I think we're all in agreement that..

[yorkie]

Simple questions for people who are pro-distance based pricing:

1) Would you remove the right to travel on direct trains? Or do direct trains that take longer routes attract a higher price? Specifically, can you state what the proposed prices would be for York to Sheffield via Doncaster, or York to Sheffield via Leeds, on direct trains?

2) Would you remove the right to break your journey?

3) How much time do you think it would take for a guard on a train going a longer route e.g. XC via Leeds, to excess all the tickets issued for the shorter route (e.g. via Doncaster) and would this time collecting a few pence be worthwhile?

4) How would you deal with the fact that York-London is about 100 miles more than York - Whitby, yet the former currently attracts a much greater fare than the latter. What price per mile would you come up with that would prevent York-London being too cheap yet also prevent York-Whitby being too expensive?

5) How would you handle journeys such as Peterborough-Leicester, Tain-Golspie?

6) If a customer buys a Poppleton to Burley Park return, and issued a ticket via the shortest route and then travels back on a direct train, would they be charged an excess? If so, why and do you think this is fair and a good use of the conductors' time? Also why would you price a less busy rural route higher than a busier InterCity route?

I look forward to reading the answers, in the highly unlikely event that they be forthcoming. If the detail is not forthcoming I'll assume that the proposals to introduce distance based pricing is fundamentally flawed because the people who suggest it do not consider the actual detail!

Our ticket system isn't perfect but it is good for passengers who know their rights and have time to look up the best deals and it does match demand to capacity (rightly or wrongly). I wouldn't swap it for distance based pricing.

 

[Old Timer]

Yorkie
As has been pointed out, mileage based pricing applied from the inception ofthe railways until the 1970s, and indeed until at least 1980 season ticket rates were based upon mileage.

Your post is thus pointless because such journeys as you submit (and similar) were dealt with satisfactorily.

This Forum seems to be schizophrenic when it comes to fares and ticket validity.

Everyone spends lots of time working out ways of getting around selective pricing, and complaining about the various idiosyncracies that this brings with it.

When the alternative is suggested everyone then suddenly changes horse in mid-stream and produce various scenarios which they claim supports their argument that mileage based pricing will not work.

Well the fact is that, as I have said so many times now, mileage based ticketing worked for years without problem despite there being more complexity of routes and duplication of routes between different Railway Companies from the Grouping onwards.

There will always be particular scenarios which will need to be addressed, and this applies moreso with selective pricing than mileage based pricing.

Just because practically no-one here may have experienced mileage based ticket pricing does not mean it did not and would not work.

As I said before you cannot have it both ways, you either live with the stupidities of the nonsense fares system we have now or you accept the the alternative as the basis, with adjustments for quality of service, etc.

 

[glynn80]

As has been pointed out, mileage based pricing applied from the inception ofthe railways until the 1970s, and indeed until at least 1980 season ticket rates were based upon mileage.

Your post is thus pointless because such journeys as you submit (and similar) were dealt with satisfactorily.

I think the question he and others are asking is HOW! How were they dealt with, no one is denying that distance based pricing was used in the past but it would be helpful to have details!

 

[Old Timer]

OK, let me try to explain, as I was told.

Let us take Euston to Glasgow Central 401 miles from Euston.

Now this was priced on that basis, OK

So what about St Pancras to Glasgow Central ?.

The RCH, later the Inter-Regional Fares and Season Ticket Committee, determined that a Euston to Glasgow ticket would be priced direct via the Main Line but would be valid from St Pancras via Leeds and the S&C.

It was also valid via the Birmingham area and via the GS&W. Why ? Well for a start some trains went via that route, and a break of journey could result in a passenger legitimately travelling from Carlisle to Glasgow on a service that went via the GS&W.

Now it would be it would not be really viable or sensible or acceptable to charge more for trains travelling via those routes, hence the Routing Guide.

Now of course the issue is what happens with a Coventry to Glasgow Central ticket ?

This is where the other part of the equation comes into play, which is related to the routing of train services. Ordinarily a passenger travelling from Coventry to Glasgow would be travelling on a direct train which would travel via Birmingham and Wolverhampton, hence it would be priced and available via New St and Wolves, but NOT via Rugby.

Let us look at a situation where prices to the same town/City may vary between roues.

A perfect example was Bedford to London.

The cheapest route was direct from Bedford Midland Road to London St Pancras - 50 miles - and was thus priced as such. However if you went from Bedford St Johns, the price was higher. Why I hear you ask ?

Well quite simply the train service from St Johns ran to Bletchley and connected into Bletchley to Euston services. The distance was thus 17 miles plus 47 miles = 64 miles and was priced as such. It was thus a case for the passenger to decide how they travelled.

Now a Euston via Bletchley ticket was valid at St Pancras, whilst a Midland Road to St Pancras was NOT valid at Euston. Why ? All down to mileage, and is where excess charges came into play.

If you travelled between two stations which had diferent routes, the higher fare was always valid via the shorter route because the passenger had paid more and thus no excess could be raised for obvious reasons. Conversely a St Pancras ticket would have only been charged at 50 not 64 miles and thus the difference would have been between the two fares. As the passenger has paid less than the true fare,then an excess would be raised.

Now let us look at a situation where a longer fare is valid via two distinct routes, and look at the Jct point station.

Carlisle will do.

What is the situation with pricing from Carlisle to Glasgow ?

There are two potential scenarios here. Firstly are there through services via both routes ? and secondly would a reasonable person elect to travel via the GS&W.

If there are regular services via both routes then the decision has to be made which way do we price ? Now this is where a little judgement comes into play.

We could set a Carlisle to Glasgow direct and a second via the GS&W.

Alternatively we could take the view that a normal person would go via Beattock and price only via that route.

An alternative would be to artifically increase the mileage from Carlisle to Glasgow to reduce the differential between the two routes and then accept a loss of revenue for the longer route. I cannot remembe rif that was the solution for that without access to an old fares manual which of course I do not have access.

I can however give you a worked example where this applied.

Hemel Hempstead is 24m 41ch from Euston, Harpenden is 24m 45ch. So what you might say ?

Well years ago we had the Hemel Hempstead to Harpenden branch line, thus there were two routes to London. One via Watford Jct to Euston aznd the other via Harpenden to St Pancras. Now it would be slightly difficult to have two fares as the difference would be very small, so how do we resolve THIS particular scenario ?

Well the answer is that we adjusted the Hemel Hempstead chargeable mileage from 25 miles to 27 miles. This then allowed a ticket from Hemel to be valid via both routes. It also took cognisance of the fact that there would need to be a single/return between Hemel Hempstead and Harpenden that was not too highly priced in comparison to the throughout fare. Variations of say 5 miles become negligable over longer distances but can assist in levelling fares over short distances.

Finally one benefit of mileage based fares was that of Inter-Availability, thus Runcorn / Warrington to London tickets were available at either. Similarly Carlisle/Newcastle to London tickets were Inter Available as were Glasgow/Edinburgh.

I hope this answers some of the questions.

 

[yorkie]

It certainly does, I like that reply!

It doesn't actually answer the specific questions I had, but it does provide a very good insight into how things used to be - it'd probably be equally at home in the nostalgia section.

Thanks for the insight, it is very interesting indeed.

That suggests that York-Sheffield would be priced via Donny so no extra charge via Leeds, so that question is answered.

It doesn't resolve the problem of London being too cheap and Whitby being too expensive though

 

[Old Timer]

It doesn't resolve the problem of London being too cheap and Whitby being too expensive though

On what basis ?

Distance equalises all. You are comparing prices now against a different system.

The BR system of SP would have adjusted upwards for the better London service. It may well have adjusted downwards if it felt that this was justified.

 

[Lampshade]

Surely the answer is straight line distance (as the crow flies) pricing?

 

[tony_mac]

that would also introduce lots of anomalies where the railways aren't straight. York to Whitby would cost less than York to Middlesbrough, for example.

I don't have a major problem with the fares the way they are, individual anomolies can usually be dealt with by route-specific tickets. I think it needs to be a complex system to deal with many different factors, for example the railways should be subsidised so that people don't need to drive into major cities, or to better manage the demand on busy / quieter routes.

I have much more of a problem with the way the restrictions work. They are managed in an entirely ad-hoc manner, with all TOCs seeming to take a different approach. There are far too many different types, they change frequently, and there is no clear information available for passengers - it seems that you have to ring up NRES every time you buy a ticket to see what they are, as they may have changed since the last time you bought one. You can't even ask a member of staff what the restrictions on a ticket are and be sure of getting the correct answer.
You certainly can't reliably use the ticket name as a clue to its validilty, which seems to be what customers expect.

and don't get me started on the routeing guide!

 

[A60K]

Surely the answer is straight line distance (as the crow flies) pricing?

How much would you charge for these journeys:
1. Southend-Whitstable, Southend-London, Whitstable-London
2. Helmsdale-Wick, Helmsdale-Thurso, Thurso-Wick
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

for example the railways should be subsidised so that people don't need to drive into major cities, or to better manage the demand on busy / quieter routes.

But of course, John Major's government looked at how much subsidy BR was receiving and came up with these wonderful plans to eliminate most of that subsidy and make the railway business much much more efficient. And of course it worked! Cough, splutter...

Serious question: how much more than at the moment would you subsidise, say, Northern to reduce fares for commuting into Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, Newcastle and Sheffield?

 

[Failed Unit]

For my 2p I would like to see some standardisation of restrictions, look at the CDR, valid in the evening in some areas but not others. Even that would be fine, but with the ticket been restricted by who prices the ticket is difficult. OK on EMT priced tickets in the evening but no XC. Not very good for a passenger travelling between Long Eaton and Newark for example having to look if the ticket is priced by EMT or XC!

As others may have guessed I hate the fact that "off-peak" tickets are valid all day on some routes as per saver - the name is just wrong as people now buy the "anytime" by mistake. I understand why it exists as it stops the chancers from turning up and getting on the train hoping they won't be challanged and if they are they will be no worse off.

A whole new subject is the anomolies. Market Rasen - Lincoln and Lincoln - Newark are about the same distance but the price of the Newark - Lincoln SDR is about the same as the Lincoln - Market Rasen CDR. If anything you would expect the Newark ticket to be higher priced as it has the better level of service.

It would be nice to see some kind of discount offer for people arriving before 0730 on CDR's. But I guess we would then see a very overcrowded 0729 arrival and an empty 0731 arrival!

I guess any attempts to simplify will result in the passenger losing, the last round resulted in many East Coast passengers seeing the fares they paid going up by making the saver the "super off peak" and the business saver the "off-peak" tickets