Join the campaign for cheaper rail fares

[yorksrob]

I also think, and accept some may disagree, that commuting for work is more important (and should be protected to a degree) than leisure travel, which is optional - just like buying many VATable goods. Yes, too many commuters means the need for loads of rolling stock that sits idle for much of the day, but as the population grows and everyone wants to work in cities (and thus employers set up there) this is a problem that won't go away.

I think there's an element of truth to that logic - and it is the basis of current fares regulation. I suspect though that in the Network SouthEast area there isn't much scope to increase leisure time fares without losing revenue through loss of custom. Particularly in areas such as Kent where the commuter belt co-exists with some quite high levels of deprivation.

 

[Greenback]

The sad thing is that there is a sense that rail fares are too high, and that the forthcoming increases will not help the industry at all in the medium or long term, but the hyperbole and badly researched 'facts' used in the OP completely subverts and rational campaign against future large fare increases.

What is needed is a balanced and reasoned argument in favour of a structure that delivers lower internal costs for the whole fragmented industry which would allow lower fare rises in years to come.

 

[jon0844]

In an ideal world, a lot of the wastage in the railway (the stuff Old Timer does such a good job of highlighting, with actual experience and knowledge) would be reduced.

We would get better value for money for projects, like station rebuilds and refurbishments (so it won't cost millions to put in lifts or extend a platform) so more improvements could be made.

We wouldn't seek to renationalise, but if a Government was serious about encouraging people out of their cars, then the railway might get more of a subsidy - because fares are too high here (IMO) and just because some operators do ridiculously cheap deals with advance fares, like the airlines, it isn't the solution when public transport is more of a necessity than flying (generally).

With the need to invest more to copy with peak travel, that will mean more scope to running and encouraging more off-peak travel. Instead of just going with, often confusing, advance tickets and deals (with different restrictions on different TOCs) we should be investing in smart ticketing solutions. Thus, you can simplify everything - and those who travel the most will automatically get savings, or loyalty discounts, over time. The 'more you travel, the more you save' logic would probably get more people on the trains, just as such schemes work for any other industry.

There's so much that can, and should be done, but I fear that what is going to happen is that fares just go up by a percentage every month and not a lot else. Obviously we'll get ongoing maintenance and after a certain time, when there's no longer any choice, some new rolling stock, but (besides HS2) there doesn't seem to be much thought about the future needs.

I'm still a great supporter of working from home, but don't believe that enough people will ever do that to make a big impact.

 

[Geezertronic]

I'm still a great supporter of working from home, but don't believe that enough people will ever do that to make a big impact.

Working from home doesn't work 5 days a week, not in my business anyway (IT Consultancy). There will always be the need for travel regardless of technological advances - there is a lot to be said for a face to face meeting compared to a tele conference

 

[Greenback]

if a Government was serious about encouraging people out of their cars, then the railway might get more of a subsidy - because fares are too high here (IMO) and just because some operators do ridiculously cheap deals with advance fares, like the airlines, it isn't the solution when public transport is more of a necessity than flying (generally).

Ah, the eternal question springs to mind! What is the railway system actually for? Should it be seen as a social necessity for the economic well being and growth of the country? Or should it be like any other commodity, and subject only to the strict rules of the market? In other words, let those who use it pay for it, and if it isn;t profitable, axe it!

Once we can answer that question with a large consensus of agreement, we will be able to implement a fares policy accordingly. At present, we have a system that tries to do both, which is correspondingly complex and unwieldy, which ultimately adds its own costs into the mix.

 

[jon0844]

Working from home doesn't work 5 days a week, not in my business anyway (IT Consultancy). There will always be the need for travel regardless of technological advances - there is a lot to be said for a face to face meeting compared to a tele conference

I brought this up with TfL as I could work from home 2-3 days a week easily, but there's no form of flexible season ticket that allows you do travel around half the time. It would mean VERY expensive daily tickets (around £22 a day for an anytime travelcard from Hatfield) or trying to do 2 days at the end of one week and 2/3 days at the start of the next (and get a weekly). Oh, and you lose the benefits of an annual ticket then.

But, there didn't seem to be much interest in this, or other smart ticketing solutions, which is probably why there's no incentive to merely travel to work less - as against not at all. If loads of people cut their journeys to work by just 1 or 2 days a week (average), it would be quite significant.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Once we can answer that question with a large consensus of agreement, we will be able to implement a fares policy accordingly. At present, we have a system that tries to do both, which is correspondingly complex and unwieldy, which ultimately adds its own costs into the mix.

It tries to do both, but it amazes me how much money is already given to the railway by the tax payer - and yet even with my season ticket I am effectively paying (if calculated for weekdays only) £13.40 a day. Okay, that's a travelcard - but I live 25 miles or so out of London and spend just 35 minutes on the train. If the tax payer pays half of the cost, then I cost the railway another £13.40 - and my ticket should be £26.80!

Now, given the number of commuters, which is always growing - I'd assume that more passengers, especially those standing, can't really cost that much. I take up one seat and get on a train with people who have come from further out and may have spent some £20+ a day (God help those who buy a daily ticket).

Somehow it makes me think the railway is incredibly inefficient somewhere along the line (sic). Sure, if I go and get value for money by spending the ENTIRE day going all over Z1-6 then I'm more of a problem, but most people aren't - and giving me my free travel at weekends isn't much grief. I don't always go into London on weekends, nor can I claim a refund for my days on leave or sick.

Imagine if I started to work from home once or twice a week. I'd still pay the exact same!

 

[TrainBrain185]

Train Fares in dear old Blighty??? Two words sum the whole thing up.
"RIP OFF". Oh, wait, I shall exclude the Shareholders and Directors Bonuses in that. Whilst our Railways gently fade away.......

 

[Old Timer]

Train Fares in dear old Blighty??? Two words sum the whole thing up.
"RIP OFF". Oh, wait, I shall exclude the Shareholders and Directors Bonuses in that. Whilst our Railways gently fade away.......

Here we go again :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

On the basis of a 3% profit margin ? (Source : DfT) I rather think not. Most construction companies are up in double figures, and Tesco have just announced a double figure INCREASE in first quarter trading figures. Might be worth ranting at them, bearing in mind you probably spend more there than you do on the Railway.

I can get 2&1/2 % in a Post Office savings account and any Company can get more by simply investing. This probably explains why the TOCs are pretty much all Bus Companies, who are used to living on practically no return.

 

[Flamingo]

OldTimer, you simply never learn. Don't introduce facts and rational argument into the threads about how nasty the TOC's are, it only confuses those who are only here to rant and repeat Daily Mail headlines!

Also, it's a waste, as they simply ignore what they can't understand.

 

[TrainBrain185]

Here we go again :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

On the basis of a 3% profit margin ? (Source : DfT) I rather think not. Most construction companies are up in double figures, and Tesco have just announced a double figure INCREASE in first quarter trading figures. Might be worth ranting at them, bearing in mind you probably spend more there than you do on the Railway.

I can get 2&1/2 % in a Post Office savings account and any Company can get more by simply investing. This probably explains why the TOCs are pretty much all Bus Companies, who are used to living on practically no return.

http://www.dailyfinance.co.uk/2010/12/08/stagecoach-interim-profits-leap-44/
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

OldTimer, you simply never learn. Don't introduce facts and rational argument into the threads about how nasty the TOC's are, it only confuses those who are only here to rant and repeat Daily Mail headlines!

Also, it's a waste, as they simply ignore what they can't understand.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/2915533/Train-operator-FirstGroup-joins-profits-express.html

 

[Flamingo]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/2915533/Train-operator-FirstGroup-joins-profits-express.html

That article is from 2005. That's six years ago. Before the world economy imploded.

Got anything recent to share with us?

(BTW, your post kinda proves my point - poorly researched half-facts backing up a conclusion reached before any evidence is looked for)

 

[TrainBrain185]

OldTimer, you simply never learn. Don't introduce facts and rational argument into the threads about how nasty the TOC's are, it only confuses those who are only here to rant and repeat Daily Mail headlines!

Also, it's a waste, as they simply ignore what they can't understand.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-11690074 (2010 figures)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That article is from 2005. That's six years ago. Before the world economy imploded.

Got anything recent to share with us?

(BTW, your post kinda proves my point - poorly researched half-facts backing up a conclusion reached before any evidence is looked for)

Yes, hands up, made an error. 2010 figures via BBC provided.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That article is from 2005. That's six years ago. Before the world economy imploded.

Got anything recent to share with us?

(BTW, your post kinda proves my point - poorly researched half-facts backing up a conclusion reached before any evidence is looked for)

As mentioned, an admitted error on my part.

So may I put you on the spot by asking you if you think the UK Rail operators are giving passengers value for money with their rail fares despite making very good profits?

 

[Old Timer]

http://www.dailyfinance.co.uk/2010/12/08/stagecoach-interim-profits-leap-44/
l

The profits increase covers the whole business. Your point being that the DfT figure is wrong then ?

 

[me123]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-11690074 (2010 figures)

Interesting to note that, and this is quoted from the article: "The rail division, which runs Great Western, ScotRail, Capital Connect, and TransPennine Express, grew passenger revenues by 4.4%. Rail operating profits were in line with the previous year at £48.4m."

 

[jon0844]

So they had more passengers, but didn't make more money.. and even if the Group as a whole increased profits by 10, 20 or 30%, it still doesn't mean that a TOC suddenly makes 10, 20 or 30% of every £1. It would be 10, 20 or 30% of 3%, which is pretty small. Assuming everything else increases, it may still remain 3%.

In any case, the money being 'wasted' isn't on the train operators - any more than all of our national debt is because it all went to greedy bankers. But we like to have easy targets. Only the likes of Old Timer know how it's being squandered within Network Rail, or has any clue as to why/how it's happening.

We can speculate and simply blame contractors and lazy rail workers, then politicians, then our next door neighbour that we don't like much, but that's about all we can do!

 

[starrymarkb]

There was a breakdown of the fares on BBC News a while agao

• 48p in every £1 goes to Network Rail, which charges operators to access tracks and other infrastructure costs
• 17p on staff
• 17p on miscellaneous costs including train maintenance, administration, contractors
• 11p on leasing trains
• 4p on fuel/energy
• 3p to train company profit

3% is quite a low margin, most shops have a margin of 20% or more on each item!

 

[Flamingo]

As mentioned, an admitted error on my part.

So may I put you on the spot by asking you if you think the UK Rail operators are giving passengers value for money with their rail fares despite making very good profits?

You haven't shown that they are making very good profits yet.

If as said by other posters they are making 3% profit on every pound spent, then I would say that they do give good value for money.

 

[Mojo]

If as said by other posters they are making 3% profit on every pound spent, then I would say that they do give good value for money.

I agree, it's not profit; it's the nature of the industry and a problem that it must overcome in order to modernise and prepare itself for the future. It amazes me that despite "innovations" such as driver only/one person operation, automatic ticket gates, unstaffed stations, online ticket retailers, ticket vending machines, pay trains, IECCs and other power signal boxes, automatic level crossings and an array of other things that the railways cost more now than they used to!

 

[Flamingo]

Well, all the above listed cost money to set up, implement and run. The question is how much more would it cost to run at the current level of service and train numbers without all of them

 

[TrainBrain185]

The profits increase covers the whole business. Your point being that the DfT figure is wrong then ?

No OT. I trust what you say is correct. I am by no means up on the finer points of facts and figures of Company Balance Sheets, profits and loss figures and what exactly goes where. I do not doubt what you say, but I am just like the average person who sometimes reads up on how the media portrays profits made each year.
Having travelled on a lot of European and USA Rail services, it just leaves a bitter taste in my mouth when I pay far more per mile or km in my home country. I would not try to argue the point UK fares are high if I had never sampled rail systems abroad.
I really do think we get a raw deal on Railways UK. Nothing will change my views on that.

 

[Old Timer]

No OT. I trust what you say is correct. I am by no means up on the finer points of facts and figures of Company Balance Sheets, profits and loss figures and what exactly goes where. I do not doubt what you say, but I am just like the average person who sometimes reads up on how the media portrays profits made each year.
Having travelled on a lot of European and USA Rail services, it just leaves a bitter taste in my mouth when I pay far more per mile or km in my home country. I would not try to argue the point UK fares are high if I had never sampled rail systems abroad.
I really do think we get a raw deal on Railways UK. Nothing will change my views on that.

In fairness, for some reason in the UK we pay more for much of our goods than other Countries, I simply fail to see how we can be on of the top 5 economies and yet people in say Spain have far more disposable income than we do.

Where I am now, people eat out much more than the UK, and seem to have more money, everything is cheaper, and the way of life is simpler and slower and much less stressful, yet everything gets done and people are relatively happy with their lot. The complete opposite of the UK.