Rail travel - a luxury?

[Ianno87]

Assuming you’re paying out of your own pocket, I can say from experience that the lawyer/accountant/other professional service ilk are just as likely to baulk at the additional £226. To earn that back in 3 hours, you need to be earning £128k per annum after tax. While there are accountants and lawyers et al who earn north of £300k, they are few and far between.

Remember when there was all the fuss other news about the top 5% of earners earning £80k per annum? A day’s work for them is £300 before tax, so roughly £200 after tax and pension costs. Even then it’s a case of asking if you’re happy to spend a day’s salary for a couple of hours on the train.

Repeat: First class train fares for business travel are paid for by the employer, not the employee.

Hourly wages and hourly rates are not the same thing. Employees get paid a salary which works out as £X per hour. The employer actually charges a multiple of X to the client to cover overheads, profit, eyc.

And for a first class fare the employer probably charges it to the client, where a first class fare basically amounts to a rounding error in the overall fee.

 

[Purple Orange]

I work around 15miles away from my house, my early starts and late finishes mean rail travel isn't an option for a lot of the shifts. First train gets me to work for around 7am, last train means I can finish no later than 2315 however I think currently due to covid the last train is 30mins earlier so no later than 2245.

I own a car and so does the Mrs, I work 5 days a week so spend around £15 per week on petrol for commuting. A return on the train to work is around £4.90 i think, so around £10 per week more, which adds up over time.

I do use the train occasionally when I can purely for my own enjoyment, but the car is definitely more convenient, cheaper and quicker for me - I live 30 seconds from the motorway and get to work in 20minutes. On the train its 15minute walk to the nearest station, or 5minute drive to one with a car park, then takes 35minutes on the train (including a connection) followed by a 10minute walk to work when I get there. In my mind it is definitely a luxury, I couldn't afford to use it every week. My car is cheap on tax and never needs work doing on it touch wood.

If I wasn't interested in trains, I'd almost certainly not bother using them for commuting. That said, I always use public transport if I'm going shopping or for a drink over in Liverpool, much more convenient and cheaper when you factor in parking costs and tunnel tolls.

The train only really works well if you work in day-time hours on the whole. But for those that do, the 2-car analogy falls down a bit when you just compare petrol costs with the price of a ticket. Considering the cost of insurance and an annual service & MOT, can all three be bought for less than £520? (The £10 difference per week you mentioned).

Repeat: First class train fares for business travel are paid for by the employer, not the employee.

Hourly wages and hourly rates are not the same thing. Employees get paid a salary which works out as £X per hour. The employer actually charges a multiple of X to the client to cover overheads, profit, eyc.

And for a first class fare the employer probably charges it to the client, where a first class fare basically amounts to a rounding error in the overall fee.

I was responding to a comment that implied paying out of your own pocket. Please pay attention.

Yes, hourly wages and hourly rates are not the same thing (which I pointed out earlier). Regarding passing the cost on to a client, the majority state this in their contracts that reasonable travel expenses will be paid for (excluding first class), or they may specify that no travel expenses are considered in the fees. Either way, the number of employers wishing to pay for first class is falling fast and has been for years.

 

[plugwash]

I don't know what magic buses ya'll are catching, but my experience in Manchester and the Midlands has been they are typically more expensive than the trains, especially per mile.

My experience in greater manchester is that the cost of public transport has very little to do with the distance and far more to do with how frequent a user you are and what mix of modes and operators you are using.

If you are making an off-peak day return journey and can make the whole journey by rail then it is indeed often cheaper than the bus. OTOH if you have to use a bus to get to the rail station at the start of your journey then it will probably be cheaper to make the whole return joruney by bus. Even if you have to use multiple bus companies, an "any bus" day ticket is still cheaper than a "bus and train" day ticket.

 

[route101]

My experience in greater manchester is that the cost of public transport has very little to do with the distance and far more to do with how frequent a user you are and what mix of modes and operators you are using.

If you are making an off-peak day return journey and can make the whole journey by rail then it is indeed often cheaper than the bus. OTOH if you have to use a bus to get to the rail station at the start of your journey then it will probably be cheaper to make the whole return joruney by bus. Even if you have to use multiple bus companies, an "any bus" day ticket is still cheaper than a "bus and train" day ticket.

Same in Glasgow, with bus company specific tickets, the bus and train ticket is more expensive not well used.

 

[Bald Rick]

One angle to look at all as, is first class a luxury or an unnecessary extravagance? Tomorrow you could get an off-peak return from Manchester to Edinburgh up the WCML for £84.70 in standard or £179.90 in first (either direct with TPE or change on to Avanti). An off-peak return to travel from Manchester to London is £92.10 in standard and £318 in first.

For what you get in first class, an additional £226 is not worth the little niceties you get. Even those who think that being able to work justifies the expense are deluding themselves in my humble opinion, as you are subject to the same rubbish network.

In short, the incremental cost would make me feel very ripped off. Better to spend that cash on something of far better quality out in the real world.

Alternatively, if you’re going next Thursday, and select your trains (which more than half of passengers do, particularly for first class) the difference between standard and first is less than £50 return. With the food, drink, pace, comfort, table, etc.

Buffet cars haven't existed for a long time on West Coast. It's part of what I mean about this luxury feel.

A buffet car was part shop, part kitchen for at seat service. In place, we have a shop and at seat service. What is the difference to the passenger?

 

[Horizon22]

Also, looking to the future, more people are choosing to live in urban or semi-urban areas which can only mean more train travel.

An interesting survey was done in recently in which they found that a) there is a growing demographic of younger affluent Brits who don't own a car by choice b) there is also a growing demographic of working class suburban folk who couldn't afford a car but now can. Together these trends now mean that there are now slightly more cars on the roads, but a similar percentage of people don't drive. We could end up with a country in which only the poor and the very rich drive!

A significant - although maybe short-term shift - has been people moving to the countryside for extra space away from cities having experienced lockdowns. Now if even half of those people still go to work in the office occasionally post-Covid that's more train travel even away from urban areas.

One angle to look at all as, is first class a luxury or an unnecessary extravagance? Tomorrow you could get an off-peak return from Manchester to Edinburgh up the WCML for £84.70 in standard or £179.90 in first (either direct with TPE or change on to Avanti). An off-peak return to travel from Manchester to London is £92.10 in standard and £318 in first.

For what you get in first class, an additional £226 is not worth the little niceties you get. Even those who think that being able to work justifies the expense are deluding themselves in my humble opinion, as you are subject to the same rubbish network.

In short, the incremental cost would make me feel very ripped off. Better to spend that cash on something of far better quality out in the real world.

Well those fares can help subsidise the rest of the network then. If it's not carting around fresh-air that's a premium for the railway to make.

 

[3141]

A significant - although maybe short-term shift - has been people moving to the countryside for extra space away from cities having experienced lockdowns. Now if even half of those people still go to work in the office occasionally post-Covid that's more train travel even away from urban areas.

If they are buying a home in the countryside that's probably more than just a short-term shift! But I guess you meant that perhaps the tendency to move from town to country may not last.

Having moved, they may then be more likely to buy a car if they don't already have one, because there will probably be less public transport in a country area, and unless they have moved to a place with a railway nearby they may also need it for when they do go to the office, at least for part of the journey.

 

[Stewart2887]

I love travelling by train, and until recently went Oxford-Scotland occasionally. But £140 return each (there's three of us) is just nonsense. Driving with two drivers sharing, petrol is about £75 all in. And last but one trip, CrossCountry were leaving people on the platforms as there wasn't even standing room. Needs sorting

 

[Dr Hoo]

I love travelling by train, and until recently went Oxford-Scotland occasionally. But £140 return each (there's three of us) is just nonsense. Driving with two drivers sharing, petrol is about £75 all in. And last but one trip, CrossCountry were leaving people on the platforms as there wasn't even standing room. Needs sorting

Interesting that even with 'nonsense' high fares the train was still too full to get on. Real paradox there for a 'luxury' service.

 

[Ianno87]

Interesting that even with 'nonsense' high fares the train was still too full to get on. Real paradox there for a 'luxury' service.

Depends what proportion of the passengers were actually on cheap short distance fares and crowding off the long distance passengers. The "Cross Country paradox"

 

[6Gman]

Buffet cars haven't existed for a long time on West Coast. It's part of what I mean about this luxury feel.

They may not be called buffet cars but if there's a counter and I can buy drinks, sandwiches and the like it's a buffet.

 

[Bald Rick]

Interesting that even with 'nonsense' high fares the train was still too full to get on. Real paradox there for a 'luxury' service.

Indeed. Sounds to me that the fares are too low!

 

[StephenHunter]

They may not be called buffet cars but if there's a counter and I can buy drinks, sandwiches and the like it's a buffet.

Indeed. It might not be a Pullman service, but it's still on-train catering.

 

[Philip]

Indeed. Sounds to me that the fares are too low!

Just because the train is full it is no excuse for high fares. And the point remains that many people are put off using the train because of the high fares.

The role of the railway is to get people from A to B, like the bus. It is not to offer a posh restaurant on wheels and these people mentioned who will only use the train if first class is available could do with climbing down off their horse...

 

[tornado]

I love travelling by train, and until recently went Oxford-Scotland occasionally. But £140 return each (there's three of us) is just nonsense. Driving with two drivers sharing, petrol is about £75 all in. And last but one trip, CrossCountry were leaving people on the platforms as there wasn't even standing room. Needs sorting

This has a lot to do with CrossCountry's business plan. From what I can see they think customers who travel with them only a few stops are more price-sensitive, and are considering other means of transport. So they need to attract them with low advance fares. Others who are travelling long-distance with no other option will just accept the standard price tickets as they need to travel. Between them, those two groups fill most of their trains. Oh and also, they did have a policy of no advances on Fridays and Sundays(!).

From where you are, it's cheaper and probably equal in time to go via London. LNER have some very good advance deals, and you'll make up the time once you're on the ECML.

Also, LNER offer another 20% off advances with groups of 3-9 people. Plus you can use Network Railcards for part of the journey.

 

[Bald Rick]

Just because the train is full it is no excuse for high fares. And the point remains that many people are put off using the train because of the high fares.

The role of the railway is to get people from A to B, like the bus. It is not to offer a posh restaurant on wheels and these people mentioned who will only use the train if first class is available could do with climbing down off their horse...

In your opinion.

Other opinions are available, and more widely held - in particular by those people who have been running the railways for the past 190 years. But perhaps they’re all wrong and you’re right. Just in case, it might be worth you studying a couple of text books on economics and marketing, particularly the sections on price elasticity, differential pricing and market segmentation.

 

[47271]

Cross Country is an undercapacitied overpriced aberration operating unsuitable smelly noisy trains over long distances and shouldn't be used as an example of anything.

I don't want to be rude to the OP, but I think that he needs to get out more - as we all do at the moment!

In normal circumstances I travel thousands of miles a year by rail for work, and in both First and Standard Class. What I see is that all sorts of people use all sorts of trains to make all sorts of trips in all sorts of places. You just can't generalise.

 

[STINT47]

Cross country's fleet should have strengthened years ago allowing prices to be dropped. They're must be a lot of suppressed demand from people who are put off travelling due to high fares and overcrowding. My self included.

I find rail travel a luxury for anything other than short distance journeys. I just cannot justify the expense of long distance travel by Cross Country and some other TOCs and am forced to use cheaper alternatives. I am aware of advance tickets but these are often still expensive compared to other options.

Perhaps a rail card for those who are middle aged, have bills to pay but a low salary could help?

 

[yorksrob]

Buses rarely offer decent value for money in comparison to the train because most of them do the "we don't do return tickets, you'll have to buy a day ranger" scam.

The one bus company I've found to be exceptional value is I think, East Yorkshire buses, based around Hull.

 

[GB71]

Just because the train is full it is no excuse for high fares. And the point remains that many people are put off using the train because of the high fares.

The role of the railway is to get people from A to B, like the bus. It is not to offer a posh restaurant on wheels and these people mentioned who will only use the train if first class is available could do with climbing down off their horse...

As another poster put it Philip "In your opinion."

I rarely contribute but read with interest many of these threads debating such things. I have made many choices in my life, as I am sure those who would like me to "climb down off my horse" have made their choices - I work long hours and have sacrificed other things in my life for my career as has my wife - completely our choice. We don't particularly spend a fortune on technology or designer clothing for example (I personally see many things today as technology for the sake of technology but again that's down to individual choice and not for me to tell others to "climb down off their horses"). I personally do however derive my own personal satisfaction/pleasure through travel and rarely do I not travel first class on a train or business class when I fly - absolutely MY choice.

So FWIW it's all about choice in life not about the need to climb on or off horses.

All that said, I do agree with the sentiment that rail travel should be available for all - and it is noticeable in this debate that the most commonly mentioned TOC is CrossCountry - many would agree that many of their fares are eye watering in comparison to others and that split ticketing has particularly taken off since Arriva took XC. But (again my opinion) the root cause of this is not a first class carriage - it is the short stock that was ordered for this route shortly after privatisation and the bid that Arriva made for the franchise. Now I could well be wrong here and I stand to be corrected, but I think InterCity Cross Country was not seen as the financially strongest of the former BR InterCity operations and there was a desire when it was re-franchised to make it more financially viable and hence Arriva's submission - however as I say I stand to be corrected on that.

 

[Ianno87]

Buses rarely offer decent value for money in comparison to the train because most of them do the "we don't do return tickets, you'll have to buy a day ranger" scam.

You could argue that toss either way - here in Cambridge you get, in effect a "free" day ticket as a consequence of a simple return trip to town. So you don't have to decide in advance where you need a Return or a Day Ticket (either the risk of paying more to "upgrade" or the risk of paying for a Day ticket you end up not needing)

 

[yorksrob]

You could argue that toss either way - here in Cambridge you get, in effect a "free" day ticket as a consequence of a simple return trip to town. So you don't have to decide in advance where you need a Return or a Day Ticket (either the risk of paying more to "upgrade" or the risk of paying for a Day ticket you end up not needing)

But most people want to just go somewhere and come back, rather than travelling around on buses all day, so it really is a scam.

Plus what's to stop them offering both a return fare and a day ranger.

 

[Ianno87]

But most people want to just go somewhere and come back, rather than travelling around on buses all day, so it really is a scam.

Not really. In Cambridge "most people" may make 3 or 4 journeys, especially if a change of bus is involved.

Plus what's to stop them offering both a return fare and a day ranger.

That's worse for the passenger - it requires a prior decision of the level of travel you want to do in advance.

 

[yorksrob]

Not really. In Cambridge "most people" may make 3 or 4 journeys, especially if a change of bus is involved.



That's worse for the passenger - it requires a prior decision of the level of travel you want to do in advance.

Do you honestly believe what you're saying ?

 

[Ianno87]

Do you honestly believe what you're saying ?

Yes, as these are exactly the choices I make whenever I use the bus.

I perceive £4.50, even if only for a return journey, relatively decent value compared to petrol and parking (and stress of traffic etc). And I prefer not having to make a "Hobson's Choice" of prior knowledge of the number of journeys I intend to make as to which product (return or day ticket) would be better value.

Several times I've only originally intended to make a return, and then had to do an extra trip unexpectedly. If I'd originally bought a return, I'd then be out of pocket having to then buy another single or return on top of this.

And the notion that "most people" only do return trips isn't true - alot of people will do return trips that require a change of bus - i.e. 4 single journeys in total

 

[yorksrob]

Your point about multiple buses for one journey is a fair one. However in most cases I know whether I am going to make multiple journeys in a day, and if I don't the option of a day ranger is enough, without being forced to buy one for every shortish return journey that doesn't justify one.

 

[RT4038]

But most people want to just go somewhere and come back, rather than travelling around on buses all day, so it really is a scam.

Plus what's to stop them offering both a return fare and a day ranger.

I think you are just arguing for the sake of it - all over this forum there are complaints that bus ticketing is too complicated, and that passengers are disadvantaged when they have to change buses. When the bus company tries to simplify the system (a simple one price day ticket being a de facto return including free transfer, plus the bonus of additional journeys on that day if you really want them) you allege that it is a scam.

Your point about multiple buses for one journey is a fair one. However in most cases I know whether I am going to make multiple journeys in a day, and if I don't the option of a day ranger is enough, without being forced to buy one for every shortish return journey that doesn't justify one.

That is what happens when fare structures are simplified. Win some, lose some.

 

[Ianno87]

I think you are just arguing for the sake of it - all over this forum there are complaints that bus ticketing is too complicated, and that passengers are disadvantaged when they have to change buses. When the bus company tries to simplify the system (a simple one price day ticket being a de facto return including free transfer, plus the bonus of additional journeys on that day if you really want them) you allege that it is a scam.



That is what happens when fare structures are simplified. Win some, lose some.

Lots of non-regular bus users are put off by not knowing what the fare is in advance. Having a headline and relatively memorable "day ticket" price (e.g. that you can stick on the side of the bus) overcomes this.

 

[Philip]

In your opinion.

Other opinions are available, and more widely held - in particular by those people who have been running the railways for the past 190 years. But perhaps they’re all wrong and you’re right. Just in case, it might be worth you studying a couple of text books on economics and marketing, particularly the sections on price elasticity, differential pricing and market segmentation.

I would have more sympathy if there weren't so many examples of a train packed to the rafters in standard whilst only half full in first. I've seen this happen a lot on the TPE trains, perhaps in such a situation it should be mandatory for the guard to open up first/declassify and let all passengers use all available space on the train. This declassifying happens only from time to time in my experience, not every time standard is full.

First Class has its advantages and when there is plenty of space on the whole train, then yes it is a nice thing to have. But it has no place on trains which are over capacity in standard.

 

[RT4038]

Lots of non-regular bus users are put off by not knowing what the fare is in advance. Having a headline and relatively memorable "day ticket" price (e.g. that you can stick on the side of the bus) overcomes this.

Quite so. In the Cambridge example the passenger can still buy individual single tickets, on a graduated scale by stages, if they want to.