On Dec 12, 2:26*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
[revenue protection stuff snipped - interesting comments; I disagree
and I think that's centred on differing views of human behaviour that
probably aren't worth arguing about here!]
OEPs is a separate issue and I think it's clear that this concept is
unpopular with people even though there is an evasion risk associated
with travelling beyond zonal season availability into PAYG territory.
What is not clear is whether the modified TOC vending machines will
retail PAYG *and* also set OEPs as part of their upgraded functionality.
If that is the case then it avoids people having to seek out TfL
ticketing facilities to set OEPs before they travel out of zone -
assuming a start in TOC territory and within the validity of a
Travelcard.
Surely they must, otherwise that would be absolutely stark-raving-
bonkers? "You can get an OEP at every PAYG machine. Erm, except the
one we've just installed at your station..."
The only things TfL could've done to make Oyster more useable would've
required the permission of the TOCs, and with DfT refusing to wield
big sticks at them TfL's hands were tied. OEPs are a massive,
ridiculous pain in the arse, as is the fact that new PAYG lines will
be on rail rather than standard Tube payscales. TfL spent years trying
to ensure that they weren't, but ultimately couldn't.
You've made some interesting statements there - did the DfT really
refuse to wield a "big stick"? *Did TfL really spend years trying to
ensure a common farescale? *I have not seen anything that suggests both
statements are completely correct - I'd be interested to know if you
have your own evidence for this? *I'm not necessarily disagreeing btw,
just curious as to whether it is verifiably true rather than just your
perception of what went on.
This is my perception, based on some demonstrable facts, some hearsay
that I believe, and some conjecture.
Demonstrably, TfL spent a long time trying to persuade TOCs to take up
PAYG. Demonstrably, DfT failed to compel new London rail franchises
let once the PAYG concept was in place to accept PAYG as a condition
of their franchise.
I've heard from people who ought to know, but haven't seen anything in
writing, that TfL (in a "general consensus among top people" sense)
had wanted all London rail to come under a common, zonal farescale
based on the Tube one, and have also heard that TfL would rather not
have to do OEPs but for the need to appease the TOCs.
The rest is conjecture...
If you really want to see the striking differences between north and
south of the Thames in terms of fares then a look at the 2010 maps for
child and 16+ PAYG charges throws the "split" into sharp focus. *On
issues like this I can see why people may end up being very ****ed off
that their local TOC did not join the party earlier. Even the new bit of
C2C land in Essex offers free child travel for 5-10 year olds - that's
an interesting decision by C2C. *
Yes, it is. I'd love to know in these kinds of talks how much it comes
down to differing customer and traffic profiles affecting the
particular TOC's decision, versus how "growth & customer-centric"
versus "protection & customer-extorting" the personalities in charge
of the TOC are...
The loss of cash based CDRs within the zones for those whose railcards
do not work on Oyster is also an issue. *A quick look at the next set of
Mayor's questions will see that the usual suspects (politically) have
picked up on these issues. Whether a fix is even feasible I just don't
know but the risk to Oyster being seen as acceptable for key parts of
the travel market is definitely there. *The removal of "back up" options
for people who can't participate has perhaps been a tad precipitate -
taking on board your earlier remarks about TfL's cautious implementation
methodology.
Yes, that's true - the obvious solution would be to integrate
railcards properly with Oyster, but I suppose that goes against the
whole ITSO nonsense the DfT's been wasting its time on instead of
developing the system that already exists.
Still dear old Mr Toad (ever in tune with the times) is demanding that
Boris axes even more buses in Oxford Street. Is that so his taxi can
move more quickly?
I'm ashamed it took me as long as it did to work out the ideological
context of debendification:
1) there are bendy buses. they carry passengers. it works
2) there are ridiculous numbers of replacement buses. they bunch up
meaning some are rammed and some are empty. they don't have enough
doors so take too long to fill and empty. photogenic traffic jams of
buses are created.
3) Something must be done!
4) "25% of these buses are empty, so we'll cut the frequency by 25%"
5) London's bus capacity cut by 25%. 25% fewer opportunities for
failures over 30 to get around. BIG TORY WOOYAY!
I'm glad I'm getting out of the country before the *******s take
charge nationwide.
--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org