Paul Corfield wrote:

On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 08:58:00 -0800, Mizter T wrote:

ThisIsLondon / the Evening Standard have the following story of
interest, of which there is an extract below. Unfortunately the story
isn't precise on what the plans are to be - so I'll add my own
comments underneath the quoted text.

-----
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...ils/article.do
-----
*Cost of season tickets to soar under new system*
Jason Beattie, Chief Political Correspondent - 12.11.07

Thousands of rail commuters face a huge rise in the cost of season
tickets, the Standard can reveal.

Some travellers could pay as much as £600 more for an annual pass,
campaigners claim.

From 2010 the cost of a season ticket will be based on which zone the
starting station is in rather than its distance from the central
London terminus.

[snip]

So here are my comments on this...

Since beginning of this year all point-to-point *non-season* tickets -
i.e. single and day returns - for journeys wholly within London (i.e.
zones 1-6) have had their prices set on a zonal basis (although they
are still issued on a named origin and destination basis and
validity). At the time we were told that season tickets would also
eventually also be priced on this bases.

The main thing that the report lacks clarity on is whether rail-only
season tickets are to be withdrawn completely and commuters moved over
on to Travelcard seasons, or whether rail-seasons might continue to
exist, albeit priced on a zonal basis.

Reading between the lines the report would appear to presume the
former course of action - i.e. withdrawal of rail-only season tickets
altogether. I say this because it states that a Surbiton to London
annual season ticket would rise in price by £630 to £1800. AFAICS the
current price of a rail-only season ticket is £1280, whilst the
current price of a zone 1-6 ticket (Surbiton being on zone 6) is £1720
- that's actually a price difference of £440 at current prices, so
perhaps the Standard calculator is broken, they know next years fares
already, or I'm stupid and have got it all wrong.

I don't read the article as meaning rail only seasons disappear at all.
Nor do I see that there is a mandating of Travelcards instead. I think
an extreme (and probably inaccurate) example has been used to try to
make a headline. I simply can't see the TOCs agreeing (even under DfT
pressure) to scrap rail only seasons. The problem being pointed to is
the same as for zonal cash fares - people further out in a zone gain
compared to those who are closer to the centre where a mileage based
fare would be lower.

The £1800 figure, along with mentions of Surbiton and also of Kingston
(in the full article) was all that what led me to think that's what
the article might be suggesting - £1800 being a near enough figure to
£1720, the cost of an annual zones 1-6 Travelcard.

But what you say is indeed a good point, not least because rail-only
seasons tickets are a significant part of any TOCs revenue stream.
Whilst that revenue might have to be shared between TOCs, dependent
upon the route in question, it doesn't have to be further shared with
TfL as happens with the Travelcard revenue.


It's perfectly feasible to allow rail only seasons on Oyster together
with PAYG for non rail use as an available feature (just as Travelcard
and PAYG combine on TfL services). I think this is potentially quite
attractive but the problem is entirely centred on the pricing that is
finally chosen. The knock on that then follows for Travelcard is also
interesting given that price comparisons will be very easy to make and
I'd anticipate some switching to rail only seasons and PAYG rather than
full priced Travelcards. Whether pressure would build for LU only
seasons and PAYG is a further potential twist.


On rail routes that accept PAYG, a rail-only season ticket loaded on
an Oyster card could presumably be used to auto extend rail journeys
beyond that held on the season ticket - another interesting
possibility!

Am I right in saying that LU season tickets basically went out when
Travelcard seasons came in? And were there many grumbles when this
happened, or was the price difference minimal?

Whilst the Travelcard is fantastic I do find it surprising that they
are the only season ticket choice for an LU-only commuter whereas a
rail commuter (usually) has a choice between Travelcard season or a
cheaper rail-only season. In particular, ever since the Capitalcard
(which had BR validity too) was folded into the expanded LT+BR
Travelcard scheme in the late 80's, a simple reading of this
arrangement would suggest that income from LU-only commuters leaves
the hands of LU towards the TOCs. That said I suppose the Travelcard
monies are allocated according to how many passengers are using what
services so LU shouldn't be out of pocket as a result.