« the horrors of "transferring" in 1974, and a happier future | Main | "mapnificent": your freedom to roam »

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83454714d69e201348913d66d970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference the peril of low base fares:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

anonymouse

Los Angeles is also one of the few cities that I can think of that doesn't allow free transfers within the rail system. In fact, they don't think of it as a subway system so much as four rail lines that happen to be (minimally) connected, and that's a big part of the problem. It'll be interesting to see how the Regional Connector and through-routing of the Blue/Gold/Expo lines change that attitude.

EngineerScotty

That said, unlike airlines (which compete for the traveller's business), transit agencies in different cities don't really compete with each other. A ticket on LACMTA won't help me get from Fisherman's Wharf to Haight-Ashbury, and a ticket on Muni won't get you from Hollywood to the LA Civic Center. The only reason comparing fares in different cities matters is, as you note, for arguments over which agency is more (in)efficient.

bzcat

Not only does LACMTA insist on charging a base fare for every train ride, they won't even let you buy all the train tickets (for each segment) at the first boarding point. I've resign to the fact that we will not see free transfers within the rail system in LA anytime soon (if ever). But I don't understand why LACMTA wouldn't allow me the option of buying both tickets for my 2-rail ride at the first point of boarding. TAP card kind of address this point but most people in LA do not use TAP. The need to buy a 2nd ticket at the transfer point is a huge impediment to more wide spread use of our rail system.

anonymouse

With airlines, there have actually been cases where a ticket from A to C costs substantially more than a ticket from A to B via C, and people would buy tickets from A to B with a connection and just not use the second part of the ticket. It makes a kind of sense: C is probably the airline's hub, which means the airline has a very large presence there, possibly a near-monopoly. And that means they can charge higher prices for flights to or from C, while they still have to compete for the A to B market.

Scott

@Jarrett: Perhaps you have addressed this in the past, but I wonder what your thoughts are about the practice in Japan and the PRC/Hong Kong (and I imagine elsewhere) of charging metro fares by specific distance travelled, as compared with all-inclusively or by zones? I have seen this mentioned as a hypothetical option for the Vancouver area Skytrain system, in connection with the plan to install fare gates and "smart cards" by 2013. My concern (or suspicion) is that the current base fare would become a new "one or two stations" fare, with a third station becoming 1.5 times the old amoung, four stations 2 times, and so on. On the other hand, people who currently travel just one or two stations but cross a boundary and so pay a higher fare write positively about the idea.

Scott

Hmmm...actually, it seems the idea is not as hypothetical as I was thinking:

Translink proposes smart cards tapped in and out at fare gates as, among other things, "open[ing] the way toward a ‘user-friendly’ and innovative fare policy that will maximize the ability to attract and retain riders and promote increased ridership on underutilized portions of the transit system." (http://www.translink.ca/en/About-TransLink/Media/2009/April/Timing-is-right-for-fare-gates-on-SkyTrain.aspx). This seems to indicate a pay-by-distance and/or pay-by-line-popularity, system. Again, I would be curious about your thoughts on this. Could or has the same kind of pay-by-distance, tap-in-tap-out system been used for buses?

EngineerScotty



With airlines, there have actually been cases where a ticket from A to C costs substantially more than a ticket from A to B via C, and people would buy tickets from A to B with a connection and just not use the second part of the ticket. It makes a kind of sense: C is probably the airline's hub, which means the airline has a very large presence there, possibly a near-monopoly. And that means they can charge higher prices for flights to or from C, while they still have to compete for the A to B market.

Not only that, but the airlines used to permit you to travel round-trip in this fashion--not caring that you didn't make the trip from C to B or B to C, and letting you board the return flight back to A.

Nowadays, if you fail to take the second part of your outbound journey (without a Very Good Reason), the remainder of your ticket (i.e. your return trip) is cancelled without refund.

Nathan Williams

Scott: Your "elsewhere" of fares by distance includes the Washington, DC metro system, and it also includes different peak and off-peak fares, with a total range from about $2-$5.

Paul K McGregor

Don't forget BART is distance based as well but they don't charge a peak/off peak fare.

Alon Levy

Scott, the fare isn't proportional to distance in any city I know of. In cities with distance-based fares, usually there's a minimum amount plus an extra per distance traveled, like on a taxi. For example, Shanghai charges RMB3 plus RMB1 for every additional 10 km. It's actually a simpler scheme than in cities with unlimited monthly discounts.

Cities like Shanghai and Singapore don't advertise a headline fare, because it depends on distance so much. Online aggregators differ on how to treat them; the one I know about gives the fare for a trip of 10 km or 10 stations, depending on how the fare is calculated.

Art Busman

I'd have to disagree that "budget airlines" charge fees for all kinds of things compared to the major airlines. Southwest allows 2 free checked bags and JetBlue allows 1 free checked bags compared to all the major US airlines that charge for checked bags. All the major airlines now charge for food. I'm not aware of anything Southwest or JetBlue charge for above and beyond the major US airlines. They also charge more for direct flights because you are avoiding their hubs and in the airline and package delivery business, directing things through major hubs is more cost effective for them.

Nicholas Barnard

I think the problem with distance based fares with smart cards is remembering to tap on the way out, especially on systems like Sound Transit's Central Link in Seattle where there is no access control.

Also the fact that agencies aren't looking at A to C trips and are instead seeing A to B then B to C is problematic. I remember asking Jack Latterman, a transit planner in Seattle, if they were looking forward to the additional information they'd gain from our smart card system and he said not really. I was kinda shocked given that I'd think it would be a goldmine of data, seeing unexpected transfers people are making that could be timed better etc.

Jarrett at HumanTransit.org

For the record, I very much look forward to good smartcard data from cities where I work!  Location information about boardings/alightings is especially important, as are records of connection activity.

david vartanoff

From my POV lack of free transfers and distance based fares are de facto redlining of neighborhoods. The WMATA and BART systems compound this by making feeder bus usage a further charge. Given that fares have almost no relation to the actual cost of the trip in question, high fares and transfer surcharges are simply disincentives to use. In the SF Bay Area, each agency has different fare policies making longer trips confusing and unnecessarily expensive compared to similar mileages in say Chicago or New York.

Alon Levy

Art: the full-fare/budget airline distinction doesn't really exist in the US. All airlines have changed their service levels to some medium level. But in the rest of the world, budget airlines are considerably worse - they charge for everything, have very low seat pitch, are assholes about carry-ons, and force you to buy a new ticket if you miss a connecting flight.

anty

I seem to remember a poll from metro on whether people would like to pay more (I think it was $2.25) and have free transfers or not.

The comments to this entry are closed.

the firm

Jarrett is now in ...

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...