Road vs Rail pricing

[Bletchleyite]

That's a very narrow view of someone who sees a car as a mere tool to get from A to B. Not in keeping with most forum members views on rail.

In this context it is. Someone who is a car enthusiast will own the type of car they are an enthusiast about regardless of whether they might use rail as well or not, and regardless of if a 1.0l Vauxhall Corsa is cheaper. Comparing a monthly or per-mile figure to work out which you should choose is irrelevant to those people because they'll choose the car regardless because it's more than a mode of transport.

Or do you consider your annual Modern Railways sub (if you have one) part of the cost of each train ticket? If you do, you're probably the only one!

 

[miami]

For a new car, £200 a month for a brand new car for 3 years with 3 years servicing at 15k miles a year. If you're unlucky a couple of new tyres. If you are a heavy driver a new set of brakes for £500. £300 insurance and tax per year, total cost 8k, or 18p per mile. Maximum of 30p a mile total, or £22 return for my day out to Shrewsbury. An old car is clearly cheaper.

But for most people (outside of London), they need a car anyway so it's only the marginal costs that matter, and that's either £10 in the tank and £4 to park, vs £35 for a train that may turn up or may not, will take far longer, and you have to structure your day around.

For a longer trip, I drove to London during first lockdown, as the railway have cancelled the train I'd normally get. Hired a car, which was delviered and collected from home, for 3 days. Set off at 06:30, was in London for 09:30. Total cost of hire, petrol, and parking just off Euston road was less than a peak time single (which I need to arrive before 11:34), let alone a peak return (the peak is 15-19). That was for one person. To take my family to London costs £240 return, or £190 if I plan in advance and get a railcard. That's over 50p a mile, and that's the cheap "OFF PEAK" ticket.

To take my family in the car involves listening to the 65 story treehouse on audible instead of radio 4.

(That's of course the other issue - can't do that on the train)

will just find themselves carrying fresh air in their train or bus.

Any other industry would have to lay off thousands if they were carrying fresh air around -- see the airlines.

The railway doesn't seem to care. They've spend 30 years relying on daily commuters in the peak, business people doing peak time long distance for meetings, and maybe students traveling long distance off peak, and still required billions of tax payer subsidies. I don't think train tickets even attract VAT do they?

Those are all now at risk. Simultanously the £30b a year raised from petrol tax has an end in sight. What is the railway going to do? How will it continue to justify subsidies for mostly empty diesel trains rattling down the line from Crewe to Shrewsbury and on to Llandrindod when it doesn't even try to compete for custom from people who have a car?

 

[Wallsendmag]

Parking charges are one thing comletely missing from the equation as well as congestion charges road tolls.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Parking charges are one thing comletely missing from the equation as well as congestion charges road tolls.

Parking was mentioned above. Congestion charges and road tolls are presently relevant to very few journeys.

 

[bb21]

Rail simply cannot compete with cars on financial terms in some cases (eg. group travel of 3/4+) without massive subsidy, and should not aim to compete unless so desired and funded by authorities.

Also for that reason rail should focus on upping its offering on things other than fares.

Rail networks have a different strategic focus to the aims of the road network. The government will want to maintain as much of that as possible for when the economy starts to recover. Mass redundancy is unlikely, although not impossible if the pandemic drags on forever.

Airlines (or for that reason any other industry) are a completely different beast.

 

[WesternLancer]

What are these "current road taxes"? Roads are funded from general taxation (and council tax) and your Vehicle Excise Duty is just a very small component of that.

In the context of my post they are elements of taxation or charges that govt levies if you have a car / choose to run a car / or believe you have no choice but to run a car - eg tax on fuel / VED / VAT on car related costs / Insurance Premium tax on car insurance etc etc.
I very much agree these are not "road taxes" and they are optional - no car / you don't pay - and yes roads are very much funded from general taxation pot.

But like all taxes they can be an incentive to behave in particular ways, and my point is that most of these taxes incentivise car use once you have one.

That's a very narrow view of someone who sees a car as a mere tool to get from A to B. Not in keeping with most forum members views on rail.

Maybe a fair point but of course forum members are not representative of majority of rail users, in the same way I know plenty of car users who have no interest in their car beyond ability to get them from A to B at whatever moment they wish to do so.

For a new car, £200 a month for a brand new car for 3 years with 3 years servicing at 15k miles a year. If you're unlucky a couple of new tyres. If you are a heavy driver a new set of brakes for £500. £300 insurance and tax per year, total cost 8k, or 18p per mile. Maximum of 30p a mile total, or £22 return for my day out to Shrewsbury. An old car is clearly cheaper.

But for most people (outside of London), they need a car anyway so it's only the marginal costs that matter, and that's either £10 in the tank and £4 to park, vs £35 for a train that may turn up or may not, will take far longer, and you have to structure your day around.

For a longer trip, I drove to London during first lockdown, as the railway have cancelled the train I'd normally get. Hired a car, which was delviered and collected from home, for 3 days. Set off at 06:30, was in London for 09:30. Total cost of hire, petrol, and parking just off Euston road was less than a peak time single (which I need to arrive before 11:34), let alone a peak return (the peak is 15-19). That was for one person. To take my family to London costs £240 return, or £190 if I plan in advance and get a railcard. That's over 50p a mile, and that's the cheap "OFF PEAK" ticket.

To take my family in the car involves listening to the 65 story treehouse on audible instead of radio 4.

(That's of course the other issue - can't do that on the train)



Any other industry would have to lay off thousands if they were carrying fresh air around -- see the airlines.

The railway doesn't seem to care. They've spend 30 years relying on daily commuters in the peak, business people doing peak time long distance for meetings, and maybe students traveling long distance off peak, and still required billions of tax payer subsidies. I don't think train tickets even attract VAT do they?

Those are all now at risk. Simultanously the £30b a year raised from petrol tax has an end in sight. What is the railway going to do? How will it continue to justify subsidies for mostly empty diesel trains rattling down the line from Crewe to Shrewsbury and on to Llandrindod when it doesn't even try to compete for custom from people who have a car?

Probably off topic but you also touch on the big flaw in the UK privatisation model - the railway works on the public sector model of - here's the product - it needs a subsidy - if no subsidy we have to close it down. Seemingly no incentive to build up the market and sell the product. Often the case in the best of times, certainly no effort at it now. Will we see it post covid to replace commuter business that may never return? I fear not. The poor value 'flexible' seasons being experimented with suggest not much hope of this.

 

[Haywain]

the big flaw in the UK privatisation model - <snip>. The poor value 'flexible' seasons being experimented with suggest not much hope of this.

These are heavily related. The privatisation model relies heavily on government influence/control do the the nature of franchising and the split of infrastructure and operations, so is not truly privatised. And currently it is far less privatised and the tickets you refer to are mandated by DfT whilst the Treasury will not accept any risk of revenue loss which stifles any thoughts of innovation.

 

[WesternLancer]

These are heavily related. The privatisation model relies heavily on government influence/control do the the nature of franchising and the split of infrastructure and operations, so is not truly privatised. And currently it is far less privatised and the tickets you refer to are mandated by DfT whilst the Treasury will not accept any risk of revenue loss which stifles any thoughts of innovation.

agree, yes. And no doubt season issue made worse - ref 'flexible' seasons as a result of regulations applied to the 7 day season ticket I guess.

 

[A0wen]

"Missing one’s slot or being on the wrong road at the wrong time would incur wrath, public humiliation, a demand to pay the full fare, a penalty charge and threat of a court summons"

That's not me.

30 years ago the norm was to walk upto counter, buy return ticket, board train to destination, get on a train, get a train back later that day. If you didn't have a ticket, you bought it on the train.

Since then extra restrictions were piled on to limit what trains you can actually take with your ticket, and time and again staff make up their own rules.

Nice bit of hyperbole there - factually wrong of course, because BR introduced lower priced, journey restricted Advance fares back in the 1970s.

What has changed, though arguably for the better, is there are more trains running on routes which previously had a limited service - so if you take Stoke - London for example the ONLY option was Inter City for many years with the fare that reflected that. The introduction of the Trent Valley stopper extended to Crewe meant there was an alternative, with a slower journey time which could be offered at lower cost. You can also add in the fact the ticketing system is now far more transparent thanks to the internet. Where previously you'd only be shown the options the surly bloke behind the counter could be bothered to tell you about, the internet means you get told everything.

 

[WesternLancer]

Nice bit of hyperbole there - factually wrong of course, because BR introduced lower priced, journey restricted Advance fares back in the 1970s.

What has changed, though arguably for the better, is there are more trains running on routes which previously had a limited service - so if you take Stoke - London for example the ONLY option was Inter City for many years with the fare that reflected that. The introduction of the Trent Valley stopper extended to Crewe meant there was an alternative, with a slower journey time which could be offered at lower cost. You can also add in the fact the ticketing system is now far more transparent thanks to the internet. Where previously you'd only be shown the options the surly bloke behind the counter could be bothered to tell you about, the internet means you get told everything.

well, 40 years ago then, but such BR fares were far from the norm then I would say(apart from perhaps peak / off peak).

Yes, web more transparent as you say - however doesn't stop people (and I would say majority to seems to me) finding the transparency simply confusing...

And there are plenty of people now, esp young people, who seem to think that whatever ticket they have can only be used on the train for which they have a reservation - which then conveys the sense that the train is not a flexible or convenient mode - the last thing you need to convey when 60+% of your business has just evaporated in the last 8 months I tend to think.

 

[35B]

It depends if you are car owner makiing the choice to leave the car in the garage and use public transport or a public transport user wishihg to switch to car.

Once you have the car the marginal cost of a journey is petrol and parking and a penny or two for wear and tear which most drivers will ignore.

Apart from the stupidly cheap off peak fares on London Underground it is hardly ever cost effective for me to switch to rail for any journey that I might make. Even then the cost of station parking can tip the balance in favour of the car.

Absolutely. I travelled to London for pleasure in September and, with light traffic and discounted parking, the direct cost of driving (fuel, parking) was sufficiently less than the train to amply justify the extra time taken.

This car owner (actually, 2 cars) fully understands the wider costs of his cars, and the difference between the full and marginal costs of journeys. He also, in the real world, makes the decision of train or car based on convenience, personal preference, and the direct cost of the journey.

 

[miami]

well, 40 years ago then, but such BR fares were far from the norm then I would say(apart from perhaps peak / off peak).

Indeed, with no internet to book in advance you'd have to make a special trip to the station or some other form of ticket office to buy them, clearly far more hassle than now.

Sadly statistics aren't available before 2009, but even since then, journeys on advanced tickets have increase 90%, but offpeak tickets only 43%.

 

[PeterC]

It doesn't even depend on that. Literally nobody considers all-in car usage as a simple per-mile figure. It's only of any relevance for HMRC to calculate what should be taxed.

It isn't even worthy of discussion because it's a total fallacy.

The marginal cost of using a car once you've already decided to have one is little more than the fuel, and to succeed in its pricing models public transport needs to "get" that and accept it whether it likes it or not. It is not going to change. Even with car clubs it won't, you pay a membership fee plus a distance based usage fee.



It isn't a per-mile cost, though, and literally nobody ascribes it that way, and you can totally forget them doing so because it is not going to happen under any circumstances ever.

The only figure most people care about in terms of the cost of ownership on its own is the monthly finance payment. This is effectively a monthly "convenience fee" of car ownership. There are a few slightly different models for this - PCP, lease, personal loan - but they all basically give the same principle - a pretty much fixed monthly price for the convenience of owning a car and having it sitting waiting for you whenever you want it.

Accept it and move on. However much you shout about it, you will not change this fact.

You seem to be deliberately taking my reply to another post out of context for the sake of an arguement.

 

[robbeech]

One of the often omitted benefits in terms of cost to using the train rather than having a car is that you end up going lots of places in other people’s car, so in many ways, the sheer inconvenience (outside big cities at least) of not having a car and having to use the train is often masked by the fact that someone will give you a lift.

There’s a number of people I know from my line of work that don’t drive, despite being in an industry that often relies heavily on the ability to drive, but they get away with it because there’s always someone willing to go and pick them up and drop them off in their car. Some even refuse to learn to drive because of the environmental impact of owning a car, but they’ll get someone to pick them up. And of course that also includes to a point being picked up and dropped off from the nearest rail station.

The true cost of not using the car should include this type of cost to other people using their cars to pick you up and drop you off places.

I am not for one minute suggesting I have a problem with people getting lifts with other people. It often makes sense to do so but these hidden costs can’t be omitted from any calculations done.

 

[miami]

It's only of any relevance for HMRC to calculate what should be taxed.

Interestingly HMRC say 45p/mile upto 10k miles, and 25p/mile over, thus putting the upper bound marginal cost for a fancy lexus at 25p/mile.