• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (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!

Rail operators call for leisure fares (especially day returns) to increase

Status
Not open for further replies.

WelshBluebird

Established Member
Joined
14 Jan 2010
Messages
4,923
But it is possible, of course, that even if their main motivation is to do that (and I think it is a motivation, but I think it isn't the only one; most businesses do want to extract maximum profit from their customers, but it also isn't in their interest to scare them all off) there are positive outcomes for the passenger too.

I don't see any positive outcome of handing all the control of fares over to the RDG and ToC's (which is what it sounds like they want), especially considering what they are suggesting.
As for scarring off passengers - considering a large number of rail travel is essentially a captive market, there isn't a huge risk there imo. It very much is put up with it because you have no other realistic choice.

Well like I say, I haven't read it yet although on face value for me it does seem like a challenge to the current system, even if that's currently being driven by the TOCs. Are there definitely seem to be varying opinions on what they are proposing, depending on whom is commenting on the subject which feels like this is going provoke debate and further challenges.

As I said, there is a difference between challenging the existing broken system, and wanting to remove all regulations which protect the consumer, whilst at the same time suggesting changes that will drive prices up for a large number of passengers, and add restrictions to other passengers where none existed before.

Its nto omandatory though

Not at the moment, but the post I was replying to implied that it could be in the future (or at least that is how I read it).

It's one reason why I'm so much in favour of single fare pricing.

The problem with that is what we will see is single fares staying at the level they are at and returns removed.
Anyone wanting a return would see pretty much a doubling in their fare (as currently many singles are only a little cheaper than the returns).

However for the most part airlines have a captive market, trains do not. Most passengers do have a choice, price them out and watch the passenger numbers fall off a cliff, in particular services used more by leisure passengers. TOCs will be aware of this, despite what many people believe. And if they don't, then they will go the way the airline companies that ignored the changing face of passenger demand.

It very much depends on which market you are looking at. Leisure travel, yeah I'd agree with you (apart from travel into London). But commuters? There is a reason people put up with higher than inflation and higher than wage increases price rises. And that isn't because they enjoy it.

The Monday-Friday 9-5 full time office job has changed

That really isn't changing as much or as quickly as some people like to think.
Sure a lot of places offer more flexible working now, but usually that still means having to be in the office during core hours (often 10-4) and then either starting early or starting late.

The new system will not be designed by RDG or the TOCs - that is essentially government's role. I know this is really hard for the conspiracy theorists to grasp, but the point of the report is to say that change is necessary; that many of government's own obectives in relation to modernising ticketing can only be achieved with parallel fares reform; and that this change can be done in a financially sustainable way for the government and passengers.
It does not ask for the fares system to be handed over to TOCs to revise, and under the current industry structure, RDG plays no role in either setting contracts or fares policy - it just 'turns the handle' on industry systems. It is in 'turning the handle' that RDG has unique insights into how the whole system is working (or not, as the case may be), which is why it has produced the report, which is for government to act on, bearing in mind that they have responsibility (both financial and economic as well as to voters) for the rail system.

Errr but hasn't the RDG just literally set out some proposals of what it wants to see?
And have you not seen how much power the RDG has in terms of removing valid routes etc (seriously, have a look at the RG updates thread, there is no way all those changes are actually getting the proper oversight they need).
If you think the RDG or the ToC's will not have a hand in any new system, then you are being VERY naive.
They have literally asked for regulations to be removed. What do you think private companies will do if that happens?
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

fandroid

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2014
Messages
1,730
Location
Hampshire
Making day returns more expensive on the commuter routes into London will blow up in the TOC's faces. Leisure trips at the weekend are very price sensitive, and take in a lot of revenue. If they try it on, expect 'simplification' to be rapidly reversed and something like a German Schöneswochenendeticket to be magically introduced to grab the customers back. BR introduced those fares for sound commercial reasons. Nothing has really changed that basic truth since privatisation.
 

Clip

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2010
Messages
10,822
Not at the moment, but the post I was replying to implied that it could be in the future (or at least that is how I read it).
And as Ive said on the subject in the many many threads for years about this now is that it will happen - whether people like it or not it will happen. Doesnt matter what you or others may think the march to this sort of ticketing is in full swing - may not be while im alive but its rather naive to think it wont happen just because someone likes a bit of card.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
The problem with that is what we will see is single fares staying at the level they are at and returns removed.
Anyone wanting a return would see pretty much a doubling in their fare (as currently many singles are only a little cheaper than the returns).

We didn't see that when Virgin Trains unilaterally introduced the SVH (a single sold at half the return provided it's accompanied by an Advance or Anytime Single).

We didn't see that when Virgin Trains unilaterally switched from Apex Returns to Virgin Value Singles, the precursor of the present Advance Single fares.

(Noting clearly which TOC has done all the sensible innovation here - yes, the one people accuse of doing the passenger-unfriendly stuff, that made the two biggest recent passenger-friendly changes to the fare system)

Why would we see it now? To make it revenue neutral, I'd reckon on around 60%. I'm quite sure the TOCs want to increase fares, but this is not necessarily going to be a vehicle to do it. For it to be revenue neutral, some fares will increase, of course, but some will reduce.
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
13,305
Location
Isle of Man
It was my understanding that the revenue distribution was affected by routing guide changes precisely because ORCATS takes into account the route restrictions on a ticket.

The routeing guide isn't used as ORCATS is based on the fastest journey opportunities. If you use a valid but slow and convoluted route it's unlikely the TOCs you use will receive revenue for your journey as ORCATS assumes you go the quickest way and distributes the revenue accordingly.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
The routeing guide isn't used as ORCATS is based on the fastest journey opportunities. If you use a valid but slow and convoluted route it's unlikely the TOCs you use will receive revenue for your journey as ORCATS assumes you go the quickest way and distributes the revenue accordingly.

So (and I think this is the point the OP is making) - are there cases where ORCATS gives the revenue to a TOC on which, due to the Routeing Guide, the ticket wasn't actually valid?
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
13,305
Location
Isle of Man
We didn't see that when Virgin Trains unilaterally introduced the SVH (a single sold at half the return provided it's accompanied by an Advance or Anytime Single).

That happened for revenue reasons, not for customer service reasons. They get 100% of advance revenue. So if you can persuade people on to advances in one direction you get more money.

Without the SVH people would just buy the SVR and Virgin would be at the mercy of ORCATS.

Virgin Value was innovative, though, and was a way of trying to bring yield management into the industry.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
That happened for revenue reasons, not for customer service reasons. They get 100% of advance revenue. So if you can persuade people on to advances in one direction you get more money.

Fair point. But it was also a recognition that for the vast majority of long-distance travellers (me included) they know or can easily work out when they want to make their outward journey, but perhaps don't know when the return journey will take place (though again the vast majority of people know which day it will be on). It was a quite innovative modification to the ticketing system that allowed them to maximise their own revenue while also giving the passenger a slightly cheaper journey. Quite well thought-through, really.
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
13,305
Location
Isle of Man
So (and I think this is the point the OP is making) - are there cases where ORCATS gives the revenue to a TOC on which, due to the Routeing Guide, the ticket wasn't actually valid?

Sort of.

An example is St Albans Abbey to London Terminals. ORCATS would distribute that income to LNR as that's the fastest journey opportunity. When it was used as a loophole ticket from St Albans City it meant that Thameslink weren't getting the revenue.

It wouldn't now allocate the revenue to Thameslink as it isn't valid that way due to the routeing guide, so it isn't a fastest journey opportunity.
 
Last edited:

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
13,305
Location
Isle of Man
It was a quite innovative modification to the ticketing system that allowed them to maximise their own revenue while also giving the passenger a slightly cheaper journey. Quite well thought-through, really.

Oh definitely a welcome addition to the ticketing system, but not entirely altruistic!
 

Clip

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2010
Messages
10,822
We didn't see that when Virgin Trains unilaterally introduced the SVH (a single sold at half the return provided it's accompanied by an Advance or Anytime Single).
Because they knew that they would be keep more revenue for themselves with TOC only tickets being one half of that transaction £££

We didn't see that when Virgin Trains unilaterally switched from Apex Returns to Virgin Value Singles, the precursor of the present Advance Single fares.

Because they knew that they would keep more revenue for themselves with strictly TOC only tickets £££

Why would we see it now?

Because the singles would be largely not be TOC restricted therefore less money for the TOC themselves through ORCATS and thus less revenue for the TOCs £££
 

35B

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2011
Messages
2,295
There is some competition from private cars but in many cases there isn't. For example, commuting to a job in Central London simply isn't an option by car. Likewise a long distance day trip (whether business or leisure) often isn't feasible by car.
Maybe not. But the competition is also the "do nothing" option. Other leisure options exist, business travellers can avoid travel.
 

Hadders

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
27 Apr 2011
Messages
12,984
Maybe not. But the competition is also the "do nothing" option. Other leisure options exist, business travellers can avoid travel.

Really? Something like a visit to a relative in hospital, a family event etc is a leisure journey but "do nothing" isn't really an option.

Our economy relies on leisure travellers - the last thing the Government should be doing is discouraging this type of travel.
 

35B

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2011
Messages
2,295
Really? Something like a visit to a relative in hospital, a family event etc is a leisure journey but "do nothing" isn't really an option.

Our economy relies on leisure travellers - the last thing the Government should be doing is discouraging this type of travel.
I agree. But my point is that the railway cannot assume that would be travellers will pay whatever is asked.
 

bakerstreet

Member
Joined
29 Nov 2009
Messages
910
Location
-
Interesting to see that in the current ‘Rail’ magazine, both editor Nigel Harris (‘RDG proposals are a lifeline the Government should seize’) and fares and services consultant Barry Doe (‘one of the best reports to have ever come from the industry’) are absolutely singing the praises of the proposed changes.

For those who are worried about the RDG proposals it might be worth writing to both because judging from much of the reaction in this thread Nigel and Barry are not seeing what you are seeing.

The current Rail is issue 873

In the next (874) Barry Doe will devote his whole page to reviewing the plans.

I have always found Barry Doe to be very pro keeping fares fair for passengers and calling out some of the TOCs’ nonsensical decisions on fares in the past.

What are they seeing that some of us are not?
 
Last edited:

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Interesting to see that in the current ‘Rail’ magazine, both editor Nigel Harris (‘RDG proposals are a lifeline the Government should seize’) and fares and services consultant Barry Doe (‘one of the best reports to have ever come from the industry’) are absolutely singing the praises of the proposed changes.

For those who are worried about the RDG proposals it might be worth writing to both because judging from much of the reaction in this thread Nigel and Barry are not seeing what you are seeing.

The current Rail is issue 873

In the next (874) Barry Doe will devote his whole page to reviewing the plans.

I have always found Barry Doe to be very pro keeping fares fair for passengers and calling out some of the TOCs’ nonsensical decisions on fares in the past.

What are they seeing that some of us are not?

When's 874 out? I normally read MR, but this will be worth a look.
 

bakerstreet

Member
Joined
29 Nov 2009
Messages
910
Location
-
When's 874 out? I normally read MR, but this will be worth a look.

I think March 13 onwards (it’s every 2 weeks so should be on sale for at least a week or so)

The current edition’s Nigel Harris editorial is worth a scan too. But yes I’m definitely going to read Barry Doe in a couple of weeks.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
So I bought RAIL yesterday and had a read...don't bother, it is quite possibly the worst article I have ever read in a publication like that. It doesn't actually explore the issues or possibilities, it's just basically 2 and a half pages of him waxing lyrical about two of the good aspects (reducing the need for splits and things being calculated from a base) ignoring all the possible issues, such as what happens if more than one TOC serves a route.
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,224
Location
Bolton
So (and I think this is the point the OP is making) - are there cases where ORCATS gives the revenue to a TOC on which, due to the Routeing Guide, the ticket wasn't actually valid?
We are fairly sure that this is the case at least sometimes, yes.

You will never know for any one particular flow if it has a custom allocation or other special settlement, though. If there were evidence of this happening, a TOC could also challenge the allocation.
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,224
Location
Bolton
So I bought RAIL yesterday and had a read...don't bother, it is quite possibly the worst article I have ever read in a publication like that. It doesn't actually explore the issues or possibilities, it's just basically 2 and a half pages of him waxing lyrical about two of the good aspects (reducing the need for splits and things being calculated from a base) ignoring all the possible issues, such as what happens if more than one TOC serves a route.
Some of RAIL's comment, and especially Nigel Harris and his big mouth on twitter, seem to me to have been captured slightly by the industry, rather than being actively independent journalists these days.

He even claimed that the government should cease the industry's proposals. Can you imagine a trade association of banks or financial services firms producing a document which asked the government to remove "outdated regulations", and then some Guardian journalists endorsing the proposals and saying the government should implement them?
 

squizzler

Established Member
Joined
4 Jan 2017
Messages
1,903
Location
Jersey, Channel Islands
So I bought RAIL yesterday and had a read...don't bother, it is quite possibly the worst article I have ever read in a publication like that. It doesn't actually explore the issues or possibilities, it's just basically 2 and a half pages of him waxing lyrical about two of the good aspects (reducing the need for splits and things being calculated from a base) ignoring all the possible issues, such as what happens if more than one TOC serves a route.
Presumably the latter is resolved by the ticket agent you have chosen to do business with in accordance with your stated priorities. For an idea of the depth of innovation likely to occur see this article on a system developed by a former head of ticketing with SBB amongst other backers.

https://www.railjournal.com/in_depth/swiping-simplify-ticketing

AS passengers’ habits continue to change and technology evolves, the traditional model of purchasing tickets before or during a trip is being challenged. Passengers are looking for ease of use, and ways to avoid confusing pricing systems. Commuting patterns are also changing, with an increasing tendency towards home working, reducing the benefits of purchasing standard season tickets and other multi-trip tickets.

And as passengers look for more convenient travel options, the variety of alternative fare-collection systems continues to grow.
One of the most well-known is the Oyster contactless ticketing system used by Transport for London, where passengers tap their pre-paid Oyster Card or any wireless-enabled bank card at both ends of the trip, before being charged the cheapest fare for their journey.

However, Swiss-based start-up Fairtiq is looking to take the convenience offered by such systems a step further by removing the need to tap in and out at stops, instead turning the passenger’s phone into a GPS-enabled ticket.

The system is simple for passengers to use, says Fairtiq CEO and founder, Mr Gian-Mattia Schucan. As they hop onto a train, metro, tram, bus or even ferry, the passenger swipes the “start” button in the Fairtiq app to begin the journey. They can then travel across multiple modes of transport, before swiping the “stop” button when they arrive at their destination.

During the ride, the app provides a ticket that can be viewed and verified by operators and conductors. After the trip has been completed, an algorithm uses the phone’s GPS and other metrics to determine how much the passenger should be charged, which travel modes were used, and how much of the fare should be paid to each operator.

The system can also determine if passengers have walked for part of the journey, and removes this from the charge. If the value of a single ticket exceeds the price of a one-day ticket, the customer only pays the lower fare. Article continues on linked page...
 

35B

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2011
Messages
2,295
Presumably the latter is resolved by the ticket agent you have chosen to do business with in accordance with your stated priorities. For an idea of the depth of innovation likely to occur see this article on a system developed by a former head of ticketing with SBB amongst other backers.

https://www.railjournal.com/in_depth/swiping-simplify-ticketing
A fascinating piece, but a model which I simply would never trust for any journey of any value. I am willing to use Oyster/Contactless for journeys within Greater London because the cost is low and I can manage my exposure if the fare isn't quite what I thought it would be. But for journeys of any distance, and where the fare level is likely to matter, it is a model that comes pretty close to asking me to write a blank cheque on the promise that it won't be filled in with too many zeroes.

The other point that is unresolved in London, let alone this scheme, is how you handle fares for those who can't use credit, particularly children. TfL do it with penal fares which are almost designed to punish irregular travellers (no Oyster, can't use Contactless, dig deep); extended to a national scale you have a system that can work well for insiders and deter outsiders.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
18,533
TfL do it with penal fares which are almost designed to punish irregular travellers (no Oyster, can't use Contactless, dig deep);

...or be capped by Travelcard / daily cap but that assumes travel into central London and the further away you get, the less effective that cap is in managing the traveller's exposure to being charged.
 

sheff1

Established Member
Joined
24 Dec 2009
Messages
5,461
Location
Sheffield
So I bought RAIL yesterday and had a read...don't bother, it is quite possibly the worst article I have ever read in a publication like that. It doesn't actually explore the issues or possibilities, it's just basically 2 and a half pages of him waxing lyrical about two of the good aspects (reducing the need for splits and things being calculated from a base) ignoring all the possible issues,

Fortunately I did not buy RAIL, but read the article in Smiths. I agree with your assessment and, really, we should have expected nothing less from a journalist who has obviously fallen for RDG's spin.

He says, if the changes are implemented, Virgin "could" reduce the Anytime Fare from London to Crewe from the current £269 return to something closer to the currently regulated £81.50 'Saver' fare.

Of course they could do this now without removal of the regulation - they choose not do yet he does not mention this.

If the regulation on the 'Saver' was removed what they "could" do is increase that fare (or, under single leg pricing, the £80.50 off peak single which is effectively capped at present by the regulated 'Saver' fare). Which of these two "could"s do people think is more likely - again a question ignored by Mr Doe.
 

Kite159

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Jan 2014
Messages
19,157
Location
West of Andover
Fortunately I did not buy RAIL, but read the article in Smiths. I agree with your assessment and, really, we should have expected nothing less from a journalist who has obviously fallen for RDG's spin.

He says, if the changes are implemented, Virgin "could" reduce the Anytime Fare from London to Crewe from the current £269 return to something closer to the currently regulated £81.50 'Saver' fare.

Of course they could do this now without removal of the regulation - they choose not do yet he does not mention this.

If the regulation on the 'Saver' was removed what they "could" do is increase that fare (or, under single leg pricing, the £80.50 off peak single which is effectively capped at present by the regulated 'Saver' fare). Which of these two "could"s do people think is more likely - again a question ignored by Mr Doe.

The people who think with single leg pricing a current day return of £10 (with a single being £9.90) will suddenly become £5.00 are mistaken. If anything the new fare will be £5.50 so a price rise by the backdoor.
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
13,305
Location
Isle of Man
What are they seeing that some of us are not?

Nigel Harris is seeing the inside of the RDG's rectum, up which he climbed a very long time ago.

Expecting Nigel Harris to criticise the railway executives he wishes he was is like expecting my pet guinea pig to learn Mandarin.

Whether he's sycophantic because he's a sycophant, or because his magazine would fold without rail industry ad revenue, or indeed both, who knows. But he's never going to do anything but gush over anything emanating from RDG.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
18,533
The people who think with single leg pricing a current day return of £10 (with a single being £9.90) will suddenly become £5.00 are mistaken. If anything the new fare will be £5.50 so a price rise by the backdoor.

...and of course, if the return is in the peak (and restrictions don't currently apply) the return will go from £10 to £15 (or more), perhaps with a more significant increase for some people if railcards aren't valid on peak fares.
 

superjohn

Member
Joined
11 Mar 2011
Messages
531
A quick summary of any Barry Doe article:
Companies that sponsor his website = Great
Companies that don’t = the worst thing ever.

I steer clear of Rail magazine for publishing his drivel.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
A quick summary of any Barry Doe article:
Companies that sponsor his website = Great
Companies that don’t = the worst thing ever.

I steer clear of Rail magazine for publishing his drivel.

I hadn't read it in years and won't be starting again, MR is far superior even if it can be somewhat of an industry journal at times.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top