tim wrote:
"Nick" wrote in message
...

"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...

...

The National Rail fares system is a complicated mess at the moment, and
hardly sets a good example for London to revert to.

...

Apart from a few anomalies, it isn't that complicated at all


It's complicated in the sense that all journeys are individually
priced. It is thus impossible for someone to sell you a ticket

Every can of beans / newspaper / magazine / item of clothing / etc you
buy is individually priced and you cope with that don't you.

from A to B without them having a complete database (thick
book or computer disk) of fares from every A to every B. To
be able to sell tickes for a zonal system all you need is a map
on the wall.

Effectively, this means that to buy a ticket for my journey I
have to queue up at the station. Were a complete zonal system
in operation accross all modes, I could just go and buy a ticket
from my local newsagents (as I could for LT journeys).

tim

1. Assumption that there will be a queue at the station and not at the
newsagents. Whenever I buy a ticket (an extension as I have a Z1-3
annual) I do so off-peak and almost invariably there is no queue.
Buying a newspaper at the newsagents can be a horrible though, waiting
behind all those bloody people buying zonal tickets!

2. AFAIK, the reason, AFAIK, that fares structure takes 7 volumes or
whatever and it takes an age to buy a ticket is that BR had made
thousands of special terminal in the 1970s and these are what are still
being used by counter staff today. The memory capacity of these is very
limited indeed.

A modern box (probably running Linux and with a cheap 80-120GB hard
drive) could easily cope with all of the data and spit out the cheapest
or quickest option in a fraction of a second. With a decent UI[*] that
is what the passenger accessible machines would have as well.

* that includes learning that none of Waterloo, Charing Cross and
Victoria start with an L.

On Sat, 12 Feb 2005, Stephen Osborn wrote:

Every can of beans / newspaper / magazine / item of clothing / etc
you buy is individually priced

Not quite. The "pick and mix" has a fixed price for your choice of
the items included in the offer. And a zone fare system works a bit
like that.

"Stephen Osborn" wrote in message
...
tim wrote:
"Nick" wrote in message
...

"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...

...

The National Rail fares system is a complicated mess at the moment, and
hardly sets a good example for London to revert to.

...

Apart from a few anomalies, it isn't that complicated at all


It's complicated in the sense that all journeys are individually
priced. It is thus impossible for someone to sell you a ticket

Every can of beans / newspaper / magazine / item of clothing / etc you buy
is individually priced and you cope with that don't you.

It's not a question of coping, it's a question of costs of
distribution/sale. When buying a tangible item there is inherently
a cost of distribution in getting the goods on the shelf. adding to this
cost by having to this stick a little price sticker does not make much
difference. A travel ticket has no cost of distribution other than
that of calculating the price, making the price calcualtion more
difficult makes a bigger difference.

from A to B without them having a complete database (thick
book or computer disk) of fares from every A to every B. To
be able to sell tickes for a zonal system all you need is a map
on the wall.

Effectively, this means that to buy a ticket for my journey I
have to queue up at the station. Were a complete zonal system
in operation accross all modes, I could just go and buy a ticket
from my local newsagents (as I could for LT journeys).

tim

1. Assumption that there will be a queue at the station and not at the
newsagents.

so go to another news agents.

Whenever I buy a ticket (an extension as I have a Z1-3 annual) I do so
off-peak and almost invariably there is no queue.

aren't you lucky.

tim

tim wrote:
"Stephen Osborn" wrote in message
...

tim wrote:



It's complicated in the sense that all journeys are individually
priced. It is thus impossible for someone to sell you a ticket

Every can of beans / newspaper / magazine / item of clothing / etc you buy
is individually priced and you cope with that don't you.

It's not a question of coping, it's a question of costs of
distribution/sale. When buying a tangible item there is inherently
a cost of distribution in getting the goods on the shelf. adding to this
cost by having to this stick a little price sticker does not make much
difference. A travel ticket has no cost of distribution other than
that of calculating the price, making the price calcualtion more
difficult makes a bigger difference.

What are you talking about? You said that it is complicated, implying
that is a problem, I merely pointed out it is no more complicated than
any shopping trip.

As for your costs of distribution 'argument', this is total hogwash.
The price of many goods bears no relationship to their cost of
distribution, compare a designer dress with a cheap one. Or are you
saying that all sale prices should be related to the cost of
distribution - in which case all travel tickets would cost the same.

1. Assumption that there will be a queue at the station and not at the
newsagents.

so go to another news agents.

No, I was merely pointing out an unfounded assumption, namely that there
will always be a queue at a station and never at a newsagents.

Whenever I buy a ticket (an extension as I have a Z1-3 annual) I do so
off-peak and almost invariably there is no queue.

aren't you lucky.

No, smart. If you go to any shop (which is what a station booking
office is) when it is quiet then there is less chance of a queue.

"Stephen Osborn" wrote in message
...
tim wrote:
"Stephen Osborn" wrote in message
...

tim wrote:



It's complicated in the sense that all journeys are individually
priced. It is thus impossible for someone to sell you a ticket

Every can of beans / newspaper / magazine / item of clothing / etc you
buy is individually priced and you cope with that don't you.

It's not a question of coping, it's a question of costs of
distribution/sale. When buying a tangible item there is inherently
a cost of distribution in getting the goods on the shelf. adding to this
cost by having to this stick a little price sticker does not make much
difference. A travel ticket has no cost of distribution other than
that of calculating the price, making the price calcualtion more
difficult makes a bigger difference.

What are you talking about? You said that it is complicated, implying
that is a problem, I merely pointed out it is no more complicated than any
shopping trip.

It is complicated for the provider, therefore it adds to the cost of
sale.

As for your costs of distribution 'argument', this is total hogwash. The
price of many goods bears no relationship to their cost of distribution,

Of course there isn't a relationship, but there is an element of
cost that is 'distribution. Make the distribution more complicated
and this cost goes up.

compare a designer dress with a cheap one. Or are you saying that all
sale prices should be related to the cost of distribution - in which case
all travel tickets would cost the same.

1. Assumption that there will be a queue at the station and not at the
newsagents.

so go to another news agents.

No, I was merely pointing out an unfounded assumption, namely that there
will always be a queue at a station and never at a newsagents.

I never made this assertion. I simply suggest that it is often easier
to buy your travel tickets at the newsagents rather than the station.
This is definately the case with an unmanned station where the machine
might be vandalised, not have the correct change etc and you have the
aggro of explaining all this to the guard to avoid a penalty fare, noting
that some of the reason you can think of do not avoid the penalty.

If you don't like the idea of buying them at the newsagents then
that's fine, but why does this give you the right to deny this option
to somebody else?

Whenever I buy a ticket (an extension as I have a Z1-3 annual) I do so
off-peak and almost invariably there is no queue.

aren't you lucky.

No, smart. If you go to any shop (which is what a station booking office
is) when it is quiet then there is less chance of a queue.

Um, so I'll change my meeting time to one when I know that the
booking office is not going to have a queue, that'll go down well
won't it?

tim

tim wrote:
"Stephen Osborn" wrote in message
...


What are you talking about? You said that it is complicated, implying
that is a problem, I merely pointed out it is no more complicated than any
shopping trip.


It is complicated for the provider, therefore it adds to the cost of
sale.

A. So is that your only concern? If so you are ditching your earlier
assertion that a complicated point-to-point ticketing system is bad for
the passenger buying a ticket.

B. If it is implemented (as I suggested in a single computerised
database) then any extra cost of a more complex system is spread out
over millions of tickets and effectively amounts to nothing.

As for your costs of distribution 'argument', this is total hogwash. The
price of many goods bears no relationship to their cost of distribution,


Of course there isn't a relationship, but there is an element of
cost that is 'distribution. Make the distribution more complicated
and this cost goes up.

As B above.

1. Assumption that there will be a queue at the station and not at the
newsagents.

so go to another news agents.

No, I was merely pointing out an unfounded assumption, namely that there
will always be a queue at a station and never at a newsagents.

I never made this assertion. I simply suggest that it is often easier
to buy your travel tickets at the newsagents rather than the station.
This is definately the case with an unmanned station where the machine
might be vandalised, not have the correct change etc and you have the
aggro of explaining all this to the guard to avoid a penalty fare, noting
that some of the reason you can think of do not avoid the penalty.

QUOTE
Effectively, this means that to buy a ticket for my journey I
have to queue up at the station. Were a complete zonal system
in operation accross all modes, I could just go and buy a ticket
from my local newsagents (as I could for LT journeys).
/QUOTE

Sounds like an assumption that there will be a queue at the station but
not at the newsagents to me.

If you don't like the idea of buying them at the newsagents then
that's fine, but why does this give you the right to deny this option
to somebody else?

Now who is trying to put words in other people's mouths?
I never came near suggesting that tickets should not be sold in
newsagents. In:
"I was merely pointing out an unfounded assumption, namely that there
will always be a queue at a station and never at a newsagents."
the word merely shows that refuting the assumption was the limit of my
comment.

Whenever I buy a ticket (an extension as I have a Z1-3 annual) I do so
off-peak and almost invariably there is no queue.

aren't you lucky.

No, smart. If you go to any shop (which is what a station booking office
is) when it is quiet then there is less chance of a queue.

Um, so I'll change my meeting time to one when I know that the
booking office is not going to have a queue, that'll go down well
won't it?

I never said that either. I assume that you would not go into a
newsagents at a busy time (on the way to the station in the morning,
say) and expect a guarantee there will be no queue. You might go to the
newsagents at a quite time, the previous evening perhaps.

Of course you could go to the station at a quite time as well.

On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 13:28:20 +0000 (UTC), Stephen Osborn
wrote:

Every can of beans / newspaper / magazine / item of clothing / etc you
buy is individually priced and you cope with that don't you.

Yes, but there is enough room in your average shop for all these items
to be out on display. With a probable average of, say, 5 or 6 ticket
types per relation (which would be N(N-1) where N is the number of
stations on the national system, or on LUL, as applicable), that ain't
practical. Even in the days of Edmondson (sp?) tickets, there was
duplication - I have somewhere a ticket from Liverpool Central to "any
station bounded by Rainford, Aughton Park or Formby" (or something
like that).

2. AFAIK, the reason, AFAIK, that fares structure takes 7 volumes or
whatever and it takes an age to buy a ticket is that BR had made
thousands of special terminal in the 1970s and these are what are still
being used by counter staff today. The memory capacity of these is very
limited indeed.

The complexity of the fares structure has nothing to do with the
machines which issue it, which as it happens are largely in the
process of being replaced with machines which do "know" the entire
fares structure.

A modern box (probably running Linux and with a cheap 80-120GB hard
drive) could easily cope with all of the data and spit out the cheapest
or quickest option in a fraction of a second. With a decent UI[*] that
is what the passenger accessible machines would have as well.

The cheapest/quickest *single* ticket, yes (where I mean one ticket,
not just a one-way). The number of possible fares *combinations* is
staggering, and because the fares system (if you'd call it that) is so
badly broken, it is necessary to investigate these for best value.

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

Neil Williams wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 13:28:20 +0000 (UTC), Stephen Osborn
wrote:

Every can of beans / newspaper / magazine / item of clothing / etc you
buy is individually priced and you cope with that don't you.

Yes, but there is enough room in your average shop for all these items
to be out on display. With a probable average of, say, 5 or 6 ticket
types per relation (which would be N(N-1) where N is the number of
stations on the national system, or on LUL, as applicable), that ain't
practical.

True, but I am not sure that this is fully relevant. I doubt that you
compare the price of every can of baked beans every time you go shopping
to see which is the best value, but you might do so now and then.
However if you were to buy some caviar then you probably would check out
the best value.

So, if you want to check out the prices (caviar / London to Edinburgh)
then you can do so. If you are happy with what you usually get (beans /
day return your-local-station to London) then you can do that.

The key thing is that the system needs to reliably gives the appropriate
ticket.

One basic point to bear in mind is that, in general, systems can be fair
or they can be simple.
A zonal system can be simpler but full of anomalies (e.g. four stops
crossing a zonal boundary costing more than 10 stops with a single zone)
and so less fair.
A point to point system can be fairer (charging for the distance
traveled) but will be more complex.

2. AFAIK, the reason, AFAIK, that fares structure takes 7 volumes or
whatever and it takes an age to buy a ticket is that BR had made
thousands of special terminal in the 1970s and these are what are still
being used by counter staff today. The memory capacity of these is very
limited indeed.

The complexity of the fares structure has nothing to do with the
machines which issue it, which as it happens are largely in the
process of being replaced with machines which do "know" the entire
fares structure.

I was not clear. The 7 volumes are only relevant in that station staff
have to look things up in a number of large paper books and often get
them wrong, because there are so many options /discounts / etc. It does
not really matter if there are 7 volumes or 17 volumes if the system
reliably gives the appropriate ticket.

A modern box (probably running Linux and with a cheap 80-120GB hard
drive) could easily cope with all of the data and spit out the cheapest
or quickest option in a fraction of a second. With a decent UI[*] that
is what the passenger accessible machines would have as well.

The cheapest/quickest *single* ticket, yes (where I mean one ticket,
not just a one-way). The number of possible fares *combinations* is
staggering, and because the fares system (if you'd call it that) is so
badly broken, it is necessary to investigate these for best value.

But single tickets (i.e. A to B and back either one day or seasonal)
versus travelcards is what this discussion is about.

If you regularly travel A to B to C to D to A or your journeys are
irregular (home to work to one of many clients to different one of
many clients to work to pub to home) then a travelcard is almost
guaranteed to be better for you.

If all you do is local train station to London to local train station
then a travelcard is almost guaranteed to be worse for you.

BTW, I would totally agree that the number of possible tickets is
unnecessarily wide. I went from London to Edinburgh last year and there
were well over 20 possible fares.

Neil

On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 14:42:23 +0000 (UTC), Stephen Osborn
wrote:

But single tickets (i.e. A to B and back either one day or seasonal)
versus travelcards is what this discussion is about.

Oh, true. The thing I was referring to was the rather annoying
situation on the National Rail system where it's often cheaper to
split tickets on a simple, point-to-point single or return journey,
just because the fares system is such a mess.

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

In article , Stephen Osborn
writes
One basic point to bear in mind is that, in general, systems can be
fair or they can be simple.
A zonal system can be simpler but full of anomalies (e.g. four stops
crossing a zonal boundary costing more than 10 stops with a single
zone) and so less fair.
A point to point system can be fairer (charging for the distance
traveled) but will be more complex.

An even more basic point you are all avoiding is defining "fair". Once
you have an agreed definition, *then* you can start arguing whether one
particular system is "fairer". But first you need to agree the
definition.

For the record, I *don't* agree that a system is unfair if A-B and A-C
ever have the same price.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: