How can rail fares be simplified?

[Bletchleyite]

Exactly the same on the western branch of TfL Rail - why would I choose to travel from Slough to Paddington on the stopper if I can get there for the same price on the non-stop. There really should be some 'TfL Only' fares in place.

The stopper doesn't exist for you to do that, though, it exists to carry passengers on local journeys. Of course you can, but is there a need to push you to? This is this fallacious point about competition.

Just because there is a train from Reading to London doesn't mean that train is intended to carry passengers on journeys from Reading to London.

There are plenty of such cases. For instance on the WCML, unless doing it for an increased chance of a seat southbound, the Tring stopper is not a good train to catch for a Tring<->Euston journey; you're better catching a semifast. Or if you're going Marylebone to Wycombe, you don't want the stopper that terminates there as it takes over an hour. Or Euston-Watford - you wouldn't use LO for the whole thing, and there is really no sensible reason to motivate you to do so.

This is the competition fallacy on local journeys. On InterCity journeys, having that differentiation probably does make sense because the price difference broadens the market in a way that doesn't really happen on short ones.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Sep 2020 ==

Or an IC supplement.....

Or nothing. Pushing people onto Crossrail is of no benefit as that just means Crossrail will be overcrowded when you get near London.

An IC-Zuschlag would work if you had, say, 3tph of 12-car EMUs doing Reading, Slough and Paddington - you would then want the local journeys to be pushed onto those - that's a bit more like the situation around MK.

 

[Meerkat]

Because costs are higher if more trains with fewer passengers run, and because average revenue falls. It's as basic as that. Not to mention the performance disbenefit from running more trains than were really necessary.

Regulation should not lie with government. I'm not sure there are any areas where that's useful.

Your if isn’t a given - there wouldnt necessarily be more trains run or the same number of passengers.
Anyway we better agree to disagree to get back on topic (there is now another thread for TOC only fares)
I just want to know what we are supposed to be solving and why before working out how to solve it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As for rinsing the passenger, my view would be that there should be more taxpayer support and lower overall fares than today. Taxpayer support for a system that allows cream-skimming behaviour like on-rail private competition is a waste of public money.

I agree. Anything requiring subsidy is a natural monopoly, I'd say. Competition kicks in for me solely where it is possible to make a profit from it.

(Yes, there's BSOG, the Bus Service Operator's Grant, which is sort of a subsidy for just running a bus. But it's not really a subsidy, it's tax relief - a subsidy is where you're paid in excess of what the state charges you, in my book)

 

[CBlue]

Because costs are higher if more trains with fewer passengers run, and because average revenue falls. It's as basic as that. Not to mention the performance disbenefit from running more trains than were really necessary.

Regulation should not lie with government. I'm not sure there are any areas where that's useful.

Seems simple enough to me.

It doesn't seem that the existing ticketing system was ever designed to be used by multiple companies - other examples I've had in the past were riding around on an Anglia Day Ranger and being refused access by EMT onto a service from Norwich to Ely - instead having to wait half an hour for the GA service. I had asked the guard upon boarding and she said they were only valid on Greater Anglia services.

I later found out at home that the ticket was valid on EMT, although bizzarely not on Crosscountry between Ely and Cambridge despite that service being well within the scope of the ticket boundaries.

With the confusion that results from what colour train your ticket is valid on, and even staff not always knowing, no wonder people put it into the "too much effort" category.

 

[Starmill]

Your if isn’t a given - there wouldnt necessarily be more trains run or the same number of passengers.

Uhm? There are more services because we allow on-rail competition!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Sep 2020 ==

I just want to know what we are supposed to be solving and why before working out how to solve it.

I have to say on a personal level I would prefer to keep the current system just as it is. Changing it would only have negatives, for me. But keeping the status quo is not my overall preference, because it's bad for almost everyone else in the country, whether they use rail or not. And there is little chance of it staying substantially the same now anyway.

 

[Horizon22]

The stopper doesn't exist for you to do that, though, it exists to carry passengers on local journeys. Of course you can, but is there a need to push you to? This is this fallacious point about competition.

Just because there is a train from Reading to London doesn't mean that train is intended to carry passengers on journeys from Reading to London.

An IC-Zuschlag would work if you had, say, 3tph of 12-car EMUs doing Reading, Slough and Paddington - you would then want the local journeys to be pushed onto those - that's a bit more like the situation around MK.

Quite and the peak often has these types of services to cater for that sudden demand from the Outer London regions (Covid notwithstanding).

It's all about where the overlap happens between local / regional / IC services. Some stations have been awkwardly in the middle of this such as Slough for instance. Or Orpington or East Croydon in the Southeast. The first IC/regional stop often ends up being the terminus of the local stop and rather congested as a result.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's all about where the overlap happens between local / regional / IC services. Some stations have been awkwardly in the middle of this such as Slough for instance. Or Orpington or East Croydon in the Southeast. The first IC/regional stop often ends up being the terminus of the local stop and rather congested as a result.

And Reading does have that issue, but pushing people to take an hour and a half journey on Crossrail which would then get excessively busy as a result is not the answer to it.

 

[matt_world2004]

There is already a price differentiation for crossrail to reading. TfL concessionary tickets like freedom and veterans passes are only valid on crossrail. GwR scholars only passes are only valid on GWR.

 

[JonathanH]

There is already a price differentiation for crossrail to reading. TfL concessionary tickets like freedom and veterans passes are only valid on crossrail. GwR scholars only passes are only valid on GWR.

...and, of course, off peak paper tickets to Thames Valley destinations valid out of Paddington on TfL Rail and not GWR in the evening peak even though TfL's own fare structure requires a peak fare to be paid.

 

[Horizon22]

And Reading does have that issue, but pushing people to take an hour and a half journey on Crossrail which would then get excessively busy as a result is not the answer to it.

Definitely not, I was more referring to the inbetween places like Slough which is sort of served with a limited express to London if you time it right.

There is already a price differentiation for crossrail to reading. TfL concessionary tickets like freedom and veterans passes are only valid on crossrail. GwR scholars only passes are only valid on GWR.

The price differential off-peak at Reading is very small for an extra 30-40 min journey time.

Either way, a simplifcation is well overdue, but engrained complexities and passenger behaviours will make this difficult. It's a bit like Council Tax rebanding & revaluing; lots of people know its necessary but it will disadvantage several even if its fairer overall and nobody wants to put their name to it.

 

[JonathanH]

The price differential off-peak at Reading is very small for an extra 30-40 min journey time.

How? Off-peak day travelcard = £26. Anytime day travelcard = £55.90. That is double the cost. How much more expensive do you want the differential to be?

 

[matt_world2004]

The price differential off-peak at Reading is very small for an extra 30-40 min journey time.

Either way, a simplifcation is well overdue, but engrained complexities and passenger behaviours will make this difficult. It's a bit like Council Tax rebanding & revaluing; lots of people know its necessary but it will disadvantage several even if its fairer overall and nobody wants to put their name to it.

For off peak to reading the price is £0 on TfL rail services compare to £10.10 on GwR with a freedom pass that's quite big.

 

[Starmill]

For off peak to reading the price is £0 on TfL rail services compare to £10.10 on GwR with a freedom pass that's quite big.

How many people out of those who could use the railway have a freedom pass though..?

 

[Horizon22]

How? Off-peak day travelcard = £26. Anytime day travelcard = £55.90. That is double the cost. How much more expensive do you want the differential to be?

I meant the off-peak differential between a TfL slower service and a GWR service. Fully accept the huge (and in my view disproportionate) off-peak & anytime prices.

 

[matt_world2004]

I meant the off-peak differential between a TfL slower service and a GWR service. Fully accept the huge (and in my view disproportionate) off-peak & anytime prices.

They both have the same fares for undiscounted tickets off peak

 

[Horizon22]

They both have the same fares for undiscounted tickets off peak

Yes but you can get a minimal saving by splitting the ticket. This comes to the heart of whether a 25min journey or a 50min journey should have the same cost.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes but you can get a minimal saving by splitting the ticket. This comes to the heart of whether a 25min journey or a 50min journey should have the same cost.

Resourcing capacity on the slower service costs more, so arguably, no, there shouldn't be a discount for using the slower service, unless it's underused which Crossrail won't be.

 

[Horizon22]

Resourcing capacity on the slower service costs more, so arguably, no, there shouldn't be a discount for using the slower service, unless it's underused which Crossrail won't be.

Then we will always deal with overcrowding for people whereby the fast service exists where, although perhaps not the most convenient departure time, will utilise the journey time saving. A bit factor in people's journey decisions.

Now you could argue that's a planning issue whereby if you didn't want that service overcrowded, there shouldn't be a station call...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Then we will always deal with overcrowding for people whereby the fast service exists where, although perhaps not the most convenient departure time, will utilise the journey time saving. A bit factor in people's journey decisions.

But then for places like Reading the answer to that is to restructure the service so that there is a high capacity fast commuter service, then you put pick up/set down restrictions on the ICs to keep the commuters off those. A few people will ignore them, but from experience at Euston most won't (and they didn't even when there were no barrier checks at Euston), and that's enough to control the issue.

 

[Horizon22]

But then for places like Reading the answer to that is to restructure the service so that there is a high capacity fast commuter service, then you put pick up/set down restrictions on the ICs to keep the commuters off those. A few people will ignore them, but from experience at Euston most won't (and they didn't even when there were no barrier checks at Euston), and that's enough to control the issue.

True. I'm mainly speaking in hypotheticals at this point as these services do exist but there has always been a big difference in preference/loadings in my experience even for miniscule time savings.

 

[JonathanH]

But then for places like Reading the answer to that is to restructure the service so that there is a high capacity fast commuter service, then you put pick up/set down restrictions on the ICs to keep the commuters off those.

There already is a high capacity fast commuter service from Paddington to Reading. It is just that it runs to Oxford, Bristol and South Wales and uses trains with pointy ends. Running trains from Paddington formed of flat fronted units which terminate at Reading and run at 110mph (beyond those which already run) would be a bad use of capacity (as you know).

Moreover, there is now no price differential between 125mph and 110mph services and (re)introducing one does not simplify fares.

 

[biko]

This discussion will never end. It is impossible to have a fares system that pleases everybody. Basically there are a few simple systems:

- Only train-specific tickets (airline model): very simple, just valid on one specific journey and people don’t have to worry about validity. TOCs are happy because yield management is easy and demand can be regulated. However, people lose all flexibility.
- Only one flexible ticket per origin and destination pair: easy to understand for passengers and very flexible. However, no demand or yield management possible and some complications with permissible routes.
- Only zonal tickets: Even easier than above and more flexible as long as it is clear which zones you need. But has the same downsides.

All these options would not work for the UK. It is just a too diverse network so you will always end up with some kind of compromise. And compromises mean complications...

In any case, single fare pricing has only advantages in each system. It removed half of the options and removes the need to consider both directions of travel.

 

[matt_world2004]

This discussion will never end. It is impossible to have a fares system that pleases everybody. Basically there are a few simple systems:

- Only train-specific tickets (airline model): very simple, just valid on one specific journey and people don’t have to worry about validity. TOCs are happy because yield management is easy and demand can be regulated. However, people lose all flexibility.
- Only one flexible ticket per origin and destination pair: easy to understand for passengers and very flexible. However, no demand or yield management possible and some complications with permissible routes.
- Only zonal tickets: Even easier than above and more flexible as long as it is clear which zones you need. But has the same downsides.

All these options would not work for the UK. It is just a too diverse network so you will always end up with some kind of compromise. And compromises mean complications...

In any case, single fare pricing has only advantages in each system. It removed half of the options and removes the need to consider both directions of travel.

I think the most simplist system is each pte have their own zonal structure with cross boundary fare priced as something similar to London Zone 1 to Birmingham zone 6 PTEs will work out between themselves what the price will be between their two jurisdictions

 

[markymark2000]

I think the most simplist system is each pte have their own zonal structure with cross boundary fare priced as something similar to London Zone 1 to Birmingham zone 6 PTEs will work out between themselves what the price will be between their two jurisdictions

But there are huge areas of the country with no PTE and in quite a lot of cases, fares are quite low in PTE areas so if you happen to find yourself, purely for example, travelling from Southport to Manchester, you have low fares for Merseyside, high fares for Bescar Lane to Gathurst and then you have cheap fares again from Wigan to Manchester. All you will end up with is opportunities where it is much cheaper to split tickets for local travel (rather than now where split ticketing really only benefits people travelling longer distance.

 

[317 forever]

I think I would ban operator specific fares if the price difference between the operator specific and the anytime is less than £2 single.
Also operators selling tickets less than £1 below a day ranger price should be banned. Passengers then get sold a dayranger. This is commonplace in buses so I believe people are getting more used to it.

In some areas, I think it would be good to start grouping stations and sell tickets to the station group and remove all tickets to specific stations. For example Wrexham General and Central renamed to 'Wrexham Stns'. Liverpool Moorfields, Lime Street Lower, Liverpool Central and James Street renamed to 'Liverpool Loop'. I know that this is done in some areas common already but it doesn't go far enough and I think that by changing it to be more common, it would reduce the amount of fare combinations.

For a slightly more 'out there' grouping fare system, you could link branch lines. For example Milford Haven Branch. As all the fares to all stations on the branch are very similar, you could group the line for the purposes of non local travel. Then for local travel on the branch, set a standard fare. Ie, local travel between Milford Haven, Johnston, Haverfordwest & Clarbeston Road, this could be charged at £5. For travel from any of these stations to anywhere else, fares are basically the same as now, worked out point to point, but the origin is 'Milford Haven Branch'.
All tickets for travel to/from Deganwy is priced as for traveling to Llandudno is another one.
Anglesey could be it's own fare zone again, £5 single for inter zone or longer distance fares charged as Anglesey to [destination]
I know this would still cause some confusion over the amount of fares and it may cause some confusion over the destination on the ticket not being the destination which you chose but all in all, you are massively reducing the amount of point to point fares which may help to reduce the overall fares.

I think a final point would be where network tickets exist, just have no point to point fares. Merseyrail is the main one I am looking at here. They already have an off peak daysaver. Just make a peak time daysaver and rid all point to point Merseyrail fares. Combined with above, fares to/from places outside of the Merseyrail network are then done by the line so 'London to Merseyrail Wirral Line'.

Your mention in the first paragraph about Day Rangers reminded me of the time last year when I was travelling from Heaton Chapel to Worcester Foregate Street. It did not tell me that it would be cheaper to get a Single to Stoke or Crewe then a West Midlands Day Ranger. As I wanted to ride the recently electrified routes, I did this anyway. As it is, I doubt a through ticket would have been valid via Crewe, Stoke and Rugeley anyway, although via Longbridge / Bromsgrove probably would be ok at least.

 

[hexagon789]

wrong thread