Rail usage

[Snow1964]

The standout statistic is that revenue decreased by 1% (after adjustment for inflation). Whilst that was entirely predictable given the fare freeze, it will no doubt set a few hares running in the industry and government.

What we can't tell is if that was Gross revenue, or net revenue after subtracting refunds for hot weather cancellations and delay repay refunds, and suspensions due to accidents.

Could be that revenue actually went up, but the inability to fully operate the service caused a big reduction due to rebates and refunds. It's not clear from data presentation.

 

[Magdalia]

London Overground 313m 309m 98.83%
Greater Anglia 995m 977m 98.26%
Greater Thameslink 2398m 2361m 90.11%
South Eastern 1168m 984m 84.24%
South Western 1497m 1257m 83.97%
Chiltern 415m 319m 76.86%
C2C 306m 232m 75.93%




Few things stand out :
1) many of the newly nationalised operators are near the bottom

In these the key factor isn't ownership, it is London commuting.

 

[NCT]

3) The operators with some new Trains, Anglia, SWR, Avanti are towards the bottom, but northern with old trains near the top (something wrong with replacement priorities here)

Anglia is in profit but Northern is in heavy subsidy. A starved camel is still bigger than a growing horse. In pure economic terms investing in a starved camel still gives greater bang for your buck than investing in a horse.

 

[The exile]

Anglia is in profit but Northern is in heavy subsidy. A starved camel is still bigger than a growing horse. In pure economic terms investing in a starved camel still gives greater bang for your buck than investing in a horse.

Haven’t you got that the wrong way round?

 

[Bald Rick]

Whilst that was entirely predictable given the fare freeze, it will no doubt set a few hares running in the industry and government.

Those hares were set running a long time ago. The industry gets revenue data much earlier (almost real time).

 

[ScotGG]

In these the key factor isn't ownership, it is London commuting.

Bit more nuanced than that. LO is near back to 100 per cent as it didn't take an axe to services. Nat Rail services like SWR did.

It'd be handier to see difference between SWR, SE and Southerns metro routes and TfL modes. There's also the Liz line factor.

 

[Magdalia]

LO is near back to 100 per cent as it didn't take an axe to services.

I'd suggest it is the other way around: LO had to maintain services because usage didn't fall in the same way that it did on longer distance commuting routes.

Those hares were set running a long time ago.

The hare should be ahead of the hounds!

 

[London Trains]

Bit more nuanced than that. LO is near back to 100 per cent as it didn't take an axe to services. Nat Rail services like SWR did.

It'd be handier to see difference between SWR, SE and Southerns metro routes and TfL modes. There's also the Liz line factor.

Absolutely, when comparing passenger figures to pre-Covid, the service levels being provided should also be compared. Its no different to the way that the Elizabeth Line is excluded from a lot of data because Paddington to Abbey Wood wasn't open before Covid.