"LNR & WMR ONLY" and other "ONLY" tickets under GBR

[thenorthern]

Once Great British Railways is created, I was wondering what will happen to the "LNR & WMR ONLY" and other TOC "Only" tickets? I know the open-access only tickets will of course remain but will GBR have cheaper tickets for the slower trains?

From experiance the TOC "ONLY" tickets are very popular with families and people travelling for leisure. Back in 2012 I remember from Stoke-on-Trent, there was the direct Virgin service that ran every half hour and either went direct or only stopped at Milton Keynes Central taking 90 min. While at the same time there was the London Midland services before project 110 which went via Stafford and Northampton and took 2h 46m. The Virgin Service was more popular however, a lot of people did catch the slower London Midland Train as it was much cheaper.

Getting rid of the "slower train only" tickets would be very unpopular with rail users but as there would be no incentive for GBR to keep them I can see them being scrapped.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

From experiance the TOC "ONLY" tickets are very popular with families and people travelling for leisure.

Likely 'popular' only because they're probably cheaper than the available alternatives. Would suggest that's the key criterion.

 

[thenorthern]

Likely 'popular' only because they're a little cheaper than the available alternatives.

Most likely that, although a bit more than a little cheaper. Anytime any permitted return from Stafford to London Euston is £246.00 while the LNW Only ticket is £130.00.

 

[AlterEgo]

Getting rid of the "slower train only" tickets would be very unpopular with rail users but as there would be no incentive for GBR to keep them I can see them being scrapped.

You just route them geographically. The groundwork has already been laid for this by removing the right to do change of route excesses onboard in the recent NRCoT, bringing them closer, but not fully into line with the soon to be defunct TOC Only tickets.

Why would GBR not have the incentive to encourage people to use slower trains, say, via Northampton or what is currently LNR over the intercity services?

 

[RT4038]

Why would GBR not have the incentive to encourage people to use slower trains, say, via Northampton or what is currently LNR over the intercity services?

Presumably if the slower trains do not have the capacity for those passengers?

There is no altruistic reason to offer cheaper fares on slower, local, trains. The purpose of doing so is that the local trains are usually emptier than the express trains and it is a good way of selling the capacity (the alternative being to reduce slow train frequency, which would not be popular at the stations only served by these trains).

 

[thenorthern]

Why would GBR not have the incentive to encourage people to use slower trains, say, via Northampton or what is currently LNR over the intercity services?

LNW get all the revenue from "LNW ONLY" tickets so there is an incentive financially for them to sell them as it means more revenue for them as otherwise very few people would travel on LNW services from Stafford to London so it's revenue where there would not otherwise be revenue.

Presumably if the slower trains do not have the capacity for those passengers?

There is no altruistic reason to offer cheaper fares on slower, local, trains. The purpose of doing so is that the local trains are usually emptier than the express trains and it is a good way of selling the capacity (the alternative being to reduce slow train frequency, which would not be popular at the stations only served by these trains).

Also if the revenue is going to the same company they don't really care about getting passengers onto certain trains.

 

[CyrusWuff]

You just route them geographically. The groundwork has already been laid for this by removing the right to do change of route excesses onboard in the recent NRCoT, bringing them closer, but not fully into line with the soon to be defunct TOC Only tickets.

Why would GBR not have the incentive to encourage people to use slower trains, say, via Northampton or what is currently LNR over the intercity services?

Playing devil's advocate, why would GBR have an incentive to split London - Birmingham traffic between three routes, when having the majority using Intercity services (assuming the routed flows are removed, so all three are the same price) should free up capacity on regional services for passengers joining at intermediate stations?

 

[JonathanH]

Getting rid of the "slower train only" tickets would be very unpopular with rail users but as there would be no incentive for GBR to keep them I can see them being scrapped.

The logical thing is to make the differential pricing for advance fares only, so that passengers know they are only valid on a single booked train.

That would remove confusion in a future where all services have the same branding.

Why would GBR not have the incentive to encourage people to use slower trains, say, via Northampton or what is currently LNR over the intercity services?

If HS2 opens, then there will be absolutely no incentive to encourage people to use slower trains instead, but GBR will have been up and running for some time before that.

 

[Topological]

One of the other purposes of these "only" tickets is that it allows the railway to tap into a price sensitive market without having to reduce the fares on the premium tickets. I think there is every incentive for GBR to continue to do so.

GBR will need to give it some thought. The stock is different 730/350 versus Pendolino, so there is an easy way for the public to tell them apart. However, it is not fully intuitive to the point of being foolproof. Two service groups could be created (Intercity* and Regional Railways*) and then the LNR/WMR simply becomes a Regional Railways* service.

We could say that because the railway is nationalised it should offer lower fares to everyone, but I believe that the railway should do things like the "ONLY" ticket to allow better revenue maximisation and avoid the need for additional taxpayer subsidy.

 

[AlterEgo]

Playing devil's advocate, why would GBR have an incentive to split London - Birmingham traffic between three routes, when having the majority using Intercity services (assuming the routed flows are removed, so all three are the same price) should free up capacity on regional services for passengers joining at intermediate stations?

There isn't capacity for all the - let's say, Birmingham to London traffic to use Avanti, for a start. Some form of route specific charging will remain, unless anyone thinks all the VIA YORKS and VIA HIGH WYCOMBEs of current practice will disappear?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Apr 2026 ==

Also if the revenue is going to the same company they don't really care about getting passengers onto certain trains.

Why did BR have lower geographic route specific fares then?

 

[thenorthern]

The logical thing is to make the differential pricing for advance fares only, so that passengers know they are only valid on a single booked train.

That would remove confusion in a future where all services have the same branding.

In most cases it would make sense although it's not always possible especially for services which are relatively short distance and used by commuters.

Take Penrith to Carlisle for example the walk up any permited standard return fare is set by Northern for some reason and is £15.20, the TPE only fare is £12.50 and Avanti fare is £11.90. £3.30 a day might not seem much but given the average worker works around 215 days a year that it £709.50 a year saving on the commute.

 

[Hadders]

There's potentially two issues at play here:

1. People want fares to be simplified. That's easy, remove the 'complicated' but cheaper tickets like 'LNR/WMT' only tickets forcing people to purchase more expensive tickets.
2. If everyone's paying more they will travel on the faster services. This would result in crowding on the fast services with spare capacity on the slower trains, although this would leave capacity for people making journeys from intermediate stations.

I suspect that what will happen is that cheaper 'walk-up' tickets will get withdrawn with Advance tickets being used for the slower services.

I fear we're moving towards an era of Advance fares for reasonably prices loger distance travel.

 

[JonathanH]

I fear we're moving towards an era of Advance fares for reasonably prices loger distance travel.

Isn't it more a case of moving towards fixed itineraries for long distance travel, rather than purely buying in advance, eg allowing purchase up to 15 minutes before departure but for a fixed journey?

 

[Hadders]

Isn't it more a case of moving towards fixed itineraries for long distance travel, rather than purely buying in advance, eg allowing purchase up to 15 minutes before departure but for a fixed journey?

We can argue over the detail but I suspect we'll be looking at quota controlled, dynamically priced fares. Planning a day out inevitably means you'll need to commit to a train home when you make your outward journey - firstly to make sure there's tickets still available and secondly to make sure it's at a price you're willing/able to pay.

 

[London Trains]

We can argue over the detail but I suspect we'll be looking at quota controlled, dynamically priced fares. Planning a day out inevitably means you'll need to commit to a train home when you make your outward journey - firstly to make sure there's tickets still available and secondly to make sure it's at a price you're willing/able to pay.

Which truly sounds like the death of the railways...the loss of flexibility at reasonable prices is a massive incentive to just use the car instead.

 

[Haywain]

You just route them geographically.

How do you do that when both fast and slower trains use exactly the same routes, such as Peterborough to King's Cross?

 

[Kite159]

I suspect that what will happen is that cheaper 'walk-up' tickets will get withdrawn with Advance tickets being used for the slower services.

I fear we're moving towards an era of Advance fares for reasonably prices loger distance travel

Especially if the management of LNER have any say, Want a flexible ticket, then you will need a full price anytime ticket, everything else will be booked train only for anything medium - long distance travel.

Such advance fares will disappear during engineering works or periods of high demand.

 

[AlterEgo]

How do you do that when both fast and slower trains use exactly the same routes, such as Peterborough to King's Cross?

Route them by sector. I expect some form of branding will remain to differentiate slower and faster services.

 

[JonathanH]

Route them by sector. I expect some form of branding will remain to differentiate slower and faster services.

The political rhetoric is very much for a single unified brand, and for simpler fares / less confusion for passengers.

(As a matter of interest, given the Gatwick Express / Southern / Thameslink brand issue, would GBR be legally able to diffentiate fares by brand?)

 

[Merle Haggard]

snip

Why did BR have lower geographic route specific fares then?

With reference to the route in the O.P.; BR actively dissuaded Birmingham New Street to Euston passengers from using the service via Northampton by advertising it North of ?Rugby? (from memory) as a service to Hemel Hempstead.
Fares did not differentiate between the two routes.

 

[JamesT]

The political rhetoric is very much for a single unified brand, and for simpler fares / less confusion for passengers.

(As a matter of interest, given the Gatwick Express / Southern / Thameslink brand issue, would GBR be legally able to diffentiate fares by brand?)

All the reporting around simpler fares has been about advance/off-peak/peak and things like single-leg pricing and contactless. It’s been very silent about how the new structure of operations aligned to NR regions will affect things.

Setting up GBR requires legislation, changing the rules to allow brand specific pricing could be done at that point.

 

[AlterEgo]

The political rhetoric is very much for a single unified brand, and for simpler fares / less confusion for passengers.

There’s no way you won’t have LNR’s local services as a separate brand, even if the trains are the same colour and they’re called “GBR Regional” or whatever The railway simply cannot carry everyone from Birmingham to London on the fastest trains and nobody paying top whack is taking longer to sit on inferior trains via Northampton or the Chilterns.

All the reporting around simpler fares has been about advance/off-peak/peak and things like single-leg pricing and contactless. It’s been very silent about how the new structure of operations aligned to NR regions will affect things.

Quite. The idea it will be one giant monolith is far fetched. That would be completely unmanageable and not even BR worked in this way.

The nuclear option as @Hadders half alludes to is to make intercity services reservation only and remove flexible fares altogether, basically making them a separate commercial entity. Need a ticket? Got to get a reservation and a likely expensive fixed train ticket. This would be a longer term project and this wouldn’t surprise me. (By extension, you make the London to Birmingham Anytime cheaper and it’s not valid on the “Avanti” services)

 

[Haywain]

would GBR be legally able to diffentiate fares by brand?

Yes, it just needs to be written in to the NRCoT.

 

[Bald Rick]

The logical thing is to make the differential pricing for advance fares only, so that passengers know they are only valid on a single booked train.

I think that’s a reasonable assumption where there is different ’offer’.

However for things like Penrith - Carlisle mentioned upthread (indeed any station pair between Preston and Scotland on the WCML), I would expect fares harmonisation, and removal of the operator specific tickets.

 

[The Planner]

In most cases it would make sense although it's not always possible especially for services which are relatively short distance and used by commuters.

Take Penrith to Carlisle for example the walk up any permited standard return fare is set by Northern for some reason and is £15.20, the TPE only fare is £12.50 and Avanti fare is £11.90. £3.30 a day might not seem much but given the average worker works around 215 days a year that it £709.50 a year saving on the commute.

If you are commuting 5 days a week, you will have a season ticket, so the comparison needs to be with that.

 

[Trainbike46]

There’s no way you won’t have LNR’s local services as a separate brand, even if the trains are the same colour and they’re called “GBR Regional” or whatever The railway simply cannot carry everyone from Birmingham to London on the fastest trains and nobody paying top whack is taking longer to sit on inferior trains via Northampton or the Chilterns.

For the Chilterns, a route restriction would be an option.

I agree they will likely have some branding difference, as you suggest a "regional" brand, or an "IC" brand (with the route restriction "not IC"), would be a way this could stay.

A third option (which I am not in favour of, but it is possible) would be to use advances.

Quite. The idea it will be one giant monolith is far fetched. That would be completely unmanageable and not even BR worked in this way.

Operationally there will have to be some splits, but those don't necessarily have to follow the branding splits. E.g., operationally you could split by region, while branding is split by by IC/regional/etc.

The nuclear option as @Hadders half alludes to is to make intercity services reservation only and remove flexible fares altogether, basically making them a separate commercial entity. Need a ticket? Got to get a reservation and a likely expensive fixed train ticket. This would be a longer term project and this wouldn’t surprise me. (By extension, you make the London to Birmingham Anytime cheaper and it’s not valid on the “Avanti” services)

This would be a really bad thing if it did happen.

I do wonder why some parts of the railway industry are so keen to throw away one of rail's key selling points. Flexibility is one of the things at which rail can be (and mostly is) much better than Air and (some) Coach competition, though it still is not as flexible as driving. Throwing away competitive advantages for limited benefits is not a good idea.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Apr 2026 ==

However for things like Penrith - Carlisle mentioned upthread (indeed any station pair between Preston and Scotland on the WCML), I would expect fares harmonisation, and removal of the operator specific tickets.

For that specific example, it would probably be better to go to one fare somewhere in between the three separate ones.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

It all depends how GBR is structured (sector or regional), and how many "profit centres" there are.
If I'm not mistaken, BR originally had a single till policy, so all the revenue went to one place via the 6 Regions, with a common fare structure.
It then developed the business sectors which owned the ticketing for their flows (Intercity, NSE, Regional) and priced accordingly.
The London-Birmingham fast flow was Intercity, the slower/stoppers were a mix of NSE/Regional.

Privatisation has taken that to extremes with TOC autonomy, but GBR will at least have separate Scottish/Welsh/English (and metro Mayors) fares autonomy.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I do wonder why some parts of the railway industry are so keen to throw away one of rail's key selling points.

Because it makes their life easier, as they can diagram a 2 car at a busy time and just price people off it.

 

[thenorthern]

If you are commuting 5 days a week, you will have a season ticket, so the comparison needs to be with that.

Between Penrith and Carlisle, for the Carnet tickets it's £108.00 for 8 trips with the any permitted fare set by Northern while £82.90 for the TPE only ticket. There is no Avanti Carnet.

For the annual pass it's £2,352.00 for the any permitted annual pass set by Northern and £2,016.00 for the Avanti only annual pass, there is no TPE only annual pass.

 

[The Planner]

Between Penrith and Carlisle, for the Carnet tickets it's £108.00 for 8 trips with the any permitted fare set by Northern while £82.90 for the TPE only ticket. There is no Avanti Carnet.

For the annual pass it's £2,352.00 for the any permitted annual pass set by Northern and £2,016.00 for the Avanti only annual pass, there is no TPE only annual pass.

Which compared to 215 x £11.90 is £2558.50. The annual Avanti pass is £9.38 a day, and can be used outside the working week.