I'll stick to "history and privatisation" if you prefer
I don't mind the current system but it doesn't lend itself easily to simple pricing.
Walk on fares generally offer passengers a reasonable amount of flexibility in routing, journey timing and ability to break their journeys. Each of the many thousands of walk on fares is set by one of the many Train Operating Companies (TOCs) but generally valid on any TOC's trains. The combination of these two factors makes simple and consistent train pricing impossible. We could simplify ticket prices by removing the flexibility passengers have always enjoyed in the UK and by setting prices at a national level, thus taking control of pricing away from TOCs . I am not sure whether this is desirable for either.
Advance tickets avoid such problems by being set by the TOC which runs the service and being valid only on a booked train over a set route. People complain about there being a range of prices of these tickets available for different operators but isn't this what was wanted by privatising? This is the only bit of the rail network where TOCs are actually competing on price over the same routes offering comparable services. Arguably it is one of the few instances where the passenger sees any benefit from privatisation. It would be bizarre to remove these popular tickets in the name of simplification.
I agree buying train tickets has meant doing extra computer research but I find it an enjoyable aspect of tour planning.
For those who romance about nationalised railway must have forgot or never travelled on trains in the last 20 years when government owned. Old dirty carriages, if a train go in on time they held a celebration party and staff were very de-humanised.
There is your way. There is my way. But there is no "the way".
I can remember turning up at Kings Cross on the day after privatisation and seeing hordes of railway staff standing around on the concourse in groups not sure what they should be doing. Someone had clearly gone into a comfy back office and told them to get out there and do something but quite what to do seemed to be a mystery to them.
bikepacker wrote:I agree buying train tickets has meant doing extra computer research but I find it an enjoyable aspect of tour planning.
For those who romance about nationalised railway must have forgot or never travelled on trains in the last 20 years when government owned. Old dirty carriages, if a train go in on time they held a celebration party and staff were very de-humanised.
I don't find searching for fares all over the place so I don't get ripped off fun at all, whether for work or play. It just wastes my time when I have better things to do.
I used BR extensively for years, and found it consistently better than the current system, especially for bikes. Remember guards' vans, anyone? I also don't remember the staff being unfriendly. There will always be bad apples. Not long ago I had to go and sort out a member of staff to help two old people with luggage when they had been messed about and dumped at a station en route due to cancellations and delays. The staff clearly saw the couple were in distress, but did nothing until I insisted something was done. Nobody is perfect. Mostly staff are good now, and were good then.
We all have our own opinions but I do not regard the normal fares charged on UK trains to be a rip off. But then I have used trains in Switzerland where relative prices are at least double.
Perhaps your time is of a monitory value higher than mine. So in one example (and I can quote many others) being able to get a £180 return fare to Inverness down to £33.95 in 20 minutes on my computer, may not be cost effective to you.
There is your way. There is my way. But there is no "the way".
I think Flinders was objecting to having to jump through hoops rather than saying that the better fares weren't worth getting.
As to whether something is a rip off - it's always relative isn't it? If somebody starts selling something cheaper then a previously reasonable higher price looks unreasonable.
My mother now shops at Aldi because Sainsburys and Morrisons "rip you off". Many years ago she stopped going to the local grocery shops because they were "a rip off". Before the supermarkets she was happy with the local shops In real terms it has very much been a case of the newer shops lowering prices rather than existing shops increasing theirs. Rip off is not a term I particularly like because it is never used the other way; nobody ever considers they have ripped off the shop when they buy something at or below cost.
Bicycler wrote: Advance tickets avoid such problems by being set by the TOC which runs the service and being valid only on a booked train over a set route. People complain about there being a range of prices of these tickets available for different operators but isn't this what was wanted by privatising? This is the only bit of the rail network where TOCs are actually competing on price over the same routes offering comparable services. Arguably it is one of the few instances where the passenger sees any benefit from privatisation. It would be bizarre to remove these popular tickets in the name of simplification.
Except in the last two places I've lived there is no competition- one trainline and one operator. If you actually want to go somewhere useful you need to change trains and now you're using two operators and most often have to buy two tickets to get an advance purchase on one of the legs
That is still not a reason against having Advance tickets. Presumably you still get some benefit or you would buy one ticket rather than two. If your point is that you'd like to see Advance tickets on a wider range of routes then I concur. Introducing more alternate fares doesn't produce the simplification some desire though.
Bicycler wrote:That is still not a reason against having Advance tickets. Presumably you still get some benefit or you would buy one ticket rather than two. If your point is that you'd like to see Advance tickets on a wider range of routes then I concur. Introducing more alternate fares doesn't produce the simplification some desire though.
I don't particularly want to see more/less advance tickets. I'd like to see fair pricing for walk-on tickets.
I think it is ludicrous that to travel at peak times on a return journey that is under 150 miles each way costs well over £200 second class. And I don't think expecting the official fare search engine to give me the cheapest fares when that's what I ask for is asking too much.
Switzerland isn't a great comparison, BTW, as fares are notoriously expensive there compared to other parts of Europe, but wages are far higher.
Bicycler wrote:I think Flinders was objecting to having to jump through hoops rather than saying that the better fares weren't worth getting.
As to whether something is a rip off - it's always relative isn't it? If somebody starts selling something cheaper then a previously reasonable higher price looks unreasonable.
My mother now shops at Aldi because Sainsburys and Morrisons "rip you off". Many years ago she stopped going to the local grocery shops because they were "a rip off". Before the supermarkets she was happy with the local shops In real terms it has very much been a case of the newer shops lowering prices rather than existing shops increasing theirs. Rip off is not a term I particularly like because it is never used the other way; nobody ever considers they have ripped off the shop when they buy something at or below cost.
Thanks, you're right about the hoops. When I said 'rip off' what I meant was that, had I not checked elsewhere, the official rail enquiries site would have had me paying more than I ought to have done because its information was incomplete.
Mick F wrote:A friend of ours is of Dutch extraction and he say that in Holland, the train fares are priced per kilometer. Full stop. No fussing about with different fares and advanced bookings, just simple and priced per kilometer.
That's not exactly surprising, it is what most railways do in continental Europe. So you personally are happy about not having the opportunity to buy cheap advance tickets? What proportion of rail travellers do you reckon would agree with you? You will of course have more space in the carriage as demand will fall, so that is very nice for you. And the government will have to pay more subsidy, because the only reason train companies offer advance tickets is to increase demand and make more money.
MikeF wrote:And we have an absolutely crazy system of fare pricing - why?
History and shoddy privatisation and it really isn't as easy as you might think to sort it all out.
The much criticised privatisation of the UK railways copied the much acclaimed privatisation of the Japanese railways. Go figure.
But the cost of rail travel in Japan is a fraction of that in the UK, and there aren't multiple prices for the same journey. It's very different from the UK. You should be able to walk into a station ticket office or buy online, if you prefer, and the price should be fixed, at the cheapest of course, for a given journey. Mrs F is pretty good at getting a good deal on the fares though.
"It takes a genius to spot the obvious" - my old physics master.
I don't peddle bikes.
It's interesting to hear Mick F who is usually the first to point out the disproportionate effect of fuel price increases upon rural communities propose a strict per-km charge for rail journeys. People in big cities would love it though.
A flat fare is certainly simple. The commuters would love the fare decrease (until they found their trains even more crowded) but anybody who currently pays for Advance or Off Peak tickets would undoubtedly see their fare rise if revenues were to be kept the same. Capacity problems at peak times would be worsened by the cheapening of peak fares and no incentive to travel at off peak times. As for late night trains, well they'd have to be cancelled or run mostly empty if the cheap Advance tickets that have in part revitalised these services were removed.
