'Rail journeys up by a quarter in 5 years'

[Chris125]

A rail statistics fact sheet has just been released by the DfT - Rail Trends Great Britain 2012/13

In 2012/13 rail passengers made 1.5 billion journeys with franchised operators, travelling 36 billion miles.

After remaining at around the same level for several decades, rail use in Great Britain has seen large increases since the mid-1990s.

The number of journeys has doubled since 1994/95, and increased by a quarter in the last 5 years.

In 2012/13, 69 per cent of journeys were made with London & South East operators, 23 per cent with regional operators and 9 per cent with long-distance operators.

Chris

 

[455driver]

I understand thet there have been noises made about how the figures are collated, IE countinfg somebody who changes trains midway as 2 seperate journies instead of one.

 

[RichmondCommu]

I understand thet there have been noises made about how the figures are collated, IE countinfg somebody who changes trains midway as 2 seperate journies instead of one.

If true that report can't possibly be taken seriously!

 

[tbtc]

...and yet I keep seeing comments that expensive tickets are pricing too many people off the railways...

 

[455driver]

Rail (I think) had a feature on this trick a while ago.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

...and yet I keep seeing comments that expensive tickets are pricing too many people off the railways...

If that is the case, imagine how much worse the current overcrowding would have been if they had not been priced off..:roll:

 

[RichmondCommu]

...and yet I keep seeing comments that expensive tickets are pricing too many people off the railways...

The thing is many people are traveling because they don't have a realistic alternative. If my wife and I are planning a journey without our teenage children we often find that it's cheaper to drive. No children, no railcard!

 

[Goatboy]

...and yet I keep seeing comments that expensive tickets are pricing too many people off the railways...

Good logic - because lots of people can travel from London to Birmingham for £7.50, that must mean every ticket in the country is reasonably priced.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Good logic - because lots of people can travel from London to Birmingham for £7.50, that must mean every ticket in the country is reasonably priced.

Well exactly, look at the cost of the walk on fares!

 

[tbtc]

Good logic - because lots of people can travel from London to Birmingham for £7.50, that must mean every ticket in the country is reasonably priced.

If 25% more people use a product than used it five years ago then it must be too expensive?

Got any more examples like that?

 

[Goatboy]

If 25% more people use a product than used it five years ago then it must be too expensive?

'The product' = the rail network

You know as well as everyone else does that the network as a whole has an enormous range of fares from the hilariously cheap to the eyewateringly expensive. Without a total breakdown of which routes and tickets have seen which levels of growth it is impossible to say that all tickets are reasonably priced simply based on the knowledge that rail journeys are 'up by a quarter'.

Plus, some aspects of the rail network are entirely price inelastic. For example, if food suddenly cost 10 times more than it does today, people would still buy it. Would you then argue it's not too expensive because people still buy it, using the logic you've demonstrated above? Commuter fares are generally a forced purchase - you could double the price tommorrow and people would have no choice but to pay it, but what it does do is significantly reduce a consumers disposable income which has negative long term effects on the economy as a whole.

 

[RichmondCommu]

If 25% more people use a product than used it five years ago then it must be too expensive?

In all fairness it’s already been suggested that changing trains might have been recorded as two separate journeys. Let’s not read too much into these figures.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Plus, some aspects of the rail network are entirely price inelastic. For example, if food suddenly cost 10 times more than it does today, people would still buy it. Would you then argue it's not too expensive because people still buy it, using the logic you've demonstrated above? Commuter fares are generally a forced purchase - you could double the price tommorrow and people would have no choice but to pay it, but what it does do is significantly reduce a consumers disposable income which has negative long term effects on the economy as a whole.

Well exactly and the DfT know this only too well. Year upon year season ticket prices go up and yet they know that commuters will continue to turn up for more of the same.

 

[Goatboy]

The irony is that the ticket prices increase at RPI + 1%.

How is RPI arrived at? Ah yes, by examining a basket of products. Which includes... rail fares. So, effectively, part of the reason fares go up is because fares went up...

 

[Chris125]

If true that report can't possibly be taken seriously!

Why, do you think there has been a substantial increase in the number of people changing trains during their journey? Besides, someone can correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the figure is consistent with the increase in passenger-miles and revenue and I'd have thought the number of journeys involving a change of train must be be relatively low overall anyway.

Chris

 

[RichmondCommu]

Besides, someone can correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the figure is consistent with the increase in passenger-miles and revenue and I'd have thought the number of journeys involving a change of train must be be relatively low overall anyway.

For people living in our major citys I would suggest that the majority of railway journeys involve changing trains, especially in the SE. I think the same would apply to many of our other metropolitan area's.

 

[Chris125]

For people living in our major citys I would suggest that the majority of railway journeys involve changing trains, especially in the SE. I think the same would apply to many of our other metropolitan area's.

While I would agree that most commute's (which make up the bulk of overall journeys) in the South East involve a change of mode, from train to tube or bus for example, I find it hard to believe a majority involve changing from one 'national rail' service to another as well.

Chris

 

[RichmondCommu]

While I would agree that most commute's (which make up the bulk of overall journeys) in the South East involve a change of mode, from train to tube or bus for example, I find it hard to believe a majority involve changing from one 'national rail' service to another as well.

Chris

Who said anything about commute's? If you live Lea (SE London) but need to get to Manchester you are unlikely to take the bus to Euston. For what it's worth I hope one of my employees is making this journey later on this morning (UK time!) There are thousands of other examples.

In hindsight, I accept that in regard to London and the SE I should have excluded commuters!

 

[Chris125]

Who said anything about commute's?

That's what a sizeable proportion of all rail travel in this country involves, especially in the South East.

Chris

 

[RichmondCommu]

That's what a sizeable proportion of all rail travel in this country involves, especially in the South East.

Chris

In that case are you choosing to ignore all other journeys?

 

[Chris125]

In that case are you choosing to ignore all other journeys?

No, but as commuting makes up a sizeable proportion of all rail journey's, especially in the South East, the fact that few of them are likely to involve any change of train means the number's doing so overall are likely to be relatively low - and there's no obvious reason to think that's radically increased in the last 5 years anyway.

Chris

 

[The Ham]

It should be pointed out that the rail statistics count a number of things, however I think that 2 are useful for this disscussion, first they cound the number of passengers and secondly they count the number of journies. It is this second figure which has gone up by by a quater in the last 5 years.

In which case there could be a marginal increase in these figures due to there being people changing trains, but it is likely to be not that significant (as in the first 4 years of that 5 year period passenger numbers went up by 15%).

It is unlikely that the way in which passenger journies are counted has changed, and although the use of split tickets and alternitive (slower) routes has increased over time as passengers find that doing so can save them money. Again in the greater scheme of things this is hardly going to make a big difference to the total.

 

[Drsatan]

I'm fairly certain the main reason for the increase in passenger numbers is that members of the public have come to realise that taking the train solves most of the negative things associated with driving, like finding somewhere to park, getting stuck in a traffic jam, not being able to read a book or use your laptop when driving etc.

Somehow I doubt the increase in petrol prices can solely be attributed to the increase in passenger numbers, especially as the fuel duty escalator has been frozen for the past three years.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I'm fairly certain the main reason for the increase in passenger numbers is that members of the public have come to realise that taking the train solves most of the negative things associated with driving, like finding somewhere to park, getting stuck in a traffic jam, not being able to read a book or use your laptop when driving etc.

Somehow I doubt the increase in petrol prices can solely be attributed to the increase in passenger numbers, especially as the fuel duty escalator has been frozen for the past three years.

Fuel duty escalator, green energy taxes added to domestic energy bills...more Governmental "cunning plans" to heap extra taxation measures onto the long suffering British public on top of all the other forms of taxation they already have loaded on our shoulders during this current millennium...

 

[tbtc]

if food suddenly cost 10 times more than it does today, people would still buy it. Would you then argue it's not too expensive because people still buy it, using the logic you've demonstrated above? Commuter fares are generally a forced purchase - you could double the price tommorrow and people would have no choice but to pay it

If you put the price of food up ten times and people bought the same amount of food, then I'd agree that it was inelastic. Some demands are fairly stable (I wouldn't keep my central heating on all day long if the price dropped, just as I'm not going to turn it off all day long because the price has now gone up).

But the point you are missing is that pasenger numbers have gone up by "25%" (at a time when the number of stations/ lines has stayed virtually stable), which means that demand has gone up significantly despite the "RPI + 1%" price rises.

Why has demand gone up by so much?

In all fairness it’s already been suggested that changing trains might have been recorded as two separate journeys. Let’s not read too much into these figures

Why, do you think there has been a substantial increase in the number of people changing trains during their journey? Besides, someone can correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the figure is consistent with the increase in passenger-miles and revenue and I'd have thought the number of journeys involving a change of train must be be relatively low overall anyway.

Chris

Its going to be almost impossible to get an accurate figure for passenger numbers:

• someone with split tickets may have two tickets but only use one train - do they count as making one journey or two?
• does someone changing trains count as making two journeys even though they only bought one ticket?
• how to you define a "break of journey"?
• what about Rovers?

...but as long as the method of calculation is consistent from year to year (as Chris125 says), then I'm prepared to accept a benchmark figure.

I don't think there'll have been a significant number of journeys where an extra change is required over recent years (some direct journeys are split, some services see new direct journeys possible), so maybe it is a fair way to calculate.

 

[Goatboy]

But the point you are missing is that pasenger numbers have gone up by "25%" (at a time when the number of stations/ lines has stayed virtually stable), which means that demand has gone up significantly despite the "RPI + 1%" price rises.

I'm not missing this point, I'm simply saying this stat on its own doesn't tell us enuogh for you to be able to claim all fares are not too expensive, thats all.

Why has demand gone up by so much?

I genuinelly don't know but how much of it is related to very cheap advance fares?

Some routes must be at historical rock bottom prices - I'm sure under British Rail you could never travel from Birmingham to London for the equivilent of £7.50 today. This must be driving a lot of growth from people who would otherwise drive.

 

[tbtc]

I'm not missing this point, I'm simply saying this stat on its own doesn't tell us enuogh for you to be able to claim all fares are not too expensive, thats all

I'm not claiming that all fares are cheap, nobody is, just that the "large numbers of people are priced off the railways" argument that I keep hearing doesn't seem to stand up to scrutiny.

 

[Zoe]

I genuinelly don't know but how much of it is related to very cheap advance fares?

Some routes must be at historical rock bottom prices - I'm sure under British Rail you could never travel from Birmingham to London for the equivilent of £7.50 today. This must be driving a lot of growth from people who would otherwise drive.

I note that at least on some intercity routes it's not that unusual these days for almost every single seat (other than the unreserved coach if it exists) to be reserved. Ten years ago if I travelled to London from the Westcountry then as long as I avoided certain times I could usually find an unreserved seat and unoccipied seat somewhere even if there were none in coach D (which back then was the unreserved coach). I expect quite a few of these extra reservations are due to the fact that some of the advance fares are very cheap (as you automatically get a reservation with an advance ticket) although I can't be completely certain of this as it's also possible that people with walk-up tickets are for some reason choosing to make a reservation on a specific service when previously they would not have done.

 

[davetheguard]

Who said anything about commute's? If you live Lea (SE London) but need to get to Manchester you are unlikely to take the bus to Euston. For what it's worth I hope one of my employees is making this journey later on this morning (UK time!) There are thousands of other examples.

In hindsight, I accept that in regard to London and the SE I should have excluded commuters!

Ahhh! Superfluous apostrophe alert.

The plural of a commute is, presumably, "commutes". Plurals don't have an apostrophe!

Sorry to be so pedantic.....
....all I need to do now is work on my spelling!

 

[DynamicSpirit]

If 25% more people use a product than used it five years ago then it must be too expensive?

Got any more examples like that?

House prices?

To clarify: Yes that is intended as a joke, though there is an obvious, albeit imperfect, parallel in terms of demand and prices increasing simultaneously, and house prices now widely viewed as being too expensive.

 

[Goatboy]

just that the "large numbers of people are priced off the railways" argument that I keep hearing doesn't seem to stand up to scrutiny.

The figure given isn't sufficient for you to be able to say that, though.

Perhaps it's true, perhaps large numbers of people are priced off the railway and seek alternative methods of transport, but this number of people is outweighed by growth on other parts of the network?

If there are 100 users, and 10 leave because they are priced off but 35 new people join because they find good deals on other parts of the network it's inaccurate to say 'nobody left because usage has risen by a quarter!'.

It would be like pretending an empty train on a line in the middle of nowhere didn't exist purely because there are loads more people on an FGW service somewhere else.