Modern Railways: LNER and compulsory reservations

[DB]

An Advance single from Edinburgh to London still costs more than a Doncaster to York Off Peak Day Return.

Short distance passengers are welcome, it just involves choosing your train at least 5 minutes before (which most people do anyway)

Right - and what if I need to travel at some point in the afternoon on a Friday but don't know when (this does happen, it's not hypothetical) and all the trains are as full as the booking system will allow (and they will be, going north at least)?

This reduced capacity will lose them a fair proportion of the Doncaster-York market (they will drive instead).

If f they are already selling a maximum of long-distance advance tickets they can't sell any more, so they've turned away the short-distance standing customers for no benefit.
If the train isn't quite booked up, how many more people do you reckon would decide that 'yes, I will book a train because I know it won't be crowded'? Is the income from those few extra advance tickets going to be more than all the revenue they've lost? Remember that the trains may actually not be at capacity on some days, but if short-distance passengers know that they might not be able to travel, they may well decide not to risk it and drive instead.

Can you not see how tenuous your arguments are getting?

It always seems faintly absurd at Leeds to see the LNER Harrogate extensions displayed with “You MUST have a seat reservation to use this service“ - it’s not as if there’s much recourse if somebody was found onboard without.

And it's not as if they will be busy, either!

Same with the Aire Valley - the evening one only has a handful of passengers even in normal circumstances.

 

[Roast Veg]

As said abou

Right - and what if I need to travel at some point in the afternoon on a Friday but don't know when (this does happen, it's not hypothetical) and all the trains are as full as the booking system will allow (and they will be, going north at least)?

This is the exact scenario that makes me very anxious about compulsory reservations. I can book a precise train going out, but almost never on the return journey, because for leisure my plans are often open ended. In a very practical sense it can be down to knowing a lot about timings for my home station, but not about a place I've never visited!

 

[bramling]

I'm suggesting more passengers might actually prefer them overall than dislike them.

How does it follow that just because they *might* like them, that they would not use the railway at all if the feature was not provided? Especially against the pretty much guaranteed certainty that some users would be put off by inflexibility.

And, of course, the scenario of “sorry, your booked train is cancelled, wait here whilst we try to accommodate you (and a couple of hundred others in the queue) on the next available service” As seen on airport reality TV dramas!

 

[JonathanH]

One element to this is that LNER is being used to test different possible futures for rail ticketing, such as the single ticket pricing trial from London to Leeds, Newcastle and Edinburgh. If it works there it will happen elsewhere. We will have to see if it works as well as LNER (and whoever is behind it) think it will.

There are movements from both RDG and government towards fare reform. The majority of 'normal' passengers say they want fare reform even if they don't know what it is they want.

RDG's 'easier fares' website has three priorities for future fares:

1. The ‘unbundling’ of fares, through a move to a single fare as the basic unit of all pricing in the new system, with algorithmic rules underpinned by regulation to allow and encourage the best combinations of single leg fares for return, through (allowing travel from any point on the network to another regardless of operator) and multi-journey tickets. This is similar to the way fares are currently structured within London, which has its own rules distinct from the rest of the network.
2. Train companies to be able to create discounted, premium, train specific and personalised variations of these fares, for example, charging less at quieter periods, more for first class, less for reduced flexibility, and so on. This ensures that fares are priced appropriately to market and are not simply the sum of their parts.
3. Protection from excessive fares through regulation of price levels rather than of a limited number of specific fares types that may not reflect customers’ needs. For example, moving from regulating the day return and 7-day Season Ticket for commuters, to regulating the maximum price paid when travelling over the course of a week - with systems programmed to deliver this automatically.

Number one of nine benefits they tout is

A simplified buying process - so people could buy from an easy to understand range of tickets online and on smart devices, or use pay-as-you-go.

Those who can make the most of what we have today can be fearful in some ways as to what this might entail. Compulsory reservations from London on the 'Intercity' operations seem entirely consistent with these proposals and probably what 'focus groups' would say they want if it means that people are ensured of a seat.

The worst part of this for the 'day trip' market is that single ticket pricing does possibly lead to higher fares for certain journeys, relative to the 'cheap day returns' which have become 'off-peak day returns'. Clearly single leg pricing for fares means that, for the Intercity operators, compulsory reservations would be a natural extension.

We also have to note that, if you live in London and the South East, LNER is the train company you use if you are going on a long-distance trip to Yorkshire, the North East or Scotland. If you live in Yorkshire, the North East and Scotland, it is how you get to London. If you live in between, it is how you go on a short-distance day trip. To the majority of its users, LNER is a long-distance operator.

If the compulsory reservation idea extends to travelling from London to Cambridge, Oxford, Southampton, Bournemouth, Exeter (and why not), then it becomes more challenging.

It is somewhat ironic that LNER were chasing the short-distance off-peak and weekend market between Stevenage and London prior to March 2020.

 

[Ianno87]

How does it follow that just because they *might* like them, doesn’t necessarily follow that they would not use the railway if not provided? Especially against the pretty much guaranteed certainty that some users would be put off by inflexibility.

Don't know the answer. But clearly (if the story is true) LNER think it is worthwhile if the advantages to some passengers outweigh the disadvantages to others.

The railway is, at least, correct in that it cannot just assume it can necessarily keep doing the same thing forever.

An example from another industry is how cinemas have basically moved from "pay on arrival" to "book in advance" over the past decade or so.

 

[DB]

Don't know the answer. But clearly (if the story is true) LNER think it is worthwhile if the advantages to some passengers outweigh the disadvantages to others.

The railway is, at least, correct in that it cannot just assume it can necessarily keep doing the same thing forever.

LNER want what is easiest for them! Far easier to manage if they can impose capacity limits.

Don't think anyone is suggesting 'doing the same thing forever' - but changes should take all users into account, not just the long-distance, book ahead ones and sod the rest!

 

[philosopher]

This is an entirely unsurprising 'development'. LNER have shown their disdain for walk-up passengers in many ways. From removing long-standing permitted routes (e.g. Edinburgh to London via the WCML) to eliminating return tickets, and now this.

To be fair it is not just LNER, I do seem remember Richard Branson a few years ago saying he wanted Virgin West Coast to be reservation only.

 

[37424]

We

One element to this is that LNER is being used to test different possible futures for rail ticketing, such as the single ticket pricing trial from London to Leeds, Newcastle and Edinburgh. If it works there it will happen elsewhere. We will have to see if it works as well as LNER (and whoever is behind it) think it will.

There are movements from both RDG and government towards fare reform. The majority of 'normal' passengers say they want fare reform even if they don't know what it is they want.

RDG's 'easier fares' website has three priorities for future fares:


Number one of nine benefits they tout is


Those who can make the most of what we have today can be fearful in some ways as to what this might entail. Compulsory reservations from London on the 'Intercity' operations seem entirely consistent with these proposals and probably what 'focus groups' would say they want if it means that people are ensured of a seat.

The worst part of this for the 'day trip' market is that single ticket pricing does possibly lead to higher fares for certain journeys, relative to the 'cheap day returns' which have become 'off-peak day returns'. Clearly single leg pricing for fares means that, for the Intercity operators, compulsory reservations would be a natural extension.

Well long distance day trips got hammered when long distance cheap day returns were replaced by Savers etc, I used to make lots of long distance day trips but when they were replaced by Savers/Supersavers it quickly became too expensive and my trips were reduced, if the next fares reform hits cheap day returns again I guess I wouldn't be surprised by that.

It seems to me various elements within the industry and TOC's have wanted to turn long distance routes into Airlines for some time, So I reckon it will happen and Covid has been unfortunately the trigger to help make it happen, but if does then I will vote with my feet bye bye long distance rail.

 

[Hadders]

Utterly disgraceful is reservations are made compulsory.

There are many reasons why this shouldn't happen, including:

- What happens at times of disruption
- Loss of flexibility
- Loss of capacity at busy times if standing is banned
- What happens if a connection into a LNER train is late but there are no reservations available on a later train. Do you become stranded?
- Ease of booking and amendment, particularly the vulnerable and those with limited or no technology
- Reservations are not appropriate for short distance journeys where LNER are the sole or main operator e.g. Newark to Retford, Doncaster to York, Durham to Newcastle etc
- Checks for reservations can be made prior to boarding at King's Cross but it's not feasible at intermediate stations meaning passengers will just board without reservations, potentially causing argument, resentment and conflict on board

 

[willgreen]

On the flip side, how many people currently don't travel by train today because they worry they won't get a seat train will be crowded etc etc?

Not that introducing compulsory reservations will change this, of course - compulsory reservations are in essence a concrete limit on capacity. Trains won't be crowded, but unless LNER find a load more carriages from somewhere, passengers who would have been standing / in vestibules etc. won't be able to get on the train.

 

[Ianno87]

LNER want what is easiest for them! Far easier to manage if they can impose capacity limits.

Don't think anyone is suggesting 'doing the same thing forever' - but changes should take all users into account, not just the long-distance, book ahead ones and sod the rest!

LNER are also clearly switched on to the age of social media - pictures of packed trains plastered all over Twitter with cries of "it's not safe! / You've sold too many tickets!" aren't a good look. This is their solution.

Not that introducing compulsory reservations will change this, of course - compulsory reservations are in essence a concrete limit on capacity. Trains won't be crowded, but unless LNER find a load more carriages from somewhere, passengers who would have been standing / in vestibules etc. won't be able to get on the train.

But people *will* get on the train if they have a guaranteed seat and don't have to worry about arguing over it, pushing past passengers to reach it etc etc.

 

[willgreen]

But people *will* get on the train if they have a guaranteed seat and don't have to worry about arguing over it, pushing past passengers to reach it etc etc.

That leads to fewer people getting the train, though - is that what we want?

 

[DB]

LNER are also clearly switched on to the age of social media - pictures of packed trains plastered all over Twitter with cries of "it's not safe! / You've sold too many tickets!" aren't a good look. This is their solution.

It's a "solution" which will reduce their capacity, and therfore income in the medium term, which takes no notice of how railways are actually used, and which will drive away a proportion of their customers. Only a state-backed organisation would think this a good idea.

But people *will* get on the train if they have a guaranteed seat and don't have to worry about arguing over it, pushing past passengers to reach it etc etc.

But by and large, most people will take that risk and use the train anyway, so what's been gained by rejecting walk-up passengers?

 

[Ianno87]

That leads to fewer people getting the train, though - is that what we want?

Does it necessarily? Or does it better distribute demand to available capacity? By spreading passengers who would be otherwise prepared to stand onto available capacity on other trains?

It's a "solution" which will reduce their capacity, and therfore income in the medium term, which takes no notice of how railways are actually used, and which will drive away a proportion of their customers.

How do you know that? LNER, holding all the ticket sales data, presumably know near-enough *exactly* how its passengers use their services.

 

[bramling]

To be fair it is not just LNER, I do seem remember Richard Branson a few years ago saying he wanted Virgin West Coast to be reservation only.

Course, as it means they can bunch demand up at the times when it’s convenient, and passengers have to fit round that.

What is the point of running stuff like 3tph to Birmingham and Manc if you can’t turn up and go?

 

[Domh245]

Or does it better distribute demand to available capacity? By spreading passengers who would be otherwise prepared to stand onto available capacity on other trains?

Doubtful. People won't change their plans because of when the train is available, they'll just use a different mode (and not consider the train again as it's too unreliable!). Some people may be flexible, but I don't think most will be

There's also better ways of distributing demand to match capacity such as removing all peak restrictions on fridays.

 

[DB]

Does it necessarily? Or does it better distribute demand to available capacity? By spreading passengers who would be otherwise prepared to stand onto available capacity on other trains?

People who are able and willing to travel at other times, particularly long distance, are already catered for in the current differential pricing system, via advance tickets tied to specific trains. If somebody buys a walk-up ticket at full price, that tends to be because they need the flexibility.

How do you know that? LNER, holding all the ticket sales data, presumably know near-enough *exactly* how its passengers use their services.

They don't sell all the tickets - most tickets I buy will be from Northern, for example. And how do I 'know' that it will reduce capacity? Well, I'd like to see how imposing hard limits on the numbers allowed on trains can do anything else!

 

[Bletchleyite]

This is an entirely unsurprising 'development'. LNER have shown their disdain for walk-up passengers in many ways. From removing long-standing permitted routes (e.g. Edinburgh to London via the WCML) to eliminating return tickets, and now this.

As LNER are nationalised, I think it’s not much of a jump to think that what they are doing reflects Government policy.

 

[DB]

As LNER are nationalised, I think it’s not much of a jump to think that what they are doing reflects Government policy.

Indeed - and if so it shows that the government isn't as committed to reducing car use as it would like to claim!

 

[bramling]

LNER are also clearly switched on to the age of social media - pictures of packed trains plastered all over Twitter with cries of "it's not safe! / You've sold too many tickets!" aren't a good look. This is their solution.



But people *will* get on the train if they have a guaranteed seat and don't have to worry about arguing over it, pushing past passengers to reach it etc etc.

I’m not sure the alternative would be a good look either - photos plastered all over Twitter of, for example, “family left on cold station platform for several hours because they weren’t allowed on a fully booked service”, or perhaps even worse “family turfed off train by jobsworth guard for not having a reservation”.

 

[JonathanH]

What is the point of running stuff like 3tph to Birmingham and Manc if you can’t turn up and go?

I'd imagine:
a) it is only 20 minutes wait until the next train if you can't get a reservation at the time you want
b) it is plenty of capacity to give people a choice of times when booking.
c) the trains have different calling points on the route spreading out demand.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Course, as it means they can bunch demand up at the times when it’s convenient, and passengers have to fit round that.

What is the point of running stuff like 3tph to Birmingham and Manc if you can’t turn up and go?

More choice of trains, meaning more likely that one will fit your needs?

Capacity, given that you can’t run 400m trains on the classic WCML?

 

[DB]

a) it is only 20 minutes wait until the next train if you can't get a reservation at the time you want

No guarantee that the next one won't be fully booked either, and the one after, especially at certain times - that sort of uncertainty would put many people right off.

 

[AlterEgo]

Rail isn’t airline, and shouldn’t be attempting to emulate it. Indeed turn-up-and-go is a great advantage rail has over air for domestic journeys, especially with air being essentially stuck with the copious security procedures forever more.

Indeed - I think the erstwhile poster forgets that, unlike air travel, rail's primary competition is the private car, whose strongest benefit is unlimited flexibility.

 

[Ianno87]

They don't sell all the tickets - most tickets I buy will be from Northern, for example. And how do I 'know' that it will reduce capacity? Well, I'd like to see how imposing hard limits on the numbers allowed on trains can do anything else!

It all gets fed into LENNON, ORCATS etc, so every TOC will have a detailed breakdown of tickets sold and revenue allocated to it, regardless of who actually sells the ticket.

Indeed - I think the erstwhile poster forgets that, unlike air travel, rail's primary competition is the private car, whose strongest benefit is unlimited flexibility.

But also a guaranteed seat...

Indeed - I think the erstwhile poster forgets that, unlike air travel, rail's primary competition is the private car, whose strongest benefit is unlimited flexibility.

But also a guaranteed seat...

 

[bramling]

It all gets fed into LENNON, ORCATS etc, so every TOC will have a detailed breakdown of tickets sold and revenue allocated to it, regardless of who actually sells the ticket.



But also a guaranteed seat...



But also a guaranteed seat...

... which a seat reservations already gives - without the big negative of being potentially left stranded somewhere.

The scenario of during disruption being unable to reach one’s seat or reservations being dropped is unlikely to be avoided by compulsory reservations, so this just leaves a train being too busy due to heavy loading. Not worth worrying about, especially on something like LNER where most services are 9 or 10 cars long.

 

[DB]

It all gets fed into LENNON, ORCATS etc, so every TOC will have a detailed breakdown of tickets sold and revenue allocated to it, regardless of who actually sells the ticket.

That's not going to tell them, e.g. what proportion of people used their trains between York and Doncaster and what proportion used XC.

But also a guaranteed seat...

How many times?! You can already have that - cases where it's so crowded that you can't get to the seat are so few that it's insignificant - and if a train is that crowded it demonstrates that there's no problem with getting enough passengers so no need to go chasing niche cases of people who won't travel on a busy train.

 

[Watershed]

Indeed - I think the erstwhile poster forgets that, unlike air travel, rail's primary competition is the private car, whose strongest benefit is unlimited flexibility.

Exactly. This is the heart of the issue - LNER like to think they are an airline. And it's true, one of their big markets is undoubtedly competing with the airlines for London-Scotland traffic (and to a limited extent Newcastle/NE traffic).

But they are far more than that, and so to apply such a policy across the board completely ignores their other key market and competitor. Perhaps they will only learn their lesson by losing traffic to cars...

 

[Ianno87]

That's not going to tell them, e.g. what proportion of people used their trains between York and Doncaster and what proportion used XC.

Yes, ORCATS does that. The CATS literally stands for Computerised Allocation of Tickets to Seats.

How many times?! You can already have that - cases where it's so crowded that you can't get to the seat are so few that it's insignificant - and if a train is that crowded it demonstrates that there's no problem with getting enough passengers so no need to go chasing niche cases of people who won't travel on a busy train.

Might be a rare occurence in practice, but I bet it is a perceived worry or barrier to a much larger number of potential travellers. That is almost certainly supported by any market research along the lines of "why don't you travel by train more?".

The end outcome might actually be more travellers overall - people travelling on previously quiet services whose worries are unfounded.

 

[Watershed]

How do you know that? LNER, holding all the ticket sales data, presumably know near-enough *exactly* how its passengers use their services.

They have data on how people that decide to travel with them, do so.

Anything else is based on speculation, surveys and forecasts. I suppose you have to try everything else to realise you weren't so wrong to start with!

Computerised Allocation of Tickets to Seats.

Err, nope, Computerised Allocation of Tickets to Services!