why do singles cost the same as returns

[dieselbashdave]

Hi all

I've been checking out prices on NationalRail for INV-MAN via EDB and I've noticed that a single ticket costs £113 (anytime day retn) and a return £126 (O/P). I'm wondering why a single doesn't cost 50% less as logically I'm burning 50% less diesel, having 50% less staff and 50% less track access on account of going one way? It's a bit of a puzzle

Can anyone out there in Ticketland explain the economics behind it as I think I'm being a bit dense. Oh yeah PS: dates were out on 22nd April and the return was on 24th April as of today the 19th.

There was an advance at £60 single but it's the "any train" as per T&Cs tickets that I tend to go for as insurance!

 

[benk1342]

Those more knowledgeable in these matters may correct me, but I believe that part of it has to do with regulation. For this long-distance route the regulated fare will be the off peak return, which you observed is £126. The single fare is not regulated, leaving the train company free to charge as much as it believes the market can bear. Evidently the amount it settled on was £113.

 

[soil]

The single is an Anytime Single. Not an Anytime Day Return. It's valid for break of journey.

The return is an Off-Peak Return, and break of journey is not permitted outbound.

Therefore the tickets are not comparable.

If you check

http://brfares.com/#fares?orig=INV&dest=MAN&rlc=

you can see that there is a SVH fare, priced at exactly half the SVR fare.

This ticket is effectively an off-peak single, but it can only be sold in conjunction with an Advance single for the return leg.

The cheapest cost is theoretically then £20.50 (for the cheapest Virgin Advance) plus £63.05 for the SVH = £83.55. If you're only going one way-, then that would be cheaper than buying the Anytime Single fare, and flexible, albeit still not permitting break of journey.

In general singles are not half the price of returns because they don't want people to avoid the fare - most people return, so they price the single at a similar level to the return to cut late-night/opportunistic fare avoidance. If you need to dodge fare checks both directions to make fare avoidance worthwhile, people are much more likely to buy a ticket.

 

[telstarbox]

The overheads on a return are less than twice those on a single (eg management salaries, marketing, prosecution and so on), so there's an element of bulk buying (someone can probably explain this better than I can).

 

[MarlowDonkey]

In general singles are not half the price of returns because they don't want people to avoid the fare - most people return, so they price the single at a similar level to the return to cut late-night/opportunistic fare avoidance.

What seems idiotic and open to exploitation by the knowledgeable is pricing a single at a higher price than a return. I was checking a version of that EMT example from another thread and the price for Nuneaton to St Pancras via Leicester works out much cheaper as a Day Return Nuneaton to Bedford and Day Return Bedford to St Pancras. If a break was needed in Leicester presumably you book it as Bedford Nuneaton and St Pancras Bedford. I don't believe there is any requirement to retain the outward part of a Return.

 

[bb21]

You are not comparing like with like. You are comparing an Anytime Single (£113.50) with an Off-Peak Return (£126.10). The price of the Anytime Return in this case (£227) is exactly twice the price of an Anytime Single. Off-Peak Return fares started off as something that offers a discount over the Standard Return (Anytime Return) hence can be much less than the price of the Anytime Return, depending on how big a discount was offered. This means that it may not cost much more than the Anytime Single.

As for why (Super) Off-Peak Returns cost marginally more than their corresponding single fares, my post from two days ago might be useful. It doesn't explain everything, however provides a reason for many of those occurrences.

 

[LexyBoy]

The fact that Anytime Returns are normally twice the price of the corresponding Anytime Single knocks down most of the arguments usually brought forwards IMO, especially as these are the most attractive tickets for fraud.

I think bb21's explanation is right, plus the TOCs obviously think people will pay it. I hope they will see the light and follow FGW's lead in pricing many singles at around half the price of the return. The current situation is just another thing which brings the industry in for criticism and loses potential customers.

 

[soil]

Around London, a CDR is little more than an SDS typically. So you would buy the CDR, rather than trying to save 10p by buying a SDS.

 

[bb21]

I hope they will see the light and follow FGW's lead in pricing many singles at around half the price of the return. The current situation is just another thing which brings the industry in for criticism and loses potential customers.

I hope they don't. Don't forget that they abolished SSR fares in 2005, then jacked up SVR fares by 20% and renamed the original SVRs into SSRs, obviously aligning them with the time restrictions of the old SSR fares. They then had the cheek to claim that they were offering cheaper travel by "introducing" Super Saver fares.

 

[MikeWh]

Around London, a CDR is little more than an SDS typically. So you would buy the CDR, rather than trying to save 10p by buying a SDS.

Or use Oyster (if within the area of course) where everything is singles so a return is twice a single.

 

[dieselbashdave]

Right I see now - comparing apples to oranges. D'oh! Well it's been a long day and I spent 2 hours getting home thanks to some merchant banker james blunt deciding to shut the Kessock Bridge. :roll:

 

[LexyBoy]

I hope they don't. Don't forget that they abolished SSR fares in 2005, then jacked up SVR fares by 20% and renamed the original SVRs into SSRs, obviously aligning them with the time restrictions of the old SSR fares. They then had the cheek to claim that they were offering cheaper travel by "introducing" Super Saver fares.

I've not forgotten, I was referring to a particular point of their pricing.

Anyway, I'm sure plenty of operators would have squeezed the regulated SVR restrictions as much as possible. At least FGW kept a less restricted ticket, unlike a certain operator of grey and red trains on the WCML...

 

[tbtc]

The current situation is just another thing which brings the industry in for criticism and loses potential customers.

It's not as extreme as flights used to be (in the days when I needed to/ could afford to fly) - there you often saw single tickets costing more than returns - because anyone buying a single *needed* to get from A to B (rather than just wanting to), so you could squeeze more money from them.

Especially off-peak, there's an element of that logic on the railways in terms of the pricing

 

[LexyBoy]

Eurostar was/is bad for this too. A few years ago I went up to the counter at Lille and asked for a ticket to London. Without even looking it up, the clerk said "that'll be €300". Asked how much a return would be, and after picking a random date far in the future was sold a ticket for €70 ish, leaving on the next train.

 

[soil]

Eurotunnel do it too. A single is about £300, a day return around £40. If you don't return the same though, they'll attempt to charge your credit card for the difference!

 

[transmanche]

I hope they will see the light and follow FGW's lead in pricing many singles at around half the price of the return. The current situation is just another thing which brings the industry in for criticism and loses potential customers.

East Coast now offer Super Off Peak singles for half the price of returns on some flows - although they are only available from their website and are not available for purchase on the day of travel.

I buy them quite often as they're usually only a couple of pounds more expensive than an Advance if you purchase a day or two before travel and they give you more flexibility. Plus they're handy if you're going to be away longer than a month.

Seeing as Advances are always sold as singles, I think it's the way forward for long distance fares.

 

[No Brakes]

I heard a guard explain to a passenger a while ago when they asked the same question, that it was to do with people going up to London years ago (possibly war time) and getting boozed up, and selling their return portion onto others. To stop the practice they made singles and returns virtually the same price.

He may have been making that up for the benefit of the passenger (!), but personally I'm rather glad as I'm sure returns are more widely used. What is annoying is the concept of 'day returns', in that returning on the same day is one price, but if you work overnights (for instance) you end up paying for 2 singles, because your workday happens to start and finish on different days.

 

[yorkie]

This crops up every so often. When it last cropped up, 4 days ago, I posted:

Oh no, not that chestnut again

It deserves a thread in its own right, but can we leave it a few months before re-opening that debate (in a new thread)

There was a huge debate here: Proposal to price by distance travelled (rather than market based pricing) and it has cropped up in numerous other threads since then too, so plenty of reading material for anyone who is curious

East Coast not offer Super Off Peak singles for half the price of returns ...

Seeing as Advances are always sold as singles, I think it's the way forward for long distance fares.

Agreed. Virgin do something similar(ish) with their Off Peak Singles online (though they are not available singly!).

Without something along those lines, some passengers will be sticking to the "singles are always cheaper" mode of thinking, and may end up paying MORE than the price of the appropriate return fare! Some websites make this an easier mistake to make, than others.

But the TOCs are not going to change their ways any time soon. They'll wait for the DfT to force it upon them, and moan like hell at the loss of revenue.

In fact, I heard a rumour that the DfT does want to implement this, but at great cost to passengers, with Super Off Peak fares to be abolished, and walk-up TOC specific fares to be abolished, and Day Return fares to be abolished.:roll: This will leave everyone paying the quite high Off Peak Return fare, or half of that if only going one way.

One thing is certain: they will not just make singles half the price of a return. They will be withdrawing cheap deals and making us pay more overall, as they always do!

Remember how some TOCs abused "Simplification" in 2008, despite requests from ATOC and the DfT that they didn't take advantage...

 

[Greeby]

East Coast made some positive ground in the form of abolishing the Weekender by lowering the SVR price to match it. But they ought to go the whole hog and do the same with Super Off-Peak.

What Virgin should do is unlock the SVH and make it available across the board as a regular single. Not only helping passengers out, but would kill off the majority of LM Only singles along the route

 

[Searle]

Without a huge knowledge of the history of price fares and a *bit* of economic knowledge, I'd hazard a guess that it gives you the impression that the return is much better value, and that you're getting more service for your money as compared with the single. This may not be the case, but it gives that impression.

Also as you've already chosen to travel by train, but let's say you've just chosen to get a single ticket, if a return is just a little bit more, as a pose to double a single, you're much more likely to get a return and put a little bit more money into the railway's pocket.

Also the obligatory economies of scale

 

[bb21]

What Virgin should do is unlock the SVH and make it available across the board as a regular single. Not only helping passengers out, but would kill off the majority of LM Only singles along the route

At the risk of upsetting their income from SVS fares with no adjustment to other fares? Sorry but cannot see that happening in a million years.