Why there are no longer any bargain fares (Radio 4 today)

[Oldddudders]

I'm not sure why 1995 is being quoted for TOCs, since none was sold until 1996, and several key ones not until 1997. Furthermore, in many cases the BR top team was kept on by the new owners, because they knew what they were doing, whereas the new, bus-orientated owners, did not. Even now there are TOCs with ex-BR personnel at the helm. 

 

I have no idea what this BR-bashing is all about, especially as the facts do not support the - entirely political - stance. Perhaps he thinks BR, more than 25 years later, is responsible for the present appalling industrial relations? 

[Dava]

I stand by what I wrote, I don’t know why it disappeared except the forum was wobbly last night. It’s not a political statement more than others on here.
 

Abellio, Avanti & TPE are still out there as foreign owned profit-taking TOCs. The botched Major era privatisation led eventually to the mess we have now.

 

”It’s not the People’s Railway anymore, we just pay for it.

 

Privatisation and the cackhanded attempts to shore it up have been the biggest, most costly screwup in UK railway history.”

 

Dava

[black and decker boy]

2 hours ago, Dava said:

I stand by what I wrote, I don’t know why it disappeared except the forum was wobbly last night. It’s not a political statement more than others on here.
 

Abellio, Avanti & TPE are still out there as foreign owned profit-taking TOCs. The botched Major era privatisation led eventually to the mess we have now.

 

”It’s not the People’s Railway anymore, we just pay for it.

 

Privatisation and the cackhanded attempts to shore it up have been the biggest, most costly screwup in UK railway history.”

 

Dava

They are not profit taking (I doubt any TOC makes any profit at present) They earn a small fee for running trains and taking the governments contempt and criticism / wrath from the public.

 

the government takes all revenue risk and controls fully how money is spent. The government sets what service frequency it wants the TOCs to provide, what fleets to use (or not use) etc

 

Government is pushing through service cuts for this May TT change. 
 

UK rail revenue is down 20-25% compared to precovid. Government want costs to follow a similar drop. They don’t care if your train is full, especially if it’s got a high subsidy.

[lmsforever]

In an earlier post mention was made of Virgin and Branson did not understand their franchise  is somewhat wrong  ,as I understood the DFT made a great deal of trouble for them and basically held them in contempt throughout their tenure of the franchise. Culmanating in the famous court case my personal opinion formed by traveling with the current incumbents and Virgin is that Virgin had the best staff who were very customer orientated made a journey a pleasure I expect there will be people who do not agree but thats how I think a franchise should be run and Virgin had the know how.

[Mallard60022]

1 hour ago, lmsforever said:

In an earlier post mention was made of Virgin and Branson did not understand their franchise  is somewhat wrong  ,as I understood the DFT made a great deal of trouble for them and basically held them in contempt throughout their tenure of the franchise. Culmanating in the famous court case my personal opinion formed by traveling with the current incumbents and Virgin is that Virgin had the best staff who were very customer orientated made a journey a pleasure I expect there will be people who do not agree but thats how I think a franchise should be run and Virgin had the know how.

Apologies that was me. My experience was only from the ECML which turned out to be Stagecoach with Virgin Livery. Local Station Staff at 36E, hated that period.

My experience of Virgin X Country was Stuffed beyond reasonable comfort, but 1st Class very well looked after thanks with typical Aircrew style Service.

Perhaps because Virgin had the knowhow, that's why they bailed out as things were so awkward? I had no idea they were hounded by DFT.

Phil

[Wheatley]

3 hours ago, lmsforever said:

as I understood the DFT made a great deal of trouble for them and basically held them in contempt throughout their tenure of the franchise.

So much contempt that they were granted 4 (?) franchise or contract extentions. 

[Mike_Walker]

6 hours ago, Dava said:

I stand by what I wrote, I don’t know why it disappeared except the forum was wobbly last night. It’s not a political statement more than others on here.
 

Abellio, Avanti & TPE are still out there as foreign owned profit-taking TOCs. The botched Major era privatisation led eventually to the mess we have now.

 

”It’s not the People’s Railway anymore, we just pay for it.

 

Privatisation and the cackhanded attempts to shore it up have been the biggest, most costly screwup in UK railway history.”

 

Dava

Avanti and TPE both have FirstGroup as the major partner so not "foreign owned" unless you regard Scotland as foreign.  Abellio have recently sold their UK rail and bus operations to the UK management as they were no longer profitable.

 

Once again, please get your facts right before spouting off.

[jjb1970]

10 hours ago, C126 said:

I think we need to be aware here of the phrase, "correlation is not causation", among other things.  May I beg to suggest a single, simple explanation to such socio-economic questions is rarely the answer, in my limited experience.

 

That should be the first lesson taught in statistics and data analytics classes, unfortunately it seems to be widely ignored. 

 

The concepts of 'informed decision making' and data supported analysis are excellent, but it is very easy to fall into the trap of assuming correlation is causation. The other issue of course is that data is only useful if you understand what it means and wider context.

[BachelorBoy]

10 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

If you can't get any further than that it's pretty clear that you haven;'t got a clue what you're talking about.

 

Er no - Govt made it clear which was which through legislation and the subsidy system.  Something else you appear not to have bothered to look at.

 

 

It didn't until 1968. 

 

 

 

 

[BachelorBoy]

Apologies for stirring up a hornet's nest of raw nerves. (Yes, I know that's a mixed metaphor).

 

I have no desire to start feuds with anyone here.

 

So let me respond broadly, and leave it there. 

 

Yes, I know correlation isn't causation. And I am sure the sudden rise in passenger numbers after privatisation was due to  combination of a number of factors. But it is still a dramatic change, and coincidences are worth investigating. I do hope someone, somewhere, is researching this properly. (Feel free to post links to any research that seems relevant).

 

My views on the disaster that was nationalisation are shaped by a book by BR's former chief economist, Stewart Joy, called "The Train That Ran Away", published in the mid-70s. (Especially the mistake of building lots of steam locos instead of dieselising, and also the cackhanded way BR approached dieselisation after 1955.)

 

There are some interesting excerpts here.

 

https://www.steamindex.com/library/joy.htm

 

Here's a flavour...

 

There were two points at issue: whether BR should have been building steam locomotives at all, and whether the experimentation and construction of new classes was justified. Subsequent attempts to explain this waste have hinged upon the underlying preference for main line electrification, which was itself no more than a guess, and a desire to use indigenous fuels.

Concern, both from a private BR viewpoint and nationally, about the security of fuel supplies is quite understandable. Britain was only three years out of a war in which the supply of petroleum products had been a critical factor. But the diesel oil equivalent of BR's total 1948 coal consumption of 14 million tons was only 220 tanker loads with the small vessels then in use. In any case, the country was short of coal at the time.

 

The argument about waiting for electrification is far less strong. If capital spending restrictions were going to defer electrification, it was argued, it would be better to have one more generation of steam locomotives in the interim. But even if electrification were the ultimate objective, the advantages of diesel traction made it preferable to steam even as an interim solution. As we now know, had diesels been chosen their relative advantages over main line electrification would probably have made them the permanent solution, because a large part of the case for main line electrification, even as late as 1968, rested on the 'unreliability' of diesels. Had diesels been developed at a deliberate pace from nationalisation, their reliability would have been much greater in later years. This was only an indirect effect of the determination of the Railway Executive to ignore diesel traction in 1948. The most costly effect was to defer for nearly ten years the most important single technological advance in railway history.

 

While BR was developing its obsolete fleet of standard steam locomotives, the only development work in progress on diesels was by the commercial locomotive builders, in conjunction with their export business. With no home market, the British locomotive builders found difficulty in competing with the American producers in export markets. Then, in 1954 when BR belatedly recognised the advantages of diesel traction, it found its own design staffs and the commercial locomotive building industry unable to meet its demands. Even the report of the 'impartial committee' in 1951 had not led to any experimentation in addition to the running of the five pre-nationalisation prototypes. This brings us back to the second question which was more immediate for the Railway Executive: whether new steam designs were justified for an admittedly interim requirement.

 

Edited January 13, 2023 by BachelorBoy

[C126]

"Apologies for stirring up a hornet's nest of raw nerves. (Yes, I know that's a mixed metaphor). | I have no desire to start feuds with anyone here. | So let me respond broadly, and leave it there."

 

May I, in return, thank you for your postings, and hope you have, if not been 'swayed' by some of the counter-evidence cited here, not felt 'put out' by the replies and arguments against.  I look forward to reading all opinions, if needing a thick skin at times!

 

While of course I hope your opinion has now changed more towards mine 😀 , thank you for the views and evidence you have quoted.  I will look out The Train That Ran Away with interest, not having heard of this work.  This discussion/debate has been very helpful in clarifying my own views, and I hope you will not be put off from contributing again in the future.  Thank you to all who have contributed so far.

[The Stationmaster]

When somebody writes a book they very often set out to try to justify their own opinion and for balance you need to read other opinions/. Stewart Joy was no different in that respect and wrote very much from an accountant's viewpoint in respect of Riddles' decisions.  But the counter view, taking various facts into account, is rather different.  Firstly at nationalisation the newly created BR faced very serious motive power situation - the war had led to delays in overhauls and also meant the retention of numerous older engines with many dating from the 19th century - something had to be done, and done relatively quickly, to deal with those problems and it had to be done within the money and technology currently available.  

 

Riddles favoured mainline electrification but there was no money available for all but minimal expenditure on existing schen mes and any then proposed schemes were shelved.  Imported oil was expensive especially as the country was short of foreign exchange due to wartime debts and that left little choice.  Added to that British industry was along way from geared up to rapidly produce the necessary components for a large fleet of any short of diesel train but at least the shunting fleet could be gradually dieselised drawing on existing technology and designs and that saved operating costs even if the fuel cost the wrong sort of money.

 

But coal was readily available, the railway could build steam engines with no need to re-tool its workshops and retrain staff and British industry could do the same.  So if electrification wasn't on then the logical, and cheapest ('cheap' as in affordable cost was very important in post-war Britain), course was to build new steam engines which were far more efficient in overall operational costs than the superannuated relics they replaced.  And don't forget that was exactly what most of the BR Standards did - they not only replaced engines built before the Grouping and Great War but engines built in the 19th century and past the end of their economic lives.

 

The real question, which in my view Joy never really addresses, is what could Riddles have done instead?  If you can't provide a viable answer to that then it is far more difficult to criticise what Riddles did.  Whatever the alternative was the country could not afford to spend $US on imported fuel (that ruled out major or widespread use of oil even though its cost per mile run was very low).  Coal could generate electricity but electrification schemes on a wide scale were beyond the country's economic capability (that ruled out major electrification schemes), traction fleet modernisation was essential but what other choices for a large amount of operational train mileage  existed for Riddles and those who provided the cash?  

 

So diesels were built for shunting work and to designs not too dissimilar from steam engines in their mechanical components.  And a move was made to investigating, and gradually developing to trialling, diesel multiple units for branch and secondary lines building on proven technology and readily available components based on road transport.   What real alternatives did Riddles have - answers on a postcard please.

Edited January 15, 2023 by The Stationmaster
Correct typos

[C126]

May I just add an, alas only 'semi-knowledgable', aspect about the implementation of diesel locomotion I read somewhere (so do treat it as you see fit): the B.R. board did not have time to trial fully all the locomotives commissioned before purchasing fleets of the designs, and political considerations had to be taken as to areas of employment by those manufacturing firms.  If anyone can contribute more knowledgably about this, I would love to hear it.

[Mark Saunders]

The current industrial action is poorly reported by the media as it puts the Network Rail action together with the TOC action.

 

It takes a lot to get the TSSA to take action!

[Mallard60022]

Another good book, if you can tolerate the rather ponderous and a bit of a pompous style, is 'I Tried to Run a Railway' by that Fiennes chappy.

 

https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=a006321d9faa2dadJmltdHM9MTY3MzU2ODAwMCZpZ3VpZD0xOWY4N2Y0MS1mNTA0LTZjZTEtM2I3Ni02ZGQ2ZjQyMzZkNzgmaW5zaWQ9NTUxMA&ptn=3&hsh=3&fclid=19f87f41-f504-6ce1-3b76-6dd6f4236d78&u=a1L2ltYWdlcy9zZWFyY2g_cT1pK3RyaWVkK3RvK3J1bithK3JhaWx3YXkrZ2VyYWxkK2ZpZW5uZXMmaWQ9MDlEMjU1NDlEQzdCMEIwREE5MzI2MTM4Rjg0Q0Q2QjYzMjRDQzc2NSZGT1JNPUlRRlJCQQ&ntb=1

 

P

[Mike_Walker]

32 minutes ago, C126 said:

May I just add an, alas only 'semi-knowledgable', aspect about the implementation of diesel locomotion I read somewhere (so do treat it as you see fit): the B.R. board did not have time to trial fully all the locomotives commissioned before purchasing fleets of the designs, and political considerations had to be taken as to areas of employment by those manufacturing firms.  If anyone can contribute more knowledgably about this, I would love to hear it.

True in part but the early abandonment of the pilot scheme was more the result of political pressure to reduce costs by speeding up the withdrawal of labour intensive steam in the face of rapidly escalating losses rather than a desire to promote employment.  Had BR been allowed to follow through with the pilot scheme those "lemons" we were saddled with would not have got beyond the initial batches.

 

Those rapidly escalating losses resulted from the rapid decline in both passenger numbers and freight tonnage following the national strike by ASLEF in 1956 which led to an explosion in private car ownership and road haulage.  A lesson for today perhaps?  History has a habit of repeating itself.

[Mallard60022]

25 minutes ago, Mark Saunders said:

The current industrial action is poorly reported by the media as it puts the Network Rail action together with the TOC action.

 

It takes a lot to get the TSSA to take action!

Again, the 'general public' have little ide about how the Industry works or is 'governed'. There is also the totally unbiased media of course (not)

P

[Mallard60022]

3 minutes ago, Mike_Walker said:

True in part but the early abandonment of the pilot scheme was more the result of political pressure to reduce costs by speeding up the withdrawal of labour intensive steam in the face of rapidly escalating losses rather than a desire to promote employment.  Had BR been allowed to follow through with the pilot scheme those "lemons" we were saddled with would not have got beyond the initial batches.

 

Those rapidly escalating losses resulted from the rapid decline in both passenger numbers and freight tonnage following the national strike by ASLEF in 1956 which led to an explosion in private car ownership and road haulage.  A lesson for today perhaps?  History has a habit of repeating itself.

Standard Class Engines, especially the 9Fs, were short lived but many planned to run until the late70s, as were the Modified Bulleid Pacifics. I always though that short sited thinking about how to run modern MT Steam engines on Oil,  next to Diesels in Modern Depot, on heavy haulage Trains in Industrial areas such as Thornaby, Tinsley and (say) Newport and elsewhere, was due to the 'Oil Crisis' of the 60s and 70s. Beeching, the Road Lobby of the Government of the time and this sort of external but uncontrollable situation, had a big affect on how the Railways morphed in the 60s and 70s. Politics and other external 'factors' has a hell of a lot to be blamed for and some things to be praised for.

I've often fantasised about a layout with fleets of 9Fs and Stanier 8Fs in Blue Livery, with the BR Logo on the Tender, thundering around on Coal, Oil, Ore, Steel  and Aggregates. A Depot would have been fun with both Steam and Diesels and even Electrics (Woodhead), sharing the areas as was the case in some areas of  Europe for many years after us. I won't suggest that the French and Germans had some damn fine Steam Engines. They 'lost' the War too!

[Mallard60022]

Back to Bargain Fares. It's the issue with finding the 'best fares' for the average member of the Public that is the issue.

Phil 

[lmsforever]

I had a look for services and fares Milton Keynes Glasgow and was pleasantly surprised at the standard class fare on the 6.30 am to Glasgow but the return fare was increased ,but the 6.3o was the only down train with no changes.The only return was 4.30 up with no changes everything else had up to four changes .and not good prices the fare structure  has really gone down hill,

[jjb1970]

It's not just trains, or travel.

 

Many restaurants offer dishes of the day at a big discount or incentives out of their peak hours to get customers in. Retail shops have sales, you can be using the same camera, headphones, wearing the same trousers or shoes etc as the person next to you who paid half the price you did. Cars are notorious, depending on how good you are at negotiating and your timing can make a huge difference to price. Even buying a house, people negotiate.

 

Given that people recognize that if they want the best price they need to shop around and time things right, and given that I've never met anyone who ever objected to getting a discount in a sale or at happy hour, I'm not sure why people would whinge about people who do their home work or who travel off peak getting a good discount.

[Mallard60022]

One thing I always try to look at is Split Ticketing. J Public rarely even know about that and their knowledge of the System and Geography of the Lines/Stations etc. is almost zero.

I've used Ticket Offices where the member of Staff ahs been an expert at this. Poxy Ticket Machines are NOT!

P

[The Stationmaster]

On 13/01/2023 at 14:31, Mallard60022 said:

Back to Bargain Fares. It's the issue with finding the 'best fares' for the average member of the Public that is the issue.

Phil 

Based on the journey I made up to London yesterday it would appear that there plenty of 'bargain' fares introduced as a result of  DafT's stupid way of micro managing the railway.  If a passenger on our local branch actually had a ticket he was as daft as DafT because there was no reason whatsoever for him to buy one - no booking off (closed by DafT), no Conductor on the train (no financial incentive for the operator to provide one - thanks to DafT), and no revenue controls whatsoever.  Passengers travelling beyond the branch who had to book at the junction - it still has a Booking Clerk but for how long? - might or might not have been totally honest about where they had started their journey (I suspect they were honest but there was an incentive to save a few quid).

 

All very well where stations are staffed and have ticket barriers but even worse when it comes to securing revenue I, and many others of course, walked through an open ticket barrier at Paddington with no need to use my ticket.  Had they known about the situation at Paddington quite a few people - a couple of dozen in fact - could have saved themselves £18 plus and done 'the railway' out of £400+  of revenue relating to  on our branchline.

 

Simple fact is that in many places revenue collection and protection is non-existent and the ultimate bargain fare of zero is available to many who are that way inclined.

 

At least TfL was properly managing its revenue - it was just a shame that it was unable to operate a reliable service which resulted in me having to use a total of 5 different lines/trains, with journey time almost trebled, when I need only have used 3 lines/trains for a 21/22 minute journey.  Amazingly (to me) 40% of the trains on that journey were terminated short of booked destination!

[C126]

And do not forget the bargains to be had travelling First Class on a Standard ticket on a train with only a Driver as crew!  'Disgusted 1st Commuter'. 🙄

[Mike_Walker]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

Based on the journey I made up to London yesterday it would appear that there plenty of 'bargain' fares introduced as a result of  DafT's stupid way of micro managing the railway.  If a passenger on our local branch actually had a ticket he was as daft as DafT because there was no reason whatsoever for him to buy one - no booking off (closed by DafT), no Conductor on the train (no financial incentive for the operator to provide one - thanks to DafT), and no revenue controls whatsoever.  Passengers travelling beyond the branch who had to book at the junction - it still has a Booking Clerk but for how long? - might or might not have been totally honest about where they had started their journey (I suspect they were honest but there was an incentive to save a few quid).

 

All very well where stations are staffed and have ticket barriers but even worse when it comes to securing revenue I, and many others of course, walked through an open ticket barrier at Paddington with no need to use my ticket.  Had they known about the situation at Paddington quite a few people - a couple of dozen in fact - could have saved themselves £18 plus and done 'the railway' out of £400+  of revenue relating to  on our branchline.

 

Simple fact is that in many places revenue collection and protection is non-existent and the ultimate bargain fare of zero is available to many who are that way inclined.

 

At least TfL was properly managing its revenue - it was just a shame that it was unable to operate a reliable service which resulted in me having to use a total of 5 different lines/trains, with journey time almost trebled, when I need only have used 3 lines/trains for a 21/22 minute journey.  Amazingly (to me) 40% of the trains on that journey were terminated short of booked destination!

I see exactly the same thing every time I use our neighbouring branch line - the next one towards London from Mike's.