LA Times: Free Wi-Fi, more leg room, leather seats on Greyhound? Really (http://www.latimes.com/travel/deals/la-trb-greyhound-express-20120503,0,5407404.story)
My first thought was, "Really?" Not that Greyhound is going to get me across the Pond... :) Growing up in Northern California, we rode Greyhound many times up/down I-5 and 99.
:)
Greyhound Express, a new premium bus service, rolled out Wednesday for routes that link Los Angeles, Oakland, San Francisco and other California cities. The brand that turns 100 next year has tricked out Express buses with free Wi-Fi, power outlets, leather seats, three-point seat belts and extra legroom. Express customers get one more nice perk too: reserved seats.
The service was launched 15 months ago in Chicago, expanded to the Northeast and now has begun in California. Express routes along California 99 and Interstate 5 in California include:
Technically true, but its northwestern operation is owned by Greyhound Lines, providing service between Seattle and Portland, Oregon. BoltBus utilizes the existing operating authority of Greyhound Lines (although it is run as a distinct business).
In fact someone posted this right here in the Budget Travel a few days ago.
Still, good catch ;)
EmailKid
Palal
May 4, 12, 4:45 am
Megabus tried and failed in doing SF-LA. Let's see if Greyhound makes it.
Probably not worth it time-wise to do the entire route though.
choster
May 4, 12, 9:08 am
Unfortunatelly the bus stations are still the nasty Greyhound pits where many people do not want to hang out outside of daylight hours :(This factor is not to be underestimated. One of the keys to the success of the dragon buses, and later competitors like Megabus, is that they don't use city bus terminals. They've done surveys as to why people prefer the $40 Vamoose Bus ride to a $35 Greyhound ride, and the inconvenience, insecurity, or insalubriousness of many city bus terminals is always one of the big reasons. Most passengers in these corridors aren't waiting hours for a connection, and much as it might have confused my grandmother, waiting outside in a parking lot in the weather can be preferable to sitting inside— when inside means fending off panhandlers on the Bench Of Questionable Cleanliness, inhaling the aroma of shuttered Hardee's, under flickering orange lights.
pacer142
May 10, 12, 1:58 am
This factor is not to be underestimated. One of the keys to the success of the dragon buses, and later competitors like Megabus, is that they don't use city bus terminals. They've done surveys as to why people prefer the $40 Vamoose Bus ride to a $35 Greyhound ride, and the inconvenience, insecurity, or insalubriousness of many city bus terminals is always one of the big reasons. Most passengers in these corridors aren't waiting hours for a connection, and much as it might have confused my grandmother, waiting outside in a parking lot in the weather can be preferable to sitting inside— when inside means fending off panhandlers on the Bench Of Questionable Cleanliness, inhaling the aroma of shuttered Hardee's, under flickering orange lights.
If Greyhound terminals are as bad as is being made out (I've never been to one), why isn't Greyhound (or should that be First Greyhound - remember they're now Scottish-owned with substantial non-US experience on board!) considering what can be done to improve them?
I can't see any decent photos of it unfortunately, but Digbeth, a rathole with all the charisma of a 50 year old bus depot, was rebuilt as Birmingham Central Coach Station (that's Birmingham, UK), the result being an impressive, airy, glass and steel building that's far nicer than most railway stations and airports in the UK. A seriously good job. Why not Greyhound?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_Keynes_Coachway (a smaller version in my home town).
Neil
ofto
May 14, 12, 4:23 pm
If Greyhound terminals are as bad as is being made out (I've never been to one), why isn't Greyhound (or should that be First Greyhound - remember they're now Scottish-owned with substantial non-US experience on board!) considering what can be done to improve them?
Yes, but making money off the poor in America who often have no other option for travel is good business. Instead we should have a segregated service like Boltbus, for them to make money off the middle class.
I really have to admit that I'm skeptical about the "Greyhound Express" service. I took it last summer from Milwaukee to Chicago, though the bus did have the fancy new paint-job it was not up to what they claim. It was an older bus with outlets awardly placed every few seats, broken wifi, tiny legroom and the classic greyhound broken seats and sticky floor. Luckly I wasn't expecting more than regular greyhound service but I doubt its really going to get more people on board unless they actually improve the quality.
This factor is not to be underestimated. One of the keys to the success of the dragon buses, and later competitors like Megabus, is that they don't use city bus terminals. They've done surveys as to why people prefer the $40 Vamoose Bus ride to a $35 Greyhound ride, and the inconvenience, insecurity, or insalubriousness of many city bus terminals is always one of the big reasons. Most passengers in these corridors aren't waiting hours for a connection, and much as it might have confused my grandmother, waiting outside in a parking lot in the weather can be preferable to sitting inside— when inside means fending off panhandlers on the Bench Of Questionable Cleanliness, inhaling the aroma of shuttered Hardee's, under flickering orange lights.
I must say I agree that the lack of segregation from lower class and transient people also wont bid well with many middle class riders.