By Dave Millhouser

It was magic.

My friend Calvin ran, literally, a "bus barn" where he repaired coaches.

Part of his magic was the process where he got three buses in a barn that really only fit two. Hed never let us watch; for all we knew he lowered one through the roof.

He had a miraculous way of healing sick buses and his reputation attracted repair business from all over the region.

This was during the 1970s and Calvin wanted to run coaches, as well as fix them. But the industry was still heavily regulated, and "operating authority" was out of his reach.

The only way to realize his ambition was to become what was then called a "gypsy" . . . and use loopholes to operate on the fringes.

Gypsy has become an archaic bus term; today, such operators might be labeled noncompliant or rogues.

Fortunately for him, in 1982 virtually 30 years ago to the day you are reading this the industry was deregulated.

He seized the opportunity to compete legitimately, growing from a single 1964 GM 4106 to the largest and most innovative carrier in his region. Calvin wasnt alone; there were dozens of stories like his.

Competition improved the quality of motorcoach travel and, like in other modes of deregulated transportation, including airlines, prices went down.

Old timers werent thrilled; to survive they had to improve. Ultimately, everyone benefited.

Many of you own, or work for, companies that made it through that era. Most companies that survived are much different operations today.

The numbers arent readily available, but its reasonable to assume that a large percentage of currently successful coach operations did not exist in 1982.

An attempt to re-regulate?

In the maneuvering that produced the new federal highway and public transportation law this past June, there was an effort to substantially raise the barriers to entering the industry.

Safety was cited as a major concern.

Im aware of no evidence indicating new, or smaller, companies are less safe.

I also think there is ample safety regulation in place to, if properly administered, do the job.

Part of what may be happening is the inclination to limit competition. Its hard to argue with "safety," but the undertone may be an attempt to return to de-facto regulation.

In ye olden days, to get authority you had to prove your service was "needed," now you need to prove youre safe (before youve turned a wheel).

How weve changed

Its been 30 years since deregulation, and its worthwhile to take a look at how weve changed.

We all (justifiably) complain that revenues dont keep pace with costs, and yet youre still here. Youve managed, somehow, to operate efficiently enough to endure in these ugly times.

Of course, some have not made it, but thats how Darwin works, and the survivors are the better for it.

Does anyone believe that the spectacular innovations weve seen would have occurred in a noncompetitive environment? Coach builders responded to market pressure by offering good-looking coaches that are safer, ride better, and offer a variety of entertainment options.

Prior to 1982, most charters were done by line carriers as a sideline, and customers were captive.

By 1985, offshore manufacturers were attracted to a growing charter/tour market that demanded the stylish buses they built. Some succeeded in our unique market, some failed. Their presence stirred the North American builders to compete on a higher level.

Fresh blood, ideas

In the regulated environment there was no need to "sell," but competition changed that. We saw an influx of creative new people who explored all sorts of markets that had been ignored or taken for granted.

Some of these folks failed spectacularly, while some, like Calvin, marched the industry forward. We serve more people, in more ways, than ever before.

Coach operators joined the rest of the business universe of maintaining profits through equipment and manpower efficiencies combined with competitive prices and services.

A Wizened Executive pointed out that operating in a deregulated world is "hard work and little wonder many would like to see the good old days of regulation return. The next best thing is heaping on loads of dubious regulations (had an ADA audit lately?) that are difficult for the startup to endure."

Little guys HAVE to be creative to survive, and often offer significant new ideas. Conversely, increased regulation burdens them the most. The cost, per employee of a drug screening, or safety program, is significantly less for a big company.

Established operators can handle regulatory costs more efficiently.

A Congressman recently observed: "Im wary of large companies that want to pass more regulations because for them, the costs are easily absorbed, but are burdensome for the small entrepreneur and discourage start-ups."

Staving off rules

We need to fight the temptation to solve problems with new rules. Clearly, sometimes theyre needed, but often all that is required is to utilize intelligently what already is in place.

Freedom entails risk. Encouraging competition may create some pain, but will also bring the new energy and ideas that we need to thrive. Its not fair to shut the door in the face of potential legitimate competitors after were safely inside, and frankly, we need them. Without their innovation were on a plateau, and its only downhill from here.

The founders of the United Motorcoach Association understood this and worked hard to see the industry deregulated. Much of the industry, as we know it today, owes its current opportunity to compete and succeed to those guys.

I live on an island (73 feet from the mainland), and we sometimes joke about closing the bridge so we dont have to put up with all the commuters, tourists and big city folks.

Its fun to contemplate, but without those people (and the aggravation they create) we wouldnt have the restaurants, attractions and entertainment we currently enjoy.

Dave Millhouser is a bus industry marketing consultant and freelance writer. Contact him via email at Davemillhouser@gmail.com.