better than a poke in the eye with a burnt stick (but only just)

It's been a while since I've taken the time to complain about anything train-related, so I'm going to rectify that with a short moan.  Rejoice, or bear with me as appropriate.

 

My commute takes me about half-way to London, and at the end of last year I paid a four-figure sum for the privilege of holding a Season Ticket for this.  You'd have thought, therefore, that when I actually want to travel all the way in to London I'd enjoy some reasonable savings, given that I only have to buy a ticket for half the journey.  If like me, however, you did think that, you thought wrong.  Especially when it comes to Saver Returns, as I found out this weekend.  I paid £15.70.  If you want to pay for the whole 1 1/4 hour journey in full, you pay £15.10.  The saving didn't even cover my Krispy Kreme doughnut* on arrival, and given that my Season Ticket works out at substantially more than 60p for that part of the journey I feel a bit short-changed.

 

Rant over.  Rejoice, or bear with me until next time, as appropriate.

 

>>

* Maple-Flavour glazed. Lush.

Comments

Anonymous said…
As I've said before, and will no doubt say again, the railways have been going downhill ever since certain idiots decided to listen to a certain Dick when he suggested closing half of them.

It's kind of ironic, actually - Britain was the first country to have a railway system as we know it, and yet we've got pretty much the worst managed system in the world. You'd have thought that with the amount of time the Powers That Be spend trying to imitate other countries in everything else, they'd have noticed that they manage to run railways properly...
Sun Jun 15, 09:45:00 PM GMT
Anonymous said…
JP, since you're a fan of private companies running the railways, I think there's a contradiction if you expect 'sensible' pricing - by which I mean a clear link between distance travelled and price.

Surely the market will determine the most efficient price, which may well (or rather, probably won't) have any link to the distance travelled. What, you want 1/2 price tickets for travelling 1/2 the distance! What kind of pinko socialist world do you want to live in?
Sat Jun 21, 10:10:00 PM GMT
Anonymous said…
Is it just me, or did you actually pay 60p MORE for your ticket than you would have done if you didn't have a Season Ticket? I wasn't aware that you were mathematically challenged, but I feel that I should advise you, next time, to pay for the whole 1 1/4 hour journey in full - ie "£15.10" - and just don't admit to holding a Season Ticket. I'm sure they won't mind!
x
Sun Jun 22, 07:15:00 PM GMT
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

the purpose of religion

One of the things which featured in the recent debate on this post is the idea that “religion should be about improving oneself”. This has got me thinking; ‘religion’ of course takes many forms, but in the vast majority of cases I disagree with this. To paraphrase MarkC, religion is certainly something which as a by-product might help with “improving oneself”, but however you measure self-improvement it is not the sole point, certainly not in the Judeo-Christian case. In fact, if your sole aim is to “improve yourself”, why waste your time playing around with the trappings of religion? Most religions are based around the idea of faith in God, and that, surely, is the point. Considering Christianity specifically, Jesus said “ Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself ” and so ‘religion’ should not be in danger of becoming all about wo...
Read more

atheism is a matter of faith, not science: the debate continues

Following the letters page in last Wednesday's Metro and the follow-up comment on this post I’m pleased to see that the beginnings of a debate are brewing, and I intend to use this post to pick up the baton again. Unsurprisingly, I’m going to start by responding to the aforementioned comment. I apologise if my tone was deemed to be a bit sharp, but I have no hesitation in defending the point I was trying to make. According to dictionary.com , faith can be defined as “belief that is not based on proof.” As there is no proof that God does not exist, belief that God does not exist (i.e. atheism) must be faith. Now, I take your point that “as human beings we are always revising and fine tuning what we hold to be true based on the evidence to hand, what we discover and our ability to determine what is probable or improbable.” To digress slightly, that is why switching on the Large Hadron Collider is going to be something of a milestone, as it could eit...
Read more

milk and sugar?

I've been debating with my housemate as to whether tea or coffee is more popular world-wide. We've both done quick web-searches, and we've both got results to match our different claims. I say tea, he says coffee. So, to settle the debate, it's down to you. Do you prefer tea or coffee? Please leave a comment below - one word is all it takes.
Read more