Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
And it's this that is a big part of the problem, and one practiced by LNR/LM. TOCs should not sell any Advance tickets on trains which would be expected to carry standing passengers.
-
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!
Standing on long rail journeys to be banned under Virgin Trains plan for airline-style fare
- Thread starter duncanp
- Start date
- Status
And it's this that is a big part of the problem, and one practiced by LNR/LM. TOCs should not sell any Advance tickets on trains which would be expected to carry standing passengers.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Overcrowding is not dangerous (as if it was it would not be allowed). It is unpleasant/uncomfortable. Best stick to facts in the debate rather than hyperbole?
Why the need for HS2? Capacity. The answer for drastic increases in capacity between London, the Midlands and the North West and Scotland, HS2. A way to reduce capacity in the 6 years prior to HS2 opening...make the existing railway seated passenger only.
Ah, so at leat waiting for a train with seats available won't be longer than 6 years.
The on busy services that see frequent standing assuming the train is at maximum length and service maximum frequency then the logical conclusion is that the ticket price would go up not down to cover lost revenue from the standing passengers.
Sure on very lightly loaded services compulsory reservations would see the average selling price drop as the operator looks to maximise sales. Overall the scheme is only likely see to an increase in revenues for the operator and quite neatly side step open access revenue abstraction opportunities.
Aren't off peak and anytime fares the government regulated ones? How would they be withdrawn if only specific reservations were to be offered? Or would one route be excluded from having to offer for sale off peak and anytime fares?
Again with the aggression just because someone values others’ convenience over yours.
One is under the current system, the former is under a compulsory reservation system where the ability to switch bookings would make multiple bookings less necessary.
And unused reservation doesn’t mean no one ends up sitting in that seat.
But also the operator can use this to REDUCE their capacity, and then only sell higher priced tickets, giving them a better margin.
And the maximum length/frequency argument normally falls down. I did a business (not leisure) trip over the S&C, needing to get from Doncaster to Carlisle on a weekday. The S&C train was only 2 cars, of which more than 50% were pre-reserved, some for a couple of coach groups just doing part of the trip. We actually had standing passengers over the high Pennines, with this ridiculous minimalist formation which the commercial team then thought they could pre-reserve without providing any extra accommodation for it.
Well, I mean, if the DfT wants to push major reform to faring, they can easily change the regulations around this…
Remember Virgin's response was to a DfT RFC about faring reform, so how they would be withdrawn is easy: the DfT would change the regulations.
The flexible regulated fares would effectively need to be withdrawn to make compulsory reservation ticketing work, unless the DfT was taking in hit in terms premium payment or additional subsidy. I'd expect the system to offer a demand priced fixed non refundable ticket and a set fare refundable ticket which would carry a large premium over the fixed fare.
Corporate bookers would as happens with airline tickets already either buy multiple fixed fare tickets if cheaper than a single refundable or multiple refundable tickets, in later case then claim refunds on the unused tickets. The "overbooking" behaviour of airlines is generally driven by knowledge that a percentage of sold tickets will not be used and either discarded or refunded. However once checked in even on a "refundable" ticket most then become non refundable.
Demand modelling if the goal is to maximise revenue should actually see an operator calculate the likely number tickets that will sell then provide capacity slightly lower which as you note would see more higher priced tickets sold. Traditional long haul airlines are very good at this where they have a range different aircraft sizes and match demand to plane.
That (may?) be the goal of an operator, however this is a public service where the infrastructure is owned by the taxpayer. Would the DFT really accept that? And remove the regulated fares? What would stop it becoming like house prices and pricing average Joe out through huge demand for limited seats?
Also, you suggest an operator could use this to reduce capacity? How would that be the aim in any way of any operator? We're commissioning HS2 to increase capacity not reduce it.
A solely demand based pricing system seems a radical proposal imo. How can one plan based on that? What about child travelers? The price changes each day? No regulated fares in a subsided industry where travelers could be priced out if enough people wished to travel at the same time? Where would the fares regulation be?
This particular comment really got me. If someone has a meeting overrun or whatever, in a compulsory reservation world, they lose their seat and their money, and on say a Friday weekend before a bank holiday, there could be no seats left, leaving them stuck. Not very passenger friendly...
Given a few years of booking data and travel data it would be fairly simple to predict demand to a per train level with adjustments made in the model for special events etc, the likes of Ryanair, Easyjet do this already. Yes the price a customer would pay would vary each day and likely per train including any refundable fare. Season ticket holders would likely be charged a precalculated fare based on statistical averages for the time they wish to, or normally travel.
Going fully demand based wouldn't see fare regulation as there is ultimately a maximum price that a customer will pay for a seat before using alternative means or not travelling, this maximum fare thus becomes the flexible refundable fare.
As a example easyjet Stansted to Glasgow in July sees fares vary between £37 and £138 with the "flexible" fare varying between £99 and £181. The goal of the system isn't to actually to sell every seat be to maximise the amount of revenue taken per service, empty seats are fine if selling that seat wouldn't have increased overall revenue. Taking the concept to its most extreme an operator could sell "walkup" fares just prior to departure at notional cost just to fill any empty seats.
Sounds rather risky. Basically it's saying let the market lead and it will regulate itself. That was done with the private property and rental markets...
If there is an ultimate top line price that a consumer will pay, what if some of the consumers are very wealthy or businesses are paying? Then the average town worker may be priced out with no protection by regulation.
Airlines are not a subsidised public service with regulated fares are they? Railway franchises are. Airlines are not used as often for daily commutes to and from work, or by kids getting to and from education.
If open access operators wished to apply to operate on a purely business basis in that way, with a market based price structure and reservations only, that's a different thing and the customer would have no likely protection against unfair price rises under those circumstances.
That is simply not true. Why do you think that it is?
Compulsory reservation systems work elsewhere in the world without anyone having to check in. As I said, I am not in favour of Virgin's proposals, but let's argue against them based on actual facts.
They do, but unless the TOC knows exactly which tickets are actually riding, they cannot release 'no show' seats nor accurately re-calculate connection reservations should disruption occur. Failing to do either of these will lead to inefficiency.
If a compulsory reservation system was to be introduced on long distance trains it would ideally incorporate the very best practice in inventory management, reservation availability and disruption rebooking. For that, you need to know exactly who is travelling when (like the airlines) and this would require some kind of reliable 'checking in'
I think you are getting too hung up on this concept of regulated fares. Fares can still be regulated in order to prevent excessive profits or inefficient seat occupancy - the regulations would just be different to how they are done now.
This system is being advocated for long distance inter city services only. This is not kids getting to and from education on local trains.
Why do we need demand based pricing? This will just lead to huge fare increases at the times people want to travel.
What's wrong with setting a price for a particular journey with no variation so everyone knows where they stand (pardon the pun!)
What's wrong with setting a price for a particular journey with no variation so everyone knows where they stand (pardon the pun!)
Like Norwich - Diss
Wigan - Warrington
Swindon - Didcot
Bedford - Kettering
Derby - Sheffield
How are you going to differentiate long distance inter-city from short distance ones where the inter-city service is also the local service?
In a nutshell - because the railways cannot cater for all the demand at the times people want to travel, so they must be induced to travel at other times.
F Great Eastern
Established Member
Because you'd get huge amounts of people traveling at peak, vastly more than there are now, and almost empty trains off-peak. If you have a flat price you lose any real control over balancing loads.
Having off-peak and peak traffic is not just about making more money, it's about trying to push people into quieter trains if they are not time sensitive and advances also try and push people to quieter trains too.
The coach companies such as National Express would love there to be a flat rate, in fact, they are already making representations that this should be done as they know it will be good for their business.
But we keep trying to smash down big ideas by finding station pairs somewhere in the country where there is a (minor) problem, none of which are unsolvable.
Norwich-Diss and Bedford-Kettering are outer suburban trains really, and probably would not be compulsory reservation services. Wigan-Warrington, Swindon-Didcot and Derby-Sheffield would probably have to have some kind of local service introduced to cater for local passengers making these journeys (if all the inter-city service on these sections were indeed compulsory reservation)
What evidence do you have of this fact?
Because that’s how people live. They expect to be able to catch a bus or train when they want to. It’s not the same as flying.
My list is not just a few isolated examples. There are loads more across the country. I doubt very much there is the capacity to introduce additional local services, and if there is who is going to pay for them?
Absolutely spot on. A train is not a plane, the markets are completely different and cannot really be compared.
F Great Eastern
Established Member
There is no reason to add extra trains between Norwich and Diss, and the trains that serve these stations are the Intercity trains that run from London to Norwich so they are hardly outer Suburban trains.
It would beyond stupidity to run an extra train between Norwich and Diss when these passengers are already adequately taken care of. It shows you don't use these services.
F Great Eastern
Established Member
The main benefit that the train has over the likes of National Express is that it is quicker and generally it's not a huge amount more expensive when booking in advance.
If you're going to a flat rate it's going to have to be far higher than your average advance fare, at which point the coach becomes more attractive again. Advance purchase tickets were the worst thing to happen to the coach industry as they lost passengers hand over foot to the railways. The one that would really benefit from a removal of flat rate fares however is MegaBus with their pile it high and sell them cheap ethos.
The railway has to be careful because the leisure market who mostly would be travelling on advance tickets, is far more price sensitive than it is for business customers and commuters. If you remove Advance tickets and leisure passengers have to pay 20-30% more on average then there will certainly be bleed to the coach operators.
A 'normal' knows when that would be because they can listen to the announcements on the train. "The next station is .... in about 20 minutes time" and "We are now approaching ....". Standing passengers are usually quite cooperative when someone needs to get off, even those returning from the races on a 'dry' train.
The railway can cater for demand in most cases, with some passengers standing, as the system copes. If it didn't, London terminuses would have to close due to crowding out of the door. Extra capacity is nearly always planned for the long term, and in the better cases short term future, hence HS2, and hence new stock with extra seats and new timetables.
But all this needs to be explained to companies nationally for it to work. It's the business world that mainly operates 9 - 5 Monday to Friday not the railway. A great deal of office workers work a 9 to 5.
- Status