Another reason why GBR and “ticket simplification” are bad things.If I was in charge of pricing at my local TOC I would make it eight days over five or preferably six weeks.
If this was the case I would buy one but as it is if I make seven journeys or nine over the current 28 days I'm out of pocket. Add in that the saving is fairly small and I cannot justify buying one as it stands.
I think for many organisations such as where I work it is more a case of making sure team members have a chance to physically interact each week. Working in blocks week on/week off won't cut it.If I need to go to the office for 2 days one week and before 9.30 am, I would consider whether to go in 5 working days in a row and then not go in for another week or more.
If a company ever required 50% working in the office I would ask if it could be one week in and one week off. That would be better than 3 or 2 days at a time.
Lots of jobs, including my own, involve meetings frequently being added or moved at a late stage. Nothing to do with being 'sufficiently clued up'.On the other hand, once you are only travelling 7 times in 28 days, why does the railway need to offer any discount at all? People should be sufficiently clued up to work out how many times they are going into a workplace and how to plan around holidays.
If someone gets 'sent on a course' or has to go to a meeting, it won't automatically come out of their 'workplace time'.
Where I work they are talking about having to agree a date when teams can meet so not everyone comes in at the same time. Obviously, with some working part-time, it needs to be flexible to an extent or people might never see colleagues.I think for many organisations such as where I work it is more a case of making sure team members have a chance to physically interact each week. Working in blocks week on/week off won't cut it.
Lots of jobs, including my own, involve meetings frequently being added or moved at a late stage. Nothing to do with being 'sufficiently clued up'.
You have conflated different things there. The DfT and Treasury are making all the calls of fares right now and that is a bad thing. Provided GBR is allowed the freedom to manage fares within an overall Government funding settlement then that has to be better. So-called 'innovative' TOCs are in receipt of Government funding right now and without a GBR middleman will never have the freedom you wish for.Another reason why GBR and “ticket simplification” are bad things.
You get the DfT making a bad call and innovative TOCs aren’t allowed to do something better.
You've hit the nail on the head there. Flexi seasons are a stupendously daft idea. They do nothing that carnets couldn't while working out less flexible and more expensive.Basically, a different product is needed. Flexi-season is not a very customer-centric product.
Basically, a different product is needed. Flexi-season is not a very customer-centric product.
The Flexi-ticket is basically a Carnet (using the 'if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck' analogy). Pricing of each unit and the length of time that a customer has to make use of each bundle (as well as other enhancements like a reduced rate for off peak travel) are all configurable within the existing product structure provided the political will is there.You've hit the nail on the head there. Flexi seasons are a stupendously daft idea. They do nothing that carnets couldn't while working out less flexible and more expensive.
Assuming the vast majority have used them for commuting, so the average person using them would have bought multiple tickets. So perhaps with an average of 5 tickets bought per passenger there may be around 20,000 people who've used them.At a speech today a Government minister has stated that 100,000 Flexible season tickets have been sold.
Seventh annual Rail Industry Forum
Latest updates on the Williams-Shapps Plan for Rail and the reform of the UK rail industry.www.gov.uk
Less than impressive. How many standard annual season tickets were sold pre-pandemic and even currently.At a speech today a Government minister has stated that 100,000 Flexible season tickets have been sold.
Seventh annual Rail Industry Forum
Latest updates on the Williams-Shapps Plan for Rail and the reform of the UK rail industry.www.gov.uk
As far as I can tell the seller (as in the railway) probably did judge the market right. Just the product was kneecapped by the Treasury who demanded that the saving was just 10% compared to buying walk-up tickets. I'm sure I read somewhere that the industry had planned for the saving to be similar to an existing seven day season whilst the Treasury wanted an even less than 10% saving compared to buying walk-ups.Blame the punter for not buying rather than the seller for misjudging the market?
Fair enough.As far as I can tell the seller (as in the railway) probably did judge the market right. Just the product was kneecapped by the Treasury who demanded that the saving was just 10% compared to buying walk-up tickets. I'm sure I read somewhere that the industry had planned for the saving to be similar to an existing seven day season whilst the Treasury wanted an even less than 10% saving compared to buying walk-ups.
I am wracking my brains trying to recall where the heck I saw it. If I do remember I'll post a link!I haven't seen anything stating who decided on the level of discount.
No worries. It would be better covered by a media article so that history can properly record who decided what.I am wracking my brains trying to recall where the heck I saw it. If I do remember I'll post a link!
Aha it was from this article: https://www.railwaygazette.com/uk/r...rates-as-treasury-takes-control/60218.article which was discussed at the time here on the Forum. But for our purposes this is the section that's relevant:No worries. It would be better covered by a media article so that history can properly record who decided what.
As lockdowns eased earlier this year, the operators and RDG started to present evidence to government intended to support development of a flexible season ticket aimed at commuters who were coming back to city centre workplaces fewer than five days per week. The operators suggested these tickets should come with savings on a par with a conventional season ticket, but this was rebuffed by the Treasury.
The final product, officially welcomed by operators but privately derided, offers a discount of around 10% and has been described by one source as ‘pretty much providing two tickets for the price of two’. Even this meagre discount was seen as a victory within the industry; in the lead up to its launch one insider had reported that Treasury officials wanted no more than a 5% incentive.
The only place I see any 'blame' being directed at anyone in that article.Blame the punter for not buying rather than the seller for misjudging the market?
It's the price as well but they undoubtedly work for some people.I think the big problem is not the discount but the length of time you have to use the tickets. It is a very niche product because of this. I believe the products it replaced had a much better ratio of days of travel vs calander time you had to use them. It would be really interesting to see the repeat buisness figures to tell if they actually work for people.
I'm unsure if it could be considered value for money if you're able to use the Northern trains really. Almost every single train at every time of day has their Advance ticket at £2.20 available on it! Obviously to some people they'll want to save that extra few minutes.Yes, if you are regularly commuting 3-4 days a week at peak times then at least on Stockport to Manchester the flexi-season makes sense.
There are, however, many journeys where Advance fares are not available.I'm unsure if it could be considered value for money if you're able to use the Northern trains really. Almost every single train at every time of day has their Advance ticket at £2.20 available on it! Obviously to some people they'll want to save that extra few minutes.
I can see two sides to the argument. Most products that people buy have an expiry date - mobile data (use it or lose it monthly, perhaps with carry-over), food (it goes off), gift-cards (x months) - so people are quite used to the idea that things have to be used up in a certain time or lost. Conversely, we have an industry desperate to retain / claw-back lost customers - so making the time period so short seems counter intuitive. Perhaps, like postage stamps, 'travel' could be bought and used whenever, regardless of subsequent price increases. Buy 480 singles (the annual figure used for station usage statistics) for the price of an annual season. No revenue lost to the industry but use spread over a longer period, say 3 years validity. If people return to commuting full time, they use up the tickets sooner, if WFH restrictions return (as they will on Monday) they get used up slower. Not sure you would actually want a physical box handed to you with 480 cardboard tickets in it, but we do live in an electronic age.I think the big problem is not the discount but the length of time you have to use the tickets. It is a very niche product because of this. I believe the products it replaced had a much better ratio of days of travel vs calander time you had to use them. It would be really interesting to see the repeat buisness figures to tell if they actually work for people.
The infrastructure to support a product like this just isn't there, at least outside the South East.I can see two sides to the argument. Most products that people buy have an expiry date - mobile data (use it or lose it monthly, perhaps with carry-over), food (it goes off), gift-cards (x months) - so people are quite used to the idea that things have to be used up in a certain time or lost. Conversely, we have an industry desperate to retain / claw-back lost customers - so making the time period so short seems counter intuitive. Perhaps, like postage stamps, 'travel' could be bought and used whenever, regardless of subsequent price increases. Buy 480 singles (the annual figure used for station usage statistics) for the price of an annual season. No revenue lost to the industry but use spread over a longer period, say 3 years validity. If people return to commuting full time, they use up the tickets sooner, if WFH restrictions return (as they will on Monday) they get used up slower. Not sure you would actually want a physical box handed to you with 480 cardboard tickets in it, but we do live in an electronic age.
It doesn't need to be a lot longer. 6 weeks rather than 4 would probably do. Then people who do 2 days a week in the office could use it without losing out when they have a week or two off.I can see two sides to the argument. Most products that people buy have an expiry date - mobile data (use it or lose it monthly, perhaps with carry-over), food (it goes off), gift-cards (x months) - so people are quite used to the idea that things have to be used up in a certain time or lost. Conversely, we have an industry desperate to retain / claw-back lost customers - so making the time period so short seems counter intuitive. Perhaps, like postage stamps, 'travel' could be bought and used whenever, regardless of subsequent price increases. Buy 480 singles (the annual figure used for station usage statistics) for the price of an annual season. No revenue lost to the industry but use spread over a longer period, say 3 years validity. If people return to commuting full time, they use up the tickets sooner, if WFH restrictions return (as they will on Monday) they get used up slower. Not sure you would actually want a physical box handed to you with 480 cardboard tickets in it, but we do live in an electronic age.
I'm not thinking of stored value cards (eg Oyster or equivalent) which require readers to scan in and out at every station (although those are being rolled out beyond the big cities). m-tickets or e-tickets will do the trick, requires a smart phone and a mobile signal (or download as pdf). Guards have the ability to scan such tickets in many places (not sure if every guard on every TOC yet). Whether you offer the cardboard version is debateable, perhaps the 'deal' for having a well priced product available is that it is only available electronically.The infrastructure to support a product like this just isn't there, at least outside the South East.