LNER to pilot removal of Off-Peak tickets

[yorksrob]

I think at the end of the day it's a publication with mostly wealthy journalists on the payroll catering to a mostly wealthy subscriber base. Certainly they're in the main not the sort of people who are going to be fussed at spending £130 - £150 each way between London and Edinburgh as a matter of course.

One would hope that a major industry journal would "have the passengers back" to an extent.

 

[Starmill]

One would hope that a major industry journal would "have the passengers back" to an extent.

Sadly out of the remit they see for themselves in my view. Editorially they've never put an emphasis on consumer affairs.

 

[yorksrob]

Sadly out of the remit they see for themselves in my view. Editorially they've never put an emphasis on consumer affairs.

Probably true editorially.

That said, Alan Williams has been very vocal about the abysmal passenger experience for Northern passengers over the past few years.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I was quite disappointed to see the continuing lack of challenge to this from Modern Railways in the latest edition.

Roger Ford supports it. Suspected reasons:

1. LNER can do no ill in their eyes (always been true of the ECML)
2. He can afford the sums charged, and enjoys the quieter trains (I suspect)
3. Modern Railways pretty much never criticises the industry, presumably because if it did it might lose access to detail on it (one of the letters this month on the subject really shouldn't have been published, it was barely literate and lacked pretty much any facts beyond the principle that the writer was happy to book months in advance for headline fares)

FWIW noting that very common £130 figure, one does wonder if we might see a partial climbdown involving the reinstatement of that fare but at around £140, about a third more than it was?

 

[Starmill]

2. He can afford the sums charged, and enjoys the quieter trains (I suspect)

The latter point he stated outright on Twitter of course.

3. Modern Railways pretty much never criticises the industry, presumably because if it did it might lose access to detail on it (one of the letters this month on the subject really shouldn't have been published, it was barely literate and lacked pretty much any facts beyond the principle that the writer was happy to book months in advance for headline fares)

Certainly it doesn't outright criticise editorially or in Ford's column, which are the main reasons people buy it. They maintain just enough reporting of the facts not to be accused of badly unbalanced coverage, while conveniently directing any actual blame at Ministers or customers.

one of the letters this month on the subject really shouldn't have been published, it was barely literate and lacked pretty much any facts beyond the principle that the writer was happy to book months in advance for headline fares

It's a joke. Editorially cowardly.

 

[yorksrob]

Roger Ford supports it. Suspected reasons:

1. LNER can do no ill in their eyes (always been true of the ECML)
2. He can afford the sums charged, and enjoys the quieter trains (I suspect)
3. Modern Railways pretty much never criticises the industry, presumably because if it did it might lose access to detail on it (one of the letters this month on the subject really shouldn't have been published, it was barely literate and lacked pretty much any facts beyond the principle that the writer was happy to book months in advance for headline fares)

FWIW noting that very common £130 figure, one does wonder if we might see a partial climbdown involving the reinstatement of that fare but at around £140, about a third more than it was?

Alan Williams stands up for passengers, particularly the shoddy northern services over the past few years, but I agree, one letter against the proposal and another for (albeit not mentioning off-peak fares at all) is a bit weak.

I find it hard to believe that this is a true representation of their post bag.

 

[weeklycommuter]

Referencing LNER annual accounts to 31 March 2023 and 31 March 2022 (including figures for the year to 31 March 2021) and ORR passenger journeys by operator for LNER for each year to the same dates at the links below I note the following revenues and costs rounded to the nearest million pounds, numbers of LNER passengers and revenue per passenger (disregarding delay repay) rounded to the nearest pound

Year to 31 March 2023: Passenger Revenue 699 Delay Repay (24) Dft Subsidy 96 Other 53 Total revenue 824
Passengers 23.4 million Revenue per passenger £30
Year to 31 March 2022: Passenger Revenue 480 Delay Repay (10) Dft Subsidy 248 Other 41 Total revenue 759
Passengers 17.7 million Revenue per passenger £27
Year to 31 March 2021: Passenger Revenue 106 Delay Repay (1) Dft Subsidy 602 Other 23 Total revenue 730
Passengers 4.2 million Revenue per passenger £25

LONDON NORTH EASTERN RAILWAY LIMITED filing history - Find and update company information - GOV.UK

LONDON NORTH EASTERN RAILWAY LIMITED - Free company information from Companies House including registered office address, filing history, accounts, annual return, officers, charges, business activity

find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk

Table 1223 - Passenger journeys by operator | ORR Data Portal

dataportal.orr.gov.uk

Noting the following current single fares to London from the following places I note LNER’s revenue per passenger even accounting for the annual fare increases must be far less than the revenue which would be received if all passengers with advance tickets travelled with off peak tickets instead so I have to conclude if LNER, the DfT and HM Treasury want more revenue per passenger they should reduce the number of advance tickets and encourage more passengers to buy off peak tickets instead.

Leeds anytime £165.90 offpeak £70.20
York anytime £168.10 offpeak £71.70
Newcastle or Manors anytime £195.70 offpeak £87.90
Edinburgh or Haymarket anytime £199.60 offpeak £91.20

The reliability of the service also needs to be improved to reduce the delay repay payments.
The sum of LNER passengers for the four quarters to 31 December 2023 is 24.3 million, only 4 percent more than the 23.4 million for the year to 31 March 2023, so it does look like the post-pandemic recovery in LNER passenger numbers has tailed off at around 9 percent more than the 22.3 million for the year to 31 March 2019.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Alan Williams stands up for passengers, particularly the shoddy northern services over the past few years, but I agree, one letter against the proposal and another for (albeit not mentioning off-peak fares at all) is a bit weak.

I find it hard to believe that this is a true representation of their post bag.

I suspect given how weak the one in favour was that it was the only one in favour.

 

[AdamWW]

I suspect given how weak the one in favour was that it was the only one in favour.

It's very easy to mistake the proportion of published letters in favour and against something as an indication of the proportions received, rather than an editorial decision.

 

[Haywain]

It's very easy to mistake the proportion of published letters in favour and against something as an indication of the proportions received, rather than an editorial decision.

It's also easy to mistake the views of the readership of a magazine that is generally aimed at those working in the industry as being aligned with those who are customers.

 

[Failed Unit]

The trick is easy - if you want a Super Off Peak Single from Kings X to Edinburgh, buy one to Haymarket, and if you want one to Newcastle, buy one to Manors.

You don't, as things stand, need to do it for any other journey than those two specifically as the Super Off Peaks still exist.

It isn't relevant to Advances as these don't permit break of journey or start/end short. The best way to get good value Advances is to use a site that does splitting such as the Forum's one.

Would I be right in saying from London you can also get around it by buying from somewhere such as Finsbury part or the various London travel card zones?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Would I be right in saying from London you can also get around it by buying from somewhere such as Finsbury part or the various London travel card zones?

It appears so yes.

 

[Wallsendmag]

Would I be right in saying from London you can also get around it by buying from somewhere such as Finsbury part or the various London travel card zones?

Currently

 

[yorksrob]

It's also easy to mistake the views of the readership of a magazine that is generally aimed at those working in the industry as being aligned with those who are customers.

Without the customers there is no railway.

 

[Mainline421]

Would I be right in saying from London you can also get around it by buying from somewhere such as Finsbury part or the various London travel card zones?

Using underground zonal tickets still won't offer Off-Peak fares. Finsbury Park national rail works

 

[robbeech]

Had a bit of a nose over the coming week or two and unsurprisingly almost all trains are more expensive than the Super Off Peak Single was. £130ish seems a fairly typical figure.

The reason for this becomes ever clearer...

When all trains are more than the old ticket price (by nearly 50% in many cases) they cannot argue that the aim is to redistribute passengers onto quieter services.

 

[Blindtraveler]

When all trains are more than the old ticket price (by nearly 50% in many cases) they cannot argue that the aim is to redistribute passengers onto quieter services.

They must think we, the great unwashed traveling public are even more stupid than we look, surely someone somewhere in LNER towers realized that it wouldn't belong until somebody somewhere sat and went through service by service day by day and quickly realized that this is what they had done in terms of pricing

 

[Bletchleyite]

When all trains are more than the old ticket price (by nearly 50% in many cases) they cannot argue that the aim is to redistribute passengers onto quieter services.

Well, quite. I could, as I said, be convinced by the idea of a smoother transition by way of Advances, and even pricing up the odd super busy train like a 5 car that can't be avoided when things are busy. Or a policy where Advances were available in basically unlimited numbers up to departure. But this is just daylight robbery.

 

[Krokodil]

They must think we, the great unwashed traveling public are even more stupid than we look, surely someone somewhere in LNER towers realized that it wouldn't belong until somebody somewhere sat and went through service by service day by day and quickly realized that this is what they had done in terms of pricing

In this age of social media it's much easier for the passengers to get organised and collectively call them out.

 

[Blindtraveler]

In this age of social media it's much easier for the passengers to get organised and collectively call them out.

Only a matter of time

Wonder if anyone will try and take any form of legal action or involve trading standards or some other consumer type organization that sufficiently noisy heavy and disruptive to make them either tell the truth at worst or perform a U-turn at best

 

[Captain Deltic]

Unlikely that Roger Ford will oppose it, LNER can do nothing wrong in his eyes (nor any previous ECML operator in my observation!)

Just to clarify this point, I am neither "for", nor "against" the LNER experiment. It is a business matter, with three potential outcomes:. Either, it will deter passengers, ridership and revenue will fall and the new fares policy will have to be abandoned. Or it will fill more seats and increase revenue, and be judged a success.. Or it will make little or no difference. and we will have learned something towards fares reform.

We will know the outcome soon enough.

BTW, I don't have any free passes!

 

[AdamWW]

Just to clarify this point, I am neither "for", nor "against" the LNER experiment. It is a business matter, with three potential outcomes:. Either, it will deter passengers, ridership and revenue will fall and the new fares policy will have to be abandoned. Or it will fill more seats and increase revenue, and be judged a success.. Or it will make little or no difference. and we will have learned something towards fares reform.

We will know the outcome soon enough.

BTW, I don't have any free passes!

How is LNER (and soon perhaps all operators) being permitted to abandon fare regulation which has existed since privatisation a "business matter" rather than a political decision?

 

[yorksrob]

Welcome to the forum @Captain Deltic .

Unfortunately even if this reform does fill more seats (although presumably this could be achieved without ditching off-peak) and does increase revenue, it will still be a poor outcome in terms of freedom to travel when one needs, and a stealth price hike for passengers.

Commercial considerations aside, as members of the travelling public, farepayers and taxpayers, we should be asking, is this really the direction we want the passenger railway to be going in ?

 

[absolutelymilk]

Welcome to the forum @Captain Deltic .

Unfortunately even if this reform does fill more seats (although presumably this could be achieved without ditching off-peak) and does increase revenue, it will still be a poor outcome in terms of freedom to travel when one needs, and a stealth price hike for passengers.

Commercial considerations aside, as members of the travelling public, farepayers and taxpayers, we should be asking, is this really the direction we want the passenger railway to be going in ?

I think it depends what happens to the extra revenue. If it is used to reduce tax rates, then it obviously wouldn't have a good impact on the railway, but it could be used to put on more services or pay for more investment, (further justified by the likelihood of higher revenues following the change in fare policy).

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't think those two can be conflated. It won't fill more seats alone - you could do that simply by releasing more Advances under the price of the super off peak. What it will do (and so will be judged a success) is get more money out of those who do travel on busy trains. But then that raises a question in my mind - why are my taxes subsidising the travel of rich people?

I also am concerned that it doesn't trial other things alongside it that make Advances friendlier, e.g. no admin fee for changes, refundable, break of journey allowed (provided any travel is on booked trains) etc. It's not a given that even a compulsory reservation railway has to ape Ryanair.

 

[yorksrob]

I think it depends what happens to the extra revenue. If it is used to reduce tax rates, then it obviously wouldn't have a good impact on the railway, but it could be used to put on more services or pay for more investment, (further justified by the likelihood of higher revenues following the change in fare policy).

I think that even if they were to use any extra revenue on putting on more services (and that's an extremely big "if", given that any revenue is apparently being sucked straight back into the treasury), there's still the broader question as to whether its desirable for the travelling public to be subjected to such restrictions and price volatility on travel.

The last thing we want is for the railway to become "a rich man's toy" even if its a money spinner

 

[Haywain]

How is LNER (and soon perhaps all operators) being permitted to abandon fare regulation which has existed since privatisation a "business matter" rather than a political decision?

It's both.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The last thing we want is for the railway to become "a rich man's toy" even if its a money spinner

This is a key concern.

It'd be even more of a concern over on the WCML, as I bet they wouldn't be reducing the Anytime - £200 single Edinburgh to London is almost borderline reasonable ish (!) for a fully flexible ticket. £185 single Manchester to London, which is half the distance, very much isn't. So applying this to the WCML could be much, much worse.

 

[AdamWW]

to be subjected to such restrictions and price volatility on travel.

Quite. The message is very simple. If you want to just be able to travel when you need to, with no notice, and have confidence over what it will cost you, get yourself a car. This is no longer what rail is for unless you are extremely well off.

I think I've said it before, but if a road pricing scheme like this was introduced I doubt many people in the UK would stand for it (even if they were told that it was just a "business decision").

Yes - other forms of transport work like that. But in my view that's a good reason for the taxpayer support to the railways to result in us having one form of transport that those without access to a car can use for flexible travel.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Quite. The message is very simple. If you want to just be able to travel when you need to, with no notice, and have confidence over what it will cost you, get yourself a car. This is no longer what rail is for unless you are extremely well off.

Yep. It's designed for the railway to be an adjunct to the car.

I think I've said it before, but if a road pricing scheme like this was introduced I doubt many people in the UK would stand for it (even if they were told that it was just a "business decision").

There are very, very few things that would have British people rioting on the streets - that just isn't us. But a national road pricing scheme of this kind would in my view be such a thing. People only accept rail being expensive and crap because they can drive.

Yes - other forms of transport work like that. But in my view that's a good reason for the taxpayer support to the railways to result in us having one form of transport that those without access to a car can use for flexible travel.

Indeed.

And I'd be separating that from compulsory reservations, which have merits and pitfalls slightly separate from all this. The issue with this is the swingeing fare increases on pretty much every single train.

I was, to be honest, utterly shocked at how brazen it is. I expected some spikes in fare e.g. Friday 1800ish from London and Sunday PM to it. But every single train has gone up, sometimes massively.