• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both 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!

2024 Budget impact on Rail

Status
Not open for further replies.

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
30,596
Location
Fenny Stratford
If the industry ran the same amount of train as on a weekday, there would be no capacity issue.
Is that really true on Intercity routes these days? Avanti seems to be just about the same 7 days a week ( edge cases excluded)

The old funding model was outmoded and unsuited to modern society. The reality is that business travellers and commuters are a lot less captive than they used to be, and government will just have to build the industry atound the more savvy, price conscious passengers it has a chance of finding.
a really easy statement to make. You cant just "make it so". That is surely the point of the change underway.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
40,766
Location
Yorks
It very often does. The WCML intercity base timetable is the same all week except at the extremities of the day.

Sunday afternoon will always be busy - everyone wants to come home from leisure journeys then. Even British Rail charged weekend trippers a bit more to reflect that - the SuperSaver wasn't valid Fridays - but if you use single fare pricing you need to in some way restrict both peaks, not just one of them.

That sounds like a reason against single fare pricing to me.

Is that really true on Intercity routes these days? Avanti seems to be just about the same 7 days a week ( edge cases excluded)

That may be true for IC I suppose. I guess they can just adjust the number of advanced purchase fares they sell in that case.


a really easy statement to make. You cant just "make it so". That is surely the point of the change underway.

Given that they can spunk billions up the wall in fuel duty cuts, I'd say it would be extremely easy to achieve a net reduction in rail fares.
 

Krokodil

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2023
Messages
3,851
Location
Wales
No it isn't.
Passenger journeys may be similar to 2019, but revenue won't be, given the loss of peak commuter and business traffic (with more off-peak and leisure travel).
Commuter traffic is very inefficient. It requires vast amounts of resources which spend quite a lot of the day carting fresh air about. Smoothing out the peaks has allowed some rolling stock to be let go which reduces costs and improves productivity.

Sure. But there is no sign of any more recovery in revenue
Better industrial relations will mean fewer refunds due to cancelled services.

It very often does. The WCML intercity base timetable is the same all week except at the extremities of the day.
Regional services are very lacking though. The west side of Northern runs a similar timetable on a Sunday as it does on Christmas Day (i.e. zilch!)
 

miami

Established Member
Joined
3 Oct 2015
Messages
3,206
Location
UK
Talk of railcards (disabled persons excluded) increasing by around £5, hardly seems significant when the average saving is around £156 annually I believe. Plus, they've been £30 per year for a significant period of time now.

Charging for railcards really puts off people from doing the

Wife and Mother-in-law looking at going to a christmas market, they could get the train, but clearly aren't going to waste £30 on a railcard, so would have to pay £60 for 2 full fares.

Or they could drive, which is far cheaper than it used to be.

Meanwhile bus fares are up 50%

With roads, I'd like to see VED slashed for petrol cars, but petrol costs increased, discouraging long journeys. Currently it costs a lot to own a car, but once you do the cost per mile is very cheap. I pay 5p a mile in VED and 5p a mile in petrol tax, so 10p a mile. But if I were to decide whether to take the train or drive somewhere, the marginal tax on the driving is only 5p a mile.

If instead it was 0p a mile in VED and 10p a mile in petrol tax that would incentivise me to take shorter journeys
 

Krokodil

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2023
Messages
3,851
Location
Wales
That may be true for IC I suppose. I guess they can just adjust the number of advanced purchase fares they sell in that case.
And add a fake "compulsory reservation" flag to services to pretend that they're all sold out.
 

Merle Haggard

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2019
Messages
2,645
Location
Northampton
Charging for railcards really puts off people from doing the

Wife and Mother-in-law looking at going to a christmas market, they could get the train, but clearly aren't going to waste £30 on a railcard, so would have to pay £60 for 2 full fares.

Or they could drive, which is far cheaper than it used to be.

Meanwhile bus fares are up 50%

With roads, I'd like to see VED slashed for petrol cars, but petrol costs increased, discouraging long journeys. Currently it costs a lot to own a car, but once you do the cost per mile is very cheap. I pay 5p a mile in VED and 5p a mile in petrol tax, so 10p a mile. But if I were to decide whether to take the train or drive somewhere, the marginal tax on the driving is only 5p a mile.

If instead it was 0p a mile in VED and 10p a mile in petrol tax that would incentivise me to take shorter journeys

I recall that one Government some time ago tried to move towards this, but it was strongly objected to. Most vociferously from the Lib. Dems. because of the alleged effect on rural communities.
Many proposed changes make things fairer overall but almost inevitably make one sector worse off, and that sector always manage to complain so loudly that the changes are withdrawn. Even though they may be better off at the expense of many others.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
30,596
Location
Fenny Stratford
Given that they can spunk billions up the wall in fuel duty cuts, I'd say it would be extremely easy to achieve a net reduction in rail fares.
You cant get many more people on your 5 car XC or EMT service!

Now, OBVIOUSLY, we need longer and better trains but the money isn't there for that to happen and so to make it happen we will have to pay more for our tickets. That is reality because the government doesn't treat the railway as a number one priority, unlike this board!

That's why I find "make it so" statements so maddening. There is no acknowledgement of reality.

Meanwhile bus fares are up 50%
up from a temporarily reduced £2 flat fare to, checks nots, a not unreasonable £3 flat fare!

Whenever i got the bus previously i paid £5/6 or £7 and seemed to be the only one paying. I will take £3 as a win thanks!
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
101,854
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Now, OBVIOUSLY, we need longer and better trains but the money isn't there for that to happen and so to make it happen we will have to pay more for our tickets

I absolutely will not. I will drive instead if LNER style pricing makes it to the WCML. My long distance rail travel will close to cease.

Edinburgh/Newcastle are slight oddities in being far enough that most people won't consider the car, the main competitor is air. But most other UK journeys can be done by car, and with substantially increased fares over and above fares that are already ludicrously expensive that is what people will do, in droves.

It is considerably cheaper to hire a car for the day and drive to an outlying Tube station than it is to make a peak time Manchester-London journey already, without increasing it further. That is ludicrous. I'd kind of get it if the railway offered a premium quality of service, but it doesn't, it offers little better than Ryanair/Travelodge levels of service.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
30,596
Location
Fenny Stratford
That is ludicrous. I'd kind of get it if the railway offered a premium quality of service, but it doesn't, it offers little better than Ryanair/Travelodge levels of service.
ok - who is going to pay to make it better then? You clearly wont. Who should? Don't say the government because they have other priorities. We might not like that but that is where we are.

Therefore, we all have to contribute more if we want better services. ( That goes for both railway and public services!) I simply ask for an acknowledgement of reality. Once we have that we can look at what practical steps we can take to weight the scales one way or another in terms of cost and service type and passenger type.

EDIT - I am not trying to be difficult or argumentative. I would love it (LOVE IT!) if the government had annouced an immediate 50% fares cut & a £400bn investment programme but we don't live in a fantasy world sadly. Hell, we don't even live in a fair world!
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
101,854
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
ok - who is going to pay to make it better then? You clearly wont. Who should? Don't say the government because they have other priorities. We might not like that but that is where we are.

Therefore, we all have to contribute more if we want better services. ( That goes for both railway and public services!) I simply ask for an acknowledgement of reality. Once we have that we can look at what practical steps we can take to weight the scales one way or another in terms of cost and service type and passenger type.

I am happy to pay increased general taxation for a package of high quality public services. I am not happy to pay increased fares, just as I am not happy to fund healthcare at the point of use.

If that means the death of the railway, tough. I'm not funding an incompetently run, incompetently managed mess by way of paying far in excess of what it's worth.

Here's an example - a trip to the Lake District for a weekend presently costs around £120 by train all in. £200? No chance when the fuel for a car I already own comes in around £70 at most.
 

WelshBluebird

Established Member
Joined
14 Jan 2010
Messages
5,146
Wife and Mother-in-law looking at going to a christmas market, they could get the train, but clearly aren't going to waste £30 on a railcard, so would have to pay £60 for 2 full fares.
If its £30 per person, that means you'd save £10 for just that one journey. It really doesn't need many journeys over the course of the 12 month period of the railcards valdity to save money overall. For lots of journeys you can save the railcard cost for just one journey!
 

setdown

Member
Joined
5 Jan 2016
Messages
283
I think there needs to be a more intelligent fare strategy in place on the WCML, to help grow revenue, but I don't think the LNER strategy is that. Case in point: yesterday evening, around 6pm, I travelled southbound on a 5-coach Evero train from Crewe to London. The thing was absolutely empty. However, the day before, the only fare showing available was the full-price off-peak single. No advances. Why? The train is empty. Charge a third less, and I bet a few people would switch from the London Northwestern service. More choice for the customer at that time of day, the railway gets a bit more cash than before, everyone is a winner?
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
30,596
Location
Fenny Stratford
If that means the death of the railway, tough. I'm not funding an incompetently run, incompetently managed mess by way of paying far in excess of what it's worth.
there is no room for debate with that kind of statement. It borders on preposterous!
Here's an example - a trip to the Lake District for a weekend presently costs around £120 by train all in. £200? No chance when the fuel for a car I already own comes in around £70 at most.
Ok - i am not saying it should be £200. I am saying it could be, say, £135.

Also going by car means you cant have a drink or a sleep or travel at the same speed. I would pay a premium for that! We do today.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
20,510
The old funding model was outmoded and unsuited to modern society. The reality is that business travellers and commuters are a lot less captive than they used to be, and government will just have to build the industry atound the more savvy, price conscious passengers it has a chance of finding.
The funding method that is more likely to apply, unfortunately, is pushing up prices where the market supports it. Anywhere that the railway is overcrowded - for example on Saturday mornings - will be seen as places where more money could be made from higher prices - in a similar vein to the LNER reform.

With roads, I'd like to see VED slashed for petrol cars, but petrol costs increased, discouraging long journeys.
It is short journeys by car that need to be discouraged though, because they are the ones that, combined, create the most pollution and congestion.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
30,596
Location
Fenny Stratford
I think there needs to be a more intelligent fare strategy in place on the WCML, to help grow revenue, but I don't think the LNER strategy is that. Case in point: yesterday evening, around 6pm, I travelled southbound on a 5-coach Evero train from Crewe to London. The thing was absolutely empty. However, the day before, the only fare showing available was the full-price off-peak single. No advances. Why? The train is empty. Charge a third less, and I bet a few people would switch from the London Northwestern service. More choice for the customer at that time of day, the railway gets a bit more cash than before, everyone is a winner?
a very fair point well made!
 

12LDA28C

Established Member
Joined
14 Oct 2022
Messages
4,539
Location
The back of beyond
Charging for railcards really puts off people from doing the

Why shouldn't the railway charge for railcards? I can see the merit in giving disabled railcards out free to those who qualify but for everyone else it seems every Tom, Dick or Harriet is 'entitled' to one these days and I never really understood the logic of the 'Network Card' which gives people a third off their rail fare just because of where they live. How bizarre.
 

778

Member
Joined
4 May 2020
Messages
477
Location
Hemel Hempstead
We live in the real world not the star trek world. As the population grows car ownership is going to go up.
As the population goes up more people will travel by rail as well.

Correct - the problem is surely one of capacity. Sunday is now a very busy travel day. Fare structures may have to change to reflect this.
Do you think peak restrictions will be bought in Saturdays and Sundays?

Was there anything mentioned about battery trains in the budget speech or document? Maybe the government will not invest in battery trains because they can see electric cars and buses coming in the next 10 years and it will give them an excuse to close some lines.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
20,510
I never really understood the logic of the 'Network Card' which gives people a third off their rail fare just because of where they live. How bizarre.
It made sense in the 1980s when it was introduced as a way of encouraging travel at times when there was spare capacity in the relevant area - eg the gap between ridership in peak and off peak was wider. That is not so much the case now as leisure travel is much more significant.

Do you think peak restrictions will be bought in Saturdays and Sundays?
SWR, and to a lesser extent LNR on its longer routes, have different prices on Saturday mornings, although still called off-peak.

Advance fares used on longer routes can be higher at busier times.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
101,854
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Ok - i am not saying it should be £200. I am saying it could be, say, £135.

LNER are saying it should be £200 or more. Particularly if, because of the vagiaries of hiking, I can't commit to a specific train months in advance.

Also going by car means you cant have a drink or a sleep or travel at the same speed. I would pay a premium for that! We do today.

I pretty much never drink alcohol on trains, nor am I capable of sleeping in a seat or on a moving vehicle. Door to door, car is about an hour quicker.

there is no room for debate with that kind of statement. It borders on preposterous!

I don't think it is preposterous. There is a point above which people simply won't pay when the car is an option, which for most families it is. And if passenger numbers collapse, the railway dies.

I think it is very notable indeed that LNER didn't use Leeds for the fare increase trial as they did for the single fare pricing one, but rather used one of the few sets of journeys in the whole of the UK where air is the main competitor. I think the outcome could have been very different.
 

The exile

Established Member
Joined
31 Mar 2010
Messages
4,187
Location
Somerset
It made sense in the 1980s when it was introduced as a way of encouraging travel at times when there was spare capacity in the relevant area - eg the gap between ridership in peak and off peak was wider. That is not so much the case now as leisure travel is much more significant.
In other words, it worked!
 

Krokodil

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2023
Messages
3,851
Location
Wales
Well, I (along with lots on here) feel that that is a step too far.
Likewise there are a lot of things on the modern railway that I wouldn't do if I were in charge, but I'm not in charge so they're being done.

You cant get many more people on your 5 car XC or EMT service!

Now, OBVIOUSLY, we need longer and better trains but the money isn't there for that to happen and so to make it happen we will have to pay more for our tickets. That is reality because the government doesn't treat the railway as a number one priority, unlike this board!
I suspect that the economics of seven car bimodes stack up rather favourably compared with coupling up pairs of Voyagers. More capacity, fewer staff, more efficient engines, electric power where appropriate and less maintenance.

there is no room for debate with that kind of statement. It borders on preposterous!
No it isn't. It's perfectly rational to vote with one's feet if the price exceeds the value of the service.

Also going by car means you cant have a drink or a sleep or travel at the same speed. I would pay a premium for that! We do today.
There's paying a premium and there's being fleeced. If Avanti did what LNER have done: "London to Manchester single on Saturday? That's a quite busy day so it'll be £190 please"
 

RT4038

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2014
Messages
4,604
I absolutely will not. I will drive instead if LNER style pricing makes it to the WCML. My long distance rail travel will close to cease.

Edinburgh/Newcastle are slight oddities in being far enough that most people won't consider the car, the main competitor is air. But most other UK journeys can be done by car, and with substantially increased fares over and above fares that are already ludicrously expensive that is what people will do, in droves.

It is considerably cheaper to hire a car for the day and drive to an outlying Tube station than it is to make a peak time Manchester-London journey already, without increasing it further. That is ludicrous. I'd kind of get it if the railway offered a premium quality of service, but it doesn't, it offers little better than Ryanair/Travelodge levels of service.
Welcome to the club! Lots and lots of people already have come to that conclusion - perhaps the railway will then be able to reduce services to cater for a lower demand, more in line with their rolling stock capacity and reduce the pressure on recruitment and the wage bill. If the demand doesn't actually lower then that will tell us all something of course.

I am happy to pay increased general taxation for a package of high quality public services. I am not happy to pay increased fares, just as I am not happy to fund healthcare at the point of use.

If that means the death of the railway, tough. I'm not funding an incompetently run, incompetently managed mess by way of paying far in excess of what it's worth.

Here's an example - a trip to the Lake District for a weekend presently costs around £120 by train all in. £200? No chance when the fuel for a car I already own comes in around £70 at most.
Well I'm not happy to be funding the railway (whilst hardly using it in recent years) at its current level of subsidies and grants through general taxation, giving cheap fares at the point of use. Whether the fares are worth it or not is a subjective view, but it does appear to be an incompetently run, incompetently managed mess where reality has gone out of the window. Will need a political strongman to deal with that - where is an Ernest Marples when we need him?
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
30,596
Location
Fenny Stratford
No it isn't. It's perfectly rational to vote with one's feet if the price exceeds the value of the service.
agreed - but we aren't seeing that though are we? I suspect there is ability to absorb higher prices yet. Like I said the trains are rammed on Sunday.
There's paying a premium and there's being fleeced. If Avanti did what LNER have done: "London to Manchester single on Saturday? That's a quite busy day so it'll be £190 please"
I have no problem with that ( is that not what airlines do?) as long as the train with 4 peopel on is priced to attract custom.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
101,854
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I have no problem with that ( is that not what airlines do?) as long as the train with 4 peopel on is priced to attract custom.

The problem with that (which is the LNER thing) is the car. Nobody is going to pay nearly £400 return London-Manchester each for a family day trip, they'll just drive to an outlying Tube station instead.

The thing with airlines is that the competition is mostly other airlines, who all do the same thing.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
30,596
Location
Fenny Stratford
Clearly: The unspoken part of higher fares is seeing a return on that money through higher quality, more reliable, more punctual services!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top