Abolish Railcards

[hooverboy]

DB Bahncards are not "off peak only" - they do not have such a concept at all. All walk-up fares are "Anytime" - "Flexpreis" (though the price can vary by day of the week I believe, and commensurate with that it's singles only, no returns), smoothing of this is done by "Sparpreis" tickets which are the same as Advances.

not quite.
when you buy the tickets from the vending machine you will be given a selection of trains times with variable fares, and its nearly always the case that the peak time fares are much higher.
It does seem to vary a lot in which mode of transport you use. Ie an ICE train fare is double or more the price of RE train for the same route, but the RE train does more stops and takes longer.

You're right about the single-only tickets though, Return tickets in germany are not common,apart from some local transport networks.

you can get other rail rover type cards that don't carry a restriction(apart from not valid ICE tains).
most local travelcards are anytime travel ie munich Isarcard.

 

[devonexpress]

Or a better idea, abolish the current confusing railcard system.

Introduce a new railcard, as others have suggested for a higher price that anyone can buy and use, no matter age, situation, profession.

It then leaves it down to the personal travelling to decide, if they don't travel frequently they can just pay the normal price, more frequent travellers could get the railcard.

 

[JonathanH]

I think also an expansion of "network railcard" type regional cards would also be a good idea.£30 p.a for these is quite OK, but they really should come up with a national standard for "off peak" hours,so everybody knows when and when not travel is valid.
a flat 9am/9.30am time for everything eliminates all the confusion

No, a flat time for off-peak is not a good system, particularly around major cities. Why is it right that if someone leaves Plymouth on the 0925 to Birmingham and another person leaves Totnes on the same train, the person from Plymouth pays so much more than the traveller from Totnes? Travelling into London, typically off-peak is defined in terms of arrival time there. A blanket off peak cut off based on departure time does not do this.

As noted upthread there are very sound reasons for the various railcards having been established with different time restrictions.

 

[JonathanH]

Or a better idea, abolish the current confusing railcard system.

Introduce a new railcard, as others have suggested for a higher price that anyone can buy and use, no matter age, situation, profession.

It then leaves it down to the personal travelling to decide, if they don't travel frequently they can just pay the normal price, more frequent travellers could get the railcard.

Why is the current railcard arrangement confusing? You only need to know the terms and conditions applicable to the railcard you hold. The fact that a railcard for a different group of people has different terms is irrelevant.

And, as for a national railcard, I just don't think it makes sense unless it comes with some pretty material restrictions to make it only apply at times that are truly off peak - so maybe validity from 11am to 3pm and after 8pm on weekdays, before 9am and after midday on Saturday and between midday and 4pm, then 8pm onwards on Sundays.

 

[HSTEd]

Or we just abolish this entire system, cut ticket prices by a blanket value and be done with it.

It's like bus passes, there are so many now its almost not worth having bus fares at all.

 

[JonathanH]

Or we just abolish this entire system, cut ticket prices by a blanket value and be done with it.

No, there are many places where trains are full to capacity, including at off peak times. Why should we go around reducing the revenue taken on those trains? Railcards are a blunt instrument but act in the direction of filling off-peak capacity.

It's like bus passes, there are so many now its almost not worth having bus fares at all.

That is just a function of which part of the population typically catches buses.

 

[HSTEd]

No, there are many places where trains are full to capacity, including at off peak times. Why should we go around reducing the revenue taken on those trains?

Well we could just not reduce the fares on these routes, wherever they are.

Railcards are a blunt instrument but act in the direction of filling off-peak capacity.

Cutting off peak fares would do the same thing wouldn't it?

 

[JonathanH]

Well we could just not reduce the fares on these routes, wherever they are.

There might be complaints from current users of railcards but yes, abolishing railcard and keeping the base fares as they are is an option.

Cutting off peak fares would do the same thing wouldn't it?

Sometimes railcards aren't available with the same time restrictions as off peak fares - with the Network Card in 1986 one of the aims was to reduce demand on the first off peak train and move it to later ones.

As others have noted upthread, getting a reduction is sometimes more favourable to people than just simply having low prices in the first place.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Sometimes railcards aren't available with the same time restrictions as off peak fares - with the Network Card in 1986 one of the aims was to reduce demand on the first off peak train and move it to later ones.

Having 2 levels of off-peak (Off Peak and Super Off Peak) can also help do that. Even more so if you move to singles because people can purchase the one that makes sense in each direction.

 

[JonathanH]

Having 2 levels of off-peak (Off Peak and Super Off Peak) can also help do that. Even more so if you move to singles because people can purchase the one that makes sense in each direction.

Yes, I did almost note that bit at the same time it also introduces more complexity (and that is something train travellers rate highly as something they don't like about the fares charged).

 

[devonexpress]

Why is the current railcard arrangement confusing? You only need to know the terms and conditions applicable to the railcard you hold. The fact that a railcard for a different group of people has different terms is irrelevant.

And, as for a national railcard, I just don't think it makes sense unless it comes with some pretty material restrictions to make it only apply at times that are truly off peak - so maybe validity from 11am to 3pm and after 8pm on weekdays, before 9am and after midday on Saturday and between midday and 4pm, then 8pm onwards on Sundays.

1st, for example 16-25 railcards, are also applicable to those ages 26 - 30 who are in full time education, this is not overly advertised. the government is trying to make a railcard for everyone, so why not get rid of having 20 different railcards and just have 1?

And why would the restrictions need changing, technically there is already a national railcard, it's just split into many different options to suit different people's needs. Just because you'd be condensing it down to one doesn't mean the timings of it's use should change!

As for abolishing them altogether, and reducing fares, I do agree it would be the most sensible option who is going to pay for that flashy new fleet of IET's on GWR, LNER, TPE, EMR? We're still waiting for the report on train fares to come out, which I believe suggests changing the fare system which would be a massive help. One thing I never understood was why travelling from Plymouth to Exeter was cheaper than travelling Exeter to Taunton even though it's roughly the same distance, but because of the Devon/Somerset boundary it was more expensive.

 

[JonathanH]

One thing I never understood was why travelling from Plymouth to Exeter was cheaper than travelling Exeter to Taunton even though it's roughly the same distance, but because of the Devon/Somerset boundary it was more expensive.

The Plymouth to Exeter off-peak day return fare was reduced in the mid 2000s when the franchises were merged to encourage more use on more lightly loaded trains. By the time they are East of Exeter they tend to be busier.

Market forces.

As for abolishing them altogether, and reducing fares, I do agree it would be the most sensible option who is going to pay for that flashy new fleet of IET's on GWR, LNER, TPE, EMR?

...and who is going to pay for future improvements.

One railcard with different terms for different users is more complicated than having multiple different railcard with their own appropriate conditions.

 

[Bletchleyite]

One set of T&Cs would make most sense to me. Then there's only one Railcard button on a TVM.

Just sell it to different demographics at different prices.

The one exception I'd be tempted to make is to bin the Family and Friends and Two Together cards, and simply offer that discount to groups travelling together on the same tickets without the Railcard, and to go with it roll out GroupSave nationally. To keep it simple (though it'd be eroding the F&F card a bit) it would be a simple "for any journey where two or more people are travelling together with the tickets purchased together there is a third off all fares, adult or child".

Then Railcards would just be an offering to allow one to pay a subscription to discount fares for *one* person by that. For instance the "companion" bit of the Disabled card would be unnecessary as that would work under the group discount instead.

 

[devonexpress]

One set of T&Cs would make most sense to me. Then there's only one Railcard button on a TVM.

Just sell it to different demographics at different prices.

The one exception I'd be tempted to make is to bin the Family and Friends card, and simply offer that discount to groups travelling together without the Railcard.

Agreed! It doesn't need overthinking, T&C wise but changing the price based on circumstances , age etc makes more sense.

 

[JonathanH]

One set of T&Cs would make most sense to me. Then there's only one Railcard button on a TVM.

Just sell it to different demographics at different prices.

The one exception I'd be tempted to make is to bin the Family and Friends and Two Together cards, and simply offer that discount to groups travelling together on the same tickets without the Railcard, and to go with it roll out GroupSave nationally. To keep it simple (though it'd be eroding the F&F card a bit) it would be a simple "for any journey where two or more people are travelling together with the tickets purchased together there is a third off all fares, adult or child".

What T&Cs are they going to be? I guess you would set them somewhere close to those which apply to the 26-30 railcard - anytime but with a minimum fare restriction early before 10am - you could probably get away with withdrawing the July / August easement on the 16-25 railcard with reasonably little complaint.

I don't think there is any need for different prices for different demographics. I don't see any justification whatsoever for railcards for people travelling alone between 30 and 60 at any price.

I think you can quite easily bin off the Network Railcard. Its usefulness is going to diminish in the near future when we get the extension of PAYG out from London, particularly if the London fare structure applies (although I wouldn't have gone from home to Colchester two weeks ago to sample the class 745 at £39.40 whereas I was happy to do so at £26).

Not sure what you then do with the local area railcards - they were introduced to allow higher prices to be charged to non-locals to cover more of the cost of the maintenance of the routes while preserving their usefulness to residents which doesn't seem to be a bad idea.

 

[JamesRowden]

I don't see any justification whatsoever for railcards for people travelling alone between 30 and 60 at any price.

What about a railcard which comes with a driving ban for its duration? The offer of cheaper fares might encourage people to live without a car, subsequently increasing public transport revenue and improving the environment.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think you can quite easily bin off the Network Railcard. Its usefulness is going to diminish in the near future when we get the extension of PAYG out from London, particularly if the London fare structure applies (although I wouldn't have gone from home to Colchester two weeks ago to sample the class 745 at £39.40 whereas I was happy to do so at £26).

I think I'd bin that off in favour of a (much higher priced) National Railcard, same with the Gold Card, which could be replaced by getting a free National Railcard with your annual season.

I sort of have a tenner a month by direct debit in mind as a possibly viable price point for such a thing.

 

[Llanigraham]

What about a railcard which comes with a driving ban for its duration? The offer of cheaper fares might encourage people to live without a car, subsequently increasing public transport revenue and improving the environment.

And how would that work in rural areas with no public transport?

 

[transmanche]

1st, for example 16-25 railcards, are also applicable to those ages 26 - 30 who are in full time education, this is not overly advertised.

No, the 16-25 is available to people of any age who are in full-time education. Not just those under 30. (The 16-25 Railcard is 'better' than the 26-30 Railcard, as there is no minimum fare in July or August.)

this is not overly advertised.

I'd say it's pretty well known that mature students also qualify for a 16-25 Railcard. Especially on university campuses. And this advert makes it pretty clear too.


Image shows an advert for 16-25 Railcard, highlighting that mature students also qualify.

 

[adrock1976]

One set of T&Cs would make most sense to me. Then there's only one Railcard button on a TVM.

Just sell it to different demographics at different prices.

The one exception I'd be tempted to make is to bin the Family and Friends and Two Together cards, and simply offer that discount to groups travelling together on the same tickets without the Railcard, and to go with it roll out GroupSave nationally. To keep it simple (though it'd be eroding the F&F card a bit) it would be a simple "for any journey where two or more people are travelling together with the tickets purchased together there is a third off all fares, adult or child".

Then Railcards would just be an offering to allow one to pay a subscription to discount fares for *one* person by that. For instance the "companion" bit of the Disabled card would be unnecessary as that would work under the group discount instead.

Regarding the second bit I have bolded above regarding the companion, it would seem to be in contradiction with the first bit I have bolded above regarding group save as it would be deemed as two individuals not travelling together who are going to the same destination. Also, for the companion, it would be the undercounted fare as it is mentioned that the group save is for 2 or more people.

Furthermore, the second bit that is bolded may be perceived as another attack on disabled people, which there could be a strong possibility it may contravene international law as defined by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. See https://www.un.org/development/desa...he-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities-2.html

Although I did not see an article specifically for transport, there are various other articles that could apply such as healthcare, employment, etc. There are some disabled people who require a companion to travel with them, otherwise they would never get out of their home which could lead to a detrimental effect on their mental health and wellbeing.

 

[Belperpete]

I have yet to see any clarity about WHY we would want to abolish railcards, or just have one railcard. There is no point in increasing the overcrowding on already way-overcrowded peak services. Nor in decreasing fares - where would the money come from?

I can see the point in a "universal" off-peak railcard, that would replace the current two-together and family railcards, and possibly all the other off-peak railcards too, allowing any adult and one or two accompanied children at discount rates. The money is made by the additional fare income, not from the cost of the railcard itself. So the cost of the railcard is immaterial provided it covers the admin costs. I think the current cost has been unchanged for a few years, so could probably do with increasing, but not significantly. There could even be an argument for issuing a universal railcard free to anyone buying an annual season ticket (there may need to be a threshold - what is the cheapest annual season available?).

The disabled railcard, which serves a very different purpose, and with very different conditions, would stay.

There are historic inconsistencies in the way the different off-peak railcards cover the peak-hour restrictions. On a universal card these conditions would obviously need to be harmonised. For people who already have an existing railcard, allow them the choice of carrying on renewing it with its current t&cs, or transferring to the new universal card.

If at some point in the future it is found that almost-all off-peak tickets are being bought with a railcard, then there would be an argument for abolishing the railcard altogether and just selling all off-peak tickets at the reduced rate. But I doubt that we are anywhere near that tipping-point currently.

 

[yorksrob]

What T&Cs are they going to be? I guess you would set them somewhere close to those which apply to the 26-30 railcard - anytime but with a minimum fare restriction early before 10am - you could probably get away with withdrawing the July / August easement on the 16-25 railcard with reasonably little complaint.

I don't think there is any need for different prices for different demographics. I don't see any justification whatsoever for railcards for people travelling alone between 30 and 60 at any price.

I think you can quite easily bin off the Network Railcard. Its usefulness is going to diminish in the near future when we get the extension of PAYG out from London, particularly if the London fare structure applies (although I wouldn't have gone from home to Colchester two weeks ago to sample the class 745 at £39.40 whereas I was happy to do so at £26).

Not sure what you then do with the local area railcards - they were introduced to allow higher prices to be charged to non-locals to cover more of the cost of the maintenance of the routes while preserving their usefulness to residents which doesn't seem to be a bad idea.

And why do you single out single travellers between 60 and thirty as not justifying a railcard ?

There are plenty of people in this bracket on low incomes for whom prices are a barrier.

Plus you're forgetting the fundamental purpose of railcards, which is to generate revenue at off-peak times, which works the same across any demographic.

 

[yorksrob]

I think I'd bin that off in favour of a (much higher priced) National Railcard, same with the Gold Card, which could be replaced by getting a free National Railcard with your annual season.

I sort of have a tenner a month by direct debit in mind as a possibly viable price point for such a thing.

I would agree with that. The annual season should include rail based PTE products though.

 

[JonathanH]

And why do you single out single travellers between 60 and thirty as not justifying a railcard ?

There are plenty of people in this bracket on low incomes for whom prices are a barrier.

At £120 a year (or more) the purchase of a supposed National Railcard is going to be a barrier for people on low incomes anyway. Sounds like something aimed at people who are reasonably affluent in the first place.

 

[yorksrob]

At £120 a year (or more) the purchase of a supposed National Railcard is going to be a barrier for people on low incomes anyway. Sounds like something aimed at people who are reasonably affluent in the first place.

Then make it fifty pounds.

You've completely avoided the point, which is that the railcard would generate revenue at off-peak times, regardless of whether you think its justified or not.

 

[Bletchleyite]

At £120 a year (or more) the purchase of a supposed National Railcard is going to be a barrier for people on low incomes anyway. Sounds like something aimed at people who are reasonably affluent in the first place.

It would be aimed at people who will travel long distances frequently by train, often on walk-up fares, which isn't generally going to be those on low incomes who are going to be travelling occasionally and mostly on the cheapest Advances. The point isn't to reduce revenue, but to change how it works along the lines of why people use cars so much - you pay a fair chunk of the cost of your rail travel "up front" (monthly), so then you get a lower headline rate when you do travel, which means you're more likely to and further increase revenue that way. The pricing is similar to DB's BahnCards which appear to work as a business model.

The intention of a full-priced National Railcard is not to make rail travel more accessible to those on limited incomes. If that was the intention, a version could be issued for households able to prove they have a maximum combined annual income of under say £25K at the classic £30.

 

[JonathanH]

Then make it fifty pounds.

You've completely avoided the point, which is that the railcard would generate revenue at off-peak times, regardless of whether you think its justified or not.

The railway needs to find a way of generating revenue at 'super' off-peak times - many trains are already full at parts of the off-peak - e.g. Saturday mornings with people happy to pay the full off-peak price.

This is why it seeks to generate revenue by way of time-limited offers (eg the surfeit of special offers at this time of year and yield management through advance fares). Having something available at quieter times of the year encourages people to travel when the railway wants them to fill up capacity rather than waiting until it suits the traveller.

 

[JonathanH]

The intention of a full-priced National Railcard is not to make rail travel more accessible to those on limited incomes. If that was the intention, a version could be issued for households able to prove they have a maximum combined annual income of under say £25K at the classic £30.

Maybe that would be better.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Maybe that would be better.

To me the best idea is that you have one Railcard concept - unified T&Cs which would probably look a bit like the 18-25 minus the July-August "minimum fare" holiday and possibly with an absolute "not before 10am" for arrival at stations within the London zones (as otherwise you'd need an excessively high minimum fare), then simply offer it to different demographic groups at different prices - £30 if you're a "concessionary" demographic be that YP, student, 26-30, disabled, elderly or whatever, £120 by way of £10/month DD if you don't fit one of those.

The "group" aspects of the Two Together and Family cards would be better dealt with as an extension and modification of GroupSave in my view. In essence, a flat 1/3 off adult or child tickets for any group from 2 upwards where the tickets are purchased at the same time and the group travels together for the entire ticketed journey. This could, for simplicity, share the same minimum-fare/earliest validity time approach as Railcards. I would also allow a smaller group if one person drops out provided all the tickets were held - again, keep it simple, act as a reasonable person would think.

Keep it simple.

 

[tasky]

It seems to me that British and Swiss railcard schemes have quite different functions

The British Young Person scheme, as well as the senior scheme, are about varying the price of tickets for price-sensitive groups of travellers, while still being able to charge full fares for groups that aren't.

The extension of the scheme to 30 year olds mirrors that - the age at which young people remain strapped for cash has risen for this generation. In some respects the senior scheme is a bit outdated as seniors are not as likely to be cash-strapped as they once were, but it is not politically sensible to remove it.

The Swiss scheme is more about buy-in - the higher upfront price means people feel they've already invested in the rail network, so they're more likely to use the train more regularly.

To a small extent there is some of this in the British scheme, but it's more about targeting lower prices at specific groups.

There is probably wisdom in both approaches. The approach suggested upthread of a generally available railcard which lower prices for certain groups seems sensible.