Which fares changing?
Almost all adult single fares in Tyne & Wear, County Durham and Northumberland will remain at £2.50, though some short hop fares will be less than this. Journeys into Teesside on service X10 and journeys into Cumbria on service 681 will still be capped at £3.

The tables below shows the prices for our one day and multi-day tickets from 2 Janaury 2026.

https://www.gonortheast.co.uk/changes-fa...nuary-2026

(17 Dec 2025, 10:57 am)Michael wrote Which fares changing?
Almost all adult single fares in Tyne & Wear, County Durham and Northumberland will remain at £2.50, though some short hop fares will be less than this. Journeys into Teesside on service X10 and journeys into Cumbria on service 681 will still be capped at £3.

The tables below shows the prices for our one day and multi-day tickets from 2 Janaury 2026.

https://www.gonortheast.co.uk/changes-fa...nuary-2026

An All Zones ticket is now £130 a month!? 

In comparison, you can travel on any bus in the Greater Manchester area for £80.

Apparently, next year ( not sure of when) the Tyne and Wear Day Rover is to be dissolved altogether, (Nexus decision) with the TNE £7.50 will remain/in place of . , which is a better ticket altogether

(17 Dec 2025, 11:26 am)Adrian wrote An All Zones ticket is now £130 a month!? 

In comparison, you can travel on any bus in the Greater Manchester area for £80.

An All Zones ticket that doesn’t get you into all zones as you’re charged an extortionate amount of money if you need to travel on the X10. And they wonder why ridership is down.

The price of buses in general are shocking lately;

They're so obsessed about banging on about £2.50 / £3.00 fares which might be cheap, if you're travelling from Consett to Newcastle.

The problem is the same fare from somewhere like Newcastle to the Swallow Hotel in Gateshead is also £2.50 and there's no realistic weekly/monthly tickets which is getting that any cheaper for a basic return.

If you're working 5 days a week, that's £100 a month (£98 due to T&W ticket). It's not cheap or good value, at all.

(Respect it's an extreme example that)

(17 Dec 2025, 11:26 am)Adrian wrote In comparison, you can travel on any bus in the Greater Manchester area for £80.

You can travel on any regional train, bus, metro and tram across the whole of Germany for €58 

I still don't understand why we aren't subsidising something like that, over single fares imo. Mind maybe not as extreme though, maybe the £80 mark instead which is equivilant of someone making 3 returns every week maybe, give or take?

(18 Dec 2025, 9:54 pm)Storx wrote You can travel on any regional train, bus, metro and tram across the whole of Germany for €58 

I still don't understand why we aren't subsidising something like that, over single fares imo. Mind maybe not as extreme though, maybe the £80 mark instead which is equivilant of someone making 3 returns every week maybe, give or take?

The difference, of course, being that Germany regards public transport as something that helps people get around in an efficient manner, whereas the UK regards it as something you can use to make profit out of those who have no alternative .....

(18 Dec 2025, 9:36 pm)Storx wrote The price of buses in general are shocking lately;

They're so obsessed about banging on about £2.50 / £3.00 fares which might be cheap, if you're travelling from Consett to Newcastle.

The problem is the same fare from somewhere like Newcastle to the Swallow Hotel in Gateshead is also £2.50 and there's no realistic weekly/monthly tickets which is getting that any cheaper for a basic return.

If you're working 5 days a week, that's £100 a month (£98 due to T&W ticket). It's not cheap or good value, at all.

(Respect it's an extreme example that)

This is the point I made when the capped fares first came out. It's a complete lottery with our bus network on whether or not it's a value for money product for you. Introducing this without a hopper-style mechanism was a mistake.

The biggest issue with weekly/monthly tickets is that there's so much waste associated with them. I'd say the vast majority of those who were commuting daily in 2019 are no longer doing so. 5 days a week in an office is a thing of the past, and most have agreements of either 40% or 60% office attendance. This is another example of where the bus industry are engrained in the past though, and they've completely failed to grasp how the world of work now works.

Sure, there's the 'Flexi 5' product on offer, it's priced in such a way that you completely lose any value in what you previously had by purchasing a 28 day ticket. What's really needed is a larger bundle, e.g. 20 or 30 tickets, with a suitable discount applied. 

(18 Dec 2025, 9:54 pm)Storx wrote You can travel on any regional train, bus, metro and tram across the whole of Germany for €58 

I still don't understand why we aren't subsidising something like that, over single fares imo. Mind maybe not as extreme though, maybe the £80 mark instead which is equivilant of someone making 3 returns every week maybe, give or take?

Because as a Country we seem to know the cost of everything but the value of nothing. Look at Crossrail (or even the Northumberland Line) for example; everyone was moaning about cost, being a waste of money, what we already have been sufficient etc, yet once open and people are using it, no one ever talks about the cost anymore.

I think there's also a snobbery towards public transport in particular, and it stems from Thatcherism. A lot of vocal people view it as a dirty, inconvenient and desperate way to travel, so even something as simple as a bus lane is seen as a waste of money. We never apply the same critique to roads, e.g. the hundreds of millions spent on the Coal House improvements, Tyne Tunnel 2, the Coast Road, .... the list goes on.

(19 Dec 2025, 10:25 am)Adrian wrote This is the point I made when the capped fares first came out. It's a complete lottery with our bus network on whether or not it's a value for money product for you. Introducing this without a hopper-style mechanism was a mistake.

The biggest issue with weekly/monthly tickets is that there's so much waste associated with them. I'd say the vast majority of those who were commuting daily in 2019 are no longer doing so. 5 days a week in an office is a thing of the past, and most have agreements of either 40% or 60% office attendance. This is another example of where the bus industry are engrained in the past though, and they've completely failed to grasp how the world of work now works.

Sure, there's the 'Flexi 5' product on offer, it's priced in such a way that you completely lose any value in what you previously had by purchasing a 28 day ticket. What's really needed is a larger bundle, e.g. 20 or 30 tickets, with a suitable discount applied. 


Because as a Country we seem to know the cost of everything but the value of nothing. Look at Crossrail (or even the Northumberland Line) for example; everyone was moaning about cost, being a waste of money, what we already have been sufficient etc, yet once open and people are using it, no one ever talks about the cost anymore.

I think there's also a snobbery towards public transport in particular, and it stems from Thatcherism. A lot of vocal people view it as a dirty, inconvenient and desperate way to travel, so even something as simple as a bus lane is seen as a waste of money. We never apply the same critique to roads, e.g. the hundreds of millions spent on the Coal House improvements, Tyne Tunnel 2, the Coast Road, .... the list goes on.

Think you’re comparing apples and pears with the bus lanes vs road infrastructure mind.  The obvious difference being the reality (inconvenient as it may be for some).  There are plenty of car journeys meaning (once the improvement works are done) a large proportion of the population gain a significant benefit.  Compared to bus lanes where there are ever fewer scheduled services using them, running to fewer places, less often – and which may or may not turn up and get you from A to B without breaking down.  The reason people see bus lanes as a waste of money is that there are so few buses on the road to use them even compared to 10 years ago let alone the peak after deregulation.  And that downward trend has been sustained and increasing over that time, so highly unlikely to change with or without bus lanes.  Increasing priority for something that runs so poorly and infrequently (and for some expensively) as is the case in many parts of our region is very likely just wasteful.

(18 Dec 2025, 9:36 pm)Storx wrote The price of buses in general are shocking lately;

They're so obsessed about banging on about £2.50 / £3.00 fares which might be cheap, if you're travelling from Consett to Newcastle.

The problem is the same fare from somewhere like Newcastle to the Swallow Hotel in Gateshead is also £2.50 and there's no realistic weekly/monthly tickets which is getting that any cheaper for a basic return.

If you're working 5 days a week, that's £100 a month (£98 due to T&W ticket). It's not cheap or good value, at all.

(Respect it's an extreme example that)

Just as extreme is the £2.50 for the short hop between Fram and Arnison or the city centre, using GNE. Arriva are only charging £1.70 for those journeys.

(19 Dec 2025, 4:27 pm)stagecoachbusdepot wrote Think you’re comparing apples and pears with the bus lanes vs road infrastructure mind.  The obvious difference being the reality (inconvenient as it may be for some).  There are plenty of car journeys meaning (once the improvement works are done) a large proportion of the population gain a significant benefit.  Compared to bus lanes where there are ever fewer scheduled services using them, running to fewer places, less often – and which may or may not turn up and get you from A to B without breaking down.  The reason people see bus lanes as a waste of money is that there are so few buses on the road to use them even compared to 10 years ago let alone the peak after deregulation.  And that downward trend has been sustained and increasing over that time, so highly unlikely to change with or without bus lanes.  Increasing priority for something that runs so poorly and infrequently (and for some expensively) as is the case in many parts of our region is very likely just wasteful.

You've largely reaffirmed my point. Whilst I agree with some of your criticism around buses, it's still that snobbery towards public transport (and active travel, for that matter) that questions every penny of investment. You simply don't get that with other infrastructure projects. 

If we're going to encourage more people to use public transport or active travel modes, then it has to be a lot better, doesn't it? I don't blame private car owners for not wanting to use it in it's current state and cost, but that doesn't mean that investment in that infrastructure isn't important to build it to a point where people are happy to use it.

The Northumberland Line, which I mentioned in my previous post, has been a real success story for the region. Politicians prepared to take a financial gamble on the benefits reported, yet it's completely exceeded everyone's expectations. So much so that the Council is being inundated in enquiries about development alongside the line. There's dozens of places across the region that you could do the same and achieve results.

(19 Dec 2025, 4:27 pm)stagecoachbusdepot wrote Think you’re comparing apples and pears with the bus lanes vs road infrastructure mind.  The obvious difference being the reality (inconvenient as it may be for some).  There are plenty of car journeys meaning (once the improvement works are done) a large proportion of the population gain a significant benefit.  Compared to bus lanes where there are ever fewer scheduled services using them, running to fewer places, less often – and which may or may not turn up and get you from A to B without breaking down.  The reason people see bus lanes as a waste of money is that there are so few buses on the road to use them even compared to 10 years ago let alone the peak after deregulation.  And that downward trend has been sustained and increasing over that time, so highly unlikely to change with or without bus lanes.  Increasing priority for something that runs so poorly and infrequently (and for some expensively) as is the case in many parts of our region is very likely just wasteful.

Appreciate it's going off topic from fares, but bus lanes are meant to look empty. 

Based on current frequencies, are there any current examples of bus priority measures that should be removed?

(19 Dec 2025, 10:25 am)Adrian wrote This is the point I made when the capped fares first came out. It's a complete lottery with our bus network on whether or not it's a value for money product for you. Introducing this without a hopper-style mechanism was a mistake.

The biggest issue with weekly/monthly tickets is that there's so much waste associated with them. I'd say the vast majority of those who were commuting daily in 2019 are no longer doing so. 5 days a week in an office is a thing of the past, and most have agreements of either 40% or 60% office attendance. This is another example of where the bus industry are engrained in the past though, and they've completely failed to grasp how the world of work now works.

Sure, there's the 'Flexi 5' product on offer, it's priced in such a way that you completely lose any value in what you previously had by purchasing a 28 day ticket. What's really needed is a larger bundle, e.g. 20 or 30 tickets, with a suitable discount applied. 

Totally agreed on the monthly tickets, mind maybe instead of flexi tickets, maybe the price of a 28 day ticket should come down instead?

If the vast majority of customers are only using the bus 3 days a week, then maybe the pricing of the weekly and monthly tickets should be adjusted to support that or somewhere in between, at least. 

Tbh though the whole pricing system sucks, personally I wish we'd divide the North East in a number of zones, and pricing is set based on that, ie one zone £1.20, two zone £1.50 and so on with it being clear what the zones actually are unlike now where it's not clear, at all, with a new day ticket replacing the £2.50 fares (maybe £6?). It means people can use their initiative whether that's better value or not and those making short journeys or hopper journeys aren't being punished for the sake of someone making a journey like Berwick to Newcastle who should be paying £5.00 for a single which would still be bloody good value (obviously there'd be the £3 cap thanks to national government).

(19 Dec 2025, 5:43 pm)inAdrian wrote You've largely reaffirmed my point. Whilst I agree with some of your criticism around buses, it's still that snobbery towards public transport (and active travel, for that matter) that questions every penny of investment. You simply don't get that with other infrastructure projects. 

If we're going to encourage more people to use public transport or active travel modes, then it has to be a lot better, doesn't it? I don't blame private car owners for not wanting to use it in it's current state and cost, but that doesn't mean that investment in that infrastructure isn't important to build it to a point where people are happy to use it.

The Northumberland Line, which I mentioned in my previous post, has been a real success story for the region. Politicians prepared to take a financial gamble on the benefits reported, yet it's completely exceeded everyone's expectations. So much so that the Council is being inundated in enquiries about development alongside the line. There's dozens of places across the region that you could do the same and achieve results.

I definitely haven't reaffirmed your point.  

It isn't snobbery toward public transport.  It is reality based on decades of evidence of decline despite investment in bus priority measures and gimmicks (indeed, anything other than actual services really). The fact that investment in infrastructure has occurred alongside a terminal decline in service provision does not support the the notion that investing in more solid white lines is going to drive an improvement in the bus network.  There is a world of difference to road infrastructure where the benefit is (generally) plain for everyone to see and experience - just dismissing a different view to your own as snobbery is not how to have a sensible debate.

I don't know anything about the Northumberland Line but if that has been about opening up new links and providing actual services it is, again, like apples and pears to bus lanes.  If your argument was that investing in actual better (more frequent, direct, choice etc) routes then there would be a fairer analogy and I doubt many would argue.

---

(19 Dec 2025, 7:29 pm)Kimlfixit wrote Based on current frequencies, are there any current examples of bus priority measures that should be removed?

Are there any in the region that have led to a demonstrable increase in overall quality of the network (e.g. increased ridership driving increased frequency, or new connections being introduced along these corridors)?

(19 Dec 2025, 9:42 pm)stagecoachbusdepot wrote I definitely haven't reaffirmed your point.  

It isn't snobbery toward public transport.  It is reality based on decades of evidence of decline despite investment in bus priority measures and gimmicks (indeed, anything other than actual services really). The fact that investment in infrastructure has occurred alongside a terminal decline in service provision does not support the the notion that investing in more solid white lines is going to drive an improvement in the bus network.  There is a world of difference to road infrastructure where the benefit is (generally) plain for everyone to see and experience - just dismissing a different view to your own as snobbery is not how to have a sensible debate.

I don't know anything about the Northumberland Line but if that has been about opening up new links and providing actual services it is, again, like apples and pears to bus lanes.  If your argument was that investing in actual better (more frequent, direct, choice etc) routes then there would be a fairer analogy and I doubt many would argue.

---

Are there any in the region that have led to a demonstrable increase in overall quality of the network (e.g. increased ridership driving increased frequency, or new connections being introduced along these corridors)?

I don't know whether you live in an urban area, but from a sub urban area lack of bus priority is a serious problem as journeys are unbearably slow to the stage it's borderline unusable unless you have nothing better to do. 

There has been very little investment in bus lanes etc in the North East, and the vast majority of it, is a complete waste of money in the wrong place because it'd cause too much controversy to do it where it should be. The nonsense planned in Sunderland around Hastings Hill - is a prime example of that.

Places like the Coast Road near Corner House, Gosforth High Street, West Road, Chester Road, Stamfordham Road, around the Metrocentre etc being the sort of places I'm talking about here.

Google Brighton if you want to see somewhere which actually prioritises bus transport and there's examples where there's been big growth.

(19 Dec 2025, 9:42 pm)stagecoachbusdepot wrote I definitely haven't reaffirmed your point.  

It isn't snobbery toward public transport.  It is reality based on decades of evidence of decline despite investment in bus priority measures and gimmicks (indeed, anything other than actual services really). The fact that investment in infrastructure has occurred alongside a terminal decline in service provision does not support the the notion that investing in more solid white lines is going to drive an improvement in the bus network.  There is a world of difference to road infrastructure where the benefit is (generally) plain for everyone to see and experience - just dismissing a different view to your own as snobbery is not how to have a sensible debate.

I don't know anything about the Northumberland Line but if that has been about opening up new links and providing actual services it is, again, like apples and pears to bus lanes.  If your argument was that investing in actual better (more frequent, direct, choice etc) routes then there would be a fairer analogy and I doubt many would argue.

---

Are there any in the region that have led to a demonstrable increase in overall quality of the network (e.g. increased ridership driving increased frequency, or new connections being introduced along these corridors)?

Sunderland Road Bus Link, A694 near Swalwell Roundabout, Great North Road/Blue House Roundabout, Team Valley Maingate roundabout, Wardley to Heworth off the top of my head have improved the journey experience.

However, because of the limited scope of bus lanes here and the UK in general, they've probably only prevented frequency reductions, rather than generate new services as the savings are small compared to the time needed to invest elsewhere. 

The political will for the number of bus lanes at the scale needed to have a tangible impact just isn't there.

(20 Dec 2025, 12:38 pm)Kimlfixit wrote Sunderland Road Bus Link, A694 near Swalwell Roundabout, Great North Road/Blue House Roundabout, Team Valley Maingate roundabout, Wardley to Heworth off the top of my head have improved the journey experience.

However, because of the limited scope of bus lanes here and the UK in general, they've probably only prevented frequency reductions, rather than generate new services as the savings are small compared to the time needed to invest elsewhere. 

The political will for the number of bus lanes at the scale needed to have a tangible impact just isn't there.

If buses were a genuine, viable, affordable option - bus lanes wouldn't need to exist.

They're only there, because of the amount of cars on the road.

(Yesterday, 1:47 am)Andreos1 wrote If buses were a genuine, viable, affordable option - bus lanes wouldn't need to exist.

They're only there, because of the amount of cars on the road.

You are confusing cause, effect and purpose.

Bus lanes don’t exist because buses aren’t viable, they exist to make them reliable. 

Without more priority, buses get delayed by congestion, become unpredictable, and more people stop using them, which increases car traffic. That’s a policy failure, not evidence buses don’t work.

(Yesterday, 7:12 am)Kimlfixit wrote You are confusing cause, effect and purpose.

Bus lanes don’t exist because buses aren’t viable, they exist to make them reliable. 

Without more priority, buses get delayed by congestion, become unpredictable, and more people stop using them, which increases car traffic. That’s a policy failure, not evidence buses don’t work.

Take cars off the road and the bus lanes dont need to exist. 

Making life difficult for car drivers doesn't encourage the modal switch. 

If operators can get the basic, fundamentals right, then passengers will make the switch back to public transport. 

The reason people switched to cars, was because buses didn't work for them. Not because there wasn't a bus lane. 

Ridership has been declining for decades. And it's not because there wasn't a bus lane.

The correlation between increase in car usage and decline in passenger numbers is clear to see. The introduction and growth of bus priority measures hasn't stemmed the decline.

(Yesterday, 9:41 am)Andreos1 wrote Take cars off the road and the bus lanes dont need to exist. 

Making life difficult for car drivers doesn't encourage the modal switch. 

If operators can get the basic, fundamentals right, then passengers will make the switch back to public transport. 

The reason people switched to cars, was because buses didn't work for them. Not because there wasn't a bus lane. 

Ridership has been declining for decades. And it's not because there wasn't a bus lane.

The correlation between increase in car usage and decline in passenger numbers is clear to see. The introduction and growth of bus priority measures hasn't stemmed the decline.

Not sure I totally agree here mind, cars will always be quicker than a bus so unless you have some punishment for using them, then a lot of people will not make the move across. 

The reason people moved across is because cars became affordable and ironically at the same time public transport didn't. 

The problem is the bus priority measures are a load of crap; Cowgate being a prime example, runs for miles but the buses don't use it because they can't get across. The lights at Wardley, Centrelink, Silverlink Bus Link, Great Park P&R and so on being others - just a complete waste of money.

See personally I'd be more ruthless personally, but I'd do it in a way that prioritises a main corridor for cars so it's not just punishing them for punishing them.

Like the Heworth area I'd do something like:


With the red areas being areas if you go in a car, I'll make your journey absolute hell because I don't want you going down there but the green routes I'll make every effort for it to be freeflowing. 

If you got that working, why does anyone need to be in the red bits? In the end it means everyone wins, instead we have Heworth which is a shambles so everyone goes on a rat run along Sunderland Road, through Wrekenton or what not and everyone is punished as a result and no-one wins. The orange bits being access to the hospital.

(Yesterday, 9:41 am)Andreos1 wrote Take cars off the road and the bus lanes dont need to exist. 

Making life difficult for car drivers doesn't encourage the modal switch. 

If operators can get the basic, fundamentals right, then passengers will make the switch back to public transport. 

The reason people switched to cars, was because buses didn't work for them. Not because there wasn't a bus lane. 

Ridership has been declining for decades. And it's not because there wasn't a bus lane.

The correlation between increase in car usage and decline in passenger numbers is clear to see. The introduction and growth of bus priority measures hasn't stemmed the decline.

No disrespect, but that is a very idealised way of looking at thing. The bus is not the answer to every car journey - not should it be.

I really don’t want to give a history lesson either, but bus use plummeted between the 50s and 80s as car ownership grew. A period some nostalgically call the halcyon days of British bus! (ha). It’s worth remembering that having a car back then was a status symbol, like owning a colour TV or a washing machine - something we all have today.

For aspirational folk of the 60s and 70s, the implicit message was clear: why share a bus with others when you can drive yourself and your family? And that mindset stuck. Use a bus in some of our less salubrious areas today and I'd agree with that sentiment. if you owned a car, why would you go back to the bus?

As car use increased through the 70s and 80s, buses became slower and less reliable, triggering the vicious cycle of passengers abandoning them. 

Bus priority measures only really emerged outside London from the 90s, but car use had already exploded over the previous four decades. Perhaps our forefathers should have introduced priority earlier, giving buses the reliability they needed instead of letting them sit in traffic for 40+ years without doing anything to help speed bus journeys.

(Yesterday, 11:07 am)Kimlfixit wrote No disrespect, but that is a very idealised way of looking at thing. The bus is not the answer to every car journey - not should it be.

I really don’t want to give a history lesson either, but bus use plummeted between the 50s and 80s as car ownership grew. A period some nostalgically call the halcyon days of British bus! (ha). It’s worth remembering that having a car back then was a status symbol, like owning a colour TV or a washing machine - something we all have today.

For aspirational folk of the 60s and 70s, the implicit message was clear: why share a bus with others when you can drive yourself and your family? And that mindset stuck. Use a bus in some of our less salubrious areas today and I'd agree with that sentiment. if you owned a car, why would you go back to the bus?

As car use increased through the 70s and 80s, buses became slower and less reliable, triggering the vicious cycle of passengers abandoning them. 

Bus priority measures only really emerged outside London from the 90s, but car use had already exploded over the previous four decades. Perhaps our forefathers should have introduced priority earlier, giving buses the reliability they needed instead of letting them sit in traffic for 40+ years without doing anything to help speed bus journeys.

I'm not sure anyone said that buses should be the answer to every car journey. 
But what I will say, is that the vast majority of car journeys can (or should) be quite easily done by bus.

As we have seen with certain operators, they've not adapted routes to changing customer demands or alternative destinations. 
If they did do that, I think we both know that there would be a proportion of car users who would make the modal switch. 
If they make the modal switch, then there's fewer cars on the road etc etc. 

We've got major employers in out of town business parks. Where do the buses come to and from to get to the likes of Quorum or Cobalt? 
Bus lanes will not be the answer or solution to cars going to/from those places and fighting out for parking spaces.

(Yesterday, 12:18 pm)Andreos1 wrote I'm not sure anyone said that buses should be the answer to every car journey. 
But what I will say, is that the vast majority of car journeys can (or should) be quite easily done by bus.

As we have seen with certain operators, they've not adapted routes to changing customer demands or alternative destinations. 
If they did do that, I think we both know that there would be a proportion of car users who would make the modal switch. 
If they make the modal switch, then there's fewer cars on the road etc etc. 

We've got major employers in out of town business parks. Where do the buses come to and from to get to the likes of Quorum or Cobalt? 
Bus lanes will not be the answer or solution to cars going to/from those places and fighting out for parking spaces.

Better route planning and adapting to changing travel patterns matters, no argument there. But you can't do that everywhere as the costs would be enormous for very little guaranteed return.

I'd actually argue Out-of-town business parks are a good example of where land use and transport planning have worked against buses for decades. For example, they are all built with huge car parks. If you get off a bus at Cobalt, you have further to walk to your office than a car user. Buses are already losing before a single business moves in! 

But that doesn’t negate the role of bus priority. Even where routes do serve major employment sites, buses still have to travel through congested corridors to get there. If those sections are slow and unreliable, people won’t switch, regardless of how well the final destination is served.

It’s also worth recognising a behavioural factor: many car users value privacy, control, and not having to share space with strangers. That preference didn’t disappear, it’s been a constant since car ownership became widespread. To overcome that, buses have to be not just available, but clearly reliable and time-competitive. 

The Mayors fares have clearly helped to some degree as passenger numbers are 8% higher apparently, but that only helps so much.

Mode shift isn’t achieved by a single intervention. It needs viable routes, competitive journey times, and reliability. Bus lanes don’t solve everything, but without them, buses struggle to compete with cars even when the routes are well designed. See TfL average bus speeds!

(19 Dec 2025, 9:18 pm)Storx wrote Totally agreed on the monthly tickets, mind maybe instead of flexi tickets, maybe the price of a 28 day ticket should come down instead?

If the vast majority of customers are only using the bus 3 days a week, then maybe the pricing of the weekly and monthly tickets should be adjusted to support that or somewhere in between, at least. 

Tbh though the whole pricing system sucks, personally I wish we'd divide the North East in a number of zones, and pricing is set based on that, ie one zone £1.20, two zone £1.50 and so on with it being clear what the zones actually are unlike now where it's not clear, at all, with a new day ticket replacing the £2.50 fares (maybe £6?). It means people can use their initiative whether that's better value or not and those making short journeys or hopper journeys aren't being punished for the sake of someone making a journey like Berwick to Newcastle who should be paying £5.00 for a single which would still be bloody good value (obviously there'd be the £3 cap thanks to national government).

I wholeheartedly agree with this- i am one of these people..i work from home min 2 days per week (sometimes 3) so im a prime example where im only in office 2/3 days per wk (3 more often than not but not gonna turn down extra day at home sometimes!). 

Atm i use the Network One ticket as including the Metro and bus together it works out more affordable (and even if it is the slower option- it does give me a backup of using the Coaster from Team Valley to home in North Tyneside if/when Metro is on blink/delays/breakdowns etc).

So these price rises increases my costs again and if wasnt for needing to be in office (and tbh i like mix of both) then it wouldnt encourage me to buy it.

I would totally be for the option of "zones"- in essence this does exuist already under Network One but probs needs a bit more streamlining- as you say give people the choice of (sorry to sound like a slogan)- travel where they want (zones), when they want (sure theres an argument for peak/offpeak) and how they want (some people have better connections just Metro, some Metro and bus, some may even be Northern services (would include Northumberland line in this equation now).

We have the infrastructure there to do it (Metro IS better with new trains, buses are (as a rule) getting better (well seeing investment at least) so just need someone to "join the dots" and people may at least "think" about using the network

(Yesterday, 1:11 pm)Kimlfixit wrote Better route planning and adapting to changing travel patterns matters, no argument there. But you can't do that everywhere as the costs would be enormous for very little guaranteed return.

I'd actually argue Out-of-town business parks are a good example of where land use and transport planning have worked against buses for decades. For example, they are all built with huge car parks. If you get off a bus at Cobalt, you have further to walk to your office than a car user. Buses are already losing before a single business moves in! 

But that doesn’t negate the role of bus priority. Even where routes do serve major employment sites, buses still have to travel through congested corridors to get there. If those sections are slow and unreliable, people won’t switch, regardless of how well the final destination is served. 

It’s also worth recognising a behavioural factor: many car users value privacy, control, and not having to share space with strangers. That preference didn’t disappear, it’s been a constant since car ownership became widespread. To overcome that, buses have to be not just available, but clearly reliable and time-competitive. 

The Mayors fares have clearly helped to some degree as passenger numbers are 8% higher apparently, but that only helps so much.

Mode shift isn’t achieved by a single intervention. It needs viable routes, competitive journey times, and reliability. Bus lanes don’t solve everything, but without them, buses struggle to compete with cars even when the routes are well designed. See TfL average bus speeds!

I just wanted to highlight two elements of your reply. 

A number of these business parks, actually have a shortage of spaces. 
Competitions are held, for winners to access prime spots or even guaranteed spaces. 
Rainton Bridge had to build a brand new car park. 
Doxford International, have cars parked on access roads.

On the second point, Durham Road has bus lanes/priority measures between The Angel and the Tyne Bridge, since the early 90s.
Despite the A1 being widened and improved (to cope with the traffic which exists because buses don't) and the flow moving away from Low Fell, I see absolutely no major improvement in journey times over the last 35 years.
They're slow and probably more unreliable than they were.

(Yesterday, 3:43 pm)Andreos1 wrote I just wanted to highlight two elements of your reply. 

A number of these business parks, actually have a shortage of spaces. 
Competitions are held, for winners to access prime spots or even guaranteed spaces. 
Rainton Bridge had to build a brand new car park. 
Doxford International, have cars parked on access roads.

On the second point, Durham Road has bus lanes/priority measures between The Angel and the Tyne Bridge, since the early 90s.
Despite the A1 being widened and improved (to cope with the traffic which exists because buses don't) and the flow moving away from Low Fell, I see absolutely no major improvement in journey times over the last 35 years.
They're slow and probably more unreliable than they were.

On the business parks point, the parking shortages actually reinforce the argument rather than undermine it. If car demand already exceeds supply, that’s precisely the scenario where viable alternatives are needed. But people won’t switch unless buses are competitive on reliability and journey time, which brings us back to priority and congestion on the wider network, not just the final mile.

On Durham Road, limited stretches of bus lane don’t equate to continuous priority. If buses still have to negotiate multiple congested junctions, general traffic lanes, and mixed-running sections, the overall journey remains slow and unreliable. 

That’s why isolated priority measures rarely deliver dramatic improvements on their own.

More broadly, the lack of improvement over decades reflects the growth in traffic volumes overwhelming piecemeal interventions. That’s not evidence bus priority doesn’t work, it’s evidence it hasn’t been applied consistently or extensively enough to offset rising car use.

With price rises are all being held to randsom?

Electric Vehicles and other buses give bus company significant fuel savings per mile so the bus companies are running on reduced overheads funded by the North East Mayor and central government as taxpayers but they still use the excuse that fares need to increase?

Same as the metros if we have half of the new metro in service they will have a massive saving in being more efficient - shouldnt this mean the price per mile should decrease and our fares should decrease too! Or am I living in a cooo kooo land

(Yesterday, 4:14 pm)Kimlfixit wrote On the business parks point, the parking shortages actually reinforce the argument rather than undermine it. If car demand already exceeds supply, that’s precisely the scenario where viable alternatives are needed. But people won’t switch unless buses are competitive on reliability and journey time, which brings us back to priority and congestion on the wider network, not just the final mile.

On Durham Road, limited stretches of bus lane don’t equate to continuous priority. If buses still have to negotiate multiple congested junctions, general traffic lanes, and mixed-running sections, the overall journey remains slow and unreliable. 

That’s why isolated priority measures rarely deliver dramatic improvements on their own.

More broadly, the lack of improvement over decades reflects the growth in traffic volumes overwhelming piecemeal interventions. That’s not evidence bus priority doesn’t work, it’s evidence it hasn’t been applied consistently or extensively enough to offset rising car use.

On the business park front, I agree public transport is needed. That's why I have mentioned it a number of times. 
However it goes back to the network going to places the public want at an affordable price.
Not necessarily bus priority. 
Bus priority won't fix the lack of a direct bus to/from Seaham to Doxford International or the lack of any bus that will get someone to Quorum from Walker. 
They're just going to continue to fight for spaces or hope they win a competition. 

Unfortunately, the lay of the land through Low Fell will dictate how any bus lanes or priorities work.
They're there, they have been for 35 years and haven't made any huge difference. 
I'd argue the lay of the land for the vast majority of the North East would dictate any priority measures were designed similarly. 
If that means they will only ever be 'piecemeal', then the ROI will never be achieved. 

Unless a new road is put in to place, such as Centre Link or something is done to a main road, such as the Wardley Bus Gate. 
Neither of which have stood the test of time or justified the investment made. 

What would you suggest would work?

(Yesterday, 7:41 pm)Andreos1 wrote What would you suggest would work?

Traffic shouldn't be going through Low Fell, full stop, the locals should be using buses heading towards Newcastle; non-locals have no reason to go through there, at all, bar rat running Heworth/Whitemare Pool or the A1 traffic. 

There's nothing else along there for substantial traffic to be using it.

Same discussion for Bensham Road and Old Durham Road (excluding the hospital). If you want to improve the buses then you need to fix the car bottlenecks ie. Heworth, Whitemare Pool, the A1 etc.

It's the same North of the Tyne with Cowgate being a shambles, aswell.

Surprised Askew Road has been mentioned yet!