As any fule kno, the southern TOCs are insisting on PAYG fares being
higher than Tube fares:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8107537.stm

But the BBC has managed to pick the most radically stupid example it
could possibly have chosen:

[begin quote]
For example, between Finsbury Park and King's Cross it costs £2.20 on
the Tube whereas it costs £4.00 on rail.
[end quote]

1) rail and tube tickets are interavailable between FPK and KGX
2) hence the fare is gbp4 because that's the Tube paper ticket fare
for a Z12 single journey
3) ...and Oyster PAYG is ALREADY VALID between FPK and KGX at the
gbp2.20 fare!

I despair...

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

On Jun 18, 4:00*pm, John B wrote:
As any fule kno, the southern TOCs are insisting on PAYG fares being
higher than Tube fares:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8107537.stm

But the BBC has managed to pick the most radically stupid example it
could possibly have chosen:

[begin quote]
For example, between Finsbury Park and King's Cross it costs £2.20 on
the Tube whereas it costs £4.00 on rail.
[end quote]

1) rail and tube tickets are interavailable between FPK and KGX
2) hence the fare is gbp4 because that's the Tube paper ticket fare
for a Z12 single journey
3) ...and Oyster PAYG is ALREADY VALID between FPK and KGX at the
gbp2.20 fare!

I despair...


Agreed - that is a *monumentally stupid* example.

A far better example would have been Balham (zone 3) to Victoria (zone
1). The Tube PAYG fare is £2.70/peak, £2.20/off-peak. A single rail
fare is £3.10 (within the London zones, all rail fares are conform to
the same fare scale and are all priced zonally, albeit issued on a
point-to-point basis).

This comment is interesting:
---quote---
The mayor said that although he "shared the aspiration" for a single
unified pay-as-you-go scale across London, fares on national rail
services in London are set by the train operators.
---/quote---

Well, not quite - as I've said, rail fares across London all now
conform to the same zonal fare scale as decreed by DfT Rail - this
change was implemented in January '07 as a precursor to the (eventual)
acceptance of Oyster PAYG on NR in London. TfL got DfT to make that
change - presumably however the TOCs got some input into setting these
base fares in 2007, and since then these fares have risen with
inflation (though I suppose the TOCs could lobby an acquiescent
government to raise them above a mere keeping-pace-with-inflation
increase).

Anyway one can only assume it is this fare scale that the TOCs want to
use for their Oyster PAYG on NR fares - which hardly comes as any big
surprise to be honest. Presumably there's no mechanism for the DfT
insisting upon the TOCs offering lower fares for Oyster PAYG journeys
(even if the DfT were so minded to do, which they wouldn't be)...
unless the DfT unilaterally changed the underlying zonal fare scale
for rail fares in London (i.e. to match the Tube PAYG fare scale), but
I'd assume that when these were introduced, the deal agreed between
the DfT and the TOCs was that (excluding inflation tracking changes)
this fare scale could only change by mutual agreement - and the TOCs
are hardly going to agree to lower fares.

Plus the TOCs were never going to be happy about effectively handing
over control of their fares to the Mayor, which is what a universal
fare scale for London could ensue - unless there was a mechanism
devised whereby both TfL and NR had an input into deciding the
universal fare scale. But one can imagine them pulling in opposite
directions - the TOCs wanting to raise fares, the Mayor wanting to
hold them steady or lower them (see Ken holding Tube fares at the same
level from one year to the next). Even if the Mayor was open to
putting up fares, I can see a distinct unwillingness to surrender the
ability to directly set fares to a new mechanism whereby said fares
were negotiated by TfL and the TOCs together - setting fares is one of
the direct levers the Mayor has, and it's something that has a direct
effect on Londonders who use TfL services (i.e. a good proportion of
one's electorate).

John B wrote:
As any fule kno, the southern TOCs are insisting on PAYG fares being
higher than Tube fares:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8107537.stm

But the BBC has managed to pick the most radically stupid example it
could possibly have chosen:

[begin quote]
For example, between Finsbury Park and King's Cross it costs £2.20 on
the Tube whereas it costs £4.00 on rail.
[end quote]

1) rail and tube tickets are interavailable between FPK and KGX
2) hence the fare is gbp4 because that's the Tube paper ticket fare
for a Z12 single journey
3) ...and Oyster PAYG is ALREADY VALID between FPK and KGX at the
gbp2.20 fare!

I despair...

Agree - although perhaps it is Caroline Pidgeon who doesn't understand that
there are joint ticketing arrangements already in place?

Whatever, I've brought this 'factual error' to their attention via the BBC
'contact us' page...

Paul S

Mizter T wrote:

Agreed - that is a *monumentally stupid* example.

A far better example would have been Balham (zone 3) to Victoria (zone
1). The Tube PAYG fare is £2.70/peak, £2.20/off-peak. A single rail
fare is £3.10 (within the London zones, all rail fares are conform to
the same fare scale and are all priced zonally, albeit issued on a
point-to-point basis).


But that isn't the full story, as it is only true when comparing single
fares. If (like most pax I imagine) you are clever enough to buy a 'rail'
standard return at £5.30 or off peak return at £4.10 it is less than the
equivalent two PAYG singles. I don't recall anything in the media that has
looked at that level of detail, it's more normal for them to go off on one
about the £4.00 cash fare (as in the BBC article above)...

So there is possibly an opportunity for the TOCs to move to LU like fare
scales within the zones on a cost neutral basis by switching to a singles
only system? Swings and roundabouts, slightly cheaper singles but no
returns...

Paul S

Mizter T wrote:
On Jun 18, 4:00 pm, John B wrote:
...

I despair...


Agreed - that is a *monumentally stupid* example.

A far better example would have been Balham (zone 3) to Victoria (zone
1). The Tube PAYG fare is £2.70/peak, £2.20/off-peak. A single rail
fare is £3.10 (within the London zones, all rail fares are conform to
the same fare scale and are all priced zonally, albeit issued on a
point-to-point basis).


The worst examples are likely to be in the suburbs, where comparing,
say, a Z3 to Z4 tube, north-of-river-TOC PAYG and south-of-river-TOC
PAYG is likely to provoke howls of outrage from the people who, let's
face it, are waiting longest anyway.

The example I'd toss out would be Chiswick-Brentford (SWT), Chiswick
Park-Boston Manor (Tube) and Acton Main Line-Hanwell (FGW), all Z3-Z4
trips over broadly similar distances (2, 4 and 3 stops respectively). I
know the first one is £2.10, the second is £1.10 and I'm pretty sure the
third is £1.10 as well, although I'm open to correction. Can anyone
confirm; are the existing National Rail PAYG schemes all on the Tube
fare scale even when you aren't going between Tube stations?

Tom

On Jun 18, 4:41*pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:

John B wrote:
As any fule kno, the southern TOCs are insisting on PAYG fares being
higher than Tube fares:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8107537.stm

But the BBC has managed to pick the most radically stupid example it
could possibly have chosen:

[begin quote]
For example, between Finsbury Park and King's Cross it costs £2.20 on
the Tube whereas it costs £4.00 on rail.
[end quote]

1) rail and tube tickets are interavailable between FPK and KGX
2) hence the fare is gbp4 because that's the Tube paper ticket fare
for a Z12 single journey
3) ...and Oyster PAYG is ALREADY VALID between FPK and KGX at the
gbp2.20 fare!

I despair...

Agree - although perhaps it is Caroline Pidgeon who doesn't understand that
there are joint ticketing arrangements already in place?

Whatever, I've brought this 'factual error' to their attention via the BBC
'contact us' page...


Thanks - we shall see if they manage to comprehend it...

*If* it was in fact Caroline Pidgeon's error, I don't think it's one
that would be made by Val Shawcross (Chair of the Assembly Transport
Cttee), who very much comes across as being on the ball about her
brief.

This story almost certainly emanates from the LibDem machine - nothing
wrong with that in and of itself I suppose, though it is a bit of an
opportunity to bash the Mayor for something essentially outside of his
control. I long ago gave up on any thought of a universal fare scale -
indeed I'm not sure I ever thought it was a realistic aspiration - and
settled on the prospect of PAYG fares on NR being the same price as
their paper equivalents. The push for a universal fare scale can wait
for another day (if indeed it ever comes) - simply getting PAYG up and
running on the railways is the first order of priority.

That said, for normal Londoners who have not been observing the
ongoing saga of PAYG on NR, the expectation that PAYG fares would be
the same on Tube and NR is totally understandable. The LibDems appear
to simply be tapping into this sentiment.

Tom Barry wrote:

The example I'd toss out would be Chiswick-Brentford (SWT), Chiswick
Park-Boston Manor (Tube) and Acton Main Line-Hanwell (FGW), all Z3-Z4
trips over broadly similar distances (2, 4 and 3 stops respectively).
I know the first one is £2.10, the second is £1.10 and I'm pretty
sure the third is £1.10 as well, although I'm open to correction. Can
anyone confirm; are the existing National Rail PAYG schemes all
on the Tube fare scale even when you aren't going between Tube
stations?

In fact NREs shows exactly the same fares for the SWT and FGW examples.
Which is as you'd expect, as although the FGW journey has PAYG it is not a
dual availability LU/NR route, ie the cash single isn't £4.00 like the
Finsbury Park - Kings Cross BBC example...

Paul S

On Jun 18, 5:00*pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:

Mizter T wrote:
Agreed - that is a *monumentally stupid* example.

A far better example would have been Balham (zone 3) to Victoria (zone
1). The Tube PAYG fare is £2.70/peak, £2.20/off-peak. A single rail
fare is £3.10 (within the London zones, all rail fares are conform to
the same fare scale and are all priced zonally, albeit issued on a
point-to-point basis).

But that isn't the full story, as it is only true when comparing single
fares. If (like most pax I imagine) you are clever enough to buy a 'rail'
standard return at £5.30 or off peak return at £4.10 it is less than the
equivalent two PAYG singles. *I don't recall anything in the media that has
looked at that level of detail, it's more normal for them to go off on one
about the £4.00 cash fare (as in the BBC article above)...

Agreed - I kept the example simple and so didn't mention return fares
(I recall posters on 'one'/NXEA advertising their 'increased
acceptance' of Oyster PAYG specifically pointing out that a CDR could
nonetheless be cheaper).

The return fare situation can be complicated further by the existence
of capping too - and there remains the question of how combined LU+NR
journeys would be priced.


So there is possibly an opportunity for the TOCs to move to LU like fare
scales within the zones on a cost neutral basis by switching to a singles
only system? Swings and roundabouts, slightly cheaper singles but no
returns...

I have thought of this before - however they ditched return tickets,
then that could perhaps have adverse knock-on effects - e.g. people
arriving at the Surbiton ticket office and asking for a return from
Esher, or going to Knockholt and asking for returns from Dunton Green
or Sevenoaks.

I didn't really follow the story at the time (though I've been
intending to look into it ever since), but there was a bit of a
controversy when London Overground took over from Silverlink Metro and
initially ditched a number of CDR fares - only to have to reinstate at
least some of them after complaints were made (presumably these were
journeys for which 2x PAYG single fare was a significant increase over
the CDR). Afraid I'm hazy on the details - but that's perhaps an
example of how an LU-like single fares only policy didn't translate
too well when they tried to apply it elsewhere.

I know the first one is £2.10, the second is £1.10 and I'm pretty
sure the third is £1.10 as well, although I'm open to correction. Can
anyone confirm; are the existing National Rail PAYG schemes all
on the Tube fare scale even when you aren't going between Tube
stations?

In fact NREs shows exactly the same fares for the SWT and FGW examples.
Which is as you'd expect, as although the FGW journey has PAYG it is not a
dual availability LU/NR route, ie the cash single isn't *£4.00 like the
Finsbury Park - Kings Cross BBC example...

I have travelled Hayes & Harlinhgton - Hanwell (ZZ5-4) several times
and been charged £1.10 PAYG.
nationalrail.co.uk offers £2.10 Anytime Single and £3.10 (?!) Off-Peak
Single for the same journey.

On Jun 18, 5:08*pm, Tom Barry wrote:
Mizter T wrote:
On Jun 18, 4:00 pm, John B wrote:
...

I despair...

Agreed - that is a *monumentally stupid* example.

A far better example would have been Balham (zone 3) to Victoria (zone
1). The Tube PAYG fare is £2.70/peak, £2.20/off-peak. A single rail
fare is £3.10 (within the London zones, all rail fares are conform to
the same fare scale and are all priced zonally, albeit issued on a
point-to-point basis).

The worst examples are likely to be in the suburbs, where comparing,
say, a Z3 to Z4 tube, north-of-river-TOC PAYG and south-of-river-TOC
PAYG is likely to provoke howls of outrage from the people who, let's
face it, are waiting longest anyway.

Woah there - don't simply presume those north-of-river TOCs that
currently accept Oyster PAYG will necessarily stay on the cheaper LU
farescale (though I think it would be fair to assume that
straightforward interavailable journeys - easiest example being
Stratford to Liverpool St - would stay on the Tube fare scale, though
that does then beg the question as to how a Maryland to Liverpool St
journey would be charged - if it's the higher NR fare scale then
that'd encourage people to just walk to Stratford instead.)

To throw this question into sharp relief, perhaps the easiest question
to ask is whether FGW will stay on the LU PAYG farescale, or decide to
shift over to the higher NR PAYG farescale?


The example I'd toss out would be Chiswick-Brentford (SWT), Chiswick
Park-Boston Manor (Tube) and Acton Main Line-Hanwell (FGW), all Z3-Z4
trips over broadly similar distances (2, 4 and 3 stops respectively). *I
know the first one is £2.10, the second is £1.10 and I'm pretty sure the
third is £1.10 as well, although I'm open to correction. *Can anyone
confirm; are the existing National Rail PAYG schemes all on the Tube
fare scale even when you aren't going between Tube stations?


[The £2.10 Chiswick-Brentford fare being the paper rail fare]

Yes - all the existing NR PAYG schemes are all on the LU farescale,
even if you don't go anywhere near an LU station. As I ponder above,
the question is whether they'll stay that way.