Ticket Machines - Some people's thoughts....

On Wednesday it was plastered all over the news that ticket machines aren’t really that user friendly and as a result a third of queues at ticket offices had waiting times longer that the ‘industry standard’ of five minutes at peak times. This research was undertaken by Passenger Focus, an organisation that was set up to defend the rights of rail users, but who in reality are only listened to by the media. The Association of Train Operating Companies, Network Rail and anyone else in the industry rarely, if ever, take any notice of them. Now I could rant about ticket machines for ages, but in reality I have nothing to complain about. In all honesty I do not find them that confusing, but I acknowledge that it might just being a case of being well-versed in their operation to the point whereby it is second nature. My only gripe is when the touch-screens don’t work and I find myself repeatedly beating my finger against them like someone who needs a ticket to Narnia, but can’t find it. This said, I am also aware that my case is exceptional and many others do have problems.

Rather than discuss the results of the survey, which I felt was a highly imperfect one, I felt it would be far more interesting to get some views and experiences from my friends on the subject of ticket machines. Thus, I posted the BBC website’s article on Facebook and requested people’s opinions. However, what happened was that the discussion that started trailing off into lots of discussion about the quality of the railways generally and the various run-ins that a few of my friends have had with railway officials. Yet from amongst these I received some interesting comments.

Sarah said that she was “always paying over the odds” because she was “thick!” I think not Sarah. If anything has come out of the survey it is that ticket machines are confusing and sometimes do not show the cheapest price. However, this is what they are legally obliged to do. Simon followed this by saying that “I've picked up some very cheap tickets from the ticket office as opposed to the machines.” Therefore, as limited as this evidence is, my friends confirm that occasionally the ticket machines overprice which it seems from all prior pieces of evidence is not a new phenomenon.

But then again, Adrian recounted a story in which he was offered a ticket at the ticket office, as opposed to the machine which he was unable to use.

“I normally buy off-peak returns to Manchester Piccadilly from Thames Ditton or Surbiton, which allow me to make the inward journey at any time within a month. This, with my 16-25 railcard, costs me £45.60. When approaching a ticket kiosk the member of staff offered me a return for somewhere in the region of £120, even though the machine offered me my usual £45 snatch minutes earlier (but it wouldn't take my card). I even had an old ticket for a previous journey, which I showed him, and he paused, shrugged and said that £120 something was the price he was being shown. I then persuaded him to sell me a travelcard. This way I travelled to Euston and bought my usual £45 ticket from there.”

Therefore, it seems that there is not just a problem of ticket pricing at machines or at the offices, there is a very real problem somewhere in the software. If machines and offices are out of sync with each other this amounts to a form of corruption. Indeed, unless people are willing to check both the machine and the office prices, then this put the railway companies’ operatives in a position of power. Who has the correct knowledge, or time in this case, to be able to question what prices are presented to them? Very people I’m sure. Therefore, the companies can effectively stop people from receiving the cheapest prices. They might try to deny they do this, but the evidence is plain to see in the cases recounted by my friends and others.

Only Simon talked about the actual quality of the interaction with the machines. While in no way representative of the nation’s experiences, the lack of commentary on how user-friendly they ticket machines were in the discussion I started, possibly shows that the quality of this interaction is secondary to people’s concerns over receiving the correct and cheapest price. Simon said:

“I think the machines operated by South West Trains are okay. It's Southern's that are rubbish! You don't seem to be able to buy multiple tickets of a single type. However, Southern do provide Oyster services which SWT do not.”

In my own experience I have found that the difference between different companies’ ticket machines can make a very real difference in the quality of the buying experience. I agree with Simon that SWT’s ticket machines are okay, but they could be improved. The only other experience that comes to mind is East Coast’s machines which are very user friendly. I think, however, the report that Passenger Focus presented is quite poor because it was not a complete survey of ticket machine services across the nation. PF only looked at the machines operated by four companies (South West Trains, First Great Western, East Midlands Trains and SouthEastern). This is no way to run a survey and what is required is more data from which to draw conclusions. Indeed, if the Association of Train Operating Companies’ (ATOC) own figures show that ticket machine users are satisfied 7 out of 10 times, then there seems to be a discrepancy that can only put down to regional variations that haven’t been accounted for in PF’s work (even if ATOC’s figures can also be considered dubious).

Overall, I think that the process of purchasing tickets by all means, from machines, offices or online, needs to be looked at more carefully and using far better research. Perhaps there should be a standard machine or software? Or what about a poster with the prices of the most used tickets at each station? Of course, with such a fractured industry this is unlikely to happen. I think first we need to get the prices altered…oh dear, well, that’s another problem!

The South West Oyster Fiasco

South West Trains, my local Train Operating Company (TOC), dumbfounds me a lot of the time. Some of the things it does, some of the ways it works, strike me as silly. Many of its actions just serve to heighten my suspicion that the only thing that motivates its management is to line the pockets of its owners' shareholders. This said, at times it does incompetent and costly things that beggar belief, that explain why it probably needs to milk the franchise for all it is worth. The best demonstration of this is in its attitude to the Oyster Card which from the 1st January could be used on all its services in the 6 zones that Transport for London (TfL) cover.

For those of you who are unaware of the Oyster card, this is an electronic ticketing device that you can use in the TfL area (basically greater London) to make journeys. There are card readers at every station and at the start of the journey you simply touch your card onto the yellow panel and then touch out at the end. If you have opted for the pre-pay option this will take money off your card's account. If you have put a Travel Card onto the Oyster then it just logs your journey and hands the data over to a government department (Ok...that last part I hope isn't true, but I'm as sure as heck the data collected has been used somewhere at some point). Usually single journeys from 'anywhere' to 'somewhere else' with an Oyster are cheaper than buying a paper ticket. I have always felt that for a system of travel it is perfect. Efficient, relatively hustle free and cheap.

Although they could have meddled with the names and concepts to make it a bit more interesting. Card readers sounds so droll, so mild, so boring. How about instead of 'card readers' they call them 'quest start portals'? And Oyster? Really? How'd they come up with that one? Even a 'Crustacean Card' would have sounded better. Continuing the 'quest' theme, what about 'Mighty Steed' card. Whims, I venture, but it could have been so much more interesting. Anyway, I digress.

Originally Oyster was only rolled out on the London Underground (and bus) services in July 2003. London Underground is run by TfL and is therefore nationalised. Yet the National Rail services are run by private TOCs and are therefore privatised. It was always hoped, and expected, by TfL and the Mayor, that in time the suburban routes of the National Rail operators, such as South Eastern, Southern, and our beloved SWT, would allow Oyster readers to be placed at their stations so that every traveller in London could enjoy its benefits. Of course when the Mayor at the time, Ken Livingstone, muted this, he had the door slammed in his face by the TOCs more than once. Yet, never a man to give up, Ken kept beating away like a persistent door-to-door salesman; getting to the point where he was sitting on the sofa with the TOCs, in their living room (it was a house share), with a cup of tea.

This process of getting Oyster on National Rail services took a long time for a number of reasons. Firstly there was the obvious one. TfL, I hope, is run in the interest of the public (this is of course unless you are Bob Crow) and therefore is a not-for profit organisation. The TOC's are really not. The implementation of Oyster on National Rail routes would mean that many of the fares between stations which the TOCs controlled themselves would actually be reduced as they would be brought in line with the fares of TfL's zonal system. In the end the agreement meant that while Oyster Rates on National Rail services are usually cheaper than the paper tickets, they are now set by the TOCs. Secondly it would mean a lot of investment in the network by the TOCs. The estimated cost of Oyster equipment at SWT's stations cost them an estimated £40 million. Therefore the negotiations, which went on before January 2009, were complicated and frustrating, but by mid-2008 most companies had agreed a deal with TfL. That is except SWT, dragging their feel like a petulant child who screams as everyone walks away.

Basically, I think, they hated the fact that this would be a heavy investment and cut into their immediate profits. This said, most children of this ilk do eventually have to be picked up and brought back to the family. SWT was no exception, and under heavy pressure from TfL and realising they were being left out, they agreed to adopt Oyster. Yet, for making the move they were given one very important concession. (this is the ice cream to calm the kid down).

As many of you will have found out no SWT ticket office will top up or put travel cars on your Oyster, or sell you the thing in the first place. This forces the traveller to go to the local 'travel shops' for all their Oyster needs. SWTs fatuous arguments were that the equipment was too expensive and also that selling Oyster services wasn't part of their franchise agreement. Hang on a minute, it wasn't part of anyone's franchise agreement.

I'm befuzzled, I cannot see why a company that consistently acts as though they only care about profit refuses to sell Oyster products at its ticket offices? While there would be an initial sunk cost, this would be soon made up in the cut they'd get from selling Oyster products. It's not like there isn't a precedent. The owners of the myriad of newsagents certainly, at some point, saw that they could make a bit of extra cash from operating Oyster machines. In addition all the London-connecting TOCs saw the benefit of having Oyster-selling equipment at ticket offices. So why can't SWT? I suspect it is again because it would cut immediately into their profit margin. This, for company who has got a ten year franchise agreement (2007-2017), is incredibly short sighted and is probably loosing them a lot more profit than they realise.

The short-sighted nature of SWT was brought home to me on Thursday. My usual route between Hampton Court and Waterloo is as follows. Firstly I go from Hampton Court to Surbiton, where I change onto the direct train to Waterloo. This train comes from Alton and is one of SWT's long-distance services. On Thursday, after enjoying a mere 7 minutes of stationary delight at Subiton station, I got on my usual fast train. Sitting reading my book I suddenly became aware of the Ticket Inspector, passing through the carriage. He got to me and I dutifully pulled out my Oyster. “Oyster eh”, came the response, “Not to worry,” and moved on without checking a thing. This is not the first time my Oyster hasn't been checked by a SWT ticket inspector, and I am sure it won't be the last. In addition I have a number of friends who have experienced the same thing.

The truth is that SWT staff simply don't have the device issued to most TfL staff to check whether Oysters are valid. Therefore if I am on a train without having 'touched in' at the start of my journey I would technically be travelling without a ticket and would be required to pay a fine of £20. Further there are ticket inspectors on services between stations with no ticket barriers (Whitton to Mortlake, Teddington to Strawberry Hill). Overall it begs the question as to why SWT staff don't have the Oyster checkers? Is the company slow? Have they forgotten something in the run-up to Oyster's introduction? It isn't like they haven't had the time to buy these devices for their ticket inspectors, and they are ten-a-penny elsewhere in London. I can't answer this question, but ultimately SWT haven't bought them and therefore again are loosing revenue. Again, this is possibly because they don't want spend the any more than they have to now, even if long-term this may loose them money.

Overall the point that I have been making throughout this post is that I feel that SWT, as a business, are not long-term thinkers. They care more about immediate profit and their dividends, rather than long-term gain in both reputation and financial terms. With this attitude we can only hope that this company, which I personally perceive as only acting in the interest of Stagecoach's shareholders, looses the franchise in 2017.

Gordon Brown's got the wrong ticket

Before the Labour Party's manifesto came out it apparently was going to contain a policy that struck me as a bit wishy-washy. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8612741.stm) Labour, I thought, was announcing that they would force the Train Operating Companies (TOC) to offer the lowest fare to travellers when they roll up to buy a ticket. I wrote this blog entry over the weekend, and then found that I couldn't find the policy in the manifesto. However please read this blog entry as I hope it reveals some points of interest, even if it is a little redundant now.

Firstly, let me state I don't applaud this policy and if Labour are going to be making this pledge there are a few questions I would like to ask Gordon Brown, just so I know, if he is aware of exactly what he is pledging.

Firstly, why haven't the TOCs been offering the lowest price anyway? I am aware that the TOCs like to take my money and that going to Scotland, for example, costs an arm, a leg, and forces people to take out loams, but I was under the impression that companies would automatically offer the best deal. Yet apparently this hasn't so been so, and in a survey conducted by consumer group Which? tell found that the lowest fare was not offered in over half the cases they included. Let's not beat around the bush, this is the government's fault. There have been 13 years of letting the TOCs get away with charging exorbitant prices. Labour's pledge has therefore effectively exposed the failings of a Labour government who have not controlled effectively the greed of an industry who run their businesses only in the interest of their shareholders.

When you say 'lowest fare' is that really fair? The reality is that if this policy goes through it won't mean that the fare structure will change, or that even that the lowest prices for tickets will drop. It just means that Labour will force the companies to always offer the lowest fare, which may still be expensive. This isn't really fair is it? If the lowest priced tickets, particularly for long distance journeys, are still out of reach of those on low-incomes, what chance have we got of getting everyone onto the railways? They'll just use cheaper, less pleasant and less environmentally friendly forms of transport to make their journeys. Therefore this again exposes a problem of the Labour's governance of the railways. What the increasing fare rises have done in the last 13 years is to create a transport class system. Those who can afford the ticket prices frequently use the railways, yet this leaves a large section of the population for which the cost rail travel is prohibitive. What is really needed is a full review of ticket pricing so that rail travel is within the reach of everyone.

How will I know what exactly is the lowest fare? As stated, I was always under the impression that I did always get the lowest fare. Pop onto any train operator's website, type in your destination and time of travel, and the site will pop out a range of prices for your journey at different times of the day. I literally have no idea how these prices are worked out. I am told, by people who know about such things, that there is an elaborate formula that is involved...somewhere. There is not a simple rule which says that the traveller pays a set price per mile. Therefore, if this policy goes through, how will travellers really be able to gauge if they received the best price? What is required is a simple pricing structure that is easy for everyone to understand.

Will I really get the lowest fare? As most people are aware there are ways to achieve cheaper railway travel by splitting the journey into legs, for which you buy separate tickets. So for example, if I was travelling from London Paddington to Penzance, this may cost me £60. However if I were to buy a ticket from Paddington to Bristol, and then one from Bristol to Penzance (while remaining on the same train) the journey may be cheaper overall. However, if this new policy was implemented, I doubt that people turning up at the booking office or buying on-line will have these ticketing options offered to them. Instead, they are more likely to be offered the cheapest ticket for the entire through journey. This would make Gordon Brown's new policy a lie, as individuals will still fail to get the lowest fare available unless they are aware of the money saving options open to them.

Therefore is the policy that Labour is proposing going to make a real difference? Well undoubtedly some people will benefit through cheaper fares, but these are individuals who are travelling frequently by train anyway. If Gordon Brown was serious about making train tickets affordable and lowering their cost, he would look very carefully at the way that tickets are priced and the underlying formulas that determine them. He may even look at the franchise system that has allowed companies driven by greed to scrape every last penny out of the rail traveller. Until this happens rail travel will not be universally available, not be cheap and ticket pricing will still be very very confusing.