Fare article on BBC

[whole diary]

[basset44]

Hi All,

Interesting article on BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21056703

Basset

[trainer]

I found this a most interesting read and although not much detail is given about FGW^▸ (First Great Western)-land, it appears from the graphs that regular travellers haven't done too well.  Speaking personally as a mainly leisure traveller these days I have not been concerned about pricey fares and have had good value overall - even before I earned my Senior Rail Card.  Even in the days when I regularly travelled Yatton-Salisbury the fare was so reasonable that the car was never an option for one, two or even three people travelling to the same 10am meeting, both on price and speed.  However, I know other destinations required much more consideration and had less subsidy.  Not sure about the latter these days as I have no DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) 'mole' anymore.  I know I cannot afford to travel to/from Paddington in the peak very often.

[broadgage]

It is interesting to note that in most cases season tickets have increased in price by much less than single tickets.
It could reasonably be argued that season ticket holders are over subsidised, remembering that most travel in the peak.

I dont see why regular travelers should not get a discount by means of a season ticket, but the present differential does seem excessive.

I suspect that the reason for the large discount given to season ticket holders is at least partly political. The cost of an anual season ticket might influence for whom the ticket holder votes, especialy if an election falls near the date of the fare increase.
The rising cost of single tickets is less likely to influence voting choice, since by definition most people dont buy that many single tickets (or they would buy a season, except in the rare case of someone who travels most days but to different destinations)

I have long held the view that the present regime is daft and over complicated.
It is clearly sensible to charge higher fares at peak times and lower fares in the off peak. I see no merit whatsoever in charging varying fares according to the date of booking, rather than according to the time and date of travel.


To rub salt into the wound, the last minute traveler who has paid the highest fare often has to stand because the seats are booked by discounted ticket holders.

I have previously suggested that only 3 different fares should be payable for a given journey rather than the dozens available now.
On a busy service the full fare should be payable regardless of whether the ticket was purchased 10 minutes or 10 weeks before departure.
Likewise on poorly patronised services a more modest fare should be charged, even for last minute travel.

Weekly season tickets should be sold at a MODEST discount, compared to 5 peak time returns.
Monthly seasons should be 4 times the weekly price, and yearly at about 11 times the monthly price.

First class when provided should be no more than twice the standard fare, and no cheaper than one and a half times the standard fare.

As an example, first class off peak, walk up from Taunton is about ^170, but standard is about ^40, there would seem to be case for making first no more than twice the standard fare, or say ^80 in this particular case.

[ellendune]

It is interesting to note that in most cases season tickets have increased in price by much less than single tickets.
It could reasonably be argued that season ticket holders are over subsidised, remembering that most travel in the peak.

Agree.  Or perhaps full fare passengers are being bled dry.

I dont see why regular travelers should not get a discount by means of a season ticket, but the present differential does seem excessive.

Totally agree

I suspect that the reason for the large discount given to season ticket holders is at least partly political. The cost of an anual season ticket might influence for whom the ticket holder votes, especialy if an election falls near the date of the fare increase.

I think that is correct

The rising cost of single tickets is less likely to influence voting choice, since by definition most people dont buy that many single tickets (or they would buy a season, except in the rare case of someone who travels most days but to different destinations)

I think that is correct.

I have long held the view that the present regime is daft and over complicated.
It is clearly sensible to charge higher fares at peak times and lower fares in the off peak. I see no merit whatsoever in charging varying fares according to the date of booking, rather than according to the time and date of travel.

Just makes the headline look better to me.

To rub salt into the wound, the last minute traveler who has paid the highest fare often has to stand because the seats are booked by discounted ticket holders.

I have previously suggested that only 3 different fares should be payable for a given journey rather than the dozens available now.
On a busy service the full fare should be payable regardless of whether the ticket was purchased 10 minutes or 10 weeks before departure.

Likewise on poorly patronised services a more modest fare should be charged, even for last minute travel.

Agree

Weekly season tickets should be sold at a MODEST discount, compared to 5 peak time returns.
Monthly seasons should be 4 times the weekly price, and yearly at about 11 times the monthly price.

I agree the present discount is a kick in the teeth for those of us who have to fork out the full fare, particulalrly in the peak when the vast majority of season ticket holders are travelling.

Of course you could leave the season ticket prices the same and reduce the rest of the fares.  Or perhaps more likely reduce the full fares and increase the season tickets to match.

First class when provided should be no more than twice the standard fare, and no cheaper than one and a half times the standard fare.

As an example, first class off peak, walk up from Taunton is about ^170, but standard is about ^40, there would seem to be case for making first no more than twice the standard fare, or say ^80 in this particular case.

I disagree with you on this one. I am happy to let the market decide what is the correct first class premium over standard.

[grahame]

I dont see why regular travelers should not get a discount by means of a season ticket, but the present differential does seem excessive.

Totally agree

Putting that in figures:

If I take a course that runs on Mondays in London over 10 weeks and travel peak, I pay
158.50 x 10 = 1585.00
for my peak tickets from Chippenham

If I take a course that runs on Mondays to Friday in London over 10 days (so within 2 weeks) and travel peak, I pay
243.00 x 2 = 486.00
for two weekly season tickets

Is it really right that I pay only 30.6% of the cost for the same number of journeys if they happen to be close together?



Edit note: I've crossed through a couple of grahame's words, as I think they are typos. CfN. 
Edit note: Thanks - I have clarified / change it to what I think I meant to say!  G

[John R]

As broadgage says, full fare passengers are being bled dry, with fare increases vastly in excess of inflation. If season tickets had been allowed to rise by the same amount then it would quite likely have caused a degree of social disruption, as commuters would be unable to afford to travel by rail, with all the potential consequences in urban areas.

It does seem ludicrous that a weekly season is less than the cost of two daily tickets.  On many more local routes the cost is around 4 daily tickets, but that reflects a lower cost per mile of the standard walk on fare.

One of the fares often mentioned is the walk on single/return from Manchester to London. Those with a long memory might recall that one big hike was justified on the grounds that whilst the west coast modernisation was underway Virgin couldn't put on enough services in the peak to meet the demand, so the fare increase was designed to suppress demand. I've never noticed it come down once the increased capacity was put in place.

[ChrisB]

The weekly used to be 3.5 x daily rate under BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)), I think. This strikes me as about right.

The annual needs to take account of annual leave days, plus a discount for buying well in advance. It's calculated on 40 x weekly I think. As pax often have 5 weeks leave these days, that's a discount of 7 weeks - or just over 13%. Pretty reasonable for paying in advance.

[grahame]

The weekly used to be 3.5 x daily rate under BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)), I think. This strikes me as about right.

Me too.  But does that mean put up a Chippenham to London weekly from 243.00 to 554.00, reduce the peak return fare from 158.50 to 69.00, or something in between (350.00 weekly / 100.00 daily)? 

[paul7575]

Areas like the SWML^▸ (South Western Mail Line) have got this problem with the pricing at places like Winchester, where the 7 day season to Waterloo costs about the same as 2 Anytime returns.  Looked at another way, they are paying 40% of the theoretical 5 day cost (ignoring the weekend use they get effectively free, as no-one ever includes it in comparisons!) and still they complain bitterly about the cost whenever BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) South show up for the annual vox pop...

This means the railway has pretty much 'painted themselves into a corner' regarding the government's hoped for 'part time seasons' for people working only 2 or 3 days a week.  No doubt someone, somewhere, will be expecting a 3 day season to be made available for just a bit more than the cost of a day return - and a 2 day season for less than a day return?

Paul

[ChrisB]

Me too.  But does that mean put up a Chippenham to London weekly from 243.00 to 554.00, reduce the peak return fare from 158.50 to 69.00, or something in between (350.00 weekly / 100.00 daily)? 

It's the peak daily that has got out of kilter, so that needs reducing - but this would mean less money in the farebox which the TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) won't like - meaning complaints from them to the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) and adjustments made to franchise payments to sort out. However, this would mean the taxpayer paying more for the railway, when successive Governments have spent a decade reducing that cost! So we'll have to see what the current Fares Review comes up with....

This means the railway has pretty much 'painted themselves into a corner' regarding the government's hoped for 'part time seasons' for people working only 2 or 3 days a week.  No doubt someone, somewhere, will be expecting a 3 day season to be made available for just a bit more than the cost of a day return - and a 2 day season for less than a day return?

Can't disagree with that...be interesting to see what the Fares Review comes up with, coz there's been enough pressure for these tiockets that they'll have to address this...

[thetrout]

An observation if I may?

The Government has for years been going on about shifting the cost of the railways from the Taxpayer to the Passenger (Fare Payer) I'd be interested to know how many of those passengers pay Income Tax, NI etc?

So in theory, If you're a tax payer and you travel to work by train, You get taxed twice? Yes I know about Fuel Duty and Company Car tax etc. But I can't see how shifting the cost from Taxpayer to Farepayer is going to help!

I see that method working like this:

Passenger takes train to work. Costs are shifted towards the passenger resulting in fares increases. Passenger can no longer afford the Rail Fare so decides to drive. Government increases fuel duty etc forcing passenger back onto the trains. Repeat cycle until serious financial problems occur...

I also agree with some of Broadgage' comments from earlier in the thread. In particular the cost of a First Class Ticket. We have the following types of ticket (Please let me know if I've missed any)

Standard Anytime Single
Standard Anytime Return
Standard Anytime Day Single
Standard Anytime Day Return
Standard Off Peak Single
Standard Off Peak Return
Standard Off Peak Day Single
Standard Off Peak Day Return
Standard Super Off Peak Single
Standard Super Off Peak Return
Standard Super Off Peak Day Return
First Anytime Single
First Anytime Return
First Anytime Day Single
First Anytime Day Return
First Off Peak Return
First Off Peak Day Return
First Off Peak Day Single <-- Very limited use on that one. predominantly SWT^▸ (South West Trains) have that fare option and even then it's almost impossible to find!

Why can't the above Standard Class ticket types be made available to passengers requiring First Class?

Let me use an example. 16:08 Westbury - London Paddington. This is a slow stopping service taking 1:46 from WSB^» (Westbury - next trains) - PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains). A Standard Class Super Off Peak Single is priced at: ^28.10 (Via Newbury) and the cheapest First Class Single is a First Class Anytime Single at: ^121.00 (Also Via Newbury)

That's nearly ^100 extra for the First Class Premium for a ticket which would be valid in the peak, but travelling on a train where SSR and SSS tickets are valid! Now I know for a fact that, that train is going to have pretty much empty First Class Carriages to Reading.

Now using Broadgage' Example. The First Class Fare based on the SSS would work out at: ^56.20 so lets round this to ^55 for clarity.

Personally, If I walked up to Westbury Station and was quoted ^55.00 (or ^56.20) for a First Class Super Off Peak Single into London for that train, I wouldn't be able to get my Credit Card out quick enough. Whereas if I was quoted ^121.00 I would ask for the FOS and travel via Salisbury for ^62.00

I honestly think the railways have shot themselves in the foot with that one. I would willingly pay more for a flexible First Class Ticket that was sensibly priced than go to the trouble of booking in advance. I don't call ^121 for a FOS from WSB - PAD on a train where Super Off Peak tickets are valid sensible. Something around the ^60 mark I almost certainly would.

* All prices do not include any form of discount

** Edited to clarify and tidy up some of my points **

[BandHcommuter]

This article demonstrates the divergence between regulated and unregulated fares. Most season tickets are regulated with annual increases capped on most routes at RPI^▸ (Revenue Protection Inspector (or Retail Price Index, depending on the context))+1%. I would guess that overall, since privatisation, season ticket prices have increased at a lower rate than average earnings, making them more affordable. Anytime tickets are regulated on some routes but not others. TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) have increased unregulated fares to the extent that they think the market will bear it, leading to the exacerbation of a whole range of fares anomalies and inconsistencies.

Reducing peak fares creates potential problems for operators. Firstly it reduces yield, which may or may not be compensated for by additional passenger numbers. Secondly, if a fares reduction results in additional demand, the extra passengers will need to be accommodated, and we are told that many peak trains are already overcrowded, so more capacity will be required.  So you either lose revenue, or increase costs, either of which is likely to lead to a change in subsidy requirement.