My idea to abolish market based pricing and implement pricing based on distance and train category

[RT4038]

It’s a debate that the UK has never properly had, and one on which forum posters are quite divided. Do we want to be Luxembourg, or the USA?

Somewhere in between, I would guess! No appetite for extremes.

My opinion is that, public services should not have market based pricing. These include water, electricity, public transport, medical system, etc., which are essential items with infrastructure.

Significant numbers of people would agree with you on all except public transport, which for various reasons is not considered in the same category (except enthusiasts of course).

 

[AlterEgo]

10p per mile for the distance from the start station to the end station, as the crow flies

That is going to open up some insane split ticket opportunities.

 

[eldomtom2]

I'd absolutely support lowering the more expensive fares to the same price as the cheaper fares and paying more tax to achieve this.

Providing no fares go up!

Honestly I think you could perhaps change perceptions by toning down demand-based pricing and allowing trains to sell out. I honestly think a lot of people would react better to "Sorry - sold out" than a ridiculous walk-up fare.

In my experience, the number one reason people give when asked why they don’t use the railway is that the railway doesn’t go close enough to where their journey is.T

That may be your experience, but it's not mine.

It would perhaps be worth researching how many journeys are genuinely unviable to make by train...

Quite! People will often cite the cost of train tickets, when the real motivation is the convenience of the car at the start, during, and at the destination of the journey. And this is quite understandable.

What motive would people have to lie about the reasons for not taking the train?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Jul 2023 ==

The problem is that the UK is neither, nor can it ever pretend to be otherwise. Luxembourg is a county, and the USA is a continent. The UK is too big for the network to be a single hub system all about moving people in and out of a single city (Luxembourg) but it is too small to focus on bulk movement of cargo across multi-day distances (USA).

Our network is much closer to the French or German models, where Intercity traffic is a much more commercial affair than social, but rural passenger traffic is far more social than commercial. Therefore the fare system needs to be flexible enough to allow for subsidised fares on routes where it is needed, but also revenue optimisation on routes where it is possible.

Let's not pretend that the poor state of US passenger rail is primarily due to geography.

 

[Bald Rick]

It would perhaps be worth researching how many journeys are genuinely unviable to make by train...

Given that 97.5% of all passenger trips are not made by train, it seems reasonable to assume that most of them are not viable by that mode.

Transport Statistics Great Britain: 2022 Domestic Travel

www.gov.uk

 

[yorkie]

Honestly I think you could perhaps change perceptions by toning down demand-based pricing and allowing trains to sell out. I honestly think a lot of people would react better to "Sorry - sold out" than a ridiculous walk-up fare.

OK so you are suggesting compulsory reservations; what do you do when a team like Newcastle United have just been playing Arsenal, Spurs, Chelsea etc and the trains south are already fully booked, and you have hoards of walk-up passengers for Durham, Darlington etc...

You could pretend the train is "sold out" and make no tickets available, and those "in the know" travel anyway, or do you have BTP on standby at each set of doors?!

Is the concept of claiming trains are "sold out" really that popular? I am not so sure...

Trainline says tickets are sold out, can I still take the train?

On Saturday (14th January 2023) I will be travelling to Wigan North Western from Birmingham New Street. This ticket is booked, and I intend to go, however I plan to return the next day, (Sunday 15th January 2023) but the Trainline app says that all of those trips are “Sold Out”. On this Avanti...

www.railforums.co.uk

Trains sold out - how to get to destination?

Hello, I need to get to Market Harborough from London on Saturday 8th October, arriving by ~11am. All the trains are sold out. I unfortunately didn't know I was going to have to go to Market Harborough before now. Is there any way of me getting there (i.e., via other routes and changing? Or...

www.railforums.co.uk

Lumo is "Sold Out"

I need to travel on the 14:48 Lumo service from Kings Cross tomorrow afternoon. Trainline will show the service on the journey planner as sold out. All other websites I have tried do not list it at all. I am aware that a reservation is not compulsory. How can I buy a walk up ticket to travel on...

www.railforums.co.uk

Derby - Stoke Sat 30 July "Sold Out" ?

Checking for tomorrow, all morning trains from Derby to Stoke on Trent & return trains at 1734 & 1934 are shown as 'sold out / no fares avaialble / not open for booking' on all the sites I have tried (NRES, EMR, TPE, Train split, LNER) As far as I can see these EMR trains are running and...

www.railforums.co.uk

Cross country sold out Jun 14th Birmingham Exeter am Off Peak

How on earth can we have a train system where cross country say they are sold out nearly 2 weeks before travel on an off peak journey. Not sure how this is supposed to be managed but it is bonkers.

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[eldomtom2]

OK so you are suggesting compulsory reservations; what do you do when a team like Newcastle United have just been playing Arsenal, Spurs, Chelsea etc and the trains south are already fully booked, and you have hoards of walk-up passengers for Durham, Darlington etc...

You could pretend the train is "sold out" and make no tickets available, and those "in the know" travel anyway, or do you have BTP on standby at each set of doors?!

Is the concept of claiming trains are "sold out" really that popular? I am not so sure...

People don't like it when trains are sold out. But I suspect it creates a better impression than an extremely high fare does - because the latter feeds into a perception of the railways being expensive.

 

[yorkie]

People don't like it when trains are sold out. But I suspect it creates a better impression than an extremely high fare does - because the latter feeds into a perception of the railways being expensive.

But the fares from Newcastle to Durham/Darlington aren't that expensive?

 

[hux385]

My suggestion would be to divide the UK map into zones, and charge by the number of zones crossed. To balance customer affordability vs revenue, we could adjust the number of zones to either increase or decrease fares as needed.

I would propose a £2.50 fare for every zone crossed. All fares as single leg and no advance or off peak discounts, just one set price.

For example, having seperate zones for Edinburgh, Dunbar, Northumberland, Newcastle would mean Edinburgh-Newcastle crosses 4 zones and is therefore £10 one way. Edinburgh - Central Belt - Glasgow would cross 3 zones and therefore be £7.50. Thoughts?

 

[Bletchleyite]

The fares system sort of already is zonal, with long distance fares from smaller stations just deriving from those at larger stations.

I could see sense in making it less granular, so all "Merseyrail map" to "London map" fares would be the same, for instance, though I don't think, because zones would tend to be different sizes, the idea of setting fares nationally based on zones crossed would work particularly well. That's more of an urban transport thing.

 

[eldomtom2]

But the fares from Newcastle to Durham/Darlington aren't that expensive?

I'm talking in a broader sense than one specific example.

 

[hux385]

The fares system sort of already is zonal, with long distance fares from smaller stations just deriving from those at larger stations.

I could see sense in making it less granular, so all "Merseyrail map" to "London map" fares would be the same, for instance, though I don't think, because zones would tend to be different sizes, the idea of setting fares nationally based on zones crossed would work particularly well. That's more of an urban transport thing.

I think the zoning system is something which works well in urban areas. If I am visiting London, I find the zone system very simple and reassuring.

Expanding this idea for national trains would make things much less daunting for the average passenger and would avoid the lucky dip vibe of searching for ticket options online that we currently have. Also, charging by zone would eliminate split ticketing since the sum of lots of smaller journeys would be exactly equal to one longer journey.

 

[yorkie]

I'm talking in a broader sense than one specific example.

OK, so you agree that it doesn't really stand up to scrutiny when looking at actual example journeys.

Anyway good luck with your campaign; I think you may need it...

My suggestion would be to divide the UK map into zones, and charge by the number of zones crossed..

So we're going to be talking many hundreds of zones. What if short journeys straddle two zones?

This thread is now pure fantasy so I think I'll be bowing out soon!

 

[LYuen]

OK, so you agree that it doesn't really stand up to scrutiny when looking at actual example journeys.

Anyway good luck with your campaign; I think you may need it...

So we're going to be talking many hundreds of zones. What if short journeys straddle two zones?

This thread is now pure fantasy so I think I'll be bowing out soon!

There are a lot of practical examples of fixed pricing or mixed fixed and market pricing mechanism for railway all over the world.

For example in Germany, R and RE are very much zone based, while ICE is market pricing
Similarly for Trenitalia in Italy, R and RV trains are distance based, while IC and Frecciarossa are market pricing

Japan is a more extreme example - base fare simple distance based, train type premium (for express, high speed train) and service premium (for green car/1st class) are added onto the base fare which are also distance based.
There are railway company run OTAs that sell advance tickets at a fixed discount.

And to be fair, we do use a mixed of variable and fixed pricing in the UK - Oyster and PAYG fares in London region, return fares for some operators are fixed.
Making walk up single fare more sensible, e.g. fixed at 60% of a return fare when there is one, is certainly practical and worth discussing.

 

[yorkie]

There are a lot of practical examples of fixed pricing or mixed fixed and market pricing mechanism for railway all over the world.

For example in Germany, R and RE are very much zone based, while ICE is market pricing

Similarly for Trenitalia in Italy, R and RV trains are distance based, while IC and Frecciarossa are market pricing

Yes, for longer distance journeys zonal or mileage based pricing is impractical hence the move to market based pricing.

True zonal pricing that exists in Germany, where there is no penalty for mixing and matching zones is sadly not really a thing in Great Britain.

Japan is a more extreme example - base fare simple distance based, train type premium (for express, high speed train) and service premium (for green car/1st class) are added onto the base fare which are also distance based.
There are railway company run OTAs that sell advance tickets at a fixed discount.

And to be fair, we do use a mixed of variable and fixed pricing in the UK - Oyster and PAYG fares in London region, return fares for some operators are fixed.

Yes fares are set by all sorts of different methodologies, many of them historical. But there has been a huge drive towards market based pricing in recent years. PAYG fares in London are loosely and nominally zonal based but with some modes costing more than others, and premiums charged for mixing modes, which isn't how it's done in more sensible countries such as Germany, Switzerland etc.

Zonal pricing absolutely makes sense for urban areas, but zonal pricing for the entire GB rail network is a bit more questionable.

While some people seem to associate market based pricing with loopholes, anomalies and splitting opportunities, these issues can and do still occur where pricing isn't market based.

Making walk up single fare more sensible, e.g. fixed at 60% of a return fare when there is one, is certainly practical and worth discussing.

Single leg pricing, or going part way towards that, is a topic that's been discussed on other threads. For example a proposal to retain return fares but price singles at around 60% was posted here:

LNER Single Fare Pricing - is there a fairer alternative?

In the main thread here: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/lner-removing-return-tickets.248455/page-7#post-6218916 ...there has been discussion of the LNER single fare pricing move and how it disadvantages certain groups, as well as meaning a near across-the-board 4% increase. This being...

www.railforums.co.uk

There are numerous other threads where it's cropped up too.

 

[eldomtom2]

OK, so you agree that it doesn't really stand up to scrutiny when looking at actual example journeys.

I didn't say that and to suggest so is dishonest. Remember COP26 and how it was brought up that it was cheaper to fly than to pay the (walk-up) rail fare?

 

[miklcct]

I didn't say that and to suggest so is dishonest. Remember COP26 and how it was brought up that it was cheaper to fly than to pay the (walk-up) rail fare?

So at that moment was the walk up air fare really cheaper than the walk up rail fare? If so the government should tax the airlines to stop this happen again.

 

[eldomtom2]

So at that moment was the walk up air fare really cheaper than the walk up rail fare? If so the government should tax the airlines to stop this happen again.

In all honesty I somewhat doubt it actually was a walk-up vs walk-up comparison, but my point is more about what people perceive rail fares as rather than the objective reality.

 

[yorkie]

I didn't say that and to suggest so is dishonest.

If you are accusing my of dishonesty, you will need to withdraw that remark.

I did specifically ask: "what do you do when a team like Newcastle United have just been playing Arsenal, Spurs, Chelsea etc and the trains south are already fully booked, and you have hoards of walk-up passengers for Durham, Darlington etc...?"

Your response to that question was:

People don't like it when trains are sold out. But I suspect it creates a better impression than an extremely high fare does - because the latter feeds into a perception of the railways being expensive.

When I questioned whether these fares were expensive, you then said:

I'm talking in a broader sense than one specific example.

Therefore, to me your responses appear to be inconsistent; perhaps there has been some misunderstanding? Perhaps you can end this confusion by clarifying a few matters please?

1) Are you saying that the passengers in my example above (i.e. Newcastle to places like Darlington/Durham) do or don't want these trains to be "sold out" and/or denied boarding after such events?
2) are you saying that the fares are (percieved to be) or aren't extremely high for such journeys?
3) are you saying that there is a choice between trains appearing as sold out, or fares being expensive, and we can't have any other choice? Right now I believe there are some good value fares and I don't think the users of these fares want to be denied travel without a reservation.

 

[eldomtom2]

1) Are you saying that the passengers in my example above (i.e. Newcastle to places like Darlington/Durham) do or don't want these trains to be "sold out" and/or denied boarding after such events?

Obviously they would rather be able to take the train. However if the intent is to turn passengers away to manage crowds then high walk-up fares create a negative impression of high prices that saying "sold out" doesn't. (Of course, saying "sold out" gives a negative impression of capacity, but that's more easily understood to not be universally the case than high fares are).

2) are you saying that the fares are (percieved to be) or aren't extremely high for such journeys?

I'm saying there is a general perception of the railways as being expensive, and part of that is due to high walk-up fares.

3) are you saying that there is a choice between trains appearing as sold out, or fares being expensive, and we can't have any other choice?

Well everyone here says high walk-up fares are necessary to manage crowds...