Virgin's staggering SOR's and FOR's increase once again!

[All Line Rover]

Virgin have continued on their "mad fares" crusade, introducing some new staggering fares from 2012.

• A Manchester to London "Standard Anytime Return" (SOR) will increase from £279 to £296.
• A Manchester to London "First Anytime Return" (FOR) will increase from £399 to £423.

• A Preston to London "Standard Anytime Return" (SOR) will increase from £289 to £306.*
• A Preston to London "First Anytime Return" (FOR) will increase from £406 to £430.*

*Out of interest, these fares cost the same (or more) as this years fares from Glasgow to London! It's also of note that the "new" FOR from Lancaster to London costs the same as the "new" FOR from Glasgow to London - both £440!

Similar fares rises are happening across the network. The smallest fare rises appear to be on the Wolverhampton > Birmingham > Euston route. (Hmm... I wonder why? )

Who do Virgin expect to buy these tickets!? It's not helping with the criticism!

It's difficult to believe Virgin's claim of "chronic overcrowding" when they have such staggering fares. It's no wonder the 19:00 to Manchester is to busy! Someone ironic, when almost every Pendolino between 17:00 and 18:59 has plenty of spare capacity...

No fare rises, Branson? Remember that promise?

 

[snail]

Or, put another way, "Shock! Horror! Fares rise by 6%, same as all the others!"

Non-story.

 

[All Line Rover]

Or, put another way, "Shock! Horror! Fares rise by 6%, same as all the others!"

Non-story.

At which rate, a Manchester to London FOR will cost £675 by 2020. Or just over £900 by the time HS2 starts in 2025 (if it does start in 2025, that is).

Only regulated fares must increase by an average of about 6%. All other fares can increase or decrease as a TOC wishes. You'd have expected these staggering fares to "stabilize" by now. It's not at all helping to alleviate the overcrowding on certain Off-Peak services.

 

[S Stock]

Luckily, I commute in the opposite direction to most (Out of London in the AM, into London PM!) but on the few occasions I go the other way, I must admit that Virgin service in the peak are far quieter than those just into Off-peak, which is bizarre but quite understandable considering the huge gap between the two fares.

I know they promised no fare increases (Although if you believed this, then you are foolish) but as snail mentions - it is inline with other TOCs.

 

[Greeby]

I was hoping Virgin might follow East Coast's lead with the GVR and Scottish Executive in terms of undercutting themselves. Sadly not

 

[calc7]

I always like All Line Rover's icon choices for threads.

Anyway, as a business and leisure traveller, I think their fares represent pretty good value for the former (who are price insensitive) whilst the advance fares are very good value for the latter.
Very little problem with the price rises, but the 16-25 railcard could warp that opinion

 

[deltic]

Virgin have continued on their "mad fares" crusade, introducing some new staggering fares from 2012.

• A Manchester to London "Standard Anytime Return" (SOR) will increase from £279 to £296.
• A Manchester to London "First Anytime Return" (FOR) will increase from £399 to £423.

Does anyone pay these fares? I travel to Manchester on business - often first class and even buying a ticket just a couple of days before can pick up advance ticket for around £100 and buy a walk on standard class off peak single for return

 

[AlterEgo]

People do buy these fares. Or rather, people's employers.

 

[neilmc]

People do buy these fares. Or rather, people's employers.

My employer - a large high steet bank who could afford it - have chosen not to.

If you are travelling on these silly fare trains they expect you to have booked at least one leg in advance, or travel off-peak as many business people are now doing.

If all else failed I'd travel both ways off peak and spend the saving on a hotel as at least I'm getting a product for my money and not being blatantly defrauded.

 

[shinkansen1966]

For London Euston to Manchester Piccadilly, the cheapest advance purchased fare is £23.00, the dearest will now be £296.00. It says much about our rail fares in this country where travel in the same class, on the same route and with the same company can vary by factor of nearly 13 fold.

If we are to regulate our fares, let's regulate the maximum difference between cheapest and dearest fare - say a factor of 5.

Cheapest fare would then be (say) £30 return, dearest £150.

 

[SS4]

For London Euston to Manchester Piccadilly, the cheapest advance purchased fare is £23.00, the dearest will now be £296.00. It says much about our rail fares in this country where travel in the same class, on the same route and with the same company can vary by factor of nearly 13 fold.

If we are to regulate our fares, let's regulate the maximum difference between cheapest and dearest fare - say a factor of 5.

Cheapest fare would then be (say) £30 return, dearest £150.

Although I see your point it's more like 6.5 fold since you're comparing a single with a return

 

[90019]

Or, put another way, "Shock! Horror! Fares rise by 6%, same as all the others!"

Non-story.

Virgin Trains in fares rise 'average' shocker!

 

[shinkansen1966]

Although I see your point it's more like 6.5 fold since you're comparing a single with a return

On Virgin Trains London to Manchester, cheapest advance purchase return fare is £23.00. Source: Virgin's best fare finder.

13 fold difference between return fares in the same class of travel is excessive. To me, a 5 fold difference would appear more reasonable.

 

[radamfi]

My (large) company has banned the use of Anytime tickets for long distance journeys. You have to get Advance tickets now, although you may be allowed to get an Off-Peak Return if you can make a good case.

 

[AlterEgo]

On Virgin Trains London to Manchester, cheapest advance purchase return fare is £23.00. Source: Virgin's best fare finder.

13 fold difference between return fares in the same class of travel is excessive. To me, a 5 fold difference would appear more reasonable.

Indeed. The cheapest Advance Single is £11.50, though it must be remembered that these are almost never sold on peak trains, if ever.

However, I'm interested to know why proposing regulation of fares means that the cheapest tickets have to go. Why would you raise the cost of the cheapest ticket for some arbitrary reason?

 

[jon0844]

My (large) company has banned the use of Anytime tickets for long distance journeys. You have to get Advance tickets now, although you may be allowed to get an Off-Peak Return if you can make a good case.

My old employer also had a similar policy, which was a PITA given the fact that in journalism you can't always plan your travel in advance.. however, with such high open fares, it's to be expected.

Mind you, despite them coming down on employees hard for paying a lot to travel, they always used trainline.com!

 

[Deerfold]

For London Euston to Manchester Piccadilly, the cheapest advance purchased fare is £23.00, the dearest will now be £296.00. It says much about our rail fares in this country where travel in the same class, on the same route and with the same company can vary by factor of nearly 13 fold.

If we are to regulate our fares, let's regulate the maximum difference between cheapest and dearest fare - say a factor of 5.

Cheapest fare would then be (say) £30 return, dearest £150.

If the regulation said there could only be a 5-fold difference in fares do you really believe Vrigin would drop the price of the most expensive ticket?

 

[phil8715]

My old employer also had a similar policy, which was a PITA given the fact that in journalism you can't always plan your travel in advance.. however, with such high open fares, it's to be expected.

Mind you, despite them coming down on employees hard for paying a lot to travel, they always used trainline.com!

I thought you flew everywhere Jon

But to be honest these fares are getting silly. It's cheaper to actually fly abroad.

There's a recession on people can't afford to travel, ok there are some cheap fares but not that many. This is really going to make the economy recover, not!!

 

[jon0844]

I thought you flew everywhere Jon

But to be honest these fares are getting silly. It's cheaper to actually fly abroad.

There's a recession on people can't afford to travel, ok there are some cheap fares but not that many. This is really going to make the economy recover, not!!

For work, I fly when I am going to an event in another country, although Orange take people to Paris by Eurostar which is always nice.

For UK travel, I never take a plane (15 years ago things were different, as I used to fly a lot by helicopter from Battersea, or private jet from RAF Northolt, thanks to the industry having loads of cash!).

If a train isn't viable for whatever reason, I'll drive.

I believe in choice and using the right tool for the job. I support air, road and rail (and, as someone sailing this week to Denmark, sea too).

Ridiculous fares are not the way forward, and I quite like the idea of having to regulate them by introducing a multiplier that works out the cheapest v most expensive tickets. Or, failing that, you regulate standard class tickets and allow for the few businesses that will still allow employees to travel in 'luxury' (as well as those who have enough money to help subsidise everyone else!).

 

[shinkansen1966]

If the regulation said there could only be a 5-fold difference in fares do you really believe Vrigin would drop the price of the most expensive ticket?

If there were 5 fold fares regulator (cheapest to dearest), the increase in the cheapest fares could well grab the headlines. It would make rail companies think carefully about their fares structure. Instead of the current situation where we have ever more restrictive off peak walk-on fares and ever more expensive anytime fares. Both of which are lazy revenue raising fare solutions.

 

[Deerfold]

If there were 5 fold fares regulator (cheapest to dearest), the increase in the cheapest fares could well grab the headlines. It would make rail companies think carefully about their fares structure.

Really? They don't seem bothered about the headlines about the highest fares at the moment. I doubt you'd get much headline out of "Cheapest fare from Manchester to London now a reasonable prince instead of being dirt cheap".

 

[penaltyfines]

My (large) company has banned the use of Anytime tickets for long distance journeys. You have to get Advance tickets now, although you may be allowed to get an Off-Peak Return if you can make a good case.

Yep I know quite a few companies, large and small, that have banned Anytime tickets over £100. It's getting silly.

One of them it's standard practice to fly to Manchester rather than take the train now!

 

[Old Timer]

Virgin have continued on their "mad fares" crusade, introducing some new staggering fares from 2012. ....
Who do Virgin expect to buy these tickets!? It's not helping with the criticism!.............

May I ask who on here has ever paid the full fare on a Virgin service ?

Most travellers off peak are doing so out of choice or at least do so with the benefit of advance notice, only those who are travelling at short notice for work will thus pay the full fare and even then in some cases reduced tickets can still be available the evening before.

Obviously things are not so good for people travelling for family emergencies which occur hours before travelling but then the same issue exists in every other form of transport which operates demand pricing.

I have to say yet again that the ridiculous way that rail tickets are now priced and marketed ultimately acts against the traveller. Ridiculously priced off-peak tickets do not in any way recover the true costs of operation, which then have to be recovered through full priced or more expensive "reduced" fares - or increased subsidy.

We then have to consider the issues that arise with ticket excess when people are travelling outside of the validity of tickets, and the vastly greater differential fare excess required. This simply makes it difficult for Guards/Conductors/TMs to carry out their role, generates a lot of negative publicity, and incurs costs of dealing with such issues that are almost certain to far outweigh any revenue gained.

Another consideration is that very low fares can and do attract onto the Railway those whom previously would not have been able to afford it, and whilst the majority may not be a particular problem, there are certainly individuals and groups whose presence is not desirable, and who would previously have not been on the system. We see the evidence of this in damage to vehicles and generally disruptive and anti-social behaviour. By way of example, Centro introduced a whole series of very cheap travel tickets, the downside of which was to make the whole Coventry/Wolverhampton corridor in particular an extended playground with many cases of doors being opened in traffic and then being struck by passing trains.

The Industry is building up an incorrect belief that low rail cost travel is feasible when in fact it is not, which is why such high fares generate lots of negative puiblicity and comment and comparison (inevitably) against incomparable air fares. What is needed is a properly dialogue on ticket pricing, which brings the top and bottom fares much closer together, and gets rid of a myriad of cheap tickets which only help to maintain higher subsidies. It is ironic is it not that Branson, who made such a point about running without any subsidy now has one of the highest subsidies per mile according to my last information.

Oh for a return to mileage based pricing which BR used, and which is still successfully used by a very large number of other railway systems without problem.

 

[Nym]

Thats strange, I just got an expenses claim from from an international (as someone at uni put it, arms dealer) defence contractor, and it just says, "Reasonable 2nd Class Rail Travel can be claimed", Air travel on the other hand is only for in cases where other means of transport are not available...

 

[LCC106]

Serious questions, don't shoot me down:

1 How reflective is the increased cost of rail travel of the increased rates of pay / good benefits that workers in the rail industry receive?
2 What are the main reasons attributed to fare increases?

Cheers

 

[Nym]

For 1)
I'd say that the pay and good benifits are largely dissapearing for rail workers, and definately for indirect employees that are now largely contractors, who see no additional benifits or wage compared to standard workers in their field.

For 2)
Personally (and don't shoot me down here) years of goverment neglect coming back to haunt them.

 

[Deerfold]

Serious questions, don't shoot me down:

1 How reflective is the increased cost of rail travel of the increased rates of pay / good benefits that workers in the rail industry receive?
2 What are the main reasons attributed to fare increases?

Cheers

I'd say for 2> The government's policy (as the previous government's) that travellers pay a higher proportion of the railway's costs compared to government/taxpayer subsidy (combined with a system which seems to be designed to inflate those costs).

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Serious questions, don't shoot me down:

1 How reflective is the increased cost of rail travel of the increased rates of pay / good benefits that workers in the rail industry receive?
2 What are the main reasons attributed to fare increases?

Cheers

Each TOC has different agreements for pay increases, so there is no easy answer to the first question.

I believe the news on the radio has said the rise will help fund new trains and such, the same as they do every year.



On a related point, I noted in the TPE fares brief that walk on fares would increase by 6.1%, which was broken down into Off-Peak (6.0%), Anytime (6.0%), Season Tickets (6.0%) and First Class (3.4%), and Advance fares generally would increase by 5%.

To be honest, I think TPE seriously need to look at the credentials of the staff who are coming up with these figures, their maths is a little lacking.

 

[junglejames]

Serious questions, don't shoot me down:

1 How reflective is the increased cost of rail travel of the increased rates of pay / good benefits that workers in the rail industry receive?
2 What are the main reasons attributed to fare increases?

Cheers

For point 2. A couple of good reasons. Firstly, and the main reason, is privatisation. Too many different companies are now involved, fighting with each other etc etc. They all want to make a profit, and are employing extra people in order to fight against the other companies. More companies to make a profit for, and increased costs as well.
You also have the fact TOCs need to make a larger profit than BR. You are no longer just trying to cover your costs. You are trying to make a profit for your shareholders, plus if you are a profit makiing TOC, you also need to pay the government.

The second point, is exactly what Old Timer mentioned. The stupid fares structure we have. In order to make themselves look good with loads of stupidly low fares, they have to make walk on fares stupidly expensive to overcompensate.

 

[newbie babs]

I pay the full price on any rail travel, I have no discounts, no passes, nothing.

I don`t mind paying if the service is good though (mostly it is, a few nighmares)

I won`t be getting any pay rise this coming year and I don`t earn a great deal so for me the price increase will restrict what I trips I make and I will probably end up with loads of holiday days left.

The fares structure is horrendous and booking in advance in the job I work is a virtually impossible.