There was an article (on p2) of The Times yesterday entitled "More train fare pain as firms scrap super off-peak tickets". It appears to be affecting C2C, Chiltern, SouthEastern, London NW, and South Western Railway, but not Thameslink (fortunately for me). But as with all press articles on the railways the details were scarce and it obviously written by somebody with no actual knowledge of the subject.

There was a remarkably mild comment from London TravelWatch saying "We're fully behind the idea of simplifying the fares system and travel options for rail passengers but we've not seen much publicity about these changes and are concerned that public awareness may be very low" ... "This will mean that some journeys may actually cost more".

This seems a remarkably mild comment from London TravelWatch: I nearly always travel to London on a Super Off-peak ticket, and if forced to get the next most expensive (Off-peak) would be paying something like 30% more.
So: can this be true? It looks like a disguised 30% rise in off-peak rail fares in most parts of South East England.

--
Clive Page

On Wed, 6 Dec 2023 15:38:54 +0000, Clive Page <usenet@page2.eu> wrote:

>There was an article (on p2) of The Times yesterday entitled "More train fare pain as firms scrap super off-peak tickets". It appears to be affecting C2C, Chiltern, SouthEastern, London NW, and South Western Railway, but not Thameslink (fortunately for me). But as with all press articles on the railways the details were scarce and it obviously written by somebody with no actual knowledge of the subject.
>
>There was a remarkably mild comment from London TravelWatch saying "We're fully behind the idea of simplifying the fares system and travel options for rail passengers but we've not seen much publicity about these changes and are concerned that public awareness may be very low" ... "This will mean that some journeys may actually cost more".
>
>This seems a remarkably mild comment from London TravelWatch: I nearly always travel to London on a Super Off-peak ticket, and if forced to get the next most expensive (Off-peak) would be paying something like 30% more.
>So: can this be true? It looks like a disguised 30% rise in off-peak rail fares in most parts of South East England.

AIUI they were withdrawn by ScotRail in October when the all-day
off-peak trial started.

Clive Page <usenet@page2.eu> wrote:
> There was an article (on p2) of The Times yesterday entitled "More train
> fare pain as firms scrap super off-peak tickets". It appears to be
> affecting C2C, Chiltern, SouthEastern, London NW, and South Western
> Railway, but not Thameslink (fortunately for me). But as with all press
> articles on the railways the details were scarce and it obviously written
> by somebody with no actual knowledge of the subject.
>
> There was a remarkably mild comment from London TravelWatch saying "We're
> fully behind the idea of simplifying the fares system and travel options
> for rail passengers but we've not seen much publicity about these changes
> and are concerned that public awareness may be very low" ... "This will
> mean that some journeys may actually cost more".
>
> This seems a remarkably mild comment from London TravelWatch: I nearly
> always travel to London on a Super Off-peak ticket, and if forced to get
> the next most expensive (Off-peak) would be paying something like 30% more.
> So: can this be true? It looks like a disguised 30% rise in off-peak
> rail fares in most parts of South East England.
>

If fares are simplified there will always be losers as well as winners,
even if the aim is to be revenue neutral.

On 06/12/2023 16:39, Tweed wrote:
> Clive Page <usenet@page2.eu> wrote:
>> There was an article (on p2) of The Times yesterday entitled "More train
>> fare pain as firms scrap super off-peak tickets". It appears to be
>> affecting C2C, Chiltern, SouthEastern, London NW, and South Western
>> Railway, but not Thameslink (fortunately for me). But as with all press
>> articles on the railways the details were scarce and it obviously written
>> by somebody with no actual knowledge of the subject.
>>
>> There was a remarkably mild comment from London TravelWatch saying "We're
>> fully behind the idea of simplifying the fares system and travel options
>> for rail passengers but we've not seen much publicity about these changes
>> and are concerned that public awareness may be very low" ... "This will
>> mean that some journeys may actually cost more".
>>
>> This seems a remarkably mild comment from London TravelWatch: I nearly
>> always travel to London on a Super Off-peak ticket, and if forced to get
>> the next most expensive (Off-peak) would be paying something like 30% more.
>> So: can this be true? It looks like a disguised 30% rise in off-peak
>> rail fares in most parts of South East England.
>>
>
> If fares are simplified there will always be losers as well as winners,
> even if the aim is to be revenue neutral.
>
Yes, but in this case, abolishing a whole class of cheap tickets means that we shall all be losers and the only winners are the train companies (or whoever gets the revenue these days, maybe the DFT?).

--
Clive Page

On 06/12/2023 17:24, Clive Page wrote:
> On 06/12/2023 16:39, Tweed wrote:
>> Clive Page <usenet@page2.eu> wrote:
>>> There was an article (on p2) of The Times yesterday entitled "More train
>>> fare pain as firms scrap super off-peak tickets".   It appears to be
>>> affecting C2C, Chiltern, SouthEastern, London NW, and South Western
>>> Railway, but not Thameslink (fortunately for me).  But as with all press
>>> articles on the railways the details were scarce and it obviously
>>> written
>>> by somebody with no actual knowledge of the subject.
>>>
>>> There was a remarkably mild comment from London TravelWatch saying
>>> "We're
>>> fully behind  the idea of simplifying the fares system and travel
>>> options
>>> for rail passengers but we've not seen much publicity about these
>>> changes
>>> and are concerned that public awareness may be very low" ... "This will
>>> mean that some journeys may actually cost more".
>>>
>>> This seems a remarkably mild comment from London TravelWatch:  I nearly
>>> always travel to London on a Super Off-peak ticket, and if forced to get
>>> the next most expensive (Off-peak) would be paying something like 30%
>>> more.
>>> So: can this be true?  It looks like a disguised 30% rise in off-peak
>>> rail fares in most parts of  South East England.
>>>
>>
>> If fares are simplified there will always be losers as well as winners,
>> even if the aim is to be revenue neutral.
>>
> Yes, but in this case, abolishing a whole class of cheap tickets means
> that we shall all be losers and the only winners are the train companies
> (or whoever gets the revenue these days, maybe the DFT?).
>

Or fewer people will travel by rail, and the only winners will be the
car and fuel industries..

Clive Page <usenet@page2.eu> wrote:
> On 06/12/2023 16:39, Tweed wrote:
>> Clive Page <usenet@page2.eu> wrote:
>>> There was an article (on p2) of The Times yesterday entitled "More train
>>> fare pain as firms scrap super off-peak tickets". It appears to be
>>> affecting C2C, Chiltern, SouthEastern, London NW, and South Western
>>> Railway, but not Thameslink (fortunately for me). But as with all press
>>> articles on the railways the details were scarce and it obviously written
>>> by somebody with no actual knowledge of the subject.
>>>
>>> There was a remarkably mild comment from London TravelWatch saying "We're
>>> fully behind the idea of simplifying the fares system and travel options
>>> for rail passengers but we've not seen much publicity about these changes
>>> and are concerned that public awareness may be very low" ... "This will
>>> mean that some journeys may actually cost more".
>>>
>>> This seems a remarkably mild comment from London TravelWatch: I nearly
>>> always travel to London on a Super Off-peak ticket, and if forced to get
>>> the next most expensive (Off-peak) would be paying something like 30% more.
>>> So: can this be true? It looks like a disguised 30% rise in off-peak
>>> rail fares in most parts of South East England.
>>>
>>
>> If fares are simplified there will always be losers as well as winners,
>> even if the aim is to be revenue neutral.
>>
> Yes, but in this case, abolishing a whole class of cheap tickets means
> that we shall all be losers and the only winners are the train companies
> (or whoever gets the revenue these days, maybe the DFT?).

No, the revenue goes straight to the Treasury.

On Wed, 6 Dec 2023 17:24:06 +0000, Clive Page <usenet@page2.eu> wrote:

>>
>> If fares are simplified there will always be losers as well as winners,
>> even if the aim is to be revenue neutral.
>>
>Yes, but in this case, abolishing a whole class of cheap tickets means that we shall all be losers

Only the users of the Super Off-Peak tickets will be losers. How many
of them are there?

On 07/12/2023 13:08, Peter Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Dec 2023 17:24:06 +0000, Clive Page <usenet@page2.eu> wrote:
>
>
>>>
>>> If fares are simplified there will always be losers as well as winners,
>>> even if the aim is to be revenue neutral.
>>>
>> Yes, but in this case, abolishing a whole class of cheap tickets means that we shall all be losers
>
> Only the users of the Super Off-Peak tickets will be losers. How many
> of them are there?

Raises hand!
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 06/12/2023 15:38, Clive Page wrote:

> So: can this be true?  It looks like a disguised 30% rise in off-peak
> rail fares in most parts of  South East England.

From something I only glanced at, I think the idea is to reorganise
fares to enable contactless payment. I haven't looked at the details.

--
Arthur Figgis

On 07/12/2023 17:41, Arthur Figgis wrote:
> On 06/12/2023 15:38, Clive Page wrote:
>
>> So: can this be true?  It looks like a disguised 30% rise in off-peak
>> rail fares in most parts of  South East England.
>
> From something I only glanced at, I think the idea is to reorganise
> fares to enable contactless payment. I haven't looked at the details.

That sounds suspiciously like an excuse. Why implement a contactless
system which can tell whether to charge a normal off-peak or anytime
fare, but doesn't know that anyone arriving in London after 1429 and
leaving before the evening blackout at 1431 pays only super off-peak?

In message <brg3ni9vsqo04cnq0nm10as5kravgoqptr@4ax.com>, at 13:08:09 on
Thu, 7 Dec 2023, Peter Johnson <peter@parksidewood.nospam> remarked:

>>> If fares are simplified there will always be losers as well as winners,
>>> even if the aim is to be revenue neutral.
>>>
>>Yes, but in this case, abolishing a whole class of cheap tickets means that we shall all be losers
>
>Only the users of the Super Off-Peak tickets will be losers. How many
>of them are there?

Here on the GN the tickets named "Super Off-Peak" are actually
"Weekenders", and only valid all day Saturday/Sunday/BH.

There's no weekday even-more-off-peak tickets available.

It'd be nice to know if they are also proposing to scrap these
Weekenders.

ps On many flows the classic Super Off-Peak tickets are virtually
useless. Nottingham to London for example you get to stay for about an
hour, if you don't instead wish to get back at bed-time.
--
Roland Perry

On 07/12/2023 13:08, Peter Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Dec 2023 17:24:06 +0000, Clive Page <usenet@page2.eu> wrote:
>
>
>>>
>>> If fares are simplified there will always be losers as well as winners,
>>> even if the aim is to be revenue neutral.
>>>
>> Yes, but in this case, abolishing a whole class of cheap tickets means that we shall all be losers
>
> Only the users of the Super Off-Peak tickets will be losers. How many
> of them are there?
I don't know. But these make up at least 75% of all tickets that I buy, and at weekends when there are no time restrictions on them my guess is that they would have made up almost 100% of all return tickets purchased on routes in NSE-land where there are available.

--
Clive Page

On 07/12/2023 18:04, Certes wrote:
> On 07/12/2023 17:41, Arthur Figgis wrote:
>> On 06/12/2023 15:38, Clive Page wrote:
>>
>>> So: can this be true?  It looks like a disguised 30% rise in off-peak
>>> rail fares in most parts of  South East England.
>>
>>  From something I only glanced at, I think the idea is to reorganise
>> fares to enable contactless payment. I haven't looked at the details.
>
> That sounds suspiciously like an excuse.  Why implement a contactless
> system which can tell whether to charge a normal off-peak or anytime
> fare, but doesn't know that anyone arriving in London after 1429 and
> leaving before the evening blackout at 1431 pays only super off-peak?

To simplify single leg pricing, and standarise across operators?
--
Arthur Figgis