In reply to news post, which Paul Corfield wrote
on Sun, 4 Dec 2005 -
On 4 Dec 2005 11:48:50 -0800, "TheOneKEA" wrote:

This is probably more complicated because the trains interwork over LUL
tracks either side of NR tracks. People *may* be confusing what happens
to ticket revenue with what gets paid between the parties for the use of
the tracks under a separate agreement. Given that the only reason why
we have Zones 6AB and C is to create higher fares to avoid a massive
step change in the Chiltern fare structure beyond Amersham then I think
you can take it as read that Chiltern clearly do get revenue for its
trains over LU tracks. IIRC Chiltern would not agree to Zone 6 fares
being applied right out to Amersham in the same way as LU charges to Z6
to Epping and other stations in Essex where it is the sole operator.

The reasons for zones 6A to 6D goes back to the GLC days. These outer
zones were not in the area covered by the GLC but instead come under
Hertfordshire and Buckinghamshire councils. These councils would not
subsidise the fares as the GLC did and so the fares were increased in
these zones. They pre date Chiltern by many years. Today, Ken and the
London assembly do not cover the areas serves by these zones, but TFL
services run out to the area, I assume the higher fares in these areas
are also a result of the non London subsidy. It does though have the
affect of ramping the fares up for Chiltern as you go out into Bucks,
but this is perhaps a side effect.
--
Matthew P Jones - www.amersham.org.uk
My view of the Metropolitan Line www.metroland.org.uk - actually I like it
Don't reply to it will not be read
You can reply to knap AT Nildram dot co dot uk