Mike@Raileasy
Verified Rep
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2011
- Messages
- 104
I also think on-rail competition is a fallacy and should be banned, not encouraged.
Interested to hear why you think so.
RDG have this to say:
Value for money Where there is competition in the market, evidence shows the customer benefits from better value for money and in some cases lower fares
Stronger passenger growth: Competition on the East Coast Main Line showed that stations where there were directly competing services saw 42% growth in passenger journeys as opposed to 27% for those stations without a competitive offer.
I must admit I don't get the "case study", does this imply this new competition will introduce cheaper fares than current walk up fares? Isn't this the idea behind the current advances on the day options?
Example case study: Easier fares, more choice on intercity routes Amy works for a tech start-up in Newcastle. She regularly travels back to London, where she went to university, to see her friends, or to Peterborough to see her Mum and Dad. Her work is flexible – there’s no nine-to-five and work comes in peaks and troughs. Amy finds it hard to make plans too far in advance and so, under the current system, she finds herself paying a large part of her disposable income in rail fares bought the day she travels. In a reformed system, with a choice of intercity operators and an easier to use system of fares, Amy would be able to use her smartphone to shop around for the service which suits her best and costs her the least. As with airlines, companies on intercity routes would fight for Amy’s business with offers, discounts and more options. Amy would have more control, and she would be spending less each month.