London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London.

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #10   Report Post  
Old May 31st 09, 05:21 PM posted to uk.transport.london,uk.railway
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: May 2009
Posts: 29
Default Oyster revenue allocation question

On 31 May, 17:50, wrote:
On May 31, 1:33*pm, Mr Thant
wrote:

On 31 May, 13:02, "Andrew Heenan" wrote:


Thameslink already has two quite separate services, the metro (via the
Sutton Loop), and the Bedford to Brighton. It would make perfect sense for
LOROL to control the metro service, but not the long distance.


Except late at night when the trains run all stops Bedford - St P, and
during the peaks when the service patterns get complicated. They also
share stock and depots and drivers. It would take a major
reorganisation to try to run the metro service as a separate
operation.


But isn't the eventual plan that the suburban services will gain new 8
car trains, whilst the longer distance services will gain 12 car
trains. This will lead to a separation in the rolling stock at least.
The question is surely whether the service has to be completely
separate or whether the suburban section can be specified by TfL as a
signatory to the franchise, with a suitable arrangement of fare
allocations.


I would imagine that it might be better to create a new LOROL operator
for South London similar to LOROL in the North, maybe renamed to LOROL
2 with the services operated under contract to TfL on a strictly no
revenue-risk basis. These could be branded Overground similarly to the
North London services. Then these could be differentiated from the
Southern, SWT and Southeastern services and meet the minimum
requirement for metro-frequency in the suburbs which Overground will
eventually meet on all routes.

However, unfortunately there would still be the problem of other
Southern, Southeastern and Thameslink services which would call at
very few London Stations, but would still have to accept oyster. Thus
rebranding and restructuring Suburban services in South London in a
similar manor to Overground in the North while being beneficial in
other aspects, would not solve the problem of revenue allocation
because there would still be other operators not directly controlled
under TfL. So they are going to have to come to an agreement with the
4 south London TOCs which do not currently accept Oyster yet.


 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NR-only season tickets in London (was: Would it be lawful for non-London train and bus operators to share revenue?) Mizter T London Transport 1 October 6th 06 01:43 PM
How much revenue is lost through passengers with no tickets on bendibuses Paul London Transport 11 February 22nd 06 07:34 PM
Revenue sharing between TfL and TOCs TheOneKEA London Transport 10 December 6th 05 08:46 AM
Largest Bus Allocation Robert Woolley London Transport 8 September 17th 03 04:48 PM
Revenue protection Gooner London Transport 4 July 24th 03 06:28 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:50 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 London Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about London Transport"

 

Copyright © 2017