https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/24/labour-promises-rail-nationalisation-within-five-years-of-coming-to-power

Basically, it'll be implementing the Shapps-Williams GBR plan. In effect,
all it amounts to is the OLR replacing existing concessions as they run
out. Open access will remain, and nothing else will be nationalised.

In message <lEfWN.83178$kt2.15411@fx13.ams1>, at 22:24:17 on Wed, 24 Apr
2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/24/labour-promises-rail-na
>tionalisation-within-five-years-of-coming-to-power
>
>Basically, it'll be implementing the Shapps-Williams GBR plan. In effect,
>all it amounts to is the OLR replacing existing concessions as they run
>out. Open access will remain, and nothing else will be nationalised.

That's pretty much the summary which was on the BBC News this morning.

In particular not nationalising the ROSCOs, or tearing up supply
contracts for things like IETs.

But they also raised the hoary old prospect of "always paying the
cheapest fare", which apparently involves scrapping most of the
allegedly-confusing discounted fares. Which are only "confusing"
because of the way they apply to limited subsets of travellers, who
nevertheless find them attractive in return for various restrictions
on where/when the ticket is valid, do you have a companion who is
obliged to travel on the exact same trains, and so on.

So what they really mean is "always pay the cheapest fare - selected
from a much reduced basket of on average higher priced tickets". The
acid test, of course, is whether they propose to reduce the payment by
automatically splitting tickets. Not just halfway geographically, but
changing to an off-peak ticket if one's journey spans 09:30 (or
whatever).
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <lEfWN.83178$kt2.15411@fx13.ams1>, at 22:24:17 on Wed, 24 Apr
> 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/24/labour-promises-rail-na
>> tionalisation-within-five-years-of-coming-to-power
>>
>> Basically, it'll be implementing the Shapps-Williams GBR plan. In effect,
>> all it amounts to is the OLR replacing existing concessions as they run
>> out. Open access will remain, and nothing else will be nationalised.
>
> That's pretty much the summary which was on the BBC News this morning.
>
> In particular not nationalising the ROSCOs, or tearing up supply
> contracts for things like IETs.
>
> But they also raised the hoary old prospect of "always paying the
> cheapest fare", which apparently involves scrapping most of the
> allegedly-confusing discounted fares. Which are only "confusing"
> because of the way they apply to limited subsets of travellers, who
> nevertheless find them attractive in return for various restrictions
> on where/when the ticket is valid, do you have a companion who is
> obliged to travel on the exact same trains, and so on.
>
> So what they really mean is "always pay the cheapest fare - selected
> from a much reduced basket of on average higher priced tickets". The
> acid test, of course, is whether they propose to reduce the payment by
> automatically splitting tickets. Not just halfway geographically, but
> changing to an off-peak ticket if one's journey spans 09:30 (or
> whatever).

The railway is already pretty much nationalised as it is, bar a few
stragglers. You just need to follow the money. All major, and most minor,
spending decisions are now government controlled.

We already know what simplified ticketing means, as is being demonstrated
by nationalised LNER. Withdrawal of off peak fares and take your chance on
whatever they see fit to charge on Advances. EasyJet must be loving it.

In message <v0cuqp$2s7ti$1@dont-email.me>, at 06:56:26 on Thu, 25 Apr
2024, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <lEfWN.83178$kt2.15411@fx13.ams1>, at 22:24:17 on Wed, 24 Apr
>> 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/24/labour-promises-rail-na
>>> tionalisation-within-five-years-of-coming-to-power
>>>
>>> Basically, it'll be implementing the Shapps-Williams GBR plan. In effect,
>>> all it amounts to is the OLR replacing existing concessions as they run
>>> out. Open access will remain, and nothing else will be nationalised.
>>
>> That's pretty much the summary which was on the BBC News this morning.
>>
>> In particular not nationalising the ROSCOs, or tearing up supply
>> contracts for things like IETs.
>>
>> But they also raised the hoary old prospect of "always paying the
>> cheapest fare", which apparently involves scrapping most of the
>> allegedly-confusing discounted fares. Which are only "confusing"
>> because of the way they apply to limited subsets of travellers, who
>> nevertheless find them attractive in return for various restrictions
>> on where/when the ticket is valid, do you have a companion who is
>> obliged to travel on the exact same trains, and so on.
>>
>> So what they really mean is "always pay the cheapest fare - selected
>> from a much reduced basket of on average higher priced tickets". The
>> acid test, of course, is whether they propose to reduce the payment by
>> automatically splitting tickets. Not just halfway geographically, but
>> changing to an off-peak ticket if one's journey spans 09:30 (or
>> whatever).
>
>The railway is already pretty much nationalised as it is, bar a few
>stragglers.

Yet you get programmes like that preposterous one on ITV the other
week, where none of the commentators would accept that any of it is
nationalised.

>You just need to follow the money. All major, and most minor,
>spending decisions are now government controlled.
>
>We already know what simplified ticketing means, as is being demonstrated
>by nationalised LNER. Withdrawal of off peak fares and take your chance on
>whatever they see fit to charge on Advances.

It's more about withdrawing returns, but if singles are half the price
of the old returns that's not a huge issue.

And: https://www.brfares.com/!faredetail?orig=PBO&dest=YRK&tkt=SOS £79
https://www.brfares.com/!faredetail?orig=PBO&dest=YRK&tkt=SVS £45

So I think you are over-egging it just a bit.

>EasyJet must be loving it.

Last time I looked, it wasn't that easy to fly from say Peterborough to
York.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <v0cuqp$2s7ti$1@dont-email.me>, at 06:56:26 on Thu, 25 Apr
> 2024, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <lEfWN.83178$kt2.15411@fx13.ams1>, at 22:24:17 on Wed, 24 Apr
>>> 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/24/labour-promises-rail-na
>>>> tionalisation-within-five-years-of-coming-to-power
>>>>
>>>> Basically, it'll be implementing the Shapps-Williams GBR plan. In effect,
>>>> all it amounts to is the OLR replacing existing concessions as they run
>>>> out. Open access will remain, and nothing else will be nationalised.
>>>
>>> That's pretty much the summary which was on the BBC News this morning.
>>>
>>> In particular not nationalising the ROSCOs, or tearing up supply
>>> contracts for things like IETs.
>>>
>>> But they also raised the hoary old prospect of "always paying the
>>> cheapest fare", which apparently involves scrapping most of the
>>> allegedly-confusing discounted fares. Which are only "confusing"
>>> because of the way they apply to limited subsets of travellers, who
>>> nevertheless find them attractive in return for various restrictions
>>> on where/when the ticket is valid, do you have a companion who is
>>> obliged to travel on the exact same trains, and so on.
>>>
>>> So what they really mean is "always pay the cheapest fare - selected
>>> from a much reduced basket of on average higher priced tickets". The
>>> acid test, of course, is whether they propose to reduce the payment by
>>> automatically splitting tickets. Not just halfway geographically, but
>>> changing to an off-peak ticket if one's journey spans 09:30 (or
>>> whatever).
>>
>> The railway is already pretty much nationalised as it is, bar a few
>> stragglers.
>
> Yet you get programmes like that preposterous one on ITV the other
> week, where none of the commentators would accept that any of it is
> nationalised.
>
>> You just need to follow the money. All major, and most minor,
>> spending decisions are now government controlled.
>>
>> We already know what simplified ticketing means, as is being demonstrated
>> by nationalised LNER. Withdrawal of off peak fares and take your chance on
>> whatever they see fit to charge on Advances.
>
> It's more about withdrawing returns, but if singles are half the price
> of the old returns that's not a huge issue.
>
> And: https://www.brfares.com/!faredetail?orig=PBO&dest=YRK&tkt=SOS £79
> https://www.brfares.com/!faredetail?orig=PBO&dest=YRK&tkt=SVS £45
>
> So I think you are over-egging it just a bit.
>
>> EasyJet must be loving it.
>
> Last time I looked, it wasn't that easy to fly from say Peterborough to
> York.

It really isn’t just withdrawing returns. In their trial flows (the most
important being KGX to Waverley) you can no longer purchase off peak
tickets. The options are Anytime or Advance. The off peak fare effectively
capped the Advance price during the off peak periods. Now they can charge
what they like up to the Anytime price.

https://www.independent.co.uk/business/simpler-fares-trial-adds-more-than-ps100-to-cost-of-some-train-journeys-b2497343.html

Mark Smith, founder of Seat61.com, said: “It’s now pretty clear to everyone
that the LNER fares ‘simplification’ was a smokescreen for removing the
Off-Peak fare to allow big price increases.

“I now suspect DfT is behind this.

“As a trial simplification for passengers it has already failed and should
not be extended.”

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/24/labour-promises-rail-nationalisation-within-five-years-of-coming-to-power
>
> Basically, it'll be implementing the Shapps-Williams GBR plan. In effect,
> all it amounts to is the OLR replacing existing concessions as they run
> out. Open access will remain, and nothing else will be nationalised.

It sounds like it's also removing some of the overheads of the private
railway: contract bidding/awarding, costs attribution. ie if HMG-owned
Network Rail delays HMG-owned LNER's train, there's no point in one
government-owned body claiming compensation from the other. It seems such
structures would still have to exist for open access and freight, but
presumably still much reduce the process.

Also possibly means breaking things out of TOC silos - eg one national
ticketing sales platform, not broken up by TOC.

All of which could happen today with the current concession model, but this
just removes the fiction that some other operator is in the middle.

Theo

Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/24/labour-promises-rail-nationalisation-within-five-years-of-coming-to-power
>>
>> Basically, it'll be implementing the Shapps-Williams GBR plan. In effect,
>> all it amounts to is the OLR replacing existing concessions as they run
>> out. Open access will remain, and nothing else will be nationalised.
>
> It sounds like it's also removing some of the overheads of the private
> railway: contract bidding/awarding, costs attribution. ie if HMG-owned
> Network Rail delays HMG-owned LNER's train, there's no point in one
> government-owned body claiming compensation from the other. It seems such
> structures would still have to exist for open access and freight, but
> presumably still much reduce the process.

There's also the Merseyrail, TfW, ScotRail, LO and EL TOCs, as well as the
charter operators. So some such system would still be needed.

>
> Also possibly means breaking things out of TOC silos - eg one national
> ticketing sales platform, not broken up by TOC.
>
> All of which could happen today with the current concession model, but this
> just removes the fiction that some other operator is in the middle.
>

I think it was all in the Shapps-Williams plan. Given that Labour now
supports it, I wonder why the government doesn't proceed with the GBR
legislation?

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/24/labour-promises-rail-nationalisation-within-five-years-of-coming-to-power
>>>
>>> Basically, it'll be implementing the Shapps-Williams GBR plan. In effect,
>>> all it amounts to is the OLR replacing existing concessions as they run
>>> out. Open access will remain, and nothing else will be nationalised.
>>
>> It sounds like it's also removing some of the overheads of the private
>> railway: contract bidding/awarding, costs attribution. ie if HMG-owned
>> Network Rail delays HMG-owned LNER's train, there's no point in one
>> government-owned body claiming compensation from the other. It seems such
>> structures would still have to exist for open access and freight, but
>> presumably still much reduce the process.
>
> There's also the Merseyrail, TfW, ScotRail, LO and EL TOCs, as well as the
> charter operators. So some such system would still be needed.
>
>>
>> Also possibly means breaking things out of TOC silos - eg one national
>> ticketing sales platform, not broken up by TOC.
>>
>> All of which could happen today with the current concession model, but this
>> just removes the fiction that some other operator is in the middle.
>>
>
> I think it was all in the Shapps-Williams plan. Given that Labour now
> supports it, I wonder why the government doesn't proceed with the GBR
> legislation?
>
Bit hard to get motivated as your government heads for the edge of the
cliff.

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/24/labour-promises-rail-nationalisation-within-five-years-of-coming-to-power
>>>>
>>>> Basically, it'll be implementing the Shapps-Williams GBR plan. In effect,
>>>> all it amounts to is the OLR replacing existing concessions as they run
>>>> out. Open access will remain, and nothing else will be nationalised.
>>>
>>> It sounds like it's also removing some of the overheads of the private
>>> railway: contract bidding/awarding, costs attribution. ie if HMG-owned
>>> Network Rail delays HMG-owned LNER's train, there's no point in one
>>> government-owned body claiming compensation from the other. It seems such
>>> structures would still have to exist for open access and freight, but
>>> presumably still much reduce the process.
>>
>> There's also the Merseyrail, TfW, ScotRail, LO and EL TOCs, as well as the
>> charter operators. So some such system would still be needed.
>>
>>>
>>> Also possibly means breaking things out of TOC silos - eg one national
>>> ticketing sales platform, not broken up by TOC.
>>>
>>> All of which could happen today with the current concession model, but this
>>> just removes the fiction that some other operator is in the middle.
>>>
>>
>> I think it was all in the Shapps-Williams plan. Given that Labour now
>> supports it, I wonder why the government doesn't proceed with the GBR
>> legislation?
>>
> Bit hard to get motivated as your government heads for the edge of the
> cliff.

I think it's more than that. The problem is that the current secretary of
state doesn't agree with it, and would rather have a much bigger role for
the private sector. It's why he's supporting new open access operators,
which makes a big change for the DfT. I think he'd like to get as many as
possible in place before the election.

In message <umx*63OIz@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, at 12:00:56 on Thu,
25 Apr 2024, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> remarked:
>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/24/labour-promises-rail-n
>>ationalisation-within-five-years-of-coming-to-power
>>
>> Basically, it'll be implementing the Shapps-Williams GBR plan. In effect,
>> all it amounts to is the OLR replacing existing concessions as they run
>> out. Open access will remain, and nothing else will be nationalised.
>
>It sounds like it's also removing some of the overheads of the private
>railway: contract bidding/awarding, costs attribution.

You seem to be under the misapprehension that there's no internal
profit-centering in large organisations.

Anyway, to pick one example, do you think they propose to re-nationalise
the station car parks?

>ie if HMG-owned
>Network Rail delays HMG-owned LNER's train, there's no point in one
>government-owned body claiming compensation from the other.

Of course there is, otherwise the factory has a blank chequebook, and no
comeback if the trains turn to be rubbish.

>It seems such
>structures would still have to exist for open access and freight, but
>presumably still much reduce the process.
>
>Also possibly means breaking things out of TOC silos - eg one national
>ticketing sales platform, not broken up by TOC.

The "one ticketing platform"" they have at the moment is a pile of
steaming excrement, so competition in that market is essential. Are
you expecting labour to re-nationalise The Trainline?

>All of which could happen today with the current concession model, but this
>just removes the fiction that some other operator is in the middle.

Can't parse that, sorry.
--
Roland Perry

On 25/04/2024 12:00, Theo wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/24/labour-promises-rail-nationalisation-within-five-years-of-coming-to-power
>>
>> Basically, it'll be implementing the Shapps-Williams GBR plan. In effect,
>> all it amounts to is the OLR replacing existing concessions as they run
>> out. Open access will remain, and nothing else will be nationalised.
>
> It sounds like it's also removing some of the overheads of the private
> railway: contract bidding/awarding, costs attribution. ie if HMG-owned
> Network Rail delays HMG-owned LNER's train, there's no point in one
> government-owned body claiming compensation from the other. It seems such
> structures would still have to exist for open access and freight, but
> presumably still much reduce the process.

They aren't going to renationalise the ROSCOs so that leaves that still
in operation.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <umx*63OIz@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, at 12:00:56 on Thu,
> 25 Apr 2024, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> remarked:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/24/labour-promises-rail-n
>>> ationalisation-within-five-years-of-coming-to-power
>>>
>>> Basically, it'll be implementing the Shapps-Williams GBR plan. In effect,
>>> all it amounts to is the OLR replacing existing concessions as they run
>>> out. Open access will remain, and nothing else will be nationalised.
>>
>> It sounds like it's also removing some of the overheads of the private
>> railway: contract bidding/awarding, costs attribution.
>
> You seem to be under the misapprehension that there's no internal
> profit-centering in large organisations.
>
> Anyway, to pick one example, do you think they propose to re-nationalise
> the station car parks?
>
>> ie if HMG-owned
>> Network Rail delays HMG-owned LNER's train, there's no point in one
>> government-owned body claiming compensation from the other.
>
> Of course there is, otherwise the factory has a blank chequebook, and no
> comeback if the trains turn to be rubbish.

I read that as “delays” as in “makes a train run late” rather than
“prevents an order from being issued in a timely fashion”.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 25/04/2024 12:00, Theo wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/24/labour-promises-rail-nationalisation-within-five-years-of-coming-to-power
>>>
>>> Basically, it'll be implementing the Shapps-Williams GBR plan. In effect,
>>> all it amounts to is the OLR replacing existing concessions as they run
>>> out. Open access will remain, and nothing else will be nationalised.
>>
>> It sounds like it's also removing some of the overheads of the private
>> railway: contract bidding/awarding, costs attribution. ie if HMG-owned
>> Network Rail delays HMG-owned LNER's train, there's no point in one
>> government-owned body claiming compensation from the other. It seems such
>> structures would still have to exist for open access and freight, but
>> presumably still much reduce the process.
>
> They aren't going to renationalise the ROSCOs so that leaves that still
> in operation.

They're not going to nationalise anything. They'll just not replace the
concessions when they run out.

I wonder if the Tories will simply offer five year extensions to all
existing concession holders before the election?

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 25/04/2024 12:00, Theo wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/24/labour-promises-rail-nationalisation-within-five-years-of-coming-to-power
>>>
>>> Basically, it'll be implementing the Shapps-Williams GBR plan. In effect,
>>> all it amounts to is the OLR replacing existing concessions as they run
>>> out. Open access will remain, and nothing else will be nationalised.
>>
>> It sounds like it's also removing some of the overheads of the private
>> railway: contract bidding/awarding, costs attribution. ie if HMG-owned
>> Network Rail delays HMG-owned LNER's train, there's no point in one
>> government-owned body claiming compensation from the other. It seems such
>> structures would still have to exist for open access and freight, but
>> presumably still much reduce the process.
>
> They aren't going to renationalise the ROSCOs so that leaves that still
> in operation.

Harper seems keen to encourage open access operators, by cutting back the
concession network (eg, dropping LNER services to Sunderland). I wonder if
the existing ones will be allowed to increase their networks, and new ones
approved (with contracts signed), before the election?

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <umx*63OIz@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, at 12:00:56 on Thu,
> 25 Apr 2024, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> remarked:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/24/labour-promises-rail-n
>>> ationalisation-within-five-years-of-coming-to-power
>>>
>>> Basically, it'll be implementing the Shapps-Williams GBR plan. In effect,
>>> all it amounts to is the OLR replacing existing concessions as they run
>>> out. Open access will remain, and nothing else will be nationalised.
>>
>> It sounds like it's also removing some of the overheads of the private
>> railway: contract bidding/awarding, costs attribution.
>
> You seem to be under the misapprehension that there's no internal
> profit-centering in large organisations.
>
> Anyway, to pick one example, do you think they propose to re-nationalise
> the station car parks?

That's a good point, and I suspect not. Ditto for other outsourced
services, such as catering, cleaning, etc..

>
>> ie if HMG-owned
>> Network Rail delays HMG-owned LNER's train, there's no point in one
>> government-owned body claiming compensation from the other.
>
> Of course there is, otherwise the factory has a blank chequebook, and no
> comeback if the trains turn to be rubbish.

Yes, I'm sure sort of delay attribution and compensation system will have
to continue.

>
>> It seems such
>> structures would still have to exist for open access and freight, but
>> presumably still much reduce the process.
>>
>> Also possibly means breaking things out of TOC silos - eg one national
>> ticketing sales platform, not broken up by TOC.
>
> The "one ticketing platform"" they have at the moment is a pile of
> steaming excrement, so competition in that market is essential. Are
> you expecting labour to re-nationalise The Trainline?

She made the announcement at The Trainline, so presumably Labour supports
it. Perhaps Labour simply plans to outsource all online ticketing to it
(with PayGo outsourced to Cubic).

On 25.04.2024 08:56, Tweed wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <lEfWN.83178$kt2.15411@fx13.ams1>, at 22:24:17 on Wed, 24 Apr
>> 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/24/labour-promises-rail-na
>>> tionalisation-within-five-years-of-coming-to-power
>>>
>>> Basically, it'll be implementing the Shapps-Williams GBR plan. In effect,
>>> all it amounts to is the OLR replacing existing concessions as they run
>>> out. Open access will remain, and nothing else will be nationalised.
>>
>> That's pretty much the summary which was on the BBC News this morning.
>>
>> In particular not nationalising the ROSCOs, or tearing up supply
>> contracts for things like IETs.
>>
>> But they also raised the hoary old prospect of "always paying the
>> cheapest fare", which apparently involves scrapping most of the
>> allegedly-confusing discounted fares. Which are only "confusing"
>> because of the way they apply to limited subsets of travellers, who
>> nevertheless find them attractive in return for various restrictions
>> on where/when the ticket is valid, do you have a companion who is
>> obliged to travel on the exact same trains, and so on.
>>
>> So what they really mean is "always pay the cheapest fare - selected
>> from a much reduced basket of on average higher priced tickets". The
>> acid test, of course, is whether they propose to reduce the payment by
>> automatically splitting tickets. Not just halfway geographically, but
>> changing to an off-peak ticket if one's journey spans 09:30 (or
>> whatever).
>
> The railway is already pretty much nationalised as it is, bar a few
> stragglers. You just need to follow the money. All major, and most minor,
> spending decisions are now government controlled.
>
> We already know what simplified ticketing means, as is being demonstrated
> by nationalised LNER. Withdrawal of off peak fares and take your chance on
> whatever they see fit to charge on Advances. EasyJet must be loving it.

There have been calls by ECML operators for some time, certainly
preceding the current operator, to adopt an SNCF style compulsory
reservation model. I'm sure they'd love it when they can sell the last
few seats on a train for several times the current anytime fare. Of
course the press would have a field day when some story of a stranded
pensionner/school child is stuck half way accross the country with every
train sold out for the next 3 days and no way to get home.

Robin

In message <v0eji2$37si0$1@dont-email.me>, at 21:56:19 on Thu, 25 Apr
2024, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <umx*63OIz@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, at 12:00:56 on Thu,
>> 25 Apr 2024, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> remarked:
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/24/labour-promises-rail-n
>>>> ationalisation-within-five-years-of-coming-to-power
>>>>
>>>> Basically, it'll be implementing the Shapps-Williams GBR plan. In effect,
>>>> all it amounts to is the OLR replacing existing concessions as they run
>>>> out. Open access will remain, and nothing else will be nationalised.
>>>
>>> It sounds like it's also removing some of the overheads of the private
>>> railway: contract bidding/awarding, costs attribution.
>>
>> You seem to be under the misapprehension that there's no internal
>> profit-centering in large organisations.
>>
>> Anyway, to pick one example, do you think they propose to re-nationalise
>> the station car parks?
>>
>>> ie if HMG-owned
>>> Network Rail delays HMG-owned LNER's train, there's no point in one
>>> government-owned body claiming compensation from the other.
>>
>> Of course there is, otherwise the factory has a blank chequebook, and no
>> comeback if the trains turn to be rubbish.
>
>I read that as “delays” as in “makes a train run late” rather than
>“prevents an order from being issued in a timely fashion”.

The same principle applies to giving the factory the aforementioned
blank cheque.

The delay replay compensation schemes are both automated, and also an
incentive for one cost centre to get its act together.
--
Roland Perry

In message <v0fknf$3hnud$3@dont-email.me>, at 09:22:23 on Fri, 26 Apr
2024, Bob <bob@domain.com> remarked:
>On 25.04.2024 08:56, Tweed wrote:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <lEfWN.83178$kt2.15411@fx13.ams1>, at 22:24:17 on Wed, 24 Apr
>>> 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/24/labour-promises-rail-na
>>>> tionalisation-within-five-years-of-coming-to-power
>>>>
>>>> Basically, it'll be implementing the Shapps-Williams GBR plan. In effect,
>>>> all it amounts to is the OLR replacing existing concessions as they run
>>>> out. Open access will remain, and nothing else will be nationalised.
>>>
>>> That's pretty much the summary which was on the BBC News this morning.
>>>
>>> In particular not nationalising the ROSCOs, or tearing up supply
>>> contracts for things like IETs.
>>>
>>> But they also raised the hoary old prospect of "always paying the
>>> cheapest fare", which apparently involves scrapping most of the
>>> allegedly-confusing discounted fares. Which are only "confusing"
>>> because of the way they apply to limited subsets of travellers, who
>>> nevertheless find them attractive in return for various restrictions
>>> on where/when the ticket is valid, do you have a companion who is
>>> obliged to travel on the exact same trains, and so on.
>>>
>>> So what they really mean is "always pay the cheapest fare - selected
>>> from a much reduced basket of on average higher priced tickets". The
>>> acid test, of course, is whether they propose to reduce the payment by
>>> automatically splitting tickets. Not just halfway geographically, but
>>> changing to an off-peak ticket if one's journey spans 09:30 (or
>>> whatever).
>> The railway is already pretty much nationalised as it is, bar a few
>> stragglers. You just need to follow the money. All major, and most minor,
>> spending decisions are now government controlled.
>> We already know what simplified ticketing means, as is being
>>demonstrated
>> by nationalised LNER. Withdrawal of off peak fares and take your chance on
>> whatever they see fit to charge on Advances. EasyJet must be loving it.
>
>There have been calls by ECML operators for some time, certainly
>preceding the current operator, to adopt an SNCF style compulsory
>reservation model.

That works better for long distance trips, than Grantham to Newark,
where they are the local service.

>I'm sure they'd love it when they can sell the last few seats on a
>train for several times the current anytime fare. Of course the press
>would have a field day when some story of a stranded pensionner/school
>child is stuck half way accross the country with every train sold out
>for the next 3 days and no way to get home.

When I was trying to get back to England last summer on an All-Lines
Rover it was surprisingly difficult to get a (non compulsory)
reservation on an Avanti from Glasgow.

Impossible, in fact, so I had to get a Scotrail train to Edinburgh and
an Avanti from there.
--
Roland Perry

On Fri, 26 Apr 2024 08:34:18 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
wrote:

>
>When I was trying to get back to England last summer on an All-Lines
>Rover it was surprisingly difficult to get a (non compulsory)
>reservation on an Avanti from Glasgow.
>
In some cases that's because the train is full, but it's never easy.
Do you use the GWR app? It seems to be the best but frequently no
reservations are offered.

>Impossible, in fact, so I had to get a Scotrail train to Edinburgh and
>an Avanti from there.

In message <38om2jp4jq4radl02veu01v32olrjavpbq@4ax.com>, at 09:09:44 on
Fri, 26 Apr 2024, Ken <ken@birchanger.com> remarked:
>On Fri, 26 Apr 2024 08:34:18 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>When I was trying to get back to England last summer on an All-Lines
>>Rover it was surprisingly difficult to get a (non compulsory)
>>reservation on an Avanti from Glasgow.
>>
>In some cases that's because the train is full, but it's never easy.
>Do you use the GWR app? It seems to be the best but frequently no
>reservations are offered.

I seriously doubt the GWR app does seat reservations for all-line
Rovers, even on GWR trains let alone others.

I attempted my booking at the much-lauded travel centre at Glasgow
Central, which at the time was at the peak of its about-to-be-closed
crisis. They were very helpful and couldn't explain the lack of
reservations, which they said was very unusual. But there I was (a
mid-week mid-morning).

>>Impossible, in fact, so I had to get a Scotrail train to Edinburgh and
>>an Avanti from there.

--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:

> In message <38om2jp4jq4radl02veu01v32olrjavpbq@4ax.com>, at 09:09:44 on
> Fri, 26 Apr 2024, Ken <ken@birchanger.com> remarked:
>>On Fri, 26 Apr 2024 08:34:18 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>When I was trying to get back to England last summer on an All-Lines
>>>Rover it was surprisingly difficult to get a (non compulsory)
>>>reservation on an Avanti from Glasgow.
>>>
>>In some cases that's because the train is full, but it's never easy.
>>Do you use the GWR app? It seems to be the best but frequently no
>>reservations are offered.

> I seriously doubt the GWR app does seat reservations for all-line
> Rovers, even on GWR trains let alone others.

> I attempted my booking at the much-lauded travel centre at Glasgow
> Central, which at the time was at the peak of its about-to-be-closed
> crisis. They were very helpful and couldn't explain the lack of
> reservations, which they said was very unusual. But there I was (a
> mid-week mid-morning).

>>>Impossible, in fact, so I had to get a Scotrail train to Edinburgh and
>>>an Avanti from there.

Did you get the reservation out of Edinburgh in Glasgow?

Regards, ULF

Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
> On 25.04.2024 08:56, Tweed wrote:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <lEfWN.83178$kt2.15411@fx13.ams1>, at 22:24:17 on Wed, 24 Apr
>>> 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/24/labour-promises-rail-na
>>>> tionalisation-within-five-years-of-coming-to-power
>>>>
>>>> Basically, it'll be implementing the Shapps-Williams GBR plan. In effect,
>>>> all it amounts to is the OLR replacing existing concessions as they run
>>>> out. Open access will remain, and nothing else will be nationalised.
>>>
>>> That's pretty much the summary which was on the BBC News this morning.
>>>
>>> In particular not nationalising the ROSCOs, or tearing up supply
>>> contracts for things like IETs.
>>>
>>> But they also raised the hoary old prospect of "always paying the
>>> cheapest fare", which apparently involves scrapping most of the
>>> allegedly-confusing discounted fares. Which are only "confusing"
>>> because of the way they apply to limited subsets of travellers, who
>>> nevertheless find them attractive in return for various restrictions
>>> on where/when the ticket is valid, do you have a companion who is
>>> obliged to travel on the exact same trains, and so on.
>>>
>>> So what they really mean is "always pay the cheapest fare - selected
>>> from a much reduced basket of on average higher priced tickets". The
>>> acid test, of course, is whether they propose to reduce the payment by
>>> automatically splitting tickets. Not just halfway geographically, but
>>> changing to an off-peak ticket if one's journey spans 09:30 (or
>>> whatever).
>>
>> The railway is already pretty much nationalised as it is, bar a few
>> stragglers. You just need to follow the money. All major, and most minor,
>> spending decisions are now government controlled.
>>
>> We already know what simplified ticketing means, as is being demonstrated
>> by nationalised LNER. Withdrawal of off peak fares and take your chance on
>> whatever they see fit to charge on Advances. EasyJet must be loving it.
>
> There have been calls by ECML operators for some time, certainly
> preceding the current operator, to adopt an SNCF style compulsory
> reservation model. I'm sure they'd love it when they can sell the last
> few seats on a train for several times the current anytime fare. Of
> course the press would have a field day when some story of a stranded
> pensionner/school child is stuck half way accross the country with every
> train sold out for the next 3 days and no way to get home.

On the 10.45 Lumo from London to Edinburgh yesterday there was an
announcement that tickets for the cancelled 12.18[1] would be accepted, but
because the train was fully booked you would be unlikely to get a seat.
There weren’t obviously many people standing, but there probably weren’t
many people who’d be able to jump forward 90 minutes to get different
train.

[1] Train hit deer earlier that morning - see another thread.

Same

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

In message <57eb86c7efab4b12cde3e01c117410b9@www.novabbs.org>, at
13:27:52 on Fri, 26 Apr 2024, ulf_kutzner <Ulf.Kutzner@web.de> remarked:
>Roland Perry wrote:
>
>> In message <38om2jp4jq4radl02veu01v32olrjavpbq@4ax.com>, at 09:09:44
>>on Fri, 26 Apr 2024, Ken <ken@birchanger.com> remarked:
>>>On Fri, 26 Apr 2024 08:34:18 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>When I was trying to get back to England last summer on an All-Lines
>>>>Rover it was surprisingly difficult to get a (non compulsory)
>>>>reservation on an Avanti from Glasgow.
>>>>
>>>In some cases that's because the train is full, but it's never easy.
>>>Do you use the GWR app? It seems to be the best but frequently no
>>>reservations are offered.
>
>> I seriously doubt the GWR app does seat reservations for all-line
>>Rovers, even on GWR trains let alone others.
>
>> I attempted my booking at the much-lauded travel centre at Glasgow
>>Central, which at the time was at the peak of its about-to-be-closed
>>crisis. They were very helpful and couldn't explain the lack of
>>reservations, which they said was very unusual. But there I was (a
>> mid-week mid-morning).
>
>>>>Impossible, in fact, so I had to get a Scotrail train to Edinburgh and
>>>>an Avanti from there.
>
>Did you get the reservation out of Edinburgh in Glasgow?

Yes, like the ones I couldn't get direct, about 5pm the previous day.

So having carefully arranged to stay the night next to Glasgow Central,
we had to make our way to Glasgow Queen St early the next morning. But
pushing a wheelchair keeps me fit (I think). Luckily it wasn't raining.
--
Roland Perry

On Fri, 26 Apr 2024 14:07:58 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
wrote:

>In message <38om2jp4jq4radl02veu01v32olrjavpbq@4ax.com>, at 09:09:44 on
>Fri, 26 Apr 2024, Ken <ken@birchanger.com> remarked:
>>On Fri, 26 Apr 2024 08:34:18 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>When I was trying to get back to England last summer on an All-Lines
>>>Rover it was surprisingly difficult to get a (non compulsory)
>>>reservation on an Avanti from Glasgow.
>>>
>>In some cases that's because the train is full, but it's never easy.
>>Do you use the GWR app? It seems to be the best but frequently no
>>reservations are offered.
>
>I seriously doubt the GWR app does seat reservations for all-line
>Rovers, even on GWR trains let alone others.

The GWR app allows you to book seats (and bike places) without buying
a ticket, and seems to work on all TOCs that have reservations (even
those pointless train reservation without a specified seat). It's not
that easy to get to: I think you need to go to My Bookings or
something, even though you don't have any. Seat61 explains it.
>
>I attempted my booking at the much-lauded travel centre at Glasgow
>Central, which at the time was at the peak of its about-to-be-closed
>crisis. They were very helpful and couldn't explain the lack of
>reservations, which they said was very unusual. But there I was (a
>mid-week mid-morning).
>
I've found them helpful there, too.
>>>Impossible, in fact, so I had to get a Scotrail train to Edinburgh and
>>>an Avanti from there.

In message <rrfp2jpuqs63p4vnsjspcb4m09012isjth@4ax.com>, at 10:07:58 on
Sat, 27 Apr 2024, Ken <ken@birchanger.com> remarked:
>On Fri, 26 Apr 2024 14:07:58 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>In message <38om2jp4jq4radl02veu01v32olrjavpbq@4ax.com>, at 09:09:44 on
>>Fri, 26 Apr 2024, Ken <ken@birchanger.com> remarked:
>>>On Fri, 26 Apr 2024 08:34:18 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>When I was trying to get back to England last summer on an All-Lines
>>>>Rover it was surprisingly difficult to get a (non compulsory)
>>>>reservation on an Avanti from Glasgow.
>>>>
>>>In some cases that's because the train is full, but it's never easy.
>>>Do you use the GWR app? It seems to be the best but frequently no
>>>reservations are offered.
>>
>>I seriously doubt the GWR app does seat reservations for all-line
>>Rovers, even on GWR trains let alone others.
>
>The GWR app allows you to book seats (and bike places) without buying
>a ticket, and seems to work on all TOCs that have reservations (even
>those pointless train reservation without a specified seat).

They aren't pointless, it's a way to persuade people who have bought a
cheap AP ticket to travel on the intended train.

>It's not that easy to get to: I think you need to go to My Bookings or
>something, even though you don't have any. Seat61 explains it.

There's a tab called "My Tickets". And if you try to make a seat
reservation without a ticket it gobbledegooks: "30026 There was a
problem processing the journey planning results for the requested
operation".

>>I attempted my booking at the much-lauded travel centre at Glasgow
>>Central, which at the time was at the peak of its about-to-be-closed
>>crisis. They were very helpful and couldn't explain the lack of
>>reservations, which they said was very unusual. But there I was (a
>>mid-week mid-morning).
>>
>I've found them helpful there, too.

>>>>Impossible, in fact, so I had to get a Scotrail train to Edinburgh and
>>>>an Avanti from there.

--
Roland Perry