LNER to pilot removal of Off-Peak tickets

[Watershed]

PR spin from LNER's David Horne to regional politicians yesterday:

Rail North Committee - Monday 15th July 2024

Jump to 32:33-34:20 for the relevant section.

I wonder if David Horne actually believes what he said. I don't, but those in the room may be more easily convinced...

Indeed.

"Many thousands" of customers choosing Flex fares constitutes "really positive take-up", apparently. I'm sure if it were into the tens or hundreds of thousands he would have said so.

"We haven't really seen any downsides from the empirical evidence" - well of course not, because you only see the people who've decided to pay the new ripoff fares! What about the thousands of others who decide to fly or drive instead, or simply don't travel at all for? I guess they don't count as far as he's concerned.

"It does seem to be working in terms of giving customers a product that they want" - how do they know that? Have they spoken to both people who have actually booked, and those who haven't? Do customers really want higher prices and less flexibility?

"Tackling some of the complexity the industry has had hitherto" - ah yes, because introducing new ticket types with completely different rules helps to reduce complexity... He also describes the complexity in the passive voice, as if it were something forced on the industry rather than the self-imposed reality.

He must live on different planet to most rail passengers if he thinks it's going well.

 

[Mainline421]

"It does seem to be working in terms of giving customers a product that they want" - how do they know that? Have they spoken to both people who have actually booked, and those who haven't? Do customers really want higher prices and less flexibility?

Over a third of people surveyed said the supplement provides less flexibility than they need before they were even introduced, so no. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/simpler_fares#incoming-2552001

I wonder if David Horne actually believes what he said. I don't, but those in the room may be more easily convinced...

You can hear him hesitating as he very carefully chooses his words, which still stretch in to the territory of objective untruth.

 

[weeklycommuter]

Do customers really want higher prices and less flexibility?

The higher prices are also contrary to the Labour Party manifesto commitment to affordable fares. There is no way that four hundred pounds for a return train journey from London to Newcastle which is around 80p a mile can be claimed to be affordable. If the Labour Government wants to be taken seriously they need to enforce their manifesto commitment and order LNER to bin this so called "pilot" immediately and reinstate the off peak fares London to Newcastle and Edinburgh including all day Friday Saturday and Sunday.

 

[yorksrob]

Indeed.

"Many thousands" of customers choosing Flex fares constitutes "really positive take-up", apparently. I'm sure if it were into the tens or hundreds of thousands he would have said so.

"We haven't really seen any downsides from the empirical evidence" - well of course not, because you only see the people who've decided to pay the new ripoff fares! What about the thousands of others who decide to fly or drive instead, or simply don't travel at all for? I guess they don't count as far as he's concerned.

"It does seem to be working in terms of giving customers a product that they want" - how do they know that? Have they spoken to both people who have actually booked, and those who haven't? Do customers really want higher prices and less flexibility?

"Tackling some of the complexity the industry has had hitherto" - ah yes, because introducing new ticket types with completely different rules helps to reduce complexity... He also describes the complexity in the passive voice, as if it were something forced on the industry rather than the self-imposed reality.

He must live on different planet to most rail passengers if he thinks it's going well.

Complete whitewash/hogwash at its worst.

I only watched up until the Avanti chap came on, but if that was the end of it, there appeared to be no scrutinisation of the scheme whatsoever.

 

[AdamWW]

The higher prices are also contrary to the Labour Party manifesto commitment to affordable fares. There is no way that four hundred pounds for a return train journey from London to Newcastle which is around 80p a mile can be claimed to be affordable. If the Labour Government wants to be taken seriously they need to enforce their manifesto commitment and order LNER to bin this so called "pilot" immediately and reinstate the off peak fares London to Newcastle and Edinburgh including all day Friday Saturday and Sunday.

But did they say affordable walk-up fares, or did they just mean affordable fares for those making journeys that can be planned and committed to months in advance?

 

[yorksrob]

But did they say affordable walk-up fares, or did they just mean affordable fares for those making journeys that can be planned and committed to months in advance?

I think that a commitment to "affordable fares" must surely include some consideration of walk-on fares, simply for the fact that not everyone can book months in advance and walk on fares ultimately act as a limit on the cost of AP.

Hope the new Government feels the same way.

 

[JonathanH]

Hope the new Government feels the same way.

Surely the government are going to take a lead from the experts in the rail industry and follow their direction on the merits of different approaches to fare setting?

 

[redreni]

I think that a commitment to "affordable fares" must surely include some consideration of walk-on fares, simply for the fact that not everyone can book months in advance and walk on fares ultimately act as a limit on the cost of AP.

Hope the new Government feels the same way.

So do I. And it's not just a question of how they feel, it's what the manifesto says.

If you take away the off-peak fares, the advances can and do go up to a level above the withdrawn off-peak fares. If there's one clear conclusion to be drawn from the pilot, it's that.

So as you say, the continued existence of off-peak fares is just as important to those who can commit in advance to a specific date and time as to those who can't.

 

[yorksrob]

Surely the government are going to take a lead from the experts in the rail industry and follow their direction on the merits of different approaches to fare setting?

The proposals being trialed by LNER seem more like voodoo marketing dreamt up by a cut price advertising agency, than anything designed by industry experts.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Jul 2024 ==

So do I. And it's not just a question of how they feel, it's what the manifesto says.

If you take away the off-peak fares, the advances can and do go up to a level above the withdrawn off-peak fares. If there's one clear conclusion to be drawn from the pilot, it's that.

So as you say, the continued existence of off-peak fares is just as important to those who can commit in advance to a specific date and time as to those who can't.

Quite.

 

[Royston Vasey]

Surely the government are going to take a lead from the experts in the rail industry and follow their direction on the merits of different approaches to fare setting?

They're going to go straight to David Horne then...

 

[Bletchleyite]

They're going to go straight to David Horne then...

It's a massive concern that it's not entirely unlikely that Horne will end up as MD of "GBR InterCity" in due course...

 

[weeklycommuter]

But did they say affordable walk-up fares, or did they just mean affordable fares for those making journeys that can be planned and committed to months in advance?

It will be voters who judge whether or not they have met their manifesto commitment as voters will decide whether to reelect them or throw them out so it means affordable walk up fares.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It will be voters who judge whether or not they have met their manifesto commitment as voters will decide whether to reelect them or throw them out so it means affordable walk up fares.

TBH I'm not sure the population as a whole cares that much about actual walk-up fares as we understand them (as distinct from the price of an Advance quite near departure). But they *do* care that the typical one-way London to Edinburgh fare for a weekend away has shot up from about £90 to about £130.

Which brings us back to the truth, namely that this is all about increasing fares, massively in some cases.

 

[weeklycommuter]

TBH I'm not sure the population as a whole cares that much about actual walk-up fares as we understand them (as distinct from the price of an Advance quite near departure). But they *do* care that the typical one-way London to Edinburgh fare for a weekend away has shot up from about £90 to about £130.

Which brings us back to the truth, namely that this is all about increasing fares, massively in some cases.

This is the result of the removing the affordable off peak walk up fare.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Jul 2024 ==

Indeed.

"Many thousands" of customers choosing Flex fares constitutes "really positive take-up", apparently. I'm sure if it were into the tens or hundreds of thousands he would have said so.

"We haven't really seen any downsides from the empirical evidence" - well of course not, because you only see the people who've decided to pay the new ripoff fares! What about the thousands of others who decide to fly or drive instead, or simply don't travel at all for? I guess they don't count as far as he's concerned.

"It does seem to be working in terms of giving customers a product that they want" - how do they know that? Have they spoken to both people who have actually booked, and those who haven't? Do customers really want higher prices and less flexibility?

"Tackling some of the complexity the industry has had hitherto" - ah yes, because introducing new ticket types with completely different rules helps to reduce complexity... He also describes the complexity in the passive voice, as if it were something forced on the industry rather than the self-imposed reality.

He must live on different planet to most rail passengers if he thinks it's going well.

Indeed. LNER is in competition with travel by car which provides total flexibility on the time of day the journey is made and on breaks in the journey. The only rail tickets which provide this flexibility are anytime and off peak tickets. Advance tickets are useless and I know people who have made journeys which they could have done by train with LNER for whom only an anytime or off peak ticket would provide acceptable flexibility and who looked at LNER, saw the exorbitant anytime fare of around four hundred pounds return per person and decided to travel by car so LNER lost the business. Ironically they could have purchased an off peak ticket by choosing a different destination station but they are not going to look for loopholes and work arounds, if LNER wants their money LNER has to offer the competitive fare which is the off peak fare for the journey entered. LNER is also in competition with airlines and they cannot compete with airlines on journey times so unless they offer very very low fares like Lumo they will only compete on flexibility on the time of day that the journey can be made and the convenience of a walk up and go ticket valid on any available train.

 

[redreni]

Actually they can compete with airlines on journey times. I've now clocked up at least five flights between London and Newcastle (and half a dozen more between London and Manchester), all of which for journeys which take just as long by air as by rail once transfers at either end are taken into account.

All LNER had to do to get my business on the Newcastle journeys was not be significantly more expensive than the plane even factoring in the cost of airport transfers.

And also, not make me wait until too near the time to find out what the advance fares would be. I had to decide whether to take the price BA were offering based on a comparison of that with my educated guess on what the train might cost - when you know what date and time you want to travel and you know which trains you want to book, but the prices either haven't been set or remain a secret for whatever reason, it gives the airline a big advantage.

 

[Kite159]

TBH I'm not sure the population as a whole cares that much about actual walk-up fares as we understand them (as distinct from the price of an Advance quite near departure). But they *do* care that the typical one-way London to Edinburgh fare for a weekend away has shot up from about £90 to about £130.

Which brings us back to the truth, namely that this is all about increasing fares, massively in some cases.

Agreed, I dread to think how much fares would be on Sunday services from Edinburgh to London in August now the price cap got removed, at the times of day they run 3tph to London due to the high demand (maybe a goal for LNER is to suppress demand so much they can save money by ditching those extra services )

My last couple of trips to Scotland I haven't even considered using LNER due to the higher costs, preferring to chance my arm with Avanti.

 

[nwales58]

"We haven't really seen any downsides from the empirical evidence" - well of course not, because you only see the people who've decided to pay the new ripoff fares!

Yup. Classic confirmation bias.

You would need a survey of users over a period *before* the changes to compare with the survey of current users. Before+After surveys are standard good practice in transport appraisla, including in DfT's TAG. Have LNER really only done the latter and the missing survey is now impossible?

There again, classic professional management. Decide the outcome then force your way to achieve it.

 

[PG]

There again, classic professional management. Decide the outcome then force your way to achieve it.

Or classic political ploy. Decide the outcome then commission the inquiry.

It's a massive concern that it's not entirely unlikely that Horne will end up as MD of "GBR InterCity" in due course...

Perhaps he could be booted into the Lords for  disservices to passengers...

 

[Gerald Fiennes]

Well, OK, but the overcrowding on many LNER trains suggests that pax have not been much deterred by the effective increases in fares. Although not touched on in the Rail North session, the new fares structure effectively (at least in theory) reduces crowding by setting price expectations higher than in the past. Whether that is the right balance or not is the question for the politicians, but that's what the new structure does. Similarly, the yield management software will get better at picking up the busiest trains and reducing the number of lower fares available on them potentially leading to further revenue increases (ie. effective fare increases).

The much delayed Dec 24 timetable provides a bit more capacity, but only really to/from Newcastle, so that will help a bit but it does seem that a much broader debate is now needed about volumes to/from Scotland and how they should be handled by rail. Some will be refugees from the many problems that WC and TP have had (and are, to some extent, continuing), but there does seem to have a very significant increase in demand for longer distances, particularly Thursday to Monday. How much would this drop if the West Coast fully recovers its mojo?

Regular service patterns are probably the only way forward -- with long distance trains having the same stopping patterns, so as to maximise overall use of capacity. That means eg. 10 mins longer to/from Edinburgh for the faster trains with maybe 2 extra stops than today, maybe 8 mins longer to/from Newcastle but the benefit being a regular further path (or maybe two) between York and Newcastle where the constraints between the fasts and the semi-fasts are particularly acute.

A timetable that focusses on capacity on Thursday to Monday and speed during midweek might also be worth thinking about. Counter-cultural to what most forum members' experience, perhaps, but it does seem that demand patterns and levels have fundamentally altered.

 

[yorksrob]

Well, OK, but the overcrowding on many LNER trains suggests that pax have not been much deterred by the effective increases in fares. Although not touched on in the Rail North session, the new fares structure effectively (at least in theory) reduces crowding by setting price expectations higher than in the past. Whether that is the right balance or not is the question for the politicians, but that's what the new structure does. Similarly, the yield management software will get better at picking up the busiest trains and reducing the number of lower fares available on them potentially leading to further revenue increases (ie. effective fare increases).

The much delayed Dec 24 timetable provides a bit more capacity, but only really to/from Newcastle, so that will help a bit but it does seem that a much broader debate is now needed about volumes to/from Scotland and how they should be handled by rail. Some will be refugees from the many problems that WC and TP have had (and are, to some extent, continuing), but there does seem to have a very significant increase in demand for longer distances, particularly Thursday to Monday. How much would this drop if the West Coast fully recovers its mojo?

Regular service patterns are probably the only way forward -- with long distance trains having the same stopping patterns, so as to maximise overall use of capacity. That means eg. 10 mins longer to/from Edinburgh for the faster trains with maybe 2 extra stops than today, maybe 8 mins longer to/from Newcastle but the benefit being a regular further path (or maybe two) between York and Newcastle where the constraints between the fasts and the semi-fasts are particularly acute.

A timetable that focusses on capacity on Thursday to Monday and speed during midweek might also be worth thinking about. Counter-cultural to what most forum members' experience, perhaps, but it does seem that demand patterns and levels have fundamentally altered.

This is all well and good, but they need to be considering these options before removing flexibility and engaging in price gouging.

"Any time" fares on long distance are designed to deter the vast majority of the travelling public. They the equivalent to a builder over quoting the job because he doesn't want the work. In no way is it acceptable that these become the only flexible option, with TOC's carte blanche to price people off at all times.

 

[modernrail]

I would get writing to Louise Haigh. MP’s don’t necessarily get the nuance in this stuff because they don’t pay their fares. However, I have it on extremely good authority that the SoS is willing to get her head around the detail when the detail is presented to her. She has done so in another transport area that needs attention.

We also need to stop Horne’s style of, well lies to me, spin perhaps to others, taking root.

 

[takno]

I would get writing to Louise Haigh. MP’s don’t necessarily get the nuance in this stuff because they don’t pay their fares. However, I have it on extremely good authority that the SoS is willing to get her head around the detail when the detail is presented to her. She has done so in another transport area that needs attention.

We also need to stop Horne’s style of, well lies to me, spin perhaps to others, taking root.

If you have specific issues with the data having been presented to the select committee in a partisan way, it's probably best to highlight those in your letter as well. Otherwise it's likely that your complaint will be treated as having been addressed by the select committee evidence.

If you are going down that route you may want to be specific about why you thought the evidence was problematic. It's useful to point out ways in which the trial is fundamentally incompatible with stated Labour policy on price and simplicity. It's also useful to point out ways in which the data will have been rendered meaningless by poor trial design - ease of use of splitting and extending to get round it for example. You'll also want to point to data which wasn't presented and which you believe should have been.

There's no point in saying you think David Horne looks a bit shifty. He's not a politician - he's essentially a public servant doing what he (perhaps wrongly) thinks is best for the railway and the government. As soon as you say anything which can be construed as an ad-hominem attack, then you've instantly lost the attention of the person reading the letter, and the argument.

 

[CompactDstrxion]

My (Labour) MP, on an LNER route has written back to me and so far is essentially ignoring my request for them to go to Haigh about the trial, instead relying on some copy-and-paste lines about how GBR will make it all better.

 

[signed]

I wonder how well used is the Haymarket loophole on ECML to Edinburgh.

Return September 7th to September 14th goes from £107.70 with a 16-25 to £60.15 with a Super Off-Peak return. Nearly 50% cheaper with allowed BOJ.

 

[Bletchleyite]

My (Labour) MP, on an LNER route has written back to me and so far is essentially ignoring my request for them to go to Haigh about the trial, instead relying on some copy-and-paste lines about how GBR will make it all better.

To be honest I'd be surprised if GBR didn't adopt this scheme nationally. Which is why they're loath to criticise it.

It might be LNER's idea but they definitely seem to like it...

 

[signed]

It might be LNER's idea but they definitely seem to like it...

LNER's DfT idea*

 

[Bletchleyite]

LNER's DfT idea*

Actually if you go through the above thread it seems consensus is that it was actually suggested by LNER management in response to a DfT request to increase profitability.

 

[miklcct]

it was actually suggested by LNER management in response to a DfT request to increase profitability.

but did it increase patronage?

 

[Krokodil]

Actually if you go through the above thread it seems consensus is that it was actually suggested by LNER management in response to a DfT request to increase profitability.

And to be fair, if the objective is to increase profitability then it is a good idea. Just so long as you put to one side any notions of it being a public service.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And to be fair, if the objective is to increase profitability then it is a good idea. Just so long as you put to one side any notions of it being a public service.

To be fair the "Romance" style European railways pretty much all do something similar, but tend not to have such swingeing restrictions on their Advance style tickets as we do (e.g. no breaks, no starting late/finishing early unless the railway randomly deems you not to be avoiding a fare, ticket has no value if you miss the train*) which date from when they were cheap bargain basement fares and not the default. And aside from "Eurostar Red" which seems to be the foremost authority in overcharging to excess, most of the fares top out at vaguely reasonable sums so even if you buy one on the day you don't get ripped off.

Even the 70 minute flex retains pretty much all the key disadvantages of the Advance fare.

* Even Ryanair doesn't do that, there is a fee for rebooking but they do offer it, you don't lose all your money unless the ticket was really cheap.