Network Ticketing
Network Ticketing
(10 Sep 2013, 4:14 pm)aureolin 1034 shares in total valued at £1 per share, giving of course a total share capital of £1,034. It's a strange number, and what I don't understand is that if it's a partnership, why isn't every 'invitee' just sold a single share valued at £1?
(10 Sep 2013, 4:14 pm)aureolin 1034 shares in total valued at £1 per share, giving of course a total share capital of £1,034. It's a strange number, and what I don't understand is that if it's a partnership, why isn't every 'invitee' just sold a single share valued at £1?
In theory, the operators are agents, selling on Network Ticketings products - receiving a portion of the revenue, the amount based on the proportion of shares they own.
There is no way in those shares will come about free of charge.
There has to be an investment of some sort, into the Network Ticketing organisation.
(10 Sep 2013, 4:32 pm)eezypeazy Because it's only a mechanism for dividing up revenue from a multi-modal, multi-operator ticketing scheme by market share... nothing more, nothing less...
What's difficult to understand about that?
(10 Sep 2013, 4:32 pm)eezypeazy Because it's only a mechanism for dividing up revenue from a multi-modal, multi-operator ticketing scheme by market share... nothing more, nothing less...
What's difficult to understand about that?
There's a number of ways they can divide up the revenue. Here's some I can think of:
- Per boarding: All boardings are recorded, so dividing up the proceeds per boarding would, IMO, be relatively simple. Attempts by individual operators to 'skew' the boardings by forcing changes would be counter-productive, as people don't like changing buses or modes - it's only worth doing to 'aggregate' two half-bus loads together to make a full bus load (and I'd guess that's the theory at places such as Washington). M1 feeds in to Metro because it can't compete journey-speed wise with Metro; but most GNE buses at Gateshead go through to Newcastle, where the interchange time penalty is greater than the time of the extra bus ride.
- Per boarding weighted by average fare: GNE and Arriva run many longer, inter-urban services, whereas SNE's routes are mainly town or city centre services. GNE and Arriva might argue that they forego a higher fare every time they accept an NTL ticket when compared with SNE. Sounds fairer, but gets more difficult to administer.
- Proportion of mileage operated: forget trying to count boardings, simply divide the takings by the number of miles each operators' buses operate. This assumes that there costs/revenues are broadly the same across the county, which I doubt is true; but I throw this one in for completeness.
That's just three potential models - I've no idea which one they use, but I'd guess the second might work.
BTW, did anyone notice that NTL holds 27 of its own shares? I'd guess that this enabled NTL to be paid enough of the revenue (not quite three per cent?) to cover its own costs... clever!
Re the GNE 'share' being less than the PTE's: surely this just reflects how the NTL market works? Multi-modal tickets, where it's possible to take advantage of the faster speed of rail and the higher frequency of buses, surely suggest that combined bus/Metro journeys is the main use that these tickets are put to?
(12 Sep 2013, 8:07 pm)Andreos1 Just a thought, based on eezypeazy's suggestion that the Network Ticketing shares are divided out to members, based on the % of the market share they have.
I wonder if this is this decided annually or more often?
(12 Sep 2013, 8:07 pm)Andreos1 Just a thought, based on eezypeazy's suggestion that the Network Ticketing shares are divided out to members, based on the % of the market share they have.
I wonder if this is this decided annually or more often?
(12 Sep 2013, 8:29 pm)busman101 The shares in NTL remain the same as far as I know and the revenue is apportioned on usage across the partner operators - so if a new operator came into local bus operation and wanted to accept NTL tickets then they would get their share of the revenue pot rather than a share of the company
(12 Sep 2013, 8:29 pm)busman101 The shares in NTL remain the same as far as I know and the revenue is apportioned on usage across the partner operators - so if a new operator came into local bus operation and wanted to accept NTL tickets then they would get their share of the revenue pot rather than a share of the company
(12 Sep 2013, 8:29 pm)busman101 The shares in NTL remain the same as far as I know and the revenue is apportioned on usage across the partner operators - so if a new operator came into local bus operation and wanted to accept NTL tickets then they would get their share of the revenue pot rather than a share of the company
(12 Sep 2013, 8:29 pm)busman101 The shares in NTL remain the same as far as I know and the revenue is apportioned on usage across the partner operators - so if a new operator came into local bus operation and wanted to accept NTL tickets then they would get their share of the revenue pot rather than a share of the company
(12 Sep 2013, 8:50 pm)aureolin That was my argument, which was apparently incorrect. From what I've seen now I'd say it works exactly how eezypeazy described.
if any scheme members' share of the
market changes, their share of the revenue
changes. So, for example, a Metro extension to
Washington would almost inevitably see the
PTE's share increase and GNE's fall
(12 Sep 2013, 8:50 pm)aureolin That was my argument, which was apparently incorrect. From what I've seen now I'd say it works exactly how eezypeazy described.
if any scheme members' share of the
market changes, their share of the revenue
changes. So, for example, a Metro extension to
Washington would almost inevitably see the
PTE's share increase and GNE's fall
I think we can all see now just how simple this is - it just divides up the revenue based on usage, after NTL's own costs are deducted.
The 'shares' in the company are nominal shares - they are never traded, but (presumably) can be redistributed to reflect market share at an appropriate moment.
Agreed that the question of voting rights at meetings is intriguing, but ask yourselves this - what is there to be decided and voted upon? I'd guess that the biggest decision is an annual review of NTL prices. Each shareholder (including Nexus on behalf of Metro/Ferry) has a need to maximise revenue; but set NTL prices too high and customers will buy two individual operator tickets instead, thereby depriving companies of NTL revenue. Set NTL prices too low and operators own tickets become more expensive and NTL's share of total revenue goes up and the individual operator loses control of his own revenue stream. And Nexus has the problem of needing to maximise revenue while satisfying their political masters' desire for cheap travel...
I would imagine the meetings might get rather tense...!!!
(13 Sep 2013, 7:35 am)eezypeazy I think we can all see now just how simple this is - it just divides up the revenue based on usage, after NTL's own costs are deducted.
The 'shares' in the company are nominal shares - they are never traded, but (presumably) can be redistributed to reflect market share at an appropriate moment.
Agreed that the question of voting rights at meetings is intriguing, but ask yourselves this - what is there to be decided and voted upon? I'd guess that the biggest decision is an annual review of NTL prices. Each shareholder (including Nexus on behalf of Metro/Ferry) has a need to maximise revenue; but set NTL prices too high and customers will buy two individual operator tickets instead, thereby depriving companies of NTL revenue. Set NTL prices too low and operators own tickets become more expensive and NTL's share of total revenue goes up and the individual operator loses control of his own revenue stream. And Nexus has the problem of needing to maximise revenue while satisfying their political masters' desire for cheap travel...
I would imagine the meetings might get rather tense...!!!
(13 Sep 2013, 7:35 am)eezypeazy I think we can all see now just how simple this is - it just divides up the revenue based on usage, after NTL's own costs are deducted.
The 'shares' in the company are nominal shares - they are never traded, but (presumably) can be redistributed to reflect market share at an appropriate moment.
Agreed that the question of voting rights at meetings is intriguing, but ask yourselves this - what is there to be decided and voted upon? I'd guess that the biggest decision is an annual review of NTL prices. Each shareholder (including Nexus on behalf of Metro/Ferry) has a need to maximise revenue; but set NTL prices too high and customers will buy two individual operator tickets instead, thereby depriving companies of NTL revenue. Set NTL prices too low and operators own tickets become more expensive and NTL's share of total revenue goes up and the individual operator loses control of his own revenue stream. And Nexus has the problem of needing to maximise revenue while satisfying their political masters' desire for cheap travel...
I would imagine the meetings might get rather tense...!!!
http://www.networkonetickets.co.uk/ticke...er-tickets
Magpie Mover ticket prices announced for 15/16 season.
(08 Jun 2015, 11:03 am)Andreos1 http://www.networkonetickets.co.uk/ticke...er-tickets
Magpie Mover ticket prices announced for 15/16 season.
(08 Jun 2015, 11:03 am)Andreos1 http://www.networkonetickets.co.uk/ticke...er-tickets
Magpie Mover ticket prices announced for 15/16 season.
If it can be done in the South East, then it can be done in the North East, no need for QCS.
http://www.route-one.net/industry/one-ti...all-buses/
(09 Sep 2015, 1:13 pm)Malarkey If it can be done in the South East, then it can be done in the North East, no need for QCS.We have this already, and have had for as long as I can remember. The North East Explorer ticket...
http://www.route-one.net/industry/one-ti...all-buses/
(09 Sep 2015, 1:13 pm)Malarkey If it can be done in the South East, then it can be done in the North East, no need for QCS.We have this already, and have had for as long as I can remember. The North East Explorer ticket...
http://www.route-one.net/industry/one-ti...all-buses/
Smart, Multi-Operator Travel Launched for North East Bus Passengers
Date: 14 Dec 2015
Region’s bus users to benefit from innovative smart ticketing initiative
Seamless multi-journey travel across the major bus operators of the North East - Stagecoach, Go North East and Arriva
Unlimited travel with any bus operator from less than £2 per day
http://www.simplygo.com/news/smart-multi...passengers
(14 Dec 2015, 4:05 pm)Dan Smart, Multi-Operator Travel Launched for North East Bus Passengers
Date: 14 Dec 2015
Region’s bus users to benefit from innovative smart ticketing initiative
Seamless multi-journey travel across the major bus operators of the North East - Stagecoach, Go North East and Arriva
Unlimited travel with any bus operator from less than £2 per day
http://www.simplygo.com/news/smart-multi...passengers
(14 Dec 2015, 4:05 pm)Dan Smart, Multi-Operator Travel Launched for North East Bus Passengers
Date: 14 Dec 2015
Region’s bus users to benefit from innovative smart ticketing initiative
Seamless multi-journey travel across the major bus operators of the North East - Stagecoach, Go North East and Arriva
Unlimited travel with any bus operator from less than £2 per day
http://www.simplygo.com/news/smart-multi...passengers
(14 Dec 2015, 4:12 pm)Michael About time, sound like a good idea.
What is the SmartZone boundaries?, just Tyne & Wear?
(14 Dec 2015, 4:12 pm)Michael About time, sound like a good idea.
What is the SmartZone boundaries?, just Tyne & Wear?
(14 Dec 2015, 4:58 pm)Malarkey Sunderland, Newcastle, South Tyneside & North Tyneside.
Washington, Gateshead and a few other areas dont benefit from this, further more from going on "The Key" Website to buy a Ticket you cannot purchase multiple zones either, therefore you would have to revert to Network One if you were using multiple operators, makes the scheme pretty pointless in my opinion.
(14 Dec 2015, 4:58 pm)Malarkey Sunderland, Newcastle, South Tyneside & North Tyneside.
Washington, Gateshead and a few other areas dont benefit from this, further more from going on "The Key" Website to buy a Ticket you cannot purchase multiple zones either, therefore you would have to revert to Network One if you were using multiple operators, makes the scheme pretty pointless in my opinion.
