On Tue, 1 Nov 2005 19:45:33 +0000, Paul Terry
wrote:

Fine by me and most others I've seen contributing on here. However
when the argument is extended to what seems to be little more than "I could
use Oyster but I choose not to, but I don't want to be penalised for that
choice" then that is where a lot of people feel the argument is extremely
weak.

I don't think you *can* choose to use Oyster if part of your journey
within London involves travel on the many TOCs that won't accept Oyster
for occasional journeys.

Correct, but that's not the situation we're talking about - you're not
getting "penalised" for not using Oyster. You would be only if you
were buying tube or bus single tickets.

In message , Paul Terry
writes
Which is why I said I am not "anti-Oyster" - I am just one of the huge
number of people for whom Oyster offers nothing but increased expense.
Until Uncle Ken can address that issue, the take-up of Oyster will
remain limited, and will discriminate (as the London Assembly has
pointed out) against many Londoners who don't rely on TfL for their
entire journey.
And as uncle Ken has pointed out, he has offered to put in for free all
the Oyster readers on any NR station in the zonal area but NR are the
ones dragging their feet. Perhaps it's to NR that you should really
complain.
--
Clive

They get accused of being anti-Oyster when they complain about a
"rip-off" that is, in fact, not charging more to anyone but the
paranoid and the lazy.

Er, charging twice as much for cash as on Oyster isn't a rip-off? What
is this world you inhabit?

No. It is lack of thrift on your part not a 'rip-off'.

However, whenever anyone mentions this, we seem to be dubbed "the
anti-Oyster brigade" by people whose knowledge of travel patterns other
than their own seems somewhat limited.

You think so? It seems to me that most people actually acknowledge this
issue and where heated discussion arises it is where the root of someones
argument is actually, and I paraphrase, "I could use Oyster but I choose
not
to".

Well, I choose not to use Oyster because it is more expensive for the
journeys I make within London.

Indeed, and from what I can see most people would think that was an
excellent reason for not doing so and it would not be the cause of any
debate. My point is that the sort of discussion where accusations of being
'anti-Oyster' sometimes come up tend to be triggered by cases where someone
acknowledges that Oyster is available and the cheapest option and yet elects
not to use it for various reasons.

Fine by me and most others I've seen contributing on here. However
when the argument is extended to what seems to be little more than "I
could
use Oyster but I choose not to, but I don't want to be penalised for that
choice" then that is where a lot of people feel the argument is extremely
weak.

I don't think you *can* choose to use Oyster if part of your journey
within London involves travel on the many TOCs that won't accept Oyster
for occasional journeys.

Am I wrong? Are you saying that I can *choose* to use Oyster for my
occasional journeys from Richmond to Waterloo on SWT?

If I am right, I cannot see the *choice* you mention. I can brandish my
pre-pay Oyster as many times as I like to the inspectors on SWT, but I
will still be given a penalty fare, since the thing is invalid on huge
swathes of London's rail network.

Indeed. So clearly I could not have been referring to you in particular.
As I said previously the heated debates come about not in cases like yours,
but in cases where Oyster is a sensible option that is readily available yet
still not used. That in itself doesn't trigger the debate, it is when there
are then complaints about being treated unfairly as a result of that free
choice.

Personally, I am not "anti Oyster" at all - and I don't suppose Colin
is. I just wish the damn thing could actually manage to be as useful as
a daily travel card. Unfortunately it remains useless for occasional
travel on London's suburban rail network.

I should say I don't suppose Colin is particularly anti-Oyster either. He
is against the idea of there being an apparently excessive difference
between Oyster and cash prices for single journeys. I personally think the
force of his argument is not matched by the weight of his case but there you
go.

I totally agree, but I think we should express it differently. It is
absence
of Oyster that is the issue. Oyster itself is excellent as far as it
goes,
and it has to start somewhere.

Which is why I said I am not "anti-Oyster" - I am just one of the huge
number of people for whom Oyster offers nothing but increased expense.
Until Uncle Ken can address that issue, the take-up of Oyster will
remain limited, and will discriminate (as the London Assembly has
pointed out) against many Londoners who don't rely on TfL for their
entire journey.

I'm not really clear where the increased expense comes in. I also think the
discrimination argument is rather flimsy. Most of my journeys have a
National Rail component and I don't feel at all discriminated against. I
just take the convenience and cost benefits of Oyster where I can.

On Tue, 1 Nov 2005 19:23 +0000 (GMT Standard Time),
(Colin Rosenstiel) wrote:

In article ,
(James Farrar) wrote:

On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 12:44:17 +0000, Paul Terry
wrote:

In message , Clive
writes

If you can beat Oyster fares then why are you whinging?

I think Colin's point, with which I agree, is that there are a
number of types of journey that are more expensive using Oyster.

However, whenever anyone mentions this, we seem to be dubbed "the
anti-Oyster brigade" by people whose knowledge of travel patterns
other than their own seems somewhat limited.

They get accused of being anti-Oyster when they complain about a
"rip-off" that is, in fact, not charging more to anyone but the
paranoid and the lazy.

Er, charging twice as much for cash as on Oyster isn't a rip-off? What
is this world you inhabit?

A world when choosing to pay more is not being ripped off.

For single journeys, use Oyster or pay for the privilege of using a
paper ticket.

--
James Farrar
. @gmail.com

On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:18:36 +0000, U n d e r a c h i e v e r
wrote:

On 31/10/05 12:49 am, in article ,
"James Farrar" wrote:

Giving a *bigger* discount is a *rip-off*?

Yes, because the base fare which the discount is being applied to is
unreasonably high.

Another view is that the base fare is the Oyster fare; those who
choose to buy paper tickets can pay extra to do so.

As has been pointed out here, some people, myself included, will from time
to time pay cash.

You will choose to pay more than you need to? Why?

--
James Farrar
. @gmail.com

On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:06:14 +0000, U n d e r a c h i e v e r
wrote:

On 30/10/05 2:29 am, in article ,
"James Farrar" wrote:


Anyone not buying tickets often enough to bother to pay the £3 deposit,

If you're not bothered to pay a deposit you'll get back in as few as
two journeys, you deserve to pay through the nose.

My elderly father makes about two or three journeys per year by public
transport in London.

He does not 'deserve' to pay through the nose.

If he chooses to pay more than he needs to, he does.

--
James Farrar
. @gmail.com

Adrian wrote
Michael R N Dolbear ) gurgled happily,

For a single this is unlikely but since in your example even an
Z1-6
Travelcard is less than twice a £3.40 fare

Look past Zone 6.

For me, a pair of singles is over £3 cheaper than an ODTC - there
used to
be an LT card in the middle, but that got pulled.

Not understood. I carried on with the OP's example. If you have a
further example let's see the details.

When is 7DTC capping coming in on Oyster?

Probably never, the complexities, such as ODTC capping day by day, were
glanced at in a post on this NG.

--
Mike D

In article ,
(TKD) wrote:

They get accused of being anti-Oyster when they complain about a
"rip-off" that is, in fact, not charging more to anyone but the
paranoid and the lazy.

Er, charging twice as much for cash as on Oyster isn't a rip-off?
What is this world you inhabit?

No. It is lack of thrift on your part not a 'rip-off'.

I'm alright because I hardly use the things but what about the tourists?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Michael R N Dolbear ) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

For a single this is unlikely but since in your example even an
Z1-6 Travelcard is less than twice a £3.40 fare

Look past Zone 6.

For me, a pair of singles is over £3 cheaper than an ODTC - there
used to be an LT card in the middle, but that got pulled.

Not understood. I carried on with the OP's example. If you have a
further example let's see the details.

I'm in Zone B.

Single is £4.60
ODTC is £12.40
7DTC is £45.80

There used to be a thing called an "LT card" that was effectively an ODTC
except for not allowing use of (non-tube-fare) overland trains within the
zones. It was a tenner. It got pulled completely about a year ago.

When is 7DTC capping coming in on Oyster?

Probably never, the complexities, such as ODTC capping day by day, were
glanced at in a post on this NG.

Shame.

It would be the single biggest killer-app in terms of Oyster functionality
for me. I'm not in town every day - but some weeks I can be in four or five
times - but I don't usually know in advance how many.

Do I start the week with a 7DTC and risk over-paying because I'll only be
in three times?

Do I go for ODTCs and risk over-paying because I'll be in every weekday and
possibly at the weekend?

I doubt I'm unique, but it's magnified because of the ticket cost from
here.