The attached map shows where the various matrices apply. The black bits show where there is no matrix in the public domain.

Also attached is our understanding of Cork-Cobh-Midleton.

Matrices not published:
* WRC
* Waterford-LJ-Limerick/Cork/Galway
* Tralee-Mallow-Cork-Cobh/Midleton
* Gormanston-Belfast
* NIR add-on fares
* Cross route / cross commuter boundary fares, e.g. Wicklow-Bray, Kilcock-Clonsilla
* Note stations to open (4) aren't listed.

Limerick could be added to the "Dublin Heuston - Cork Fare Grid" and "Dublin Heuston - Tralee Fare Grid". It is only one station to add, but removes duplication and sets up all the Limerick-Cork/Kerry fares.

Did i read this correctly, €14 return Thurles to Templemore :O it went up that much from €10.30

__________________________________________________ _____________

Update called Thurles train station its still that price but they have it down on irishrail.ie as A-B on the new fare grid which is incorrect.

Templemore Thurles is a band A, always was. All the charts from Irish Rail say A as well so can't see the issue

http://www.railusers.ie/passenger_in...&stage1=Submit

Went to a TVM at Heuston and asked for a single to Kildare: Price - 13 Euro. The cheapest of the options above.

A couple of general issues:
- When I first read about introducing speed of service as a pricing factor, I thought about a sarcastic comment that as all trains in Ireland are slow by international standards, will they be divided now into slow, slower and slowest? But this is a bit outside the point – the track quality and resulting speed limits is an issue nobody seems to care, got used to that.
- I actually understood that differentiating the services within each route would be implemented, rather than assigning each route to a set speed category. So e.g. there would be now non-stop (or max 1-2 stops) trains between major cities as well as slower services that serve nearly every single station on the same routes (say going all the way Dublin-Cork). And the former would be more expensive, with an obvious assumption that it's also noticeably faster. But that’s not gonna happen (it seems) and all trains on a particular route will be assumed to be of the same class. This means we’ll continue to have trains stopping either 5 or 9 times on the same route with both being at the same price! (Dublin-Galway is an example here.) Now the absurd part is that having four stops less makes the journey faster by only 10 minutes. The word ‘Express’ is abused here, really.
- I didn’t like the way they talk about revenue in these docs, e.g. current revenue base will be retained, and a small overall increase in passenger numbers could be generated
So the key for them was to make sure the revenue remains the same after fare adjustments – this is assuming passenger numbers are virtually flat (note the word ‘small’ in the quote). Whereas I thought fares could and should be used pro-actively as a way to attract more passengers and in turn increase the revenue. In fairness, this is happening with online discounts but when reading the NTA docs I have a strong impression that the attitude of old is still there:
passenger numbers are decreasing -> we have to increase the fares to keep revenues unchanged (a typical public sector approach, especially when subsidies are being cut).
Instead of:
passenger numbers are decreasing -> we have to improve our services (which includes making fares attractive so usually reducing them) -> passenger numbers would bounce back and so would the revenues.
It seems so obvious, yet I wonder if anybody in IÉ or NTA is aware that the quality of service on offer should be their priority in terms of revenue management? The 'quality' also includes e.g. number of trains per day and their times (merely 3 trains a day on a weekend to Wexford, last train to Dublin from most places departing around 6 etc), the speed of service as compared to motorway (track quality again!) and a number of other issues, which are actually impacting revenues (via passenger numbers), most likely much more than a fare structure. A logical fare structure is only one (and pretty obvious) element and it should not be implemented mainly with a view to keep things (i.e. revenue) as they are – it’s a drastic improvement that’s needed!

Firstly let us get one thing very clear Irish Rail's passenger numbers have been static for the last three years so unlike Dublin Bus which as been losing 5%+ per year Irish Rail is stable at 37.5-38 million with growth on some routes.

Sadly the idea that randomly cutting fares will fill seats doesn't hold.

On many routes passenger numbers barely changed when a discount was offered above normal, so the situation was worse off not better and given the situation that is a financial risk which the passengers will end up paying for

The yield managed fares are the best way forward as they can be controlled and adapted to ensure they actually deliver, random saver fares with blanket availability don't help

The NTA numbers say
1) The average fare paid will effectively not change (30% of fares went down)
2) The elimination of many of the stupid inconsistencies will in time generate business especially when combined with the further fare changes next year and the year after which will see further reductions

There isn't any real demand on the Rosslare line, Bus Eireann might be hourly (and 40 minutes slower) but they are just carrying air around for the most part, though the 01:30 Rosslare Dublin bus does a good business in drunks and Dublin Airport

"01:30 Rosslare Dublin bus" - are you sure? Maybe the 03.30 Rosslare - Dublin?

The 01.30 and 19.30 journeys Rosslare - Airport and corresponding return journeys ex Airport were discontinued around a year ago.

No Dublin-bound service ex Europort between 18.30 and 20.30 and none between 23.30 and 03.30.

Trekker ticket price increase
 

Don't think this has been mentioned yet...

The Trekker ticket now retails at €110 (previously €100).

Fair enough Mark. I realise it is possibly derailing :) the topic a bit but I thought that as a principle the fares should encourage more potential passengers, rather than merely making sure revenue stays the same. I suppose growth of passenger numbers (and thus the revenue) should be a key goal for any transport company (I know I may sound a bit naive with this one).

The report in general sounded to me much like Dublin Bus stand on fares in response to falling patronage - 'adjust' (i.e. increase) them. As I don't agree with such an approach, I hope IÉ are not trying to do the same but just cleverly merged with a move to make fares consistent (which is very reasonable in itself). A potential danger with yield driven fares (if I understand them correctly) is that when a route gets less popular, fares on it are increased to keep revenue/yield intact. So it gets even less popular and so fares are increased even more and it could go like that to infinity.

In general, flat passenger numbers in the current environment (incl. the motorways) can probably be considered a success. However, one of the best ways to improve these, especially in the short term, seems simple: offer more attractive fares on the less frequented routes and advertise them as much as you can. It's disappointing to see the current approach - as you say - did not really work (thanks for clarification). Perhaps this idea can be saved and simply needs some honing (picking dates, trains, sections of routs)? Or what alternative method is there to use?

I saw many years ago the results of the first tests of semi yield managed fares targeted at specific trains on specific days.

The revenue growth was nothing short of stunning, it filled the trains, the average fare paid was less and the revenue taken in was significantly more. A win win for everyone.

Blanked price cuts don't work as there is no control over use, so there is no business sense to offer a discount on a train which is standing room only as was Irish Rail practice for 20+ years. You get people complaining of having to stand.

On the other had Irish Rail charged full fare on empty trains where people complain that the full trains have discounted seats. The logic of this makes no sense and thats behind the move to kill the Fri/Sun price difference. Irish Rail have now introduced a formal after 9.30 am fare on some routes which parallels international practice.

We expect a major revision to yield managed ticketing this year where it will become a lot smarter and flexible. But until people embrace booking ahead the full effect won't be felt