The "Rail fare increase and related discussions" thread

[6Gman]

That's good you travel first class, did you get up and see the people standing in the 2nd class?
Did you ask people who were doing the same journey as you if they were happy to pay £55.5 return?
In my situation Chorley to Manchester tpe is always full and you have to stand up. There is a solution Northern but this is a lot slower and runs every hour. Coming home at peak, when you've experienced standing up on a Northern train at 25 degrees then you can come on here and say the prices are fair.

But do you not see the problem with the point you make?

1. You have to stand. Solution - more stock. Extra cost. Higher fares (or subsidy).
2. Northern only runs hourly. Solution - more frequent service, more stock. Extra cost etc etc
3. Train is too hot. Solution - new stock (if problem is non air-con units) or extra spare units (if problem is air con failure). Extra cost etc etc

A better service means higher costs.

Unless someone can find a way of reducing the railway's cost base, and I honestly don't know how that can (acceptably) be done: more DOO? reduced station staffing? reduce staff costs? structural changes?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

For me personally, it has cost ~£1200 this year just to use my car, and that's before I put any fuel in it and do any repairs/servicing that may be needed!

As an aside, your post beautifully illustrates a basic problem with how you pay for car travel vs train travel: I doubt that many people would argue that on environmental and quality of life grounds, as well as the need to reduce congestion, there's an urgent need for more people to be travelling by public transport instead of by car. But with cars, as you've so vividly illustrated, a very high proportion of your costs come upfront just to get the car on the road in the first place. After that, assuming your car isn't a complete gas-guzzler, I'd say the incremental cost of making journeys by car is actually pretty good value if you look at the cost/mile figure - and in most places quite a bit cheaper than it would normally be with a walk-on rail or bus fare (especially if you have friends or family in the car). By contrast, with trains, if you don't have a season ticket and don't happen to be travelling on your season ticket route, all your costs are incrementally per-journey made. That all adds up to quite a hefty financial incentive for most people who have cars to use them as much as possible for journeys.

The rail fare rises are very bad in that context, but I do think something more fundamental needs to be done as well to try to make sure that, whatever mode you choose to use for your journey, the bulk of your expenses come in incremental per-journey costs. (Having said that, I'm not sure what possible solution there could be. I wonder if something along the lines of road pricing and using revenue from it to somehow lower the initial cost of owning a car would work. If it was politically do-able).

(Apologies if this is stretching a bit from the topic of the thread, but it seems relevent).

 

[LE Greys]

As an aside, your post beautifully illustrates a basic problem with how you pay for car travel vs train travel: I doubt that many people would argue that on environmental and quality of life grounds, as well as the need to reduce congestion, there's an urgent need for more people to be travelling by public transport instead of by car. But with cars, as you've so vividly illustrated, a very high proportion of your costs come upfront just to get the car on the road in the first place. After that, assuming your car isn't a complete gas-guzzler, I'd say the incremental cost of making journeys by car is actually pretty good value if you look at the cost/mile figure - and in most places quite a bit cheaper than it would normally be with a walk-on rail or bus fare (especially if you have friends or family in the car). By contrast, with trains, if you don't have a season ticket and don't happen to be travelling on your season ticket route, all your costs are incrementally per-journey made. That all adds up to quite a hefty financial incentive for most people who have cars to use them as much as possible for journeys.

The rail fare rises are very bad in that context, but I do think something more fundamental needs to be done as well to try to make sure that, whatever mode you choose to use for your journey, the bulk of your expenses come in incremental per-journey costs. (Having said that, I'm not sure what possible solution there could be. I wonder if something along the lines of road pricing and using revenue from it to somehow lower the initial cost of owning a car would work. If it was politically do-able).

(Apologies if this is stretching a bit from the topic of the thread, but it seems relevent).

I'd say it is. There's one possible solution. Not road pricing, but abolish VED, make MoT exams free and recoup the full costs of the road system from fuel taxes, plus a little on top of that to cover the environmental costs. That brings a measure of parity. They can't do much about insurence or car purchase costs, partly because that would be a form of illegal state aid (AIUI) and partly because it would still be necessary to do so. Fuel consumption is a very good measure of both how efficient a vehicle is - so encouraging people to drive fuel-efficient vehicles - and how much driving someone does. Essentially, that brings it closer to parity.

The problem with this is it might penalise people in rural areas, where there is no alternative but to drive, but there is another side to that in that revenue generated might be able to subsidise rural bus services as an alternative. Spreading this a bit wider, it should then provide an incentive to improve rural rail services, to avoid the accusation that the government is abandoning country people.

 

[yorksrob]

As an aside, your post beautifully illustrates a basic problem with how you pay for car travel vs train travel: I doubt that many people would argue that on environmental and quality of life grounds, as well as the need to reduce congestion, there's an urgent need for more people to be travelling by public transport instead of by car. But with cars, as you've so vividly illustrated, a very high proportion of your costs come upfront just to get the car on the road in the first place. After that, assuming your car isn't a complete gas-guzzler, I'd say the incremental cost of making journeys by car is actually pretty good value if you look at the cost/mile figure - and in most places quite a bit cheaper than it would normally be with a walk-on rail or bus fare (especially if you have friends or family in the car). By contrast, with trains, if you don't have a season ticket and don't happen to be travelling on your season ticket route, all your costs are incrementally per-journey made. That all adds up to quite a hefty financial incentive for most people who have cars to use them as much as possible for journeys.

The rail fare rises are very bad in that context, but I do think something more fundamental needs to be done as well to try to make sure that, whatever mode you choose to use for your journey, the bulk of your expenses come in incremental per-journey costs. (Having said that, I'm not sure what possible solution there could be. I wonder if something along the lines of road pricing and using revenue from it to somehow lower the initial cost of owning a car would work. If it was politically do-able).

(Apologies if this is stretching a bit from the topic of the thread, but it seems relevent).

A good point.

And all the more reason why the railway should also try and encourage people to use it more using sunken costs, i.e. with season tickets, carnets and (dare I say it) a national railcard.

 

[Zoe]

And all the more reason why the railway should also try and encourage people to use it more using sunken costs, i.e. with season tickets, carnets and (dare I say it) a national railcard.

One issue here is with encouraging intercity services. If like currently you have cheap advance fares and expensive walk-up fares then you are going to discourage people that want flexibility from using rail but at the same time the seats are getting filled by some people that wouldn't have used the trains if these cheap advance fares had not been available.

 

[Cletus]

http://www.parliament.uk/Templates/BriefingPapers/Pages/BPPdfDownload.aspx?bp-id=SN06384

So, taking the figures from page 5, approximate (regulated) fare increases have been:-

2004 4%
2005 4%
2006 4%
2007 4%
2008 5%
2009 6%
2010 0%
2011 6%
2012 6%
2013 6%

It it any wonder the general public complain?

 

[yorksrob]

One issue here is with encouraging intercity services. If like currently you have cheap advance fares and expensive walk-up fares then you are going to discourage people that want flexibility from using rail but at the same time the seats are getting filled by some people that wouldn't have used the trains if these cheap advance fares had not been available.

I can see that point as well. I notice that on longer South West trains routes, the network card discount co-exists with advanced fares (with the advanced fares still being a bit cheaper for routes such as Waterloo - Exeter/Weymouth, so perhaps they could work something out on InterCity routes.

 

[tbtc]

So, taking the figures from page 5, approximate (regulated) fare increases have been:-

2004 4%
2005 4%
2006 4%
2007 4%
2008 5%
2009 6%
2010 0%
2011 6%
2012 6%
2013 6%

It it any wonder the general public complain?

Quoting those figures without the inflation (ROI) for the years makes the figures seem a lot higher, but isn't really fare.

 

[The Barlow Boy]

Is travelling by car quicker than the train though?

Scunthorpe to basically anywhere is almost always quicker by train, and in my circumstances, with car running costs at £3.35/day (excluding fuel), the price of a ticket is roughly comparable to using the car to a lot of places.

Yes, I do have a lot of flexibilty as to where and when I go, but so does someone with a season ticket. Unless otherwise restricted, a season ticket is valid between the origin and destination on all permitted routes and to/from all intermediate stations. Don't forget you get a hefty discount on an annual season as well compared to buying weekly seasons or anytime returns - Not something a car driver gets even if the do the same round trip every day for a year.

And for your other point, yes, a driver may not be bothered by screaming kids, arguing passengers and drunks (depending on who is in the vehicle with them), but they do have to put up with a lot of people on the roads who seem to think that the laws do not apply to them.

So how does my Reigate to London season ticket benefit me when I decide to go to Brighton for the day? The season ticket is only flexible over it's line of route, elsewhere it's a piece of cardboard.
If I decide to go to Canterbury - I city I like visiting - it's the car every time, it takes half the time the train(s) do. I can drive to Guildford in the same time as the train takes but, as I've explained, the car gives me the time flexibility plus it's easier carrying stuff I've bought back in the back of my Golf estate.
Certainly, for daily commuting to and from the big city the train takes some beating, especially with the parking restrictions that are in force in many towns and cities but that's how and why the TOCs have us by the short and curlies when it comes to pricing. No matter how you look at it and what criteria you apply we have the most expensive trains in Europe and no matter how many rail people and rail supporters are in denial about it that's a fact.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That's good you travel first class, did you get up and see the people standing in the 2nd class?
Did you ask people who were doing the same journey as you if they were happy to pay £55.5 return?
In my situation Chorley to Manchester tpe is always full and you have to stand up. There is a solution Northern but this is a lot slower and runs every hour. Coming home at peak, when you've experienced standing up on a Northern train at 25 degrees then you can come on here and say the prices are fair.

Now do the same journey by turning up at the ticket office and buying a ticket for the next available train - not such good value now is it?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Is travelling by car quicker than the train though?

Scunthorpe to basically anywhere is almost always quicker by train, and in my circumstances, with car running costs at £3.35/day (excluding fuel), the price of a ticket is roughly comparable to using the car to a lot of places.

Yes, I do have a lot of flexibilty as to where and when I go, but so does someone with a season ticket. Unless otherwise restricted, a season ticket is valid between the origin and destination on all permitted routes and to/from all intermediate stations. Don't forget you get a hefty discount on an annual season as well compared to buying weekly seasons or anytime returns - Not something a car driver gets even if the do the same round trip every day for a year.

And for your other point, yes, a driver may not be bothered by screaming kids, arguing passengers and drunks (depending on who is in the vehicle with them), but they do have to put up with a lot of people on the roads who seem to think that the laws do not apply to them.

That flexibility which you speak of is only applicable to the ticket's line of route. My Reigate to London allows me to break a journey, use any train, make as many journeys between intermediate stations as I like. The only thing is, to travel for a day by the sea-side in Brighton/Eastbourne/Hove Actually I have to buy another ticket. Not so flexible now is it?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Well worth reading, I agree (even if the conclusion that Bob Crow is talking rubbish shouldn't surprise everyone...)



Fantastic, thanks. So, since privatisation the average ticket on Network South East/ Regional Railways has gone up by about 10% in real terms? Kind of puts the "eye watering" / "excessive" / "rip off" comments into a bit of perspective. But I doubt the Daily Mail will be publishing that tomorrow morning...

Interesting that the rise in longer distance travel has been quite so huge - I guess a handful of bargain Advance tickets has hidden some pretty steep rises for normal fares (plus the ever narrowing goal posts of "off peak")

So who's had a 10% pay rise this year?

 

[Yew]

Unless someone can find a way of reducing the railway's cost base, and I honestly don't know how that can (acceptably) be done: more DOO? reduced station staffing? reduce staff costs? structural changes?

Remove ROSCOS? syphoning millions off the Railways to rent stock bought by the government in the 70's. Doesnt sit right with me. Maybe one day I'll sit and do the calculations, to find just how much they rip us off.

 

[Cletus]

Quoting those figures without the inflation (ROI) for the years makes the figures seem a lot higher, but isn't really fare.

Possibly not. But then again I suspect the general public may not include inflation in their thoughts?

 

[yorksrob]

Possibly not. But then again I suspect the general public may not include inflation in their thoughts?

Or they may not have had inflation in their wages (at least for a few years) - more's the point.

 

[Cletus]

Or they may not have had inflation in their wages (at least for a few years) - more's the point.

Including myself more than a few years!

 

[tbtc]

So who's had a 10% pay rise this year?

In real terms the increase (on non-Intercity services) has been around 10% since privatisation (i.e. well below 1% a year).

This is the point that the media will wilfully ignore, but the truth appears to be that most train tickets have only crawled marginally higher than inflation year on year since the mid '90s (hence this year's 3% rise looking so big).

 

[SS4]

Unless someone can find a way of reducing the railway's cost base, and I honestly don't know how that can (acceptably) be done: more DOO? reduced station staffing? reduce staff costs? structural changes?

Or the government runs it directly at a loss just like other public services. Tory thinking has infected the mind of many. Cutting costs is not the One True Solution, I wonder what'd be saved if TOCs (with their shareholders adding an extra layer of payments), ROSCOs (see above and they basically have a monopoly on rolling stock) and the like were replaced by civil servants (on a lower wage as has been the case in public v private sector for decades).

Exactly why are we cutting the costs of essential public services? Who benefits? If it's such a Good Thing (TM) then why are continental railways state owned? We've got the Anti Robin Hood's in power, taking money from the poor to give to the rich.

 

[radamfi]

Until now, fare rises have been accompanied by patronage growth. So, until now, there has been little incentive for the Government or the rail industry to reduce fares. That would merely reduce income and increase overcrowding. So the only way I can see to stop that is for patronage to fall sufficiently so that rail income is reduced. People have to boycott the Anytime fares and the more expensive Off Peak tickets. People need to trade down to Advances or coach travel or local bus services or get really organised with car share. In the case of the London commuting, drive to the nearest Tube station or drive to somewhere where you can get a bus to the nearest Tube station.

All these options are considerably more inconvenient and mostly less green than getting the train. But if you don't want to pay those kind of fares, I see no other option, other than to move to the countries in mainland Europe where fares are considerably lower.

 

[yorksrob]

Including myself more than a few years!

I can empathise !

 

[6Gman]

We've got the Anti Robin Hood's in power, taking money from the poor to give to the rich.

Except if - for example - you put up VAT, but freeze rail fares you are - overall - taking money from the poor(er), and giving it to the rich(er).

 

[scandal]

Today's news is nothing short of what was expected, especially after the government limited the rise in rail fares in January 2012, to continue subsidising rail fare rises each year goes not only against the political interest to make the railways more efficient but also against current governmental policy of allowing greater freedom for train operators....in spite of the 150+ page highly specified GW ITT.

There are some interesting debates which appear to be gaining traction in the aftermath of these reported rises in a few months, for starters, many are on wage freezes, unemployment is rising, and yet inflation is increasing, we are as the Campaign for Better Transport argues in danger of creating 'transport poverty'. This isn't of course unique to the railways, I've seen numerous examples of young jobseekers having to walk from their house miles to the town centre as they can't afford bus fares, JSA is £56 a week, which when you factor in £20 a week or so on a bus pass doesn't leave you with much to live on, but I digress. It can be argued that commuting is a lifestyle choice and that by choosing to live in say Bedford, whilst working in London you factor in increasing rail costs, but as the trends have shown people are having to work further and further from their homes and as mentioned increasing fares for what many see as a service that fails to meet the price they pay and service quality they expect looses goodwill to the railway and begin to question modal choice. I noticed recently National Express started running commuter coaches to Canary Wharf, it is not railway romanticism that makes people use trains to get to work, it is the most efficient and affordable option to many, but increasing rail travel costs begin to question this.

One of the real reasons for these rises in rail costs is that the railway is horrendously complicated and inefficient, it is hard to find out black and white figures of how much the railway really costs, the Dft for example recently claimed that the railways were making a profit of £500m in premium payments, but this ignored the PTE subsidy allocated to the TOCs and NR's grants. As an example of the inefficiency lets take a look East Coast, this company is owned by Directly Operated Railways, part of the DfT, it operates over Network Rail and duly pays them for that privilege, NR is of course a private company, although it is owned by HM Government. The trains that East Coast used were built for and paid for by British Rail, which itself was funded by HM Government, so just how much does this train operator (HM Government) pay to use the trains which British Rail (HM Government) bought outright years ago?
East Coast (HM Government) spent £81,000,000 in leasing costs for 2011.

To the credit of this Government they have accepted that the railway is inefficient and in danger as Phillip Hammond said of becoming "a rich mans toy", however the McNulty report focuses on the inefficiencies of staffing, but this was only 34% of costs for 2011 for ScotRail. This thread has made arguments about increasing cost of fuel...using the ScotRail example this was just 11%, whilst petrol costs are increasing so is the efficiency of motor cars, indeed as the OBR show in their next 50 year prediction HM Government set to loose some £68bn in transport taxes through this.

One of the main problems as Railtrack showed, is that operating costs of the railway can not cover capital costs, until we take the view that railways provide a social benefit and an improvement as are too important to fail, since they are used by so many we must either price people off the railways, whilst satisfying ourselves that the railways are self funding or we can increase taxes on business and property that benefits from railway investment, for those interested there are some very interested reports and books on the Jubilee Line Extension and the true costs including benefit to business.

Incidentally, for those suggesting Labour would do the same, remember that a lot of these commuter areas are in marginal seats come the next election and as recent policy think tanks have shown there is popular interest in renationalisation to improve efficiency, regulate costs and provide a publicly accountable railway. As a point of interest the RMT disaffiliated from the Labour Party in 2004.

 

[tbtc]

To the credit of this Government they have accepted that the railway is inefficient and in danger as Phillip Hammond said of becoming "a rich mans toy", however the McNulty report focuses on the inefficiencies of staffing, but this was only 34% of costs for 2011 for ScotRail

McNulty mentioned a lot of things, including the ROSCOs. However the Unions shrieking has given people the impression that the entire report was only about reducing staff costs (thus distracting people from the real need to make leasing costs lower).

 

[Class 33]

Until now, fare rises have been accompanied by patronage growth. So, until now, there has been little incentive for the Government or the rail industry to reduce fares. That would merely reduce income and increase overcrowding. So the only way I can see to stop that is for patronage to fall sufficiently so that rail income is reduced. People have to boycott the Anytime fares and the more expensive Off Peak tickets. People need to trade down to Advances or coach travel or local bus services or get really organised with car share.

These news reports about the fare rises allways seem to be targetted towards the daily commuter, with mentions of what the season tickets prices will rise to. Fair enough. But there is also the leisure and casual train travellers too.

Firstly though, if people can book several weeks ahead then there are some really good bargains out there, and the annual rail prices hikes are apparantly having no effect on the prices of these tickets. For instance Bristol-London Paddington cheapest Advance single tickets have been £10 for at least the past 15 years!! Can't complain about that! Other really good value priced Advance tickets for example are London-Manchester £12 single, London-Edinburgh £16 single, Bristol-Brighton £9 single. There are some darn good bargains if you can book well in advance!

But not everyone can plan well ahead to get these great value fares. Some people may need to travel at very short notice due to an important family matter or something, or less seriously they just fancy a day out. A lot of the walk-on fares are absolutely ludicruously high. For example York-London return Off Peak Return £149 or £249 Anytime Return!!!! Who the hell pays these sort of prices??!! I certainly wouldn't. Daylight robbery! At those prices I would rule the train out as my method of travel and instead go by coach for a much more sensiblly priced fare. The train operators would no way be getting my custom for those prices. Whereas if the walk-on fare was more sensibly priced, say for example £50 return for this such journey then I'd be more inclined to pay this.

I totally agree that people should boycott the Anytime and more expensive Off Peak fares, and seek other means of travel instead. Then perhaps as a result of far less revenue from these fares, the train operators will be forced to reduce their fares considerably.

Split ticketing - this is a good way to cut the costs of rail fares considerably. But I expect there's still a lot of people out there who don't know about this method and are still paying way extortinately priced fares for journeys they could be paying a lot less for. For example Bristol-Birmingham walk-on Off Peak fare is £48 return. Very expensive. I wouldn't pay that price for such a journey. But by using the split ticket method - in this case splitting at Cheltenham, the cost can be brought down to a much more sensibly priced fare of £30 return. That's £8 Bristol-Cheltenham, and £22 Cheltenham-Birmingham. So why then can the walk-on Off Peak Return from Bristol-Birmingham not just be priced at £30 return?? Passengers shouldn't have to use this "hidden" method of getting cheaper fares, the fares should be priced more sensibly in the first place. Whilst split ticketing is legit, the train operators do not really want the passengers to know about this do they!

Rail Cards(non season tickets) - there are Young Persons(18-26), Family, and Senior Railcards giving 1/3 off fares. Why not a Railcard for those of us aged 27-59 giving 1/3 off fares??

 

[HH]

As expected tonight's Evening Standard Headline screamed "Rail Fares to rise by 11%". Not at all misleading. They even quoted supposed new prices for Season Tickets, which is a pretty amazing job, seeing as none of the TOCs will know these for some time. But then the daily rags never let facts get in the way of a good story.

It is to be hoped that the Tories do another U-Turn and bring the rises down to RPI+1% again, but I wouldn't bank on it. Last year inflation was around 5%, and I think they thought 8% was just too big.

People forget that in the first franchise period fares rose by RPI -1% plus a performance adjustment. On some TOCs, like Connex South East that meant a further drop. I know the excuse for RPI+3% on SE was the new Javelin trains; the truth of the matter is that fares on SE were out of kilter with the rest of London & surrounds and SRA wanted to bring them in line.

 

[WatcherZero]

Remove ROSCOS? syphoning millions off the Railways to rent stock bought by the government in the 70's. Doesnt sit right with me. Maybe one day I'll sit and do the calculations, to find just how much they rip us off.

They publish investor reports.

Angel Trains 2010/2011

Refinanced £800m of bank loans with a £400m bond issue and £450m of new banking facilities. 99.4% of the 4,469 strong fleet was on lease. £1.2bn of bonds are now outstanding at rates of 6.25%-6.875% covering 10-20 years.

Total debt £2.267bn
Gross Revenue £465.4m
Net Revenue £344.7m
£40.2m was spent acquiring new rolling stock with £84.2m of rolling stock remaining on order.
Overheads £18.1m
Payment to shareholder £44m
Reduction of debt £122.2m
Tax refund of £9.6m recieved on corporation tax over payment in 2008

Leverage ratio was 5.8 against a maximum permissable of 8.5
Company credit rating BBB/Stable

Leasing Activity
* 28 Vehicles (Class 150) were re-leased to Northern Rail until Sep 2013.
* 112 vehicles (Class 357) were extended with C2C to May 2013.
* 240 vehicles (Class 317) and 84 vehicles (Class 360) were extended with London Eastern Railway (National Express East Anglia) until Oct 2011, corresponding with the postponement of re-franchising by the DfT.

* 16 new build vehicles (Class 172) were delivered and are on lease with London Overground until Nov 2014.
* 8 new build vehicles (Class 172) were delivered and are on lease with Chiltern Railways until Dec 2021.
* 11 new build vehicles (Class 390) were delivered and are on lease with Virgin Rail (with a section 54 undertaking) until Mar 2022.

Angel Trains makes up 37% of the UK leasing market.

 

[ainsworth74]

Payment to shareholder £44m

Damn, wish I was that shareholder

However, interesting stuff, thanks.

 

[bnm]

Firstly though, if people can book several weeks ahead then there are some really good bargains out there, and the annual rail prices hikes are apparantly having no effect on the prices of these tickets. For instance Bristol-London Paddington cheapest Advance single tickets have been £10 for at least the past 15 years!! Can't complain about that! Other really good value priced Advance tickets for example are London-Manchester £12 single, London-Edinburgh £16 single, Bristol-Brighton £9 single. There are some darn good bargains if you can book well in advance!

But not everyone can plan well ahead to get these great value fares. Some people may need to travel at very short notice due to an important family matter or something, or less seriously they just fancy a day out. A lot of the walk-on fares are absolutely ludicruously high. For example York-London return Off Peak Return £149 or £249 Anytime Return!!!! Who the hell pays these sort of prices??!! I certainly wouldn't. Daylight robbery! At those prices I would rule the train out as my method of travel and instead go by coach for a much more sensiblly priced fare. The train operators would no way be getting my custom for those prices. Whereas if the walk-on fare was more sensibly priced, say for example £50 return for this such journey then I'd be more inclined to pay this.

That's all well and good, but to retain a revenue neutral situation, those £10 Advance Purchase fares would have to rise by factor similar to the reduction of the Off Peak/Anytime fares.

Rail ticket prices are market based, with the expensive walk-up fares subsidising the cheaper Advance Purchase fares. The median point is the actual cost of transporting a passenger from A to B. That's a simple analysis excluding the variables, be they season tickets, railcard, 1st Class, multi use tickets (rovers) etc.

Do we want that median point to be applicable to all? I'd say not. That would truly price people of the railways.

 

[Wath Yard]

People need to trade down to Advances or coach travel or local bus services or get really organised with car share. In the case of the London commuting, drive to the nearest Tube station or drive to somewhere where you can get a bus to the nearest Tube station.

Why do people need to do this? Do you live in London? Driving to a tube station is fine in theory, the only difficult bit is the parking. So not really a practical idea.

There are some interesting debates which appear to be gaining traction in the aftermath of these reported rises in a few months, for starters, many are on wage freezes, unemployment is rising, and yet inflation is increasing, we are as the Campaign for Better Transport argues in danger of creating 'transport poverty'.

There has always been 'transport poverty'. The very poor (students, unemployed and the like) walk or cycle, slightly less poor people catch the bus and richer people catch the train or drive. That's how it has always been, at least in my lifetime, and that’s how my main method of transport has changed as I’ve got older and wealthier. The only difference is that in the 21st century everything has to have a name so tabloid newspapers, pressure groups, and politicians who have no intention of doing anything about it if they get into office can shout about it.

 

[dieselbashdave]

It's a highly emotive subject, but my advice is to use business sense. Does your local TOC provide value (i.e. a benefit of some kind such as e.g. onboard wifi or newspapers or something like that)? Do they have excellent quality management procedures and policies? Do they have a high understanding of marketing and CRM theory and translate this into practice at ALL levels of the organisation throughout ALL the stakeholders? (haven't met a TOC that seems to have any CRM or marketing knowledge though) Will a potential x% fare increase still allow value to be retained? If not my advice is to go to someone (or rather something!) that does have value.

To put it into context, I used to (a long long long time ago!) use Apple desktops. Breakdown after breakdown, overpriced software that doesn't work, actually charging for what is essentially a FreeBSD/Debian hybrid OS, constant HDD reformatting. They got the middle finger and Fujitsu Siemens ended up laughing all the way to the bank. 7 years later, my slimline Fujitsu desktop box is still going strong. Once it goes, it'll be Fujitsu that get my dough again (or whoever is left, I think FSC went bust so it'll probably be Dell, who made my old laptop).

Into TOC-talk; Virgin West Coast offers enhanced mobile coverage in their trains, a cafe-shop, high speed with a smooth ride. I think £101.30 +x% increase is still good value because of the many benefits that they offer compared to driving down to Manchester/Lake District.

A 10% increase in FSR's Far North run removes that value, even with a declassified first class compartment/bouncy castle and free newspapers on some services. The trains are noisy and even with the refurbishment are getting a bit tatty. There are no trains between 10:00 and 16:00 approx. Compare this to a 30 - 50 mpg car drive (depends on if the DPF filter needs a re-gen though!) sat outside ready to go at any time it's simply not got enough value to entice me to spend my cash with them. A 1% increase is fine, that doesn't eat into the value margin but anything over 5% risks eroding it. First fundamental law of business. Do. Not. Erode. Value! else customer walks (or rather drives/takes the bus).

 

[NSEFAN]

First fundamental law of business. Do. Not. Erode. Value! else customer walks (or rather drives/takes the bus).

I get what you are saying, but that picture is not entirely correct, as there will always be some people who are "forced" to use the train because the alternatives are unnacceptable. This is another reason why fares increases annoy so many people.

What really annoys me is how a fair number of people don't understand the situation properly, and just assume the money is going into the TOC's pockets. While this is partly true, they are certainly not the only beneficiary from the increases. A lot of waste in the industry (particularly in bureaucracy) quietly gets ignored whilst the Daily Stupid bleats about it, and Outraged From Orpington starts calling for renationalisation, as if it would make any difference.

 

[radamfi]

Why do people need to do this? Do you live in London? Driving to a tube station is fine in theory, the only difficult bit is the parking. So not really a practical idea.

Did you not see my other suggestions for those outside London? Car share, coaches, local buses?

Did you also not see me mention driving to where you can get a bus to the Tube station, which would get around the parking problem.

Did you not see me point out that these alternatives would be inconvenient?

It IS possible to run a reasonable train service with lower fares as can be seen in mainland Europe. And many of these countries are even less in debt than the UK so low rail fares haven't bankrupted them.

For the price of a middle distance season ticket in GB, you can get UNLIMITED travel for some rich Western European countries.

 

[Wath Yard]

Yes, I saw them and they were all as ill thought out as the one I highlighted.

Everybody must do such and such or emigrate. OK, will do.