• 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!

Abolishing peak and off peak fares?

Status
Not open for further replies.

nanstallon

Member
Joined
18 Dec 2015
Messages
1,063
It is worth looking at why we have any distinction between peak and off peak fares. It seems wrong to me that people who have to travel before 09.00 (even 09.30 or 10.00!) should have to pay more - after all these are usually people using the railway to get to work - an activity that should be encouraged. The TOCs have been using peak hours as a way to boost their income, and have been steadily widening the definition of peak hours. So, I suggest that the time of day when one travels should no longer affect the cost of a ticket.

Also, it would get rid of a lot of hassle with people 'caught' with the wrong ticket and being threatened with prosecution.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

signed

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2024
Messages
2,388
Location
ROI
Doing that will just lift everyone's fare, bad idea. The same thing will happen if we scrap Railcards.
 

Andover

Member
Joined
30 Mar 2019
Messages
54
It doubt it will happen short of total fare reform, and there will be a lot of true and practical arguments raised against here, but in principle yes. Pricing is a dubious and erratic way of directing demand IMHO.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
23,389
The TOCs have been using peak hours as a way to boost their income, and have been steadily widening the definition of peak hours.
Other way round. If you trace back the history of rail fares, the railway is charging fares at a 'standard rate' at peak time and offering a discount at off-peak times.

That differential is greater on more popular routes and those where there is a captive market that will bear higher prices, because the standard fare has been allowed to grow to manage demand and reduce the cost of the railway to the taxpayer.

There actually are some places where there is only one fare, the same in the peak and off-peak. Passengers travelling off-peak who don't know the history wonder why they are being charged the peak fare.
 

Hadders

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
27 Apr 2011
Messages
18,153
It is worth looking at why we have any distinction between peak and off peak fares. It seems wrong to me that people who have to travel before 09.00 (even 09.30 or 10.00!) should have to pay more - after all these are usually people using the railway to get to work - an activity that should be encouraged. The TOCs have been using peak hours as a way to boost their income, and have been steadily widening the definition of peak hours. So, I suggest that the time of day when one travels should no longer affect the cost of a ticket.

Also, it would get rid of a lot of hassle with people 'caught' with the wrong ticket and being threatened with prosecution.
Let's look at some examples. Take Stevenage to London, current fares:

Anytime Day Return £26.70
Off Peak Day Return £21.80
Weekend Day Return £14.60

What would the fare be under your system? How would you ensure that trains at the busiest times of the day have sufficient capacity to cope.
How would you ensure there was no loss of revenue and that passengers purchsing the cheapest tickets do not significantly more than at present.

Manchester to London, current fares:

Anytime Return £369.40
Off Peak Return £109.00

Again what would the fare be under your system?
 

Bevan Price

Established Member
Joined
22 Apr 2010
Messages
8,344
Let's look at some examples. Take Stevenage to London, current fares:

Anytime Day Return £26.70
Off Peak Day Return £21.80
Weekend Day Return £14.60

What would the fare be under your system? How would you ensure that trains at the busiest times of the day have sufficient capacity to cope.
How would you ensure there was no loss of revenue and that passengers purchsing the cheapest tickets do not significantly more than at present.

Manchester to London, current fares:

Anytime Return £369.40
Off Peak Return £109.00

Again what would the fare be under your system?
Apart from those on expense accounts, how many people buy those ludicrously expensive £369 tickets?
How many more people might they attract if a lower, more sensible fare was charged ?
 

Hadders

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
27 Apr 2011
Messages
18,153
Apart from those on expense accounts, how many people buy those ludicrously expensive £369 tickets?
How many more people might they attract if a lower, more sensible fare was charged ?
I've no idea, but regardless of whether it's an expense account or not these fares do get sold. How would you reform the fares, and cruically how would you do it without increasing the Off Peak fare significantly?
 

6Gman

Established Member
Joined
1 May 2012
Messages
9,224
Apart from those on expense accounts, how many people buy those ludicrously expensive £369 tickets?
People who have to travel at short notice.

And it's the people paying £369 who help to allow the £109 fares to exist.

So, if you just have one fare those who were paying £369 and are now paying less will be content; those who no longer have a £109 fare will be very unhappy!
 

Fawkes Cat

Established Member
Joined
8 May 2017
Messages
5,325
The thing is, there's a limited number of people you can fit on a train. This number can be increased if you pay for more carriages, longer platforms and so on, but it will still be limited.

If the demand to use the train exceeds the capacity of the train then there needs to be a way of restricting the number of users. The current way of making that restriction is by price, and then (if necessary) by sheer physical capacity i.e. there's no room for some people to get on the train.

If price (i.e. peak fares) is withdrawn as a rationing mechanism, that leaves physical capacity - which won't be popular with anyone and in particular with anyone who doesn't get on at the origin station. Or what other mechanism should be used?
 

crablab

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2020
Messages
1,299
Location
UK
The industry reliance on season ticket and Anytime revenue is woefully out of date in modern society. People simply don't work in the same way they used to, and the need to be physically present in, or travel between, offices is much reduced.
Every business I've worked for has a presumption against Anytime fares for business travel, and 1st Class has been banned. I'm not saying that's universal, but I'd feel comfortable saying it's going to be pretty common.
It seems wrong to me that people who have to travel before 09.00 (even 09.30 or 10.00!) should have to pay more - after all these are usually people using the railway to get to work
These days Anytime (Peak) fares disproportionately impact those who have to commute 5 days a week for work. So someone who cannot work from home, which is more likely (not exclusively, of course) to be those on lower incomes.

Certainly some employers are wanting people back in offices some days a week, but there's a lot more flexibility around numbers of days and times. (Trains are noticeably quieter on Monday & Friday, and we of course remember TfL's trial in making Friday off-peak to stimulate demand)

So looking at the railway as a form of social good, it seems to penalise those who are working but have less means to spend on travel Vs those in higher paid jobs with more flexibility and don't have to travel every day, or can avoid the peak.
If the demand to use the train exceeds the capacity of the train then there needs to be a way of restricting the number of users. The current way of making that restriction is by price
I would really love to see some industry-wide data for loading & reservation volumes on routes at different times.

Does it actually work as a demand spreading mechanism? Perhaps I'm just unlucky, but the Peak trains I get on do not tend to be absolutely rammed. Indeed, if I get a 7am train RDG to PAD I can guarantee it's going to be pretty quiet & carriages are usually fairly empty. If I get the first off-peak trains of the day (from 9:30) I'm usually standing.

People don't like being crammed in or having to stand and those with time flexibility will, I'd suggest, naturally want to choose quieter trains if that data is available to them. Perhaps if earlier trains (which from my observations, tend to be empty) weren't considered Peak, people might travel earlier and spread demand that way? As it stands, there's no incentive to travel at 6am Vs 8am.

Increasingly, we've seen peak restrictions removed on Friday evenings out of London, to try and smooth demand. I'd say this is a good example of where the current mechanism isn't working.

All in all, Anytime fares seem like an anachronistic mechanism to try and manage demand, from the days before we could present people with data and allow them to make choices about when they travel. Plus, of course, a revenue raiser from those who can't avoid the extortionate fares.

How would you reform the fares, and cruically how would you do it without increasing the Off Peak fare significantly?
It's unfortunate everything starts from a position of having to be revenue neutral.
However, given that constraint, you'd have to increase the off-peak fares by an average of the 'lost' Anytime income. (Incidentally, this is one of the scenarios explored in the ticketing/fares survey that RDG did back pre-covid. There's a report somewhere, I believe.)
You might then offer bargain quota controlled Advance fares at times of over-capacity to stimulate demand and further incentivise demand spread. Note, that this is different from using Advances as the main ticket type, as LNER are doing. It's more along the lines of NS, who offer a discounted fare (priced dynamically) in times of very low demand.
How would you ensure that trains at the busiest times of the day have sufficient capacity to cope.
Mandatory reservations (counted place probably, to allow for some standing), but only in extremis.
I'd be happily proved wrong, but I reckon this would probably regularise itself and if people weren't so concerned with ticket validity, they might well choose to travel at a slightly different time, take a different route or take the next service, rather than cramming themselves on.
Or, they'd book a seat reservation if they knew it was essential they were on a particular service.

Again, if you give people data (which the TOCs have!) about load factors, rather than trying to proxy it via price, I think people will use it & vote with their feet :)
 
Last edited:

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
23,389
So looking at the railway as a form of social good, it seems to penalise those who are working but have less means to spend on travel Vs those in higher paid jobs with more flexibility and don't have to travel every day, or can avoid the peak.
The retention of anytime fares, and season tickets priced at a discount to anytime fares, serves to charge those who travel less than every day a greater cost for each day they do travel.
Perhaps if earlier trains (which from my observations, tend to be empty) weren't considered Peak, people might travel earlier and spread demand that way? As it stands, there's no incentive to travel at 6am Vs 8am.
Such an incentive does exist wherever Contactless is currently in place, with single journeys before 0630 charged at off peak rates. I think this was justified in London as being a measure for lower paid workers, but as journeys on Contactless get longer, it seems a bit perverse to offer this, because passengers are already setting off early, and it runs the risk of cannibalising revenue. Not everyone has the choice to travel before 0630.
 

Mgameing123

Member
Joined
29 Apr 2023
Messages
1,060
Location
Denmark
It is worth looking at why we have any distinction between peak and off peak fares. It seems wrong to me that people who have to travel before 09.00 (even 09.30 or 10.00!) should have to pay more - after all these are usually people using the railway to get to work - an activity that should be encouraged. The TOCs have been using peak hours as a way to boost their income, and have been steadily widening the definition of peak hours. So, I suggest that the time of day when one travels should no longer affect the cost of a ticket.

Also, it would get rid of a lot of hassle with people 'caught' with the wrong ticket and being threatened with prosecution.
Issue is that especially London bound trains are severely overcrowded during the peak. Making fares cheaper will only make things worse if you don't increase capacity.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
113,743
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
ScotRail tried this and it was found to be revenue negative. That means that to do it you'd need to increase fares overall. And that's with non-London peak/off peak split which tends to be less of a difference to start with - the South East fares differ massively, and the InterCity ones even more.

So I love the idea but it wouldn't be possible without significant subsidy input in a time of Government cuts, so it's unlikely.
 

crablab

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2020
Messages
1,299
Location
UK
Issue is that especially London bound trains are severely overcrowded during the peak.
How true is that relative to shoulder peak?
Is there any public industry data we can look at here?
Or is it (just like my assertions) based on personal observations, or what used to be true in the past?

I'm standing by a peak time IET, and both C & D are empty. Literally. Still can't get on it though.

It would be interesting to FoI Southeastern (a DfT OLR ToC) for some hard numbers.
serves to charge those who travel less than every day a greater cost for each day they do travel.
The discount is, for 5 days travelling a week, no greater than a Railcard, which a significant proportion of the population are now eligible for and which offers far greater flexibility.
A season ticket does allow unlimited travel along the route, however.
The flexi-seasons seem to be difficult to buy, difficult to use and aren't really that good of a discount, so not very well adopted.

Along with the other "Railcard reform" threads, I would advocate for wrapping these all up in a Bahncard-like scheme, with purchase discounts for certain groups.

Such an incentive does exist wherever Contactless is currently in place, with single journeys before 0630 charged at off peak rates
Fair point. Although only in Oval areas, and without Railcard discount (currently)

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

ScotRail tried this and it was found to be revenue negative. That means that to do it you'd need to increase fares overall.
Yup.
My view is that this should be part of a wider fares reform (empathetically not what the DfT/LNER consider "reform") to remove TOC restrictions, complex (-ve/+ve) easements, extensive time restrictions and genuinely simplify the routeing guide.
That's all rather radical, so it probably wouldn't be comparable.
 

Mgameing123

Member
Joined
29 Apr 2023
Messages
1,060
Location
Denmark
How true is that relative to shoulder peak?
Is there any public industry data we can look at here?
Or is it (just like my assertions) based on personal observations, or what used to be true in the past?

I'm standing by a peak time IET, and both C & D are empty. Literally. Still can't get on it though.

It would be interesting to FoI Southeastern (a DfT OLR ToC) for some hard numbers.

The discount is, for 5 days travelling a week, no greater than a Railcard, which a significant proportion of the population are now eligible for and which offers far greater flexibility.
A season ticket does allow unlimited travel along the route, however.
The flexi-seasons seem to be difficult to buy, difficult to use and aren't really that good of a discount, so not very well adopted.

Along with the other "Railcard reform" threads, I would advocate for wrapping these all up in a Bahncard-like scheme, with purchase discounts for certain groups.


Fair point. Although only in Oval areas, and without Railcard discount (currently)

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==


Yup.
My view is that this should be part of a wider fares reform (empathetically not what the DfT/LNER consider "reform") to remove TOC restrictions, complex (-ve/+ve) easements, extensive time restrictions and genuinely simplify the routeing guide.
That's all rather radical, so it probably wouldn't be comparable.
I don't have data but just look at the London Underground during the peak. The trains are so rammed that you barely can't breathe so yeah I think they should keep peak fares until they provide sufficient capacity (they never will).

The only way they can provide cheaper fares is by providing cheaper alternatives like buses that parallel the railway during the peak.
 

crablab

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2020
Messages
1,299
Location
UK
So I love the idea but it wouldn't be possible without significant subsidy input in a time of Government cuts, so it's unlikely.
Or finding a middle ground in-between, to make it neutral ;) (I agree with you though)

I think there's a valid argument to be made that weekend leisure travellers are being cross-subsidised by weekday commuters. Whilst there's always been cross-subsidy, leisure is above pre-pandemic whilst commuting/business still lags noticeably. I'm not making a judgement on whether it's "fair" or not, but it's not revenue neutral for sure.

LNER are trying to find a way to 'recover' that revenue through their fares trials. A fairer, more honest and more transparent mechanism would simply be to increase the price of the off-peak tickets, but this isn't politically acceptable hence the cloak & daggers approach.

The trains are so rammed that you barely can't breathe so yeah I think they should keep peak fares until they provide sufficient capacity (they never will).
Is this actually a problem? I don't really understand why busy trains are seen as such a significant problem. Other European countries don't seem to either?

I see it as self-regulating: people who don't like busy trains get ones that are earlier or later, people that don't mind or need to be in at a certain time get squished.
TfL probably isn't comparable to the mainline network really, given people are happy to stand for 20 minutes on a tube whereas they aren't happy to stand from Bristol to London; hence why seat reservations exist.
 

Mgameing123

Member
Joined
29 Apr 2023
Messages
1,060
Location
Denmark
Or finding a middle ground in-between, to make it neutral ;) (I agree with you though)

I think there's a valid argument to be made that weekend leisure travellers are being cross-subsidised by weekday commuters. Whilst there's always been cross-subsidy, leisure is above pre-pandemic whilst commuting/business still lags noticeably. I'm not making a judgement on whether it's "fair" or not, but it's not revenue neutral for sure.

LNER are trying to find a way to 'recover' that revenue through their fares trials. A fairer, more honest and more transparent mechanism would simply be to increase the price of the off-peak tickets, but this isn't politically acceptable hence the cloak & daggers approach.


Is this actually a problem? I don't really understand why busy trains are seen as such a significant problem. Other European countries don't seem to either?

I see it as self-regulating: people who don't like busy trains get ones that are earlier or later, people that don't mind or need to be in at a certain time get squished.
I don't think it's comparable to the mainline network really, given people are happy to stand for 20 minutes on a tube whereas they aren't happy to stand from Bristol to London; hence why seat reservations exist.
The idea of higher peak fares is to discourage people from taking the tube during the peak and use alternative methods like buses, cycling or walking.
 

crablab

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2020
Messages
1,299
Location
UK
The idea of higher peak fares is to discourage people from taking the tube during the peak and use alternative methods like buses, cycling or walking.
Given that removing peak restrictions on Friday didn't lead to significant increases in passenger numbers (AIUI, please correct me if I'm wrong), why do we believe the inverse is true?

As I say, my view is people that don't like busy tubes will choose different methods, routes or times.

Anectorally, my colleague cycles to the office as he finds it more convenient & pleasant, not because the tube ticket costs more.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
113,743
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Or finding a middle ground in-between, to make it neutral ;) (I agree with you though)

Trouble is that higher off peak fares mean lower off peak loadings as most people have a viable alternative (car or bus/coach).

LNER are trying to find a way to 'recover' that revenue through their fares trials. A fairer, more honest and more transparent mechanism would simply be to increase the price of the off-peak tickets, but this isn't politically acceptable hence the cloak & daggers approach.

I was going to mention the LNER trial, which from start to where we are has meant, on the routes with the full trial, an off peak fare increase of around 30-40% from when returns were available, and much more on some trains. LNER is a bit of an oddity though in that it is near enough full at most times of day with little scope to up capacity. That's not true on every route.

Also the actual (numbers) "peak" for long distance is Friday evening/Sunday afternoon, not weekday morning/evening.
 

Mgameing123

Member
Joined
29 Apr 2023
Messages
1,060
Location
Denmark
Given that removing peak restrictions on Friday didn't lead to significant increases in passenger numbers (AIUI, please correct me if I'm wrong), why do we believe the inverse is true?

As I say, my view is people that don't like busy tubes will choose different methods, routes or times.

Anectorally, my colleague cycles to the office as he finds it more convenient & pleasant, not because the tube ticket costs more.
It's still important to encourage people to cycle or take the bus instead of the tube during rush hour.
 

crablab

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2020
Messages
1,299
Location
UK
Trouble is that higher off peak fares mean lower off peak loadings as most people have a viable alternative (car or bus/coach).
Yeah; I'd raise the baseline to remove the concept of peak/off-peak but as I said above, use quota controlled Advances (and possibly something akin to the LNER Flex) to sell that excess capacity at a discount, which would hopefully be competitive with other modes.

(I think I've talked myself into proposing largely what LNER are doing o_O Although crucially, I will always advocate for walk up fares at reasonable prices - none of this 'sold out' nonsense, or Anytime prices on a Sunday evening)
LNER is a bit of an oddity though in that it is near enough full at most times of day with little scope to up capacity. That's not true on every route.
But if that excess capacity is so significant on some routes that it requires dedicated flexible fares, then we're back to having the two-tier peak/off-peak flexible tickets, and the suboptimal price (and capacity utilisation) gulf between them :'(
 

Haywain

Veteran Member
Joined
3 Feb 2013
Messages
24,825
The discount is, for 5 days travelling a week, no greater than a Railcard, which a significant proportion of the population are now eligible for and which offers far greater flexibility.
A season ticket does allow unlimited travel along the route, however.
Season tickets can, in the Network Railcard area, be used at times when most railcards can’t. This means they do, generally, offer a good level of discount.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
113,743
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Yeah; I'd raise the baseline to remove the concept of peak/off-peak but as I said above, use quota controlled Advances (and possibly something akin to the LNER Flex) to sell that excess capacity at a discount, which would hopefully be competitive with other modes.

But then you're (a) creating inflexibility on local services where people just want an open return of some kind, and (b) not actually reducing fares.

(I think I've talked myself into proposing largely what LNER are doing o_O Although crucially, I will always advocate for walk up fares at reasonable prices - none of this 'sold out' nonsense, or Anytime prices on a Sunday evening)

Those two things are incompatible, though.

But if that excess capacity is so significant on some routes that it requires dedicated flexible fares, then we're back to having the two-tier peak/off-peak flexible tickets, and the suboptimal price (and capacity utilisation) gulf between them :'(

There's a reason why that structure has persisted so long on regional and urban services. The idea of Advances on urban services is just a bit bizarre to be honest, despite Northern going for it in a big way. My view remains that Advances make sense on services where you can (or should be able to*) reserve an actual seat, and counted places have muddied the waters too much and added confusion for little benefit. And I think this even though I did (unusually) buy a couple of Advances for a very short journey yesterday (because it was in rural Wales and with a three-hourly service there was no possible ambiguity in which trains I might use).

* e.g. TfW long distance services - it's hard to argue against reservations on Manchester to South Wales, a long InterCity journey which not inconsiderable numbers of people do make in full or mostly in full - the reasons for not having them are primarily related to the rolling stock changeover/shortages.
 

crablab

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2020
Messages
1,299
Location
UK
The idea of Advances on urban services is just a bit bizarre to be honest, despite Northern going for it in a big way. My view remains that Advances make sense on services where you can (or should be able to*) reserve an actual seat, and counted places have muddied the waters too much and added confusion for little benefit.
I totally agree :)
(With the exception of using counted places on InterCity services, in extremis)

To be clear, my comments about Advance/Flex were related to InterCity services, not NSE-area or equivalent. Those should just be flat fare.
 
Last edited:

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
113,743
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I totally agree :)
(With the exception of using counted places on InterCity services, in extremis)

If you're doing fake compulsory reservations it does make sense to use them to oversell a bit as otherwise you waste seats which go empty. Like with planes sophisticated software can be used to predict how much to oversell by for any given train. Avanti are particularly bad at that - the unreserved coaches on 11-cars are often notable by their emptiness these days.

(Better of course not to do fake compulsory reservations :) )

To be clear, my comments about Advance/Flex were related to InterCity services, not NSE-area or equivalent. Those should just be flat fare.

But that does of course mean substantially increased off peak fares which would turn custom away. You aren't going to get much call for Bletchley to Euston weekend day trips if it's forty quid each.
 

crablab

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2020
Messages
1,299
Location
UK
You aren't going to get much call for Bletchley to Euston weekend day trips if it's forty quid each.
What about £30? £35?
I presume some modelling was done after the RDG survey to look at the price elasticity. Someone would have to determine what 'lost' peak revenue needed to be recovered, and whether that could solely be recovered within the elasticity of the off-peak market, taking into account any latent demand (which you suggest from the ScotRail trial is limited).
In any case, I'd consider a significant loss of off-peak traffic to be the fault of the revenue-neutral constraint, the railway failing to control its cost base and demonstrating the need to have sensible discussions about the level of subsidy we should/shouldn't be providing.
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
9,276
I think there's a valid argument to be made that weekend leisure travellers are being cross-subsidised by weekday commuters. Whilst there's always been cross-subsidy, leisure is above pre-pandemic whilst commuting/business still lags noticeably. I'm not making a judgement on whether it's "fair" or not, but it's not revenue neutral for sure.
I’m unconvinced. Weekend travellers are using capacity that already exists - the railway is eking more income out of their assets.
AIUI its the peak travellers that are the expensive ones - needing extra assets and staff for services/units that arent needed all day.
 

Bevan Price

Established Member
Joined
22 Apr 2010
Messages
8,344
ScotRail tried this and it was found to be revenue negative. That means that to do it you'd need to increase fares overall. And that's with non-London peak/off peak split which tends to be less of a difference to start with - the South East fares differ massively, and the InterCity ones even more.

So I love the idea but it wouldn't be possible without significant subsidy input in a time of Government cuts, so it's unlikely.
The Scotrail trial was doomed to failure; it took place at a time when services were unreliable and prone to cancellation. There is no way you are going to attract more passengers when they are never certain if/when their train might turn up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top