Intercity Railfares After HSR Liberalisation in Spain: Price Patterns in the Madrid–Barcelona Corridor

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The research design is well-structured, effectively utilizing granular fare data and combining descriptive statistical analysis with event study methodology to examine the impact of competition on Renfe's pricing strategies. However, I have several concerns:

1. Did the study account for external factors like COVID-19 or economic policies that might affect fare changes?
2. How were long-term trends in fare adjustments considered beyond immediate competitive responses?
3. Were seasonal variations or promotional activities factored into the analysis of pricing strategies?
4. Could the theoretical framework be strengthened to better explain observed pricing behaviors?
5. What implications do the findings hold for policymakers and industry stakeholders?
6. The parameters are important for a model. Do the authors use any methodology to fine-tune the parameters, such as DOI: 10.3390/math13071158

Author Response

Thank you very much for your positive comments. Please find a reply below:

COMMENT 1. Did the study account for external factors like COVID-19 or economic policies that might affect fare changes?

Reply: Yes. The COVID period was taken into account (see line 152 onwards), but it mainly affected demand, nor fares.  

COMMENT 2. How were long-term trends in fare adjustments considered beyond immediate competitive responses?

Reply: The long-term effects are limited to the analysis period for which we have data. We are currently working on an expanded database (using web scraping techniques) to be able to analyse effects over three and five years.

COMMENT 3. Were seasonal variations or promotional activities factored into the analysis of pricing strategies?

Reply: Yes. Seasonal variations should affect all competitors in a similar way. This is not the case with promotional tariffs, which are precisely a result of the competition that our paper seeks to illustrate.

COMMENT 4. Could the theoretical framework be strengthened to better explain observed pricing behaviors?

Reply: Yes. We have included a brief theoretical framework discussion in the paper.

COMMENT 5. What implications do the findings hold for policymakers and industry stakeholders?

Reply: We have included this in the discussion section.

COMMENT 6. The parameters are important for a model. Do the authors use any methodology to fine-tune the parameters, such as DOI: 10.3390/math13071158

Reply: Yes, we considered that possibility, but the limited number of variables did not allow us to conduct a more in-depth analysis. However, the variables used are similar to those in other studies in this literature.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper analyses the evolution of the prices of intercity high-speed rail ser-8 vices (HSR) operated by the Spanish public company Renfe on the Madrid-Barcelona 9 route between April 2019 and June 2022. Some improvements need to be made before it can be further considered.

• Do you have any updated statistical data? After all, it's already 2025 and the analysis data is only available until 2022?
• In the analysis of research status, it is recommended to add references from the past 3 years.
• Some language descriptions in the article are suggested to be simplified. Somes are too detailed but not strongly related to the main theme of the article.
• Many of the data in the manuscript only provide simple descriptions of statistical data, which is more traditional. Is there any more scientific method to further analyze it in depth.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments. Please find below a response to them.

COMMENT 1. Do you have any updated statistical data? After all, it's already 2025 and the analysis data is only available until 2022?

Reply. Yes. We recognise that this is one of the main limitations of the paper. The data for the period analysed is not public. We acquired it from a company (DATAMARKET) that compiled it from daily information published on the railway companies' websites. When we requested data for subsequent periods, we were told that one of the competing companies in the sector had purchased it with an exclusivity clause. We began our own web scraping in January 2024 in order to obtain information for a future expansion of the study. 

COMMENT 2. In the analysis of research status, it is recommended to add references from the past 3 years.

Reply. Ok. We have re-reviewed the literature and added a few more. Thanks

COMMENT 3. Some language descriptions in the article are suggested to be simplified. Somes are too detailed but not strongly related to the main theme of the article.

Reply. It is difficult to answer this question because the reviewer does not provide specific references. However, we have reviewed the paper in general, attempting to correct these distortions as much as possible.

COMMENT 4. Many of the data in the manuscript only provide simple descriptions of statistical data, which is more traditional. Is there any more scientific method to further analyze it in depth.

Reply. Yes. We agree that the technical sophistication of the work is not excessive, but from the outset we recognise that this is an exploratory analysis of pricing patterns for a phenomenon that is entirely new in Spain (competition in high-speed rail). We believe that, despite its limited scope, the results presented may be of interest.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The central research question of this paper is: How did the incumbent operator Renfe adjust its pricing strategy on the Madrid-Barcelona high-speed rail corridor in anticipation and response to the entry of the first private competitor, Ouigo?

More specifically, the study investigates whether Renfe changed its pricing behavior before and after the route liberalization and whether these changes varied by customer segment based on willingness to pay.

The topic is both original and highly relevant, particularly in the context of the European Union's broader transport policy aimed at liberalizing rail markets. The Spanish high-speed rail market has been closely watched due to its size, strategic importance, and potential as a model for similar liberalizations across Europe. This study directly addresses a gap in the literature by providing empirical evidence of how a public monopoly reacts to market liberalization, focusing specifically on pricing strategies across consumer segments. Such detailed disaggregation by willingness to pay (WTP) is a novel and valuable addition to the field.

These contributions go beyond anecdotal or qualitative assessments found in some previous literature and provide a robust empirical basis for policy and business strategy discussions.

Yes, the conclusions are consistent with the evidence presented. The timing of Renfe’s price reductions and structural adjustments in tariffs correlates logically with the anticipation of Ouigo’s entry and its actual market debut. The paper's claim that Renfe adjusted its pricing strategy preemptively is backed by clearly defined timeframes and fare data trends.

However, the discussion would benefit from a stronger link back to the theoretical framework or literature on competitive behavior in liberalized markets. For instance, are the observed behaviors aligned with classical models of monopoly response (e.g., limit pricing, price discrimination, or market segmentation strategies)? The authors should ensure they include both academic sources and policy papers, particularly from European transport authorities, to strengthen the paper's foundation.

Author Response

The central research question of this paper is: How did the incumbent operator Renfe adjust its pricing strategy on the Madrid-Barcelona high-speed rail corridor in anticipation and response to the entry of the first private competitor, Ouigo?

More specifically, the study investigates whether Renfe changed its pricing behavior before and after the route liberalization and whether these changes varied by customer segment based on willingness to pay.

The topic is both original and highly relevant, particularly in the context of the European Union's broader transport policy aimed at liberalizing rail markets. The Spanish high-speed rail market has been closely watched due to its size, strategic importance, and potential as a model for similar liberalizations across Europe. This study directly addresses a gap in the literature by providing empirical evidence of how a public monopoly reacts to market liberalization, focusing specifically on pricing strategies across consumer segments. Such detailed disaggregation by willingness to pay (WTP) is a novel and valuable addition to the field.

These contributions go beyond anecdotal or qualitative assessments found in some previous literature and provide a robust empirical basis for policy and business strategy discussions.

The conclusions are consistent with the evidence presented. The timing of Renfe’s price reductions and structural adjustments in tariffs correlates logically with the anticipation of Ouigo’s entry and its actual market debut. The paper's claim that Renfe adjusted its pricing strategy preemptively is backed by clearly defined timeframes and fare data trends.

However, the discussion would benefit from a stronger link back to the theoretical framework or literature on competitive behavior in liberalized markets. For instance, are the observed behaviors aligned with classical models of monopoly response (e.g., limit pricing, price discrimination, or market segmentation strategies)? The authors should ensure they include both academic sources and policy papers, particularly from European transport authorities, to strengthen the paper's foundation.

Reply. Thank you very much. We have addressed this final concern by reinforcing the literature review section

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Does the introduction provide sufficient background and include all relevant references?   The introduction to the article must describe the purpose, objectives, research methods, object of the study, research methods, and novelty of the study.
Is the research design appropriate?   The article must describe the research methodology in more detail.
Are the methods adequately described? The research methods need to be described more clearly and and present in detail
Are the results clearly presented? The results must be described in support of the research objectives. The research objectives are not formulated in detail.
Are the conclusions supported by the results?

Conclusions must be written based on the research objectives.

 

It is recommended to draw a model of Intercity Rail fares after HSR Liberalisation in Spain: Price Patterns in the Madrid-Barcelona corridor.

The list of references has been expanded to include 20 sources that are included in the Scopus or Web of Sciences databases.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments. Please find a response to them below:

COMMENT 1.

1. The introduction to the article must describe the purpose, objectives, research methods, object of the study, research methods, and novelty of the study.
2. The article must describe the research methodology in more detail.
3. The research methods need to be described more clearly and and present in detail
4. The results must be described in support of the research objectives. The research objectives are not formulated in detail.
5. Conclusions must be written based on the research objectives.

We have reviewed all these suggestions and tried to improve each section according to your points. Thanks!

COMMENT 2. It is recommended to draw a model of Intercity Rail fares after HSR Liberalisation in Spain: Price Patterns in the Madrid-Barcelona corridor.

Yes. We now provide a discussion connected with the theoretical models on competitive behavior in liberalized markets. 

COMMENT 3. The list of references has been expanded to include 20 sources that are included in the Scopus or Web of Sciences databases.

Yes. We have added a few more recent references

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have addressed almost all comments.