New railcard

[furryfeet]

just been on both eastcoast and national rail web sites and NEITHER are showing this railcard in their railcard lists, even though the journey dates are after 05 sep 2011

Anyone know when these sites are going to be updated ?

Why has ATOC not made it clear to the operators of these sites of this change happening, in time for the launch on 05 sep ?

 

[AlterEgo]

You shouldn't buy a ticket with a railcard discount if you don't have said railcard in your possession.

I expect it will go live at some point tomorrow, or next week.

 

[lyesbkz]

ATOC, we've been crying out for a Railcard that EVERYONE is eligible for!!

One could argue that everyone is eligible for this railcard, as any two persons can be named as the cardholders, and neither of them is subject to any eligibility criteria (apart from being at least 16, and if under 16 then child fares are better value!)

Oh, and the stupid 'Trial Area' thing.. but that's not a permanent criterion.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Why has ATOC not made it clear to the operators of these sites of this change happening, in time for the launch on 05 sep ?

Since it is still the 4th, we do not know for sure that this won't be available straight away tomorrow.

 

[snail]

Since it is still the 4th, we do not know for sure that this won't be available straight away tomorrow.

It's on National Rail, Trainline & WebTIS sites now but not Takethetrain.

 

[bnm]

It's on National Rail, Trainline & WebTIS sites now but not Takethetrain.

The only WebTIS site I can see offering the Two Together Railcard as an option is redspottedhanky.

 

[Flamingo]

So when checking tickets, if I come across this railcard I have to ask both passengers their names, and then ask for ID? Bloody marvellous!

BTW, it says nowhere in the T&C that both passengers have to carry photo ID, as there are no photocards to accompany it. That is the only way of realistically enforcing the T&C. I've read them and there is no mention of it.

I wish the people who think up these things would think them through!

 

[scotsman]

So when checking tickets, if I come across this railcard I have to ask both passengers their names, and then ask for ID? Bloody marvellous!

BTW, it says nowhere in the T&C that both passengers have to carry photo ID, as there are no photocards to accompany it. That is the only way of realistically enforcing the T&C. I've read them and there is no mention of it.

I wish the people who think up these things would think them through!

I thought it came with a photocard?

 

[bnm]

So when checking tickets, if I come across this railcard I have to ask both passengers their names, and then ask for ID? Bloody marvellous!

BTW, it says nowhere in the T&C that both passengers have to carry photo ID, as there are no photocards to accompany it. That is the only way of realistically enforcing the T&C. I've read them and there is no mention of it.

I wish the people who think up these things would think them through!

Er.... it is issued with a photocard (ticket office purchase) or incorporates the photos (online purchase).

You're right that the T&Cs on the Two Together website make no mention that carrying the photocard (if it's separately issued) is a requirement for the tickets to be valid. That's a bit of a glaring error.

The Manual does however state it is a requirement.

Ensure that both the photocard and Railcard are produced – except for an Online Railcard, which will have the photo incorporated.

So staff are told to ensure the photocard is present, but there's no requirement for the customer to carry it. The Railcard itself has no text on it saying the photocard must be carried, just a box for the photocard number. Not good.

 

[John @ home]

it says nowhere in the T&C that both passengers have to carry photo ID, as there are no photocards to accompany it.

It seems to me that there is a Photocard.

The Manual -> Railcards -> Two Together Railcard -> Issuing the Photocard

• Ensure that each applicant's passport-style photograph is of reasonable quality. The photograph must be a reasonable likeness. If you think it is impossible to tell that it is the applicant, you may refuse to issue the Photocard. Ask the applicant to present a clearer photograph.
• Ensure each applicant signs the reverse of the Two Together Photocard (RSP3588/41). You must not issue Season Ticket Photocards instead of Two Together Railcard Photocards.
• Trim each photograph to fit the photo box on the Photocard.
• Place both photographs over the photo box.
• Peel off the backing sheet and smooth down the film from the top to hold the photograph in position.
• Place the Photocard in one pocket of the wallet.
• Advise the customer to write their name and address in the space provided on the back of the Photocard.
• Please ensure that the number of the Two Together Photocard is endorsed in the space provided on the Two Together Railcard.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

One could argue that everyone is eligible for this railcard, as any two persons can be named as the cardholders, and neither of them is subject to any eligibility criteria (apart from being at least 16, and if under 16 then child fares are better value!)

Oh, and the stupid 'Trial Area' thing.. but that's not a permanent criterion....

Only the first 'cardholder' has to live in the area, the second 'cardholder' does not.

 

[Flamingo]

Sorry, my bad, I scanned the T&C and missed that

 

[All Line Rover]

One could argue that everyone is eligible for this railcard, as any two persons can be named as the cardholders, and neither of them is subject to any eligibility criteria (apart from being at least 16, and if under 16 then child fares are better value!)

One could argue that everyone is eligible for the Family Railcard also, as the only requirement is to bring a child - it doesn't have to be your own child. :roll:

To rephrase, we want a Railcard that EVERY TYPE OF PASSENGER is eligible for (at least during certain times of the day - morning peak excluded.) This means passengers of any age, including single travellers, etc...

 

[tony_mac]

One could argue that everyone is eligible for the Family Railcard also, as the only requirement is to bring a child - it doesn't have to be your own child.

You can get in a lot of trouble that way!

 

[All Line Rover]

Er.... it is issued with a photocard (ticket office purchase) or incorporates the photos (online purchase).

You're right that the T&Cs on the Two Together website make no mention that carrying the photocard (if it's separately issued) is a requirement for the tickets to be valid. That's a bit of a glaring error.

The Manual does however state it is a requirement.

It's very poor that the website does not list the T&C's for Railcards bought at a station.

So staff are told to ensure the photocard is present, but there's no requirement for the customer to carry it. The Railcard itself has no text on it saying the photocard must be carried, just a box for the photocard number. Not good.

I agree. I'm sure it will caused plenty of confusion. :roll:

"You need a photocard, but there's no requirement for you to bring it with you."

 

[AlterEgo]

To rephrase, we want a Railcard that EVERY TYPE OF PASSENGER is eligible for (at least during certain times of the day - morning peak excluded.) This means passengers of any age, including single travellers, etc...

But the kind of people who will use that railcard are people who, in general, already travel very regularly, dozens or scores of times a year (like you - hehe)! Why give them 34% discount on something they're paying full price for already? I doubt the extra journeys it would encourage would pay back that cut in revenue.

 

[jon0844]

I'd travel a LOT more if I got 34% off tickets outside of the former NSE area. The railcard would also cost a fair bit more.

As fares go up at a higher rate in the next few years, there will be even more incentive to offer some sort of national railcard scheme so ATOC can say that fares are still affordable, while those who travel fairly infrequently will pay a lot more.

I get the whole point that the industry could simply not bother, but why then do ANY railcards? Look abroad and you can see that not everyone thinks like that.

Also, the industry would have to be extremely arrogant to believe that everyone is forced to travel by train. It may be true for a lot of commuters (who can't get a railcard discount anyway due to the time) but there would come a point where people will either seek another method of transport (car, bike, coach/bus) or actually have to look for another job.

I am sure that when fares continue to rise, it is going to impact on off-peak usage more at the start, but will eventually hit peak times too. The industry might like the release of pressure at peak times, but won't like the empty trains running about the rest of the time.

This new railcard is a nice idea, but it seems a lot of effort when a simple railcard for ONE person to get 1/3 off would have been so much easier. ATOC could have made it so that the railcard only gave a discount to the single card holder (not x number of adults/children with you), so if you did want to travel with your friend/partner they'd buy their own railcard too (or pay full price). A much, much easier way to do things.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

I'd travel a LOT more if I got 34% off tickets outside of the former NSE area. The railcard would also cost a fair bit more....

How much would your spending increase? If you are travelling more, but not spending more, the railway gains nothing, infact it might lose out (more people = more carriages or multiple units = more expense).

I personally do not believe that you are saying you would spend more money than you currently do if you had the railcard. What reason do you have for not spending that extra money now?

And even if we assume that you do spend more money, do you represent the majority of people?

....As fares go up at a higher rate in the next few years, there will be even more incentive to offer some sort of national railcard scheme so ATOC can say that fares are still affordable, while those who travel fairly infrequently will pay a lot more....

Fares will go up, but then other costs go up too. There may be a valid argument that lower fares incourage more use, but if the increased numbers of passenger use does not increase profit, then there is no point.

....I get the whole point that the industry could simply not bother, but why then do ANY railcards? Look abroad and you can see that not everyone thinks like that....

I think you have to look at the market being aimed at, a family's prefered method of transit is by car, which is almost certainly cheaper than rail without a railcard. For rail to get revenue from that market, lower fares are needed, hence the railcard.

....Also, the industry would have to be extremely arrogant to believe that everyone is forced to travel by train. It may be true for a lot of commuters (who can't get a railcard discount anyway due to the time) but there would come a point where people will either seek another method of transport (car, bike, coach/bus) or actually have to look for another job....

A smart traveller always looks for the cheapest, most convenient option, but whilst rail fares may rise, so does bus/tram fares, car insurance, MOT, road tax, petrol/diesel, maintenance and repairs, parking fees and probably more. Yes, some people will find cheaper ways, but reducing the cost to the regular lone traveller (probably the primary user of the railway) is probably not going to increase revenue for the railway.

....This new railcard is a nice idea, but it seems a lot of effort when a simple railcard for ONE person to get 1/3 off would have been so much easier. ATOC could have made it so that the railcard only gave a discount to the single card holder (not x number of adults/children with you), so if you did want to travel with your friend/partner they'd buy their own railcard too (or pay full price). A much, much easier way to do things.

Lets assume the fare for a single adult, off peak, is £9. Let us further assume that 1m people use that for their journey(s) for, say, 200 days a year. That is £1,800m in revenue. If we then allow a railcard (at £100) which gives one third off, that revenue could possibly fall to £1,300m (average fare now £6).

The railway would then need 385,000 more people to switch to regular rail travel at that average price, over that many days, with the railcard, just to break even.

So, to achieve it's potential, the railcard would have to be:

a ) Cheap enough to entice more travellers.

b ) Expensive or restricted enough to ensure as few current users buy it as possible.

ATOC is not here to make your life easier, it is here to make money for it's members

ATOC will have researched how many people travel as a pair (or atleast appear to do so), they will work out how many people they think would benefit from the railcard and how many more will be encouraged onto the railway. They obviously feel this will lead to more revenue.

 

[transportphoto]

I have also just submitted a complaint to the ASA re Sam and Mark

 

[firespire]

I have also just submitted a complaint to the ASA re Sam and Mark

I agree testimonials shouldn't be faked. You wouldn't be able to sell £28 memberships to any other discount scheme based on fake people claiming they saved money using it.
People who appear in competition adverts holding cheques encouraging others to take part are presumably regulated and need to be genuine participants.

 

[jon0844]

If I spend £500 on leisure travel, it may remain about the same - but I'd rather have 10 journeys than just five. It's not about getting a cheap seat, but getting somewhere.

I am not struggling that much financially, but I don't like paying over the odds. Now, there are advance tickets but I often struggle to find them, or for the times I'd like to travel, so I personally prefer to wake up in the morning, look outside and think 'Let's go to xxx'.

Given I get 33% off in the NSE area, that's already making me travel now. If fares were that much higher, I may not bother or take the car - even though I'd prefer to take the train most of the time. Now, even with the discount, I bet most of the fares I'd get are more expensive than an advance - so the railway doesn't lose much at all. I'm paying less (but more IYSWIM) for some freedom.

The Gold Card/Network Card surely proves people DO want the discount. We're only talking about extending it nationwide, surely not arguing for a railcard that gives a discount given it already exists!!

As I get older, I do look for what I regard as value for money and may value that differently than others.

I doubt I'm that unique, but nor do I expect I reflect the needs of everyone. That's why you could either buy a railcard for 25/50/100% off at a higher cost, or save that money and pay as you go.

In any case, I have no doubt that in the next 5, 10 or 20 years we'll see a HUGE shake-up of ticketing, with smart ticketing, print at home etc all making it possible to save money in more innovative ways. Loyalty schemes would be easier to adopt, and so you could save the money that way (by travelling a lot more than you might otherwise).

 

[lyesbkz]

However maybe the 'testimonial' was just filling a placeholder on their site during development and they forgot to remove it?

 

[snail]

ATOC will have researched how many people travel as a pair (or atleast appear to do so), they will work out how many people they think would benefit from the railcard and how many more will be encouraged onto the railway. They obviously feel this will lead to more revenue.

You put forward some very good arguments. The other national railcards are socially acceptable, with the 16-25 'student' option encouraging people away from home to travel there and back more often. This one is clearly targeted at getting an extra person to travel, presumably why it is being introduced on a trial basis so that the revenue impact can be assessed.

I would certainly get one, it would pay for itself on one trip to London from here - but it's unlikely to encourage me to travel more just on the basis of reduced fares. I wonder how many people will end up on more than one card to increase the permutations? I know someone that has done that with F&F railcards so a combination of leaders can take Guides on day trips!

 

[island]

However maybe the 'testimonial' was just filling a placeholder on their site during development and they forgot to remove it?

transportphoto and I shall no doubt find out in due course what the ASA thinks!

 

[clagmonster]

One of the major sources of competition for all public transport is the private car. The costs of a journey with a car remain fairly well ficed whether 1 person goes or 5 (though more people travelling in a car does have an effect on comfort). Therefore, if a rail ticket is priced to compete with the car for one traveller, 2-5 tickets will likely be more expensive than the car option, so in order to compete the railway needs to reduce the price when small groups travel. Now they could reduce prices across the board, but that would lead to charging individuals less than they 'need' to. Therefore, logic leads to such offers as this and groupsave.

As for the testimonials, I also am not happy at the way they have been used. It would be quite easy for the website to say, for example:
2 Walsall fans could save £x on a trip to Scunthorpe with the railcard. Or even, 2 Walsall fans could save £x over the course of 23 away days. But they can't have already saved the money on a non existant product (unless there has been some kind of secret trial, but that is unlikely).

It will be interesting to see what happens to the Northern Duo if the railcard is extended.

 

[causton]

I just like how the two men are staring at the two women opposite on the example railcard, one looking rather disgusted at the ladies and one looking quite happy with them!

Unless the one who looks slightly disgusted is moaning to the other "I never said that - who put that in the testimonial! Two of us can't say the exact same thing anyway - a quote attributed to two people is never a proper direct quote"

 

[hairyhandedfool]

If I spend £500 on leisure travel, it may remain about the same - but I'd rather have 10 journeys than just five. It's not about getting a cheap seat, but getting somewhere....

The railway is a business. Why should a profit seeking railway introduce a railcard that will reduce revenue and profit?

....I am not struggling that much financially, but I don't like paying over the odds. Now, there are advance tickets but I often struggle to find them, or for the times I'd like to travel, so I personally prefer to wake up in the morning, look outside and think 'Let's go to xxx'....

Why should the railway reduce you fares when you not going to spend more though?

....Given I get 33% off in the NSE area, that's already making me travel now. If fares were that much higher, I may not bother or take the car - even though I'd prefer to take the train most of the time. Now, even with the discount, I bet most of the fares I'd get are more expensive than an advance - so the railway doesn't lose much at all. I'm paying less (but more IYSWIM) for some freedom....

Like I say, smart travellers will assess what is cheapest/most convenient for them. I don't think you can compare with advance fares either, yes they entice more passengers, but they are controlled, there are only so many at a set price, that won't apply to railcards.

....The Gold Card/Network Card surely proves people DO want the discount. We're only talking about extending it nationwide, surely not arguing for a railcard that gives a discount given it already exists!!....

Of course people want a discount, who wouldn't? But are there enough new users to cover the fall in revenue it would cause? You have already admitted that with a railcard, your spending on railway journeys would not increase, that is not the purpose of a railcard.

The Goldcard/Network Railcard is restricted, quite heavily really, it is limited to the former NSE area (not Gatwick Express/Heathrow Express), so it doesn't suit everyone. It is further restricted to after 10am (Mon-Fri), so it's user count is further restricted, but it does give multiple people a discount so encourages more use of the railway by other people who might otherwise go by car or bus.

....As I get older, I do look for what I regard as value for money and may value that differently than others....

The TOCs (and therefore ATOC) want profit. If a railcard doesn't produce more profit, it will not be around for long. What you regard as value for money is irrelevant to the argument for a national railcard because you wouldn't spend any extra cash.

....In any case, I have no doubt that in the next 5, 10 or 20 years we'll see a HUGE shake-up of ticketing, with smart ticketing, print at home etc all making it possible to save money in more innovative ways. Loyalty schemes would be easier to adopt, and so you could save the money that way (by travelling a lot more than you might otherwise).

Do you honestly believe that any savings made by TOCs will be passed on to the passenger?

Do you honestly think any changes made to the fares structure will make a national 'Single Person Travelling Off-Peak' Railcard any more likely than at present?

 

[Greenback]

ATOC is not here to make your life easier, it is here to make money for it's members

Quite right, although some of us might say that the rail industry should be organised and run to benefit society more!

ATOC will have researched how many people travel as a pair (or atleast appear to do so), they will work out how many people they think would benefit from the railcard and how many more will be encouraged onto the railway. They obviously feel this will lead to more revenue.

I don't think I share your faith in the quality or quantity of ATOC's research!

The Gold Card/Network Card surely proves people DO want the discount. We're only talking about extending it nationwide, surely not arguing for a railcard that gives a discount given it already exists!!

It proves that people want the discount, but it doesn't prove that having it in existence improves the profits for the TOC's involved, although I happen to think that it does!

From my point of view, having a railcard would make me spend mor eon train travel. This because some of the journeys that I now udnertake by other means will become cheaper by train.

As an example, we currently take the bus to Carmarthen if we go on a Saturday. The bus is £5.75, which is a day rover and allows to stop off outside a pub on the way back, as well as dropping us closer to the town centre in Carmartehn and picking up at the end of our street.

The train fare is £6 something each. This is a bit quicker, but there is only one route which reduces our choices for a stop off on the way home. Despite this, we would switch tot he train if we had 33% off, although we might still take the bus once or twice a year. (The main diadvantage with the bus are the lack of evening buses!)

Also, we would take more spur of the moment day trips if we knew we were going to get a discount. Again this would be more revenue for rail!

 

[furryfeet]

To rephrase, we want a Railcard that EVERY TYPE OF PASSENGER is eligible for (at least during certain times of the day - morning peak excluded.) This means passengers of any age, including single travellers, etc...

Agreed, although it would be better to have the railcard entirely unrestricted with regards to time and have say a minimum fare before say 0930 c.f. conditions for the Student railcard.

Were it not for the morning restriction on the "two together" railcard, then I would seriously consider buying one, since I reside in the trial area.

After all, the railcard gives discount on "Anytime" tickets, so why not let the ticket itself dictate when the journey is valid ?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Why should the railway reduce you fares when you not going to spend more though?

As Greenback states, the discount given by the railcard, may make one decide to travel by train, rather than by car.

Hence the railway gains revenue that it would otherwise not have at all.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

....As Greenback states, the discount given by the railcard, may make one decide to travel by train, rather than by car.

Hence the railway gains revenue that it would otherwise not have at all.

But if the extra revenue is simply money that is currently being spent anyway, there is no extra revenue and no reason to introduce a railcard..

Jonmorris0844 admitted he was not going to spend any extra money. Would it be fair to say that some, or maybe most would spend less money? Would there be enough extra travellers to make up the short fall?

 

[jon0844]

I could spend more money. I didn't say that I would not EVER spend any more money.

But if I could travel to more places for the same money, who is saying I wouldn't travel even more (because the cost of each individual trip is less) and therefore pay more?

Now, while spending more, I may have taken up more seats than I otherwise would. When all off-peak trains are so packed that this is an issue, you could reconsider the idea of giving a discount at all. In fact, you're now at the point where you have to consider extending the peak period to all day/weekends.