On 23 Jan, 18:19, Mizter T wrote:
On Jan 23, 5:50*pm, MIG wrote:





On 23 Jan, 17:29, Mizter T wrote:

On Jan 23, 1:59*pm, MIG wrote:

On 23 Jan, 13:46, Mizter T wrote:

On Jan 23, 1:05*pm, MIG wrote:
[snip]
From other postings, it seems that legislation would trump anything
else anyway if travelcards are "protected".

My point was that, whatever the fare and pricing structure, "it could
be inconvenient for people who haven't got Oyster or can't touch
during the journey" will absolutely NOT be a consideration in any
decision to retain day travelcards or otherwise.

Oyster PAYG is essentially for people making in-boundary journeys,
i.e. those within the zones.

True, as are travelcards, but travelcards can be extended, while PAYG
can't.

I don't know how two single Oyster fares from Coulsdon South to London
Terminals will compare with the difference between a day return
Brighton to Coulsdon South and a day return Brighton to London
Terminals.

Not a great example of whatever you're trying to get at - if you're
making a day trip from Brighton to Coulsdon South you don't sensibly
go via 'London Terminals' (i.e. Victoria or London Bridge), you change
at East Croydon.

Eh? *You'd get a day return including travelcard. The travelcard
validity starts at Coulsdon South. *An extension from the zones (if
you start in London) is similarly from Coulsdon South.

If you actually wanted to go there, you could do it by changing at
Gatwick and Redhill or by doubling back. *I don't know how that
affects the available fares. *If you had an outboundary travelcard or
were extending a season, it wouldn't matter where the trains stopped.

Understood - for some reason I thought you might have started to read
things over from the outboundary situation to the inboundary
situation, but you were in fact referring to the outboundary scenario
and it all makes sense. Though I disagree with the very basis of your
invented bogeyman fears - the person from Brighton is always going to
be able to get an outboundary Travelcard, full stop.

(Unless the Tories come in, give the TOCs total freedom and completely
rip apart the whole basis of inter-available ticketing - which simply
ain't going to happen. Even in a loony hypothetical situation where it
did happen, said TOCs would almost certainly negotiate with TfL for
the existence of some sort of combined day return plus TfL day rover
pass.)







People might feel they were paying multiple times if they had to go
all the way to London Terminals and back without contributing to their
PAYG cap. *If travelcards are retained, there's no problem, and they
may well be, but I am doubting whether the effect on such people will
have any bearing on a decision to retain them. *They'll be told that
they have to get off during both journeys and touch in/out if they
want to take advantage of the Oyster fares.

"They'll be told..." - you're inventing a bogeyman that isn't there -
there hasn't been any serious suggestion that the days of in-boundary
Day Travelcards are numbered. If there ever was such a proposal for
some reason, then the scenario you describe (Day Travelcard plus
Boundary Zone extension fare) would undoubtedly be taken into account
in the decision making process - I'm quite sure that this is a
ticketing combination that's used by a proportionately small but
nonetheless sizeable number of travellers in and around London on a
regular basis.

The discussion was mainly about day return outboundary travelcards,
which it was accepted that they sell lots of. *So my person is the one
who does a day trip from Brighton to London and travels around a lot
in London.

If the travelcards weren't retained, you'd have to go to London
Terminals before you could realistically start running up your PAYG
cap, hence wondering about the difference in day return Brighton to
Coulsdon South and the day return Brighton to London terminals. That
would be the extra bit you'd be paying that wouldn't count towards the
cap.

I am quite prepared to believe that the travelcards will be retained,
but I'm saying that the reasons for retaining them will be down to
legislation, not down to consideration of the people in Sussex who
either don't have Oyster cards or wouldn't get the chance to touch in.

Nonsense - ignore the legislation, and tell me in whose interest it
would be to do away with outboundary Day Travelcards? The TOCs sell
bucket loads of them.

You can voice fears about a hypothetical future withdrawal of
inboundary Travelcards and I will take you seriously... but to
question the continued existence of outboundary Travelcards is a bit
loopy. Sorry, I know that sounds harsh, but I'm in a rush and haven't
got the time to rephrase it in a nicer, less harsh way!

I don't think that through all of the discussion I've actually made a
prediction about whether or not outboundary day travelcards will be
withdrawn, so I don't take offence, not having suggested the thing
that you find loopy.

The point I keep making is that the reasons for retaining them will be

a) legislation and (I've added at least once)

b) business considerations (the bucket loads you mention), as long as
the relevant parties who currently make the money are in a position to
make the decision

I am arguing against the statements made by a couple of contributors
on the lines of "some people won't have Oyster" and "people won't have
the chance to touch in" as the reasons why the travelcards will be
retained.

The convenience of those punters will NOT be a consideration. The
result may be the same.