HS2 - good thing or bad thing?

beverick

jds_1981 wrote:

Chadders81 wrote:

Ticket prices will find their market level. Anybody who suggests otherwise is dim as shoot.

Market will be based on business people expensing though...
Nor is it a exactly a free market when you've only got two mainlines heading to Birmingham from London.

...and there's the DfT thinking that they control rail fares. Best tell Justine Greening.

Bob

secretsam

Chadders81 wrote:

I've covered this story as a journalist...Ticket prices will find their market level. Anybody who suggests otherwise is dim as shoot.

I have a degree in Economics. There is no "market" for ticket prices, as the railways are a set of regulated local monopolies - trains don't compete on the same tracks, on the whole. So for most people there is no 'choice' between providers and therefore no market. So actually what you say is as dim as shoot...

Train prices in this country (and in most others) are set at what is required to fill the gap between subsidy and cost. Trains are expensive and, on the whole, don't pay for themselves. In other European countries, trains are subsidised more than in the UK, so tickets are cheaper. In the UK, it's the users who pay. Tickets are perceived as pricey so people don't use the trains. The times when I've been on a train and it's been packed (excepting commuter trains, which HS2 is not going to provide), it's been full of suits working on laptops, not regular folks.

rick_chasey

SecretSam wrote:

Chadders81 wrote:

I've covered this story as a journalist...Ticket prices will find their market level. Anybody who suggests otherwise is dim as shoot.

I have a degree in Economics. There is no "market" for ticket prices, as the railways are a set of regulated local monopolies - trains don't compete on the same tracks, on the whole. So for most people there is no 'choice' between providers and therefore no market. So actually what you say is as dim as shoot...

Train prices in this country (and in most others) are set at what is required to fill the gap between subsidy and cost. Trains are expensive and, on the whole, don't pay for themselves. In other European countries, trains are subsidised more than in the UK, so tickets are cheaper. In the UK, it's the users who pay. Tickets are perceived as pricey so people don't use the trains. The times when I've been on a train and it's been packed (excepting commuter trains, which HS2 is not going to provide), it's been full of suits working on laptops, not regular folks.

Pwnage.

redddraggon

CraigTheBiker wrote:

There are about 30 flights every day between Manchester and London.

i bet most of the people who take such flights are those people who are going to be jumping on another plane at the London airport. If you just want to go to London it's far quicker to get the train that fly, flying is only worth it if the London airport is your destination.

beverick

SecretSam wrote:

Chadders81 wrote:

I've covered this story as a journalist...Ticket prices will find their market level. Anybody who suggests otherwise is dim as shoot.

I have a degree in Economics. There is no "market" for ticket prices, as the railways are a set of regulated local monopolies - trains don't compete on the same tracks, on the whole. So for most people there is no 'choice' between providers and therefore no market. So actually what you say is as dim as shoot...

Train prices in this country (and in most others) are set at what is required to fill the gap between subsidy and cost. Trains are expensive and, on the whole, don't pay for themselves. In other European countries, trains are subsidised more than in the UK, so tickets are cheaper. In the UK, it's the users who pay. Tickets are perceived as pricey so people don't use the trains. The times when I've been on a train and it's been packed (excepting commuter trains, which HS2 is not going to provide), it's been full of suits working on laptops, not regular folks.

1. Evidenced by the fact that GNER (and the subsequent franchise holder) for the east coast mainline backed out of the franchise because of increases in passenger numbers in excess of those expected. Basically, they couldn't increase their fares to recover the gap.

2. True, users pay a greater percentage of fare than in other countries. It does, however, vary as to which service you're using and where you are in the UK. The DfT currently subsidise rail fares to the tune of £5bn per year (including public owned rail services but excluding local government subsidies such as those in West Yorkshire and Greater Manchester), roughy £6bn of income is raised by rail fares.

The Rookie

HS2 passes less than a mile from my house, I may have to cross it on my commute......

We need to alleviate the rail corridor from Brum to Coventry and onwards to Northants and MK, that is for certain, it also needs to link to the London line, does HS2 do this....well yes, but I'm sure it could have been done better for less!

Simon

CraigTheBiker

redddraggon wrote:

CraigTheBiker wrote:

There are about 30 flights every day between Manchester and London.

i bet most of the people who take such flights are those people who are going to be jumping on another plane at the London airport.

Does it make any difference if they are going to London to catch a plane or going for any other reason? It is only around 150 miles from Manchester Airport to Heathrow. That is a journey that could easily be done by train - and would be a lot more environmentally friendly. You can get 3 to 4 plane loads of people on one 400m long train.

And the proposed HS2 includes a spur to Heathrow.

photonic69

January 2009 is when HS2 was first announced. That is 14 years ago. FFS.
It took the USA 6 years less to get from Zero to landing a man on the moon! What is wrong with this country? 160km to Birmingham vs 384,400 km to the moon. 6 years more so far and hardly anything is built. Rubbish.

davidof

photonic69 said:

January 2009 is when HS2 was first announced. That is 14 years ago. FFS.
It took the USA 6 years less to get from Zero to landing a man on the moon! What is wrong with this country? 160km to Birmingham vs 384,400 km to the moon. 6 years more so far and hardly anything is built. Rubbish.

Lyon Turin - started in the 1980s, expected to be delivered in 2045 !

Another line no-one wants but it s a massif boondoggle for politicians and their chums.

davebradswmb

Apt that this discussion is in the commuter forum, HS2 is buggering up commuting near us at the moment with temporary traffic lights and lane closures. Fortunately I commute by bike and bypass it all, although I am having to contend with extra traffic on the lanes that I use as people try to avoid the queues.

Unfortunately it closed the A5 and surrounding roads last night when I was driving back from Derby velodrome which made my night even longer.

photonic69

davidof said:

photonic69 said:

January 2009 is when HS2 was first announced. That is 14 years ago. FFS.
It took the USA 6 years less to get from Zero to landing a man on the moon! What is wrong with this country? 160km to Birmingham vs 384,400 km to the moon. 6 years more so far and hardly anything is built. Rubbish.

Lyon Turin - started in the 1980s, expected to be delivered in 2045 !

Another line no-one wants but it s a massif boondoggle for politicians and their chums.

Yes, but it's 170 miles long and 35 miles of tunnels under the alps. Projected cost at €25 billion whereas HS2 £100 billion. And no Alps to tunnel through.

The Rookie

photonic69 said:

160km to Birmingham vs 384,400 km to the moon.

There is a lot more land ownership and people to consult in that 160km than the 385,000km.
2020 destroyed the business case for HS2, assuming there was a robust one in the first place.
2 of my local favourite MTB single track routes gone, continual disruption of my cycle commute (and by an unrelated set of roadworks).

kingstongraham

Why pretend you are consulting with people whose homes you are going to put a big train line through?

focuszing723

I think Cakestop virtual democracy had it summed up.

joeyhalloran

I'm wondering if Sunaks tactic with the leak and long delay on announcement about HS2 is to try and make contractors fear for its 'too big to fail' status and try and force them to making financial efficiencies while not actually cancelling it

joeyhalloran

joeyhalloran said:

I'm wondering if Sunaks tactic with the leak and long delay on announcement about HS2 is to try and make contractors fear for its 'too big to fail' status and try and force them to making financial efficiencies while not actually cancelling it

"Prime Minister Rishi Sunak will announce that the HS2 rail link between the West Midlands and Manchester will be scrapped, the BBC understands"

Maybe not

First.Aspect

joeyhalloran said:

joeyhalloran said:

I'm wondering if Sunaks tactic with the leak and long delay on announcement about HS2 is to try and make contractors fear for its 'too big to fail' status and try and force them to making financial efficiencies while not actually cancelling it

"Prime Minister Rishi Sunak will announce that the HS2 rail link between the West Midlands and Manchester will be scrapped, the BBC understands"

Maybe not

He's replacing it with LS1.