What is the point of advance fares?

[Belperpete]

As I understand it, one of the main advantages of Advance fares for TOCs was that they could take the whole fare for that ticket, rather than having to share it like they do with the regulated fares. Because you are restricted to travelling on that particular TOC's train, it should get all the money.

Which does raise the question of what is the point of advance fares in the current regime, now that all the fare revenue goes straight to the treasury?

It could be argued that they regulate the numbers of passengers on each train, to avoid overcrowding. Except that they patently don't, because people can still get on a supposedly fully-booked train with a flexible ticket, season, etc.

Various TOCs (and East Coast in particular) seem to be pushing people towards advance tickets, and away from flexible travel. Why? To my mind, flexible travel is one of the big advantages of rail, the ability to change your travel plans on the day at whim and still know that you can get on a later train, without paying an exhorbitant penalty.

If the only point now is to have a cheaper fare, why not just make the off peak fare cheaper? That would solve all the issues around what happens when a train is cancelled or delayed, and people get on the wrong train.

 

[Haywain]

Which does raise the question of what is the point of advance fares in the current regime, now that all the fare revenue goes straight to the treasury?

Whilst most goes to the Treasury the wider franchising mechanism hasn't been formally changed, and therefore the processes that deal with revenue won't change either.

 

[signed]

In the airline business, while they push flex fares for the pure margins, the least flexible fares are the cheapest, because they are mostly guaranteed to be paid. So less risk involved.

Compared to a flex ticket that may be cancelled at any point.

Yes, you can cancel a fixed airline ticket for reimbursement of the paid taxes, but it is knowingly hidden by airlines. Because if you don't travel, they don't have to pay the taxes owed and the tax money goes to them

 

[Haywain]

Various TOCs (and East Coast in particular) seem to be pushing people towards advance tickets,

On the East Coast revenue for non TOC specific tickets is divvied up between state and open access operators so the mechanism you outlined for Advance tickets leading to revenue retention still applies.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Plenty of Advance fares are shared between several TOCs (eg AWC & Connections fares, for routes like Chester-Edinburgh).

 

[Hadders]

One of the main reasons for the TOC is they're quota controlled so they can control the number of tickets sold for each train, and the train companies can charge what they want. The flexible super off-peak/off-peak fares effectively provide a cap on the price of Advance fares but given that many TOCs want to abolish these fares (see LNER trial) expect massive increases in fares.

 

[Belperpete]

One of the main reasons for the TOC is they're quota controlled so they can control the number of tickets sold for each train, and the train companies can charge what they want. The flexible super off-peak/off-peak fares effectively provide a cap on the price of Advance fares but given that many TOCs want to abolish these fares (see LNER trial) expect massive increases in fares.

What is the benefit to the TOC of controlling the number of tickets sold? It is not the same as controlling the number of passengers on the train.

As you say, LNER seem to have used fare simplification as a tool to significantly increase fares, and dissuade flexible travel.

 

[Hadders]

What is the benefit to the TOC of controlling the number of tickets sold? It is not the same as controlling the number of passengers on the train.

As you say, LNER seem to have used fare simplification as a tool to significantly increase fares, and dissuade flexible travel.

The long distance don’t want flexible off peak travel.

They want to control the numbers of people on each train and can do this through quota controlled Advance fares. Also, off peak fares are regulated and are effectively a cap on the price of Advance tickets at popular off peak times. Abolish regulated off peak fares (as LNER has done between London and Newcastle/Berwick/Edinburgh) and they can charge what they want at popular times for leisure travel, Sunday afternoon for example.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The long distance don’t want flexible off peak travel.
They want to control the numbers of people on each train and can do this through quota controlled Advance fares. Also, off peak fares are regulated and are effectively a cap on the price of Advance tickets at popular off peak times. Abolish regulated off peak fares (as LNER has done between London and Newcastle/Berwick/Edinburgh) and they can charge what they want at popular times for leisure travel, Sunday afternoon for example.

Will these long-distance TOC policies simply become those of GBR Intercity?
LNER is effectively a leading part of GBR anyway.

 

[yorkie]

As I understand it, one of the main advantages of Advance fares for TOCs was that they could take the whole fare for that ticket, rather than having to share it like they do with the regulated fares. Because you are restricted to travelling on that particular TOC's train, it should get all the money.

Which does raise the question of what is the point of advance fares in the current regime, now that all the fare revenue goes straight to the treasury?

It could be argued that they regulate the numbers of passengers on each train, to avoid overcrowding. Except that they patently don't, because people can still get on a supposedly fully-booked train with a flexible ticket, season, etc.

Various TOCs (and East Coast in particular) seem to be pushing people towards advance tickets, and away from flexible travel. Why? To my mind, flexible travel is one of the big advantages of rail, the ability to change your travel plans on the day at whim and still know that you can get on a later train, without paying an exhorbitant penalty.

It's for reasons of yield management, demand-based pricing, maximising seat utilisation while also maximising revenue.

If the only point now is to have a cheaper fare, why not just make the off peak fare cheaper? That would solve all the issues around what happens when a train is cancelled or delayed, and people get on the wrong train.

Or allow people to travel on the 'wrong' TOC when delays/cancellations occur as a matter of course; there is a thread dedicated to that!

 

[Wallsendmag]

Will these long-distance TOC policies simply become those of GBR Intercity?
LNER is effectively a leading part of GBR anyway.

It certainly isn't

 

[Hadders]

Will these long-distance TOC policies simply become those of GBR Intercity?
LNER is effectively a leading part of GBR anyway.

It wouldn’t surprise me, the long distance TOCs have wanted to do this for years.

I don’t think whether it’s GBR or a private TOC makes any difference.

 

[Belperpete]

Also, off peak fares are regulated and are effectively a cap on the price of Advance tickets at popular off peak times. Abolish regulated off peak fares (as LNER has done between London and Newcastle/Berwick/Edinburgh) and they can charge what they want at popular times for leisure travel, Sunday afternoon for example.

I have only been looking at York fares, where there is still a super off-peak single, I hadn't realised that they had abolished even that for longer journeys. So there is now no regulated fare on LNER for journeys to Newcastle and beyond, so they are free to charge what they want! How on earth has the regulator allowed them to get away with that?! It is almost as if the regulator doesn't want to do the job.

I can certainly see what the attraction of advances are to TOCs if they can abolish the flexible fares. It effectively makes it into an airline type booking system, where you either book in advance or get fleeced on the day (or worse still, you are stuck and don't get to travel at all). It takes away one of the main attractions of train travel, for me at least, of being able to change your plans on the day at whim depending on the weather or my mood.

It would certainly explain why the TOCs are so keen to push advances if this is their aim. "Nobody buys the old fashioned tickets anymore, so let's get rid of them, and simplify the fare structure". And sooner or later, some gullible politician and pliable regulator will fall for it. As has apparently already happened with LNER.

 

[Wallsendmag]

You have to remember the ownership of LNER

 

[Haywain]

How on earth has the regulator allowed them to get away with that?! It is almost as if the regulator doesn't want to do the job.

Who is this regulator you speak of?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Who is this regulator you speak of?

It is of course the DfT, heavily advised no doubt by the GBR Transition Team.
It remains to be seen if the Labour version after July 4 decides to do things differently.

 

[Haywain]

It is of course the DfT, heavily advised no doubt by the GBR Transition Team.

I really don't think that DfT see themselves as regulators - they're too busy trying to run the train operators. And GBRTT's role is far from clear but they certainly aren't advising on regulation.

 

[nwales58]

Demand-based pricing for long distance trains has been the norm for ages in France, Spain, Italy, Sweden. 'Global pricing' in eurglish usually means compulsory reservations. The concept of a flexible open fare persists in Germany, Austria, Switzerland and so on.

So about half Europe's population cope with one system and roughly half enjoy the other.

Like it or not, we seem to be going French on London-focussed routes. Therefore the concept of regulated fare in the 1993 act is no longer suitable. France regulates, or approves, the maximum fare for each flow and it is supposedly roughly distance-based; the minimum seems to be 20-25% of the maximum.

 

[styles]

Plenty of Advance fares are shared between several TOCs (eg AWC & Connections fares, for routes like Chester-Edinburgh).

A journey usually best served by splitting at Carlisle, Preston, Crewe, or WBQ funnily enough.

 

[Buzby]

Isn’t there a ‘Russian Roulette’ element to Advance fares? You are making a future gamble that you’ll actually travel on the specified date/time - because if you don’t travel on your booked service - you’ve lost your purchase and the TOC receives revenue without providing any service (other than issuing a Aztec code or TOD if you collected it in advance.

Are there any figures around that quantifies how much revenue is gained in this way annually?

 

[yorkie]

Isn’t there a ‘Russian Roulette’ element to Advance fares?

And almost all plane fares, many hotel, concert, sports events bookings etc?

You are making a future gamble that you’ll actually travel on the specified date/time - because if you don’t travel on your booked service - you’ve lost your purchase and the TOC receives revenue without providing any service

Unless you change it before the booked departure time!

(other than issuing a Aztec code or TOD if you collected it in advance.

The retailer does that, but cannot recover their costs even if a refund was issued for any reason

Are there any figures around that quantifies how much revenue is gained in this way annually?

How would you know if a barcode ticket is unused or simply not scanned?

How would you know if a magstripe paper ticket is used? Putting it through a barrier does not do anything in this respect.

So how might you go about compiling such figures (other than asking people, and hoping they give an accurate answer)?

 

[signed]

France regulates, or approves, the maximum fare for each flow and it is supposedly roughly distance-based; the minimum seems to be 20-25% of the maximum.

Is it? I always believed that in TGV services, the fares are unregulated.

AFAIK, the High Speed part of SNCF Voyageurs is de-facto a private company since, except in some very slim cases, there are no subsidies at all, so fares are rising quite fast.

Only the TER and Intercités services are subsidised by the government

I can be wrong though.

 

[nwales58]

Is it? I always believed that in TGV services, the fares are unregulated.
...
I can be wrong though.

I could be wrong too, it was 7-8 years ago I recall seeing a byzantine formula.

Looking at their open data I now see 'Tarif Normal' for most flows and 'Tarif Réglementé' on some. I'll read further another day. TER are 'Tarif Normal' though and those are (largely or all?) set by the regions.

SNCF TGV min/max fare open data

Crucial point is that someone should grasp the nettle and decide on whether/how to regulate our accidentally-emerging new structure starting with LNER.

 

[Buzby]

How would you know if a barcode ticket is unused or simply not scanned?

There’s the rub - an airline knows if it’s passenger turns up, as does a hotel if the room remains vacant, but we have a whole industry that cannot tell whether someone has travelled on an Advance ticket UNLESS they are challenged by a revenue inspector/ticket check and unceremoniously told they ‘don’t have a valid ticket’ and are expected to pony up for the full single fare with no credit for any money paid previously. I don’t know about you, but this rankles with me as unless all your ducks are perfectly aligned, your rail journey may cost you far more than you first imagined!

 

[bcarmicle]

we have a whole industry that cannot tell whether someone has travelled on an Advance ticket UNLESS they are challenged by a revenue inspector/ticket check and unceremoniously told they ‘don’t have a valid ticket’ and are expected to pony up for the full single fare with no credit for any money paid previously

What? How is travelling on the wrong train the only way to tell whether someone has travelled? If there are scans at both stations on the ticket, then the individual has presumably travelled. Similarly if they are scanned on board the correct train.

 

[Hadders]

It is of course the DfT, heavily advised no doubt by the GBR Transition Team.
It remains to be seen if the Labour version after July 4 decides to do things differently.

Don't expect rail fares to get cheaper after next week. I simply don't see it happening.

Whoever wins the election next week is going to have a massive hole in the country's finances so there's not going to be any more money to give to the rail industry.

 

[Mainline421]

The point of Advance was to sell empty space on quieter trains that would otherwise be left empty.

Now they're just used as an excuse to treat passengers poorly, as most will understandably just pick the cheapest ticket. TOCs will sell dirt cheap advances for overcrowded trains and simultaneously offer advances for only a few pence discount on other trains (losing all flexibility except changing the time for a fee before departure).

 

[JonathanH]

TOCs will sell dirt cheap advances for overcrowded trains

"Dirt cheap advances" are now much less prevalent.

 

[Krokodil]

It's for reasons of yield management, demand-based pricing, maximising seat utilisation while also maximising revenue.

Which makes me wonder what TfW are aiming for with their seemingly limitless supply of Advances which are available in large numbers even right up to five minutes before departure for notoriously busy trains. There seems to be no targeting of cheap tickets towards trains with empty seats. They're throwing revenue away.

"Dirt cheap advances" are now much less prevalent.

Except on TfW services where there are more of them than ever.

 

[JonathanH]

Except on TfW services where there are more of them than ever.

Are they "dirt cheap"? No one is denying there are more advances. They are becoming the "standard fare" to most people.