Walk-on Fares: An alternative perspective...

[Ianno87]

A number of posters on RailUK Forums hypothesise that attractive walk-on fares are more important than tactically-priced Advance fares, ostensibly on the reduction in "flexibility" such fares mean.

I've bored everybody extensively several times before about how Advance fares and walk-on travel are no longer mutually exclusive, given that several operators now offer "Advance" tickets pretty much right up to departure, including from ticket machines.

This led me to hypothesise on the walk home - Are Walk-on tickets all they are cracked up to be to the industry?

Sure, for the passenger they offer flexibility....but (what everyone forgets is) that includes the flexibility to choose not to travel at all, right up to the last minute. For example, if the weather is poor.

Should operators actually be offering more Advance tickets (subject to quota) up to departure? After all, get punters buying Advances even the day or morning before, and their money is "in the bag", so even if they walk away, their associated revenue doesn't.

I'm not proposing removal of walk-up tickets. But more opportunity to get more revenue in the door that passengers then can't renege from.

Thoughts?

 

[Bletchleyite]

You can still choose not to buy an advance on the day?

What the railway could consider doing, to achieve what you say, is providing a small incentive to buy a flexible ticket in advance, perhaps a small discount in return for there being no refunds? But then that complicates the fare system. If flexibility is required you can do that with Advances, but only by way of purchasing just before travel, and you can always choose not to purchase in such a case.

 

[yorksrob]

I'm not denying that walk on fares represent a revenue risk to the industry in that people can choose not to travel. However:

• Just because such fares might not be all their cracked up to be for the industry, shouldn't we be aiming for a "passenger friendly" railway, rather than one priced for operational convenience.
• Also, whilst people can choose not to travel because of the weather, they can also choose not to travel because of an offputtingly high cost. Don't forget, a lot of flows, particularly those involving multiple TOCs don't offer up an advanced fare, so an overpriced walk-on might be all that people see.
• Even on routes where AP is available, it is often a bit hit and miss whether cheaper AP will be available anyway.

 

[thedbdiboy]

I'm not denying that walk on fares represent a revenue risk to the industry in that people can choose not to travel. However:

• Just because such fares might not be all their cracked up to be for the industry, shouldn't we be aiming for a "passenger friendly" railway, rather than one priced for operational convenience.
• Also, whilst people can choose not to travel because of the weather, they can also choose not to travel because of an offputtingly high cost. Don't forget, a lot of flows, particularly those involving multiple TOCs don't offer up an advanced fare, so an overpriced walk-on might be all that people see.
• Even on routes where AP is available, it is often a bit hit and miss whether cheaper AP will be available anyway.

Well yes, but it's not 'passenger friendly' to rock up for a train on Friday evening and find that it is so full you have to sit on the floor for a two hour trip. So managing demand in a user-friendly way is a good thing. The distinction between walk-up and 'Advance' is getting quite blurred in any case so it's less a case of Advance vs Walk-up and more about trying to sort out the structure so there aren't so many massive 'cliff-edges' in fares between different types of journey, fares and peak/off peak times. The focus at the moment is getting GBR mobilised but after that sorting fares is still a 'burning platform' to quote marketing-speak.

 

[miklcct]

Don't forget, a lot of flows, particularly those involving multiple TOCs don't offer up an advanced fare, so an overpriced walk-on might be all that people see.

This is solved by ticket splitting websites anyway, for most of long distance journeys involving transfers an advance fare can be found in some parts of the journey.

 

[Ianno87]

This is solved by ticket splitting websites anyway, for most of long distance journeys involving transfers an advance fare can be found in some parts of the journey.

Not forgetting that the likes of "mainstream" retailers/Apps like TrainPal and TrainLine offer split tickets options by default, so most pax are pretty clued up on buying them, and splitting to make use of an Advance.

 

[Haywain]

so most pax are pretty clued up on buying them, and splitting to make use of an Advance.

'Most' really is quite an exaggeration.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well yes, but it's not 'passenger friendly' to rock up for a train on Friday evening and find that it is so full you have to sit on the floor for a two hour trip. So managing demand in a user-friendly way is a good thing. The distinction between walk-up and 'Advance' is getting quite blurred in any case so it's less a case of Advance vs Walk-up and more about trying to sort out the structure so there aren't so many massive 'cliff-edges' in fares between different types of journey, fares and peak/off peak times. The focus at the moment is getting GBR mobilised but after that sorting fares is still a 'burning platform' to quote marketing-speak.

This would be helped by showing expected loadings on journey planners.

 

[yorksrob]

Well yes, but it's not 'passenger friendly' to rock up for a train on Friday evening and find that it is so full you have to sit on the floor for a two hour trip. So managing demand in a user-friendly way is a good thing. The distinction between walk-up and 'Advance' is getting quite blurred in any case so it's less a case of Advance vs Walk-up and more about trying to sort out the structure so there aren't so many massive 'cliff-edges' in fares between different types of journey, fares and peak/off peak times. The focus at the moment is getting GBR mobilised but after that sorting fares is still a 'burning platform' to quote marketing-speak.

The way to overcome that is to entice people into quieter trains with bargain fares.

I agree with sorting out the cliff edges in fares, but this should be achieved by getting rid of the eyewateringly expensive fares aimed at the vanishingly small number of expense account travelers.

This is solved by ticket splitting websites anyway, for most of long distance journeys involving transfers an advance fare can be found in some parts of the journey.

Not forgetting that the likes of "mainstream" retailers/Apps like TrainPal and TrainLine offer split tickets options by default, so most pax are pretty clued up on buying them, and splitting to make use of an Advance.

If a split ticket does indeed solve the issue, which it doesn't always.

 

[Haywain]

I agree with sorting out the cliff edges in fares, but this should be achieved by getting rid of the eyewateringly expensive fares aimed at the vanishingly small number of expense account travelers

I think that if you want cheap fares you have to accept that a ceiling on fares at the busiest times probably also needs to go.

 

[yorksrob]

I think that if you want cheap fares you have to accept that a ceiling on fares at the busiest times probably also needs to go.

A lot of the busier trains already don't have a ceiling if there not at peak times.

As for the traditional peak, it's questionable whether there's much potential market for higher fares anyway, given the circumstances.

 

[Ianno87]

'Most' really is quite an exaggeration.

Far more commonplace than most of this forum realise. It's pretty 'mainstream' now.

 

[Haywain]

Far more commonplace than most of this forum realise. It's pretty 'mainstream' now.

Pretty mainstream is not the same as most passengers.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Nov 2021 ==

A lot of the busier trains already don't have a ceiling if there not at peak times.

If an Off Peak or Super Off Peak fare is valid that is a ceiling on the fares.

 

[tornado]

A lot of Avanti's off-peak single advances seem to rapidly rise higher than half of a flexible off-peak return. I wonder how much they make from people who would be better off with the latter.

 

[yorksrob]

Pretty mainstream is not the same as most passengers.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Nov 2021 ==


If an Off Peak or Super Off Peak fare is valid that is a ceiling on the fares.

I was of the impression that off peak and super off peak fares were already unregulated, so are you arguing for total yield management with no fares consistency whatsoever ?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I was of the impression that off peak and super off peak fares were already unregulated, so are you arguing for total yield management with no fares consistency whatsoever ?

For long distance journeys what was the Saver, usually Off Peak but sometimes Super Off Peak, is regulated.

For short distance journeys it is the Anytime Day Return and the season tickets.

I think he was saying that if you wanted to reduce the Anytime fares down you would need to allow the Off Peaks to increase, as the busiest times on the IC railway are Friday evening and Sunday afternoon.

 

[yorksrob]

For long distance journeys what was the Saver, usually Off Peak but sometimes Super Off Peak, is regulated.

For short distance journeys it is the Anytime Day Return and the season tickets.

I think he was saying that if you wanted to reduce the Anytime fares down you would need to allow the Off Peaks to increase, as the busiest times on the IC railway are Friday evening and Sunday afternoon.

I see. I was under the impression that high Sunday demand was at least partially due to there being fewer trains to begin with.

Perhaps the super-off peak needs to be used as a reasonably priced base line most of the time, with the being a bit more leeway to charge more through the off peak at those times you mention.

 

[Ianno87]

I see. I was under the impression that high Sunday demand was at least partially due to there being fewer trains to begin with.

Not really the case on long distance services after midday - LNER even run some (effectively) 'Relief' trains on Sundays.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I see. I was under the impression that high Sunday demand was at least partially due to there being fewer trains to begin with.

Apart from early Sunday morning when demand is low, Avanti West Coast operate the same service all week, and it is busy.

Perhaps the super-off peak needs to be used as a reasonably priced base line most of the time, with the being a bit more leeway to charge more through the off peak at those times you mention.

BR probably had it about right, with the SuperSaver not valid Friday or summer Saturday and thus not applicable to weekend trips at busiest times, and the Saver otherwise.

 

[Haywain]

I think he was saying that if you wanted to reduce the Anytime fares down you would need to allow the Off Peaks to increase, as the busiest times on the IC railway are Friday evening and Sunday afternoon.

Sort of. Rather than just increasing the price of an Off Peak and using time restrictions to manage demand in a rather blunt way, I was more arguing for greater flexibility that would see higher fares on trains where there is high demand - in effect using Advance type fares and demand/yield management to control loadings, in the same way that budget airlines do.

I appreciate that this is likely to be an unpopular suggestion but unlimited flexibility allows extremes of loading. This is a personal opinion.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Or rather than managing by price you put compulsory reservations on certain trains only, as BR did?

 

[Haywain]

Or rather than managing by price you put compulsory reservations on certain trains only, as BR did?

We could try doing that on all trains...

 

[Bletchleyite]

We could try doing that on all trains...

I don't mean the flag bodge, I mean properly.

 

[yorksrob]

Sort of. Rather than just increasing the price of an Off Peak and using time restrictions to manage demand in a rather blunt way, I was more arguing for greater flexibility that would see higher fares on trains where there is high demand - in effect using Advance type fares and demand/yield management to control loadings, in the same way that budget airlines do.

I appreciate that this is likely to be an unpopular suggestion but unlimited flexibility allows extremes of loading. This is a personal opinion.

True, unlimited flexibility allows extremes of loading. It also allows waiting for another train.

 

[Bletchleyite]

True, unlimited flexibility allows extremes of loading. It also allows waiting for another train.

Which means that informing people of loadings e.g. in journey planners (SBB have done this for 10+ years) and on passenger information displays really helps.

When using SBB, I see the "three little red men" on the planner and pick a different train.

 

[yorksrob]

Which means that informing people of loadings e.g. in journey planners (SBB have done this for 10+ years) and on passenger information displays really helps.

When using SBB, I see the "three little red men" on the planner and pick a different train.

Yes, that certainly helps and I've seen some TOCs here attempt to do this.

However it's pretty pointless if you've priced most of your travelers into AP fares.

 

[miklcct]

Sort of. Rather than just increasing the price of an Off Peak and using time restrictions to manage demand in a rather blunt way, I was more arguing for greater flexibility that would see higher fares on trains where there is high demand - in effect using Advance type fares and demand/yield management to control loadings, in the same way that budget airlines do.

I appreciate that this is likely to be an unpopular suggestion but unlimited flexibility allows extremes of loading. This is a personal opinion.

If the railway goes this way my response will be to drive a private car. The reason is that, I sometimes need unlimited flexibility within off-peak period, when most of the carriages are carrying air rather than people anyway, such as late night trains. If I'm forced to pay the ridiculous anytime fare, I'm drive a car instead unless the train is much faster than driving, which rarely happen apart on the direct line.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If the railway goes this way my response will be to drive a private car. The reason is that, I sometimes need unlimited flexibility within off-peak period, when most of the carriages are carrying air rather than people anyway, such as late night trains. If I'm forced to pay the ridiculous anytime fare, I'm drive a car instead unless the train is much faster than driving, which rarely happen apart on the direct line.

I too would stop using rail for weekends away if prices were to increase significantly above present "regulated ex-Saver" prices. The only way I would pay more is for First Class, and my willingness to pay that is limited to 60% on top of that regulated fare.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Not forgetting that the likes of "mainstream" retailers/Apps like TrainPal and TrainLine offer split tickets options by default, so most pax are pretty clued up on buying them, and splitting to make use of an Advance.

'Most' really is quite an exaggeration.

Far more commonplace than most of this forum realise. It's pretty 'mainstream' now.

There is a big difference between people buying them and people actually a) intentionally buying them and b) having the faintest idea what they have actually brought.

I see lots of split tickets every day, almost exclusively in the Trainline app using the SplitSave functionality.

A very high proportion of people have no understanding of what they have purchased. This doesn't always present a problem - most of the time when I ask to see the second ticket they look confused and study their phone to then realise they actually have two tickets for their journey rather than one. However a sizeable majority use them incorrectly. I am certain not deliberately but purely because they don't actually know what they have got. This comes in 3 ways - a) not realising that part of the journey is an Advance. I.e. the first ticket is an Anytime single, they see that and don't understand the second one is Advance and then travel at the wrong time or on the wrong route or with the wrong operator; b) being on a train which doesn't stop at the station where you change from one ticket to another; or c) not actually using the route at all. For example travelling from A to D you can go via B or C. B is quicker and more frequent but C is, when using Splitsave, cheaper. Sure enough everyone pops up on the route via B with split tickets via C. In all 3 cases above people, genuinely, seem to have absolutely no idea they are doing anything wrong "I put in I want to get to X and this is what it sold me / but it says anytime / where is C, I've never heard of it / I didn't realise etc etc etc".

All these issues end up costing the passenger more money and they feel hard done by and it makes the industry look bad, difficult to use and expensive.

And there are two main reasons for these issues: a) the proliferation of apps and websites for buying tickets, the main one Trainline is NOT always that clear at all what it is you are actually buying, which makes it easier for people to buy things without actually being given the specific information about their tickets by a person at a counter or on a phone (for example, in the olden days split tickets were only really used by people that knew what they were doing and had done research or had been sold them by a ticket office which had explained what was what to the purchaser, advance tickets were only sold by ticket offices where the conditions etc were made clear at the time of purchase - so there was no excuse to not understand) and b) the increasing trend for people to not read what they are buying and just buy whatever is cheapest without making any effort to see what they are actually buying.

 

[Haywain]

I too would stop using rail for weekends away if prices were to increase significantly above present "regulated ex-Saver" prices.

For the most part they wouldn't, but on the very busiest trains they would. My point is that saying that London to Edinburgh will never cost more than £80 at weekends regardless of demand isn't helpful. And, if anything, allowing flexibility would allow demand to be pushed toward what are currently peak trains at fares more akin to Off Peak levels. From a personal perspective, I like flexibility but I hate packed trains, and I know that in a year or two I'll being paying public fares so I have an interest in how things pan out.