Not sure they originally included connections at all. They were products of the InterCity sector and later TOCS, and it's relatively recently that other TOC's have taken it up.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Why are the Railways more expensive than air travel between Scotland & the South?
- Thread starter Envoy
- Start date
- Status
Not sure they originally included connections at all. They were products of the InterCity sector and later TOCS, and it's relatively recently that other TOC's have taken it up.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
That's correct, of course.
But:
What you propose is that a condition be set - probably in the franchise spec - that the TOC must carry a certain number of passengers during a certain period of the day, if that period is shown to have empty seats.
The TOC may not want to cannibalise its peak travel yield (after all, that's where the money is made, on seasons and Anytimes!), so you would certainly end up with abuse simply to fit the franchise requirement. TOCs do all sorts of workarounds to fit the rules, and I don't see why they would behave any differently in the scenario you describe.
Yield management is far better understood by its proponents (the TOCs) than the franchise specifier (DfT). Given this, why would any bidders for any franchise which had a condition such as the one you propose attached, think it offered them extra value? Franchises are specified to be attractive to prospective TOCs.
So do the connecting TOCs get paid anything? If so hiw about non Intercity TOCs including advances with connections?
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
The connecting TOCs get a portion of the revenue, yes.
Thanks for that. So it would be easy enough for Southern to offer an Advance ticket that also covers South West Trains, and give a portion to them, just as First Great Western might on a journey to Cardiff.
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
Easy enough as long as SN and SWT both agree on how much revenue each one will get.....
Well if they can agree it with Intercity operators, shouldn't be a major problem.
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
Intercity operators are not the problem. They're the ones with the best quality data on passenger loads and yields. The sticking point comes with the commuter TOC which isn't going to reserve the customer a seat or counted place, and potentially has crowding problems.
This is because from the commuter TOC's perspective they'll be getting not a lot of money from a ticket over which they aren't going to have control of the quota.
And I'm sure that all bidders would find franchises much more attractive if they didn't have to bother with all of those pesky late evening and early morning services. The reality is that any tender specification is a compromise between what the specifier wants and what the bidder wants to give. Nevertheless, the public pays a lot for all of that infrastructure and train capacity to be running around at peak times underloaded. Bidders should be compelled to find ways to fill it.
Then why do commuter TOCs sell advanced tickets for wholly within their network?
And now do they yield manage passengers with tickets on Intercity trains on the connections trains?
If a TOC can tie a passenger to a particular train regardless of the emerged seat, then I've not yet seen a convincing argument for not selling advanced purchase tickets.
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
Last edited:
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
Because if the TOC is selling it on their own services, they get to control the quota.
If you're the TOC on the AND CONNECTIONS part of the ticket, you don't control the quota of tickets sold. This is because there is no reservation or counted place on the AND CONNECTIONS part of the ticket in the majority of cases.
I'm not saying it's impossible, I'm trying to illustrate why commercially this is not the easiest type of agreement to execute.
Last edited:
True there isn't. So how come Intercity services still have and connections tickets if commuter companies can't quota control them?
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
Last edited:
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
Because they've reached agreement between TOCs.
paul1609
Established Member
There are already southern and southwest trains advances.
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
On very specific routes, such as from Gatwick and via Clapham Jn.
paul1609
Established Member
In truth most of the other Southern / Southwest trains routes have the very reasonable route Burnham fares
I didn't know that. How interesting. I guess I've not had to buy a ticket for those routes.
Some of the routes I've wanted to travel on in the past haven't offered advances though when I'd have been happy to get such a thing.
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Do you mean Barnham? Not every station on the South West Trains network in along the South Coast or near there. For example would someone travelling from Basingstoke to Hastings go via Barnham? National Rail Enquiries says the fastest journey is via Clapham Junction.
If I tell it to go via Barnham I don't get a fare. A single via Clapham Junction is £40.70. I'm sure someone would happily buy a train specific advance for less than that.
A week in advance I can get £48 advances from Basingstoke to York and the millage must surely be greater? The journey time is.
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
- Status