As well as franchised operators, train services can be provided under an "Open Access" program.

I'm advised that an established operator and a well prepared case would very likely get ORR (Office of Rail Regulation) approval for such a service, and we've started to approach such possible operators and the press too ...

See
Press Release and Detailed Case

Well if First can't see sense then there is nothing I would like to see more than South West Trains running the service.  It would be great to see their smartly livered 159's on the hallowed FGW turf! 
I have used SWT services many times from the Salisbury area and always found them to be reliable, clean and the staff friendly. 

Hull Trains is indeed part of First Group (link below.)
http://www.hulltrains.co.uk/index.html

Here is a link that contains details of First's current rail operations.
http://www.firstgroup.com/railhome/rail_home1.php#

First are also bidding for the South Western Franchise (link below.)
http://www.firstgroup.com/railhome/sw_franchise.php

I hope first dont get the South Western Franchise -
Nothing personal against them but I just cant help hoping that they dont.

Nick , here is an article related to your query (link below.)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/5221174.stm

The quotes that explain the difference are these.

"The ORR decision at the centre of the court ruling was to grant two train operating companies - Hull Trains Company Ltd and Grand Central - the right to run "open access" passenger services on the East Coast Main Line.

GNER, which has a franchise agreement to run intercity trains on the East Coast Main Line, had also argued that the ORR decision amounted to "an unlawful grant of state aid" in favour of the two other companies.

As franchise rail operator, GNER has to make three payments to gain access to the tracks: a fixed charge, a variable charge, and a franchise premium of £1.3bn over 10 years. 

In March, Grand Central won the right to run three direct trains a day between Sunderland and London."

Hope this helps , Nick.

It would be truly great if this came to fruition but, in reality, the root cause of this whole issue is that the Melksham service isn't profitable and so I can't see another operator wishing to come in and run it under open access.

What the service really needs is public subsidy and if this isn't coming from the DfT then it might be something that local councils could contribute to.

As I understand it, First will run additional services if they are part-funded (making them at least cost neutral) - see here for a good example http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/NewsItem.aspx?id=370

If there was any chance of profit, FGW would run the service!

Where significant revisions to the Dec 06 timetable have been made, it's because the DfT have paid for them.

I understand the Swindon to Southampton service was subsidised to the tune of £1.5m pa and, although the open access proposal is for a shorter route than this, I'd guess the costs to be nearer 900k to 1m.

For a start, even for a shuttle service you'd need to hire more than one 153 unit to stand any chance of maintaining a reliable service (FGW still have to cancel services on occasions and they have 15 x 153s available across the network).

Don't get me wrong, I'd be the first to welcome with open arms a regular service provided by an open access operator but I feel the only way this service will be resurrected is through public subsidy.


Edit by Graham ... please note that this thread carries on to a second page, and that although this poster clearly has some good inside information, he's also not to my knowledge aware of other issues / elements.  If he was aware of those other elements, then he would be presenting a biased view here that's based on selective quoting, whch I can't believe to be tha case. I have added selective "yes but" items in a follow up post ...