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

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.

"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

--- 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

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.

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

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

"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

"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

--- 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