Virgin Trains lose Holyhead service

Duggys Housemate

Good man dev null, now can you try and post the on-peak times, like I said.

Hint: The peak times go the other way.

devnull

Yeah, I looked at the wrong way, but my point still stands, that tickets are cheaper if you buy in advance, even during evening peak advance tickets from London to Bristol are half the price of the walk up fares next week.

Duggys Housemate

Right, you must have spent some time searching for that, because I couldnt find any reductions, bar one six am from Bristol in the morning, 3 weeks ahead. All the others were full price. When I learn how to post images I will show what I have.

On-peak reductions like that are as useless as tits on a bull, though. If you were using this a commuting line you would probably get a pass. Otherwise the line is used by people who go to London periodically, and they probably book within a few days, paying the full fee. The other problem with advanced tickets is they are not transferable to the next train, while tickets bought at the ATM are. Which means you pay full l whack again if you are a few minutes late. Here is what I see, and the next time 7:30 is also full price.

Thats 3 weeks ahead. I am pretty sure the cheap 06:40 didnt every go through Bath, so for people from Bath its a 5 AM wakeup, or an expensive ticket.

[IMG][/img]

SandyfordGuy

All intercity services have discounted advance tickets, although there are only a certain number of tickets at each price level and obviously the peak advance tickets are more expensive than the outside peak, but are still much cheaper than the walk-up tickets. It's done deliberately to try and push leisure travelers to use later services outside peak to manage the crowd levels, if you had peak trains the same price you'd have even more people using the busiest services and less using the quiet ones.

It's called yield management and capacity management and works on the same principles as airlines and bus operators do in various countries, encourage people to use the less popular services by reducing prices which both encourages new business in times where trains are quite empty. There is nothing wrong or unusual with that, without yield management it would make overcrowding worse, and some services totally unviable.

devnull

No, I found it like that for weeks on end, now of course it depends onw hat dates you picked, if you picked when the paralympics are on in London, I would expect most of the cheap tickets have already been bought up so there would only be more expensive tickets, I found evening peak tickets at 48.50 pretty much solid for the next few weeks but I have not looked at morning peak.

Duggys Housemate

SandyfordGuy wrote: »

All intercity services have discounted advance tickets, although there are only a certain number of tickets at each price level and obviously the peak advance tickets are more expensive than the outside peak, but are still much cheaper than the walk-up tickets. It's done deliberately to try and push leisure travelers to use later services outside peak to manage the crowd levels, if you had peak trains the same price you'd have even more people using the busiest services and less using the quiet ones.

It's called yield management and capacity management and works on the same principles as airlines and bus operators do in various countries, encourage people to use the less popular services by reducing prices which both encourages new business in times where trains are quite empty. There is nothing wrong or unusual with that, without yield management it would make overcrowding worse, and some services totally unviable.

Nobody is denying that, I wasn't disputing the fact that there are on-peak and off-peak prices, just pointing out the cost of the on peak prices. As we can see here in my last post, most of the morning on-peak advance tickets are the same price as a normal tickets, though they do reserve a seat.

Now those costs are up to £179 for on-peak both ways. You will definitely be paying more than £100, you can reduce the prices on the way back by getting home later, of course.

SandyfordGuy

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Right, you must have spent some time searching for that, because I couldnt find any reductions, bar one six am from Bristol in the morning, 3 weeks ahead. All the others were full price. When I learn how to post images I will show what I have.[/quote[

The only dates that seem to be more expensive are ones during the Paralympics, before and after that time they are in-line with what devnull said apart from a very few number of exceptions.

On-peak reductions like that are as useless as tits on a bull, though. If you were using this a commuting line you would probably get a pass. Otherwise the line is used by people who go to London periodically, and they probably book within a few days, paying the full fee. The other problem with advanced tickets is they are not transferable to the next train, while tickets bought at the ATM are. Which means you pay full l whack again if you are a few minutes late.

You're saying that you are unhappy that tickets are up to 50% off and that is a bad thing? You'd rather pay full price? Advance tickets are normally available up to 2-3 days in advance if the quota of discounted tickets has not sold out, but what I would say is that people need to get used to booking in advance to get the best fares, like with flights. In addition most leisure travelers will not travel during peak times and will travel outside them. Also if you are delayed by a connecting train on the same booking on an advance ticket it will be valid on the next departing service if you inform the ticket office.,

devnull

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Nobody is denying that, I wasn't disputing the fact that there are on-peak and off-peak prices, just pointing out the cost of the on peak prices. As we can see here in my last post, most of the morning on-peak advance tickets are the same price as a normal tickets, though they do reserve a seat.

That is not a typical week though, that is when there is a major event is on in London, and thus ticket sales will be well up on normal and there will be lots more people traveling, the same as happened with the Olympics, meaning that the cheaper fares sell out very quickly.

This is no different to what happens with flights, you go and take a look at Aer Lingus flights the next time a major event is on somewhere, do they have higher prices or not? and if you miss a flight do you get allowed to transfer to the next one for free?

SandyfordGuy

You need to realise that the UK fare system is very similar to that used by Airlines, if you want a flexible ticket on an airline you need to pay extra for it do you not, it's exactly the same with train travel in UK with the benefit that with the UK train system flexible tickets cost less in off-peak times.

bk

SandyfordGuy wrote: »

but what I would say is that people need to get used to booking in advance to get the best fares, like with flights.

When you say that, I assume you are talking about the UK.

Because I don't think the airline type model works in Ireland. Irish Rail tried the airline model and it failed due to competition from motorway and the private coach bus companies.

The reality is that distances just aren't far enough and speeds high enough to justify the airline type model in Ireland.

The airline model fell apart when you could just walk up to a bus at any time, without advance booking, buy a ticket for a quarter of the price of rail and get to your destination in the same time or faster!!

I think for Irish Rail the future is more like the Dutch train system. Max walk up price is €20 one way. No need to book in advance, no seat bookings, etc. Just a very simple system, similar to the buses.

Irish Rail is currently trying a hybrid approach, you get the cheap €20 fare if you book more then 3 days in advance and pay higher fares closer. However I don't think this model will work, while better then the old airline style model, in the end they will just end up losing the "need to travel last minute" customers to the bus coaches. So in the end I think IR will simplify aggressively and embrace the Dutch model.

- Get rid of seat reservations
- Max €20 one way fares as walk up prices.
- Dump first class
- Review onboard catering (if self financing then fine, and don't forget to include the cost of lost seats in this calculation, otherwise dump)

The only way I can see Irish Rail doing different if they can knock minimum of one hour, preferably 90 minutes off journey times. This would put them at a speed advantage over bus and then they could charge a premium for such a service.

devnull

Oh without doubt I don't think the airline model will work for Irish Rail here, it's not suited to this market because of the line speeds, population density, competition and network size for some of the reasons you mention. I'm not sure what the correct model would be though. I've noticed in Ireland people seem to be less inclined to book in advance to get the best prices than in the UK also.

LeftBlank

This article makes for interesting reading, I think

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2011/dec/30/worst-train-reading-london-paddington?intcmp=239

£4,516 for an annual ticket (no taxsaver scheme) and desperately overcrowded trains.

Duggys Housemate

SandyfordGuy wrote: »

The only dates that seem to be more expensive are ones during the Paralympics, before and after that time they are in-line with what devnull said apart from a very few number of exceptions.



You're saying that you are unhappy that tickets are up to 50% off and that is a bad thing? You'd rather pay full price? Advance tickets are normally available up to 2-3 days in advance if the quota of discounted tickets has not sold out, but what I would say is that people need to get used to booking in advance to get the best fares, like with flights. In addition most leisure travelers will not travel during peak times and will travel outside them. Also if you are delayed by a connecting train on the same booking on an advance ticket it will be valid on the next departing service if you inform the ticket office.,

You are missing the point. Whatever way you dilly dally on the on-peak trips from Bristol to London, most people pay full price. Which is £90 in one direction. In general you can get better deals coming back, or wait until the off peak time. However that means getting back past 8 or 9 pm. And those trains are also packed to standing until past Reading or Swindon.

Booking 3 weeks in advance is not possible for most business travel, when meetings are decided a week, or less in advance. The day before in many cases. And there are very few at that price 3 weeks ahead. The 3 weeks I took was not for the paralympics, I tried previous weeks - the Paralympics won't, in any case be as popular as the olympics - most people on those trains will be for business. I used to live this life, and most people I talked to had full price tickets, or passes.

In any case this seems like there are representatives of FGW on this thread. Lets bear in mind that FGW is due an inflation busting increase in fares this year, and next, and the wages in England are not matching inflation. Increases will be 20 percent over a few years. The UK model is broken.

The Idyll Race

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

You are missing the point. Whatever way you dilly dally on the on-peak trips from Bristol to London, most people pay full price. Which is £90 in one direction. In general you can get better deals coming back, or wait until the odd peak time. However that means getting back past 8 or 9 pm. And those trains are also packed to standing until past Reading or Swindon.

Booking 3 weeks in advance is not possible for most business travel, when meetings are decided a week, or less in advance. The day before in many cases. And there are very few at that price 3 weeks ahead. The 3 weeks I took was not for the paralympics, I tried previous weeks - the Paralympics won't, in any case be as popular as the olympics - most people on those trains will be for business. I used to live this life, and most people I talked to had full price tickets, or passes.

In any case this seems like there are representatives of FGW on this thread. Lets bear in mind that FGW is due an inflation busting increase in fares this year, and next, and the wages in England are not matching inflation. Increases will be 20 percent over a few years. The UK model is broken.

From the perspective of First it certainly isn't broken. Britain's railways went from Beeching to Ker-Ching! for the few. :rolleyes:

SandyfordGuy

LeftBlank wrote: »

This article makes for interesting reading, I think

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2011/dec/30/worst-train-reading-london-paddington?intcmp=239

£4,516 for an annual ticket (no taxsaver scheme) and desperately overcrowded trains.

I agree that it is a problem and the overcrowding needs to be resolved, but what can train operators do when the Government continually cancels, delays and vetos orders for trains? companies can't just go out there and orde trains and fix the problem, the provision of new trains is controlled too much by the government Thameslink and the Great Western mainline along with a few lines up north have been overcrowded for a while now simply because the fact that procurement for rolling stock is taking too long and is too drawn out. There is nothing the train companies can do about this, they are restricted to the framework that is in place, all they can do is make the most of what they have, and what stock is spare (virtually nothing as several operators are in the same boat)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-17310289

SandyfordGuy

The Idyll Race wrote: »

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

You are missing the point. Whatever way you dilly dally on the on-peak trips from Bristol to London, most people pay full price. Which is £90 in one direction. In general you can get better deals coming back, or wait until the odd peak time. However that means getting back past 8 or 9 pm. And those trains are also packed to standing until past Reading or Swindon.

Booking 3 weeks in advance is not possible for most business travel, when meetings are decided a week, or less in advance. The day before in many cases. And there are very few at that price 3 weeks ahead. The 3 weeks I took was not for the paralympics, I tried previous weeks - the Paralympics won't, in any case be as popular as the olympics - most people on those trains will be for business. I used to live this life, and most people I talked to had full price tickets, or passes.

In any case this seems like there are representatives of FGW on this thread. Lets bear in mind that FGW is due an inflation busting increase in fares this year, and next, and the wages in England are not matching inflation. Increases will be 20 percent over a few years. The UK model is broken.

From the perspective of First it certainly isn't broken. Britain's railways went from Beeching to Ker-Ching! for the few. :rolleyes:

Well actually you will find many of the train operators are very unhappy about the current situation because many of their franchise calculations were based on the government actually delivering what they promised with thinks like the Thameslink Programme, DMU orders, infrastructure improvements and the High Speed trains programme, but the government are running several years behind which is hampering growth and new services because there simply is not the rolling stock around to be flexible as they want.

I agree that some of the anytime fares are without doubt overpriced and the UK system does have it's flaws and there are costs there that need to be taken out, especially in relation to the train leasing charges, which are run by banks and investment companies that take far bigger margins out of the system than any of the operators are doing. As stated previously the margin that the train operators make is very small in comparison and setting up such leasing companies upon the privatisation was a big mistake.

You say the Paralympics are not popular but close to 3 million people are reported to be attending them from 28th August until 9th September, which falls within your three week period, I Had a look at prices myself and the prices next week are discounted like has been pointed out by other posters on this thread. Of course not every single train is but for the vast majority there are discounted tickets around, but as they are quota controlled, just like airlines, when events are on they will sell more quickly.

An interesting article can be found here, which illustrates the problems in relation to rolling stock leasing companies: Many reports have come to the conclusion they are ripping off train operating companies which translates to higher running costs and higher fares: http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-are-the-train-operators-the-villains-of-the-piece/11169 there has to be real reform of such companies who are taking such high margins.

devnull

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

In any case this seems like there are representatives of FGW on this thread. Lets bear in mind that FGW is due an inflation busting increase in fares this year, and next, and the wages in England are not matching inflation. Increases will be 20 percent over a few years. The UK model is broken.

No connection whatsoever, as someone who has worked and lived in the UK in the past in the area I'm just giving my point of view so to speak. It is very easy to blame the train operating companies for lots of problems in the UK network, and there have been some bad operators down the years such as National Express East Coast, National Express East Anglia, Connex South Central, First North Western, the original C2C etc, which were entirely down to bad management and things under their control, but some of the operators right now are suffering because of problems with infrastructure, government policy and dithering, rolling stock provision and other things that are not under their direct control.

LXFlyer

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

In any case this seems like there are representatives of FGW on this thread. Lets bear in mind that FGW is due an inflation busting increase in fares this year, and next, and the wages in England are not matching inflation. Increases will be 20 percent over a few years. The UK model is broken.

For the record I've nothing to do with them - just an occasional user, more frequent observer and regular reader of transport journals, in one of which (RAIL) they did get acknowledged as having the best Intercity catering service.

Frankly your beef should be with the UK government on the fares and not the train operators - it is government policy that sets the fares.

LeftBlank

lxflyer wrote: »

Frankly your beef should be with the UK government on the fares and not the train operators - it is government policy that sets the fares.

This would be my point too - the fact than an annual ticket for 35 minute rail journey (plus LU) that you more than likely have to stand on costs in excess of 4,500 pounds is a cumulative failure of the whole system.

The Idyll Race

lxflyer wrote: »

For the record I've nothing to do with them - just an occasional user, more frequent observer and regular reader of transport journals, in one of which (RAIL) they did get acknowledged as having the best Intercity catering service.

Frankly your beef should be with the UK government on the fares and not the train operators - it is government policy that sets the fares.

It was certainly the failure of the last Labour government to undo privatisation. Britain is now stuck with the profit taking approach to the railways that has lead to First holding the Greater Western, Capital Connect and WCML franchises and the botch that is the state ownership by default of the East Coast Main Line when National Express handed back the keys.

British Rail was huge, unwieldy but it did do a job. Maybe not as efficiently as it could have, but the monster that is rail privatisation in Britain is only benefiting those who are profit taking in an unnecessarily complicated set of structures.

Translink has been criticised earlier, but it uniquely provides in these islands a fully integrated transport system. CIE doesn't do this, it grudgingly implements the decisions of its political masters and its different sectors do not integrate with each other. It has outlived any possible usefulness it ever had and should be abolished forthwith.

Reform of Britain's railways will have to wait for a Labour government that has the balls to stand up to the Murdoch and Rothmere press.

AngryLips

SandyfordGuy wrote: »

The UK system certainly is not perfect but neither is Translink.

Where does Translink fall down? I've always found them way ahead of IE in almost every way.

dowlingm

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

In any case this seems like there are representatives of FGW on this thread.

I can't speak for anyone else but am not happy to see paranoia come out to play. It's possible for people to disagree with you without being in the pay of FirstGroup, and you might take this as a reminder to add yourself to the Conflict of Interest thread.

Marcusm

devnull wrote: »

There generally are business people on many routes who only travel First Class and would not travel if standard class if that was the only choice available to them due to the extras First Class offers etc.

And there are frequently First Class ticket holders standing on inter city routes too!

Marcusm

AngryLips wrote: »

Does the current rolling stock belong to Virgin? If so what will happen to it now that they've lost the franchise?

The rolling stock in this instance belongs to Angel Trains, one of the three rolling stock leasing companies set up at privatisation. Angel will have provided terms for a new lease to each of the bidders for the franchise, terms can differ as can each bidders views on the railcars. All staff will transfer across (drivers, guards, engineers, station staff where relevant etc) so what changes is the management team and the business plan.

Marcusm

SandyfordGuy wrote: »

The leasing companies are one of the worst aspects of the UK system, they have much higher profit margins than the train operating companies, which is often overlooked.

Really, is that why the Competition Commission inquiry did nt result in any substantial fines, changes or support for such views?

Marcusm

vard wrote: »

First thing they should do is introduce an early morning train to meet ferry passengers arriving in Hollyhead looking to travel to London.

I frequently take the rail + sail to London. It ends up taking roughly 13 hours each way - the bus takes the same length of time.

When you arrive in Hollyhead however you end up having to wait along with everyone else from 1AM or so until the first train departs at about 5.30; Hollyhead couldn't be a more disgusting, depressing and dire place to be forced to wait around.

Perhaps take one of the ferries which arrives in Holyhead during daylight hours?

Fratton Fred

I've mixed views on this.

First have made massive improvements to the GW service since they took over and anyone who has done the overnight sailrail from fishguard will appreciate the Bacon rolls on the swansea to London train.

However, I like virgin. I always feel their trains have more room for some reason.

Fratton Fred

The Idyll Race wrote: »

It was certainly the failure of the last Labour government to undo privatisation. Britain is now stuck with the profit taking approach to the railways that has lead to First holding the Greater Western, Capital Connect and WCML franchises and the botch that is the state ownership by default of the East Coast Main Line when National Express handed back the keys.

British Rail was huge, unwieldy but it did do a job. Maybe not as efficiently as it could have, but the monster that is rail privatisation in Britain is only benefiting those who are profit taking in an unnecessarily complicated set of structures.

Translink has been criticised earlier, but it uniquely provides in these islands a fully integrated transport system. CIE doesn't do this, it grudgingly implements the decisions of its political masters and its different sectors do not integrate with each other. It has outlived any possible usefulness it ever had and should be abolished forthwith.

Reform of Britain's railways will have to wait for a Labour government that has the balls to stand up to the Murdoch and Rothmere press.

have you got actual experience if British rail transport before and after privatisation?

Trust me, it is a million times better than it was 30 years ago.

purplepanda

Fratton Fred wrote: »

have you got actual experience if British rail transport before and after privatisation?

Trust me, it is a million times better than it was 30 years ago.

The UK government puts in 3 times as much annual rail subsidy, (BBC Radio 5 Tuesday morning show ) in real terms, compared to the days of BR. So the trains are newer & modern, many stations have been modernised & upgraded which might explain the million times better?

However the ticket costs to commuters & long distance travelers, have become totally outrageously priced in the meantime, so much so that many taxpayers are questioning why they have to pay towards a upgraded rail system that they themselves can't afford to travel on regularly or in some cases not at all! :mad:

devnull

purplepanda wrote: »

The UK government puts in 3 times as much annual rail subsidy, (BBC Radio 5 Tuesday morning show ) in real terms, compared to the days of BR. So the trains are newer & modern, many stations have been modernised & upgraded which might explain the million times better

Subsidy is up generally since privatization but the standards are far higher, even if there are clearly some problems with the model - yes, on franchises which are loss making the government is putting more money into the franchises to make them viable, this is no bad thing and it provides better, more frequent services in areas where there is lower population density and other obstacles that make running a self financing system impossible for such areas.

However what you need to factor in is the larger train operating companies on the bigger franchises do not get subsidy they pay a premium, for example First will return €5.5bn to the taxpayer in exchanges for the right to run the West Coast Line until 2026. The money the government is earning from the premiums is then used to fund subsidy for other operations. So the true calculation of how much government subsidy is in the network right now is the premiums the government are raking in minus the subsidy they are laying out, that gives you the net cost to the government of financing the railway operations, if you took out the premiums, you'd be left with an even bigger subsidy.

Also subsidies are coming down, indeed at the moment Bob Crow who previously claimed they are far too high, is now moaning that train operating companies are paying far too high premiums and paying too much money to the government, when before he was moaning they were not paying enough.