You are accessing this site in a read-only mode. For full access to all member benefits, including message posting, please login or register. Registration is completely free, simple, and takes only a few seconds.
Login |
Free TravelKB.com registration |
Whole discussion thread
The message you are replying to and its parents are listed in the reverse order with the most recent posts first. This might not be the whole discussion thread. To read all the messages in this thread please click here.
Re: Times: Rail travellers' guide to becoming a legal fare dodger
| nitram | 29 Dec 2004 10:58 |
>>> If the railway is to compete with the car then there is no way >>> that APEX type fares are going to tempt people out of their cars, >>> because people don't like being restricted like that. >> >>As Jeremy Clarkson keeps proving, the train lost the competition >>long ago, even in long distance continental travel.
>>Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine. > >But Jeremy Clarkson decides his own rules... ... mostly based on fiction.
>If I was going to travel by high speed train to the south of France, >had luggage, and the local bus only ran hourly, I'd take a taxi to the >station.... and I would still not need to break the speed limits to >beat him. Yes.
 Signature Martin
|
| John F Kappler | 29 Dec 2004 10:51 |
>> If the railway is to compete with the car then there is no way >> that APEX type fares are going to tempt people out of their cars, >> because people don't like being restricted like that. > >As Jeremy Clarkson keeps proving, the train lost the competition >long ago, even in long distance continental travel. But Jeremy Clarkson decides his own rules...
If I was going to travel by high speed train to the south of France, had luggage, and the local bus only ran hourly, I'd take a taxi to the station.... and I would still not need to break the speed limits to beat him.
JohnK
|
| Chris Game | 28 Dec 2004 17:23 |
> If the railway is to compete with the car then there is no way > that APEX type fares are going to tempt people out of their cars, > because people don't like being restricted like that. As Jeremy Clarkson keeps proving, the train lost the competition long ago, even in long distance continental travel.
 Signature Chris Game
Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine.
|
| Tim Rogers | 28 Dec 2004 12:07 |
> : Have we really come this far since > : privatisation where some of the basic principals of rail travel are [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Why? And "because that's how it was in 1989" is not a good answer. Sorry but how the ticketing system was in 1989 was better than the myriad of fares that we have now. No doubt you will flag up the 'consumer choice' arguement but that is now 'consumer confusion'. So the whole idea of Privatisation was to turn the whole railway system into an advance purchase only system. Maybe they should try it with local buses as well. The convienience of the train is to go somewhere and then not feel fixed that you've got to come back at a certain time of day.
If the railway is to compete with the car then there is no way that APEX type fares are going to tempt people out of their cars, because people don't like being restricted like that.
Of course the reason why TOCs promote cheap advance tickets alot is because of the fact that they get a larger 'cut' of the revenue from them!!!!
Tim
> Ian |
| Ian Johnston | 28 Dec 2004 11:56 |
: > : So write my local TOC is Merseyrail. Do you think I they should offer a : > : service to book in advance in case I want to go shopping in Liverpool [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] : going through a 508 unit putting Reservation labels on seats in the 5 minute : turnaound at Chester/West Kirby/ New Brighton etc!!! Why are you assuming that seats have to be reserved? Supposing Merseyrail simply said "Buy your ticket more than three days ahead and we'll give you a quid off" in order to level out demand at booking offices. Would that be such a travesty? Do you also object to the way they give a discount to people who pay for a week, a month or a year's travel in advance?
: Have we really come this far since : privatisation where some of the basic principals of rail travel are being : eroded. "Basic principle" is not the same as "What I'm used to"
: Pay on the day is a STANDARD service. Advance purchased tickets should be : available but only as a special bonus. Why? And "because that's how it was in 1989" is not a good answer.
Ian
|
| Tim Rogers | 28 Dec 2004 11:19 |
> : So write my local TOC is Merseyrail. Do you think I they should offer a > : service to book in advance in case I want to go shopping in Liverpool > next > : Thursday!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > Why not? Because it's a stupid idea. I can just see the guards (sorry conductors) going through a 508 unit putting Reservation labels on seats in the 5 minute turnaound at Chester/West Kirby/ New Brighton etc!!! You really have been hitting that Christmas Brandy too much! Have we really come this far since privatisation where some of the basic principals of rail travel are being eroded.
Pay on the day is a STANDARD service. Advance purchased tickets should be available but only as a special bonus.
Tim
|
| Ian Johnston | 28 Dec 2004 11:00 |
: So write my local TOC is Merseyrail. Do you think I they should offer a : service to book in advance in case I want to go shopping in Liverpool next : Thursday!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why not?
Ian
|
| Tim Rogers | 28 Dec 2004 09:59 |
>>Bollocks!!! So you think that the railways should be like airlines with >>premium fares for walk on passengers? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > big premium service over taking a specific train in that time period, > and it's sensible to charge extra for that privilige. So write my local TOC is Merseyrail. Do you think I they should offer a service to book in advance in case I want to go shopping in Liverpool next Thursday!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Tim
>>Perhaps you've forgotten the purpose >>of the railways (as a public service) [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Jim. |
| Jim Ley | 27 Dec 2004 21:52 |
>Bollocks!!! So you think that the railways should be like airlines with >premium fares for walk on passengers? Yes, being able to get on a train immediately and go where you want is a premium service. I can't really see in what way it's otherwise? The flexibility to take any train you want in the next 4 days, is a big premium service over taking a specific train in that time period, and it's sensible to charge extra for that privilige.
>Perhaps you've forgotten the purpose >of the railways (as a public service) Sorry, I thought the purpose of a train was to get people (or goods) from station 1 to station 2, it's certainly not a public service.
Jim.
|
| Tim Rogers | 27 Dec 2004 21:46 |
>>> >2. As a general rule a genuinely "fair" fare policy should not rely on >>all [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > fair. Being able to travel immediately is a service that should be > paid for. Bollocks!!! So you think that the railways should be like airlines with premium fares for walk on passengers? Perhaps you've forgotten the purpose of the railways (as a public service)
Tim
|
| Jim Ley | 27 Dec 2004 21:41 |
>> >2. As a general rule a genuinely "fair" fare policy should not rely on >all [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >concentrating on simple time restrictions to satisfy yield management >issues. having cheap walk on fares at the expense of advance purchase isn't fair. Being able to travel immediately is a service that should be paid for.
>> >3. When you have a situation where the fare from A to C is less than the >> >fare from A to B that is usually because the A to C fare has received an [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >It wouldn't though. It would just result in the A to C fare becoming equal >to the existing A to B fare plus the B to C fare. You said above that A-C was due to an increased discount, so the only way your new assertion could be true was if the profits increased, now that could happen, except of course there's a fares regulator in theory preventing this...
Jim.
|
| RPM | 27 Dec 2004 20:42 |
> >1. IT would be totally impossible for clerks to offer all the fares between > >two stations, plus all the *combinations* of fares between those stations. > > Yep it would be ridiculous, I have had clerks tell me when it's > cheaper to buy a combination ticket, or a ticket beyond the > destination I really want. Clerks may be good enough to do it for you but they are not obliged to. This is for a very good reason. Is is simple enough to split a short journey, but for longer journeys the combinations increase almost exponentially. It becomes impractical to offer every possible combination.
> >2. As a general rule a genuinely "fair" fare policy should not rely on all > >the bargain fares being advanced purchase. > > Could you explain? Virgin make much of their cheap fares, but the quotas can be incredibly restrictive. Surely it is better to offer good value walk-on fares, concentrating on simple time restrictions to satisfy yield management issues.
> >3. When you have a situation where the fare from A to C is less than the > >fare from A to B that is usually because the A to C fare has received an [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > don't know about the A-C ticket better off, the result farer as each > ticket gets similar subsidies... It wouldn't though. It would just result in the A to C fare becoming equal to the existing A to B fare plus the B to C fare.
Roger
http://rpm-railpics.fotopic.net/ http://therailwaystationgallery.fotopic.net/ http://therailticketgallery.fotopic.net/
|
| Jim Ley | 27 Dec 2004 20:19 |
>1. IT would be totally impossible for clerks to offer all the fares between >two stations, plus all the *combinations* of fares between those stations. Yep it would be ridiculous, I have had clerks tell me when it's cheaper to buy a combination ticket, or a ticket beyond the destination I really want.
>2. As a general rule a genuinely "fair" fare policy should not rely on all >the bargain fares being advanced purchase. Could you explain?
>3. When you have a situation where the fare from A to C is less than the >fare from A to B that is usually because the A to C fare has received an >increased discount. Evening out the fares will only result in the A to C >fare being increased. but it will also reduce the A-B to fares, giving those people who don't know about the A-C ticket better off, the result farer as each ticket gets similar subsidies...
Jim.
|
| RPM | 27 Dec 2004 20:13 |
> The Times > December 27, 2004 <Big snip>
> The Association of Train Operating Companies said that ticket clerks did not > always advise passengers of the cheapest deal because it would take too > long. A spokeswoman said: "People are perfectly within their rights to ask > for those tickets if they want to. It¹s possible in some circumstances they > are going to get a cheaper fare." OK, the fares structure *is* complicated, and I do think the matter will come to a head at some point, but in the intrerests of balance I should make the following points:
1. IT would be totally impossible for clerks to offer all the fares between two stations, plus all the *combinations* of fares between those stations. If you want ticket office queues to slow down by a factor of about 400% then push for all combinations of fares to be made available. Personally, I don't think it is unreasonable for these combination fares to be available only to those in the know.
2. As a general rule a genuinely "fair" fare policy should not rely on all the bargain fares being advanced purchase. For example compare and contrast Virgin fare policy with Chiltern policy.
3. When you have a situation where the fare from A to C is less than the fare from A to B that is usually because the A to C fare has received an increased discount. Evening out the fares will only result in the A to C fare being increased.
4. Similarly, where A to B plus B to C fares come out cheaper than an A to C fare it may be because the more local journeys have been kept low to increase this specific market. The longer distance journey, though more expensive reflects the actual fare and is probably well enough used to not requre any discounting. In short, the cheaper local fares might be keeping the smaller stations alive.
I'm not saying the present fare amomalies are a good thing, but they are not necessarily a result of pure daftness as seems to be suggested by many posters.
Roger
http://rpm-railpics.fotopic.net/ http://therailwaystationgallery.fotopic.net/ http://therailticketgallery.fotopic.net/
|
| Biwah | 27 Dec 2004 18:42 |
The Times December 27, 2004
Rail travellers' guide to becoming a legal fare dodger By Ben Webster
With price rises ahead, it is important for passengers to be more aware of good-value deals
THOUSANDS of rail passengers pay too much for their journeys because train companies do not tell them about the cheapest tickets available. Rail fares have become so complex that only those well-versed in the rules and regulations can be reasonably sure of getting the best deal. Passengers have to know to ask for a specific ticket or combination of tickets because train companies are not obliged to advise them of the cheapest fare. One railway enthusiast runs seminars to teach travellers how to play the system to avoid paying over the odds.
The secrets of obtaining a bargain on the railways will become more relevant from January 2, when fares will increase by an average of 4 per cent. Further rises are likely because the Government is considering abolishing the price cap on Saver tickets.
One of the simplest tricks, which saves money on many routes, is to ask for two return tickets that combine to form a whole journey. A passenger starting out at Peterborough station and asking for a day return to Birmingham will be sold a Saver return for £32.10. However, if he asked for a cheap day return to Melton Mowbray for £6.20 and another from Melton Mowbray to Birmingham for £9.60, the total would be £15.80, less than half the amount requested by the clerk at Peterborough.
Another method is to buy a Network Card for £20, with which a passenger at Weymouth could buy a return to King¹s Lynn for £50.25 instead of the usual price of £76.10 making a saving of £5.85. The passenger could then use the card for the next year to get one third off all his journeys in the South East.
It is also possible to save hundreds of pounds a year by buying a season ticket that is never used for the stations it covers.
Alex Nelson, who runs a rail travel agency in Chester-le-Street, Co Durham, has a season ticket that covers the route between Ryde Esplanade and Ryde St Johns on the Isle of Wight. The two stations are at opposite ends of the town, and the season ticket is the cheapest in Britain at £104 a year.
Mr Nelson lives more than 300 miles from the Isle of Wight but uses the ticket on his regular trips to London.
The ticket, as with all season tickets, entitles him to a one-third discount within the Network South East area, which stretches from Exeter to King¹s Lynn and from Worcester to Hastings. The season ticket also allows him to upgrade to first class for only £3.
He has used his ticket on the Isle of Wight only once in four years but saves £100 a year on other journeys.
Mr Nelson has uncovered many other money-saving dodges and holds ticketing masterclasses with voluntary groups, including the Women¹s Institute and rotary clubs.
Barry Doe, a public transport consultant, said that most of the anomalies had emerged since the railways were privatised. ³Some train companies have been so greedy in pushing up fares that they can hardly complain if people play the system to get a cheaper ticket,² he said. ³In British Rail days, fare rises were done across the system and everything was dovetailed so that you didn¹t get these anomalies.
"The system would be much fairer and easier to understand if the Strategic Rail Authority set the fares centrally rather than giving the companies freedom to charge what they like."
The Rail Passengers Council plans to issue bulletins to passengers advising them how to avoid paying too much. Anthony Smith, the council¹s director, said: ³The fares system is ridiculously complicated and customers need to be very well- informed to negotiate it.
"If you are doing anything more complicated than buying a simple point to point return then the different options and restrictions can be bewildering."
The Association of Train Operating Companies said that ticket clerks did not always advise passengers of the cheapest deal because it would take too long. A spokeswoman said: "People are perfectly within their rights to ask for those tickets if they want to. It¹s possible in some circumstances they are going to get a cheaper fare."
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,170-1416530,00.html
|
Quick links:
|
|
|