dk1
Veteran Member
Seems very odd and un-railway. As a general rule it’s completely impartial when it comes to the range of tickets and operators across the network. We get paid regardless.
-
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!
Sadiq Khan says future of Heathrow Express should be ‘reconsidered’ due to Elizabeth line success
- Thread starter thenorthern
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
What's the constraint on 'government can make relinquishing HEX a condition of Heathrow expansion'?
Paying? The government currently doesn't make off the Heathrow Express (In fact depending on your opinion on if track access charges are high enough, it might make a loss for them). The government could take over the HEX and make a profit of £1 and it would be net positive to the taxpayer.
'Not getting the best income' isn't subsidy though. As I previously stated you can significantly lower fares and still make a profit. By virtue of making a profit you aren't subsidising it. I can see arguments that it shouldn't be subsidised, but we certainly shouldn't be making a profit off pubic transport.
Couple of things I would question here though, you argue that increasing Avanti prices will reduce revenue, presumably assuming passenger loads will decrease, so will decreasing HEX prices not increase passenger numbers then, by that logic?
I think I've made it pretty clear my opinion is the paths should be used for a Heathrow Express style service that does generate huge profits (40.9% profit margin) off confusing people into taking it's service and business people who don't care about costs, and it should be used to take load off the transport network if (likely when at this point) the expansion happens.
How do you suggest the increased loads on the network from Heathrow expansion is dealt with? Should the taxpayer have to pay for it?
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
The Heathrow rail infrastructure is included in it, so the tunnels etc, and the access fees changing would, but Heathrow Express service itself is not included in it, and the profit numbers given are solely for Heathrow Express.
Topological
Established Member
The Government can impose whatever conditions on expansion it likes. Heathrow can then decide whether they agree or disagree with the conditions. That is somewhat moving the goalposts though when the main focus is on what happens "now" or when the current HEX deal ends.
You are confusing finance and economics though. If I have an apple and someone is willing to pay £10 for it, I can sell that apple for £1, but in so doing I have given up the £10 that I could have had. In taking the £1, I am £9 worse off than I could have been. Hence any decision to undercharge by a government is an essential cost to society of the money that could have been raised. Finance may report the £1 in the books and be happy, but in economics we consider what could have been.
The government absolutely should make a profit off profitable routes. Cross-subsidy happens across all arms of government.
In terms of the additional loads, clearly Heathrow need to be funding improvement work to the line to allow more Elizabeth Line trains into Heathrow. That means work at Acton etc (I am sure someone somewhere can define what is needed to bring more Elizabeth Line trains west from OOC). Something should be done about Western access too so that more people can travel into Heathrow from Reading and the South West without needing to go into Paddington (soon to be OOC) and occupy space on the HEX/Elizabeth Line. That would all be much more of a bargaining tool than making the HEX cheaper.
So in short, bargain for the infrasturcture improvements and leave HEX as is.
If TfL were to run the successor service, you'd like to think the reduced surplus could be offset against the increased local patronage on Elizabeth line T4 services, since the reduced overcrowding would encourage more people to use those services - especially at rush hour.
The silo mentality of purely looking at how much profit can be extracted from Heathrow passengers is exactly how we are in the current mess where the fastest trains go underutilised whilst slower trains are overcrowded. That simply doesn't make sense on a capacity-constrained network.
The ORR might.
Price difference from the Elizabeth line to HEx are not subsidies.
True, for the Heathrow tunnel portion of the route.
Heathrow own the station, and their decor and staff are biased. National Rail are the guests. I imagine the staff at privately owned stations not at airports (Warwick Parkway comes to mind first) are impartial.
ox_chap
Member
I always hear this argument but never quite get it. The Heathrow express goes down the fast lines. Remove it and you get extra fast line paths. The Didcot semi fasts swop to the reliefs near Slough. So the new fast paths would then get a clear run to Reading? Sorry if I am missing something obvious?
Topological
Established Member
If the government could receive more money than it otherwise would, then it is an effective subsidy.
If HEX is operated by Heathrow then reducing the price requires subsidy to HEX to compensate for the lost income.
In both cases the government has to lose money in order to bring the price below where the market would stand (HEX current price being the closest we have as an estimate of what the market will stand).
The difference between the HEX price and the Elizabeth Line price is not a subsidy. HEX charge HEX prices for a different product.
It is all a bit moot because I still do not believe that anyone really cares that a different mode of transport into the airport costs more/less than the one they choose to take, let alone that the relative prices of services into Heathrow influence how they vote.
My understanding from previous posts is that the HEx following the semi fast provides a gap for the semi fast to move over to the reliefs before it’s run down by the following fast. So the path only exists for that section. If you wanted to have paths all the way to Reading they would need to be consistent and all fast.
Frankly pretty every major city that has an express airport service also has a price premium. Perhaps if GB Rail bought the privately owned Heathrow tunnels.....
Oh, and while l personally oppose Heathrow expansion, you better believe that any attempt to tie the future of expansion to that of HEX would result in an immediate application for judicial review.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
The problem there is the multiple level crossings where locals will not accept closure to suit you.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
There is de facto state involvement in both the Piccadilly and Elizabeth lines. Indeed arguably in HEX too given it is effectively licensed by a body established by central government.
Last edited:
You don’t need to tie specifically the future of HEX to it. The government can require Heathrow to fund infrastructure improvements to create capacity on railways, roads etc, along with other agreements, as part of the planning process. Better use of HEX paths is the obvious answer. There isn’t even really an economic alternative.
I'm not sure that this is necessarily true. Yes there are many cities that charge a premium but a good number of others also don't, or there is an equally good premium-free alternative.
For example that's the case in Amsterdam, Helsinki, Vienna, Berlin, Nuremberg, Lisbon, Porto, Valencia, Málaga, Zurich, Basel, Geneva, Copenhagen and Sofia. It's not solely a European thing either: Chicago, Portland, Seattle, Boston, Washington and Atlanta do it in the US as do Manchester, Birmingham and Newcastle back here.
Even for London there are Gatwick, City, Luton and Southend which all fall into that category.
HEx very much has government involvement. The project to build the Heathrow link was a joint BAA-BR initiative, it was only later on that BAA bought out BR's share AIUI. In any case the HEx wouldn't make any money without access to Network Rail metals, which are of course government owned.
Egg Centric
Established Member
Very much the key thing this to me. I don't care about British people who take the Heathrow Express. What I care about is our image abroad. It's true any savvy traveller ought not be fooled but they're still going to get "encouraged" to take it. I'm embarrassed that to anyone flying into Heathrow one of the first impressions they will get is that we appear to be trying to rip them off. We're not Egypt, we're supposed to be known for fair play. Very depressing.
I’m not sure on that, as it could be a regulatory decision. When the ORR decided that the Elizabeth line was being overcharged for tunnel access, the new price per train was set and Heathrow were not compensated for the lost income. Can that sort of decision apply to passenger fares?
Farnborough
Member
Unlike the original Airtrack proposal, the more recent Heathrow Southern Railway project specifically avoids adding traffic to problematic level crossings in the Egham area by routing the railway primarily through tunnels.
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
I think judicial review is a given whatever gets decided about Heathrow expansion.
But I don't see why amendments to HEx can't be part of the planning approval. If Heathrow is to expand then more people need to be travelling to it on public transport. The Elizabeth Line is very busy and it can't really accommodate the extra airport patronage a third runway would bring. A big part of the reason for that is because the current pricing model encourages airport passengers to use Elizabeth Line rather than HEx.
So part of the planning approval can be to remediate the HEx pricing to make sure that airport passengers going to central London use the dedicated airport train. Remove the significant premium and I think a lot of Elizabeth Line customers at Heathrow would go back to HEx.
HAL have already done both, at least to an extent. They subcontracted operation out to GWR to save money. Fares haven't really gone up for several years and they now have the advance-purchase tickets at a steep discount.
Personally, I think it is heading towards it being inevitable that HEx will eventually come under TfL's remit and will be included in the TfL pricing system.
It's depressing that some members of the forum support the ice cream seller outside Buckingham Palace flogging 10 quid cones.
Not quite. At least in my case, as someone who has travelled extensively myself, it is that there is a reasonable expectation that people might get off their lazy asses and do some basic research.
Egg Centric
Established Member
There's a spectrum. Given that there are loads of people who are so useless at travel they only go on all inclusive holidays so they don't have to be "stressed" by any of this sort of thing it's reasonable to assume that there are plenty one step up from that. Or operating from older guidebooks from when HeX was enough of an improvement over Connect/Piccadilly line it could make sense for more than niche use cases. Etc.
I lean the opposite - transit should be for locals first, and equitable. And if someone comes to London once in their life, or even once a year, they are lower on the pecking order. Our image abroad is already in the gutter, lol. Airport transport should prioritize workers, even.
That said, Gatwick has been like this forever, and people should do their research. No different to people who know that you can take the A train from JFK, or the RER in CDG, for a reasonable fare. The internet is available for everyone.
Falcon1200
Established Member
Indeed, especially people with the resources (financial and otherwise) to be able to fly into Heathrow in the first place.
coppercapped
Established Member
Hmm! HEx lost its dedicated rolling stock maintenance depot at Old Oak Common because the site was needed for the HS2 station. There were proposals to build a replacement depot at, IIRC, somewhere near Langley at HS2's expense but that was rejected. The only other halfway suitable sites, so I heard, would have been Slough, Maidenhead and Reading. There were no serious proposals for Slough and Maidenhead, the latter as the possible site was taken for Crossrail stabling sidings and adding a different design of train to the Reading site, which had been laid out for Class 387s, would have been problematic. Taken all together the solution adopted caused the minimum grief to all concerned.
Egg Centric
Established Member
I agree with you (aside from prioritising airport workers - it's up to the employer to do that) but it's extremely obvious for locals that they shouldn't take the Heathrow Express except for the super niche cases it makes sense (eg when it was 1+1 first class as a luxury start to a holiday or now when you are heading to the West Country or whatever) so I consider this an "informed consent" kind of thing.
I think judging non locals like that simply isn't fair across the full spectrum. I'd judge the foreign *me* like that but I'm a reasonably savvy traveller. Some of my more distant relatives I'd be surpised if they
made it onto a train anywhere frankly.
The "universal" international method for airports, lest we forget, is the taxi. I can easily imagine somewhere on their own being talked into thinking HeX is an upgrade on that (which as we know it is for very specific cases but for most of them either isn't or would be better off with Lizzy/Pic)
The thing is - we always had cheaper options, like the Piccadilly line (since forever) - and even in the Airbus days. It's a shared station (indeed platforms) with Elizabeth line, so I think it does come down to doing the barest minimum of research. And a lot of posters everywhere.
There is nothing nefarious other than a few HEx sales people milling around, but they are hardly aggressive. Comes down to average intelligence - 50% of people are below it. What they pay is on them to discern the options, same as me landing in a faraway place and knowing a taxi might be $$$ but there is a slow but cheap metro option, or a premium train in between those (best for a solo traveller)
AI is the great leveller, before that Trip Advisor. There are no secrets any more, and perhaps don't get on a plane without the tiniest bit of research into where you are going? I don't think stupidity and laziness are ableist, if that is where this yarn goes...
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
It has always been a case of paying your money and making your choice.
Back in the day the choices were HEx or the Picc, and later you also got the choice of the less frequent Connect (much as they tried to hide it with the false destination of Ealing Broadway on the boards at Heathrow).
We didn't use Heathrow all that often back then but Mrs Troll made the very good point that, having spent a thousand pounds on a holiday, she was not going to stand on the sweaty Picc for an hour to save twenty quid. So we took the HEx- air-conditioned and a 15 minute journey time.
All that's really changed is that the cheaper alternative has got much better whilst the premium option has got slightly worse. I still wouldn't stand on the sweaty Picc for an hour to save twenty quid, but I would take the Elizabeth Line to save twenty quid, especially since the 332s were scrapped and replaced with the dreadful 387s.
I think this is what will do for HEx in the end. You could get most people to pay the premium when the cheaper alternative was a clapped-out and overcrowded tube train. Not so much now the cheaper option is also an air-conditioned train with plenty of seating.
As we see with HEx's passenger numbers, which have dropped off a cliff, people are choosing the cheaper alternative. There's little drop-off in quality so why wouldn't you? Ironically, this in itself actually starts to become a reason to pay the premium again: the 387 may be terrible trains, but an empty train is always nicer to ride on than a full train.
Back in the day the choices were HEx or the Picc, and later you also got the choice of the less frequent Connect (much as they tried to hide it with the false destination of Ealing Broadway on the boards at Heathrow).
We didn't use Heathrow all that often back then but Mrs Troll made the very good point that, having spent a thousand pounds on a holiday, she was not going to stand on the sweaty Picc for an hour to save twenty quid. So we took the HEx- air-conditioned and a 15 minute journey time.
All that's really changed is that the cheaper alternative has got much better whilst the premium option has got slightly worse. I still wouldn't stand on the sweaty Picc for an hour to save twenty quid, but I would take the Elizabeth Line to save twenty quid, especially since the 332s were scrapped and replaced with the dreadful 387s.
I think this is what will do for HEx in the end. You could get most people to pay the premium when the cheaper alternative was a clapped-out and overcrowded tube train. Not so much now the cheaper option is also an air-conditioned train with plenty of seating.
As we see with HEx's passenger numbers, which have dropped off a cliff, people are choosing the cheaper alternative. There's little drop-off in quality so why wouldn't you? Ironically, this in itself actually starts to become a reason to pay the premium again: the 387 may be terrible trains, but an empty train is always nicer to ride on than a full train.
