|
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
In another thread buried deep in uk.transport.london, someone says:
... It is stated in the TfL Board agenda papers for 9/2/05 that the DfT have decreed that TfL zonal fares will apply to all NR journeys within the zonal area by 2007. Implementation will be on a TOC by TOC basis between now and 2007. Pre-pay will be part of the roll out of this policy. ... So does this mean no more CDR ticket prices? No cheap returns during the daytime at all??? (unless you have pre-pay on Oyster under the new scheme?) What about National Rail season tickets? I pay about 50 quid less for a monthly season ticket from Bexley (Z6) to London for a rail-only season ticket rather than buy an inflated-price Travelcard which I don't need (carnets fine for occasional tube use, and can't say I can remember the last time I used a bus). Loss of NR season tickets would mean something approaching a 50% increase in my monthly commuting cost! Rich |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 12:12:05 -0000, "Rich Mallard"
wrote: What about National Rail season tickets? I pay about 50 quid less for a monthly season ticket from Bexley (Z6) to London for a rail-only season ticket rather than buy an inflated-price Travelcard which I don't need (carnets fine for occasional tube use, and can't say I can remember the last time I used a bus). Loss of NR season tickets would mean something approaching a 50% increase in my monthly commuting cost! It may well be worth TfL offering a rail-only zonal season, but whether they will or not is another matter. Similarly, it may be worth their while offering a Cheap Day Return, but I suspect they'll go for increased ODTC revenue instead. In the PTEs, where rail season tickets tend to be controlled by the PTE rather than the train operator, there are several approaches - Merseyside do not offer a rail-only season, while Greater Manchester do. I don't know about the others. It does surprise me, and has for a time, that despite TfL generally having more control over bus and light rail services within its boundaries than the PTEs do, that it has so little control over heavy rail. 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. |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
"Neil Williams" wrote in message ... On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 12:12:05 -0000, "Rich Mallard" wrote: What about National Rail season tickets? I pay about 50 quid less for a monthly season ticket from Bexley (Z6) to London for a rail-only season ticket rather than buy an inflated-price Travelcard which I don't need (carnets fine for occasional tube use, and can't say I can remember the last time I used a bus). Loss of NR season tickets would mean something approaching a 50% increase in my monthly commuting cost! It may well be worth TfL offering a rail-only zonal season, but whether they will or not is another matter. Similarly, it may be worth their while offering a Cheap Day Return, but I suspect they'll go for increased ODTC revenue instead. No doubt they'll go for the ODTC option and substantially increase the price of the fairly lightly-used off-peak rail services in Bexley and Bromley. If this ever comes about and NR seasons are scrapped, it will even be cheaper for me to get a rail-only season from outside the TfL zones (Dartford, 20 quid per month more) than to buy a Travelcard (50 quid a month more). I don't understand why this is happening at all really. We already have a zonal ticket - it's called a Travelcard. The argument about "simplification" is just a ruse to introduce higher fares across the board which are then channeled into TfL's central funding pool. I would be happy to pay more for rail-only journies to pay for rail-specific enhancements (ie getting my dilapitated station painted), but of course that is not an option. In the PTEs, where rail season tickets tend to be controlled by the PTE rather than the train operator, there are several approaches - Merseyside do not offer a rail-only season, while Greater Manchester do. I don't know about the others. It does surprise me, and has for a time, that despite TfL generally having more control over bus and light rail services within its boundaries than the PTEs do, that it has so little control over heavy rail. I thought this was mainly because it wouldn't make sense to seperate out the responsilbities for fragements of services either side of the fairly arbitrary Greater London/TfL boundary, of which there are many. Why do I get the feeling it would be so much better if London, paricularly in terms of transport, was more properly managed as an integral part of a much larger South East region, rather than being cut-out and divorced from it. Rich |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
--- Rich Mallard said...
If this ever comes about and NR seasons are scrapped, it will even be cheaper for me to get a rail-only season from outside the TfL zones (Dartford, 20 quid per month more) than to buy a Travelcard (50 quid a month more). I don't understand why this is happening at all really. We already have a zonal ticket - it's called a Travelcard. The argument about "simplification" is just a ruse to introduce higher fares across the board which are then channeled into TfL's central funding pool. I would be happy to pay more for rail-only journies to pay for rail-specific enhancements (ie getting my dilapitated station painted), but of course that is not an option. I agree 100%. I've said it before, but zonal tickets are just a con to make us pay extra for journeys that we could make (but won't) instead of paying for the journeys which we do actually make. Trouble is, the stupid zones have been around so long that too many people have got into the habit of thinking that they're a good thing, even when they're clearly not -- and won't hear a word said against them. Maybe it would have been better if TfL abandoned their zones and came into line with the rest of the country with a point-to-point system. -- "Life is infinitely stranger than anything which the mind of man could invent." -- Arthur Conan Doyle |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 13:35:03 -0000, "Rich Mallard"
wrote: I thought this was mainly because it wouldn't make sense to seperate out the responsilbities for fragements of services either side of the fairly arbitrary Greater London/TfL boundary, of which there are many. Which is an excuse, because all the PTEs have out-boundary workings which are subsidised within the PTE area. TfL doesn't have to *operate* the rail services concerned, but there is a case for them to control ticketing, fares and to an extent the service level, just like the PTEs either can or do. Why do I get the feeling it would be so much better if London, paricularly in terms of transport, was more properly managed as an integral part of a much larger South East region, rather than being cut-out and divorced from it. I'm not sure - I think it'd result in the rural parts of the South East being ignored in favour of the big city. Their needs are significantly different, and when it comes down to local rail and bus services aren't only driven by the London commuter flow. 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. |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 16:20:53 -0000, "Solar Penguin"
wrote: I agree 100%. I've said it before, but zonal tickets are just a con to make us pay extra for journeys that we could make (but won't) instead of paying for the journeys which we do actually make. I don't think the issue here is zonal tickets, it's modes, or in particular whether one should need to pay for all modes even though one only requires a rail single. In a true joint-tariff system, the answer is yes, you should pay for all modes, because they all come together to form a system. As for the fares, yes, I do believe the ODTC price is *far* too high[1], and the peak travelcard is sickeningly expensive. It's not the principle that's the problem, it's the price. [1] I believe that day travelcards for city areas should be priced at just under twice the single fare for the "main" journey that results in their purchase. You then get the fringe benefit of extra public transport journeys that might otherwise have been made by car. 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. |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
In message , Neil Williams
writes As for the fares, yes, I do believe the ODTC price is *far* too high[1], and the peak travelcard is sickeningly expensive. It's not the principle that's the problem, it's the price. [1] I believe that day travelcards for city areas should be priced at just under twice the single fare for the "main" journey that results in their purchase. You then get the fringe benefit of extra public transport journeys that might otherwise have been made by car. The off-peak ODTC that I normally get (zones 1-2) is 10p more than twice the single fare. Pricing it at - say - 10p less wouldn't really make the slightest difference to me. The incentive to not drive is the fact that taking the car would be many times the cost of the ODTC. The current peak-time differential *is* high enough to make me want to travel off peak. For business purposes I only go into town occasionally, and I deliberately schedule meetings to start at or after 10.30, so that I can travel off-peak. Bringing the cost of the peak-time ODTC closer to that of the off-peak one would be a disincentive for me to travel off-peak (even for shopping let alone business), which may not be a Good Thing for the commuting public at large. -- Paul Terry |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
Solar Penguin wrote:
--- Rich Mallard said... If this ever comes about and NR seasons are scrapped, it will even be cheaper for me to get a rail-only season from outside the TfL zones (Dartford, 20 quid per month more) than to buy a Travelcard (50 quid a month more). I don't understand why this is happening at all really. We already have a zonal ticket - it's called a Travelcard. The argument about "simplification" is just a ruse to introduce higher fares across the board which are then channeled into TfL's central funding pool. I would be happy to pay more for rail-only journies to pay for rail-specific enhancements (ie getting my dilapitated station painted), but of course that is not an option. I agree 100%. I've said it before, but zonal tickets are just a con to make us pay extra for journeys that we could make (but won't) instead of paying for the journeys which we do actually make. Trouble is, the stupid zones have been around so long that too many people have got into the habit of thinking that they're a good thing, even when they're clearly not -- and won't hear a word said against them. Maybe it would have been better if TfL abandoned their zones and came into line with the rest of the country with a point-to-point system. I fail to see how an uncomplicated system which people can actually understand is a problem. Zones are essentially distance-based, but take into account a need to be flexible with travel plans, the fact that central London is much busier than outer London, and keep people happy when they can easily understand what fare they will pay. How would Travelcards - the most useful and flexible ticket - work under a point-to-point system? The National Rail fares system is a complicated mess at the moment, and hardly sets a good example for London to revert to. -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - transport projects in London |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
"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 (though this appears to be the line taken by TfL - mustn't confuse the dumb travelling public - let's just have simple and much higher fares overall). Take Bexley NR station, Zone 6. Turn up off-peak and ask for day return ticket to London. Clerk asks if you want tube and bus - if so you get a travelcard, if not you get a nice cheap CDR. What's so complicated about that? What is a scandal though is all the people sold Travelcards by lazy ticket clerks who should really be issuing CDRs, and people who don't know NR season tickets exist to London terminals from around here (and are buying much more expensive period Travelcards!) Sad, but true. Nick |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
... ... I fail to see how an uncomplicated system which people can actually understand is a problem. Zones are essentially distance-based, but take into account a need to be flexible with travel plans, the fact that central London is much busier than outer London, and keep people happy when they can easily understand what fare they will pay. ... Plus, this idea that fares need to be "simple" is far too overplayed IMO. So what if some cheaper fares are a little more complicated to undestand the restrictions of? For people who travel to London occasionally or tourists, I can see the need for a fairly simple ticketing scheme, be it zonal or whatever, and our existing Travelcard fits the bill nicely. But for the vast majority of us, hardened London commuters who know our routes very well indeed, we can surely be exposed to a little choice in our ticketing range so we can opt to spend less and restrict our ticket availability to match our modes of transport? Nick |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
"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 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 |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
--- Dave Arquati said...
I fail to see how an uncomplicated system which people can actually understand is a problem. Zones are essentially distance-based Distance based? Then how come a ticket from Morden to Waterloo (zones 1-4) costs the same as a ticket from Morden all the way to Mill Hill East? Is it really fair that passengers only going as far as Waterloo should pay for *twice* the distance they're actually travelling? and keep people happy when they can easily understand what fare they will pay. And how are people happy when "they can easily understand" that they're being charged *twice* as much as they should be charged? That might make you happy, but I'm not so easily pleased! How would Travelcards - the most useful and flexible ticket - work under a point-to-point system? You say "flexible" like it's a good thing. But it isn't. It's just a con to make you pay for routes you don't actually use. Suppose you want to travel, for example, from Crystal Palace to Oxford Circus. Why can't you simply buy a cheap day return from Crystal Palace to Oxford Circus? Instead you *have* to buy a One Day Travelcard for zones 1-4, which means you're also paying for the flexibility of travelling to Morden, Mill Hill East, Waterloo, and dozens of other places that you won't actually visit today! The National Rail fares system is a complicated mess at the moment, and hardly sets a good example for London to revert to. I agree that the NR system could be streamlined. So let's concentrate on streamlining it, instead of scrapping it and replacing it with something worse. For example, the development of GPS systems means that it's possible to calculate the straight-line, as-the-crow-flies distance between stations, and use that as a basis for a point-to-point system. (This way, we eliminate much of the complicated routing nonsense which makes NR's present fares system so awkward. After all, from the customer's POV it's only the start and end points that really matter, not the places in between.) Multiply that straight-line distance by a fixed pounds-per-mile rate, and you get the base cost of the ticket. You can then add on various fixed value premiums for premium services, e.g. ** travelling first class ** travelling by an express train instead of a stopping train ** even travelling by a train instead of a bus (assuming that this could be the basis for tickets on all modes of transport) Give the customers an itemised receipt along with their ticket, and they can easily understand how the fare was worked out. And while we're at it, let's get rid of pointless things like: ** different rates for adults and children. (After all, if you buy a magazine or a can of drink, the shop won't charge you extra just because you happen to be an adult. Why should adults buying train tickets be penalised that way?) ** cheaper prices for tickets bought in advance. (If you buy a tin of baked beans, the supermarket won't give you a discount if you leave the tin on your shelf for a week with out opening it. The newsagent won't reduce the price of a magazine if you keep it instead of reading it right away. So why should tickets be cheaper if you don't use them straight away?) There we are. A nice, simple, streamlined, easy to follow system, based entirely on the point-to-point system, and which cannot overcharge people the way a zonal system does. That's the sort of thing the rail companies should be aiming for. Not making things worse by forcing zones on people. -- "Napoleon was born on may 4th 1852 at Westminster so you are the one asking all the luck going, if I were going to become a Vampire." -- MegaHal |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
Solar Penguin wrote to uk.transport.london on Sat, 12 Feb 2005:
Suppose you want to travel, for example, from Crystal Palace to Oxford Circus. Why can't you simply buy a cheap day return from Crystal Palace to Oxford Circus? Instead you *have* to buy a One Day Travelcard for zones 1-4, which means you're also paying for the flexibility of travelling to Morden, Mill Hill East, Waterloo, and dozens of other places that you won't actually visit today! Why? It is probably cheaper (almost certainly, if you have Pre-pay) to buy a ticket from Oxford Circus to Brixton & then take one of the 3 or 4 buses that go from there to Crystal Palace, and reverse it. There is no obligation on you to buy a Travelcard if you don't want to. -- "Mrs Redboots" http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/ Website updated 23 January 2005 with new photos |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
--- Solar Penguin said...
For example, the development of GPS systems means that it's possible to calculate the straight-line, as-the-crow-flies distance between stations, and use that as a basis for a point-to-point system. (This way, we eliminate much of the complicated routing nonsense which makes NR's present fares system so awkward. After all, from the customer's POV it's only the start and end points that really matter, not the places in between.) Multiply that straight-line distance by a fixed pounds-per-mile rate, and you get the base cost of the ticket. You can then add on various fixed value premiums for premium services, e.g. ** travelling first class ** travelling by an express train instead of a stopping train ** even travelling by a train instead of a bus (assuming that this could be the basis for tickets on all modes of transport) Oops. I forgot to add that CDRs etc. can be treated as a fixed premium added to the single fare at this point. Should've double checked everything before I pressed Send. Sorry. -- "Konstanza stopped, sighed, and leaned against a large black wireless. You are standing in what others think of her." -- MegaHal |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
--- Mrs Redboots said...
Why? It is probably cheaper (almost certainly, if you have Pre-pay) to buy a ticket from Oxford Circus to Brixton & then take one of the 3 or 4 buses that go from there to Crystal Palace, and reverse it. Or even take a Number 3 bus all the way from Crystal Palace to Oxford Circus. The only trouble with these methods is that you end up having to travel on a bus. Not a pleasant way to travel at the best of times. Worse, it means you're on a double-decker bus, which means annoyingly low headroom. (Well, unless you get the single decker 322 from Crystal Palce to Brixton, but that goes via a very long way round and takes forever, so even the double deckers are preferable to it.) (And besides, it's all academic because I don't have Pre-pay anyway. It isn't valid on my local NR services and I don't travel by bus enough to bother with it.) -- "Through the pigeonhole flew a carrier pigeon. There was something attached to its leg. It was a postman." -- Spike Milligan. |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
Solar Penguin wrote to uk.transport.london on Sat, 12 Feb 2005:
--- Mrs Redboots said... Why? It is probably cheaper (almost certainly, if you have Pre-pay) to buy a ticket from Oxford Circus to Brixton & then take one of the 3 or 4 buses that go from there to Crystal Palace, and reverse it. Or even take a Number 3 bus all the way from Crystal Palace to Oxford Circus. The only trouble with these methods is that you end up having to travel on a bus. Not a pleasant way to travel at the best of times. But infinitely preferable to the Tube! Worse, it means you're on a double-decker bus, which means annoyingly low headroom. (Well, unless you get the single decker 322 from Crystal Palce to Brixton, but that goes via a very long way round and takes forever, so even the double deckers are preferable to it.) And you can't see out of a single-decker. But sat in the front seat upstairs on a double-decker (and since those are just by the stairs, no problem with headroom), and in no hurry, it's a joy! (And besides, it's all academic because I don't have Pre-pay anyway. It isn't valid on my local NR services and I don't travel by bus enough to bother with it.) Well, that is fair enough! -- "Mrs Redboots" http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/ Website updated 23 January 2005 with new photos |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
--- Mrs Redboots said...
Solar Penguin wrote to uk.transport.london on Sat, 12 Feb 2005: Not a pleasant way to travel at the best of times. But infinitely preferable to the Tube! And yet you'd take the Tube all the way from Brixton, instead of just a couple of stops from Victoria to Oxford Circus. :-) Ok... Just to prevent this thread turning into a dull debate on the subjective merits of Tube vs. single deckers vs. double deckers, I'll withdraw my original statement and replace it with: Suppose you want to travel, for example, from Crystal Palace to Oxford Circus *by* *train* *and* *tube*. Why can't you simply buy a cheap day return from Crystal Palace to Oxford Circus? Instead you have to buy a One Day Travelcard for zones 1-4, which means you're also paying for the flexibility of travelling to Morden, Mill Hill East, Waterloo, and dozens of other places that you won't actually visit today! How's that...? -- "Sexaphones are bad." -- Yads |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
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. |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
--- tim said...
It's complicated in the sense that all journeys are individually priced. And why is being individually priced a bad thing? Look at the example I gave elsewhere in the thread: the Northern Line ticket from Morden to Waterloo costs the same as the ticket from Morden going all the way to Mill Hill East. Passangers to Waterloo are paying for around twice as much journey than they actually use. An individually priced Morden-Waterloo ticket would solve this problem. -- "What a wonderful butler - he's so violent!" -- Douglas Adams. |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
Nick wrote:
"Dave Arquati" wrote in message ... ... I fail to see how an uncomplicated system which people can actually understand is a problem. Zones are essentially distance-based, but take into account a need to be flexible with travel plans, the fact that central London is much busier than outer London, and keep people happy when they can easily understand what fare they will pay. ... Plus, this idea that fares need to be "simple" is far too overplayed IMO. So what if some cheaper fares are a little more complicated to undestand the restrictions of? For people who travel to London occasionally or tourists, I can see the need for a fairly simple ticketing scheme, be it zonal or whatever, and our existing Travelcard fits the bill nicely. But for the vast majority of us, hardened London commuters who know our routes very well indeed, we can surely be exposed to a little choice in our ticketing range so we can opt to spend less and restrict our ticket availability to match our modes of transport? I understand that if you're a regular commuter then you want a little choice in your ticketing range. However, I highly doubt that TfL are going to abandon rail-only seasons - if they do, then you have my support to protest extensively as the cheaper price of rail-only seasons encourages people not to change to the Underground if it's not necessary, avoiding extra overcrowding. I'm sure TfL are intelligent enough to recognise that too. We are talking about single/return fares. Now, any single fare that involves through Tube-train travel will almost certainly be cheaper under the TfL zonal mechanism than the current fare, as that extra £2 or more for the Tube journey will be absorbed. The same probably applies for CDR+Tube as it's an extra £4 that's being added for the Tube. For rail-only journeys outside Zone 1, TfL fares will also probably be cheaper - they're a maximum of £1.80 under Oyster for longer journeys or £1.30 for shorter ones. All that's left are day return journeys to London terminals, which would unfortunately be more expensive under this system. Single would be £2.50 from a Zone 4 station, return would be £4.70 (capped to the price of a Travelcard). If we take Crystal Palace as an example, a single to Victoria would be £3.10 now, or a return would be £3.60. On the plus side, you get free bus and tube travel "thrown in". I guess it all depends what proportion of day-returners arriving at London terminals don't use any other transport during the day. -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - transport projects in London |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
On Sat, 12 Feb 2005, Solar Penguin wrote:
Distance based? Then how come a ticket from Morden to Waterloo (zones 1-4) costs the same as a ticket from Morden all the way to Mill Hill East? When zone-based fares are used, it's always possible to find anomalies. It's a compromise, done on the basis of simplicity. There's possibly a case to be made for ring zones being charged extra if you use them on both sided of the core, than if you only go core-to-ring or ring-to-core. That worked well in Munich, where most of the services through the rings were more-or-less axial. But with the much better connectivity of London, you'd then have people going by circumferential routes to avoid leaving their ring zone. Then you'd need some kind of honeycomb zoning system, like they have in certain other mass conurbations. Is it really fair that passengers only going as far as Waterloo should pay for *twice* the distance they're actually travelling? Fares for a single journey include not only the distance travelled, but also an element of the cost of the whole fare "system", including issuing equipment, issuing staff, ticket inspectors, gate systems etc. etc. - with the whole thing then modified by political policies, subsidies and I don't know what. If you insist on making the system more complex, you could well finish up with the economic cost of your Morden - Waterloo fare being higher than you would have previously paid to Mill Hill East. Swings and roundabouts. And how are people happy when "they can easily understand" that they're being charged *twice* as much You mean they aren't happy on the occasions they want to travel "twice" the distance and it's the same fare? It can cut both ways. as they should be charged? The tariff says what they /should/ be charged. Or do you have some special insight into the economics of the fare system? |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
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. |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
Solar Penguin wrote:
--- Dave Arquati said... I fail to see how an uncomplicated system which people can actually understand is a problem. Zones are essentially distance-based Distance based? Then how come a ticket from Morden to Waterloo (zones 1-4) costs the same as a ticket from Morden all the way to Mill Hill East? Is it really fair that passengers only going as far as Waterloo should pay for *twice* the distance they're actually travelling? What makes you think that passengers to Waterloo are paying twice the distance they're travelling? Given that the number of people travelling from Morden to Zone 1 must *vastly* outnumber those travelling beyond into northern parts of the outer zones, I find it much more likely that passengers to Mill Hill East are actually paying *less* than they would under a point-to-point system. Do you really think that under a point-to-point system, a fare to a central London station would be *less*? and keep people happy when they can easily understand what fare they will pay. And how are people happy when "they can easily understand" that they're being charged *twice* as much as they should be charged? That might make you happy, but I'm not so easily pleased! They're not being charged twice what they should; the Mill Hill East travellers are paying less than they would under your system. I'm quite happy that should I decide to travel from one side of London to the other, I'm paying less under the current system. How would Travelcards - the most useful and flexible ticket - work under a point-to-point system? You say "flexible" like it's a good thing. But it isn't. It's just a con to make you pay for routes you don't actually use. Either single/return fares decrease - which is unlikely and would be a bad move on the part of TfL as it would increase Tube crowding and reduce revenue - or Travelcard prices increase, which doesn't really benefit anyone. People aren't always making a simple return journey; they may have several destinations to visit. Why should they be penalised just because you think that it's wrong that a Travelcard is cheaper than a return ticket in some cases? Return tickets certainly aren't going to decrease in price, so the only other way is for Travelcards to increase. Suppose you want to travel, for example, from Crystal Palace to Oxford Circus. Why can't you simply buy a cheap day return from Crystal Palace to Oxford Circus? Instead you *have* to buy a One Day Travelcard for zones 1-4, which means you're also paying for the flexibility of travelling to Morden, Mill Hill East, Waterloo, and dozens of other places that you won't actually visit today! You *can* buy a return between those stations, but it's more expensive than a Travelcard, so you get a Travelcard instead. You're not paying more, you're paying less!!! I don't see the problem. You think that you're paying for that extra flexibility but you're not, as the inflexible return ticket is more expensive and isn't going to get any cheaper. The National Rail fares system is a complicated mess at the moment, and hardly sets a good example for London to revert to. I agree that the NR system could be streamlined. So let's concentrate on streamlining it, instead of scrapping it and replacing it with something worse. I wouldn't advocate a zonal scheme for the entire NR system; we're talking about Greater London, where a zonal system suits the demands placed upon the network. However, I would support streamlining the NR system, so let's have a look at your plan. For example, the development of GPS systems means that it's possible to calculate the straight-line, as-the-crow-flies distance between stations, and use that as a basis for a point-to-point system. (This way, we eliminate much of the complicated routing nonsense which makes NR's present fares system so awkward. After all, from the customer's POV it's only the start and end points that really matter, not the places in between.) Multiply that straight-line distance by a fixed pounds-per-mile rate, and you get the base cost of the ticket. You can then add on various fixed value premiums for premium services, e.g. ** travelling first class ** travelling by an express train instead of a stopping train ** even travelling by a train instead of a bus (assuming that this could be the basis for tickets on all modes of transport) Give the customers an itemised receipt along with their ticket, and they can easily understand how the fare was worked out. It's a nice idea (and I especially support a ticket for all modes of transport), but you need a method of managing demand on busy routes and in busy areas too. And while we're at it, let's get rid of pointless things like: ** different rates for adults and children. (After all, if you buy a magazine or a can of drink, the shop won't charge you extra just because you happen to be an adult. Why should adults buying train tickets be penalised that way?) What about families? Rail can't possibly compete with car without some sort of discount for groups travelling together. And once again, I think you'll find the child is being undercharged (i.e. encouraged), rather than the adult being overcharged (i.e. penalised). ** cheaper prices for tickets bought in advance. (If you buy a tin of baked beans, the supermarket won't give you a discount if you leave the tin on your shelf for a week with out opening it. The newsagent won't reduce the price of a magazine if you keep it instead of reading it right away. So why should tickets be cheaper if you don't use them straight away?) Train journeys are hardly comparable to baked beans or magazines. This is again an issue to do with demand management; encourage people to book in advance for busy trains, and encourage them to use less busy trains, resulting in a lessening of overcrowding. However, I do think that turn-up-and-go fares are just too expensive in many cases to be worthwhile except for business passengers. Even if they can't be reduced, making the availability of cheaper advance fares more transparent would make people happier, rather than the Ryanair method where you can't get a cheap fare without trawling through dozens of different flight combinations. There we are. A nice, simple, streamlined, easy to follow system, based entirely on the point-to-point system, and which cannot overcharge people the way a zonal system does. That's the sort of thing the rail companies should be aiming for. Not making things worse by forcing zones on people. I never said the whole NR network should be subjected to zonal fares. Your system certainly has some merit; however, it falls down in one major factor, which is demand management, dealt with quite simply and easily by a zonal system in cities. The main example of a distance-based fares system in this country is road traffic; journeys increase in cost proportional to distance (combined with some element of fuel efficiency). Look at how unsuccessful that system is in dealing with demand in cities and on trunk routes. There is also an issue with understanding; people don't really care what the distance is between their journey points, but journey time and price are very important. In London, if people want to perform any journey in London they haven't done before, the price, based on a zonal system, is very transparent - what zones do I travel through? With a distance-based system, it's only possible to make an informed decision by using some computer-based tool (or consulting an extremely large set of tables). -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - transport projects in London |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
"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 |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
Solar Penguin wrote to uk.transport.london on Sat, 12 Feb 2005:
--- Mrs Redboots said... Solar Penguin wrote to uk.transport.london on Sat, 12 Feb 2005: Not a pleasant way to travel at the best of times. But infinitely preferable to the Tube! And yet you'd take the Tube all the way from Brixton, instead of just a couple of stops from Victoria to Oxford Circus. :-) No I wouldn't - I suggested you might want to! Ok... Just to prevent this thread turning into a dull debate on the subjective merits of Tube vs. single deckers vs. double deckers, I'll withdraw my original statement and replace it with: Suppose you want to travel, for example, from Crystal Palace to Oxford Circus *by* *train* *and* *tube*. Why can't you simply buy a cheap day return from Crystal Palace to Oxford Circus? Instead you have to buy a One Day Travelcard for zones 1-4, which means you're also paying for the flexibility of travelling to Morden, Mill Hill East, Waterloo, and dozens of other places that you won't actually visit today! How's that...? Still untrue. You can buy a Network Rail ticket & a Tube ticket separately, there's no law requiring you to buy a Travelcard! Of course, the former would cost you a minimum of £7.10 return, while the Travelcard would cost you £5.20 and you would have the option of deciding to go somewhere else that evening and not have to pay more for your transport, but hey, it's a free country! -- "Mrs Redboots" http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/ Website updated 23 January 2005 with new photos |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
"Solar Penguin" wrote in message ... --- tim said... It's complicated in the sense that all journeys are individually priced. And why is being individually priced a bad thing? that depends upon whether you think a proper zonal system is a good thing. I happen to think that it is. Pity London doesn't have one. Look at the example I gave elsewhere in the thread: the Northern Line ticket from Morden to Waterloo costs the same as the ticket from Morden going all the way to Mill Hill East. Passangers to Waterloo are paying for around twice as much journey than they actually use. An individually priced Morden-Waterloo ticket would solve this problem. So price London to Mill Hill as seven (or whatever it is) zones This is an implementation fault, not a reason not to have zones. tim |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
--- Mrs Redboots said...
Still untrue. You can buy a Network Rail ticket & a Tube ticket separately, there's no law requiring you to buy a Travelcard! Of course, the former would cost you a minimum of £7.10 return, while the Travelcard would cost you £5.20 Good point. But we're still charged £1.90 *less* for the chance to make *more* journeys. Or, alternatively, charged £1.90 more for the chance to make fewer journeys. Whichever way you look at it, it goes against common sense. Doesn't that indicate that there's something very wrong at the heart of the system..? Why shouldn't we be able to save money by not buying those journeys that we don't make? -- "We can't stand around here doing nothing. People will think we're workmen!" -- Spike Milligan |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
--- Alan J. Flavell said...
When zone-based fares are used, it's always possible to find anomalies. Yes, it's "always possible". Always possible, because zone based systems *always* go against common sense. Then you'd need some kind of honeycomb zoning system, like they have in certain other mass conurbations. Well, once you get to things like honeycombs, it's no longer really a zonal system anyway; just a sort of point-to-point system but with very big points that cover several stations at once. So, yeah, you're right, honeycombs could be a good idea. Fares for a single journey include not only the distance travelled, but also an element of the cost of the whole fare "system", including issuing equipment, issuing staff, ticket inspectors, gate systems etc. etc. - with the whole thing then modified by political policies, subsidies and I don't know what. If you insist on making the system more complex, you could well finish up with the economic cost of your Morden - Waterloo fare being higher than you would have previously paid to Mill Hill East. Swings and roundabouts. Would having seperate fares for Waterloo and Mill Hill East lead to *significantly* increased costs for equipment, staff, gates etc.? To turn the situation on its head -- Ken Livingstone's planning to force TfL's zones onto NR fares in London. How much will *that* cost for new equipment, staff, etc.? And how are people happy when "they can easily understand" that they're being charged *twice* as much You mean they aren't happy on the occasions they want to travel "twice" the distance and it's the same fare? It can cut both ways. And how many times do people actually want to travel across London on a long journey? Compare that to the number of times people just want to travel to Central London. I suspect there are more people getting ripped off then are getting good value. The tariff says what they /should/ be charged. Or do you have some special insight into the economics of the fare system? The only insight I have is good old fashioned common sense. You should try it sometime. -- "A couple of weeks. When I get all these invisible women. Nikki discovers her obnoxious landlords are competing in a farmhouse?" -- MegaHal. |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
--- Dave Arquati said...
What makes you think that passengers to Waterloo are paying twice the distance they're travelling? Given that the number of people travelling from Morden to Zone 1 must *vastly* outnumber those travelling beyond into northern parts of the outer zones, I find it much more likely that passengers to Mill Hill East are actually paying *less* than they would under a point-to-point system. Ahhh... You think it's those elusive across-London-to-Mill-Hill-East passengers that TfL are so eager to attract with artificially low fares? Or given that the number of people travelling from Morden to Zone 1 must *vastly* outnumber those travelling beyond into northern parts of the outer zones, is it more likely that TfL have artificially high prices to discourage all those passengers congesting the network and only going into zone 1. Artificially low fares to MHW or artificially high fares to zone 1? Which are they really doing? Either way, it doesn't matter, as long as they're stopped. They're not being charged twice what they should; the Mill Hill East travellers are paying less than they would under your system. And how many times do people actually want to travel across London to Mill Hill East? Compare that to the number of times people want to travel to Central London. There are more people getting ripped off than there are getting good value. You *can* buy a return between those stations, but it's more expensive than a Travelcard, so you get a Travelcard instead. And that's exactly what I'm complaining about! Common sense says a return should cost less than a Travelcard. The fact that it costs more is **proof** that there's something seriously wrong with the current system. What more evidence do you need!?! (*snip vague off-the-top-of-my-head ideas about ways to streamline a poin-to-point fares system*) It's a nice idea (and I especially support a ticket for all modes of transport), but you need a method of managing demand on busy routes and in busy areas too. Why? That just gives the transport providers an excuse for not increasing supply to match demand. What about families? Rail can't possibly compete with car without some sort of discount for groups travelling together. Well, if you really want to encourage families, then myabe children could be added as a supplement to the adult ticket along with the first class supplement etc. Or just add a surcharge to all adult tickets. (But it's starting to get complicated again. It's worth going for the simpler system, especially if it means we don't have to put up with noisy kids on our trains! Keep them in cars, where only their parents will have to suffer! nirg) And once again, I think you'll find the child is being undercharged (i.e. encouraged), rather than the adult being overcharged (i.e. penalised). It works both ways. You can't aid the children without also penalising the adults. Train journeys are hardly comparable to baked beans or magazines. But they could become comparable. That's what I'm aiming towards with this system. Your system certainly has some merit; however, it falls down in one major factor, which is demand management, dealt with quite simply and easily by a zonal system in cities. OTOH I'd say the fact that it doesn't have any demand management nonsense is a big advantage of my scheme. It gives the transport providers some incentive to actually improve the supply of transport where it's needed most, instead of discouraging customers from travelling. (E.g. if London had had something like that, instead of zones, maybe we'd have T2K and Crossrail by now!) There is also an issue with understanding; people don't really care what the distance is between their journey points, but journey time and price are very important. In London, if people want to perform any journey in London they haven't done before, the price, based on a zonal system, is very transparent - what zones do I travel through? With a distance-based system, it's only possible to make an informed decision by using some computer-based tool (or consulting an extremely large set of tables). OTOH looking at any map will allow you to estimate the distance and so give you a fairly good idea of what it would cost. -- "Oooooooooh! No, I haven't told you any personal stuff that was based on a blatant affair with the entity." -- MegaHal |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
On Sat, 12 Feb 2005, Solar Penguin wrote:
The only insight I have is good old fashioned common sense. You should try it sometime. Congratulations, your application has been accepted without needing to refer it to the committee. (TINC). |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
Solar Penguin wrote to uk.transport.london on Sat, 12 Feb 2005:
--- Mrs Redboots said... Still untrue. You can buy a Network Rail ticket & a Tube ticket separately, there's no law requiring you to buy a Travelcard! Of course, the former would cost you a minimum of £7.10 return, while the Travelcard would cost you £5.20 Good point. But we're still charged £1.90 *less* for the chance to make *more* journeys. Or, alternatively, charged £1.90 more for the chance to make fewer journeys. Whichever way you look at it, it goes against common sense. Doesn't that indicate that there's something very wrong at the heart of the system..? Why shouldn't we be able to save money by not buying those journeys that we don't make? Perhaps it's like those "Buy two for £2.00" offers at Tesco (or "Two for £5.00"), where whatever it is, is often too expensive to be worth it if you only wanted one, but two is a bit much, really..... -- "Mrs Redboots" http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/ Website updated 23 January 2005 with new photos |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
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. |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
Solar Penguin wrote:
--- Dave Arquati said... What makes you think that passengers to Waterloo are paying twice the distance they're travelling? Given that the number of people travelling from Morden to Zone 1 must *vastly* outnumber those travelling beyond into northern parts of the outer zones, I find it much more likely that passengers to Mill Hill East are actually paying *less* than they would under a point-to-point system. Ahhh... You think it's those elusive across-London-to-Mill-Hill-East passengers that TfL are so eager to attract with artificially low fares? Or given that the number of people travelling from Morden to Zone 1 must *vastly* outnumber those travelling beyond into northern parts of the outer zones, is it more likely that TfL have artificially high prices to discourage all those passengers congesting the network and only going into zone 1. Artificially low fares to MHW or artificially high fares to zone 1? Which are they really doing? Either way, it doesn't matter, as long as they're stopped. How can fares be "artificially high"? It's not like thousands of Zone 1 commuters are subsidising about ten Mill Hill East ones. TfL's fare prices do discourage some from congesting the network in zone 1. I don't see the problem; it's simple economics - you have a supply which can't meet demand, so you raise the price of the product. The only artificiality is that the price is subsidised by the state for social reasons. If TfL fares were completely "natural", then they would probably be significantly higher than they are now, and London would cease to have a transport system that served the needs of its population. The fares are what they are; enough to allow people to actually travel, but not enough to prevent excessive overcrowding, and somewhere vaguely in the middle when it comes to raising money for improvements and covering operating costs. They're not being charged twice what they should; the Mill Hill East travellers are paying less than they would under your system. And how many times do people actually want to travel across London to Mill Hill East? Compare that to the number of times people want to travel to Central London. There are more people getting ripped off than there are getting good value. You raised the example. I agree that few people want to travel across London to MHE, so does it really matter that their fares are the same as a fare into Zone 1? Good value is a sticky concept when it comes to the Tube, but lowering fares to Zone 1 would be disastrous financially for TfL, so the only remaining strategy would be to raise fares for cross-London journeys, which would probably only raise marginal extra revenues. You *can* buy a return between those stations, but it's more expensive than a Travelcard, so you get a Travelcard instead. And that's exactly what I'm complaining about! Common sense says a return should cost less than a Travelcard. The fact that it costs more is **proof** that there's something seriously wrong with the current system. What more evidence do you need!?! Don't get so worked up about the fact that Travelcards cost less than returns in some cases! I say "in some cases" as Zone 1 and 2 fares make sense by your definition. We were comparing baked beans to TfL tickets. Annabel rightly pointed out that Tesco might offer 2 cans of baked beans for 40p when one can costs 25p. That's not a bad thing - you're saving money! Why is it done? It's to encourage people to buy more baked beans, even if they don't go into the shop wanting two cans. TfL want to encourage people to use public transport. You might only be in the market for a return journey, but it happens that a Travelcard costs less than that return journey. You pay less than a return journey; is that a bad thing? Behind the scenes, I'm sure TfL are acutely aware that Travelcards cost less than returns from zone 3 outwards. They obviously don't consider it a problem. The Travelcard system has been designed to make sure the fares are allocated appropriately, by measuring the numbers of passengers on services across the system, and distributing revenues accordingly. As for flexibility, I once travelled from Gloucester Road to Arnos Grove and back. I bought a Travelcard because it was cheaper than two singles at the time (although now, for off-peak journeys, Prepay singles are cheaper). On the way back, my train stopped for ten minutes at Bounds Green, where it was announced that there was some problem at Hyde Park Corner causing extensive delays to the Piccadilly line. Having a Travelcard, I left the Tube and walked to Bowes Park, caught a train to Highbury & Islington and got on the Victoria line. Then they announced some problem on the Victoria line and the train took an age to get to King's Cross, so I got out, gave up on the Tube and took a bus. Did I originally need a Travelcard? No. Was it useful? Yes. Was it cheaper? Yes. In an alternative scenario where a return fare was cheaper and a Travelcard was the same price as originally, I would have been worse off - yes, I saved money, but my ticket was inflexible so I would have had difficulty getting the train or bus, and TfL would have been worse off, as they would be receiving less money to put towards fixing these annoyingly regular occurrences. In an alternative scenario where a return fare was the same price as before but a Travelcard was more expensive, I would have been worse off - it didn't cost me any different, but again I had an inflexible ticket. The people who don't just make a simple return journey would also have been worse off as their tickets would have been more expensive. (*snip vague off-the-top-of-my-head ideas about ways to streamline a poin-to-point fares system*) It's a nice idea (and I especially support a ticket for all modes of transport), but you need a method of managing demand on busy routes and in busy areas too. Why? That just gives the transport providers an excuse for not increasing supply to match demand. Where does all the money come from to increase the supply? Would you prefer to be left waiting on platforms in the meantime because you can't physically fit on the train? In many cases, supply is at 100% of capacity or even above (e.g. approaches to London Bridge). The solutions cost billions of pounds. How will lowering fares help? Without any demand management, the transport providers will be incapable of providing the service that you have paid for. That is no solution by anyone's standards. What about families? Rail can't possibly compete with car without some sort of discount for groups travelling together. Well, if you really want to encourage families, then myabe children could be added as a supplement to the adult ticket along with the first class supplement etc. Or just add a surcharge to all adult tickets. (But it's starting to get complicated again. It's worth going for the simpler system, especially if it means we don't have to put up with noisy kids on our trains! Keep them in cars, where only their parents will have to suffer! nirg) You could offer a ticket supplement which offers free sedative-spiked drinks for children. More seriously, it's not a good idea just to say "keep them in cars"; not all families have a car, and we don't really want cars to be used more than necessary (certainly not in London). And once again, I think you'll find the child is being undercharged (i.e. encouraged), rather than the adult being overcharged (i.e. penalised). It works both ways. You can't aid the children without also penalising the adults. You're not penalising the adults if their tickets cost the same as they would have done in the first place! Train journeys are hardly comparable to baked beans or magazines. But they could become comparable. That's what I'm aiming towards with this system. See above, special offers. Your system certainly has some merit; however, it falls down in one major factor, which is demand management, dealt with quite simply and easily by a zonal system in cities. OTOH I'd say the fact that it doesn't have any demand management nonsense is a big advantage of my scheme. It gives the transport providers some incentive to actually improve the supply of transport where it's needed most, instead of discouraging customers from travelling. (E.g. if London had had something like that, instead of zones, maybe we'd have T2K and Crossrail by now!) It's ludicrous to say that demand management is a "nonsense"; it clearly works very well for planes and lack of it causes untold misery for motorists. One of the advantages of road user charging is that it would manage demand, provide new income to improve transport and doesn't charge motorists in lightly-trafficked areas the same way as a motorist in the centre of a huge city. If we are considering making that step forward on the roads, why would we make a step back on the railways and charge someone travelling 3 miles through rural Cornwall the same price as someone travelling 3 miles through inner London? Cutting revenue and causing unnecessary extra overcrowding and customer dissatisfaction is hardly an incentive to improve supply. There is also an issue with understanding; people don't really care what the distance is between their journey points, but journey time and price are very important. In London, if people want to perform any journey in London they haven't done before, the price, based on a zonal system, is very transparent - what zones do I travel through? With a distance-based system, it's only possible to make an informed decision by using some computer-based tool (or consulting an extremely large set of tables). OTOH looking at any map will allow you to estimate the distance and so give you a fairly good idea of what it would cost. Not very useful in London where you either have a simple schematic map or a visually intimidating geographical one. -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - transport projects in London |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
"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 |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
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. |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
In message , Dave Arquati
writes We were comparing baked beans to TfL tickets. Annabel rightly pointed out that Tesco might offer 2 cans of baked beans for 40p when one can costs 25p. That's not a bad thing - you're saving money! I've never known them do that (and I don't think that is what Annabel meant). Baked beans last for years, so the consumer would need only half the quantity and thus Tesco would lose out. Much more common is to offer two bags of veg or salad (or two almost expired pizzas) for a reduced price. People fall for the offer but cannot consume that much fresh food before it goes off - so they throw away the out-of-date goods. They then need to buy the same quantity of goods as before ... so instead of selling two lots of goods at 25p, Tesco has managed to sell one at 40p and the other at 25p (if not 40p again!). Sadly, this is becoming *very* common (especially in Sainsburys, but also Tesco). Getting back on topic, rail-fare offers will only make an impact if a reasonable number of people can benefit from them - if the benefit is limited to a few people, the benefit to the TOC will similarly be very limited. -- Paul Terry |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
Solar Penguin wrote:
--- Solar Penguin said... For example, the development of GPS systems means that it's possible to calculate the straight-line, as-the-crow-flies distance between stations, and use that as a basis for a point-to-point system. (This way, we eliminate much of the complicated routing nonsense which makes NR's present fares system so awkward. After all, from the customer's POV it's only the start and end points that really matter, not the places in between.) Multiply that straight-line distance by a fixed pounds-per-mile rate, and you get the base cost of the ticket. You can then add on various fixed value premiums for premium services, e.g. ** travelling first class ** travelling by an express train instead of a stopping train ** even travelling by a train instead of a bus (assuming that this could be the basis for tickets on all modes of transport) Oops. I forgot to add that CDRs etc. can be treated as a fixed premium added to the single fare at this point. Should've double checked everything before I pressed Send. Sorry. Just to throw this into all the other arguments, if it's illogical that a Travelcard costs less than some singles, then it's also illogical that a return should cost less than two singles. Why would you price a CDR as a fixed premium added to the single fare? -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
Paul Terry wrote:
In message , Dave Arquati writes We were comparing baked beans to TfL tickets. Annabel rightly pointed out that Tesco might offer 2 cans of baked beans for 40p when one can costs 25p. That's not a bad thing - you're saving money! I've never known them do that (and I don't think that is what Annabel meant). Baked beans last for years, so the consumer would need only half the quantity and thus Tesco would lose out. Much more common is to offer two bags of veg or salad (or two almost expired pizzas) for a reduced price. People fall for the offer but cannot consume that much fresh food before it goes off - so they throw away the out-of-date goods. They then need to buy the same quantity of goods as before ... so instead of selling two lots of goods at 25p, Tesco has managed to sell one at 40p and the other at 25p (if not 40p again!). Sadly, this is becoming *very* common (especially in Sainsburys, but also Tesco). Oh dear, I didn't really mean to start a debate about Tesco pricing policies... I'm pretty sure that Annabel meant that sometimes, two goods are offered together for a price that is cheaper than their individual prices combined. They might not sell two baked beans cans for a discount, but they certainly *do* sell four cans for a discount - multipacks. Personally, my purchase of baked beans is related to how many I can carry back from the supermarket... Getting back on topic, rail-fare offers will only make an impact if a reasonable number of people can benefit from them - if the benefit is limited to a few people, the benefit to the TOC will similarly be very limited. -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
Future of CDRs and NR season tickets in TfL zones?
On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 20:09:49 +0000, Paul Terry wrote in
, seen in uk.railway: In message , Dave Arquati writes We were comparing baked beans to TfL tickets. Annabel rightly pointed out that Tesco might offer 2 cans of baked beans for 40p when one can costs 25p. That's not a bad thing - you're saving money! I've never known them do that [...] There's a BOGOF on Crosse & Blackwell 4-can packs of baked beans (and other C&B items, for that matter) at Tesco at the moment. Ob.railway? Err.. Can't think of one. Oh, I know: the sandwich shop outside Lincoln station (now defunct) had the annoying habit of putting baked beans, with lots of sauce, on its breakfast rolls, thus making them very messy eating on the train. The sandwich stall outside Sleaford station, OTOH, doesn't - and makes an excellent sausage, bacon & egg roll. Ideal for those mornings when you really need a decent brekkie - and as she takes phone orders I don't even have to delay my train whilst it's cooked. ;-) -- Ross, a.k.a. Prof. E. Scrooge, CT, 153 & bar, Doctor of Cynicism (U. Life) |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 04:01 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk