More fare increase trials on the cards?

[Bletchleyite]

There's two more TOCs scheduled between now and mid/late 2025. One wholly intercity in nature and one a mixed bag not serving London. Some differences to the LNER trial, to test out different demographics and markets.

Good lord, lots of different trials like that is going to be a right mess. Can't we just stick with doing it all on LNER?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Aug 2024 ==

XC is being left alone, for good reason too.

The non-London one sounds more like TPE.

If Avanti are getting involved in this nonsense (and they're the only other solely IC TOC bar LNER) perhaps the new EV purchase should be brought forward. I wonder if this is part of the motivation for wanting to get them in house?

Different demographics is an interesting one. Certainly TPE's Anytimes aren't as punitive as London TOCs. Might it involve London-Birmingham or London-Manchester perhaps, to see how it works (or not) for shorter journeys? A key difference for Avanti though is that (a) their Anytimes are downright punitive even compared to LNER's*, and (b) they are generally not full, so you're not going to fill trains if you price up (which would give a clear indication that fare increases are what it's about).

TPE's Manchester-Scotland services might be an interesting one to look at it on, as these are often almost as overcrowded as XC.

It would be nice if they would trial some more-friendly Advance T&Cs, e.g. making the 70 minute ticket refundable, removing the break of journey restrictions (does any other railway worldwide do that?) and allowing a change of anything for anything - at present if you want to finish short on an Advance there is no way to change to that!

* I could just about cope with paying £200 London-Edinburgh in the peak. Whereas £200 London-Manchester (and it is about that) is utterly ripping the proverbial - if you look at the comparative distances it should be about £100.

 

[Kite159]

No doubt it will probably involve getting rid of the fare cap offered by the off-peak returns on the likes of London to Manchester so Avanti (or whoever takes over) can start charging more money at weekends.

Probably a trial to get rid of peak pricing by lowering the cost of the anytime tickets to half the current rate and getting rid of off-peak, forcing passengers who want any sort of flexibility to jump in a car, or pay £200 for the new 'anytime' return, whilst Mr businessman doesn't care that his £350 ticket has come down to £200 because he was putting it on expenses.

 

[Hadders]

Let's remember that the Off Peak Return from London to Manchester is £109 valid at Off Peak times on weekdays and any train at the weekend. It offers a choice of routes and allows you to break your journey. The return portion is valid for a month.

I wonder how much more expensive an LNER-style 70-Minute Flex ticket would cost? And whether the railway would try and claim that the new ticketing more is simple and easier to understand than the Off Peak Return.

 

[yorksrob]

I wonder if any of these trials will be trialling any actual improvements for passengers, or whether they'll just be testing innovative ways to screw more money out of us.

 

[miklcct]

No doubt it will probably involve getting rid of the fare cap offered by the off-peak returns on the likes of London to Manchester so Avanti (or whoever takes over) can start charging more money at weekends.

Probably a trial to get rid of peak pricing by lowering the cost of the anytime tickets to half the current rate and getting rid of off-peak, forcing passengers who want any sort of flexibility to jump in a car, or pay £200 for the new 'anytime' return, whilst Mr businessman doesn't care that his £350 ticket has come down to £200 because he was putting it on expenses.

The only fare increase I am going to support is the total removal of Advance tickets (leaving only peak and off-peak on intercity routes, exactly like metro routes). At the same time, the Anytime fare needs to be decreased as well to balance out the increase.

 

[Kite159]

The only fare increase I am going to support is the total removal of Advance tickets (leaving only peak and off-peak on intercity routes, exactly like metro routes). At the same time, the Anytime fare needs to be decreased as well to balance out the increase.

Which will simply push passengers towards using alternative forms of transport (flying, coaches, even cars)

For there is bit of a difference between a Metro style "Turn up and go" service from Cricklewood to West Hampstead Thameslink compared with London to Glasgow

 

[miklcct]

Which will simply push passengers towards using alternative forms of transport (flying, coaches, even cars)

For there is bit of a difference between a Metro style "Turn up and go" service from Cricklewood to West Hampstead Thameslink compared with London to Glasgow

Cricklewood to West Hampstead is definitely turn up and go.

London to Brighton or Peterborough has Advance tickets, but I won't even think of buying one.

London to Birmingham, Bournemouth or Leicester is still primary turn up and go for me, and it will be revenue positive from me if Advance tickets are withdrawn and replaced by off-peak tickets.

London to Manchester is still doable as a day trip when I see something interesting there and have nowhere else to go, although at this distance cheap Advance tickets may tempt me to travel extra on an otherwise not made journey.

Only when the journey is as long as London - the Scottish Highlands it ceases to be a turn up and go style service.

 

[Trainbike46]

Good lord, lots of different trials like that is going to be a right mess. Can't we just stick with doing it all on LNER?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Aug 2024 ==



The non-London one sounds more like TPE.

If Avanti are getting involved in this nonsense (and they're the only other solely IC TOC bar LNER) perhaps the new EV purchase should be brought forward. I wonder if this is part of the motivation for wanting to get them in house?

Different demographics is an interesting one. Certainly TPE's Anytimes aren't as punitive as London TOCs. Might it involve London-Birmingham or London-Manchester perhaps, to see how it works (or not) for shorter journeys? A key difference for Avanti though is that (a) their Anytimes are downright punitive even compared to LNER's*, and (b) they are generally not full, so you're not going to fill trains if you price up (which would give a clear indication that fare increases are what it's about).

TPE's Manchester-Scotland services might be an interesting one to look at it on, as these are often almost as overcrowded as XC.

It would be nice if they would trial some more-friendly Advance T&Cs, e.g. making the 70 minute ticket refundable, removing the break of journey restrictions (does any other railway worldwide do that?) and allowing a change of anything for anything - at present if you want to finish short on an Advance there is no way to change to that!

* I could just about cope with paying £200 London-Edinburgh in the peak. Whereas £200 London-Manchester (and it is about that) is utterly ripping the proverbial - if you look at the comparative distances it should be about £100.

I'm really hoping they don't start doing this nonsense on Avanti - I use their trains from Liverpool fairly regularly, having arrived on the ferry from Belfast, and I usually buy off-peak returns because it gives me some flexibility, and I don't think their advances are worth it, having been stung by those before due to me missing a train, especially as the discount over an anytime return is usually negligible. Financially, ferry+train is already very much at the upper limit of what I can afford to pay, and more expensive than many alternative options. The only reason I can justify it is the regular delay repay from Avanti, as their reliability isn't great, though better than what it was.

Of course, all this is related to whatever mission the government decides to give the railway. I've started a separate thread on that here: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/what-should-the-missions-for-the-new-br-be.273361/

 

[Gwr12345]

What would be the destination for TPE for these fares like London is for LNER? Would it be Manchester for all routes or trialled on one specific route? The WCML services? The Newcastle to Liverpools?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Avanti doing this as a trial would be a gift for WMT, of course. And similarly TPE a gift for Northern.

 

[skyhigh]

The only fare increase I am going to support is the total removal of Advance tickets (leaving only peak and off-peak on intercity routes, exactly like metro routes). At the same time, the Anytime fare needs to be decreased as well to balance out the increase.

Which is an utterly, totally, stupid idea.

As usual, it supports your usual unique niche with no consideration for anyone else. It would totally destroy the market for leisure travel.

Picking a random date next month, I can get an Advance from Leeds to London for £28.50. A super-off peak Single is £70.20. There is not a chance the flexible ticket would be reduced anywhere near the price of the Advance. If I was faced with my travel increasing from £28.50 to £50 or thereabouts I'd tell the railway where to stuff it and drive instead. As would many other people.

 

[miklcct]

Which is an utterly, totally, stupid idea.

As usual, it supports your usual unique niche with no consideration for anyone else. It would totally destroy the market for leisure travel.

Picking a random date next month, I can get an Advance from Leeds to London for £28.50. A super-off peak Single is £70.20. There is not a chance the flexible ticket would be reduced anywhere near the price of the Advance. If I was faced with my travel increasing from £28.50 to £50 or thereabouts I'd tell the railway where to stuff it and drive instead. As would many other people.

I would expect the price of an Anytime Single to be decreased massively, and the price of Super Off-Peak Single to be decreased slightly. For example, the Anytime can be reduced to £80, while the Super Off-Peak can be decreased to £60, when there are no cut-price Advance tickets available at all.

 

[skyhigh]

I would expect the price of an Anytime Single to be decreased massively, and the price of Super Off-Peak Single to be decreased slightly. For example, the Anytime can be reduced to £80, while the Super Off-Peak can be decreased to £60, when there are no cut-price Advance tickets available at all.

So I'd see my ticket price increase by over 100% under your plans.

Bonkers.

 

[doa46231]

So I'd see my ticket price increase by over 100% under your plans.

Bonkers.

No! What is bonkers is that the vast majority of people in this Country, will never go near a train because the railway is considered too complicated and too expensive. most people want to go at a time that suits them , not some magical time in the future that suits a rail company.
We've got to get rid of a plethora of different operators, simplify the fare system and make it cheap to travel at a time to suit them.
Our railway has been rationalised to a situation where our trains are too short because our stations are too small and our platforms are miiscule.
We've got a railway where only the well-off can afford the fares unless they either book a long time ahead or are prepared to wade through a fare system that few are wiling to make the effort to do.
We carry a tiny percentage of the population on our railways and always will until we provide a system that is easy to use, has comprehensive fares and the ability to get from any place A to any place B simply cheaply and reliably.
The chances of that are nil in this Country so rail travel will always be a somewhat niche activity except perhaps round London!

 

[Trainbike46]

No! What is bonkers is that the vast majority of people in this Country, will never go near a train because the railway is considered too complicated and too expensive.

doubling ticket prices certainly won't help fight the perception that the railway is too expensive!

 

[skyhigh]

No! What is bonkers is that the vast majority of people in this Country, will never go near a train because the railway is considered too complicated and too expensive.

So removing all the cheap tickets is going to help with the perception that the railway is too expensive?

Fixed tickets are not complicated - in fact they're probably the simplest tickets there are. You don't have to worry about what trains you can catch, what routes are valid, which operators your ticket is valid with.

Plenty of other industries use fixed tickets in return for a discount - it's not an unusual concept.

Removing cheap tickets would absolutely kill the discretionary leisure travel market though. People are willing to exchange flexibility for price.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

So removing all the cheap tickets is going to help with the perception that the railway is too expensive?

Fixed tickets are not complicated - in fact they're probably the simplest tickets there are. You don't have to worry about what trains you can catch, what routes are valid, which operators your ticket is valid with.

Plenty of other industries use fixed tickets in return for a discount - it's not an unusual concept.

Removing cheap tickets would absolutely kill the discretionary leisure travel market though. People are willing to exchange flexibility for price.

Using the term "cheap" is probably not particularly appropriate these days, especially in the context of a modern railway that requires extensive subsidy to survive.

There definitely should be accessible and affordable fares / products that suit each of the broad demographic markets (leisure, business, commute etc).

Very cheap fares offered outside of a well publicised sale or event can actually dampen demand substantially - the Ryanair effect - where people assume they are cheap for a reason and are suspicious or highly skeptical of what they are actually getting, or that it means they will need to compromise on some factor during their journey. Some are also concerned that super cheap tickets will have unusual or complex terms and conditions that difficult to navigate or could cause them issues if things go wrong. Therefore they simply don't buy them in the first place.

Cheaper is not always better!

I think this forum often can be quite out of touch with the non-interested public, what most people on this forum like/want can be significantly at odds with the wider market.

 

[yorksrob]

Using the term "cheap" is probably not particularly appropriate these days, especially in the context of a modern railway that requires extensive subsidy to survive.

There definitely should be accessible and affordable fares / products that suit each of the broad demographic markets (leisure, business, commute etc).

Very cheap fares offered outside of a well publicised sale or event can actually dampen demand substantially - the Ryanair effect - where people assume they are cheap for a reason and are suspicious or highly skeptical of what they are actually getting, or that it means they will need to compromise on some factor during their journey. Some are also concerned that super cheap tickets will have unusual or complex terms and conditions that difficult to navigate or could cause them issues if things go wrong. Therefore they simply don't buy them in the first place.

Cheaper is not always better!

I think this forum often can be quite out of touch with the non-interested public, what most people on this forum like/want can be significantly at odds with the wider market.

Fares such as longer distance off peak fares can't in any way be described as "super cheap".

The industry (and its paymasters in the treasury) are massively out of touch with the priorities of the travelling public - who want consistently competitive fares.

 

[JonathanH]

The industry (and its paymasters in the treasury) are massively out of touch with the priorities of the travelling public - who want consistently competitive fares

Unfortunately, the evidence suggests otherwise because passengers are paying the higher fares that recent years have brought, and filling trains where the service matches their requirements.

 

[yorksrob]

Unfortunately, the evidence suggests otherwise because passengers are paying the higher fares that recent years have brought, and filling trains where the service matches their requirements.

Just because passengers are forced to pay through the nose doesn't mean that they are happy with it.

And hasn't this whole situation (I won't call it a crisis because a marginal revenue gap compared to pre covid shouldn't be seen as a crisis), arisen precisely because no one will pay stupidly priced anytime fares ?

And of course, being in complete denial, the industry and its paymasters seem determined to do everything but reform stupidly priced anytime fares.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

Very cheap fares offered outside of a well publicised sale or event can actually dampen demand substantially - the Ryanair effect - where people assume they are cheap for a reason and are suspicious or highly skeptical of what they are actually getting, or that it means they will need to compromise on some factor during their journey. Some are also concerned that super cheap tickets will have unusual or complex terms and conditions that difficult to navigate or could cause them issues if things go wrong. Therefore they simply don't buy them in the first place.

This is a really good point.

Related: I find myself suffering a bit from “fare fatigue”. Ten years ago the fares from our station were simple and reasonable value. You turned up, you spoke to the ticket office staff or pressed some buttons on the ticket machine, you were sold the standard ticket for your journey. As long as you weren’t travelling in the morning peak, you didn’t feel you were being fleeced.

Since then, the time restrictions have got more complex (and punitive), vast numbers of promotions and advance fares have been introduced, and consequently the opportunities for seeking out bargains by buying at a particular time, or splitting, have multiplied. Planning an affordable day out now requires tying yourself to a particular return train, which may or may not be anywhere near the time you want.

And to be honest, for discretionary journeys, I really can’t be bothered. Weekday rail travel has become so complex that I try to avoid it for longer journeys. I realise it’s not the same for everyone, but for me, I’ve just grown tired of having to navigate such an arcane system.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

No! What is bonkers is that the vast majority of people in this Country, will never go near a train because the railway is considered too complicated and too expensive. most people want to go at a time that suits them , not some magical time in the future that suits a rail company.
We've got to get rid of a plethora of different operators, simplify the fare system and make it cheap to travel at a time to suit them.
Our railway has been rationalised to a situation where our trains are too short because our stations are too small and our platforms are miiscule.
We've got a railway where only the well-off can afford the fares unless they either book a long time ahead or are prepared to wade through a fare system that few are wiling to make the effort to do.
We carry a tiny percentage of the population on our railways and always will until we provide a system that is easy to use, has comprehensive fares and the ability to get from any place A to any place B simply cheaply and reliably.
The chances of that are nil in this Country so rail travel will always be a somewhat niche activity except perhaps round London!

You have touched on something interesting with “complicated”, I genuinely think that is part of the issue. People hate changing trains, in London people seem to prefer to take one direct train than do a perfectly sensible change. I’m not sure whether simplifying the service as much as possible would even do much to convince people.

 

[yorksrob]

This is a really good point.

Related: I find myself suffering a bit from “fare fatigue”. Ten years ago the fares from our station were simple and reasonable value. You turned up, you spoke to the ticket office staff or pressed some buttons on the ticket machine, you were sold the standard ticket for your journey. As long as you weren’t travelling in the morning peak, you didn’t feel you were being fleeced.

Since then, the time restrictions have got more complex (and punitive), vast numbers of promotions and advance fares have been introduced, and consequently the opportunities for seeking out bargains by buying at a particular time, or splitting, have multiplied. Planning an affordable day out now requires tying yourself to a particular return train, which may or may not be anywhere near the time you want.

And to be honest, for discretionary journeys, I really can’t be bothered. Weekday rail travel has become so complex that I try to avoid it for longer journeys. I realise it’s not the same for everyone, but for me, I’ve just grown tired of having to navigate such an arcane system.

And don't forget, vast numbers of new restrictions have been introduced at the same time.

Restrictions to routes, more restrictions to off-peak travel, more restrictions to railcards, withdrawal of cheap day returns in many places, introduction od TOC specific tickets with little benefit over the unrestricted ticket in price.

Overcomplicated ticketing is a problem entirely of the industry's own making, so its disingenuous when they start bleating that the only way to reduce complexity is to withdraw comparatively good value, simple tickets as with the LNER trial.

 

[Dr Day]

The justification for much of the complexity is to optimise net revenue to the individual TOC, particularly given constrained capacity.

Going slightly OT but it isn’t just the railway that makes things complicated. Virtually everything these days feels subject to the potential for a ‘deal’ requiring shopping around or potentially buying more or not quite what you actually want or finding a promo code. But clearly that is what makes money otherwise it wouldn’t be done.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And of course, being in complete denial, the industry and its paymasters seem determined to do everything but reform stupidly priced anytime fares.

This might be a reasonable compromise, indeed. If you look at LNER's pricing for Edinburgh, aside from the trains where they've let Advances sell out entirely* £130-140 seems to be the top end. So drop the Anytime down to that - unless they really want to "do an Oasis" and crank it right up when there are big events on.

Similarly Manchester-London's nearly £200 Anytime Single just isn't reasonable (it makes Kings Cross-Edinburgh, twice as far for a similar price, look reasonable, indeed), but £100 might be.

That actually would work for a lot of people - most people making long distance trips know their outward day and time but less so their return, so they could do Advance one way, Anytime the other.

I wonder if one of these trials might actually look at that option? Manchester-London would be a good one as I don't think there is another route where the Anytime is so ridiculously priced. ScotRail clearly have proven on their network that just removing Anytimes entirely isn't remunerative, but might reducing them to a less punitive level and dropping the Off Peak actually work?

Indeed, wasn't a fairly chunky (but not that chunky) reduction in Anytime fares part of the original Avanti franchise agreement before COVID mucked it up?

* Which just goes to show they aren't doing it very well. An Advance for £5 or so less than the Anytime is to LNER's benefit - they keep the revenue and they might keep it all if the train is missed or at least keep a change fee - so really they should be ensuring there are high priced Advances on every single train with the quota only running out when the actual seats do. I'd buy the Anytime for the flexibility for an extra £5, but plenty wouldn't, and it's always to a TOC's benefit to sell an Advance instead of an Anytime.


== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Sep 2024 ==

The justification for much of the complexity is to optimise net revenue to the individual TOC, particularly given constrained capacity.

Going slightly OT but it isn’t just the railway that makes things complicated. Virtually everything these days feels subject to the potential for a ‘deal’ requiring shopping around or potentially buying more or not quite what you actually want or finding a promo code. But clearly that is what makes money otherwise it wouldn’t be done.

With Domino's Pizza, I'm fairly sure the reason is to charge drunk people as much as they can get away with. If you're sober, navigating the "deals" for the best option is a bit annoying but not unduly difficult, whereas if you're drunk you're much more likely to accept the punitively priced default.

 

[yorksrob]

This might be a reasonable compromise, indeed. If you look at LNER's pricing for Edinburgh, aside from the trains where they've let Advances sell out entirely* £130-140 seems to be the top end. So drop the Anytime down to that - unless they really want to "do an Oasis" and crank it right up when there are big events on.

Similarly Manchester-London's nearly £200 Anytime Single just isn't reasonable (it makes Kings Cross-Edinburgh, twice as far for a similar price, look reasonable, indeed), but £100 might be.

That actually would work for a lot of people - most people making long distance trips know their outward day and time but less so their return, so they could do Advance one way, Anytime the other.

I wonder if one of these trials might actually look at that option? Manchester-London would be a good one as I don't think there is another route where the Anytime is so ridiculously priced. ScotRail clearly have proven on their network that just removing Anytimes entirely isn't remunerative, but might reducing them to a less punitive level and dropping the Off Peak actually work?

Indeed, wasn't a fairly chunky (but not that chunky) reduction in Anytime fares part of the original Avanti franchise agreement before COVID mucked it up?

* Which just goes to show they aren't doing it very well. An Advance for £5 or so less than the Anytime is to LNER's benefit - they keep the revenue and they might keep it all if the train is missed or at least keep a change fee - so really they should be ensuring there are high priced Advances on every single train with the quota only running out when the actual seats do. I'd buy the Anytime for the flexibility for an extra £5, but plenty wouldn't, and it's always to a TOC's benefit to sell an Advance instead of an Anytime.

Actually, I'm not convinced that the Scotrail trial proved that getting rid of peak fares was unremunerative at all. It occurred at a time when the service was reduced and unreliable. Transport Scotland were saying that numbers were a few percentage points off of breaking even (people on here can argue till the cows come home what was or wasn't in the report, but that's what they said)

I'd say it was at worst inconclusive.

In terms of compromise, I still don't see any justification for removing off-peak fares - take any busy off-peak service and it won't be packed out with walk-on travellers with off-peak tickets.

Anytime fares should be adjusted down to a level where peak long distance services aren't carting fresh air and this may even create space on off peak services as people trade up.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

People hate changing trains, in London people seem to prefer to take one direct train than do a perfectly sensible change.

Not that sensible if changing trains at an intermediate station means that you then have to stand for the remainder of your journey. For example: East Croydon.