The National Rail Travel Survey has a very interesting graph (page 21) showing useage of trains by age and gender. See
here. Also see the table on pages 22 that sets out the data (though not by gender) in figures.
The age breaks chosen on the graph and table make it very difficult to read the data and compare ages - there's a 15-year category from 45 to 59, followed by a 5-year catergory from 60 to 64, making comparisons difficult. And there's no break point at 55, making the data provided unclear except as a trigger for discussion as to the case for Club 55. However, I'm sure that First and the other
TOCs▸ have their own survey figures which are more granular.
I note ...
* 26% of train users are in the 45 - 59 group, but only 3% in the 60 - 64 group
and I speculate that the split might also be made as follows 20 - 25 13%
25 - 29 11.5%
30 - 34 11.5%
35 - 39 11%
40 - 44 11%
45 - 49 11%
50 - 54 10%
55 - 59 5%
60 - 64 3%
65 - 69 2%
(I have split out other combined groups too on a best estimate).
* Trips by female passengers drop off significantly from the 25 - 34 group to the 35 - 44 group and only change a little from the 35 - 44 group to the 45 - 59 group, even though that latter group covers a 50% wider age bracket.
It therefore seems appropriate within the marketing ethos / maximise income philospohy of commercial operation that encouragements should be made to retain the business of a group of people who are at a time of change in their lives which has historically resulted in a big drop in their rail travel.
Readers may take the view:
(a) that the railways should encourage more income and useage in this way, and build / retain business from the older generations.
(b) that the railways have quite enough customers and shouldn't need to make effort for more, especially from those who dues to age may on average need more help / assistance / support.
(c) that a trip by train from "A" to "B" should cost everyone the same, just as a loaf of bread does
The evidence of NRTS suggests that Club 55 is a sensible step for view (a) and - to some extent - for view (c), where all we need now is a scheme for 25 to 55 British residents who don't travel with children or on one specific route. Then all the hotch-potch of schemes could be combined into one nice loyalty card ...
