Expansion of LNER 70-min flex trial area ("Simpler Fares")

[Failed Unit]

As David Horne has said previously, although perhaps not on this forum, and I'm somewhat paraphrasing, but "normal" customers have accepted these changes and, on the whole, it's been positively received. It hasn't been perfect, and tweaks are suggested and made.

But these tweaks seem to all be to the determent of the customer. I am going over old ground but if this is such a wonderful system, why were LNER so quick to shut down the first "loopholes" namely London - Manor and London - Haymarket. The fact the took these step doesn't convince me "normal" customers have accepted these changes. The fact these loopholes were published in multiple national newspapers doesn't strike me as positively received. The tweaks all seem to be about making it worse for customers such as including all stations south of Stevenage in the trail.

 

[yorkie]

But these tweaks seem to all be to the determent of the customer. I am going over old ground but if this is such a wonderful system, why were LNER so quick to shut down the first "loopholes" namely London - Manor and London - Haymarket. The fact the took these step doesn't convince me "normal" customers have accepted these changes. The fact these loopholes were published in multiple national newspapers doesn't strike me as positively received. The tweaks all seem to be about making it worse for customers such as including all stations south of Stevenage in the trail.

Exactly. However, many of those who support the new structure are so entrenched in their views, they are not going to accept this point.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

But these tweaks seem to all be to the determent of the customer. I am going over old ground but if this is such a wonderful system, why were LNER so quick to shut down the first "loopholes" namely London - Manor and London - Haymarket. The fact the took these step doesn't convince me "normal" customers have accepted these changes. The fact these loopholes were published in multiple national newspapers doesn't strike me as positively received. The tweaks all seem to be about making it worse for customers such as including all stations south of Stevenage in the trail.

I think that's a bit unfair.

This is/was a genuine trial. I have no doubt about that. It's probably also true that DfT/GBR/LNER want it to be successful. Both things can be true.

If the trial is perverted so as not to capture genuine outcomes it benefits nobody at all. The trial wouldn't be viable if everyone took 'advantage' of the advice given in papers, forums etc. I think publishing them actually made the situation worse overall.

You really can't begrudge any organisation trying to run an innovative trial / experiment from trying to get some straight and accurate data out of it. You can disagree with the experiment itself, but if it's going to be ran anyway, you can't disagree that it needs fairly reliable and sensible data.

 

[Watershed]

This is/was a genuine trial.

A genuine trial would have require success/failure metrics before it started. When asked under FoI at the start of the trial, LNER said they didn't have any.

That belies the fact this is not a trial in any conventional sense. It is a test to see whether the government can get away with increasing rail revenue by introducing demand-based pricing and removing any semblance of a price cap.

If the trial is perverted

How is buying a ticket for a different journey, outwith the scope of the trial, perverting it?

You need control variables in order to assess what the impact of any change is. Surely comparing similar journeys with and without the changes would have given that?

it benefits nobody at all

It benefits those who rightly refuse to pay £200 for a London to Edinburgh journey!

The trial wouldn't be viable if everyone took 'advantage' of the advice given in papers, forums etc.

I'm sorry, but I don't believe that for one minute. And the only advantage being taken here is LNER taking advantage of people who don't know the workarounds. They are rinsing them for huge sums.

I think publishing them actually made the situation worse overall.

From LNER's twisted perspective, perhaps. But when you look at it from a holistic standpoint, the fact that LNER have expanded the scope so drastically gives away the true intention behind this sham "trial".

You really can't begrudge any organisation trying to run an innovative trial / experiment from trying to get some straight and accurate data out of it. You can disagree with the experiment itself, but if it's going to be ran anyway, you can't disagree that it needs fairly reliable and sensible data.

There is nothing innovative about it. It is an exercise in revenue raising, nothing more than that. They will not be getting reliable data given the many workarounds still available.

 

[GilfachFargoed]

There is zero competition for Yorkshire to London journeys.

Other than Grand Central, Hull Trains, National Express, FlixBus and the private car, I would agree with you.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Aug 2025 ==

There is nothing innovative about it. It is an exercise in revenue raising, nothing more than that. They will not be getting reliable data given the many workarounds still available.

The 'workarounds' are quite measurable, particularly given that they will typically represent spikes in sales on flows that were previously very low volume. Where splits are being bought as part of the same transaction that is equally measurable. The workarounds might seem to this forum as though they will dominate the data, but in practice, aside from the major 3rd party retailer proactively offering a single split (that, as above, can be accounted for), anything else will be marginal - and equally accounted for.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Understood, but that last train from Newcastle to London is not a busy train. It shouldn't cost that much!

It's probably a muck-up on the quotas, although the Edinburgh Festival really does distort things.

"normal" customers have accepted these changes and, on the whole, it's been positively received

So "positively received" that LNER have had to spend administrative time removing all the loopholes.

I think we all know that LNER wouldn't be going to the trouble of doing that if it was only a handful of cranks buying the loophole tickets.

One must therefore assume that there has been a statistically significant uplift in people purchasing tickets from Finsbury Park to Newcastle and Edinburgh.

I expect the next evolution in the fullness of time to be personalised pricing

I shouldn't think so for one second, not without significant revisions to the Data Protection Act 2018 (GDPR).

There's a reason why even Ryanair stopped their practice of inflating prices for people with cookies on their browser showing they'd previously searched the website.


== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Aug 2025 ==

If the trial is perverted so as not to capture genuine outcomes it benefits nobody at all.

If the sale of London Terminals tickets decreases and the sale of Finsbury Park/Manors/Haymarket tickets increases by a commensurate amount then that is a genuine outcome that can be recorded.

Sadly it is a genuine outcome that shows that passengers don't want the 70-minute flex ticket...

 

[Starmill]

Perhaps stop shouting at a brick wall and focus on how to make the most of these fares - there will always be loopholes and anomalies which you guys will continue to find and exploit.

Can I suggest that if you don't want to read other people's opinions, you probably ought not to be reading this thread. It would be easier for everyone if you were to just accept that people are entitled to the opinions they've posted.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's probably a muck-up on the quotas, although the Edinburgh Festival really does distort things.

Tonight it's showing as £73.30, twenty quid less than the Super Off Peak Single would be if it existed (but Lumo as £54.90 leaving at 2135, and arriving 9 minutes earlier, so only those with a bigger bag or a massive aversion to the seats would pick LNER there )

I suspect it was a screw-up and has possibly been fixed as a result of this discussion. LNER's pricing managers will absolutely be reading this sort of thing, if only to find which loopholes to close next!

There are a few others where there's a clear quota issue, mostly connections involving Grand Central and Hull.

I think we all know that LNER wouldn't be going to the trouble of doing that if it was only a handful of cranks buying the loophole tickets.

I suspect it's two sets of people - people who read here and similar, and MoneySavingExpert followers. The latter of course won't overly care about the Super Off Peak's flexibility but will care about it being cheaper. There are quite a lot of the latter.

Sadly it is a genuine outcome that shows that passengers don't want the 70-minute flex ticket...

It's a genuine outcome that people don't want to pay a higher price. I'd question whether it says very much about the 70 minute ticket.

If they wanted to know if people preferred the 70 minute ticket or the Super Off Peak Single, the way to find out would be to offer both at exactly the same price on the same trains but without changing anything else. Perhaps they could do that for another flow e.g. Leeds? I think there are a set of people who would indeed quite like it, but it would be interesting to see on a genuinely level playing field* what people would actually pick.

* With suitable help text on the Super Off Peak, not as it is now that it appears with no description of what it is.

 

[Starmill]

It's probably a muck-up on the quotas, although the Edinburgh Festival really does distort things.

There are quite a few trains without a 70 Min ticket available though, not just this one. There's every chance it's intentional.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Can I suggest that if you don't want to read other people's opinions, you probably ought not to be reading this thread. It would be easier for everyone if you were to just accept that people are entitled to the opinions they've posted.

I don't think Tazi is saying people aren't entitled to opinions, I think they are just saying that in all likelihood this pricing structure (or something like it) is the "new normal" on IC routes in due course, and attention is better directed to how to obtain the best value from it. People are entitled to moan if they want, but they aren't necessarily going to effect change by doing so.

 

[Starmill]

Understood, but that last train from Newcastle to London is not a busy train. It shouldn't cost that much!

Did you actually check if there was a public Advance available?

 

[Bletchleyite]

There are quite a few trains without a 70 Min ticket available though, not just this one. There's every chance it's intentional.

I think we may be talking cross purposes. The issue identified with the 2115 Newcastle to Kings Cross yesterday was that it was priced at the Anytime rate only. This appears to have been corrected today, with the Advance being priced at £73.30.

The 70 minute ticket is indeed missing on some trains later in the day (the 1907 Newcastle-KX has it but the 2017 and 2115 don't). I wonder if this is to avoid a large number of people buying it then ending up crowding out the last train, the 5 car Lumo? You'd not deliberately buy it to use on that as it's much cheaper at just over fifty quid, but if a large group missed the booked train it could pose an issue.

 

[Starmill]

I don't think Tazi is saying people aren't entitled to opinions, I think they are just saying that in all likelihood this pricing structure (or something like it) is the "new normal" on IC routes in due course, and attention is better directed to how to obtain the best value from it. People are entitled to moan if they want, but they aren't necessarily going to effect change by doing so.

People individually generally don't effect these kinds of changes regardless of what they do. It's not really that relevant to anything if the comments affect anything.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Aug 2025 ==

I think we may be talking cross purposes. The issue identified with the 2115 Newcastle to Kings Cross yesterday was that it was priced at the Anytime rate only. This appears to have been corrected today, with the Advance being priced at £73.30.

That's regularly an issue for Priv holders yes.

 

[Tetchytyke]

It's a genuine outcome that people don't want to pay a higher price. I'd question whether it says very much about the 70 minute ticket.

Removal of the super off peak was part of the trial, though. And if sales of tickets to/from Finsbury Park have shot up, that is statistical evidence that people do not want the super off peak to be removed. We obviously don't know whether that's because the super off-peak is cheaper or because people prefer the flexibility (or both!). But it is a clear rejection of the aims of the trial.

No wonder LNER are content to spend so much time playing whack-a-mole on these fares. Can't have people "perverting" their price gouging adventure!

There are quite a few trains without a 70 Min ticket available though, not just this one. There's every chance it's intentional.

I wouldn't have thought so on that particular train, unless there was something to significantly distort demand on that particular day.

The trains without many/any Advance and Flex tickets (AFAIK the two are linked to the same quotas) tend to be the peak trains into and out of London, e.g. the Flying Scotsman.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That's regularly an issue for Priv holders yes.

I doubt the intention is to bar Priv holders from that train (effectively) so that's something that, were I one, I would feed back formally via my Union, as it devalues the benefits that are a contractual part of my role. Or would be if I worked on't'railway!

 

[Starmill]

I wouldn't have thought so on that particular train, unless there was something to significantly distort demand on that particular day.

The trains without many/any Advance and Flex tickets (AFAIK the two are linked to the same quotas) tend to be the peak trains into and out of London, e.g. the Flying Scotsman.

I suspect there actually was a normal Advance available yesterday though just not a Priv-discount one.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Aug 2025 ==

I doubt the intention is to bar Priv holders from that train (effectively) so that's something that, were I one, I would feed back formally via my Union, as it devalues the benefits that are a contractual part of my role. Or would be if I worked on't'railway!

LNER choose to make some of the 70 Min tickets available with Priv discount. If none are available...

 

[GilfachFargoed]

I shouldn't think so for one second, not without significant revisions to the Data Protection Act 2018 (GDPR).

There's a reason why even Ryanair stopped their practice of inflating prices for people with cookies on their browser showing they'd previously searched the website.

Inflating prices might be more of a challenge, but we are already seeing variable discounting to specific customers in other industries, such as supermarkets, where individual customers are offering specific discounted prices via loyalty schemes - I typically get around 10 'Nectar Prices' offered to me by Sainsbury's each week, typically (but not always) at a 15% discount - that is a fairly basic tool at present, offering a relatively blunt discount on a small selection of products, but there is every opportunity for it to grow.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Removal of the super off peak was part of the trial, though. And if sales of tickets to/from Finsbury Park have shot up, that is statistical evidence that people do not want the super off peak to be removed. We obviously don't know whether that's because the super off-peak is cheaper or because people prefer the flexibility (or both!). But it is a clear rejection of the aims of the trial.

Among a subgroup of users, yes - I suspect those users are a combination of railway enthusiasts and MoneySavingExpert followers who are rejecting it for different reasons - rail users because they want the flexibility to change their mind as they go, MSE users because they want to pay less.

That's why I suggested trialling the 70 minute ticket alongside the Super Off Peak on the same terms at the same price, to see which people genuinely prefer. It might also be worth trialling a halfway house, such as allowing people to "flex" a Super Off Peak online so they can be sure of its validity. And see what the outcome is. I don't think a ticket that basically comes with an insurance policy against missing your train is that bad a thing (or selling that as a £20 add on on an Advance).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Aug 2025 ==

LNER choose to make some of the 70 Min tickets available with Priv discount. If none are available...

...then they've probably cocked up. I wouldn't assume competence, as the saying goes - there have been a lot of botch-ups in this trial.

Either way a formal representation from the RMT or ASLEF would probably hold more weight than a moan on here if a member of staff was affected.

 

[Starmill]

You'd not deliberately buy it to use on that as it's much cheaper at just over fifty quid, but if a large group missed the booked train it could pose an issue.

Is that even permitted? I thought 70 Min Advances could only be flexed onto another journey with an LNER train on the booking...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Aug 2025 ==

...then they've probably cocked up. I wouldn't assume competence, as the saying goes - there have been a lot of botch-ups in this trial.

Either way a formal representation from the RMT or ASLEF would probably hold more weight than a moan on here if a member of staff was affected.

Sorry you're continuing to misunderstand the point.

You said there wasn't an Advance available on that train last night, I'm pointing out that of course there wasn't one available if the search was done with a Priv discount. The 70 Min tickets are available with some quota for Priv discount, but obviously some trains have Advance but not 70 Min ones, meaning Priv discount is available only on the Anytime.

Perhaps that train has a 70 Min ticket on some future alternative travel date. If it does please do let me know which ones.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is that even permitted? I thought 70 Min Advances could only be flexed onto another journey with an LNER train on the booking...

Sorry, you're right, they aren't valid on Lumo. I thought they were since they were expanded to validity on other TOCs, but that seems to be more of an &connections style thing. Simple?

I note that the way it's set up you can't even change one onto the later trains online. If you pick the 1907 it only shows the two trains before - see the attached screen grab (image shows the 1907 LNER service showing which trains are valid on the Flex). Oops!

 

[Tetchytyke]

I think they are just saying that in all likelihood this pricing structure (or something like it) is the "new normal" on IC routes in due course, and attention is better directed to how to obtain the best value from it.

I don't interpret it like that. It may be their posting style, but it reads much more like that we're a set of cranks moaning about something that nobody else cares about, and that we should stay in our lane.

Always had to get nuance on forums though.

Whilst I'd agree that this en****tification is inevitable, we should still call them out on it.

Among a subgroup of users, yes - I suspect those users are a combination of railway enthusiasts and MoneySavingExpert followers who are rejecting it for different reasons - rail users because they want the flexibility to change their mind as they go, MSE users because they want to pay less.

I don't think it is a 'subgroup of users' though. If it was just the usual cranks and hardcore couponers then it wouldn't be statistically significant and LNER wouldn't be going to this level of trouble to shut down the workarounds.

I'm genuinely surprised that they didn't add Blaydon and Sunderland to the list at this change (edit: looks like they have added Metrocentre, Dunston, and Heworth).

 

[Starmill]

Whilst I'd agree that this en****tification is inevitable, we should still call them out on it.

Exactly. Most of us don't even care that much that prices go up ahead of inflation because we personally aren't the ones paying the new higher rates. Arguably I personally benefit from the trial through fewer other people taking up space on the train, should I wish to travel in the future, making my journey more comfortable and reliable.

I still disagree strongly with the way in which the price rise has been done. I disagree with the general public being told they are getting an improvement when something is actually getting worse because of the dishonesty of the communication far more than the underlying change.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I still disagree strongly with the way in which the price rise has been done. I disagree with the general public being told they are getting an improvement when something is actually getting worse because of the dishonesty of the communication far more than the underlying change.

In some regards it is an improvement. Again and again passenger surveys call out overcrowding as the main problem with trains, and call for TOCs to stop overselling. People who book in advance, which is most people these days, don't worry about "sold out" because that won't happen until close to the time of travel.

It isn't an improvement for me nor for you (though with a few tweaks I could be persuaded - mostly with regard to making it easier to change at the last minute on your phone, removing admin fees and removing the unnecessarily strict T&Cs of Advance fares, at least for the 70 minute ones), but it is a bit off to suggest it has no benefits whatsoever.

As for the "toxic positivity" in how it is communicated, that's basically standard these days, isn't it? And has been for years - "revised fares" placards on buses are nothing new, when "increased fares" is what it should really say.

 

[MrJeeves]

LNER choose to make some of the 70 Min tickets available with Priv discount. If none are available...

Rest in peace Travel Agents Discount/NRE Advisor Discount holders.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

You say cranks, I say (generally) you are mostly a very niche demographic to say the least.

However you are mostly moaning - 30 odd pages worth of moaning. I enjoy reading your opinions, and very much believe you have the right to moan - but you are moaning, and shouting at that brick wall within a vacuum of that niche demographic.

If this was any other forum subject, it would have been locked on the forum by now, as nothing new is really being added or contributed - it's the same arguements and complaints over and over. I fully understand why though, as most of you feel very hard done by as a result of these changes/trials.

But the reality is - this is happening, this is almost certainly the future of intercity travel, on any mode of transport. That's my point here. Shouting at that brick wall isn't going to change things or put them back to the way you think the railway should be run. I would refocus your efforts on finding loopholes, anomalies and innovative booking systems that help you get the fares that you think are acceptable - you guys need to now adapt to this system, not continually oppose it because you disagree with it's ideology, because it simply isn't going away. You don't like it - clearly - and nothing that is said by anyone is going to change that entrenched position.

 

[Starmill]

As for the "toxic positivity" in how it is communicated, that's basically standard these days, isn't it? And has been for years - "revised fares" placards on buses are nothing new, when "increased fares" is what it should really say.

No? Lots of companies fess up when things go wrong and lots of consumers appreciate the honesty.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No? Lots of companies fess up when things go wrong and lots of consumers appreciate the honesty.

But has it actually gone wrong? There are things that needed tweaking, and there are bugs, but the whole thing is roughly working as they intended, isn't it?

Again, it might not be to my or your taste, but that doesn't mean it has failed.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Inflating prices might be more of a challenge, but we are already seeing variable discounting to specific customers in other industries, such as supermarkets, where individual customers are offering specific discounted prices via loyalty schemes

Targeting specific discounts at specific people isn't anything new, "Nectar Prices" is really just a new name for a coupon. Technology makes it easier to segment your audience into smaller and smaller slithers, but it's still just couponing. And it's lawful under GDPR because you opt in when you sign up to the loyalty scheme.

Personalised pricing in a retail setting isn't easily made compatible with GDPR, especially the right to not be subject to automated decision making.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But the reality is - this is happening, this is almost certainly the future of intercity travel, on any mode of transport.

Public transport. Not the car. Well, it might have a form of it in terms of road pricing, but I suspect that would be so strongly opposed it would be politically impossible, so any large scale road pricing couldn't be much more than based on an odometer reading, or finding a way to tax electricity used to charge cars by way of smart meters or something (analysis of this isn't for this thread, it's just a comparison). And there's really no chance of cars not retaining their flexibility even if the price might vary based on whether you turned onto the motorway or continued on the A road. (OK, Germany's LKW-Maut, a tax on lorry movement, does have a "prebook the route and don't deviate" option, but this is only for those with no automatic tracking box and is really a punitive thing, perhaps comparable to the way TfL stings people for paper tickets).

One thing about London-Newcastle/Edinburgh is that for most people it really is a bit too far to drive in one go, certainly Edinburgh. Some will do it of course but most won't. It's unusual in that the main competitor isn't the car but rather air, a mode of transport that is already fully yield managed, and the OAOs which do the same.

If this was applied to say London-Birmingham or even London-Leeds it's interesting to see what the outcome would be (and if the fares would be able to increase as much). Empty Avanti trains on London-Brum at many times of day suggest that sticking about 30% on the fares there (which is what this has done) wouldn't do very much for the bottom line - people are already driving or flocking to Chiltern/WMT for cheaper options.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Aug 2025 ==

Targeting specific discounts at specific people isn't anything new, "Nectar Prices" is really just a new name for a coupon. Technology makes it easier to segment your audience into smaller and smaller slithers, but it's still just couponing. And it's lawful under GDPR because you opt in when you sign up to the loyalty scheme.

Personalised pricing in a retail setting isn't easily made compatible with GDPR, especially the right to not be subject to automated decision making.

Would they not use as a workaround that the Anytime is the fare, and if you want a cheaper fare you must sign up to the loyalty scheme? That's directly analogous to what Tesco etc are doing now - the prices without a loyalty card are deliberately and sometimes swingeingly inflated.

 

[Starmill]

But has it actually gone wrong? There are things that needed tweaking, and there are bugs, but the whole thing is roughly working as they intended, isn't it?

Again, it might not be to my or your taste, but that doesn't mean it has failed.

I think you understand exactly what I am trying to say. No consumer will see the same journey at a higher price than before (inflation adjusted) as anything other than something bad and wrong.

For me personally there are a lot of advantages, probably a big net benefit, especially the money LNER are spending on extra generous 10% cashback deals and the much lower chance of the train being heavily loaded. However for the public in general...