![]() |
New fares (with ES spin...)
|
New fares
Jim wrote:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/13301604 The official announcement (TfL press release) is at http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/press-rele...a-21-sep.shtml with details of all the fares at http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/downloads/...ares-table.pdf -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) |
New fares (with ES spin...)
"Jim" wrote in message
... http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/13301604 I don't understand how the ES can describe putting bus fares up from 100p to 120p before 9:30am and down from 100p to 80p after 9:30am as "Bus Fares Soar". Free bus travel for all under 16? That is a diabolically bad idea... buses will become unsafe for anyone else, that's if there's room for anyone else. If they only gave free travel to under-16s who have been in no trouble with the police or school, that might be an idea. -- John Rowland - Spamtrapped Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood. That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line - It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes |
New fares (with ES spin...)
On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 15:22:57 +0100, "John Rowland"
wrote: "Jim" wrote in message ... http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/13301604 I don't understand how the ES can describe putting bus fares up from 100p to 120p before 9:30am and down from 100p to 80p after 9:30am as "Bus Fares Soar". The point though is that cash fares rise 20p or 20%; AM peak Oyster pre pay fares rise 30p to £1 so nearly 50% while even off peak Pre Pay fares rise 10p or 14%. No matter which way you view it I'd say they were pretty big rises. Of course the Evening Standard will do anything to make a headline but I think they are partly justified in making a bit of noise about this. Clearly the financial settlement from government is not being directed at the bus network - looks like we are stuck with what we've got today with not a lot of room for improvement for the next 4 years. Free bus travel for all under 16? That is a diabolically bad idea... buses will become unsafe for anyone else, that's if there's room for anyone else. If they only gave free travel to under-16s who have been in no trouble with the police or school, that might be an idea. While I understand the social exclusion arguments about keeping child fares down I do not agree with the policy of free fares for under 11 year olds never mind increasing it progressively to under 18s by 2006. I trust Ken will be funding the increase in insurance and vandalism costs in certain areas of London where youths and children already wreak wanton damage on buses and related infrastructure. I feel sorry for the bus drivers - how to make a tough job even more unattractive. -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! |
New fares (with ES spin...)
John Rowland wrote:
"Jim" wrote in message ... http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/13301604 I don't understand how the ES can describe putting bus fares up from 100p to 120p before 9:30am and down from 100p to 80p after 9:30am as "Bus Fares Soar". Try reading the TfL documents (see my earlier post) rather than the ES spin. On buses, cash fares go up from £1 to £1.20 all day. Pre-pay goes up from 70p to 80p (£1 in the morning peak). Saver goes up from 70p to £1 all day (43% rise). -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) |
New fares (with ES spin...)
John Rowland wrote:
Free bus travel for all under 16? That is a diabolically bad idea... buses will become unsafe for anyone else, that's if there's room for anyone else. If they only gave free travel to under-16s who have been in no trouble with the police or school, that might be an idea. There are two advantages to me: 1) Stops them going to school/piano lessons or whatever in mummy's car 2) Encourages ownership of public transport for kids, making for better treatment of vehicles and a higher likelihood they will use public transport when they are older. I find your generalisations of young people surprising, almost disturbing, but perhaps I've failed to pick up on a nuance of your post or history. Dan |
New fares (with ES spin...)
"John Rowland" wrote in message ... "Jim" wrote in message ... http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/13301604 ... Free bus travel for all under 16? That is a diabolically bad idea... buses will become unsafe for anyone else, that's if there's room for anyone else. If they only gave free travel to under-16s who have been in no trouble with the police or school, that might be an idea. I understand what you mean; strikes me this is the teenage vandals' dream come true. Now they don't even have to pay before they get on, go upstairs and scratch the windows/paint graffiti everywhere. I am tempted to conclude whoever thinks this is a good idea has never travelled on a bus in SE London. And to think we'll all be paying for them too... (and before someone says 'not all kids do this', I would completely agree and say it's a relatively tiny minority of teenagers. However, this relatively tiny minority cause widespread damage running into hundreds of thousands of pounds; we simply cannot ignore that and allow this serious problem with bus vandalism to escalate in order to provide free bus travel for all IMO). The situation with public transport vandalism in SE London is quite simply dire. |
New fares (with ES spin...)
On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 17:58:36 +0000 (UTC),
wrote: In article , (Paul Corfield) wrote: On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 15:22:57 +0100, "John Rowland" wrote: "Jim" wrote in message ... http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/13301604 I don't understand how the ES can describe putting bus fares up from 100p to 120p before 9:30am and down from 100p to 80p after 9:30am as "Bus Fares Soar". The point though is that cash fares rise 20p or 20%; AM peak Oyster pre pay fares rise 30p to £1 so nearly 50% while even off peak Pre Pay fares rise 10p or 14%. No matter which way you view it I'd say they were pretty big rises. In 2003 the fare was 80p cash In 2004 the fare was 70p cash In 2005 the fare will be 120p cash. This will be a 50% rise on the 2003 fares and a 70% rise on the 2004 fares for the many people who pay cash. It's just a rip-off. You cannot pay 70p cash for any fare in 2004. The cash fare is £1 London wide. You only pay 70p if you opt for a Saver pre-paid ticket or Oyster pre-pay. Therefore the cash fare increase is 20%. The prepay etc. fares are just a smoke screen. It's like a firm saying - "look, we haven't put our prices up this year but, for those of you not paying by direct debit you'll now pay another £2/month!" Well yes but the objective is to get the remaining 15% of passengers out of cash and into some form of pre-payment. Providing access to such cheaper alternatives is as easy and convenient as possible then it is a reasonable policy objective. It ceases to be so if passengers are seriously inconvenienced - and it is my view that is the case already with the poorly thought out cashless zone in central London. -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! |
New fares
Richard J. wrote:
Jim wrote: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/13301604 The official announcement (TfL press release) is at http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/press-rele...a-21-sep.shtml with details of all the fares at http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/downloads/...ares-table.pdf I never realised that for a bus commuter travelling twice a day for the five working days, Pre-Pay (in both 2004 & 2005) is cheaper than a Bus Pass! It's interesting that season Travelcard price increases are high for inner zones but lower for many zones, whereas the opposite seems to be true for Day Travelcards (up from £5.40 to £6.00 for off peak all zone!). ISTR there used to be a £4.50 minimum fare for YP Railcard-discounted OP Day Travelcards - I assume this will increase in 2005 as the cheapest OPDT is now £4.70. The zone changes aren't anywhere near as drastic as I thought - just some fare simplification. Interestingly, on Pre Pay, single fares from Zones 6 & 4 to Zone 1 have decreased as a result of the simplification. *However* a whole new range of complication has been introduced with Pre Pay "peak" & "off peak". For example, if you're travelling at midday from Z6 to Z1 and back at 5pm, Pre Pay will be more expensive (£7) than a travelcard (£6) - but travelling out at 12.00 and back at 20.00, Pre Pay will be cheaper (£5.50). Although this will be confusing for the semi-regular or irregular user, it could present *significant* savings for people working outside normal hours (which I guess is the point!). Someone travelling from Z6 to Z1 for work for 07.00 (starting their journey before 06.30) and finishing at 15.00 (£2 + £3.50) would save £12 off the weekly travelcard price - some 30%! Obviously this saving would reduce if they made extra journeys, but leisure journeys at evenings would easily be absorbed (3 return journeys into Z1). Incidentally, using prepay for a Z6-1 return journey on a 9am-5pm working day would still result in a £4.50 saving, although this would be useless if the passenger broke journeys for some reason or make more than one return leisure trip. It will be interesting to see if capping extends to seven-day travelcards as with the new peak/offpeak system it could present benefits for early starters, late finishers or shift workers. -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:10 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk