Will Eurostar get competition? Getlink plans to purchase 10 sets for use by rivals for Channel Tunnel

[D6130]

I think we need a permanent answer to this question, as it comes up about every three months!

1. It is horrendously expensive in terms of staff resources. The team required to process a train with 800 passengers, with ample capacity to deal with issues, would be very large, in order to complete a train from Brussels to Lille/Paris to Calais, each with Team Leader(s) and Security
2. Passports now have to be digitally checked with on line databases, the connection to which are not reliable on a fast moving train.
3. Every train would have to stop at Lille/Calais, team disembark with any undocumented persons and then travel back passenger to the starting point. Each team would be fortunate to manage two trains per shift [ if the times were right] - on longer journeys the team could be smaller but only manage one train (see post #44)
4. There would need to be a private security presence at Calais/Lille to deal with undocumented passengers, escorting them out of the secure area, and dealing with those reluctant to alight. The French authorities would doubtless not be keen on assisting - after all it is not their problem. The potential for train delay, and resultant cost and passenger inconvenience would be enormous.

All of this extra expense would have to be covered by increases in the ticket prices.

It is obvious why the system is as currently. Yes, E* could adopt the airline model, but as explained, I am not sure how this would improve the situation - check in, secure areas etc would still be required, and St Pancras needing reconstruction and arriving passengers delayed.

I know passport checks used to be done on board trains in European countries in the past, but that was in a different era and is simply not appropriate now. How many places around the whole world is passport checking done on board a moving train now ? Very few, and probably none on a similar situation to E*.

As a regular traveller on Eurostar, I fully agree with all of the above. Very succinctly put @RT4038!

 

[Wolfie]

Why does it need that and not on-train checks with incorrectly-documented passengers removed at Lille or Calais or wherever the train enters the current "secure" tracks?

The arrival passport check problem is more difficult.

Because, very simply, HMG would never accept the security risks implicit in that. If you want a more detailed answer look at @RT4038's comprehensive post.

 

[Bald Rick]

The UK Government fine any operator that brings undocumented or incorrectly documented passengers to the UK. The fines are steep; get too many of them and your licence to operate International services will be withdrawn. Operators cannot afford to bring such passengers to the UK.

Before you board your plane at a foreign airport, the airline staff have very carefully checked that you have the correct documents/visas etc at check in and/or at boarding the plane.

Eurostar could emulate the airline model in this regard. It would still mean 'check-in' at the foreign station (both for immigration checks by their own staff, and tunnel security checks), so this would mean sterile secure platform(s) and no mixing of domestic and international passengers, and security on the train. It would also mean that St Pancras would have to be majorly redesigned (and financed) to accommodate a much larger arrivals hall, to cope with 800 passengers arriving at once and having their passports checked, and then possibly another 800 arriving on the next train a few minutes later. Look at the queues that occur at Heathrow arrivals immigration - I think the current system, even if this means no long distance through trains, is preferable to being delayed getting away on arrival.

I would suggest that 'zero reason' is mere hyperbole.

brilliant answer. Spot on.

 

[paul1609]

It wouldn’t, at all. They would lose tons of money on it.

It’s 8h30 at the very least between London and Barcelona with two stops (which would be the fewest needed for crew purposes), and that assumes no ‘Lille shuffle’ inbound. that means only one trip per unit per day. To make a profit, you would need to sell every seat on a Eurostar at an average fare approaching £200 one way.

The alternative is 2 hours by easyJet, which would be much, much cheaper.

Therefore only a small minority of travellers would choose to use the train in those circumstances. Even if 10% of the air market swapped to a rail service (which is very, very unlikely), it would only fill half a Eurostar a day each way, and that implies an average fare of £400.

Eurostar works for Paris and Brussels because city centre to city centre it is quicker than flying, and people are prepared to pay the premium of the train costing more (usually) for the time / convenience / comfort. Even then there are still 20+ flights a day from London - Paris each way. Amsterdam works because the market is huge, and the time is comparable to flying, therefore those who are close to St P or central Amsterdam the convenience / comfort of the train wins, even with a small price premium. It won’t work for Barcelona.

I agree I've done Ashford to Barcelona by rail 3 times, twice changing at Lyon off the South of France service and once crossing Paris. The cross Paris trip was about £75 cheaper. Even as a rail enthusiast after an early morning start by late afternoon the travelling becomes tedious. Northbound I've always flown basically because I'd rather have an extra day in Barcelona and an evening flight back to the UK than sitting on a train all day for the last day of a break.

 

[Gareth]

I know passport checks used to be done on board trains in European countries in the past, but that was in a different era and is simply not appropriate now. How many places around the whole world is passport checking done on board a moving train now ? Very few, and probably none on a similar situation to E*.

Finland/Russia did until the recent suspension. I think US/Canada trains do too.

 

[RT4038]

Finland/Russia did until the recent suspension. I think US/Canada trains do too.

I think the US/Canada trains do the check whilst standing in the border station. They also do not regularly have anything like 800 passengers per train, there are only something like 4 per day each way (Finland/Russia) and 1 per day at three points along a border of 5,500 miles (US/Canada). Both the US/Canada and Finland/Russia do not have any significant economic migrant issue at that border. I would suggest it is not comparable to the E* situation.

On the TanZam railway checks are done on a moving train (2 per week each way) and no doubt a few other examples , and in various other places on a standing train, but these cannot remotely be compared to the E* operation either. In fact, the number of cross 'hard' border trains is quite limited around the world nowadays, let alone checking passports/visas on the move.

 

[BRX]

It’s a reasonable assumption that the chance of through ticketing would be worse with more competition. If Eurostar can’t make the case for it, then it’s fair to say that a myriad of smaller operators won’t either

Is there some fundamental reason it's difficult and requires the resources of a large operation to make work?

I've read a travel agent saying that Eurostar's ticketing system is a mess and horrible to work with.

Maybe a new operator, starting without a legacy system, might be able and motivated to build something better and more flexible.

It's something you see happen quite a bit in the software (non railway related) world.

DB will sell you a through journey. It may not be a through ticket; this depends on whether any of the trains are "global fare", i.e. airline style, or whether TCV type ticketing still applies.

Ok, but why does the distinction matter in this case?

The point is, they can sell you, in one transaction, something that gets you from A to B at a competitive price, and in a form that isn't intimidating, and that feels "safe" to someome who doesn't habitually travel internationally by train. It means it can compete with the air alternative (which for many people might be flight + hire car or flight + expensive local swiss train ticket bought at a machine on the day) not just on price but on level of stress/worry/hassle.

I'm sure there are lots of people in the UK, at a distance from but with fairly easy access to St Pancras, who fly instead of using Eurostar, because they worry about getting stung by missing a Eurostar resulting from domestic delays, or they price in extra time or more flexible tickets to avert this, meaning they come up with an overall Eurostar time/cost that doesn't look attractive.

Being able to buy a ticket from their home station to Paris in one click and with assurances about missed connections would make a big difference.

 

[cle]

I think the US/Canada trains do the check whilst standing in the border station. They also do not regularly have anything like 800 passengers per train, there are only something like 4 per day each way (Finland/Russia) and 1 per day at three points along a border of 5,500 miles (US/Canada). Both the US/Canada and Finland/Russia do not have any significant economic migrant issue at that border. I would suggest it is not comparable to the E* situation.

On the TanZam railway checks are done on a moving train (2 per week each way) and no doubt a few other examples , and in various other places on a standing train, but these cannot remotely be compared to the E* operation either. In fact, the number of cross 'hard' border trains is quite limited around the world nowadays, let alone checking passports/visas on the move.

I have to wonder if there is something tech-based to innovate the process.

For example, ticket delivery/pick-up contingent on passport validity and a facial recognition (like Global Entry in the US) - show up to your station, and you only receive your ticket once passport scanned and face validated by the machine. This of course, has to be a point of no return at the station - so you can't then give tickets to another person. I'm sure there are other ways too.

And then maybe a more belt & braces secondary check on the train - or at St P - but much less likely to have the wrong folks on board already.

 

[paul1609]

Is there some fundamental reason it's difficult and requires the resources of a large operation to make work?

I've read a travel agent saying that Eurostar's ticketing system is a mess and horrible to work with.

Maybe a new operator, starting without a legacy system, might be able and motivated to build something better and more flexible.

It's something you see happen quite a bit in the software (non railway related) world.


Ok, but why does the distinction matter in this case?

The point is, they can sell you, in one transaction, something that gets you from A to B at a competitive price, and in a form that isn't intimidating, and that feels "safe" to someome who doesn't habitually travel internationally by train. It means it can compete with the air alternative (which for many people might be flight + hire car or flight + expensive local swiss train ticket bought at a machine on the day) not just on price but on level of stress/worry/hassle.

I'm sure there are lots of people in the UK, at a distance from but with fairly easy access to St Pancras, who fly instead of using Eurostar, because they worry about getting stung by missing a Eurostar resulting from domestic delays, or they price in extra time or more flexible tickets to avert this, meaning they come up with an overall Eurostar time/cost that doesn't look attractive.

Being able to buy a ticket from their home station to Paris in one click and with assurances about missed connections would make a big difference.

The issue isn't that its technically difficult to integrate the various systems, the issue is that the market for Eurostar once you get much away from Greater London is so small you can't recover the cost of the integration. Much of the very niche market isn't actually deterred by the lack of the integration either.

 

[BRX]

The issue isn't that its technically difficult to integrate the various systems, the issue is that the market for Eurostar once you get much away from Greater London is so small you can't recover the cost of the integration. Much of the very niche market isn't actually deterred by the lack of the integration either.

How do you know this?

 

[RT4038]

How do you know this?

Whilst the 'add a CIV ticket itinerary to the itinerary of a Eurostar ticket' may not be that technically difficult per se, I should imagine that the booking horizon of Eurostar at one year, compared to the booking horizon of National Rail tickets (supposedly 12 weeks but often reduced, sometimes to 2, particularly at weekends) means that the customer experience of trying to book such 'through' tickets is so degraded as to be a serious image problem.

The fact that Eurostar have not persevered with a solution would rather indicate that they also feel that the cost and effort is simply not worth it for the likely traffic that it would actually generate (or that there is actually no practicable* solution possible ) , bearing in mind that the lack of through tickets will only be deterring a proportion of the market.

* I am guessing that 'open' CIV tickets could be issued, but the domestic TOCs would demand that these be set at anytime fare rates which would limit the market so much that the development cost would not be worth it.

 

[BRX]

Whilst the 'add a CIV ticket itinerary to the itinerary of a Eurostar ticket' may not be that technically difficult per se, I should imagine that the booking horizon of Eurostar at one year, compared to the booking horizon of National Rail tickets (supposedly 12 weeks but often reduced, sometimes to 2, particularly at weekends) means that the customer experience of trying to book such 'through' tickets is so degraded as to be a serious image problem.

The fact that Eurostar have not persevered with a solution would rather indicate that they also feel that the cost and effort is simply not worth it for the likely traffic that it would actually generate (or that there is actually no practicable* solution possible ) , bearing in mind that the lack of through tickets will only be deterring a proportion of the market.

* I am guessing that 'open' CIV tickets could be issued, but the domestic TOCs would demand that these be set at anytime fare rates which would limit the market so much that the development cost would not be worth it.

I think you're mainly talking about the technical/logistical difficulties in implementing a system. I was asking really about the idea that a potential market (assuming a system could be implemented) doesn't exist or is only very small.

 

[RT4038]

I think you're mainly talking about the technical/logistical difficulties in implementing a system. I was asking really about the idea that a potential market (assuming a system could be implemented) doesn't exist or is only very small.

The further away from London, the less competitive the prices, the journey time and the sheer complexity of the journey will become compared to the air alternatives. This must impact on the potential market size for rail. Only relatively few of the total potential travellers will be dedicated rail enthusiasts who would be bothered to navigate the changing, the cross-London transfers and the increased journey times, and most of those will probably make the journey whether there are through tickets sold or not. I am unsure on what basis it may be thought that the actual potential is anything but small.

Eurostar already sell 'through' tickets from London to various French destinations (a 'sweetheart' booking engine); they will already have an idea of the value of the through ticket market. If they thought that there was a vast market of UK through ticketing, that they could make a profit on, taking into account the cost of developing the integration [if it is indeed practicable], then I think it would be reasonable to think that they would be doing it. E* did give this a go for a short period, but the complexity, and particularly the differing booking horizons, meant that the customer experience was pretty poor. Any move to some kind of open 'add-on' type ticket would have to be at anytime prices which would have rendered the tickets completely uncompetitive.

 

[rvdborgt]

The issue isn't that its technically difficult to integrate the various systems, the issue is that the market for Eurostar once you get much away from Greater London is so small you can't recover the cost of the integration. Much of the very niche market isn't actually deterred by the lack of the integration either.

Eurostar had a whole range of destinations beyond London for which they offered through bookings, so they must have found it was worth while. Then they changed their booking backend and ditched all through bookings, in the UK and also to Germany (not sure what happened with the through bookings to French destinations at the time). It must have hurt, since there's now a new offer to Germany (which they had already promised back in 2020). Or they were planning reinstatement from the beginning but it just took much more time.

 

[johnnychips]

Eurostar had a whole range of destinations beyond London for which they offered through bookings, so they must have found it was worth while. Then they changed their booking backend and ditched all through bookings, in the UK and also to Germany (not sure what happened with the through bookings to French destinations at the time). It must have hurt, since there's now a new offer to Germany (which they had already promised back in 2020). Or they were planning reinstatement from the beginning but it just took much more time.

Perhaps they ditched the through tickets because few people used them and it was more trouble than it was worth? There is a tale -I don’t know if it’s true - that only eight through tickets from Leeds were sold in a whole year. I find it unlikely as me and two friends managed 16 in a year from Doncaster. Their withdrawal was very inconvenient, and removed CIV protection without a lot of faffing about.

 

[Techniquest]

I only ever used a through fare once, but it was from Newport (South Wales) not my local station, which made it an expensive way of doing things. A through fare from my own station would have been better, and I seem to recall booking the Newport one was a lot more annoying than it really needed to be. I have a vague memory of it only being doable by phone? Such an idea would be impractical these days.

As usual as a through fare would be, I think they're better off not wasting their time with it.

As for this competition thing, well if they can make it work then why not? Give it a try and see where the wind takes you kind of thing!

 

[rvdborgt]

I only ever used a through fare once, but it was from Newport (South Wales) not my local station, which made it an expensive way of doing things. A through fare from my own station would have been better, and I seem to recall booking the Newport one was a lot more annoying than it really needed to be. I have a vague memory of it only being doable by phone?

I remember being able to book it online 10 years ago. Albeit only in GBP. British destinations were hidden otherwise. And there was no way of booking any Dutch station to beyond London. There was surely more potential.

 

[RT4038]

I remember being able to book it online 10 years ago. Albeit only in GBP. British destinations were hidden otherwise. And there was no way of booking any Dutch station to beyond London. There was surely more potential.

I think it required a lot more development work to make it decent, and it was decided that the expense of this just wasn't cost effective. And there was still the issue of the different booking horizons, which meant the through tickets couldn't be offered for many requests.

 

[BRX]

The further away from London, the less competitive the prices, the journey time and the sheer complexity of the journey will become compared to the air alternatives. This must impact on the potential market size for rail. Only relatively few of the total potential travellers will be dedicated rail enthusiasts who would be bothered to navigate the changing, the cross-London transfers and the increased journey times, and most of those will probably make the journey whether there are through tickets sold or not. I am unsure on what basis it may be thought that the actual potential is anything but small

The competition being air, then you just need to find locations where it's easier to get to St Pancras than an airport. Of course, much of London falls within that category - so Eurostar is popular with Londoners. But St Pancras is directly connected to many places by fast trains - not just the east midlands but lots of Thameslink destinations south of London. And Kings Cross is right next door. Euston is just 10 minutes walk away. That walking distance might be seen as a deterrent but I bet most people walk the same distance within airport buildings.
In other words there are multiple population centres that are linked to St Pancras with no cross london transfers to worry about.
I find it hard to believe that there isn't a reasonably large potential market there, which could be tempted to use Eurostar rather than air, if it were made easy for them.

 

[Horizon22]

The competition being air, then you just need to find locations where it's easier to get to St Pancras than an airport. Of course, much of London falls within that category - so Eurostar is popular with Londoners. But St Pancras is directly connected to many places by fast trains - not just the east midlands but lots of Thameslink destinations south of London. And Kings Cross is right next door. Euston is just 10 minutes walk away. That walking distance might be seen as a deterrent but I bet most people walk the same distance within airport buildings.
In other words there are multiple population centres that are linked to St Pancras with no cross london transfers to worry about.
I find it hard to believe that there isn't a reasonably large potential market there, which could be tempted to use Eurostar rather than air, if it were made easy for them.

St Pancras is also of course directly connected to an airport in the form of Luton (Airport Parkway).

 

[zwk500]

St Pancras is also of course directly connected to an airport in the form of Luton (Airport Parkway).

It's even more directly connected to Gatwick!

The competition being air, then you just need to find locations where it's easier to get to St Pancras than an airport. Of course, much of London falls within that category - so Eurostar is popular with Londoners. But St Pancras is directly connected to many places by fast trains - not just the east midlands but lots of Thameslink destinations south of London. And Kings Cross is right next door. Euston is just 10 minutes walk away. That walking distance might be seen as a deterrent but I bet most people walk the same distance within airport buildings.
In other words there are multiple population centres that are linked to St Pancras with no cross london transfers to worry about.

The walk from Euston to St Pancras, although not very long (I myself have made a 16 minute connection from Eurostar to LNWR) is along either a busy main road or through not particularly well signposted or lit residential streets. It's very different to walking through an airport terminal, especially if you are less mobile or familiar with London.

I find it hard to believe that there isn't a reasonably large potential market there, which could be tempted to use Eurostar rather than air.

I think through tickets are going to have limited impact on modal shift. Whilst helpful, if people have worked out its cheaper to fly then the only reason they'll switch is if prices drop. Through tickets would only be about booking one itinerary, prices wouldn't drop for them.

 

[BRX]

It looks like the air industry has already managed to sort out some kind of combined ticketing system with certain UK TOCs. If they can do it, then why not Eurostar.
Eg

AccesRail | Your Gateway to Air-Rail

accesrail.com

AccesRail | Your Gateway to Air-Rail

accesrail.com

 

[paul1609]

It looks like the air industry has already managed to sort out some kind of combined ticketing system with certain UK TOCs. If they can do it, then why not Eurostar.
Eg

AccesRail | Your Gateway to Air-Rail

accesrail.com

AccesRail | Your Gateway to Air-Rail

accesrail.com

Possibly because the airlines are a bigger market for the Tocs than Eurostar? Gatwick Airport station alone had circa 22 million passenger entries exits prior to covid. That's just below Edinburgh Waverley in the station league table.

 

[zwk500]

It looks like the air industry has already managed to sort out some kind of combined ticketing system with certain UK TOCs. If they can do it, then why not Eurostar.

It's definitely possible, but Rail-Air is a different offering to Rail-rail. What the link you provided is basically doing is trying to get people to take the train to Manchester Airport instead of driving and paying for parking. That is a very clear market and business/costing structure.
Linking into Eurostar, whilst beneficial, is offering a slightly different thing. A key factor in this is what level of through journeys are currently not being made because of a lack of through tickets, instead of other factors like journey time, departure times, ticket price etc. I'd suggest that those who would be willing to pay the Eurostar prices are already making the bookings individually, and a through ticket would just be more convenient for them rather than actually getting new business to E*.

 

[BRX]

It's definitely possible, but Rail-Air is a different offering to Rail-rail. What the link you provided is basically doing is trying to get people to take the train to Manchester Airport instead of driving and paying for parking. That is a very clear market and business/costing structure.
Linking into Eurostar, whilst beneficial, is offering a slightly different thing. A key factor in this is what level of through journeys are currently not being made because of a lack of through tickets, instead of other factors like journey time, departure times, ticket price etc. I'd suggest that those who would be willing to pay the Eurostar prices are already making the bookings individually, and a through ticket would just be more convenient for them rather than actually getting new business to E*.

If there's a case to encourage people to take the train to an airport rather than driving, then I don't really see why there wouldn't be a similar case for encouraging people to take the train to Eurostar, instead of driving to an airport.

One of the reasons that people might drive to an airport is that they feel they are now in control of timing - rather than missing a flight because of a delayed train that they can do nothing about. Of course, providing through ticketing is something that can address that worry.

Having recognised that this is something that influences people's journey choices, then why would it not also apply to Eurostar? I'm sure that there are people who don't use it, because they can't drive to and park at St Pancras. They worry about missed connections. So they drive to an airport instead. If they can be persuaded to swap their journey to an airport from car to train, then persuading them to take the train to Eurostar is not really different (all other factors being equal).

If the difference is one of perception - people just aren't as familiar with international rail travel as they are with air - then surely that can be addressed with marketing, a crucial part of which would have to be that you buy a ticket from X to Y and you don't worry about it being your fault of one leg gets delayed.

Anecdotally, this is a big part of what stops people using rail instead of air when traveling to Europe.

Eurostar doesn't carry a trivial number of passengers - about 10 million a year - compared to 20 or 30 million who use, say, Manchester airport. It's fewer, but in the same order.