This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/may/11/open-up-rail-ticket-booking-to-third-parties
The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 2 | Version 3 |
|---|---|
| Open up rail ticket booking to third parties | Open up rail ticket booking to third parties |
| (2 months later) | |
| Modernising the rail ticketing system is a positive step (Rail industry prepares for season ticket cull in fares shake-up, 8 May), but it won’t help UK rail appeal to passengers choosing to drive or fly to locations already well-served by rail. | Modernising the rail ticketing system is a positive step (Rail industry prepares for season ticket cull in fares shake-up, 8 May), but it won’t help UK rail appeal to passengers choosing to drive or fly to locations already well-served by rail. |
| There is a larger problem: rail’s relative lack of third-party booking services. Few travel comparison engines sell rail tickets because operators restrict easy access to data, have antiquated information systems that act as de facto technical barriers, and discourage distribution partnerships with low distribution commissions – all due to a misguided belief that direct sales engender higher margins and keep prices low. | There is a larger problem: rail’s relative lack of third-party booking services. Few travel comparison engines sell rail tickets because operators restrict easy access to data, have antiquated information systems that act as de facto technical barriers, and discourage distribution partnerships with low distribution commissions – all due to a misguided belief that direct sales engender higher margins and keep prices low. |
| It does the opposite. Rail travel has not experienced the halo-effect that third-party comparison sites have had on other tourism industries, such as air travel and accommodation, because there is a lack of competition for both operation and distribution in the rail industry. Innovation and improved quality come through increased competition – which is what comparison sites enable. | It does the opposite. Rail travel has not experienced the halo-effect that third-party comparison sites have had on other tourism industries, such as air travel and accommodation, because there is a lack of competition for both operation and distribution in the rail industry. Innovation and improved quality come through increased competition – which is what comparison sites enable. |
| The solution is simple: rail operators need to give better access and choice to consumers through third-party comparison sites and be prepared to improve their services to compete with alternatives. Privatisation of the UK rail industry was designed to reduce costs to the taxpayer, lower fares, and improve customer service. So why are private rail operators allowed to behave in a way that hinders the realisation of these benefits?Dave AshtonChief executive, Loco2 | The solution is simple: rail operators need to give better access and choice to consumers through third-party comparison sites and be prepared to improve their services to compete with alternatives. Privatisation of the UK rail industry was designed to reduce costs to the taxpayer, lower fares, and improve customer service. So why are private rail operators allowed to behave in a way that hinders the realisation of these benefits?Dave AshtonChief executive, Loco2 |
| • Simplifying rail ticketing options is welcome. However, given the disparity in fares between rail companies, true equity would require that all train companies charged a similar rate per mile. But this would require an integrated, non-competitive policy. Nationalisation is the only route to such harmonisation.Sheila CrossNorthallerton, North Yorkshire | • Simplifying rail ticketing options is welcome. However, given the disparity in fares between rail companies, true equity would require that all train companies charged a similar rate per mile. But this would require an integrated, non-competitive policy. Nationalisation is the only route to such harmonisation.Sheila CrossNorthallerton, North Yorkshire |
| • Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com | • Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com |
| • Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters | • Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters |
| This article contains affiliate links, which means we may earn a small commission if a reader clicks through and makes a purchase. All our journalism is independent and is in no way influenced by any advertiser or commercial initiative. The links are powered by Skimlinks. By clicking on an affiliate link, you accept that Skimlinks cookies will be set. More information. | This article contains affiliate links, which means we may earn a small commission if a reader clicks through and makes a purchase. All our journalism is independent and is in no way influenced by any advertiser or commercial initiative. The links are powered by Skimlinks. By clicking on an affiliate link, you accept that Skimlinks cookies will be set. More information. |
| Rail fares | Rail fares |
| Consumer affairs | Consumer affairs |
| Transport | Transport |
| Transport policy | Transport policy |
| Rail transport | Rail transport |
| Rail industry | Rail industry |
| Rail travel | Rail travel |
| letters | letters |
| Share on Facebook | Share on Facebook |
| Share on Twitter | Share on Twitter |
| Share via Email | Share via Email |
| Share on LinkedIn | Share on LinkedIn |
| Share on Pinterest | Share on Pinterest |
| Share on WhatsApp | Share on WhatsApp |
| Share on Messenger | Share on Messenger |
| Reuse this content | Reuse this content |