Fare setting...

[msussams]

As I was searching through the web for the best price for a journey covering maybe different tocs. Looking at split ticketing etc I just thought, Surely there should be one person who sets the prices not different people for different routes
Eg a trip for 30 mins for one TOC may cost £12 another £50. This inconsistency seems to be driving people to confusion making split ticketing cheaper rather than just offering the ticket for the correct price whatever that is.

What do others think? Is there a benefit for individual tocs to set their own fares that I don’t know?

 

[Starmill]

It's not vastly clear what you are asking or suggesting I am afraid.

Different train companies price different 'flows' between stations or groups of stations. There are a great many causes of the phenomenon of 'split ticketing' this is only one of them. In some cases a train company you would be very unlikely to actual travel with prices the tickets. In some cases the tickets cannot even be used on the train company that prices them.

There could be one body that sets fares, yes, but who would this be and how would decisions be made? Who would be represented and why?

 

[6Gman]

As I was searching through the web for the best price for a journey covering maybe different tocs. Looking at split ticketing etc I just thought, Surely there should be one person who sets the prices not different people for different routes
Eg a trip for 30 mins for one TOC may cost £12 another £50. This inconsistency seems to be driving people to confusion making split ticketing cheaper rather than just offering the ticket for the correct price whatever that is.

What do others think? Is there a benefit for individual tocs to set their own fares that I don’t know?

But do you set fares by :

Length of journey (time)?
Length of journey (distance)?
Quality of train?
Local affordability?
What the market will bear?
Cost of operating the service?

 

[msussams]

I don’t know how they would do it. But for example

Bristol TM to Cheltenham is £9.30 for a OFF peak single
Bristol TM to Birmingham is £56 for the same ticket

Just strikes me as inconsistent. I don’t think it matters how it is measured. Just something. Maybe Network Rail could set them?

 

[Starmill]

It is inconsistent - for a reason. GWR and CrossCountry are pursuing vastly different strategies. For many years GWR priced all of their non-London tickets with very small or even negative increases. The Bristol to Cheltenham ticket is a bargain, and it's priced as part of a group of fares where there is often a need to encourage people to use the train as the service is very poor (infrequent and slow usually), as found in other parts of the region such as Devon branclines and anyone using the very slow stopping service to Gloucester. Historically 'flex' was also permitted, where the prices of some tickets could rise by more than average so long as these were cancelled out elsewhere. Thus GWR were thought to increase London and Thames Valley fares at a higher than average rate and fares in the Bristol and South West area at a lower rate. The reasons for exactly why the price is what it is are not public but it is the product of many years' of commercial decisions.

The same applies to XC. They have very limited rolling stock and suffer from chronic overcrowding where people are standing for hours. They have thus used time restrictions to do their best to increase prices almost right the way across the board. They have deleted 'Day' fares forcing people to buy more expensive tickets with more validity than they need, added time restrictions to all long-distance off-peak tickets, even for journeys of 500 miles or even further and they have ramped up fares as much as they could because their services are in such high demand at almost all times. This results in vastly different pence per mile comparisons which I guess is what you are making.

It's not good for passengers but people are still paying it and filling up XC's trains, there is no incentive for XC to price more competitively as far as off-peak tickets are concerned. Also people paying vastly over-inflated fares like £55.90 for a single from Bristol to Birmingham is in line with government policy, which is to shift as much of the cost of the railway onto the passenger as they possibly can.

 

[msussams]

I was kinda aware of the reasons. Just thought is that right? Maybe it is. Maybe having larger fares on the XC routes supports the same toc to run or price less popular route.

 

[Starmill]

Maybe having larger fares on the XC routes supports the same toc to run or price less popular route.

This isn't really likely. To use your example a bit more let's say you arrive at Bristol Temple Meads for the 0900 service for your journey Birmingham New Street. You ask for a day return at the ticket office, after all it's under 90 minutes in journey time so you are relatively likely to come back later that day. The only thing on offer is the Anytime Return at £112.80. If you buy that, a small comission will be paid to the retailer, and almost all of the rest will go to XC as they operate almost all of the fastest journeys between Bristol and Birmingham. In the normal timetable I can't find any examples of where another operator forms part of the fastest journey so it's likely that only very little or none at all will go anyone but XC. Now, if XC were a paying a premium to the DfT you could argue that some of this money is being used to keep rural routes open, but when they are receiving a subsidy themselves it is difficult to see how the purchase of this £112.80 ticket contributes at all to the ongoing running of any 'less popular' routes.

Much of this is in the hands of government. The government could decide to open an unprofitable rural route for the social good and use any money from premium payments to fund it, but there already isn't enough to go around and the chances of that happening under the current government are basically nil. You could also argue that more money from premium payments would help keep existing rural routes open but again this is unlikely to be playing a big part in their decision not to mount a closure programme of unprofitable routes - the inevitable protests and political damage of such a move are a far bigger influence.

 

[cuccir]

I was kinda aware of the reasons. Just thought is that right? Maybe it is.

Define 'right'!

If we understand the railway network to be out infrastructure, and the service a public good and as such that we need to price rail to be affordable to all? Probably not.

If we want to maximize the efficiency of existing rail stock and infrastructure? Some form of differential pricing is required, though the current system is not the fairest.

If we want to maximize private profit, in order to make the network sustainable? Then yes, it probably is right.

So it depends what you want the rail network to do, and what you want to prioritize in order to achieve that!!

 

[yorkie]

I don’t know how they would do it. But for example

Bristol TM to Cheltenham is £9.30 for a OFF peak single
Bristol TM to Birmingham is £56 for the same ticket

Would you be happy if they both went to XC? The Cheltenham fare would at least double in price.

Just strikes me as inconsistent.

How could it be consistent?

I don’t think it matters how it is measured. Just something.

Why should an undefined and unknown 'something' be done?

If the system changed it would definitely put cheaper fares up a lot.

Maybe Network Rail could set them?

Network Rail would be an odd choice!

Maybe having larger fares on the XC routes supports the same toc to run or price less popular route.

No it doesn't.

 

[AlterEgo]

I don’t know how they would do it. But for example

Bristol TM to Cheltenham is £9.30 for a OFF peak single
Bristol TM to Birmingham is £56 for the same ticket

Just strikes me as inconsistent. I don’t think it matters how it is measured. Just something. Maybe Network Rail could set them?

Network Rail are the owners and managers of Britain’s “hard” railway infrastructure. Why would they have anything to do with fares?

 

[Hadders]

The fares system is complicated and I understand why people call for it to be simplified. In the example quoted by the OP what would happen if things were simplified:

- The Bristol-Cheltenham fare is increased
- The Birmingham-Cheltenham fare is reduced

Be careful what you wish for....

 

[Merseysider]

In msussams’ defence, they are a highly infrequent poster so what may seem obvious to the rest of us may not be universally so!

 

[Starmill]

I wouldn't criticise msussams I don't really understand the query. They also claim to have some understanding already but it's not clear what of or what they are asking or suggesting.

 

[msussams]

I was pondering on how unpredictable walk on fares are. I do understand different networks set different prices. I use the Bristol to Birmingham as an example as I know it well. It is fustrating for me who wants to use the railway more but can’t as some tickets are just too much compared to others.

I was questioning whether there should be more regulation on ticket prices. I spoke about Network Rail as an example of a body that covers the whole network not just an area. There are others too

 

[Starmill]

It is fustrating for me who wants to use the railway more but can’t as some tickets are just too much compared to others.

I agree. It's crazy the amount of work you have to do to get tickets down to a sensible price.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

I suspect that what the OP has at the back of their mind is the idea that railway fares should be regulated in some way so as to set an absolute maximum level, probably expressed in pence per mile, above which no fare could be set. But this would inevitably lead to TOCs identifying which of the flows whose fares are under their control and for which they are the sole operator then immediately setting all such fares at the maximum level permitted. And of course could meet any protest with the words "government policy"!

Yes the fares system is full of inconsistency in the way that fares are generated at all sorts of vastly different levels of affordability. But as has been discussed here many times any changes made to provide an apparently equitable way of setting fares would inevitably lead to many losers as well as winners. And if that was to be mitigated by holding fare levels down then the subsidy required from government, be it national or local, would have to rise. Or less remunerative services cut. Or the really lightly used lines closed. Political pragmatism says we muddle through with what we have.

 

[msussams]

I know it’s not really possible. And something we have to live by.

I just bought more train tickets it was more than half the fare to book each leg separately rather than one through ticket. Not everyone has the same perseverance as I did to get it so I am sure people are choosing the car rather than train because they don’t see the cheapest option easily

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I was kinda aware of the reasons. Just thought is that right? Maybe it is. Maybe having larger fares on the XC routes supports the same toc to run or price less popular route.

The train operating companies don't have a free hand in setting fares.
Much of the structure dates back to BR days (1993 in fact), and even then there were many anomalies between routes.
Main or modernised lines were "expensive", while regional lines were "cheap". Season tickets and some off-peak fares are heavily regulated (by the DfT, not Network Rail or the big, bad private owners).
So (eg) GWR inherited a complex mix of expensive and cheap fares (eg London-Bristol and London-Worcester, respectively).
Despite 20 years of privatisation, the nature of the 1993 fares is still reflected in the variation, and in things like times of validity.
BR abandoned "distance pricing" for "value pricing" in the 1970s, and the private companies have taken value pricing (aka yield management) to extremes since they took over.
Another factor is XC in particular has some very expensive off-peak fares because it is short of capacity and has no room for many cheap fares.
Meanwhile GWR has lots of capacity in its HSTs on certain routes and times and is keen to sell the space.

 

[Starmill]

Not everyone has the same perseverance as I did to get it so I am sure people are choosing the car rather than train because they don’t see the cheapest option easily

You are right, no doubt about it. Government policy limiting mobility for those who don't drive and pushing people into the most polluting, least sustainable modes of transport is a national disgrace. It makes us all poorer. But that's what it comes down to, the fault lies with the party that have clung to government.

 

[Starmill]

I know it’s not really possible.

It isn't that difficult. A requirement to cut the most expensive fares would go a long way to solving the problem. The structure would still be crazy but the bad press and anger felt by many customers would subside with lower headline fares and faster growth. Reducing restrictions and cutting long distance fares would reduce the usefullness of splitting too. All it needs is a little bit of extra government funding. We are talking less than 0.5% of annual government spending. But apparently many people vehemently disagree with using more taxpayers money for this.

 

[yorkie]

I know it’s not really possible. And something we have to live by.

XC would rather the fares you found that were affordable were increased in price so that the through fare wasn't undercut. If they get their way, travel would become expensive for everyone.

Of course in an ideal world the cheaper fare would be indicative of the fares charged by all operators, but that would require a complete change in Government policy which is sadly not going to happen.

I just bought more train tickets it was more than half the fare to book each leg separately rather than one through ticket. Not everyone has the same perseverance as I did to get it so I am sure people are choosing the car rather than train because they don’t see the cheapest option easily

There is no need to book each leg separately.

Use any national rail accredited booking site that enables split ticketing e.g. Trainsplit.

Anyone can use that; you will get one itinerary, one booking reference for the through journey.

So now split ticketing is easily accessible to all. The train companies like XC don't like it because they would prefer the higher fares to prevail. But they have to lump it