West Somerset Railway General Discussion

I wholly agree. The "return for a year" model had a lot of hidden costs, especially around access to things like galas. The "+10%" model, to which NYMR have moved, is a less attractive option to visitors, and looks an awful like a price hike. All of these then have their own practical operational challenges.

Whether we're talking about Gift Aid, or about residents' discounts, the key issue is how data can inform those choices.

 

True, though it’s worth noting that Gift Aid in effect leverages four times the value in altruistic donation from the public which might otherwise not be made, and if it didn’t exist the Government may come under pressure to fill the gap. So it is probably worth spending £1 of Government money to generate £5 of net public benefit, though I agree the Treasury is not an institution renowned for clear-headed long-term financial analysis!

Tom

 

I quite agree Tom, gift-aid on fares is not necessarily a silver bullet on its own, but there is also the issue of probably the biggest source of friction on the railway of the past few years, and that is that the supporting charities are extremely limited in the support that they can give to the Plc. I appreciate that, in part, this was due to the limitations imposed by their charitable objectives, but never-the-less, unless I am mistaken, the S&D group were evicted from their Washford site basically because they were unable to support the Plc when it went out with its begging bowl the last time there was a huge black hole in the accounts. A complete review of the structure of the WSR bodies to resolve this, and allow the gift aid to be claimed on fares, would seem to me to a no-brainer in light of the most recent financial results.

 

Perhaps that 75% is more like 70% or perhaps 60% however one thing is certain, a zero percent uplift on any figure is always zero.

 

That assumes that you don't get a compensating reduction in demand as the perceived prices rise (and the NYMR example appears to suggest in the absence of detailed figures that the "giveaway" component trashed cashflow later in the season).

 

Oh, I don't disagree, I think some kind of wholesale structural reform on the WSR would bring many benefits - I just caution against throwing all eggs into the Gift Aid basket! The other benefits may in the long term prove rather more beneficial.

Well, yes, though I suspect the actual number is likely to be considerably less than £400k.

But my wider point is that it seems to me quite frequently WSR folk are rather predisposed to a kind of "knight in shining armour" syndrome, i.e. that somewhere there is a single solution that will solve all problems. (A few years ago there was much talk of a pot of gold over the rainbow at Hinkley Point). The reality is that there are probably many incremental improvements that can be made - let's face it, which railway couldn't? - but there is no substitute for the hard work of making many small improvements. Pinning all your hops on a single answer (such as "Gift Aid on fares") is likely to leave you disappointed.

Tom

 

Just as this thread used to be recommended reading for discussions of principle, I suggest the NYMR thread occupies that (sad) place now. The message that comes out from that is that that success is borne of lots of little things, not a few big things - and that structural change is not an end in itself, but a means to an end.

 

It's not a single answer at all in that you have to get the pennies rolling in through the tills. Without that, all bets are off. Not picking up the 25% free bonus is just good housekeeping however ..........

 

That's where we might diverge in view. I'm not so sure it is as clear-cut as that, as a reading of the NYMR thread (especially a couple of years back) may show. The headline looks good, but model 1 (free return within a year) appears to have had a significant impact on cash flow in year 2 of its operation, and also places significant limitations on your ability to organise special events, which are often the lifeblood of many railways; while model 2 (10% uplift over the standard fare for GA passengers) essentially looks to most people like a price hike with no corresponding benefit.

I think what the NYMR are, and more importantly aren't, saying about Gift Aid is quite telling. After the first year of operation, there was a lot of communication about how successful it was, providing a £400k income. In year 3, there was a change of model to the 10% uplift, and no statement about how much Gift Aid was realised in the previous year, from which my natural assumption was - less. Now, in the 2026 accounts (covering 2025 trading) there is a section entitled "Key Success Measures for 2026" that says:

Tickets with the “plus 10%” Gift Aid on fares model deliver similar or greater revenue than the previous year. No increase in income is assumed despite the 10% uplift on those paying the donation fare.​

(My emphasis)​

Now, I might be over-interpreting it, but reading between the lines, it doesn't look to me like the scheme is a shining success, at least not in terms of providing a "free" revenue boost. The bit I put in bold is very interesting - either the uptake of the "donation" fare is very small, or else the additional revenue collected is being offset by a decrease in passengers due to the percieved higher price. Gift Aid is only mentioned twice in the 2025 accounts report, once as above and once to explain that the model had changed (from "free return" to "donation fare"). I get very strong vibes of a dog that went bounding out in year 1 and has returned in year 3 with its tail between its legs.

It might be possible to get the Gift Aid model to work on a heritage railway, but I believe it is not the "free hit" that many believe. At the very least I'm with @35B in thinking any decision needs to be really grounded in hard data.

Tom

 

I'd focus on the simple bit discussed ad nauseam previously about getting the Gift Aid uplift on donations. Fares are a different issue, and should be considered downstream.