On 11 Dec, 13:06, John B wrote:
On Dec 11, 8:13*am, asdf wrote:





On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 14:39:16 -0800 (PST), John B wrote:
In any case, paper ODTCs become irrelevant at the same time as the
abolition of CDRs (actually, that's an interesting one - are LU going
to continue selling paper ODTCs now that there is absolutely no
advantage in having one compared to a capped Oyster PAYG?)

Surely they (and the TOCs) will carry on selling them for the benefit of
those many millions of the population that haven't got Oyster cards?

Clearly the TOCs aren't expecting every one of their cash customers to
arrange an Oyster card by Jan 2nd either...

The TOCs will continue, sure. I don't see why, given that LU no longer
offers other multiple journey tickets on paper, they shouldn't shift
the ODTC to Oyster.

(it's not as if it'd be at all difficult for the millions of the
population who don't have Oyster cards to, erm, get one...)

What about all the tourists? It's hard for many of them to understand
Oyster. Plus it would waste their time, and increase TfL's costs, if
everyone visiting London (even for a day) had to buy an Oyster card,
use it, then get their deposit refunded at a staffed ticket window.

I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that withdrawing the paper
ODTC would harm London's reputation as a tourist destination.

I think it's a massive and absurd exaggeration. For a start, I don't
think the vast majority of travellers even particularly think about
the public transport system where they're going, much less the
ticketing methods used on it.

In any case, TfL could easily ensure that Oyster cards were available
for gbp10 with gbp7 credit and gbp20 with gbp17 credit from vending
machines at all airports, mainline terminals and major Tube stations -
and from behind the counter at hotels, ticket stops, etc, packaged
with a 10-language leaflet on how to top them up. That'd be pretty
straightforward for everyone.

(and very few people would bother getting a refund, which is a bonus
from Londoners' perspective.)

That would mean doing something helpful that takes into account
people's circumstances.

That is not the general approach to the introduction of Oyster so far,
so why should it suddenly change?

"TfL could easily" have done a number of things that took into account
reality over the the last few years, but they refused.