Advance tickets - filling unused seats, or distributing passengers across trains

[whole diary]

[grahame]

In all but exceptional cases I remain in favour of a "walk up, no reservations required" railway.

When a service is expected to be overcrowded I would restrict or even eliminate sales of discounted tickets. The original idea behind discounted tickets was to fill otherwise unused seats, not to make an overcrowded train even worse.

I travelled up to Evesham and back on Thursday - first quote from GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) site when I was looking it up was £126.60 return.  Moving forward to one train earlier than I really wanted, coming back at the ideal time, adding in the Senior Card I hadn't bothered with when just checking times, I ended up paying £14.85 for the outward journey and £8.40 to get back. 

"Filling otherwise unused seats" - maybe. I suspect I would have driven had the only way to do it by train been £126.60; various other return fares between £37.20 and £55.30 (then minus 34%) would have been tempting - but only available setting off at 10:02 which was too late.  So rather than "filling seats", I might suggest that advanced fares "Diverted journeys off busier onto quieter services".

The 05:33 Melksham to Swindon has never been our busiest train (IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion) it should be classified as "off peak!", and even the 06:18 from Swindon onward to Reading was quiet.  From there, the 07:18 out onto the Cotswold line also quiet - getting to be what would have been rush hour, but contra-flow and still probably too early for the leisure market.  Turns out that even the £126.60 ticket would not have been valid on that journey, as it's "Not via Reading" - £159.40 is the any permitted route, any time return which is what I would have needed. Edit - correction - £126.60 would have been OK; a ticket at £129.80 routed "not via Reading" would not!!   The £159.40 ticket is a weekly season; I had misread the fares page.

The 14:36 back from Evesham (why announce all the catering options at Evesham when it was so close to journey's end at Foregate Street?) again quiet; the 3 car 170 from Worcestershire Parkway to Cheltenham much busier - but perhaps because I was in the coach with what appeared to be the reservation zone.  Not busy on to Swindon (and just 5 cars), but then 'almost every seat set occupied' (the new 'nearly every seat taken'?) to Chippenham.  Rather than wait for the very late running rail replacement bus, I was in time to catch the final x34 Faresave bus. Ticket gate staff at Chippenham warned me he would NOT accept my rail ticket - correct, but another story.


Anyway - I am writing (or was) about the philosophy behind advance fares. I guess I'm happy with them in principle where they bring in new custom or shift people to travel a little earlier or later. Where the differential is not huge, there is sense in them pushing travel to the previous or next day.  I have reservations where the alternative fare is up through the roof and they're used as part of a mechnaism to push people up to punative anytime fares, and I have concerns about reduced allocations at times of engineering works - if the railways are runniing less trains than the SLC^▸ (Service Level Commitment) calls for, or lower capacity and slower rail replacement buses, why should the passengers have to pay a higher fare?

[broadgage]

My favourite option would be to greatly simplify fares, with only three different fares available for any journey.
Peak fares= relatively expensive and valid on any train.
Off peak=the mid priced option, available on all trains not advertised as peak.
Super bargain= very cheap, only available on very lightly used services.
Colour coding, different typefaces or other simple means to be used in timetables to make it clear which fares apply to which trains.

The TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) (or future equivalent body) to designate trains as peak, off peak, or super bargain, as they see fit, subject to two overriding rules.
Firstly, no more than 25% of trains (over the validity of the timetable) may be peak fare, and at least 25% must be super bargain.
Secondly, the TOC  can only alter which trains are in which fare group at timetable changes, not each week.

First class when provided to be more expensive, but only three different first class fares.

No discount for advance purchase. Fare determined as described, and NOT by time of purchase.

That might be too radical however. My second favourite option if the present system is to be retained is to simply limit or eliminate sales of discounted tickets for trains likely to be overcrowded.

[grahame]

My favourite option would be to greatly simplify fares, with only three different fares available for any journey.
Peak fares= relatively expensive and valid on any train.
Off peak=the mid priced option, available on all trains not advertised as peak.
Super bargain= very cheap, only available on very lightly used services.
Colour coding, different typefaces or other simple means to be used in timetables to make it clear which fares apply to which trains.

1. You are talking about off peak being trains - so no longer any changes between trains being anytime and off peak along the way?   For example, the 18:04 off Paddington may be a peak train, but should it still be peak when it's the 21:19 Plymouth to Penzance?

2. You differentiate between off peak and super bargain based on super bargain being lightly used services.  By the same logic,  do you propose that peak services become the ones that would likely be the most packed if there was a single uniform fare, or to keep the current system which seems very much based on trains that people will spend more money to travel on?    As an example, the 05:17 Westbury to Swindon is a peak train at present (very few passengers) and the 17:00 Bristol Temple Meads to Paddington on Sundays is super-of-peak and potentially rather busy!

[ChrisB]

In relation to 1, the suggested colour coding could require all three colours! Peak out of Pad/Reading, maybe off-peak further fown the route & super bargain west of PLY^» (Plymouth - next trains)!!

[broadgage]

For local services, the train would be peak, off peak, or super bargain according to time of day and likely loading.
Longer distance services could reasonably change en-route. The fare payable from say London to Penzance would then be the total of say peak fare to Plymouth and off peak beyond. This being calculated in advance and published.

Fares from London to Penzance being limited to only three different fares.

Fares from say Manchester to Penzance would be a bit more complex but only three different fares from Manchester to London, and another three from London to Penzance. One ticket being required for each leg of the journey. Both tickets available for purchase in Manchester.

[ChrisB]

I thought you werr trying to *simplify* things?!!

[broadgage]

I thought you werr trying to *simplify* things?!!

I am, the combination of different fares for different parts of a journey may sound complex, but only need to be done once and programmed into the ticket issuing system.
In the case of London to Penzance there would be just three fares, calculated in advance and published.

In all but exceptional cases the cost of a single ticket would be no more than any combination of tickets for each part of the journey. No prohibition on split ticketing, but in most cases nothing would be gained thereby.

For example if the 18-04 was peak to Plymouth, and off peak beyond Plymouth then a ticket from Paddington to Penzance should cost no more than the total of price of two tickets, one for each part of the journey.
The average customer need not understand the details, they simply need to know "three different fares only"

[ChrisB]

In the example you quote, what colour would the timetable times be beyong PLY^» (Plymouth - next trains)? Peak or off-peak?

[broadgage]

In the example you quote, what colour would the timetable times be beyond PLY^» (Plymouth - next trains)? Peak or off-peak?

At the discretion of the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company), subject to the two rules given earlier.

[IndustryInsider]

In the example you quote, what colour would the timetable times be beyond PLY^» (Plymouth - next trains)? Peak or off-peak?

At the discretion of the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company), subject to the two rules given earlier.

In principle Broadgage’s suggestion has considerable merit, though there would need to be a bit of fine tuning, and I suspect it won’t happen, even though now is the best opportunity for something like it to be brought in.

Though if something like it were to ever happen, I can’t see decisions such as this being at the discretion of the TOC.  It would be at the discretion of GBR^▸ (Great British Railways) surely?

[broadgage]

Yes, in my first post in this thread, I did say "TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) or other equivalent body" and should perhaps have repeated this in subsequent posts.

[grahame]

Some excellent principles and thoughts - many not new, and somewhat aside from the thread title.   It could be done and with modern electronics a good job could be made of it.  The cynical part of me thinks that there's no prospect of this sort of thing coming to pass in the visible future as it could require substantial seed funding - however, with appropriate encouragement and political will, it could help in a modal shift to public transport for the future.

The RDG^‡(resolve) fares review - the big thing a couple of years ago - seems to have faded in talk of what was going to be in Williams and been diluted further in the published Shapps-Williams report:

* There's double-speak such as "simplifying" rail fares being the bolting on of a new Flexi-season product; were that attractive for huge numbers of people, it COULD simplify things by letting many old products quietly fade, to a final withdrawal in 5 years - but that doesn't look like it's the case. 

* There is talk of fares being "affordable" rather than "cheap" - a significant more expensive description which does not make fare changes look like a carrot to encourage people strongly to rail.   

* And the review was to be "revenue neutral" - except when I challenged the team at the fares review, that wasn't the case - it was to be that the average fare was to remain unchanged; a subtle difference saying that suggestions which would grow traffic by (say) 20% alongside an average fare reduction on 20% were NOT acceptable.

I'm going to suggest that a significant proportion of rail income to this day comes from customers paying a fare above the lowest available to them for their journey:

* How many people rock up to the TVM^▸ (Ticket Vending Machine) and, not understating anytime v off-peak buy anytime for safety? 

* How many people know that there's a super-off-peak tickets available, hidden behind the menus of the TVM which would save them £20?

* How many people buy a London to Bristol ticket (which would be an anytime single at £115.00) London to Bristol for the 17:00, not realising that a peak ticket is only needed to Didcot (that's £35.60) and a super-off-peak one (at £24.60) covers them beyond?

* How many people, travelling outbound just after the morning peak, don't know exactly when they'll be coming back so choose an anytime return, but in practise come back before or after the evening fare peak?

Fix this knowledge base with a simpler system, and with a system where you don't need to make a pre-buy guess ... you loose income, and you reduce the average fare ... oops.

[grahame]

* And the review was to be "revenue neutral" - except when I challenged the team at the fares review, that wasn't the case - it was to be that the average fare was to remain unchanged; a subtle difference saying that suggestions which would grow traffic by (say) 20% alongside an average fare reduction on 20% were NOT acceptable.

Covid-time changes have made this objective even harder to deliver.   With regional and local journeys bouncing back better than long distance ones, the average fare, surely, has gone down.  Add to that the decimation of peaks and levelling out of traffic through the day, and the proportion of anytime fares in the fare mix must have gone down too ...

[ChrisB]

* And the review was to be "revenue neutral" - except when I challenged the team at the fares review, that wasn't the case - it was to be that the average fare was to remain unchanged; a subtle difference saying that suggestions which would grow traffic by (say) 20% alongside an average fare reduction on 20% were NOT acceptable.

That was always my understanding on that term, simply because there was no way the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) was going to accept a 'probability' factor of an overall reduction in fares actually increasing patronage by the same percentage (or more)

I'm going to suggest that a significant proportion of rail income to this day comes from customers paying a fare above the lowest available to them for their journey:

I would debate 'significant'. While there is always the chance of someone in a hurry selecting the higher fare, in my experience of TVMs^▸ (Ticket Vending Machine), the anytime fare is relegated in position to below the off-peak equivalent, making it quite difficult in most cases to choose the peak fare.

 - although there is definitely a significant percentage of those travelling off-peak not being offered the cheapest off-peak fare (where there is more than one fare, including any super off-peak fares for the journey in question, or TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)-specific fare)

* How many people rock up to the TVM and, not understating anytime v off-peak buy anytime for safety? 

Again, in my experience, very few, probably insignificant. Haven't seen any complaints of that nature.

* How many people buy a London to Bristol ticket (which would be an anytime single at £115.00) London to Bristol for the 17:00, not realising that a peak ticket is only needed to Didcot (that's £35.60) and a super-off-peak one (at £24.60) covers them beyond?

That is the type of problem I refer to above - and something GBR^▸ (Great British Railways) *does* need to deal with! But it's yet another fare, as it's not available in the morning peak, just the evening peak. To provide some leeway in reducing overall fares, I suspect the answer (should GBR decide to sort the problem) will be to remove the West of Didcot 'off-peak in peak' & make an evening peak across the country (or at least London commuting area). The increase in farebox from doing this would allow reductions elsewhere under the 'revenue neutral' term.

* How many people, travelling outbound just after the morning peak, don't know exactly when they'll be coming back so choose an anytime return, but in practise come back before or after the evening fare peak?

Mostly those that can claim the cost on expenses. Otherwise they'll wait/travel earlier. There's such a cost difference, that most would buy off-peak & upgrade if they found they had to return in the peak. Surely no one would buy the way you suggest?

[grahame]

* How many people buy a London to Bristol ticket (which would be an anytime single at £115.00) London to Bristol for the 17:00, not realising that a peak ticket is only needed to Didcot (that's £35.60) and a super-off-peak one (at £24.60) covers them beyond?

That is the type of problem I refer to above - and something GBR^▸ (Great British Railways) *does* need to deal with! But it's yet another fare, as it's not available in the morning peak, just the evening peak. To provide some leeway in reducing overall fares, I suspect the answer (should GBR decide to sort the problem) will be to remove the West of Didcot 'off-peak in peak' & make an evening peak across the country (or at least London commuting area). The increase in farebox from doing this would allow reductions elsewhere under the 'revenue neutral' term.

Anytime single Bristol to Didcot is £36.30 - so morning peak single Bristol to London is £115.00, or £71.90 if you know what you're dong and travel on a train that calls at Didcot. Evening split reduces the £115.00 to £60.20.  The £71.90 would be the evening fare too if you removed the "off peak in peak" as you call it.    Though catching a train from Didcot headed west at around 6 p.m. and you'll find the train is far from heaving - and you would perhaps be making it peak in name only.

* How many people, travelling outbound just after the morning peak, don't know exactly when they'll be coming back so choose an anytime return, but in practise come back before or after the evening fare peak?

Mostly those that can claim the cost on expenses. Otherwise they'll wait/travel earlier. There's such a cost difference, that most would buy off-peak & upgrade if they found they had to return in the peak. Surely no one would buy the way you suggest?

They would, Chris - I have seen it on multiple occasions.  I suspect that the passengers you see and interact with are predominantly the skilled and informed ones who know what they're doing - know to buy an off peak and then ask at Paddington (or on the train) to be excessed if they need to. I come across a different metric of travels - lovely, bright, well informed people in their own spheres but knowing only a little about rail fares, and utterly law abiding so won't take risks, especially where there's no-one physically present to ask but there are penalty fare notices and canned announcements threatening them with revenue protection if they get it wrong.

I have a meeting this afternoon with one such - really bright bloke, but looking at headline fares, reading the papers when fare increases are plaster5ed all over them, and asking "why is it so expensive to travel by train".