Why train fare is so expensive?

Fire_Fox

Public transport is expensive because, during the last Conservative government, it was all privatised.

whatmichaelsays

CarJacker wrote: »

Thanks to contribute to my thread. Train fares are expensive, I think one of the most expensive in Europe. Shameful really.

Strangely, we also have some of the cheapest.

It's something of a myth that the trains in France, Germany, Spain etc run like clockwork and cost next to nothing to travel on. A few years ago I made a journey from Perpignan to Narbonne for a return price of around €40. The outbound journey was on some antiquated commuter train whilst the TGV back to Perpignan was 20 minutes late. That same week I was on a train from Perpignan to Barcelona that broke down four times before it even made the Spanish border.

By comparison, I can do a similar journey from Leeds to Manchester for £15.50 with new, modern trains running up and down the line every 15 minutes. Still not particularly cheap but (anecdotally) better than the sort of system that many would like the UK to aspire to.

Mankysteve

I dotn believe that privatisation is the main cause of the problem.
Its nto fair to compare the Uk and european without tkaing into consideration a few facts frist
1. The infrastructure in the UK is Victorian in age while Europeans is no older than 60 years so they're had a fresh start
2.The rural train survices in Europe is not existent compared to that of the Uk

Where the problems lies is more in this system of 10 or 15 years guaranteed line contracts. It should be a rolling contact decided by those who use the services.

Also a lot of train companies in the UK don't make any profits and live sole off government substances , The government should let them die and De privatise them and use that part for running unprofitable parts of the system.

choc_mouse

movilogo wrote: »

Using £300 as fuel/parking cost + £200 as shown above, total monthly cost of motoring (all inclusive) comes to be £500.

Which is same as cost of using train every month.

I've got an iphone app which I put all my car costs on. It's averaging about £500/month but I only had it for 6 months, so this figure should go down over time - includes all upfront costs and is much less if I sell it (resale value not included).

In my case, I think it works out slightly cheaper if I relied on public transport bus+train+walk to get to work but it triples the time required e.g. 1hr30 instead of 30 minutes.

whatmichaelsays wrote: »

Strangely, we also have some of the cheapest.

Similarly, I'd happily (or seriously consider) taking a long distance train if it was cheaper than flying.

Public transport = not good value for money IMO. I think for many convenience is easier to accept than changing our ways to save this planet.

catflea

For my sins, I get the train everyday to work (and its cheaper for me to buy a ticket each day, factoring the distance and railcard, than buying a season ticket)

Since September, with the exception of the snowy conditions, I dont think my train has ever been more than 3 minutes late in leaving (ok, upto 10mins arriving) but then one stop is 3/4 stops from the end and the other is a terminus. It works out fractionally cheaper to get the train than drive, and the time difference isn't that great (approx 20 mins longer on the train)

iamana1ias

There was an interesting discussion about this on Radio 4 the other night.

In third world countries public transport travels when it's full - and won't go until it is (and there's usually room for 2 more if you ask ). Doesn't matter if it takes 6 hours to fill it, it won't go until it's crammed with people.

In the developed world, we want buses every 5 minutes and trains every 10. We don't care how many people are or aren't on the bus or train as long as we get a seat. More trains and buses running = more cost.

At the moment public transport is causing more emissions per person than car travel (the average bus has just 8 people on it - and only 13 in London :eek:). So much for public transport being greener!

movilogo

More trains and buses running = more cost

Beg to differ on that. Buses run empty because they run so infrequently that people arrange for alternative transports. This in turn make them even less profitable.

If buses run more frequently, more & more people will use them and they will become more profitable.

Economics rule says when you produce more goods, the unit cost of each one reduces as each will have fixed cost + variable cost.

The fixed cost tends to diminish for volume production.

Most local bus services get subsidy from councils. If they were that unprofitable, their owners would have shut down the business by now.

In most developing countries, train is cheapest form of transport as most people can't afford a car or air travel.

Surprisingly enough, in UK, train fare is more than air fare!

We badly need Ryanair, Easyjet like trains (though Megatrain service has started).

The First Capital Connect offers abysmal service yet charges fare thru nose. Their trains are often packed like sardines in peak hours. So, I can't buy the story that they lose money because trains are not full.

In the developed world, we want buses every 5 minutes and trains every 10.

Which world are you talking about? Outside London/Manchester/Birmingham etc. one needs to be fortunate enough to see buses arriving on time.

When one bus goes the next one doesn't arrive at least for half an hour if not more.


Other than London underground, don't think any train runs at 10 minute interval anywhere in UK.

catflea

The thing is, trains in peak times ARE packed - I try and avoid a 9am start at the office for that very reason. If I go for a later start I can get on a quiet train and sit down and use my laptop on a table :cool:

When I used to get home very late I was often the only person on my train (maybe on a budy night there would be two others!) - thats the train, not the carriage!

iamana1ias

movilogo wrote: »

Beg to differ on that. Buses run empty because they run so infrequently that people arrange for alternative transports. This in turn make them even less profitable.

If buses run more frequently, more & more people will use them and they will become more profitable.

Not true. Buses go through my town every 7 or 8 minutes through the day and even the pensioners with free bus passes don't get on them! If they put buses on every 3 minutes demand wouldn't go up! If they dropped them to every 10-12 minutes I think they'd save money, and the people that get the bus would still get the bus.

movilogo wrote: »

Which world are you talking about? Outside London/Manchester/Birmingham etc. one needs to be fortunate enough to see buses arriving on time.

When one bus goes the next one doesn't arrive at least for half an hour if not more.

Other than London underground, don't think any train runs at 10 minute interval anywhere in UK.

I live in a tiny town in mid wales - one of the poorest areas in the UK. And the trains run from the station every 10 minutes during the day, mostly on time, I believe. It costs me around £5 per day for a 40 mile round trip taking about 45 minutes each way. The train is occasionally late by a couple of minutes, but certainly no longer. At peak times it's busy, but I'd rather that than it be empty.

Taking my car costs me about £6 petrol, plus £4 per day to park. And, to get into work at the same time I have to leave home 30 minutes earlier because of the horrific traffic. So that's twice the price and an extra hour a day spent travelling.

I'm sorry that it doesn't suit your (warped) argument, but my experience appears to be very different to yours

choc_mouse

I think "reliability" is the key to public transport rather than frequency.

Trains are more or less on schedule in my experience - only the odd minute here and there unless something serious happens. But what I find with buses is what's the point of advertising "every 10 minutes" when 4 buses all come at once and then none for another 30-40 minutes? That is exactly what happened the other day to me.

Basically, I want to know if I can get to my destination by a certain time rather than having to buffer my journey times by 30 minutes either side. All the more important when connections/changes are involved.

I worked in Japan for a few years and I could definitely depend on their public transport. Not here unfortunately.