End of the line for return rail tickets

[infobleep]

I am not against fare reforms if that are fare. If I have to pay more I don't mind if its done fairly.

I don't have a car, which means I am helping the environment. Therefore I expect something in return in the form of public transport.

 

[RT4038]

Back in the day inter-city services called at Hitchin as well as Huntingdon.

Not many, to be fair, and not front rank services.

 

[infobleep]

It's a good question. For what it's worth I'm not in support of South East contactless being in the TfL system for that exact reason, I'd rather we had a national system that charged relevant walk-up single fares, a bit more like "The Key" etc, or you could buy those same fares as e-tickets, or an e-ticket Advance if you'd rather. If you really wanted to do Penzance to Wick, why not? But this isn't a speculative thread, and what certainly is happening in the South East is an extension of the TfL system, probably ultimately to the whole Network SouthEast area, though the next extension only covers most of it rather than all.

Well if it is anything like the ULEZ zone, it will probably cover most but not all. Not that I'm cynical.

Besides is the NSE area a good fit geographically? It's just a historic area based on older sectors prior to privatisation. The gold card area is wider but I'm most likely straying into speculation and ideas, which aren't for this thread so I'll cease.

 

[Haywain]

Not many, to be fair, and not front rank services.

And, ultimately, of very little relevance to this thread.

 

[Starmill]

This is nonsense, because many people already do.

I meant Bletchleyite specifically, based on his posting history, not people in general.

People in general happily buy £2 tickets from Swinton to Salford Crescent three months in advance. I see no issues with this or anything in between, providing it doesn't take away from the capability of the system to offer sensible prices, competitive against the cost of car fuel, to those paying on the day.

 

[infobleep]

I certainly wouldn't want to see the end of ranger and rover tickets, however those could be replaced with a price cap so whatever journeys you take inside a region are capped at the rover/ranger rate. Again there are complications which mean tapping in/out, not leaving the region for just even one stop, and then add railcards etc; another nightmare.

That aside, on advantage for scrapping returns is for those who make a complex trip, where a return isn't appropriate or even available, say Bolton - Blackburn - Preston - Wigan back to Bolton alighting at each (for, er, refreshment...).

Some say overnight break is niche and that single pricing will help those who want to return to a different station.

I would argue though that too is just as niche. I don't have stats to back this up though. Just my feeling.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I meant Bletchleyite specifically, based on his posting history, not people in general.

I tend not to use Advances, no, but if they were the only option and they were available up to departure at reasonable prices I probably would.

Some sat overnight break is niche and that single pricing will help those who want to return to a different station.

I would argue though that too is just as niche. I don't have stats to back this up though. Just my feeling.

The main gain is simplicity on online journey planners.

One use-case that isn't at all unusual is knowing which train one will use for an outward journey but not for the return, which single fare pricing enables.

 

[westv]

Presumably once return tickets finish they aren't coming back.


..... I'll get my coat.

 

[TheSel]

Even back in 1965 the days of the return ticket was numbered. Remember 'The Beatles'?

She was a day tripper
One-way ticket, yeah
It took me so long to find out
And I found out ...

 

[Starmill]

I tend not to use Advances, no, but if they were the only option and they were available up to departure at reasonable prices I probably would.

They would be available just before departure (i.e. when you'd buy a flexible ticket currently, at the station or on your way to it) at typically 5 - 15% cheaper than the Anytime rate, so Newark to London would be approximately £90 Anytime Single or £70 - 80 Advance single. I'd like to see you paying that much! If you were travelling on a 'peak' day like a Friday you'd be more likely to be paying the Anytime rate, if you were travelling on a day when demand were lower, like a January Monday, you'd perhaps get an Advance 25 - 35% cheaper at that point.

Effectively, if you remove the Off Peak and Super Off Peak, nearly the whole benefit goes to people who book more than four weeks in advance, and very little benefit is available for people buying on the day or the night before, because commercial departments are so keen to avoid any situation where people put off booking because they see high prices and think they could come down again. That attitude isn't going to shift, the message is still going to be "book as far in advance as possible to get the cheapest price". That's why it's so bizarre that you're willing to defend the principle.

One use-case that isn't at all unusual is knowing which train one will use for an outward journey but not for the return, which single fare pricing enables.

That kind of single pricing has been around for years though in the form of the Saver Half, but Avanti deliberately got rid of that.

 

[Bletchleyite]

They would be available just before departure (i.e. when you'd buy a flexible ticket currently, at the station or on your way to it) at typically 5 - 15% cheaper than the Anytime rate, so Newark to London would be approximately £90 Anytime Single or £70 - 80 Advance single.

And you know that how, precisely?

I've purchased an LNER Advance-on-the-Day once. It was very cheap - I think about £40 Leeds to London, well below even the Super Off Peak Single I had intended to purchase (£63.30 at present).

That's why it's so bizarre that you're willing to defend the principle.

I'm not advocating it, I'm just arguing against those who are saying it's unworkable. Those are two different things. I can, for instance, think that the ULEZ expansion is workable and at the same time be annoyed about having to upgrade my car. (This is hypothetical, my car is actually compliant )

What I would be interested to know is this:

1. What exactly is LNER going to trial?
2. If it's going to be not having off peak walk-ups on specific trains, or even only Advances and not even Anytimes, how will those trains be differentiated? Will LNER perhaps have a "LNER Budget" brand or something, run as a technical open access operation, perhaps by a subsidiary limited company so the rules about not being able to have brand-specific tickets are complied with? You'd have to clearly identify the trains involved.

That kind of single pricing has been around for years though in the form of the Saver Half, but Avanti deliberately got rid of that.

The trouble with the Saver Half was that it added all manner of complication, not least that if you had to change the day that'd cost you £10 + the other half of the single fare, utterly swingeing.

 

[Starmill]

I'm not advocating it, I'm just arguing against those who are saying it's unworkable.

Nobody is saying it's unworkable though. What people are saying is that it's wrong! I am specifically additionally saying that it's fine to operate a 100% private enterprise in that manner, but not one where most of the money comes from public funds.

And you know that how, precisely?

I've purchased an LNER Advance-on-the-Day once. It was very cheap - I think about £40 Leeds to London, well below even the Super Off Peak Single I had intended to purchase (£63.30 at present).

If that Super Off Peak weren't regulated the Advance would have been more expensive. Surely you can see that? When there is less capacity and more very cheap Advance tickets are available, the trains will be proportionally fuller than today. Therefore there's no scope for cheaper Advance tickets on the day of travel than are currently available. There would be if there were a view that it's acceptable more generally to hold some cheaper seats back and release them later, but RDG are dead against this because of the commercial view that if you do that, you start a game with your customer where they put booking off thinking they can win, and then when they don't win, you lose the sale and they go to a competitor. I can't see that changing. I agree that if they were to do that the idea of withdrawing Off Peak and Super Off Peak tickets might actually produce some useful results, but it would also generate even more accusations of unfairness from the public.

1. What exactly is LNER going to trial?

Nobody knows. But people have raised the hypothetical of removing the Off Peak and Super Off Peak, and Haywain is defending this principle / arguing against people suggesting any such change would be bad for passenegrs, so I think you'll have to draw your own conclusions (and if that's not enough, just have to wait for official details to emerge).

 

[Bletchleyite]

If that Super Off Peak weren't regulated the Advance would have been more expensive. Surely you can see that? When there is less capacity and more very cheap Advance tickets are available, the trains will be proportionally fuller than today. Therefore there's no scope for cheaper Advance tickets on the day of travel than are currently available. There would be if there were a view that it's acceptable more generally to hold some cheaper seats back and release them later, but RDG are dead against this because of the commercial view that if you do that, you start a game with your customer where they put booking off thinking they can win, and then when they don't win, you lose the sale and they go to a competitor. I can't see that changing. I agree that if they were to do that the idea of withdrawing Off Peak and Super Off Peak tickets might actually produce some useful results, but it would also generate even more accusations of unfairness from the public.

I think it's actually likely that, like airlines, the trial being talked about will involve making trains cheaper nearer to departure if they're not selling, because bar not having walk-ups that's the only thing that "dynamic pricing" could involve that isn't already done using Advances. So we shall see...

 

[Starmill]

The trouble with the Saver Half was that it added all manner of complication, not least that if you had to change the day that'd cost you £10 + the other half of the single fare, utterly swingeing.

Converting them all to a semi-flex return would have solved that. But they didn't go for that, they went for something instead that continues to offer a cheaper rate for people making an out and back rather than a one way.

I think it's actually likely that, like airlines, the trial being talked about will involve making trains cheaper nearer to departure if they're not selling, because bar not having walk-ups that's the only thing that "dynamic pricing" could involve that isn't already done using Advances. So we shall see...

Would certainly be a radical change of approach, and an unbelievable PR disaster if not handled with great care. Of course, it would probably be a boon to enthusiasts such as forum members who try look for where the price drops might occur.

 

[cactustwirly]

LNER's primary purpose is as a long distance InterCity operation. The primary service from places like Peterborough to London is provided by the regional operator, i.e. GTR. I can see a situation where LNER is a premium priced option for that, while GTR offer a cheap walk-up contactless option, a bit like the way it used to be from MKC before Avanti created their dedicated fares.

Grantham is maybe a bit less clear cut, but then that's because the LNER York semifast is basically the same thing as the LNR Crewe service on the WCML, and maybe needs different ticketing to the Edinburgh expresses.

That's completely ridiculous, it's like saying the Elizabeth line is the primary service from Reading to London...
The primary service from Peterborough to London is definitely LNER, you'd have to be completely mad to take Thameslink all the way to London instead of LNER

 

[Starmill]

That's completely ridiculous, it's like saying the Elizabeth line is the primary service from Reading to London...
The primary service from Peterborough to London is definitely LNER, you'd have to be completely mad to take Thameslink all the way to London instead of LNER

Indeed, although the real thing that would be mad would be making people pay ~£67 for a single on LNER where they can currently use the Off Peak Day Return at £39.90 (perhaps ~£42.50 from 5 March).

 

[sheff1]

Rangers and Rovers are a specialist leisure product. They could be sold via a dedicated website and not main sales channels. I don't think there's much sense in using them for capping; because they're generally priced quite high because purchasers will make lots of journeys the caps will very rarely be reached.

Ah, another claim (I didn't see an answer my query on the day & period return claim - have I missed it ?).

If I wish to travel to Newcastle and back two weekends running, it is much cheaper to buy a North East Rover than 2 Off Peak returns. One such return journey plus a trip to Hull would also exceed a 'cap'.

Of course the NE Rover (and others) will never become a 'cap' for that very reason.

 

[Starmill]

Of course the NE Rover (and others) will never become a 'cap' for that very reason.

Sadly, the common-sense approach in Devon and Cornwall, where the various off peak Ranger tickets are all set a little above above the level of the most expensive off peak tickets within their area generally doesn't apply further afield.

 

[Howardh]

Some sat overnight break is niche and that single pricing will help those who want to return to a different station.

I would argue though that too is just as niche. I don't have stats to back this up though. Just my feeling.

Bolton to somewhere returning to Wigan I would suspect is quite common, as Wigan's as easy to get to as Piccadilly, especially if the busses from western Bolton run they way one wants (7, 575). So I'm often asking is my ticket from Bolton (say to Birmingham) valid back to Wigan as a terminus; which is the case this weekend! It's to avoid the rail replacements on Sunday, from Picc. I can get the standard bus back home from Wigan quicker.

That may well be the case up and down the country, where it's better to arrive back to a different station. Maybe a thread??

 

[Bletchleyite]

Sadly, the common-sense approach in Devon and Cornwall, where the various off peak Ranger tickets are all set a little above above the level of the most expensive off peak tickets within their area generally doesn't apply further afield.

We could look at turning Rovers/Rangers into regional day tickets which could become more mainstream, which would require looking at their prices, I guess.

 

[JonathanH]

Sadly, the common-sense approach in Devon and Cornwall, where the various off peak Ranger tickets are all set a little above above the level of the most expensive off peak tickets within their area generally doesn't apply further afield.

I suspect it is the other way round. The most expensive off-peak day tickets are constrained by the price of the off-peak ranger.

We could look at turning Rovers/Rangers into regional day tickets which could become more mainstream, which would require looking at their prices, I guess.

The railway companies would lose revenue if that happened.

 

[Starmill]

I suspect it is the other way round. The most expensive off-peak day tickets are constrained by the price of the off-peak ranger.

That would have been rather a nonsense position because they could simply remove the Ranger tickets at any time if they wanted to. In any case they have applied larger proportional increases to the ranger tickets than the singles and returns several times as part of reorganising them. Doesn't appear to be causing any problems to me.

 

[Haywain]

Nobody knows. But people have raised the hypothetical of removing the Off Peak and Super Off Peak, and Haywain is defending this principle / arguing against people suggesting any such change would be bad for passenegrs, so I think you'll have to draw your own conclusions

Feel free to draw your own conclusions and, if you wish, base them on things I haven't said in this thread. However, you should be aware that while I have knowledge of what LNER have done in the past I have absolutely no knowledge of what will emerge in early March or whenever it happens to be.

 

[sheff1]

We could look at turning Rovers/Rangers into regional day tickets which could become more mainstream, which would require looking at their prices, I guess.

Which is the situation in Germany .... but we are not supposed to mention that country, apparently.

 

[Watershed]

it's not a major issue to split for a planned overnight break

Not from a practical perspective, perhaps, but it certainly is from a financial perspective. Longer journeys are priced at lower marginal pence/mile rates than shorter ones. Therefore, splitting to make an overnight break of journey is likely to cost a lot extra compared to the current flexibility of using one return portion.

Obviously it remains a niche pursuit, but you must surely recognise that people who do this will lose out through the abolition of returns.

I remain highly concerned about the implications of this move, particularly when the Minister says the railway is financially unsustainable. It suggests that the government's vision of the railway is one with fewer services and passengers, who each pay a lot more.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not from a practical perspective, perhaps, but it certainly is from a financial perspective. Longer journeys are priced at lower marginal pence/mile rates than shorter ones. Therefore, splitting to make an overnight break of journey is likely to cost a lot extra compared to the current flexibility of using one return portion.

Not necessarily. Otherwise Trainsplit wouldn't be in business!

I remain highly concerned about the implications of this move, particularly when the Minister says the railway is financially unsustainable. It suggests that the government's vision of the railway is one with fewer services and passengers, who each pay a lot more.

I'd keep overall fare/subsidy ratios separate from this change. So few people do overnight BoJs that any added revenue would be utterly marginal.

 

[Watershed]

Not necessarily. Otherwise Trainsplit wouldn't be in business!

Yes, sometimes it is cheaper. But in the kinds of situations that we are talking about, it is highly unlikely to be cheaper. Particularly so when you consider that on flows where there is both a day and period return, the "single leg" pricing is likely to be based on the period return.

 

[Starmill]

It suggests that the government's vision of the railway is one with fewer services and passengers, who each pay a lot more.

Indeed, this is very heavily implied by the words in the speech and recent actions with regards to the timetable.

I'd keep overall fare/subsidy ratios separate from this change.

The problem is that the Minister has mentioned fares reform in the same or adjacent sentences several times to cost reduction, "financial sustainability" or "fairness to the taxpayer". So while you might do that, and I might agree with that approach, that's absolutely not government policy.

 

[Skymonster]

I think it's actually likely that, like airlines, the trial being talked about will involve making trains cheaper nearer to departure if they're not selling, because bar not having walk-ups that's the only thing that "dynamic pricing" could involve that isn't already done using Advances. So we shall see...

If LNER is going that way as soon as March I hope there are revenue analysts in training and preparing for the change already. Despite some assertions that dynamic pricing / revenue management is just a big sophisticated computer program, that‘s not true - certainly not in major airlines anyway - and a fair bit of ongoing experienced human intervention is involved. I’ve no doubt it could be done from a practical point of view, but there’s plenty of opportunity to mess it up and expensive (revenue losing) make mistakes.

 

[Haywain]

If LNER is going that way as soon as March I hope there are revenue analysts in training

LNER has employed a number of revenue analysts for many years, going back to the early days of Virgin Trains East Coast, if not the earlier East Coast.