Regulated Fares

[RJ]

How did we end up with both regulated and unregulated ?

Either have all or nothing. Partly explains the dog's dinner of our current fares structure.

All or nothing?

It's this kind of thinking that encourages organisations to capitalise on people's ignorance. You cannot have absolute simplicity in ticketing and hope to have an equilibrium between supply and demand at the same time. It's in nobody's best interest to have such a simplistic structure.

 

[Zoe]

You cannot have absolute simplicity in ticketing and hope to have an equilibrium between supply and demand at the same time. It's in nobody's best interest to have such a simplistic structure.

Well if you wanted a fully capitalist model you could easily just have it fully unregulated. People that want to turn up and go would just pay the full anytime fare and anyone that wanted a cheaper ticket would book in advance. You are down to just two types of ticket.

 

[RJ]

Well if you wanted a fully capitalist model you could easily just have it fully unregulated. People that want to turn up and go would just pay the full anytime fare and anyone that wanted a cheaper ticket would book in advance. You are down to just two types of ticket.

Excellent! You've achieved simplicity but would hardly have any customers. A suggestion worthy of any pricing managers time.

 

[Zoe]

Excellent! You've achieved simplicity but would hardly have any customers. A suggestion worthy of any pricing managers time.

Off Peak fares are now so expensive on some routes that people can't afford them but the trains are still full as people book in advance. If they completley scrapped off peak fares then I doubt much would change as cheap advance fares would still be available. It would also allow the train companies to make even more money out of the people that can't book in advance. This is not my personal opinion on how things should be but with all we keep hearing about reducing the cost to the taxpayer this could be an option.

 

[island]

Maybe they need SuperDuper Off-Peak Returns, which can be used on a walk-up basis, but only on trains timed to depart on Tuesday between 1128 and 1134 or to arrive in London Terminals at or after 2155 on Friday. :roll:

 

[radamfi]

What fares exist for a typical long distance ICE journey in Germany?

You basically have full fare (with or without Bahncard) and their equivalent of Advance fare. That's it as far as I can tell. No peak restrictions.

 

[RJ]

Maybe they need SuperDuper Off-Peak Returns, which can be used on a walk-up basis, but only on trains timed to depart on Tuesday between 1128 and 1134 or to arrive in London Terminals at or after 2155 on Friday. :roll:

Anyone recall the Virgin Super Off Peak between London and Birmingham? Can't remember the exact restriction but it was something like it was usable between 11:30 and 13:10 and after 20:10. £19 for the SSS!


--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Off Peak fares are now so expensive on some routes that people can't afford them but the trains are still full as people book in advance. If they completley scrapped off peak fares then I doubt much would change as cheap advance fares would still be available. It would also allow the train companies to make even more money out of the people that can't book in advance. This is not my personal opinion on how things should be but with all we keep hearing about reducing the cost to the taxpayer this could be an option.

Do you mind me asking where you get this information about trains with quota based Advance fares available being full and the patronage being attributed to Advance fares?

 

[Zoe]

Do you mind me asking where you get this information about trains with quota based Advance fares available being full and the patronage being attributed to Advance fares?

Well in 2006 FGW scrapped the Super Saver and the cost of walk-on travel has become more expensive but at the same time a range of rock bottom advance fares were introduced. I find it no coincidence that trains seem much busier now than they were before these advance fares were introduced. I have also reports elsewhere of train managers saying that the majority of people use advance fares.

 

[yorkie]

Well in 2006 FGW scrapped the Super Saver and the cost of walk-on travel has become more expensive but at the same time a range of rock bottom advance fares were introduced. I find it no coincidence that trains seem much busier now than they were before these advance fares were introduced. I have also reports elsewhere of train managers saying that the majority of people use advance fares.

It would depend on the journey, for most people FGW provide the local or medium distance service and they would not be made on Advance fares. For long distance travel then I agree, most people can't afford the ludicrous walk-on fares for long distances.

That trains are getting busier of no surprise. ATOC don't want people to know this, and don't want to admit it, but more people are travelling, and there are many 'push factors' away from road travel (such as the high cost of fuel) that are forcing some people onto trains. However the number of people that are forced off trains is far greater than this, and the majority of people who could go by train do not do so, due to the extortionate cost of rail travel and the fact that (rightly or wrongly) people consider only the marginal costs of any journey by car. If the rail fare is £20 and petrol is £18, people will go by car and will not consider the additional costs.

The success of rail is not due to the ludicrous price structure, and lack of flexibility, but due to the increased demand for travel generally.

 

[Zoe]

It would depend on the journey, for most people FGW provide the local or medium distance service and they would not be made on Advance fares. For long distance travel then I agree, most people can't afford the ludicrous walk-on fares for long distances.

I wouldn't call Swindon to London long distance but the walk-on fare is one of the most expensive in the country for distance and cheaper advance fares are available. Do you really think rail travel would have increased so much in recent years had it not been for the introduction of rock bottom advance fares?

 

[yorkie]

I wouldn't call Swindon to London long distance but the walk-on fare is one of the most expensive in the country for distance and cheaper advance fares are available. Do you really think rail travel would have increased so much in recent years had it not been for the introduction of rock bottom advance fares?

* Only a small number of fares are available at rock bottom prices.
* I would be very surprised if Swindon to London is an example of a flow where "the majority of people use advance fares."
* The reasons for increased travel in recent years are very complex, and I do not believe that rock bottom AP fares are the only reason for this increase, although I can't deny they must account for some.
* On some routes there is evidence of a decline in passengers (due to the high fares) while on others there are huge increases (due to external pressures, push factors from other modes) and of course everything in between, the increase is not uniform. The evidence I have seen (which will, admittedly be rather limited) is that long distance travel is down, and first class travel is down. But shorter distance travel is up.

 

[radamfi]

I'm sure I remember hearing on the Channel 4 programme last night that about 70% of train travel involves travel to/from London. If that's the case then the boom in rail travel isn't that impressive at all as train travel to/from London is largely captive as the car is not very competitive on such journeys. Probably similar things could be said about trips to other major city centres, which may make up a large proportion of the other 30%.

What would be interesting is passenger statistics on routes where car is a genuine competitor (for example, middle distance trips not to city centres) and by passengers who could have used the car for their journey but actively chose to use the train. Again, if the growth in train travel is by students or people without cars then that isn't very surprising.

 

[island]

I saw the C4 programme but it was disappointing. It fell into the usual traps of comparing a SOR from London to Manchester with bargain-basement months-in-advance airfare from London to New York and complaining about being charged a full open fare for forgetting a railcard, and then did what was almost comedy by speaking to the NRE voice recognition system as though speaking to a normal human being and being surprised when it gave tickets to Kyle of Lochalsh instead of Manchester Victoria.

The points on overcrowding were justified, though.

 

[Deerfold]

...and then did what was almost comedy by speaking to the NRE voice recognition system as though speaking to a normal human being and being surprised when it gave tickets to Kyle of Lochalsh instead of Manchester Victoria.

Isn't that what you're supposed to be able to do with it? How are you supposed to speak to it? I try and be sure I'm speaking clearly but find it commonly gets what I'm saying wrong. And this on a revenue sharing line with no need for a human operator - not much incentive for them to improve it to get shorter call times is there? And don't get me started on the cost to call from a typical mobile (which is when I'm less likely to have access to other tools).

 

[island]

You're supposed to say just the station name. In response to the prompt "Did you say 'Rochdale'?" (or wherever), instead of saying "No" and waiting for a prompt to say "Manchester Victoria", he said "No, no, no, no, I said I wanted to go from Manchester to London".

 

[Deerfold]

You're supposed to say just the station name. In response to the prompt "Did you say 'Rochdale'?" (or wherever), instead of saying "No" and waiting for a prompt to say "Manchester Victoria", he said "No, no, no, no, I said I wanted to go from Manchester to London".

Ah, I've not seen it.

Though you can understand people getting frustrated with it like that.