In message .com,
Larry Lard writes

Neil Williams wrote:

Oyster in its current form is not suitable for very infrequent
passengers.

Why not?

Because, unlike the one-day travelcard, Oyster pre-pay cannot be used on
most of the national railway system in London.

--
Paul Terry

In article ,
(Roland Perry) wrote:

In message , at
22:24:00 on Tue, 4 Oct 2005, Colin Rosenstiel
remarked:
But the fare increases won't affect journeys from those stations.

They will for overnight stays. These include tube travel in central
London to work when I have to buy tube singles, currently £2 (Zone 1)
or £2.20 (Zones 1 & 2).

No wonder I use my bike now if at all possible.

Why don't you get an Oyster? Is the three quid really that much of an
issue? I have an Oyster and use it about once a month, as much for the
convenience as the ticket price.

£3 for two two pounds tickets seems more than the hassle is worth in my
book. I was wrong in thinking I'd bought as many as 7 singles this year.
The actual number I found on checking was 2.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article ,
(Tim Bray) wrote:

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
Why should I be expected to get an Oyster for just 7 single tube
fares so far this year?

Why not? It would save you money next year.

Because it would actually be for just 2 fares, I now find.

It takes 5 mins to get one, and then you just feed a tenner into the
machine when the barriers say you are getting low.

I love my oyster prepay, and delight in going straight through the
barriers while my work colleagues search their pockets for cash to go
in the ticket machine.

It's yet another card to carry and not use over 90% of the time because
WAGN tickets are all on paper.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article ,
(TKD) wrote:

It takes 5 mins to get one, and then you just feed a tenner into the
machine when the barriers say you are getting low.

...which TfL get to keep and earn interest on.

Oyster in its current form is not suitable for very infrequent
passengers. There is no excuse for blatently ripping these people
off. 2 quid was expensive, but 3 quid is offensive.

No. There is a *perception* that Oyster in its current form is not
suitable for very infrequent passengers. There is no minumum balance
on the card. Only put a fiver on if that is all you will use all year.
You don't have to send away your passport or have a credit check to
get one - you just go to a tube station and ask for one. You don't
even have to fill in a form if you don't want to. Its just plain old
fear of change.

How does one document the tickets in order to claim expenses then? Why
should I pay a year's worth up front?

It would be a different matter if WAGN used Oyster (though documentation
would still be a problem) but they don't.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

How does one document the tickets in order to claim expenses then?

You can request a statement which will be mailed to you the same day by 1st class post.

Why should I pay a year's worth up front?

You don't. You can charge up your card with only the cost of your next journey each time.

In message , at
16:27:00 on Wed, 5 Oct 2005, Colin Rosenstiel
remarked:
£3 for two two pounds tickets seems more than the hassle is worth in my
book. I was wrong in thinking I'd bought as many as 7 singles this year.
The actual number I found on checking was 2.

So pay the extra, for the convenience of paying in cash.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:38:36 on Wed, 5
Oct 2005, TKD remarked:
Out of interest, does anyone recall how much a Zone 1 tube single cost
when Ken was first elected? If it was that much less than £1.50 then
I'd be very much surprised. If so, this all strikes me as a very good
deal - especially with the flexibility of Pre-Pay.

It was £1.50 at January 2000.

What was the carnet price? I have an idea it was £1.10 (£11 quid for 10
tickets). As an infrequent traveller, that was my solution at the time.

Sounds about right - when I arrived in London in 2002, Carnet worked out
at £1.15 per ticket (and bus Savers were 65p). It went up to £1.50 per
ticket in 2003.

For me, the decrease in the Zone 1-2 prepay fare after 7pm from £2.00 to
£1.50 is certainly welcome.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 08:49:28 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

£2.30 to travel all round Nottingham all day (bus and tram). And valid
during the peaks, too.

Now that *is* good. Many of these rover-type tickets in the provinces
are off-peak only.

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 08:52:09 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

Either the extra cost is crippling you and you need to get an Oyster. Or
the number of times you'd use it doesn't justify it. One or the other!

Or gbp3 is an offensively expensive fare for a Zone 1 single.

You'll note I'm not objecting to a lower Oyster fare. I'm only
objecting to gbp2 single slightly, as it's a bit too much. But three
quid is quite simply taking the mick.

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

Paul Terry wrote:

In message , Roland
Perry writes

In message , at 17:52:40 on Tue, 4 Oct
2005, Paul Terry remarked:

My job takes me into London (via SWT and tube) only occasionally, for
which I use one-day travel cards.

How would Oyster benefit me, bearing in mind that it is not accepted
by SWT?

But how do highly priced cash fares dis-benefit you, given that you
have a travelcard?

They don't. I am merely pointing out that Oyster is of no benefit to me
or Londoners like me who now work largely from home and only go into the
office one or two days a week using NR + tube. At least, it is of no
benefit until it becomes London-wide and encompasses the entire railway
system in the capital.


You therefore have nothing to worry about with regards to the new fares
regime.

TfL would love the Oyster Pre Pay system to go London-wide and be
rolled out across the whole National Rail network in the capital. I
have read that they'd cover some of the installation costs (something I
read said they'd cover the entire cost). It is however not in their
power to make this happen, it is the decision of the TOCs.

As I see it the TOCs are wary of Pre Pay for business reasons, and
given the current business structure of the railways it shouldn't
surprise anyone that they look at things from this perspective. Some
day I'll kick of a thread with some further thoughts on the TOCs
aversion to Pre Pay, but this thread is not the right forum for such
considered thoughts as the temperature is a little too hot with
indignation!