Roland Perry

In message <oqy0eta4px1r$.1k3rxa6c5m9vy.dlg@40tude.net>, at 10:59:14 on
Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Chris Tolley <cjt.7@supanet.com> remarked:
>Some months ago, I was listening to someone from the new XC operator,
>being quizzed on "You and Yours" (R4) or something similar about the way
>they set their fares. At one point in the discussion, it emerged that
>if they can sell AP fares on their trains that are tied to specific
>seats on specific journeys, then they keep all the revenue. If they sell
>more flexible tickets, then they get less than 100% of the revenue,
>perhaps less pounds and pee than from the AP ticket. Suppose that to be
>true, then turn it on its head - if will follow that one cannot have AP
>tickets unless there is a through service between those points, which
>would answer both of your questions.

The final point cannot be true, as I've been issued an AP ticket where
the legs were in turn: MML, CT, VXC, FGW. I believe it was "XC and
connections", even though the longest leg by far was on FGW.

With slightly different timing (and availability) but presumably the
same price, a more sensible ticket between the same end points would
however have been issued as almost entirely XC with just a small hop on
CT.

Nottingham/Leicester/Bham/Reading/Plymouth was the ticket I was sold.
Nottingham/Derby/Plymouth is the other possibility.
--
Roland Perry