Peer review: Guy Anker
Managing Editor, Moneysavingexpert.com
Trying to understand the complexities of the rail fares system can seem about as easy as trying to understand Einstein’s theory of relativity.
OK, so the rail system may not quite get your head into the same sort of twist as trying to understand the space-time continuum, but Einstein would still have had plenty of material to work his magic on, had he analysed train travel.
The piece de resistance and the master of all counter-logic is split ticketing. But I’ll come onto this and the many other barmy practices later.
Paul Clifton’s article largely hits the nail on the head in the way it goes through the catalogue of complexity that may flummox all but the keenest train-spotter, although I would question whether all the suggestions put forward would really work.
I must point out that I come at this debate from a commuter’s perspective - my job when writing about train travel is trying to find the cheapest way for passengers to purchase a ticket.
But here are the key problems as I see them:
- Split ticketing is quite possibly the most illogical of all ticketing systems.
Put simply, split ticketing shouldn’t work. It makes no sense. And yet it does work on hundreds of routes and the savings can be enormous. We’ve built an app to help people find cheaper tickets this way, as otherwise it can be an arduous trial and error exercise.
Jim Steer suggests that split ticketing should be outlawed. That would be a shame if it meant those who benefit from split ticketing end up paying more, but if it brings simplicity to the market and means that people save overall, it will be beneficial.
- Returns can only cost a few pennies more than singles, but two singles sometimes beat a return
We often tell our users not only to check the price of a return, but also the price of two singles, given that on one trip the first method can win, but on another the second method will triumph. How is this inconsistency helpful?
In the article, Barry Doe suggests a structure whereby singles are the only option, but only singles at half the current return prices (I presume he means where it is currently cheaper to buy a return over two singles).
This would be a wonderful simplification of the system, were it to happen. But I will throw in a note of caution - we’ve seen it in other industries where a new structure is announced and companies agree initially to adopt the lower price, but when the spotlight is no longer on them, they revert to the higher price.
It’s like when airlines first offered reductions for not checking in luggage, as if it were a discount. Now the base fare without luggage is the norm and you pay more to check in luggage.
The risk with trains is operators ‘jimmying’ the system, so where a return is currently cheaper than two singles, the operators double the price of existing singles to make them more expensive than return fares.
- There are so many different fares, it’s difficult to benchmark a good price
I know that if Tesco sells my favourite can of tuna for £1 I’m getting a good deal, but if it’s £2 then I’ll look elsewhere as I know I’m being overcharged. If I buy a train ticket from London to Newcastle, then I’ve no idea what is a good price and what is too expensive, as there are so many possible prices to pay.
I’ve only just learned from reading Paul Clifton’s article that there are 100 fares from London to Birmingham, which is incredible and makes it impossible for a commuter to know if they are getting a good deal much of the time.
I also like the article’s analogy that understanding different fares is like trying to understand how car insurance premiums are calculated.
- You pay the same price for a slow or fast train
If I go to a football match, I expect to pay more for a seat high up on the halfway line than in row one behind the goal, as I get a better experience.
Yet I pay the same price on the fast train from London to Brighton, which gets me there in less than an hour, as I do on the one that stops at what feels like every station in the galaxy and gets me there after the last bus has departed. Surely there should be a discount to get the slower train?
- First Class can cost less than Standard Class
This is rare, but is possible. Even when First Class is only slightly more expensive, it can be cheaper overall to buy it as it can save you having to pay for food or WiFi access on-board.
It’s wonderful for those who benefit from cheap First Class fares, and we always tell people to check the price of First Class, just in case. But it really makes no sense whatsoever.
n People often prefer simplicity over price
We ran a poll on the energy market a couple of years ago, asking our users if simple or cheap tariffs are more important to them.
A decent proportion - 37% - said they’d accept simpler tariffs even if it meant some cheaper deals rise in price.
Let me be clear that I do not want to see already high rail prices (which sometimes cost more than a plane ticket) rise even further. But there is no doubt that people want simplicity in any market.
