Does the rail industry hate split ticketing?

[Tallguy]

Do the TOC’s and other parts of the rail industry that rely on customer revenue hate split ticketing? After all, the reason we split ticket is to save money and provide greater flexibility in our travel plans, both of which the revenue reliant sections of the industry that enjoys placing massive restrictions on tickets in order to maximise inconvenience to their customers hate?

 

[Starmill]

In general that certainly can't be said! West Midlands Trains for example actively encourage it:

Friday, 10 June 2022

Rail travel savings hacks that you need to know.

Split your ticket

Another easy tip to save on your rail travel is to split your ticket for longer journeys. Depending on the stations you are travelling through there might be an opportunity to split your journey up into stages – buying cheaper tickets if available for each part of the journey.

Split ticketing can require a little bit of research in order to make the biggest savings, but it is well worth it. In its simplest form, you can often just pick a major station on your route and look at separate tickets to split your journey here. These separate tickets are often cheaper than your original route, without actually having to change the journey at all. There are also many great online tools that do this for you, that’ll find you the best savings automatically!

Money-saving train travel tips

Rail travel savings hacks that you need to know. Most people don’t know that opting to reach your desired staycation destination by train is one of the most effective ways to make a big savings. With the cost of living continuing to rise, we have combined five top money-saving travel tips to...

www.londonnorthwesternrailway.co.uk

But some operators or other bodies certainly don't want it. Northern and West Midlands Trains are obvious examples where they'd have a lot to gain from splitting. Nobody has as much to lose as CrossCountry.

 

[JonathanH]

Do the TOC’s and other parts of the rail industry that rely on customer revenue hate split ticketing?

The only evidence that they hate it would be if we had compulsory compostage or it was strictly banned. It obviously prevents the railway from charging what it feels to be the market rate for some journeys but it appears to be tolerated.

 

[Starmill]

The only evidence that they hate it would be if we had compulsory compostage or it was strictly banned. It obviously prevents the railway from charging what it feels to be the market rate for some journeys but it appears to be tolerated.

In many ways it's actually a very useful thing to have around, because it better segments the market. Staff and enthusiasts, albeit that this is a tiny segment of the market, are much more likely than average to use it to save money, but also their purchases are more elastic. Foreign tourists and business travellers, who are much less price elastic, will be unlikely to even know about it and so pay the higher price, albeit those segments are still heavily diminished by the pandemic.

There are a number of cases where it does harm the commercial strategy, for example, VTEC and LNER have always struggled badly to get re-occupation of seats after Peterborough or Stevenage on afternoon peak Down trains. Before the pandemic, there were a significant number of seats being used on trains to Leeds, Newcastle or Edinburgh by Peterborough or Stevenage season ticket holders which were at capacity from London but had lots of availability into their final destination. The fact that people could use the Anytime Single from London to Peterborough then a cheaper Peterborough to Newcastle or Edinburgh Advance made it very tricky for LNER to attract people who were actually going to board at Peterborough. Easier to reoccupy a seat from somewhere further north, but then you earn less yield and have a gap with the seat unfilled from Peterborough to, say, Doncaster. Not so much of a problem these days.

 

[yorkie]

Do the TOC’s and other parts of the rail industry that rely on customer revenue hate split ticketing? After all, the reason we split ticket is to save money and provide greater flexibility in our travel plans, both of which the revenue reliant sections of the industry that enjoys placing massive restrictions on tickets in order to maximise inconvenience to their customers hate?

'The TOCs' as a whole? No; it benefits some of them!

Split ticketing is likely to increase the revenue of some TOCs such as West Midlands Trains, Northern etc.

In other cases it probably helps with yield management, for example XC appear to set prohibitively high through fares, safe in the knowledge that a few people are prepared to pay that premium but also knowing that some more savvy passengers are going to get a cheaper fare by splitting. If they simply reduced the price of longer distance journeys, they would lose the premium that some people are prepared to pay. They cannot increase the price of shorter journeys, but perhaps XC would lobby for such increases in the event that fares ever got reformed; who knows...

Yield management is all about getting as much money from each passenger as possible; some people are much more price sensitive than others.

Split ticketing in many ways benefits everyone.

Also don't forget that split ticketing allows non-permitted routes; it's not just about reducing costs!

 

[alistairlees]

Whilst TOCs are required to maximise revenues as part of their agreements with the DfT, they (and their owners) do not generally receive more or less income depending on how many tickets have been sold, or at what price.

It is more correct to say that the DfT cares about split ticketing; but the TOCs no longer do, as their income is not affected by it any more.

 

[bcarmicle]

Before the pandemic, there were a significant number of seats being used on trains to Leeds, Newcastle or Edinburgh by Peterborough or Stevenage season ticket holders which were at capacity from London but had lots of availability into their final destination. The fact that people could use the Anytime Single from London to Peterborough then a cheaper Peterborough to Newcastle or Edinburgh Advance made it very tricky for LNER to attract people who were actually going to board at Peterborough. Easier to reoccupy a seat from somewhere further north, but then you earn less yield and have a gap with the seat unfilled from Peterborough to, say, Doncaster. Not so much of a problem these days.

I'm not sure I understand the part I've bolded. Presumably the split was because it made it cheaper than e.g. a London to Edinburgh Advance, but I don't see why that makes it difficult for LNER to attract Peterborough customers?

 

[Starmill]

I'm not sure I understand the part I've bolded. Presumably the split was because it made it cheaper than e.g. a London to Edinburgh Advance, but I don't see why that makes it difficult for LNER to attract Peterborough customers?

It was possible to attract more traffic from or via Peterborough to Yorkshire, Newcastle or Edinburgh. But not without also attracting more London to Edinburgh, Newcastle etc passengers onto those trains because as you say it was cheaper than an Advance for the fast trains. This would cause increased standing from London while the fast trains had vacant seats, which for obvious reasons wasn't desirable.

Nowadays it's less of an issue, for obvious reasons.

 

[Haywain]

It was possible to attract more traffic from or via Peterborough to Yorkshire, Newcastle or Edinburgh. But not without also attracting more London to Edinburgh, Newcastle etc passengers onto those trains because as you say it was cheaper than an Advance for the fast trains. This would cause increased standing from London while the fast trains had vacant seats, which for obvious reasons wasn't desirable.

Nowadays it's less of an issue, for obvious reasons.

You seem to be saying that selling tickets from Peterborough to the north prevented tickets from Peterborough to the north from being sold. It’s difficult to follow that.

 

[Starmill]

You seem to be saying that selling tickets from Peterborough to the north prevented tickets from Peterborough to the north from being sold. It’s difficult to follow that.

It isn't so difficult in the context of re-occupation of a seat by someone actually joining the train at Peterborough surely. Which is what I said in my previous message. Obviously, price-sensitive long distance travellers people could travel from London to Peterborough on a GTR train with more capacity at a lower price, then join the LNER there for their journey to Edinburgh or wherever. But LNER are hardly going to advertise a competitor!