Cheaper fares to be offered - Cross Country to trial new system

[whole diary]

[rogerw]

In my view this is a lot of spin and little substance.  I am sure there are hundreds of people travelling from Wick to Par every day and very few would want to travel from London to Sheffield via Grantham.  Interesting that Cross Country who have some of the highest fares and greatest restrictions are being used for the trial

[John R]

So how will this work with a local favourite, the Didcot split?  Will the anytime single fare between SWI^» (Swindon - next trains) and PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains) be reduced to the sum of the fares between those places and DID^» (Didcot Parkway - next trains), thus reducing the fare from £64.50 to £54.10?  Or will you only get the reduced fare if your train calls at DID (as at present)? 

That saving, at 17% is handy, but not that dramatic.  But doing the same exercise from BRI^» (Bristol Temple Meads - next trains) reduces the fare from £102 to £61.60.  Don't expect the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)'s to agree to that kind of reduction without some change to the franchise agreement. Which I can't see the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) agreeing to.

So what happens?  Do the fares from the west to Didcot increase?  That will in itself result in more squeals of protest, and rightly so.

Oh, and an added complication. In the evening the off peak fare from Didcot west is even cheaper, so that £102 fare reduces to £52.30, a reduction of almost 50%.



 

[TaplowGreen]

So how will this work with a local favourite, the Didcot split?  Will the anytime single fare between SWI^» (Swindon - next trains) and PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains) be reduced to the sum of the fares between those places and DID^» (Didcot Parkway - next trains), thus reducing the fare from £64.50 to £54.10?  Or will you only get the reduced fare if your train calls at DID (as at present)? 

That saving, at 17% is handy, but not that dramatic.  But doing the same exercise from BRI^» (Bristol Temple Meads - next trains) reduces the fare from £102 to £61.60.  Don't expect the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)'s to agree to that kind of reduction without some change to the franchise agreement. Which I can't see the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) agreeing to.

So what happens?  Do the fares from the west to Didcot increase?  That will in itself result in more squeals of protest, and rightly so.

Oh, and an added complication. In the evening the off peak fare from Didcot west is even cheaper, so that £102 fare reduces to £52.30, a reduction of almost 50%.



 

Surely any squeals from TOCs can be silenced by pointing out that customers should have been offered the cheapest fare in the first place, so actually the TOCs have been making hay whilst this has been going on, and this is in reality just ensuring that the lowest fare is offered?

[stuving]

There's more background to this than you may realise. So maybe the pretty words about reforming ticketing that have been coming out of DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) and others meant something for once.

At the same time as the DfT "Action Plan for Information on Rail Fares & Ticketing" (13th Dec 2016 -mentioned before) there was an RDG^‡(resolve) press release and their own "Ticket Vending Machine: Ten Point Improvement Plan". This had ten points (simplified here - there  is more explanation):

1)   Reduce the number of tickets and routes that cover the same journey
ACTION: RDG will work with the Train Operating Companies to identify and eliminate unnecessary  and undesirable duplication of tickets and routes.
BENEFIT : Customers have a clearer choice and are more easily able to select the correct ticket for  their needs 2)
2)   Ticket validity information (peak/off - peak information)
ACTION: RDG will make a data feed of ticket validity information available to TVM^▸ (Ticket Vending Machine) suppliers and  work with them to incorporate this into the TVM interface.
BENEFIT : Customers  know when  their  selected  off - peak ticket is valid , ensuring they  have all the  information necessary to buy the correct ticket.
3)   Peak / off - peak configuration
ACTION: RDG will liaise with TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) and  TVM suppliers  to configure TVMs appropriately, and to  make clear to customers at what times a TVM is configured to sell off - peak tickets.
BENEFIT : Customers know when the TVM will begin to sell off - peak tickets and thus when they  might be able to find a cheaper ticket.
4)   RDG’s " My Ticket " feed
ACTION: RDG will make  its “My Ticket” feed available to TVM suppliers  and will liaise with  suppliers to embed a link to the functionality within the ticket purchase process.
BENEFIT : Customers  can see in a single functional area everything that their ticket entitles them  to  do.
5)   Build the TVM Design Guidelines into future franchises
ACTION: RDG will liaise with the DfT to add  the TVM Design Guidelines into future franchise  agreements.
BENEFIT :  All TVMs comply with  the TVM design guidelines .
6)   Do not use cryptic short codes in place of Train Operator names
ACTION: RDG will l iaise with TVM Suppliers to replace cryptic short codes with the full Train  Operator name .
BENEFIT :  Customers are clear on which operators they can, or cannot use their ticket  with.
7)   Make customers aware if cheaper tickets are available through the TVM
ACTION: Work with the TVM suppliers and the TOCs to understand what existing configuration  elements can be used to meet this requirement or, where that’s not possible, to understand what  changes are needed.
BENEFIT : Customers never unknowingly pay more for a ticket than they needed.
8)   Replace ‘sticky’ labels with digital labels
ACTION: RDG will liaise with TVM suppliers and TOCs to  replace ‘sticky’ labels with digital labels. BENEFIT : Customers are always aware of the range of tickets that the TVMs do, and do not sell.
9)   Consistent and intuitive station look - up functionality
ACTION: RDG will liaise with the TVM suppliers to  implement consistent and intuitive station look - up functionality that, as a minimum, includes key word look-up ie a customer typing in “Kings” will  be presented with London Kings Cross as well as any other matching stations.
BENEFIT :  Customers can easily and consistently find the station to which they wish to buy a ticket.
10)   A) Make clear what group stations a ticket is valid to or from
ACTION:  RDG will liaise with  the TVM suppliers to add functionality to make clear which group  stations a ticket is valid to or from.
BENEFIT :  Customers can see which group stations their ticket is valid  to or from .
      B)  Look at  what  additional  Data feeds RDG can make available.
ACTION: RDG will make all its data feeds available to the TVM suppliers .
BENEFIT :  Suppliers are able to develop innovative solutions using all the available data .

That's not just about TVMs, if you look at item 1.

[grahame]

That's not just about TVMs^▸ (Ticket Vending Machine), if you look at item 1.

In full

1) Reduce the number of tickets and routes that cover the same journey
One of the key issues with the TVM experience is the difficulty in enabling the retail of every product, as well as the confusion and decision paralysis that results from having so much choice. Reducing the number of tickets and routes that cover the same journey will simplify the development of the TVMs to meet the Design Guidelines, and will reduce customer confusion.
ACTION: RDG^‡(resolve) will work with the Train Operating Companies to identify and eliminate unnecessary and undesirable duplication of tickets and routes.
BENEFIT: Customers have a clearer choice and are more easily able to select the correct ticket for their needs

Key is definition of "unnecessary" and "undesirable" and who defines them.

[stuving]

I don't see much linkage between the programmes to change TVMs^▸ (Ticket Vending Machine) and fares, though both serve to simplify the process of using a TVM. For a start TVMs all over the country need to be changed in the same way, while fares can be simplified flow by flow (or in groups of geographically close flows).

For the fare pricing trial on XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)), the description in the RDG^‡(resolve) press release is:

Trials are due to start in May this year on selected routes of new pricing, simpler routes to give customers clearer choices, and the removal of unnecessary and unwanted fares from the system.

The trials to simplify the complex rail fares system will mean:

• A route will be overhauled to reflect what is actually on offer, ending the existing situation where changes to train services in many cases only allow fares to be added to the system rather than older, less relevant routes which customers do not use being removed from the fares system to make it clearer;
• A best value end-to-end ‘through fare’ will be offered for test journeys where customers change trains, by offering one price combining the cheapest fare for each leg of the journey. Current rules require operators to set and maintain a through price even where there are cheaper deals;
• Easier journey planning by showing customers the best price in each direction on selected routes, allowing customers to mix and match the best fare – like airline bookings.

This requires changes to regulated return fares dating back to the 1980s that can’t be sold easily online, giving customers much more clarity and simplicity.

There's more than plenty of things there that sound specific, but could lead to quite a range of different new systems.

What's notably been missing from all of this is any discussion (let alone consultation!) on the principles of ticketing, and which to retain. That would include some description of the logic underlying the current fares structure. While it is often said to make no sense whatever, I'm sure every aspect of it made good sense to whoever introduced it at the time. Why bother to look at that? Well, until you can say what purpose a feature serves, or once served, and then look at whether that purpose is still valid, wholly or in part, how can you know what to change?

[Tim]

That saving, at 17% is handy, but not that dramatic.  But doing the same exercise from BRI^» (Bristol Temple Meads - next trains) reduces the fare from £102 to £61.60.  Don't expect the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)'s to agree to that kind of reduction without some change to the franchise agreement. Which I can't see the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) agreeing to.
 

And why should they agree to it.  Enough of GWRs^▸ (Great Western Railway) customers pass through Didcot and automatically applying the split ticketing saving to them would possible be enough to flip the franchise from profitable to loss-making.

The only way I can see a proper overhaul of the fare system is if TOCs first loose the right to set their own fares and keep the farebox and franchises become "concessions" along the DLR^▸ (Docklands Light Railway)/overground model. 

[didcotdean]

The problem in overhauling the ticketing system is that even if this was to be a zero-sum game there would be individual winners and losers.

Faith seemed to previously been put into wider use of ITSO smartcards, but this seems to have been downplayed in recent years. It works quite well in the Netherlands, but is much more difficult to adapt to the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) system with widespread tickets restricted to particular services, different costs according to the time of day, and large discounts on returns completed within one day etc.

Some of the other solutions used elsewhere, such as restricting cheaper tickets (in relative terms) for short journeys to local stopping services, could work as it could eliminate the benefits of some splits but at the penalty of some people having much slower local journeys than they do at present - and in some cases there is only one 'type' of service anyway. Often this is XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) doing double-duty.

[Bmblbzzz]

The way I read it, the answer to John R's Didcot question, or any split-ticket question, is/might be that there would be a price for each leg - Swindon-Didcot and Didcot-London - which would be summed on one ticket.

[stuving]

The way I read it, the answer to John R's Didcot question, or any split-ticket question, is/might be that there would be a price for each leg - Swindon-Didcot and Didcot-London - which would be summed on one ticket.

But not in this May's trial, which is only for some XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) "routes" - presumably just XC-priced fares.

Two things about XC may be relevant to their being chosen. One is that they are usually (or even always) an "overlay", so each part of their network has fares priced by other TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company). That makes this trial easier to do, as it only involves automatic processes using existing fares, not setting new fares (which requires people and judgement).

The other point is the franchise timetable. For XC, the preliminaries are due to start in December 2017, with the ITT^▸ (Invitation to Tender) out in August 2018 and the award in June 2019. That makes it the first renewal (in other words the shortest still to run) that's compatible with a revenue-changing trial.

[Tim]

Of course one change that would not eliminate fare anomalies would be to lower the prices of the very expensive fares that people hardly ever buy but which are very bad PR^▸ (Public Relations) for the railway.

I am sure that there were anomalies under BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) and the old companies before them.  But they only become an big issue when you move to a system that has both dirt cheap fares and stupidly expensive fares.  Remove those extremes and split ticket savings would amount to a few quid here or there and we could live with that.

[The Grecian]

In relation to XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) specifically, there's a suggestion that in recent years long distance travellers have been deterred by even advance fares booked well in advance over long routes not being particularly great value. For example a quick check now shows if you wanted to travel from Newcastle to Exeter on Tues 21st March and back on Weds 22nd March after 1030 - two dates I picked on the basis they're pretty unremarkable AFAIK^▸ (as far as I know) - the cheapest singles are £91.50 each way - a saving of £1.50 on the off-peak return fare. Which you can't use if you leave your start point before 0930 (although you can split your tickets). A similar check for Birmingham-Exeter the same day reveals the cheapest fares are £36.80 each way - about £20 less than the OP^▸ (Original Poster / topic starter) return, but I still wouldn't regard it as an absolute bargain.

This and the fact most XC services suffer from overcrowding at some point during their journey (given most weekday services run through one or other weekday peaks, Sunday services are regularly overcrowded and Saturday services can have very high demand depending on sporting fixtures) may have suppressed demand or caused other passengers to travel via London. XC services are still overcrowded, but more with commuters or passengers on shorter distance advance tickets.

Most other TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) offer far better advance deals on a £ per mile basis although TBF^▸ (To Be Fair) this is also capacity based as it should be. Given XC hasn't got much capacity they can't offer particularly cheap tickets to start with - there's no incentive.

Anyway, if XC start offering cheaper longer distance fares, will this tempt more longer distance passengers to use their services and if so does that mean if you don't have a seat reservation on a 4 car Voyager, you'll be standing for the entirety of your journey (admittedly this isn't uncommon anyway)? Or will they increase all advance tickets and save the cheapest ones for services operated by HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) and doubled-up Voyagers?

Obviously I haven't used any stats so if anyone has any to refute my assertions feel free. To my mind however XC needs capacity increases as much as it needs cheaper longer distance tickets. I realise this topic has been done to death over the years and hopefully the intended changes in December 2017 will lead to improvements for the core of their network.

[Fourbee]

Is their Friday afternoon blackout on advance fares still in place?

[Tim]

To my mind however XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) needs capacity increases as much as it needs cheaper longer distance tickets. I realise this topic has been done to death over the years and hopefully the intended changes in December 2017 will lead to improvements for the core of their network.

Absolutely.  And to be fair they may be moving down that route.  To my mind, the rail problem XC has is the Voyagers.  They simply can't be very efficient trains to run singly or in multiple.  A 4 car Voyager has close to the same number of seats as a 2 car class 170 say and must be more expensive to run, fuel and maintain. 

[didcotdean]

Absolutely.  And to be fair they may be moving down that route.  To my mind, the rail problem XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) has is the Voyagers.  They simply can't be very efficient trains to run singly or in multiple.  A 4 car Voyager has close to the same number of seats as a 2 car class 170 say and must be more expensive to run, fuel and maintain. 

If Voyagers were ever the answer, it must have been a bloody stupid question.