Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
The simple fix to this problem is to abolish return tickets and price singles at the appropriate level. Return tickets give so much ticketing trouble and drive people from travelling by rail.
The simple fix to this problem is to abolish return tickets and price singles at the appropriate level. Return tickets give so much ticketing trouble and drive people from travelling by rail.
Nonsense. They only give trouble when the restrictions are poorly published or retail tools such as online apps implement their systems so poorly that passengers end up buying the wrong product. Fix that and you fix the rest.
I’m all for singles being 50% of a return, but I’m very much against even more decimation of passenger rights by forcing the purchase of single tickets.
Nonsense. They only give trouble when the restrictions are poorly published or retail tools such as online apps implement their systems so poorly that passengers end up buying the wrong product. Fix that and you fix the rest.
I’m all for singles being 50% of a return, but I’m very much against even more decimation of passenger rights by forcing the purchase of single tickets.
How are passenger rights destroyed when returns don't exist? If all flexible singles are 50% of a return, there is no need for flexible returns. Also, as the restrictions of a single must be simpler than the restrictions of a return, it also reduces the chance of buying the wrong product while keeping the full range of restrictions available.
I'm happy for single leg pricing as long as passengers don't end up paying more money or rights aren't eroded. Somehow, as this is the rail industry we're talking about, I doubt this will happen.
How are passenger rights destroyed when returns don't exist? If all flexible singles are 50% of a return, there is no need for flexible returns. Also, as the restrictions of a single must be simpler than the restrictions of a return, it also reduces the chance of buying the wrong product while keeping the full range of restrictions available.
But why make it more difficult for the consumer, all that would happen is that they will ask for a return and get given two singles? People will not ask for a single for today and a single for the day they come back, especially if its the same day.
How are passenger rights destroyed when returns don't exist? If all flexible singles are 50% of a return, there is no need for flexible returns. Also, as the restrictions of a single must be simpler than the restrictions of a return, it also reduces the chance of buying the wrong product while keeping the full range of restrictions available.
Is there really a realistic chance that, off peak, a single from Gatwick to St Pancras could be £5.20 and a single from Derby to Sheffield could be £6.35?
I can't imagine GTR and EMR respectively allowing that; their opinion will surely be that the returns are effectively 'discounted' and cannot simply be halved.
The single fares for these journeys cost much more than the above figures and , for singles, the railway is generally dealing with non-discretionary travel, which attracts a premium compared to a day return.
If someone can force the TOCs to halve all fares and not put any single fare above the cost of half the return, I would be all for it, but I am not naïve enough to think there is any realistic possibly of this occuring.
50% of the return fare wouldnt work. It would have to be set at 60-70%, otherwise there would be a massive drop in revenue.
So basically this thread is asking for yet another increase in rail fares for many people
How are passenger rights destroyed when returns don't exist? If all flexible singles are 50% of a return, there is no need for flexible returns. Also, as the restrictions of a single must be simpler than the restrictions of a return, it also reduces the chance of buying the wrong product while keeping the full range of restrictions available.
This has been covered in detail in other threads (I will try and remember to edit in a link when I’m not on my phone).
But in summary
A) overnight break of journey on the return portion. A trip London to Edinburgh and then stopping off for a day and night in York on the way back adds over 50% to the cost over a return ticket which would automatically be valid.
B) delay repay for the most severe disruption, currently a return ticket gets a 100% compensation value for a 2hr delay With single tickets this is limited to 100% of the single ticket. Where the railway lets you down the most, your compensation is halved.
C) Refund rights. If your timetable for your outbound changes with a return you can refund it with no fee. With two singles you’d only be able to refund the outbound single without fee, the ticket used for you to get home would not be eligible and you would have to pay £10.
D) Refund admin fees : where you have no entitlement to a fee free refund you will have to pay £20 to refund 2 singles as opposed to 1 return.
There are others.
I cannot even begin to accept the idea that it isn’t removing passenger rights. The true value of the ticket is NOT just the price written on it and the entitlement to travel A to B (and where applicable back to A)
Would there? Do that many people make genuine single journeys?
Or could it mean that some journeys that are presently priced off the railway, like 3-point ones or return journeys with a gap of over a month, are attracted to it?
People made these exact arguments when Apex Returns became Advance Singles (via Virgin Value Singles). It was a fallacy then, as Advance Singles have become so successful that they have become the first choice for many. It could be one now.
I wonder how the LNER trial of this exact thing is going?
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
A) overnight break of journey on the return portion. A trip London to Edinburgh and then stopping off for a day and night in York on the way back adds over 50% to the cost over a return ticket which would automatically be valid.
Of course if everything is singles you just split them accordingly. Sometimes that's even cheaper.
Same day break of journey is important, and needs to be possible on a whim as there are many reasons to want to do it - stop for food, meet someone you didn't expect to be there etc.
Overnight break of journey is not something people do unplanned outside of disruption. And if you know you're going to do it, you can ticket accordingly.
Another option is that you make longer-distance Singles valid for two days. This would result in very little misuse (it's short distance ones people have a habit of using as "season tickets") while allowing for one unplanned overnight break of journey.
I would venture the view that the number of people who made multiple overnight breaks of journey on an unplanned basis on a through ticket last year was probably somewhere in the single figures, if not zero, and if any did then they were almost certainly enthusiasts treating a long distance ticket as a sort-of-Rover, which is not something the railway really needs to consider in its decision as it is a very small and very awkward market and that market has Rovers available to it for that sort of use-case. People simply don't do that, because the risk of finding no accommodation is too great for most. Overnight breaks of journey are pre-planned, unless for something like a medical emergency in which case whether you lose your ticket value or not is really not at the forefront of your mind, and Customer Services can of course give discretionary refunds.
I have only ever done it once, which was in severe disruption (of the kind that is expected tomorrow), and the railway had long before I actually got stuck declared that tickets were valid for the next day, but I decided to have a go at getting part-way anyway and book a hotel if I got stuck (which I did). And that was one break, not two!
B) delay repay for the most severe disruption, currently a return ticket gets a 100% compensation value for a 2hr delay With single tickets this is limited to 100% of the single ticket. Where the railway lets you down the most, your compensation is halved.
I find that bizarre anyway. If they want to offer 200% they should offer that, but you shouldn't get arbitrary extra benefits just because of ticket type. Therefore, I would agree that that should be removed whether single fare pricing was introduced or not.
C) Refund rights. If your timetable for your outbound changes with a return you can refund it with no fee. With two singles you’d only be able to refund the outbound single without fee, the ticket used for you to get home would not be eligible and you would have to pay £10.
Incorrect. If you book multiple Advance Singles together for one journey, you can refund both. There is no reason to expect any other type of Single to be any different. Crikey, not even Ryanair does that.
Admin fees need abolished anyway. There is almost no cost at all of refunding an e-ticket or uncollected ToD to the purchasing credit/debit card, and even less of one for changing an Advance fare. They are an anachronism and limit flexibility unnecessarily. But again this is not a given; Trainsplit only charge one admin fee for refunding a whole return journey, regardless of how many (walk-up) fares make it up.
This has been covered in detail in other threads (I will try and remember to edit in a link when I’m not on my phone).
But in summary
A) overnight break of journey on the return portion. A trip London to Edinburgh and then stopping off for a day and night in York on the way back adds over 50% to the cost over a return ticket which would automatically be valid.
With singles, you just split your tickets appropriately, which we already need to do it anyway if the break of journey is on the outward portion (e.g. I live in Bournemouth. I want to go to Guildford on Saturday, then to Milton Keynes for a race on Sunday - I need to book accommodation as it's not possible to reach MK in time from home on a Sunday morning, and return home immediately afterwards). I must split ticket somewhere as outward portion is only valid for one day. So this is an imbalance of rights which should be removed.
B) delay repay for the most severe disruption, currently a return ticket gets a 100% compensation value for a 2hr delay With single tickets this is limited to 100% of the single ticket. Where the railway lets you down the most, your compensation is halved.
I don't think the current system is fair as well. I don't see how a long distance passenger delayed by 15 minutes should get dozens of £ in compensation, and I don't think it's fair for a one-stop local passenger in a rural area suffering an hour of delay, who doesn't have a bus alternative, get back only £2 because the ticket is just £2. We should move to a fixed compensation, e.g. a certain fixed amount over 15 minutes of delay, irrelevant to ticket price (such that freedom passes holder can also get compensation if the train is delayed).
C) Refund rights. If your timetable for your outbound changes with a return you can refund it with no fee. With two singles you’d only be able to refund the outbound single without fee, the ticket used for you to get home would not be eligible and you would have to pay £10.
D) Refund admin fees : where you have no entitlement to a fee free refund you will have to pay £20 to refund 2 singles as opposed to 1 return.
There are others.
I cannot even begin to accept the idea that it isn’t removing passenger rights. The true value of the ticket is NOT just the price written on it and the entitlement to travel A to B (and where applicable back to A)
Would there? Do that many people make genuine single journeys?
Or could it mean that some journeys that are presently priced off the railway, like 3-point ones or return journeys with a gap of over a month, are attracted to it?
I have already been priced off the railway for some 3-point journeys if there aren't any advances / I can't fix my time for advances for certain weekend journeys, due to the complexity of the fare system and the fact that an anytime single is nearly the same as an off-peak return, and there isn't an off-peak single available.
Using Bournemouth - Guildford - Tring as an example, cheap shared accommodation can only be found between Guildford - Tring en route in London. However, as an off-peak return cannot have overnight break of journey outward, I'm forced to break my ticket between Guildford - Tring, for such journey there is no advance available and a weekender return, close to 2 anytime singles, is much more than a day return. Alternatively I can buy an advance all the way back from Clapham Junction - Bournemouth in combination with an anytime single from Guildford - Clapham Junction. As a result the total cost is nearly the same as doing two day trips using advance on the first day, and semi-flex to Clapham Junction + day return to Tring on the second day, that I can't save on train ticket fare to justify a night out. As a result I decided not to sign up the race as I am not willing to travel 4 hours each way for a race, I hope to combine a trip to Guildford to save transport cost, but I can't save transport cost by doing that.
People made these exact arguments when Apex Returns became Advance Singles (via Virgin Value Singles). It was a fallacy then, as Advance Singles have become so successful that they have become the first choice for many. It could be one now.
I wonder how the LNER trial of this exact thing is going?
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Of course if everything is singles you just split them accordingly. Sometimes that's even cheaper.
As mentioned, splitting the journey where accommodation can be found is much more expensive than a through ticket for some cases (such as Guildford - Tring), and the fact that advance singles are not available for certain medium-distance journeys (such as Guildford - London) means I'm forced to pay much more compared to a through advance ticket if I want to break my journey. Compare the example of breaking Bournemouth - London at Southampton and Woking. The former can be done by 2 advances, the latter can't, despite the split part similar in length. People travelling the latter are forced to buy an anytime single, or a through off-peak return for the whole of the journey without the ability to take advantage of any advance tickets on the quieter trains.
Admin fees need abolished anyway. There is almost no cost at all of refunding an e-ticket or uncollected ToD to the purchasing credit/debit card, and even less of one for changing an Advance fare. They are an anachronism and limit flexibility unnecessarily. But again this is not a given; Trainsplit only charge one admin fee for refunding a whole return journey, regardless of how many (walk-up) fares make it up.
I don't agree with this. If there are no admin fees, people will just book a bunch of advances for multiple trains in a period at cheap prices and roll them over before travel, leaving the one needed intact. This is extremely bad for yield management. I think a percentage of the appropriate walk up fare (not a flat fee) should be charged for this privilege. However, I think the cost of refunding flexible e-tickets should be abolished instead.
That is one of the most bizarre statements I have ever seen, although clearly outdone by the bloke who suggested advance tickets for booked trains on the Victoria Line.
I simply do not understand how this can be the case. If you want flexibility, you have the option to pay for it, if you want the cheapest price, equally you have that option.
That is one of the most bizarre statements I have ever seen, although clearly outdone by the bloke who suggested advance tickets for booked trains on the Victoria Line.
I simply do not understand how this can be the case. If you want flexibility, you have the option to pay for it, if you want the cheapest price, equally you have that option.
I think it's a misinterpretation of a problem. Return fares that are not priced at 200% of the relevant single do cause issues, and the railway does seem to be moving towards fixing that with the LNER trial etc.
On the other hand I would not object to the abolition of returns entirely, provided that the admin fee for refund/change of walk-up singles was removed, so if you unexpectedly had to change the date of your return journey you could do this without penalty. Indeed, there are benefits of this - for instance, no need for excesses of any kind any more, just refund your ticket and purchase one relevant to the new route/class/time/whatever. There could still be a process for doing this on a partly-used ticket, though it'd have to be done at a ticket office or with a guard as they could see where it had been scanned and thus ensure the replacement was valid for what had been done so far.
Before lockdown I would be most likely to drive into London despite an excellent train service. That is simply because I would need to buy two singles as my work location and home location are served by different TOCs.
That is one of the most bizarre statements I have ever seen, although clearly outdone by the bloke who suggested advance tickets for booked trains on the Victoria Line.
I simply do not understand how this can be the case. If you want flexibility, you have the option to pay for it, if you want the cheapest price, equally you have that option.
At a single-only pricing, I only need to work out the most appropriate ticket combination for each direction, and that's simple enough. With the existence of returns which aren't priced at 2 singles, finding the most appropriate ticket combination is much more complicated for anything beyond a simple return, especially for a return ticket which allows different routing, when I don't need flexibility on one direction and need flexibility in the other direction, and that's also bad for yield management as well if I buy a flexible ticket for the return despite not needing flexibility on one of the direction.
I think it's a misinterpretation of a problem. Return fares that are not priced at 200% of the relevant single do cause issues, and the railway does seem to be moving towards fixing that with the LNER trial etc.
On the other hand I would not object to the abolition of returns entirely, provided that the admin fee for refund/change of walk-up singles was removed, so if you unexpectedly had to change the date of your return journey you could do this without penalty. Indeed, there are benefits of this - for instance, no need for excesses of any kind any more, just refund your ticket and purchase one relevant to the new route/class/time/whatever. There could still be a process for doing this on a partly-used ticket, though it'd have to be done at a ticket office or with a guard as they could see where it had been scanned and thus ensure the replacement was valid for what had been done so far.
But why should they be? Long distance advance tickets are often (for journeys I look at) cheaper for two advance singles than the off peak return. I know historically there used to be very little difference between the price of a single and the return fare, but that isn't the case any more. Locally (GWR), single tickets seem to be roughly two-thirds the price of the return fare. Which is closest to the cost of providing the service? (I'm well aware that isn't remotely how rail tickets are charged)
But why should they be? Long distance advance tickets are often (for journeys I look at) cheaper for two advance singles than the off peak return. I know historically there used to be very little difference between the price of a single and the return fare, but that isn't the case any more. Locally (GWR), single tickets seem to be roughly two-thirds the price of the return fare. Which is closest to the cost of providing the service? (I'm well aware that isn't remotely how rail tickets are charged)
I think the premise here, as with so many threads, is based on highly experienced railway users. In my experience, the "average joe" leisure traveller, who may or may not be part of a group of friends, or have various aged children, or who may consist of groups of both, doesn't split tickets, or do odd three-destination journeys between random locations with specific timings, or split their journey anywhere unless they mention their plans to a helpful booking office clerk who advises they can do it on one ticket. They simply walk up, and want n number of "day returns", or "I want to travel from a to b on date d about time y". Even the concept of advance tickets costing different amounts both ways can be the cause of confusion for people dragging themselves out of their cars for the first time. A return ticket is a pretty common mindset, and why complicate things at a time you're trying to encourage usage?
I think the main issue isn't that return fares are too expensive, or too complex, or cause any (unspecified by the OP) "trouble". The biggest complaint that I hear from irregular rail users is that a single is regularly priced at 90 or 95% of the return. They understand it isn't going to be 50%, because you "get something back" for giving the 'loyalty' of promising you'll return with that company (the travel equivalent of a free coffee). Quite often, this leads to the thought that the return fare is priced correctly, but the single is too high. Compare with the reactions for a peak versus off-peak fare!
I think the premise here, as with so many threads, is based on highly experienced railway users. In my experience, the "average joe" leisure traveller, who may or may not be part of a group of friends, or have various aged children, or who may consist of groups of both, doesn't split tickets, or do odd three-destination journeys between random locations with specific timings, or split their journey anywhere unless they mention their plans to a helpful booking office clerk who advises they can do it on one ticket. They simply walk up, and want n number of "day returns", or "I want to travel from a to b on date d about time y". Even the concept of advance tickets costing different amounts both ways can be the cause of confusion for people dragging themselves out of their cars for the first time. A return ticket is a pretty common mindset, and why complicate things at a time you're trying to encourage usage?
Actually, the vast majority of leisure travellers now book their journey on their phone or a planner based website or TVM, and having singles at half of the return vastly simplifies doing that.
And if they do rock up to the booking office asking for a day return, you just sell them two day singles in the same transaction, as that's the exact same thing. They might not even notice that the two parts say "single" on them.
It's only different if you're buying a medium-long distance walk-up ticket and are unsure of your return date, which is a very niche requirement indeed. The vast, vast majority of passengers know the day of their journey, even if they do not yet know the time.
Actually, the vast majority of leisure travellers now book their journey on their phone or a planner based website or TVM, and having singles at half of the return vastly simplifies doing that.
Do they? Granted my experience of the south-east corner travelling into London or other destinations in the "south-east" areas may be different from those where mainline travel is normal, but the queues at local ticket offices (counter or machines) and overheard conversations suggest that the concept of at-station, time-of-departure purchase is very much alive and kicking.
Do they? Granted my experience of the south-east corner travelling into London or other destinations in the "south-east" areas may be different from those where mainline travel is normal, but the queues at local ticket offices (counter or machines) and overheard conversations suggest that the concept of at-station, time-of-departure purchase is very much alive and kicking.
As I said, if you do go to the desk and ask for a day return to X and are given two day singles, that's the same thing if singles are half the price of returns. There might be a "but that's not a return" - "we don't do returns any more" - "oh", type conversation at worst.
Or "off peak return to X please" - "What day are you coming back?" - "Sorry, I don't know yet" - "OK, well we don't do returns any more, so you'll need to buy that on the way back" - "Oh, OK then, just a single".
Let me explain how complicated the ticketing is for my typical journey on a Sunday (when all train calls at Woking) from my home Bournemouth, going to Guildford first, then go to somewhere within the London zones, and return direct home. This can't be done on a one return ticket due to the double back between Woking - Guildford.
So
I need to calculate whether I should split my journeys as Bournemouth - Guildford + Woking - London zones, or Bournemouth - London zones + Woking - Guildford, taking any additional splits into account (which I have a spreadsheet already telling me where I should split my flexible tickets along the SW Main Line - on a Sunday this always mean Southampton Airport and Basingstoke) if I decide to go fully flexible. This is still easy enough for me to work out.
If I am inflexible, I will also look at advances, which are always priced as singles and break of journey is not permitted. Here is where the complication begin. Should I buy Bournemouth - Guildford advance single, Guildford - somewhere in London single, and a London Zones - Bournemouth advance? Should I buy the advance from Woking - Bournemouth in combination of Guildford - London return? Should I buy the advance to/from Basingstoke only and go flexible afterwards? What if Trainsplit produces a single and an advance for a single journey search? Should I buy the advance to a different stop if I intend to use a return afterwards?
If return tickets are abolished, I can take my Bournemouth - Woking, Woking - Guildford, Guildford - London, London - Bournemouth legs in isolation when checking the fare, and combine them to see if I can take advantage of any break of journeys to combine my tickets (which mean Bournemouth - Guildford, Guildford - London or Bournemouth - London).
As I said, if you do go to the desk and ask for a day return to X and are given two day singles, that's the same thing if singles are half the price of returns. There might be a "but that's not a return" - "we don't do returns any more" - "oh", type conversation at worst.
Incorrect. If you book multiple Advance Singles together for one journey, you can refund both. There is no reason to expect any other type of Single to be any different. Crikey, not even Ryanair does that.
Incorrect. This is frequently denied. Now, I’m not suggesting which is following the rules and isn’t. It may be that the rules state that you cannot refund both and some retailers use their discretion. It may be that the rules state you should refund both but some retailers are denying passengers that right unlawfully. Either is entirely possible but the fact remains that you absolutely cannot guarantee th at you’ll be able to refund the ticket for your return journey if your outward is disrupted and you decide not to travel.
And what if you don’t book them together? What if you book the outbound to secure a seat but you don’t know if you’re staying 1 or 2 nights so take advantage of being able to book separately. Then what? With a return you don’t have to worry, with 2 singles you run in to ALL the problems I stayed regardless of whether people want to believe otherwise.
If return tickets are abolished, I can take my Bournemouth - Woking, Woking - Guildford, Guildford - London, London - Bournemouth legs in isolation when checking the fare, and combine them to see if I can take advantage of any break of journeys to combine my tickets (which mean Bournemouth - Guildford, Guildford - London or Bournemouth - London).
With respect, your argument is frankly ridiculous imo.
You are suggesting that abolishing return tickets will solve your problems, where as it is not the appropriate method. The way to solve your problems is to have singles at 50% of the price. Returns could stay so people had the choice.
There does seem to be an awful lot of “I don’t need returns so get rid of them” here. Most people go A to B to A, some people do fancy stuff. By having 50% singles and returns with the same restrictions as now we make everyone happy not just you and not just me.
Hardly anyone does this; anyone who wants to get good value on their tickets will simply use a split ticket provider such as Trainsplit, which sorts it all out for you.
Let me explain how complicated the ticketing is for my typical journey on a Sunday (when all train calls at Woking) from my home Bournemouth, going to Guildford first, then go to somewhere within the London zones, and return direct home. This can't be done on a one return ticket due to the double back between Woking - Guildford.
So
I need to calculate whether I should split my journeys as Bournemouth - Guildford + Woking - London zones, or Bournemouth - London zones + Woking - Guildford, taking any additional splits into account (which I have a spreadsheet already telling me where I should split my flexible tickets along the SW Main Line - on a Sunday this always mean Southampton Airport and Basingstoke) if I decide to go fully flexible. This is still easy enough for me to work out.
If I am inflexible, I will also look at advances, which are always priced as singles and break of journey is not permitted. Here is where the complication begin. Should I buy Bournemouth - Guildford advance single, Guildford - somewhere in London single, and a London Zones - Bournemouth advance? Should I buy the advance from Woking - Bournemouth in combination of Guildford - London return? Should I buy the advance to/from Basingstoke only and go flexible afterwards? What if Trainsplit produces a single and an advance for a single journey search? Should I buy the advance to a different stop if I intend to use a return afterwards?
If return tickets are abolished, I can take my Bournemouth - Woking, Woking - Guildford, Guildford - London, London - Bournemouth legs in isolation when checking the fare, and combine them to see if I can take advantage of any break of journeys to combine my tickets (which mean Bournemouth - Guildford, Guildford - London or Bournemouth - London).
....I think the main issue isn't that return fares are too expensive, or too complex, or cause any (unspecified by the OP) "trouble". The biggest complaint that I hear from irregular rail users is that a single is regularly priced at 90 or 95% of the return. They understand it isn't going to be 50%, because you "get something back" for giving the 'loyalty' of promising you'll return with that company ....
I don't think the current system is fair as well. I don't see how a long distance passenger delayed by 15 minutes should get dozens of £ in compensation, and I don't think it's fair for a one-stop local passenger in a rural area suffering an hour of delay, who doesn't have a bus alternative, get back only £2 because the ticket is just £2. We should move to a fixed compensation, e.g. a certain fixed amount over 15 minutes of delay, irrelevant to ticket price (such that freedom passes holder can also get compensation if the train is delayed).
I have already been priced off the railway for some 3-point journeys if there aren't any advances / I can't fix my time for advances for certain weekend journeys, due to the complexity of the fare system and the fact that an anytime single is nearly the same as an off-peak return, and there isn't an off-peak single available.
If return fares are abolished and the singles are not 50% of the returns, many people will be priced off the railways.
But is the fare from Gatwck to London really going to be about a fiver for immediate travel? Is it really going to be about 6 quid for a flexible fare from Derby to Sheffield? Is this actually realistic?
Would you agree with me that if the fares are not as cheap as this, the scheme should be abandoned?
As mentioned, splitting the journey where accommodation can be found is much more expensive than a through ticket for some cases (such as Guildford - Tring), and the fact that advance singles are not available for certain medium-distance journeys (such as Guildford - London) means I'm forced to pay much more compared to a through advance ticket if I want to break my journey. Compare the example of breaking Bournemouth - London at Southampton and Woking. The former can be done by 2 advances, the latter can't, despite the split part similar in length. People travelling the latter are forced to buy an anytime single, or a through off-peak return for the whole of the journey without the ability to take advantage of any advance tickets on the quieter trains.
I don't agree with this. If there are no admin fees, people will just book a bunch of advances for multiple trains in a period at cheap prices and roll them over before travel, leaving the one needed intact. This is extremely bad for yield management. I think a percentage of the appropriate walk up fare (not a flat fee) should be charged for this privilege. However, I think the cost of refunding flexible e-tickets should be abolished instead.
50% of the return fare wouldnt work. It would have to be set at 60-70%, otherwise there would be a massive drop in revenue.
So basically this thread is asking for yet another increase in rail fares for many people
Even at 70% of the return, think Gatwick to London for £7.25 or Sheffield to Derby for £8.90 would be deemed "too cheap" by the operators concerned (to give just two examples) yet would be massive increases for people who currently buy the return.
Hardly anyone does this; anyone who wants to get good value on their tickets will simply use a split ticket provider such as Trainsplit, which sorts it all out for you.
I mentioned this in another thread a while ago that ideally what should have happened in the early days of privatisation was that the flexible singles be frozen, but the returns increasing each year.
Eventually, the price of the return would have been double the price of a single, and in that situation, return fares could be abolished.
This is the only suggestion I can think of where it would be reasonable for most passengers who purchase flexible returns would not be penalised.
And it does do multi-stop journeys but not quite in the niche way in which @miklcct wants. I doubt anyone would make a booking site that quite covers that niche.
