'FGW's ^50 million bailout revealed'

[whole diary]

[cereal_basher]

In addition leisure travellers have wised up to the rip-off fares on the railways and are now more likely to pre-book cheaper advance tickets rather than pay full whack "walk-on" fares on the day.

This needs to be sorted! Perhaps by reducing the number of Advance fares, and making them more expensive; and lowering the price of Off-Peak tickets/ introducing more Super Off-Peak tickets. This will win back leisure passengers, and allow us to have a "turn up and go" railway. (esp after Virgin's HF timetable)

I'll be paying ^3.65 (Advance Single with railcard) for Kidderminster - London Euston - arriving early afternoon, because it is a lot cheaper than going Worcester - Paddington (over ^20)

However, if there was a walk up fare of about ^10-^15 Worcester Paddington for travelling at around mid-day, I would use that!

No, don't remove cheap advance fares. What a ridiculous idea. Cheap advance fares are what enables me and my family to travel by rail, we don't want cheaper Walk-On fares, we want the cheap advance fares which are very popular, they offer great value rail travel. Walk-on fares don't.

But why should a person who suddenly needs to travel have to be faced with sky high fares? Why should a person who books ahead be restricted to a specific train, so if their meeting finishes early, they can't catch the next train home?

I agree that the Advance Fares are popular and good value, but ^3.65 for a 150ish mile journey is unfair when a walk on person pays over the roof!

Walk on fares could be good value if the were re-priced. And that means a fair fare.

If your organised and plan ahead you save money! simple!

Exactly, booking ahead enables the railway to control how busy trains get, cheap walk-on fares will cause overcrowding, and people would complain again.

[Chris from Nailsea]

I am a bit perplexed that the Telegraph interview had no mention of FGW^▸ (First Great Western)'s problems early last year 

I did say,

In a perhaps slightly more measured article, ... .

 

[Btline]

And if you suddenly want to travel, you get punished.

Notice the difference? The gap between the two fares is far too great. Perhaps it is right to reward those who book ahead. But it is wrong to punish those who can't with sky high fares. It's not fair.

And with the VHF timetable, people should have flexibility, and be able to travel home at any time from 1130 to 1630 and after 1830. (or whatever the off peak times are)

[cereal_basher]

And if you suddenly want to travel, you get punished.

Notice the difference? The gap between the two fares is far too great. Perhaps it is right to reward those who book ahead. But it is wrong to punish those who can't with sky high fares. It's not fair.

And with the VHF timetable, people should have flexibility, and be able to travel home at any time from 1130 to 1630 and after 1830. (or whatever the off peak times are)

The idea is to punish people who turn up on the day though. A lot of people now use AP tickets, getting the best deal. Others get season, tickets, which are great value, then many people use walk on fares, but for short distances, also getting a good deal. Long distance walk on fares, are expensive, but the railway must sell many less now. Maybe they do need to be lowered, but not if AP fares have to be raised to compensate.

[Zoe]

Why should people be punished for just turning up on the day?  It's not always possible to know your travel plans in advance and it's unfair to charge people ridiculous fares just for as they don't know when a meeting is going to finish or want a bit of flexibility.

The system before 2006 worked quite well, the Super Saver was available at a reasonable price and if you wanted an even cheaper journey then advance fares also existed.  In 2006 the Super Saver was scrapped and more advance fares were introduced.  Advance fares certainly have their place but I don't think this should be at the expense of affordable walk-on fares.  The current policies if anything encourage car travel as you no longer have any flexibility on the railways if you want to travel at a reasonable price.

[Btline]

I agree with Zoe.

Many Off-Peak trains are relatively empty - even with Advance fares. (apparently the Paddington - Cardiff terminators are, I expect most of the Euston - Birmingham/Manchester ones are since VHF)

But the M4,M40 and M1/M6 are certainly not quiet!

Why don't TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) fill these seats by offering lower walk up fares, and let's get cars off the road.

[devon_metro]

I'd support cheaper walk up fares. I dislike tying myself to a journey for leisure in case the weather is naff. I think a system where 1 or 2 coaches were filled with one tier of bargain fares and the rest can be more reasonably priced walk up fares. I'd travel further if it was going to be cheaper when the trains are particularly busy. The only flaw is the fact that a 1.30pm departure from Taunton to London is likely to be packed so I fear the restrictions would be seemingly astronomical.

[Phil]

I think a system where 1 or 2 coaches were filled with one tier of bargain fares and the rest can be more reasonably priced walk up fares.

Completely agree with d_m. As I've said elsewhere, a good argument can be made for effectively reintroducing the old "First" "Standard" and "Third" structure, with cheap seats in Third for those who want to book in advance at a bargain rate, and a bit more legroom - more seats with tables! - in Standard class for the walk-ons and those who don't mind paying extra.

Either way consideration definitely needs to be given to revisting the whole ticket structure as it stands at the moment. It's a mess.

[vacman]

I think a system where 1 or 2 coaches were filled with one tier of bargain fares and the rest can be more reasonably priced walk up fares.

Completely agree with d_m. As I've said elsewhere, a good argument can be made for effectively reintroducing the old "First" "Standard" and "Third" structure, with cheap seats in Third for those who want to book in advance at a bargain rate, and a bit more legroom - more seats with tables! - in Standard class for the walk-ons and those who don't mind paying extra.

Either way consideration definitely needs to be given to revisting the whole ticket structure as it stands at the moment. It's a mess.

The current "mess" is with walkup fares though! thats where the confusion is! someone who goes up to a TVM^▸ (Ticket Vending Machine) wanting a ticket to go from Truro to Plymouth, at 1100 in the morning who is coming back the next day at 1230 will look at the range of fares and probably chose "Anytime return" because the name is missleading, they may not realise that "Off-Peak" return is a period ticket? some people do it! and what most people here are suggesting is to introduce "super off-peak" type tickets that are valid for 3 or 4 trains, that would be a nightmare to enforce and creates more complex restrictions for passengers, at least with Advance it clearly states the train time on the reservation so theres no arguement! As for introducing 3 classes well thats just daft!

[Tim]

I agree completely with you Vacman on this.

Fares are very complicated and have been for a long time, but he "fare simplifciation" made things a lot worse because they imposed a venneer of simplifaction over the top of the same old mess.

The old tickets had words in them like "saver" or "cheap" which were ambiguous in meaning (for example a saver might have an evening peak restriction whereas a "cheap" ticket might not and the words themselves do nothing to assist in figuring this out) but they didn't pretend to be simpler than they actually were.  All they told the uninformed passenger was that they were more restricted and therefore cheaper than "open tickets".  If the passenger needed more information than that they asked or looked it up on the internet or whatever.  Now you have "off peak" and "anytime" which to the simple-minded passenger implies that there is a uniform peak period and a uniform off peak period (by annology with the tube or bus tickets say it isen't unreasonable to assume that "off peak" means something like "after 9:30" or "not in the morning or evening rush hour" and I bet if you asked prople off the street that is the kind of answer you would get).  Those titles hide a huge amount of complexity.   

[Btline]

What do you mean difficult to understand? A system could work as follows:

Standard Anytime - valid any time, out on date of ticket, return (if any) within a month.

Standard Off Peak - not valid on weekday journeys which finish before 1130, out on date on ticket, return (of any) within a month.

Super Off Peak - not valid on weekday journeys which finish before 1130 and weekday journeys which start between 1630 and 1830, out on date on ticket, return (of any) within a month.

All tickets allow one break of journey. Railcards valid on all tickets. Groupsave valid on Off-Peak and Super Off-Peak fares.

Simple. You know where you stand with whatever ticket you buy.

[devon_metro]

But then the 1000 Penzance - Paddington would be overwhelmed with people?

Plymouth, Totnes, Newton A, Exeter, Tiverton & Taunton all lie within your off peak hours and that particular service is heaving upon leaving Cornwall in summer.

Thats just one example...

[Btline]

But then the 1000 Penzance - Paddington would be overwhelmed with people?

Plymouth, Totnes, Newton A, Exeter, Tiverton & Taunton all lie within your off peak hours and that particular service is heaving upon leaving Cornwall in summer.

Thats just one example...

But surely off peak tickets are valid at the moment on that train?

I acknolwedge that the system would not work 100% - but the current one doesn't either!

[devon_metro]

Super Off Peak doesn't exist. I'm not sure how many people would travel to London on normal Off Peak tickets anyhow as they cost so much.

[Chris from Nailsea]

From The Times:

Sir Moir Lockhead: busman riding the recession
He built First into one of the world^s biggest bus and rail groups ^ so why is he taking taxpayers^ money to prop up his train franchises?

Broad and burly, Sir Moir Lockhead doesn^t so much roll with the punches as calmly absorb them. Yes, he says in his flat County Durham accent, we are taking taxpayers^ money to support our First Great Western rail franchise, but what^s the problem?

Revenue has dipped, it^s in the franchise agreement. If the business was making too much money the government would top-slice its share. The deal cuts both ways.

But ^50m? That^s how much his First Group operation took last year to prop up loss-making Great Western. This year it^s likely to take much more. Isn^t that a ridiculous level of risk avoidance, paid for by us?

He shrugs. The alternative would be to jeopardise the service, as other rail franchisees ^ some of which don^t enjoy revenue support ^ are finding out.

Why should Great Western get special help, though? It^s had a terrible reputation over recent years ^ delays, cancellations, cock-ups . . . ^Yeah,^ he says again. ^We^ve had a battering, but every time it happens, we learn from it.^

Is that a comfort for us? ^Well,^ he retorts, beetling his bushy black eyebrows. ^It^s no good saying ^sorry^ if you^re not doing anything about it.^

Lockhead, 64, boss of the biggest rail and bus group in Britain, won^t budge. That^s his style. He has been a target ever since First Group revealed those revenue support numbers this month. His company seems to have negotiated rather cannier rail franchise deals than its Big Five transport rivals ^ Arriva, Go-Ahead, National Express and Stagecoach. But you can^t land anything on him. He just smiles.