From another thread:
The price is a separate concept to that, in my opinion...
Some fares in Great Britain are good value, and while these are the minority (e.g. Sheffield to Derby CDR @ £12.90 which is roughly ~35 miles by road, or Sherburn to Whitby CDR @ £19.90 which is ~65 miles by road) it is absolutely vital that these, and other reasonable value fares, do not increase in cost.
If single leg pricing is introduced, then an off peak single must be HALF the cost of the current returns. No ifs, no buts. No increases to make things "simpler" (!)
Fares that are more expensive per mile than these are the ones that should be revised downward, if fares are to change.
Any attempt by GBR or anyone else to put the good value fares up will be met with huge resistance; it will be a massive PR own goal, the media will be all over it, and it will be political suicide.
The only form of fares reform that can happen is one that preserves the good value fares.
By all means re-name the fares, make them easy to buy (as e-tickets!), make a single priced at half the cost of a return, all that is fine, but the price must not go up.
By all means change the prices of fares to be more consistent, but this must only be done by reducing the fares which currently poor value, to match those of the fares that are reasonable value.
If this cannot be done, then the whole concept of fares reform is dead.
If you ask people 'would you like fares to be simple?' they will, of course say "yes".
But if you ask people 'would you like fares to be simple, if it meant good value fares will go up?' they will say "no"!
But the sort of surveys that the likes of the DfT and RDG would like would never ask such a question; this is done deliberately to try to convince us that "simplification" or "reform" has to be about being "fair", to enable the price of affordable fares to go up, when the reality is we want all fares to be good value!
Most people appear to think fares are bad value for money, and that's because most fares are too high.
For example, see this survey:
If there is to be a change in the fares structure, then the price people pay must not be higher than the price currently available on such a simple to use website.
That means the cost of the more expensive fares would have to decrease to match the cheaper fares.
There is absolutely no way the public will accept the good value fares (such as a Sheffield to Derby CDR) to go up, just so that a poor value fare (such as a Manchester to London Anytime Return) can go down in price, so that someone can tick a "this is simpler/fairer" box.
If anyone has any proposals for how fares reform could actually work, and what some sample actual fares would be, I'd be interested to hear the proposals! Providing the proposals don't increase the good value fares, then they're fine by me
I agree that fares do need to be easy to buy and use, but right now by far the biggest barrier to that is TOCs such as Scotrail, Merseyrail, TfW etc not allowing e-tickets to be issued. This could be fixed almost overnight!I'm very clear that rail under GBR must be able to innovate and develop good value pricing that is random or confined to certain routes with historically low fares pegged to regulation.
Fares need to be easy to buy and use, and the principle of the walk-up railway maintained whatever additional incentives exist for pre-booking.
The price is a separate concept to that, in my opinion...
I reject this.The only issues I think cause potential friction are
a) that to be economically viable, some fares on some routes at some times will need to be adjusted upward over time to remove some of the more extreme distortions. This doesn't mean jacking them right up and pricing people off, just a recognition of the reality; and
Some fares in Great Britain are good value, and while these are the minority (e.g. Sheffield to Derby CDR @ £12.90 which is roughly ~35 miles by road, or Sherburn to Whitby CDR @ £19.90 which is ~65 miles by road) it is absolutely vital that these, and other reasonable value fares, do not increase in cost.
If single leg pricing is introduced, then an off peak single must be HALF the cost of the current returns. No ifs, no buts. No increases to make things "simpler" (!)
Fares that are more expensive per mile than these are the ones that should be revised downward, if fares are to change.
Any attempt by GBR or anyone else to put the good value fares up will be met with huge resistance; it will be a massive PR own goal, the media will be all over it, and it will be political suicide.
The only form of fares reform that can happen is one that preserves the good value fares.
By all means re-name the fares, make them easy to buy (as e-tickets!), make a single priced at half the cost of a return, all that is fine, but the price must not go up.
The only way to resolve this would be to reduce the cost of the more expensive fares, but if the aim is to abolish "anomalies" this is futile; as you say anomalies will remain.b) whilst there will always be some anomalies somewhere (BR had a fair few), the conflicting rules over validity, routeing, break of journey and price that create a two-tier system allowing those with expertise to manipulate the price of a journey whilst most people pay the 'regular' rate will need to be resolved.
By all means change the prices of fares to be more consistent, but this must only be done by reducing the fares which currently poor value, to match those of the fares that are reasonable value.
If this cannot be done, then the whole concept of fares reform is dead.
The biggest concern I think most people have is that many fares are poor value for money.Customer research amongst ordinary (i.e. non-enthusiast) users has continuously shown that the biggest problem the industry has with fares is the total lack of trust amongst many that they are paying the best price for their journey.
If you ask people 'would you like fares to be simple?' they will, of course say "yes".
But if you ask people 'would you like fares to be simple, if it meant good value fares will go up?' they will say "no"!
But the sort of surveys that the likes of the DfT and RDG would like would never ask such a question; this is done deliberately to try to convince us that "simplification" or "reform" has to be about being "fair", to enable the price of affordable fares to go up, when the reality is we want all fares to be good value!
Most people appear to think fares are bad value for money, and that's because most fares are too high.
For example, see this survey:
Public opinion on train fares in the United Kingdom 2023 | Statista
In October 2023, just under three-quarters of survey respondents believed that train fares in the United Kingdom were either fairly bad or very bad value.
www.statista.com
It may not be totally representative, but 71% saying fares are either "fairly bad" or "bad" is pretty damning and I think most (not all) fares are bad value and I think most others would agree.Stance of survey respondents on whether train fares are good value in the United Kingdom 2020
Fairly bad 39%
Bad 32%
Don't know 16%
Fairly good 12%
Very good 1%
I can get cheap fares right now by using a site such as Trainsplit. Providing the TOCs aren't being difficult (as stated above), I will get one PDF for the whole journey. It's easy to make the transaction and I can choose to print the PDF if I want, but equally I can show it on any device. It cannot get any easier than that; anyone can do it.This is not solved by simply selling them whatever Byzantine combination of tickets and/or itineraries gets them the cheapest fare (not least because it still means wildly differing prices for otherwise comparable journeys) - it means a much more straightforward and honest pricing structure - one that is likely will be heavily digitally based and will therefore be accurately focused on the journeys actually made.
If there is to be a change in the fares structure, then the price people pay must not be higher than the price currently available on such a simple to use website.
That means the cost of the more expensive fares would have to decrease to match the cheaper fares.
There is absolutely no way the public will accept the good value fares (such as a Sheffield to Derby CDR) to go up, just so that a poor value fare (such as a Manchester to London Anytime Return) can go down in price, so that someone can tick a "this is simpler/fairer" box.
If anyone has any proposals for how fares reform could actually work, and what some sample actual fares would be, I'd be interested to hear the proposals! Providing the proposals don't increase the good value fares, then they're fine by me