RAIL - Back On Track Forum

We've had the prices for go card released, yet no details are available for the price of single tickets.
Nevertheless, by using TL's current trend of charging paper tickets 50% more than the current peak go card price, HBU has modelled some possible prices:


While I would think that paper tickets should be more expensive, the extra charge should be just 50c-$1 more for concession and adults for the processing time and paper used over go cards and as an incentive to get a go card. But 50% more is outrageous and makes Brisbane an unattractive place for tourists and those who rarely use public transport. At $4 for an adult in 2014 to go one zone, it is cheaper just to get into a car and drive!

I would also like to see the re-introduction of a weekly and daily fare capping scheme for the go card to encourage regular use.

Im not and Im sure a lot of people will not pay $2.40 to travel 2 concession zones in 2014, its pathetic.

Especially since most of the city hasn't even got better bus services as a result.

Why would anyone want to take the bus or train when it comes every 30mins - an hour, takes forever and then gets stuck in congestion along the SE busway just to get into the city?

In 2005 it cost me $1.04 (or something like that) to get home from school, 2 zone, on the bus 868 and 191/3 as I think ten trip savers were $10.40 for 10 trips as paper tickets were around $1.20-$1.30 at that stage.
If I were still at school, that same trip will now cost me $1.56 on the go card in 2011, or $2.37 in 2014!

So glad I walk to/fro uni. A 5 min bus ride to/fro UQ would cost $2 each way in 2014!

I don't have a huge problem with paper ticket users being screwed, frankly.  Buy a Go Card!  It costs around the price of an adult 3 zone ticket IIRC.

The only real issue is tourists can have difficulty getting the refund from the Go Card.

Do you want me to move this to "Go Card & Fares"?

Might be a good idea 

Quote from: Simon on September 19, 2011, 11:11:47 AM
I don't have a huge problem with paper ticket users being screwed, frankly.  Buy a Go Card!  It costs around the price of an adult 3 zone ticket IIRC.

The only real issue is tourists can have difficulty getting the refund from the Go Card.

Do you want me to move this to "Go Card & Fares"?

Ive had this argument before, tourists arent the problem, most of them do there research and buy a card this issue is australian tourists and idiots. I now use the 199 bus to new farm regularly and the amount of paper ticket users is astonishing. I would be happy for people to stand at each stop and hand out free cards. Its become ridiculous.

Add to that we don't get capping and as a student I refuse to pay over $5 for a return ticket.

Coming to a Translink bus near you in 2015.

Quote from: HappyTrainGuy on September 19, 2011, 16:14:45 PM
Coming to a Translink bus near you in 2015.

...because I hear exhaust fumes are good for you.

Quote from: Golliwog on September 19, 2011, 16:17:33 PM

Quote from: HappyTrainGuy on September 19, 2011, 16:14:45 PM
Coming to a Translink bus near you in 2015.

...because I hear exhaust fumes are good for you.

Most buses have exhaust stacks or ground level exhausts, so he would be fine on that score.  It's more the heat of the engine I'd be concerned about...

To be frank, I think this fare strategy 2012 - 2014 has no chance of surviving as is.  Might be the first task of the new CEO of TransLink to rewrite it?

A 15% increase in the shadow of a looming election?   They might if they don't stop dancing,  but I am sure the opposition will present a different strategy.

Quote from: ozbob on September 19, 2011, 17:36:21 PM
To be frank, I think this fare strategy 2012 - 2014 has no chance of surviving as is.  Might be the first task of the new CEO of TransLink to rewrite it?

A 15% increase in the shadow of a looming election?   They might if they don't stop dancing,  but I am sure the opposition will present a different strategy.

I was thinking this too. As much as it'd be nice to see a public transport plan get implemented on time and on budget ...I just can't see these planned fares continuing all the way through 2014. At the moment the cost of public transport isn't particularly above average, but over the next couple of years this will change and public opinion will be very unfavourable indeed.

And the desired effect of the fare increases, to reduce subsidy, has not come to pass. The growth in demand for services is just too high.

I've wondered though, what if, in a couple of years time the cost of IC chips will have fallen in price enough (As the cost of computer chips does over time) such that they could sell the card for say $4 alone with no credit (Or any combination of preloaded credit, priced accordingly)



And at this point, scrap paper tickets all together, and have them for sale on buses.

Would it be that much of an imposition for people to basically have a once off $4 'flagfall' for the first time you use PT in Brisbane ever? And you then keep the card therafter.
The current $10 is a bit of a hit, but for tourists for instance, its really not much in the scheme of things (It costs less than one trip through the Clem7!) plus they would benefit from the cheaper fares anyway and It would pay itself off literally in a day or two, if o_O's modeling is anything to go by.

Infrequent users, well, boohoo to them, $4 wont kill them.

Edit:
Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if cards were that cheap to produce as it is. I mean, the LA tap card costs $2 US!
What does everyone else think?
Is it worth inquiring at the PTAG how much the cards are to produce.

This could well be the KISS solution. No need to worry with specialised tourist products, or punitive fare structures to get people to use GoCards.....Just sell the damn card cheaper  

It's already available for a $5 refundable deposit.

Really? I thought it was $10.

Quote from: Gazza on September 19, 2011, 23:12:08 PM
Really? I thought it was $10.

with $5 credit

Holy - - - - !
Just checked, It really is only $5!!!

People don't want to pay $5??? This changes my opinion on the matter completely. People not owning cards are clearly just whingers then.
As above, I thought it was $10, and thought tourists might have a point in not wanting to pay $10 if they weren't going to make that amount of savings for a short visit.

But man, if that's all it costs these days (Has it always been only $5?), then everybody should just pony up and buy one!

Well, I guess then, make them $2 like in LA or something (Thats possibly as cheap as you could go), and then drop paper tickets.

If you cant spare a mere $2, well, I don't know what you'd do about people like that!

I mean really, sell the card for $2, have a bundle for bus drivers to sell, what could be simpler?

Pretty sure it's been $5 from the get go? Though they do make you pay at least $10 when you get it so theres $5 credit on it, but you kinda need that anyway.

See, I had it in my head that it was $20 originally, $10 Credit and $10 card deposit.

Quote from: Gazza on September 19, 2011, 23:45:50 PM
See, I had it in my head that it was $20 originally, $10 Credit and $10 card deposit.

The way I remember it, it was a $10 deposit originally.  I think it changed probably mid last year.

The card fee was waived when it was first introduced (I've never paid the go card fee )

Quote from: ozbob on September 19, 2011, 17:36:21 PM
To be frank, I think this fare strategy 2012 - 2014 has no chance of surviving as is.  Might be the first task of the new CEO of TransLink to rewrite it?

A 15% increase in the shadow of a looming election?   They might if they don't stop dancing,  but I am sure the opposition will present a different strategy.

I think the rises will continue as planned but that we'll see the addition of new "products" on go card... perhaps a frequent user bonus or some such so you get extra "credit" when you do something to pay for your "higher" fares. I think the cost of provision versus the fare that is paid is already disconnected enough to enable improvements in revenue while still providing passengers better deals.

Quote from: dwb on October 03, 2011, 16:07:10 PM

Quote from: ozbob on September 19, 2011, 17:36:21 PM
To be frank, I think this fare strategy 2012 - 2014 has no chance of surviving as is.  Might be the first task of the new CEO of TransLink to rewrite it?

A 15% increase in the shadow of a looming election?   They might if they don't stop dancing,  but I am sure the opposition will present a different strategy.

I think the rises will continue as planned but that we'll see the addition of new "products" on go card... perhaps a frequent user bonus or some such so you get extra "credit" when you do something to pay for your "higher" fares. I think the cost of provision versus the fare that is paid is already disconnected enough to enable improvements in revenue while still providing passengers better deals.

Well I think that would be daft.  Could happen though.  The current system is generally equitable, but too expensive!  And especially for shorter trips.

Yes for sure Dwb, as I said this present fare structure will not survive as is.

I think options within the constraints of the go card system (and there are time based restrictions) are as follows:

• Reducing the number of journeys cap before 50% reduction (say 8 or maybe lower).  (The average number of journeys on the go card is between 5 and 6 per week).


• Increasing off peak discount, say 30%  (others might argue for a higher discount)


• Further discount for auto topup  eg. 10%


• Extending the journey cap to all students (full time university/school)


• Extending concession travel and the journey cap to all Health Care Card holders (this is a strong push by QCOSS)
  

If these broad offsets or similar was done, the 15% fare increase could stick.  The LNP though I am sure will come up with an alternative, although they are vague despite highlighting the projected fare increases.

And it would appear there is a plan to phase out paper tickets from 2012?

--> http://translink.com.au/tickets-and-fares/fares/planned-fares - no mention of paper

and this statement:

--> http://www.adrianschrinner.com/Newsroom/LatestNews/tabid/67/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/534/State-fare-hikes-cause-public-transport-slump.aspx

QuoteThe State has also cancelled the daily travel ticket, with paper tickets to be scrapped next year.

This week a Translink spokesperson said the 15% year-on-year fare hike would continue, and it probably will, so dwb is on the money.  If additional products could be bought using the go-card, then even tourists would see its 'value' and purchase one.

To counter perceptions about the fares themselves, what if the government promised, say, 20-minute minimum frequency (15-min not yet possible), a bring-forward of the Nambour duplication and upgrade of the Doomben Line etc; would people then say that the price rises were justified?  Would someone paying $8000 a year for daily return travel from Palmwoods to the City say "I have value for money" if, say, they could access a train every half hour and not have to travel in a railbus ever again?

Even with the extra revenue from the fare box, the state is not going to have the money to build CRR and all the other things on its wish list.  And we are dummies for swallowing the hogwash from a government, or potential government, that promises to bring down taxes, put more money in our pockets and pay for expensive infrastructure.  It is a conjurer's trick and the slick, verbal elixir of the snake oil salesperson.

We need a government that will grow testes and tell us it will introduce a congestion tax.  It has been done before when a Howard government said 'vote for us and we will give you a GST'.  A Brisbane congestion tax is politically responsible and it will go down well in the bush, where people already perceive that their tax dollars go to the South-East.  They don't benefit directly from an investment in public transport infrastructure (i.e. CRR).

They would positively cheer if those 'southerners' paid a tax that people outside Brisbane did not have to pay.  Think Bob Katter saying 'good on those bastards for living in Brisbane, we should tax them some more for living there, then they might come to God's own country up North.'

BCC and the Chamber of Commerce will say it is a tax on jobs and growth, and that jobs will go elsewhere.  Is that necessarily a bad thing if it leads to decentralisation and TODs elsewhere?

I wonder what the government and opposition policy 'wonks' (as Ozbob calls them) are thinking up for the election campaign?

Despite the statement from Matt Longland, anything can happen from this point.  It is desperate days and the Government has been seriously criticised by the public for the fare price rises.

I think we will see some offsets ...

Quote from: ozbob on October 03, 2011, 17:06:58 PM
Despite the statement from Matt Longland, anything can happen from this point.  It is desperate days and the Government has been seriously criticised by the public for the fare price rises.

I think we will see some offsets ...

What I don't understand is the inaction since Campbell Newman announced his tilt at the Premier's position.

Don't forget that the LNP is only in the 'discussion paper' stage in respect of its transport infrastructure policy.  Whatever Mr Newman is planning, he is saving it up for closer to the election, when any polly's promise is likely to have a bigger impact.  We voters are likely to forget a promise made six months out from an election.  Plus, if you make a promise 14 days from an election, and then another the next day, and another the day after that, the media can't focus on the detail of the earlier promise.  It's likely to get little scrutiny, which is the way the pollies like it.

Quote from: ozbob on October 03, 2011, 16:41:19 PM
Yes for sure Dwb, as I said this present fare structure will not survive as is.

I think options within the constraints of the go card system (and there are time based restrictions) are as follows:

* Reducing the number of journeys cap before 50% reduction (say 8 or maybe lower).  (The average number of journeys on the go card is between 5 and 6 per week).*

Probably a good idea. Although I don't think the average number of journeys on go card is all that relevant to the debate... I don't think there is an average passenger and to believe so undermines everything!

Quote
* Increasing off peak discount, say 30%  (others might argue for a higher discount)*

Yes good idea, should probably be higher than 30%... would depend on what peak fares are and what average fare recovery is though.... The offpeak cost in 2014 should definitly be no more expensive than TL prices in 2004 (and probably cheaper)!

Quote
* Further discount for auto topup  eg. 10%*

I don't see at all why this is a good policy. Why does it matter which way you top up, the same cost is involved for Translink. I don't believe in subsidiies that are given to certain types of people unfairly... in this circumstance it would be access to a computer and a credit card. In other pre-existing products it was the unfair discount given to those who could afford to prepay a year's worth of rail travel.

Quote
* Extending the journey cap to all students (full time university/school)*

Although it annoys me that students are currently getting a raw deal as opposed to pensioners, I don't think extending the 2 journey cap would be a good idea. Remains to be seen I guess.

Quote
* Extending concession travel and the journey cap to all Health Care Card holders (this is a strong push by QCOSS)

I strongly advocated for concession travel entitlements be made to Health Card Holders in my research. I still think this is a good idea, however as per students, I do not believe limiting this to 2 journeys a day is necessarily a good idea.

Quote
If these broad offsets or similar was done, the 15% fare increase could stick.  The LNP though I am sure will come up with an alternative, although they are vague despite highlighting the projected fare increases.

I'm pretty sure the LNP alternative is service cuts. Who wants to see that?!

On this issue of who pays what, after reading the 2010-11 Translink Annual Report, it still really amazes me how low the average fare collection is per journey/passenger, and how high the QR operational subsidy is.

I'm not bashing trains, I think we should have more lines, better frequency and huge station improvements, but.... and this is a real question, how is it that BT carries just as many passengers per day as QR at a 1/3 of the cost? And what does that difference make to fare collection. For example, if we were to simply take BT passenger numbers, BT fares (collected via TL obviously), and BT operational costs, what would that fare recovery be? Surely more than 22.6%... and if so, why are all those BT passengers continuing to pay huge increases to subsidise FairsFare's travel behaviour *cough* I mean long distance passengers, at least to such a large extent???

Auto topup discounts are out there eg.  

'You can receive a further 5% discount using MyWay if you top-up your card via autoload (direct debit) and BPAY.'
http://www.transport.act.gov.au/myway/fares.html

http://www.transperth.wa.gov.au/TicketsandFares/SmartRider/AddValueMethods.aspx  Perth 25%!

This is actually reducing administrative costs as it relieves pressure on the AVVMs etc.

Quote from: dwb on October 03, 2011, 18:04:23 PM
On this issue of who pays what, after reading the 2010-11 Translink Annual Report, it still really amazes me how low the average fare collection is per journey/passenger, and how high the QR operational subsidy is.

I'm not bashing trains, I think we should have more lines, better frequency and huge station improvements, but.... and this is a real question, how is it that BT carries just as many passengers per day as QR at a 1/3 of the cost? And what does that difference make to fare collection. For example, if we were to simply take BT passenger numbers, BT fares (collected via TL obviously), and BT operational costs, what would that fare recovery be? Surely more than 22.6%... and if so, why are all those BT passengers continuing to pay huge increases to subsidise FairsFare's travel behaviour *cough* I mean long distance passengers, at least to such a large extent???

Buses don't pay for the roads etc.  Rail does for its ROW, so it will be a greater subsidy.  Also the passenger / kms for rail are much greater.  But as rail is ramped up it will probably increase passenger trips to point where it is greater than bus as well.  And there is the not so small point that the growth in PT has been directed at bus rather than rail for the last 15 years or so.  This is starting to change.

Quote from: ozbob on October 03, 2011, 18:05:52 PM
Auto topup discounts are out there eg.  

'You can receive a further 5% discount using MyWay if you top-up your card via autoload (direct debit) and BPAY.'
http://www.transport.act.gov.au/myway/fares.html

http://www.transperth.wa.gov.au/TicketsandFares/SmartRider/AddValueMethods.aspx  Perth 25%!

This is actually reducing administrative costs as it relieves pressure on the AVVMs etc.

I know they exist in other places, however I still don't believe that is necessarily something to be rewarded for and honestly it is not really reducing costs that much bc the AVVMs already exist, still need to be cash controlled, already don't take coins for go card top ups, aren't generally "under pressure". It is at most shifting an accounting burden from one place to another.

Further from a privacy/ethical perspective, I don't think registered card users should get a discount unavailable to unregistered card users.

Quote from: ozbob on October 03, 2011, 18:08:29 PM
Buses don't pay for the roads etc.

Good point. However the general community does (pay for roads) through government debt, vehicle registration, traffic offence fines, GST, stamp duty and payroll taxes. Perhaps same should be for rail ROW... ie even if just for an accounting perspective separate operational and capex/infrastructure maintenance costs to get a clearer picture.

Anything is possible from here  ...

Quote from: dwb on October 03, 2011, 18:04:23 PM
On this issue of who pays what, after reading the 2010-11 Translink Annual Report, it still really amazes me how low the average fare collection is per journey/passenger, and how high the QR operational subsidy is.

I'm not bashing trains, I think we should have more lines, better frequency and huge station improvements, but.... and this is a real question, how is it that BT carries just as many passengers per day as QR at a 1/3 of the cost? And what does that difference make to fare collection. For example, if we were to simply take BT passenger numbers, BT fares (collected via TL obviously), and BT operational costs, what would that fare recovery be? Surely more than 22.6%... and if so, why are all those BT passengers continuing to pay huge increases to subsidise FairsFare's travel behaviour *cough* I mean long distance passengers, at least to such a large extent???

No need to get personal there dwb.

I think it's high fixed costs largely.  Station staff, signallers, all cost money and rolling stock is a big cost compared to buses, even in per space terms.  Having these high priced assets poorly utilised is what costs so much IMO.

Quote from: ozbob on October 03, 2011, 18:08:29 PM
Also the passenger / kms for rail are much greater.  change.

I think you meant kms / passenger.

Quote from: ozbob on October 03, 2011, 18:05:52 PM
Perth 25%!

Compared to 15% for other SmartRider users.  Actual auto top up discount is around 12% compared to non-auto top up SmartRider users.

Quote from: dwb on October 03, 2011, 18:12:31 PM

Quote from: ozbob on October 03, 2011, 18:08:29 PM
Buses don't pay for the roads etc.

Good point. However the general community does (pay for roads) through government debt, vehicle registration, traffic offence fines, GST, stamp duty and payroll taxes. Perhaps same should be for rail ROW... ie even if just for an accounting perspective separate operational and capex/infrastructure maintenance costs to get a clearer picture.

At least 10 years ago there was a Ross Gittins (I think) article in the SMH suggesting we do precisely that, as had been done in Sweden.  Might have been more talking about long distance freight, which has been done in much of Australia, but it is an interesting suggestion.

QuoteOn this issue of who pays what, after reading the 2010-11 Translink Annual Report, it still really amazes me how low the average fare collection is per journey/passenger, and how high the QR operational subsidy is.

I'm not bashing trains, I think we should have more lines, better frequency and huge station improvements, but.... and this is a real question, how is it that BT carries just as many passengers per day as QR at a 1/3 of the cost? And what does that difference make to fare collection. For example, if we were to simply take BT passenger numbers, BT fares (collected via TL obviously), and BT operational costs, what would that fare recovery be? Surely more than 22.6%... and if so, why are all those BT passengers continuing to pay huge increases to subsidise FairsFare's travel behaviour *cough* I mean long distance passengers, at least to such a large extent???

Nobody is going to pay for rotten apples. If you serve rotten apples, you get rotten patronage and rotten fare recovery. Very simple really but the penny hasn't dropped on the powers that be...

Who is going to pay for cr*pola frequency that is 30 minutes! 30 minutes! What an utter waste of time!
And that is before you have even factored in the journey time and walking etc.

Simple. BT has no where near as much rollingstock, infrastructure, staff and assets to look after and maintain. Having a fixed permanent route would be a big issue too. Busses can spread out and cover more areas compared to trains which covers more distance along a fixed path. Comparing busses to trains is like comparing apples to oranges.

Quote from: HappyTrainGuy on October 04, 2011, 00:45:11 AM
Simple. BT has no where near as much rollingstock, infrastructure, staff and assets to look after and maintain. Having a fixed permanent route would be a big issue too. Busses can spread out and cover more areas compared to trains which covers more distance along a fixed path. Comparing busses to trains is like comparing apples to oranges.

I disagree.

The product is transport.  Why can't you compare one option for delivering that product against another?

QuoteI disagree.

The product is transport.  Why can't you compare one option for delivering that product against another?

So... rocket bus to Gympie North or Coolangatta Ex Adelaide Street Anyone???