1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156 
National Travel's attitude to licensing attacked
Page 45
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE ATTITUDE of National Travel to road service licensing was attacked by Wallace Arnold Tours Ltd, before the Metropolitan Traffic Commissioners, in London last Friday. It was opposing an application to introduce discount fares on express services.
National Travel (South East) Ltd wanted authority to reduce fares by up to 25 per cent for specific marketing promotions. Similar applications by other National Travel companies have been made in traffic areas throughout the country.
Mr Geoffrey Steel, a direc tor of Wallace Arnold, said the proposals were so wide that they would bypass the provisions of the Road Traffic Act. This worried Wallace Arnold, particularly, when in another case in another part of the country National Travel had indicated that it felt able to link extended tours operated by the constituent companies without any reference to the Traffic Commissioners.
Mr J. M. Wilson, general manager of National Travel (South East), said it was necessary to compete on equal terms with British Rail, which had the ability to advertise special fares for special events.
Standard fares would again have to be increased in the near future and to maximise traffic flexibility to reduce certain fares at particular times was required. If a 25 per cent reduction in fares could increase loadings by one-third there would be an overall increase in revenue. His own company had lost 030,000 in the last financial year.
Questioned, Mr Wilson agreed it was possible the reductions could lead to further financial loss but denied it was a way of gaining a hidden subsidy.
Mr K. S. Brindle, convenor of the Greater London Coach Fares Committee, said coach operators needed a greater marketing freedom.
FOr Wallace Arnold, Mr Steel said it would be extremely dangerous to give an operator of the size of National Travel carte blanche in the matter of fares. His company was not opposed to the principle of reduced fares for specific marketing, but it could be done under the dispensation procedure where other inte ested parties would have to I consulted.
Granting the proposals fl a period of two years, ti chairman, Mr A. S. Roberts° said the Commissioners want( to help but they must al: exercise control. Acceptir that a higher degree of fle) bility in marketing would 1 beneficial the exercise of di option to make a reducti( would be subject to thE approval and National Tray should consult with oth operators likely to be affect: before making reductions.