Why is CrossCountry so overpriced?

[TheGuy77]

Let's say you wanted to go from Birmingham to Edinburgh. Avanti will only charge you in the region of £40-70 for standard and £120-150 for first. However, £120-150 is also the price range for XC's standard class. And god forbid them charging up to £400 for first class. And yet they still use rattling, overcrowded voyagers. How much money are they making with this sort of daylight robbery? It's ridiculous for what you get!

 

[JonathanH]

How much money are they making with this sort of daylight robbery?

The money goes to the Treasury. Given the small trains and operating cost, probably very little money is being made at all.

How much should it cost to travel with CrossCountry?

 

[Dr Hoo]

There are a lot more seats to fill in an 11-car Class 390 than a 5-coach Voyager.

 

[Farigiraf]

The 170 services are equally extortionate too - a Cambridge to Peterborough return is often more than a return to London (via ECML!)

 

[Deafdoggie]

XC trains are usually overcrowded. This implies they could be charging more.

 

[800 Driver]

Because the fare policy is being used to regulate demand

 

[A S Leib]

XC trains are usually overcrowded. This implies they could be charging more.

But how many passengers, especially outside Derby – Cheltenham and Peterborough – Birmingham, are making journeys on tickets with XC-set fares rather than ones set by GWR, Northern etc.?

 

[BanburyBlue]

Shouldn't have to do it, but you can make significant savings by using splits with XC.

 

[Halish Railway]

Shouldn't have to do it, but you can make significant savings by using splits with XC.

Especially with day returns. If you’re travelling from Leeds to Birmingham, only a return within a month ticket is available, but should you spilt your ticket at Sheffield and Derby then the option of buying a day return becomes available, representing a significant price saving.

 

[py_megapixel]

I agree with the general sentiment that XC is overpriced, but I'm not sure the particular comparison used here is especially fair. XC and Avanti go by completely different routes, with XC's being substantially longer in both time and distance. And as others have alluded to, XC has much less capacity, so it would make no sense whatsoever for them to use it up offering cheap Birmingham-Edinburgh fares.

 

[TheSmiths82]

I try and avoid them if possible, if I am going to some where like Bournemouth (which is a trip I haven't done for a long time), I used to find it cheaper to go via London then back out. It always seemed mad that I was waiting for a train for London when I actually wanted to go to Manchester, but I had to let the XC go because I simply couldn't afford their fees.

I did use XC from Manchester to Bristol last year though and I think the ticket was a very reasonable £40 odd but in general I usually end up avoiding XC. My fear of Voyagers is probably another reason why!.

 

[TheGuy77]

What could XC do to stop this vicious circle of overcrowding and overpricing?

 

[Lampshade]

Because when the Arriva franchise was let they MASSIVELY overbid, expecting people to be using it for long, profitable journeys. As it turned out, the trains were (and still are) mostly full of people doing short to medium distance journeys like Leeds to Sheffield, so the only way they could attempt to claw money back is by massively inflating the fares on flows that they price, hence why split ticketing is so effective on XC.

 

[brad465]

What could XC do to stop this vicious circle of overcrowding and overpricing?

Probably a new modern fleet that increases capacity over most of its routes through longer and more frequent services, especially a bi-mode fleet that takes advantage of the many miles voyagers run under wires. However this would require a huge investment, and the environment for this doesn't currently exist.

 

[paul1609]

Let's say you wanted to go from Birmingham to Edinburgh. Avanti will only charge you in the region of £40-70 for standard and £120-150 for first. However, £120-150 is also the price range for XC's standard class. And god forbid them charging up to £400 for first class. And yet they still use rattling, overcrowded voyagers. How much money are they making with this sort of daylight robbery? It's ridiculous for what you get!

According to the lastest ORR figures Cross Country services were being subsidised by 7p per passenger/kilometre overall in 2015/6, the worst of any of the ex Intercity franchises. I rather imagine its a lot worse post pandemic.

 

[Halish Railway]

What could XC do to stop this vicious circle of overcrowding and overpricing?

They’ve so far received 3 of an extra 12 Voyagers from Avanti West Coast which should nearly eliminate 4 car running on the Voyager routes.

The Midland Rail Hub scheme should vastly increase the number of services to and from Birmingham by starting at Moor Street and Snow Hill. Promised so far is an additional 2tph from Snow Hill to Oxford, 1tph from Moor Street to Bristol, Cardiff and Hereford and 2tph from Moor Street to Leicester (all stations with the existing 2tph from Leicester/Cambridge to New Street becoming express trains).

In the longer term ideally a combination of HS2 and electrification to vastly decrease operating costs - Voyagers are very thirsty trains and have a poor ratio of seats per engine, so being replaced by an efficient EMU would provide a great cost saving. Electrifying Birmingham to Bristol and Coventry to Basingstoke would allow both Manchester services to be worked by EMUs for example. ADDITION: The above post provides the evidence of why electrification as a means of decreasing operating costs and subsidies.

 

[mvm03]

Nottingham to Derby advances are usually £1.50-£2.50 on XC

 

[skyhigh]

How much money are they making with this sort of daylight robbery?

The question should be how much are they losing. CrossCountry is essentially subsidised. They run short, heavy, fuel thirsty trains that have a comparatively high staffing requirement. On top of that the trains are full so nobody wants to increase demand further by cutting fares.

What could XC do to stop this vicious circle of overcrowding and overpricing?

XC can't change anything. They are just following DfT instructions and have been since the Pandemic. There is plenty the DfT could change, but that requires them having the funding to be able to do so.

 

[Halish Railway]

Nottingham to Derby advances are usually £1.50-£2.50 on XC

Whereas Derby to Birmingham on the same train would be about £7 with a railcard. And don’t think that the reservations would be put out as well…

 

[Deafdoggie]

The question should be how much are they losing. CrossCountry is essentially subsidised. They run short, heavy, fuel thirsty trains that have a comparatively high staffing requirement. On top of that the trains are full so nobody wants to increase demand further by cutting fares.


XC can't change anything. They are just following DfT instructions and have been since the Pandemic. There is plenty the DfT could change, but that requires them having the funding to be able to do so.

They are haemoraging money at an alarming rate. No one is going to authorise spending even more money!

 

[TheGuy77]

So if aging rolling stock is the cause of the high costs why don't they just get more fuel-efficient class 800s?

 

[Trainbike46]

What could XC do to stop this vicious circle of overcrowding and overpricing?

more rolling stock - ideally of a type that is more efficient to operate. Voyagers are low-capacity, high-fuel use units, used in a way that requires a lot of staff - a recipe for overcrowding, expensive tickets and losing money on operation.

According to the lastest ORR figures Cross Country services were being subsidised by 7p per passenger/kilometre overall in 2015/6, the worst of any of the ex Intercity franchises. I rather imagine its a lot worse post pandemic.

As above, the current units almost appear designed to lose money - and they're not even nice!

So if aging rolling stock is the cause of the high costs why don't they just get more fuel-efficient class 800s?

They are haemoraging money at an alarming rate. No one is going to authorise spending even more money!

Deafdoggie answered this - because XC is losing money, the government isn't willing to invest in new rolling stock for XC, which means the high operating costs per seat (and low capacity) doesn't get resolved, which means we're stuck in this situation of uncomfortable, expensive, and overcrowded trains.

The only thing that will get us out of that is political pressure - so do write to your MP about it, but be sure to lay the blame firmly at the hands of the government (who have been in complete control for the last 4 years, and were highly influential before that).

 

[nwales58]

All the discussion about price and demand versus capacity is good. One point we often forget is history.

Reducing or eliminating public subsidy was a top-level objective when decisions on this stock were taken, about 25 years ago. Regulated fares were to increase at generally at RPI+x and RPI+x+ouch where quality improvements were to take place. Unregulated anytime fares were assumed to increase by as much as possible.

For example, an innocuous looking 3.5% every year for 20 years doubles the fare (all in real terms).

When RPI+XXXXX should revert to RPI was little debated, though others' memories will be better than mine.

What astonishes me is that a decade ago, after giving privatisation plus commercial pricing 20 years to sort itself out (BR had market-based intercity pricing long before of course), we still had horrendous capacity/demand mismatches *and* increasing subsidy.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

So if aging rolling stock is the cause of the high costs why don't they just get more fuel-efficient class 800s?

Because the leasing cost for that type of stock is very high.
Voyagers may have thirsty engines but they are very reliable (TPE's 185s use the same engines, as do the 180s).

 

[Trainbike46]

Because the leasing cost for that type of stock is very high.
Voyagers may have thirsty engines but they are very reliable (TPE's 185s use the same engines, as do the 180s).

It's important to compare on a per-seat basis, not a per-car basis - voyagers are very space-inefficient, leading to low numbers of seats per car

Unfortunately I don't think the leasing costs of either the voyagers or the 80x are public - if someone is able to share them here, that would be really helpful, we could do a per-car and per-seat comparison to see how big a difference it would actually be, and in what direction.

In any case, leasing isn't the only way to get new rolling stock, and it is likely to be a comparatively expensive way, though it does appear that the current government will continue with leasing as the preferred option

 

[Gaelan]

Unfortunately I don't think the leasing costs of either the voyagers or the 80x are public - if someone is able to share them here, that would be really helpful, we could do a per-car and per-seat comparison to see how big a difference it would actually be, and in what direction.

We have per-operator figures for spending on "rolling stock" from the ORR: XC pays £185m, LNER pays £367m, Lumo pays £9m. These figures are dated April 2022 to March 2023 - I don't recall exactly when Lumo got their last delivery, so it may not be fully representative of their fleet.

Unfortunately it's non-trivial to extrapolate from here to individual fleets, as XC also has the Turbostars and LNER also has the 225s.

 

[MikeWM]

The 170 services are equally extortionate too - a Cambridge to Peterborough return is often more than a return to London (via ECML!)

No network/gold card discount being available on this route doesn't help either for many journeys.

With a Gold Card, I can take a daytrip to Sheringham for less than a daytrip to Peterborough, despite the former being almost three times as far by rail.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

But how many passengers, especially outside Derby – Cheltenham and Peterborough – Birmingham, are making journeys on tickets with XC-set fares rather than ones set by GWR, Northern etc.?

Lots - both on local/regional journeys (e.g. Leamington Spa–Birmingham) and longer-distance ones. For many years, a journey I made frequently had fares set by XC despite the fact no traveller would ever use a CrossCountry service for any part of it.

I don't have particularly high hopes for Great British Railways, but applying some consistency to fare setting is one area where they could make a real difference to people's perceptions of the railways.

 

[nwales58]

Seperate issue, but thanks to pre-ORCATS revenue allocation Crosscountry price most journeys that might use their trains rather than predominantly, with fudges to split to other operators (also causing the near-irrelevant 2V restriction on some flows) . E.g.

Pwllheli-Nuneaton priced by West Midlands, off-peak return 79.10 open return 106.10
Pwllheli-Hinkley prices by Crosscountry, off-peak return 103.90 open return 154.60

 

[frodshamfella]

Booked a ticket from Chester to Exeter with TFW and GWR, return for early September. I was looking at Runcorn or Acton Bridge to Exeter, but its so expensive, plus I dread using XC , in standard its pretty awful, packed no room for luggage and first class forget it, cheaper to fly to New York.