On 26 Jan, 14:27, DRH wrote:
On Jan 26, 1:58*pm, wrote:





In article
,

(DRH) wrote:
On Jan 26, 10:55*am, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
DRH wrote:
Putting the ODTC and in its variants on Oyster would obviate the
need for all/much of the PAYG infrastructure - yellow validators,
pink validators, OSIs, OEPs, Oyster helpline and all.*The system has
become ridiculously complex to the point where even those, like
posters here, with a reasonable understanding of it, can be foxed..

If you get rid of all those things how will the system combine a
couple of short single journeys with an interchange outside the
gateline into one?
Are you saying why bother, just charge a day travelcard rate
anyway?

A value judgement: either pay two single fares (if these are the only
journeys you make in a day) or *buy a ODTC (if you are making
several). * As in most fare systems, there is an element of inequality
which can only be avoided/reduced by immensely complex systems like
PAYG.

That's what PAYG does much more conveniently for the vast majority, pay
for single journeys without queuing up for tickets all the time. I almost
never travel enough by tube these days to need a ODTC, even at the
discounted rate I get one combined with an off-Peak Day Return from
Cambridge.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

An alternative model can achieve that goal by offering different
consumer benefit trade-offs (as with paper tickets elsewhere):
PAYG without capping (simple stored value ticketing)
Benefit - convenience
Cost - no discount on 'quantity' purchase (but if making only a *few
journeys, do people expect that?)

plus

ODTC on Oyster
Benefit - convenience, travel flexibility , simplicity (as current
paper ticket)
Cost - higher upfront cost; risk of not being 'value for money' if you
don't make enough journeys

The relative attractiveness of each option can be varied by a simple
mechanism - price. *At present, this heavily skewed in favour of
PAYG.

The underlying benefit for TfL would be elimination of the PAYG
infrastructure and associated costs.

DRH

The trouble is that the attractiveness to the punter isn't the main
consideration (if it's a consideration at all).

There was very strong determination to introduce Oyster and PAYG,
despite the popularity of travelcards (day and season), as evidenced
by the penalty cash fares for people not using it and the attempts to
claim that it was the new travelcard (and getting done by Advertising
Standards).

The clamour for PAYG to be accepted on NR was more to do with ending
the inconvenience of a newly-introduced non-interavailability. If
Oyster hadn't existed on LU, people would be pretty much satisfied
with travelcards, which are still far more interavailable than Oyster
PAYG (look at OEPs for gawdsake, and the differential fares).

So Oyster PAYG is not going to be abandoned for any reason. One has
to recognise that there is a very strong motivation behind it, even if
we can only conject what it might be (more income, better data, alien
lifeforce infiltration, whatever).

That's why I was surprised at the reaction to my fairly innocuous
suggestion to increase general Oyster takeup by putting a popular
product on it (ie the day travelcard).