TOC, and maintain the track and signalling etc. This is exactly my point. When they stick up their LT roundels everywhere, people think like you do.
@@highpath4776 London Overground might not be a franchise (as far as I know, it has a more permanent status than other TOCs), but is still a constituent part of the national rail network, in exactly the same way as Merseyrail. Though it is even less of a discrete system since many LO routes share tracks with other TOCs unlike Merseyrail which hardly overlaps the main network. Therefore the double arrow logo should still be displayed.
@@davidemmott6225 I think the Liverpool Street Lines with their different fares should be named TfL Rail
Great video thanks. I agree that I don't like the 'Transport for London' name. It may not be, but does feel like the sort of name that some marketing agency would come up with to make the name of and organisation feel more dynamic and customer focused.
Perhaps a preposition too far.
I'm very much "on board" with you there, Jago. It was an unnecessary confusion to rename a body everyone knew and (at times) appreciated, and which basically stayed exactly the same - adding the W & C line to the remit isn't going to butter anybody's parsnips. Neither is franchising the bus/tram routes out to private operators rather than providing them oneself. To the passenger, a bus is a bus is a bus. Just so long as they don't turn up 15 minutes late in threes.
To me, it's a difference in perception based on the phrasing: "London Transport" not only tells you exactly what the organization does, but the simple matter-of-fact tone associated with that name instantly tells you that this is a government organization that is to be taken seriously and respected. "Transport for London" feels too friendly, like some sort of Millennial corporate PR doublespeak meant to put a happy face on a group that may not be that well organized, and experience has shown actually often backfires with people distrusting organizations with friendlier names like this and taking them less seriously. It's Professional vs Casual, to put it in simple terms.
I think we should all call it TTfN. If you are of a certain age, it will raise a chuckle. When I worked briefly for Bristol Omnibus (a magnificent name) in the 70s, we had an unofficial acronym: MTW or Make Them Walk. Mind you, we had a scarily powerful union at the time and didn't tolerate any nonsense from management - or indeed the passengers. I recall at least two wildcat walkouts following attacks on our Indian conductors. Happy days....