Off peak fare structure

[ozbob]

It is time that some improvements were made to off peak fare structure IMHO.   Presently the evening weekday window for off peak is 7pm to 2am.  I would like to see that changed to 7pm to 7am.  The present discount is 15%, to increase to 20% from next January.  I would like to see that increased to 30%.

I believe this would assist in driving up public transport utilisation outside the core peaks, and makes travel more attractive at weekends.  Some service frequency improvements would help as well as course. (Weekday daily off peak is 9am to 3.30pm).

I think it is better directly in terms of fare box, and in the broader economic benefit to have a train carrying 400 pax at a 30% discount, rather than a train with 100 pax with a 15% discount.

If you think about it for a while, long haul commuters who touch on prior to 7am would get a benefit, but it could be looked at as a compensation of sorts for loss for the previous paper periodicals.

[somebody]

Although I would have to say that the Melbourne 100% discount for touch offs before 7am hasn't resulted in a reduction in overcrowding.  Perhaps it has resulted in an increase in utilisation of the rail network, which is a good thing.

[Cam]

How about thinking about this issue from a different perspective? Perhaps the peak periods on the Ipswich Line should match those periods when there are express services running in the direction of travel. i.e. 1.5 hour period AM inbound & 1.5 hour period PM outbound. All other times including counter peak travel should be classed as off peak as a form of compensation for lack of frequent express services. 

Seriously, I think that touching on before 7am should not qualify at off peak. I think that too large a proportion of commuters from outer suburbs already touch on before 7am anyway. Also, the majority of commuters travelling to Brisbane CBD from the Gold & Sunshine Coasts would also already touch on before 7am. Using 7am as the cut-off would lead to serious overcrowding of services around this time.

The way to encourage commuters to move from crowded peak services is to have frequent express services in the shoulder peak periods. I think that if there were frequent express services on the Ipswich Line over a 3 hour period rather than the current 1.5 hour period, more commuters would be attracted to the shoulder peak periods.

Scheduling express services to outer suburbs from the first, until the last service of the day & all day on weekends would attract more people from outer suburbs to use public transport in off peak periods.

[Fares_Fair]

I selected the 30% discount and off peak period touch-on before 7:00am.
Who wouldn't select a better discount ?
My taxes contribute to the rest.

The option of the off-peak period at 7:00am would result in a 15% discount (including overall costs) for long-haul commuters.
i.e. they would be able to get the 30% discount in the morning, and none in the afternoon peak, except after 7:00pm under this proposal.

It really does not compare with the discounts provided under the old 6 and 12 month tickets, but that was because the money was paid in advance.

I doubt if this would force long-haul commuters to wait for a later (post 7:00pm) service due to the length of their (our) already long day.
It would be intreresting to model its impact on commuter behaviour.
Can QR do that type of thing ?

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[somebody]

If you think about it for a while, long haul commuters who touch on prior to 7am would get a benefit, but it could be looked at as a compensation of sorts for loss for the previous paper periodicals.

Didn't notice this before, but as Cam says, it has to be journeys COMPLETED before 7am attract the discount.

[Fares_Fair]

It is time that some improvements were made to off peak fare structure IMHO.   Presently the evening weekday window for off peak is 7pm to 2am.  I would like to see that changed to 7pm to 7am.  The present discount is 15%, to increase to 20% from next January.  I would like to see that increased to 30%.

I believe this would assist in driving up public transport utilisation outside the core peaks, and makes travel more attractive at weekends.  Some service frequency improvements would help as well as course. (Weekday daily off peak is 9am to 3.30pm).

I think it is better directly in terms of fare box, and in the broader economic benefit to have a train carrying 400 pax at a 30% discount, rather than a train with 100 pax with a 15% discount.

If you think about it for a while, long haul commuters who touch on prior to 7am would get a benefit, but it could be looked at as a compensation of sorts for loss for the previous paper periodicals.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[Derwan]

Any pre-peak discounts need to be based on touch-off time, not touch-on.  Otherwise people who live further out would effectively get an off-peak discount for arriving during the peak period.

[Fares_Fair]

But that is not what this poll is saying.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[somebody]

But that is not what this poll is saying.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

Not sure why we would argue for off peak discounts for touch ons before 7am.  It has obvious faults as pointed out in this thread.  Isn't picking up these faults the point of the forum?

[Derwan]

Having the pre-peak discount based on the touch-off time is a no-brainer.  (I'm surprised Bob suggested it be based on touch ON.)

You can't give an off-peak discount to people arriving on crowded trains during the peak period.  That would just be daft.

You would also have the situation where one person would pay an off-peak fare, while another person would pay full fare despite the fact that they both arrived on the same overcrowded train during peak - simply because person 1 lives further out and jumped on the train just before 7am.

[somebody]

For the record I only voted for the 7pm-7am off peak on the assumption that the -7am would be touch off.  Poll question doesn't state it, only the text of the OP.  Since you are being contentious about this, I was going to change my vote, but it isn't allowed.

[Fares_Fair]

Having the pre-peak discount based on the touch-off time is a no-brainer.  (I'm surprised Bob suggested it be based on touch ON.)

You can't give an off-peak discount to people arriving on crowded trains during the peak period.  That would just be daft.

You would also have the situation where one person would pay an off-peak fare, while another person would pay full fare despite the fact that they both arrived on the same overcrowded train during peak - simply because person 1 lives further out and jumped on the train just before 7am.

Ozbob started this poll, and his explanation is as written.
I would not use the word daft for anything ozbob says or does.
I answered it on the basis of the explanation given at the top of the post. If that is incorrect then the poll needs to be restarted with a correct explanation.
With respect Derwan, as a Global Moderator, you need to consult with ozbob to confirm the intent of the poll.

Should the explanation be incorrect, then my vote is declared null and void.
Further, this would be of no benefit in replacing 6 and 12 month periodical tickets as per ozbob's quote;
"but it could be looked at as a compensation of sorts for loss for the previous paper periodicals."

This line suggests the intent of the poll would stand.
If it's a miscommunication error (and I am well familiar with those), we are all human.

Kind regards,
Fares_Fair.

[somebody]

FF, so you are saying that you wouldn't support a 30% off peak discount if it didn't apply to touch on's before 7am??

[ozbob]

No the intention is touch on, the go card system is apparently unable to work on a touch off basis.  If and when touch off is possible then lets consider it but for now as written.

Off peak fares are presently 'touch on', just suggesting changing the 2am to 7am.  As I said would be a compensator of sorts for anyone who touches on before 7am. Poll is not invalid.

[ozbob]

Otherwise people who live further out would effectively get an off-peak discount for arriving during the peak period.

Exactly, that is the intent.  The loss of periodical tickets has impacted significantly on those living further out.  A reduction in the morning fare would be a fair compensation without the hassles of introducing another layer of ticketing.  It also will drive some general early travel as well.

[somebody]

Otherwise people who live further out would effectively get an off-peak discount for arriving during the peak period.

Exactly, that is the intent.  The loss of periodical tickets has impacted significantly on those living further out.  A reduction in the morning fare would be a fair compensation without the hassles of introducing another layer of ticketing.  It also will drive some general early travel as well.

Can we have a remove vote option?

[ozbob]

Sure.

Might help if folks actually read the intent ...

If you think about it for a while, long haul commuters who touch on prior to 7am would get a benefit, but it could be looked at as a compensation of sorts for loss for the previous paper periodicals.

[Derwan]

Ozbob started this poll, and his explanation is as written.
I would not use the word daft for anything ozbob says or does.
I answered it on the basis of the explanation given at the top of the post. If that is incorrect then the poll needs to be restarted with a correct explanation.
With respect Derwan, as a Global Moderator, you need to consult with ozbob to confirm the intent of the poll.

I wasn't questioning Bob's intent.  I was giving my opinion on how a discount should or should not be applied.

Bob has now clarified the question and the reasoning behind it.  My opinion is that if the system cannot provide the discount based on touch-off time, we are better off not having a pre-peak discount at all.  Yes - I think having a pre-peak discount based on touch-on time would be daft.

As for "compensation" for the removal of periodicals, I think this would create a political storm.  Why should those living further out get a discount and not those living closer?  It would be seen as an unfair discount.

[ozbob]

You could also argue that a 9am off peak start is also unfair.  It depends on your perspective.  In Sydney I recall that someouter areas have an earlier start for off peak than closer in.  It matters little there will always be winners and losers no matter what you do.  I don't have a problem with a universal off peak window (touch on 7pm to 7am).  The gain in morning for some is balanced out by other issues.

The whole purpose is to maximise off peak travel.  The numbers of long haul commuters is not that significant in the big picture.  Most trips on TL network are 1 and 2 zones ..

The Melbourne 'experiment' for free travel on rail services that are scheduled to arrive in the CBD by 7am is also unfair as well for some.  But that is life, the overall community benefit is what is behind it  (the major failing with this of course is that it is rail only, and if you recall the LNP wanted to do that last state election in Qld, tantamount to shooting yourself in the foot in Brisbane ...).

[ozbob]

But thanks for the responses, there is a clear message that some improvements to off peak fares are needed.

[somebody]

Yes - I think having a pre-peak discount based on touch-on time would be daft.

+1

You could also argue that a 9am off peak start is also unfair. 

I guess you could, but only if it's based on touch on time.  Much fairer if it's based on touch off time.  Although even that creates anomalies in through town trips.

[ozbob]

Yes - I think having a pre-peak discount based on touch-on time would be daft.

+1

Maybe, but that is what we have now.  9am to 3.30pm.  Shock horror, many who touch on at 3.29pm are travelling into peak with only an off peak fare!

Nothing stopping a punter from touching on at 1.59am, catching a few hours sleep and heading off now is there?  LOL  Although I think these entrepreneurs would be fairly rare ..

[somebody]

Don't you have to touch off with in a certain number of hours (3.5?).

Shock horror, many who touch on at 3.29pm are travelling into peak with only an off peak fare!

Interesting point.  Yes, it is true that the improved service starts before 3:30pm.  And ends before 7pm.  Looks like the hours could be reviewed.

[ozbob]

Don't you have to touch off with in a certain number of hours (3.5?).

3.5 hours for last transfer, 5 hours total journey time.

[ozbob]

The real problem is the go card, and the apparent difficulty in programming it for touch off, off peak algorithms.  Seems the same story with periodicals as well as they are time based.   It can be done on go card but will require a lot of work as I understand it (and presumably expense), hence other simple alternatives to improve the fare structure need to be considered.  Changing the present 7pm to 2am window to 7pm to 7am is one way of doing that.

If you think about the go card none of the current fare elements are time based elapsed time calculations as such at the moment (other than transfers which are just simple additions).  The off peak is just a set time point for a trip ( is the trip before say 3.30pm or not? etc). The journey cap is just a simple counter.  The programming for transfers seems to be embedded in the software and comes as a standard feature.

[ozbob]

Which brings me to this conclusion.  We are not going to see periodical tickets on the go card.  What might be an option is a monthly journey cap eg. Myway style, as the go card seems to be unable to handle periodical sort of algorithms at the moment.  The 50% after 10 journeys is simple, although they did have some basic logic errors if you recall, for example if you wore a fixed fare on journey 9 the counter was reset.  That was fixed up.

So what if?  After 40 journeys in a month travel was free?  (40 is just 10 x 4 for an example)

Myway has these:

http://www.transport.act.gov.au/myway/fares.html

MyWay Fare Conditions

Please note that a 36 paid trip cap (26 paid trip cap for school students) applies for the calendar month with all subsequent travel that month free if you tag on and off.

You can receive a further 5% discount using MyWay if you top-up your card via autoload (direct debit) and BPAY.

A condition of travel using a MyWay card requires passengers to tag on and off the bus. This process provides valuable travel data to better plan bus services. Following a transition period until 31 December 2011, if you do not tag off you will be charged the standard cash fare for the trip ($4.00 for adults and $2.00 for concession).

You can transfer to another bus within 90 minutes from time of boarding the first bus at no additional cost.

Off Peak: Weekdays 9am - 4.30pm and after 6pm until last service, as well as all day weekends and public holidays

[BrizCommuter]

  Why should those living further out get a discount and not those living closer?  It would be seen as an unfair discount.

They already do in terms of price/km!

[Fares_Fair]

FF, so you are saying that you wouldn't support a 30% off peak discount if it didn't apply to touch on's before 7am??

No.
I think we need to encourage off-peak use.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[Stillwater]

1.  Having a discount applying to those who touch on before 7am is UNIVERSAL -- it applies to all
2.  It is easy to implement.  (See Ozbob's observations above)
3.  It would contain the costs of applying this measure, to below those that would apply if some sort of periodical fare structure were introduced
4.  It is politically attractive and politically defensible
5.  It may even cause a bidding war between ALP and LNP, one saying a 25 per cent discount would apply, another that it would be 30 per cent, etc
6.  It is defensible from a policy perspective also, in that it would be seen to be encouraging greater public transport use while introducing innovation to the fare structure.

As to arguments about cost.  It seems strange to me that those who pay $5 to get to and from their inner-city home via a short journey to a station with 15 minute service frequency would be envious of those who will be paying $8000 a year soon to catch a train that comes every hour off peak, or may even be a bus that takes 50 per cent longer for the same journey and risk fainting or falling from their train, or standing for an hour to catch a peak-hour service.

[Derwan]

Maybe, but that is what we have now.  9am to 3.30pm.  Shock horror, many who touch on at 3.29pm are travelling into peak with only an off peak fare!

The difference in the PM is that the direction is outbound.  It's better if people touch on at 3:29 because it means they'll be out of the city before the crowds arrive.

Yes I realise that someone could touch on outside of the city and go THROUGH the city at peak - ending up on a peak service.  But I'm talking like-for-like.  I'm talking about the majority of travellers (i.e. to/from the city).

[dwb]

No the intention is touch on, the go card system is apparently unable to work on a touch off basis.  If and when touch off is possible then lets consider it but for now as written.

Off peak fares are presently 'touch on', just suggesting changing the 2am to 7am.  As I said would be a compensator of sorts for anyone who touches on before 7am. Poll is not invalid.

I am, and have always been, STRONGLY AGAINST THIS for the reasons stated by others above. We SHOULD NOT be giving an offpeak discount to long distance passengers in peak, simply because they are long distance passengers.

If you look at the changes to the fare tables over the years there are already two things that account for a long distance subsidy, increasing zone size and a relative discount on the cost in the fare table... I will publish some numbers to support this later today.

I am fully in support of significantly INCREASING the offpeak discount, to say 50% cost of peak, however this would require the existing time definition to remain. As such I voted other.

[dwb]

Otherwise people who live further out would effectively get an off-peak discount for arriving during the peak period.

Exactly, that is the intent.  The loss of periodical tickets has impacted significantly on those living further out.  A reduction in the morning fare would be a fair compensation without the hassles of introducing another layer of ticketing.  It also will drive some general early travel as well.

This has part, but not fully removed an overly large and inequitable subsidy to a small proportion of long distance train only passengers... the ones who could afford to stump up the money for 6 and 12 month tickets. We should not be giving things cheaper to people just because they can pay a year in advance... this is actually counter any low income living on the fringe discount.

I strongly believe this forum should adjust its priorities, the whinging of long distance passengers about their raw deal is driving me mad.

[dwb]

Maybe, but that is what we have now.  9am to 3.30pm.  Shock horror, many who touch on at 3.29pm are travelling into peak with only an off peak fare!

The difference in the PM is that the direction is outbound.  It's better if people touch on at 3:29 because it means they'll be out of the city before the crowds arrive.

Yes I realise that someone could touch on outside of the city and go THROUGH the city at peak - ending up on a peak service.  But I'm talking like-for-like.  I'm talking about the majority of travellers (i.e. to/from the city).

+1 Fully agree Derwan.

[dwb]

1.  Having a discount applying to those who touch on before 7am is UNIVERSAL -- it applies to all
2.  It is easy to implement.  (See Ozbob's observations above)
3.  It would contain the costs of applying this measure, to below those that would apply if some sort of periodical fare structure were introduced
4.  It is politically attractive and politically defensible
5.  It may even cause a bidding war between ALP and LNP, one saying a 25 per cent discount would apply, another that it would be 30 per cent, etc
6.  It is defensible from a policy perspective also, in that it would be seen to be encouraging greater public transport use while introducing innovation to the fare structure.

As to arguments about cost.  It seems strange to me that those who pay $5 to get to and from their inner-city home via a short journey to a station with 15 minute service frequency would be envious of those who will be paying $8000 a year soon to catch a train that comes every hour off peak, or may even be a bus that takes 50 per cent longer for the same journey and risk fainting or falling from their train, or standing for an hour to catch a peak-hour service.

Cut the melodrama, and no I'm not envious, but I am sick of paying for your travel/lifestyle choices.

[dwb]

Also, I think that the Clem07 article and my comments on this other thread here http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=4767.msg61630#msg61630 are relevant to this discussion.

[dwb]

Which brings me to this conclusion.  We are not going to see periodical tickets on the go card.  What might be an option is a monthly journey cap eg. Myway style, as the go card seems to be unable to handle periodical sort of algorithms at the moment.  The 50% after 10 journeys is simple, although they did have some basic logic errors if you recall, for example if you wore a fixed fare on journey 9 the counter was reset.  That was fixed up.

So what if?  After 40 journeys in a month travel was free?  (40 is just 10 x 4 for an example)

I think after 40 journeys is a bad idea. Any previous "free" trips were restricted to the zones you bought the ticket for, go card doesn't have that.

[ozbob]

I strongly believe this forum should adjust its priorities, the whinging of long distance passengers about their raw deal is driving me mad.

Forums are places where people express different view points, just because you don't agree with some view points doesn't make them any less important than your own.  Learn to live and let live a little.  You state your case, there is no need to shoot the messenger.

[dwb]

I strongly believe this forum should adjust its priorities, the whinging of long distance passengers about their raw deal is driving me mad.

Forums are places where people express different view points, just because you don't agree with some view points doesn't make them any less important than your own.  Learn to live and let live a little.  You state your case, there is no need to shoot the messenger.

Yes I understand that Bob, but you have strongly taken a stance in support of a small group of vocal people and are presumably going to be pushing that perspective to the detriment of a much larger proportion of people and upon disagreement of a lot of people on this forum, in the restricted forum that is the Ministerial consultation group and in the media and under the name of RBOT (and implying its members/contributors to).

I have no problem with a range of perspectives, but the barrow you are pushing here is a very narrow one indeed, just because FF likes it cos he'll all of a sudden be paying less, doesn't make it good policy. This forum should be about good sensible policy, not popular with one segment of the community policy.

[ozbob]

I have not taken a stance either way, I simply posted a poll and wanted to test feedback.

Many people would disagree with your 50% off peak fare price.  But that matters not to me or presumably to you, as it is another good idea.

What I think, what you think is not going to determine the outcome.  The present policy is clear for all to see, 20% next January and that's all folks.

I am sure the community representatives will have their views.

The one constant we get feedback on is the fare structure.  Public feedback on blogs etc. is overwhelming and I have advice from the authorities it is also their greatest source of feedback.  The problem as I posted earlier is the difficulty for the go card system to work on a touch off basis, that would be preferred.  The present timings do advantage some over others. Tough.  Life is like that.  Changes to the timings may advantage others, but don't lose sight of the real purpose, to further improve out of peak travel options and assest utilisation.  Benefits to say 50,000 overall is better, even if a few hundred long distance commuters have a slight gain.

[Stillwater]

There would appear to be two lines of debate developing here – the 'dry' and the 'wet'.  And there is a merger of the notions of dealing with the peak by spreading passenger loads to the shoulder, also the need to look at the fare structure to make it more flexible in the context of (a) encouraging greater rail travel, and (b) providing an alternative to the old paper periodical tickets.

There is nothing wrong with that coalescence, but it just needs to be acknowledged.

The thrusts of the 'drys' is that there be a flagfall and cents per km fare structure by zone and, it is argued, there is an inbuilt 'subsidy' by virtue of the fact that the zonal band expands the further out you go.  This aspect of the dry argument does not pay due attention to the long distances between stations on the Sunshine Coast Line, for instance, and the fact that virtually (although not always) every station further out falls within its own zone.  The zonal arrangements are considered elsewhere on this forum, but having zonal boundaries between stations would be problematic.  If the argument is higher fares in some zones, or fewer zones with higher fares applying in those new zones, that is a consideration, but lies outside the scope of what is being discussed here.

The drys present the case that an extension of the off-peak period and a discount for touch-on before 7am represents a generous concession to those who travel long distance on the rail network in circumstances where those people already enjoy a discount by virtue of the zonal structure.

This line of debate places emphasis on the fare, less so on the fare structure as a means of influencing people's travel pattern and, thereby, maximising the use of the train fleet across the day, but especially at peak periods.  Airlines offer cheaper fares in the middle of the day so as to maximise peak morning and evening flights for business travellers.  Tourists like the cheaper fares in the middle of the day, or mid-week, and adjust their travel accordingly.  Yes, they get a 'discount' for the same journey and level of service that the business traveller gets.  The aim of the airline is to get a bum on every seat in every aircraft.  And, on any one aircraft, passengers sitting side by side would have paid different fares – frequently flyer no-fare, super-saver special fare, early bird payment special, 'normal' airfare, child concession etc.

The same applies on every passenger train in SEQ.  A person might have completed two journeys and then jumps on a train to pay a different fare to an adult paper ticket user, a go-card concession card holder, a student etc.

The idea of a lower fare (across all fare types) for those who touch on before 7am works technically, for reasons explained elsewhere on this thread.  As Ozbob has explained, it is a case of what is practical and workable for all.

The wet line of debate says this concept serves both as compensation for the loss of periodic tickets (a restoration of what was provided previously – albeit in a different form) and also can influence patronage levels on trains so that trains are less crowded and better utilised.

Remember, the objective is to have the crowds spread out across the train services, as they exist, thereby reducing the pressure for more peak hour trains paid for by all taxpayers.  By having people travel on shoulder services, those services have better patronage and, hopefully, fewer people arrive at city stations in the peak.

Now, take a train from the Gold Coast or the Sunshine Coast, for instance.  Passengers needing to arrive at Central in the morning leave home earlier by necessity.  If they touch on before 7am, they get the discount, but have to pay full fare going home.  The wets put the proposition that the opportunity exists for passengers living closer to the city to also touch on before 7am, making the arrival time for these inner-city passengers maybe 7.30am or 7.45am, with the 'far-outer' passengers arriving at Central in the 30 minutes before 9am.  (They have fewer trains, less choices.) The inner-city passengers arriving earlier in the city, and claiming a fare discount, get a more comfortable journey.  The same applies to the far-outer travellers, as fewer passengers will get on their train stops at stations closer to the city; having caught earlier trains.

If the objective is to spread the load, have fewer crowded trains, encourage people to travel in the shoulder period and have a more even flow of passengers through city stations, the touch on before 7am concession has merit and is worthy of further investigation.

The scales should swing from some notion of unfairness, based on differing fares, versus the train operational objectives of making good, efficient use of current trains, as timetabled, to reach an approporiate, and workable, balance.