They tried this in the West Midlands earlier this year with the Two Together Railcard, which was valid nationwide, but it was discontinued.
-
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!
Boycott of the railways
- Thread starter Voyagergirl
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Whatever they tried in Birmingham, it certainly couldn't be considered equivalent to a Network Card as it would have been of neither use nor ornament for myself and other singletons, or indeed couples who aren't joined at the hip twenty four hours a day.
They ought to consider the network card as a twenty year long pilot project and extend it across the network.
Carps1000
Member
£115.00 for 2 hours train trave.??? Not too bad....£578-00 for 2 hours plane travel Hmmmm...at least you claimed yours back some arnt so lucky
The railways still offer remarkable value on some deals.
I have a Sheffield to Nottingham ticket booked for Thursday for just £3. This is at the end of a day travelling on the whole of the Northern Network for just £10.
Rovers in general, offer some remarkable deals
http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/promotions/rangers_and_rovers.html
Eg, the whole of the West Midlands as far as Hereford, Crewe, Northampton and Leamington for £21 for the day, there's a similar ticket in the NW.
Or the whole of West Yorkshire train and bus for £7 per day.
Or a all trains and buses for £11 for the day in Derbyshire and surrounding area, £20 for a group of 2 adults and 3 children?
These are the fares rarely pointed out by the misguided press talking about peak time Manchester - London trains aimed at business people or certain transport secretaries when citing the railways are for rich people.
I suppose spending £500 plus on a car every month (the average) is transport for the people?
I have a Sheffield to Nottingham ticket booked for Thursday for just £3. This is at the end of a day travelling on the whole of the Northern Network for just £10.
Rovers in general, offer some remarkable deals
http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/promotions/rangers_and_rovers.html
Eg, the whole of the West Midlands as far as Hereford, Crewe, Northampton and Leamington for £21 for the day, there's a similar ticket in the NW.
Or the whole of West Yorkshire train and bus for £7 per day.
Or a all trains and buses for £11 for the day in Derbyshire and surrounding area, £20 for a group of 2 adults and 3 children?
These are the fares rarely pointed out by the misguided press talking about peak time Manchester - London trains aimed at business people or certain transport secretaries when citing the railways are for rich people.
I suppose spending £500 plus on a car every month (the average) is transport for the people?
dk1
Veteran Member
A lady i know who reguarly uses the train often speaks to me because i work there & i often get earache. However she has had nothing but praise since she passed through Stratford during the Olympics & was blown away with the organisation & friendliness from everyone. This has led her to travel several extra journeys & also to upgrade at weekends to 1st thanks to the complimentary tea/coffee/wifi on GA Intercity.
Her latest plans are for next month & was purely down to an email. She is heading to an Austrian restaurant in the capital with two friends for a total cost of £30 return from Norwich. Apparently a seat sale is available with single tickets for just £5!!
Her latest plans are for next month & was purely down to an email. She is heading to an Austrian restaurant in the capital with two friends for a total cost of £30 return from Norwich. Apparently a seat sale is available with single tickets for just £5!!
At least people aren't making the usual mistake of comparing a walk-up train ticket to a plane ticket booked three months out.
AndyLandy
Established Member
It cost me about £10 for two hours train travel last time I did the Mid Cheshre Railway. Cuddington to Manchester and back again. Much better value than your £115!
Given that most people will always have a car and that getting people to give up cars is unreasonable, the best case scenario is getting people to use cars less. I don't get a discount on my road tax for using the train more. Therefore the fixed costs of car ownership are irrelevent when comparing rail v road - people pay these whether they use the train or not anyway. What matters is the marginal cost of a journey by car versus the cost of a journey by rail.
AndyLandy
Established Member
I don't think it's nearly that simple. There are a whole bunch of other factors that come into play. Families who use the train more might move down from two cars to one. Or perhaps you change your car from an estate to a coupé. And some people do pass on having a car where public transport is adequate. I've got friends in exactly these situations, either looking to buy a car so they don't have to use the train, or selling their car because the train does what they need.
There's also the question of a family of four paying two full and two half fares versus a single person paying one full fare. The road costs are similar (depending on slight variations in fuel consumption and meals bought at service stations) but rail costs are three-times higher for the family.
Don't forget the Family and Friends Railcard.
Comparing cost per hour of travel isn't at all useful, as for most people a journey taking longer is not what they want because it means that they will arrive later; instead it makes more sense to compare cost per mile travelled
Ultimately, we all have our own value on travel, be it money, time or more likely a balance between them both - only the traveller can make that choice based upon their specific needs for that trip. You might prioritise time getting home after a night out, prioritise costs for a holiday trip, focus on a cost/travel time mix for getting to work.
Trouble with that is that it makes airlines bargain-tastic - pricing London to Birmingham and return in the same way Emirates currently price London to Sydney and return would give you an Advance Return price of...
... £5.85 return
Trouble with that is that it makes airlines bargain-tastic - pricing London to Birmingham and return in the same way Emirates currently price London to Sydney and return would give you an Advance Return price of...
... £5.85 return
Well at least its in the same order of magnitude, assuming the very cheapest AP tiers
On a per way basis it is about 3 times less than the cheapest AP ticket.
£5.85 return would be an unreasonably low fare to charge for such a journey. I've commented before how I beleive even the current lowest tiers are too cheap and should be increased with the additional revnue used to reduce the higher tier journeys.
AndyLandy
Established Member
Out of curiositly, what problem would that solve? I thought the whole point of tiered fare structures was that you could calculate appropriate quotas per price point to maximise loadings.
Exactly, any direct fast/semi fast service will beat the car all day long. However I'd love to give the LM Crewe to Euston service a run for its money with my Fiat Coupé or is that a bit too 'Clarkson'?
Interestingly the longest direct service in the UK (Aberdeen to Penzance) would be beaten by a car according to Google Maps (13 hr 22 versus 11hr 28) although I imagine a 2nd driver would be needed!
The third way of travelling is to belong to a car club, that way when you NEED a car you have access to one (generally for a yearly fee of about £50) and then you pay for the travel you use it. Then for the day to day travel you have a cycle, walk, a season ticket (bus &/or train) or any combination.
If you then compare the purchase costs of a car the it can work out fairly reasonable. For example you buy a 3 year old car for £4,000 cash and keep it for 6 years and sell it for £400 that works out at £50 per month (more if you take out a loan and/or your car depreciates by more than £3,600 over 6 years). That would give you access to the car club car about 9 times a month (just on your purchase costs).
However if you take out a fairly cheap lease car you are then looking at about £100 per month, which makes your costs a lot higher.
If you then use the at least £500 per year you save on tax, MOT, servicing and insurance for you season ticket(s) (or at least a fair chunk of it/them).
OK, that all assumes that you have access to a car club and reasonable public transport, which not everyone has. However it does seam odd that so many people who live in large towns and in cities where they do have access to such facilities still argue that it is cheaper to drive everywhere just because they do not consider the purchase costs of the vehicles in the first place.
AndyLandy
Established Member
Indeed. As a non-driver, there are other things that also come into play, like being prepared to take a taxi a little more often. There are also hire cars. If I ever do get a driving licence, I doubt I'd get a car, but I might hire one for a couple of weeks around Christmas, so I can travel home with heavy bags and have a vehicle for the period, but go back to public transport in the new year.
With the greatest amount of respect though its always difficult having rational debate about fares on this particular forum as many of the responders are completely isolated from the high walk-on fares by virtue of the PRIV cards they have.
It's very easy to say there is no problem with fares when you get 75% off and it doesnt cost you £200 for an anytime return to London
That is partially offset by the Company Car driver mentality that only counts the cost of fuel when saying how much it costs to drive (and also often forgets how much their consumption drops in rush hour traffic).
Aren't you assuming everyone lives next door to the originating station and their destination lies next to the target station, and the journey lies on the same radial route? ? I commute Southampton to SLough (am 2 hrs, pm 2.5hrs). Marginal cost = ticket (£28.80) + car park (£12) + fully depreciated mileage to/from stn (£12) = £53 for 150 miles = 35ppm with a mile walk each way on top rain or shine. Reliability factor 90%. Comfort factor 50%
THe car takes 1.5 hrs. Marginal cost (opex) = 17ppm, reliability = 95% comfort = 95%.
So you tell me where is the incentive to do other road users a favour and take the train?
I can monetise the capex on the car as (mileage 10k pa, depreciation £3kpa, insurance £500, tax £200, servicing £500 and fuel economy 8 l/mile @ £1.35 /litre. Put that lot in and the car's gross cost rises to 50-60ppm but Goatboy is right - we own cars anyway so you cannot just spread your capex in that way - it is bad economics.
SOmeone at the start of the thread asked what is a realistic price for a train journey. here's a stab.
If I can sit in comfort and do productive work for half the journey that is 2 hours in a working day, and that is my (only) value proposition for rail. If the train is crowded, or uncomfortable like the hideous 220 voyager then I have to pay a further first class uplift fare to guarantee working conditions which blows the rail business case apart once again.
An attractive peak fare for my 150 mile commute journey should be around £20, or say 15ppm. The car park should be £5 per day, not the rip off it is , otherwise it is not economic, as the figures show.
Finally I want the railway to compete with roads as a social railway, not with airlines for Gods sake. Where the hell are we going with transport policy?
I think your sums are out. Even if you "own the car anyway" commuting from Southampton to Slough daily is an extra 25,000 miles a year, so that's 500 quid a year in servicing just for that, opex. Plus a set of tyres per year, opex, set of brakes every year, brake discs every two, quarter of a clutch if fitted, maybe a third of a cambelt and so on.
You fundamental problem is that in a sane society a 150 mile daily commute would not be seen as sustainable. It can't be economically viable for society to provide the infrastructure to make that practical, road or rail.
railuser007
Member
- Joined
- 22 Jul 2012
- Messages
- 21
I have been more than 200 miles a day daily commute for a while and most of it on a 220 or if lucky a 221 with more space for everyone; the infrastructure is there to make this possible it just that it needs to be improved to make it more reliable and extra capacity so at least people can get on and off safely quickly.
A couple of other things to factor in
- walking to and from the station provides some gentle exercise - in my case an hour per day. I suppose the same effect could be achieved by parking a mile away from the office but somehow I don't think I would.....
- time spent driving is at best dead time and at worst highly stressful - time spent on the train can be used to work, nap, read or socialise with fellow passengers (yes I do speak to my fellow commuters).
- if I use a car for commuting I need to replace it more often (say once every 2-3 years rather than once every 9-10 years) thus increasing the cost of depreciation per year
- walking to and from the station provides some gentle exercise - in my case an hour per day. I suppose the same effect could be achieved by parking a mile away from the office but somehow I don't think I would.....
- time spent driving is at best dead time and at worst highly stressful - time spent on the train can be used to work, nap, read or socialise with fellow passengers (yes I do speak to my fellow commuters).
- if I use a car for commuting I need to replace it more often (say once every 2-3 years rather than once every 9-10 years) thus increasing the cost of depreciation per year
I didn't say it wasn't possible, I'm just not sure it's economically sensible for society to provide the infrastructure, whether it's subsidising the railways or building ever more ever bigger motorways.
Markdvdman
Member
You CAN get cheap deals on the HOWL - but you need to do complex ticket splitting. I do agree though it is heavily inefficient and the train is almost always rubbish
ian959
Member
I just have to laugh at some of the naive arguments displayed in this thread.
Fares are subjectively too expensive? Simply a factor of government policy. If you want cheaper fares, then there has to be an offset somewhere else. Most obvious one is government revenue has to increase. How do you increase government revenue? Lots of ways but the easiest and simplest is tax increases. Watch everyone complain like fury about that!
No incentive to use the train instead of the car for a 2 hour commute? Err, that is an urban planning problem as well as a personal choice issue. Which is easier to solve? The latter. No point complaining if you choose to live 200 miles from where your job is.
It is cheaper to drive from one end of the country to the other than it is to travel by train? Well maybe it is but one would have to question the sanity of someone who would want to spend 12 hours plus driving from Penzance to Aberdeen or whatever!
The sad facts of life are that EVERYTHING we do and we choose is a compromise and compromises never work out satisfying the ideals.
Certainly the UK ticket pricing/route permitted structure is ridiculously tortured and overly complicated. That is certainly the first thing that needs to be addressed, not whether fares are too expensive. First way to simply the fares structure? Get rid of the peak/off peak idea. The UK as far as I am aware from personal use is the only country that has this stupidity. Everywhere else I have traveled the fare is the same whatever the time of day. The choice is simple: single or return from point A to point B. The only concession is usually some form of day rover ticket allowing unlimited travel or weekly/monthly ticket for unlimited travel between 2 points.
Fares are subjectively too expensive? Simply a factor of government policy. If you want cheaper fares, then there has to be an offset somewhere else. Most obvious one is government revenue has to increase. How do you increase government revenue? Lots of ways but the easiest and simplest is tax increases. Watch everyone complain like fury about that!
No incentive to use the train instead of the car for a 2 hour commute? Err, that is an urban planning problem as well as a personal choice issue. Which is easier to solve? The latter. No point complaining if you choose to live 200 miles from where your job is.
It is cheaper to drive from one end of the country to the other than it is to travel by train? Well maybe it is but one would have to question the sanity of someone who would want to spend 12 hours plus driving from Penzance to Aberdeen or whatever!
The sad facts of life are that EVERYTHING we do and we choose is a compromise and compromises never work out satisfying the ideals.
Certainly the UK ticket pricing/route permitted structure is ridiculously tortured and overly complicated. That is certainly the first thing that needs to be addressed, not whether fares are too expensive. First way to simply the fares structure? Get rid of the peak/off peak idea. The UK as far as I am aware from personal use is the only country that has this stupidity. Everywhere else I have traveled the fare is the same whatever the time of day. The choice is simple: single or return from point A to point B. The only concession is usually some form of day rover ticket allowing unlimited travel or weekly/monthly ticket for unlimited travel between 2 points.
I presume you are talking exclusively about walk up tickets. It could be argued that French TGV trains have peak and off-peak rates for full fares, but since these trains have compulsory reservation, you can only use one train with your ticket anyway. (Although full fare tickets can easily be changed).
I can't think of anywhere else in western Europe that has peak and off-peak walk up single tickets. However, some of the Dutch railcards only give a discount off-peak. Regional tickets in Germany are mostly only valid after 0900. The Swiss day ticket is cheaper after 0900.
Last edited:
- Status