POLL: Should we get rid of the flag fall

[somebody]

By mode:
Train/ferry - the service will stop anyway regardless of how many get on/off, so no additional cost is incurred to the system, nor inconvenience to other passengers of any consequence
all stops bus - the service is slow anyway so slowing it further for short trips is of little consequence
express bus - the service allow journeys which are too short anyway so few issues with this one either

In case there is any confusion:
If the rate per zone is around 60c (1st 9 zones), that would mean a 1 zone fare is 60c, 2 zone $1.20 etc.
In option 2, the 1 zone fare would be $1.10

[Golliwog]

I don't think the purpose of the flag fall component is to account for stopping the bus/ferry/train (as you appear to be suggesting). Rather I believe it's to allow for trip chaining within the zones. I still think it needs to be a bit lower than it is though.

[somebody]

What's trip chaining?  If there was no flag fall, you could travel across zone 1 to 1/2 get off; get on, go to 2/3, get off; get on, go to middle of zone 3 get off;  But you have still paid for all 3 zones, so you might as well have run through.

[Golliwog]

What's trip chaining?  If there was no flag fall, you could travel across zone 1 to 1/2 get off; get on, go to 2/3, get off; get on, go to middle of zone 3 get off;  But you have still paid for all 3 zones, so you might as well have run through.

Woops, sort of wrong but right use of trip chaining. Transport lingo for doing more than one thing in an outing (eg: Go to work, come home via shops/gym/pick up kids from school). In this case what I meant was things like catching a train in to the city, then say a bus back out to UQ or something similar where you're travelling through zones that you've already paid for.

[Fares_Fair]

Forgive the simple questions,
but what is the purpose of the flag fall component of fares on a rail network?
and how do we know what it really is?

[ozbob]

Flag fall arose from early taxis.  The old meters had a little flag and when you boarded the cab the driver would move the flag down.  This immediately registered as a cost, even before you had travelled ( the ' flag fall ').  The rest of the fare then depended on how far you travelled.

Its meaning has been extended to include the cost of first boarding the transport (the cost of having it there in the first place), and then the rest of the fare on how far you travel.

Look at the fare table.

Adult go card fares the flag fall would be roughly $2.50.

[somebody]

What's trip chaining?  If there was no flag fall, you could travel across zone 1 to 1/2 get off; get on, go to 2/3, get off; get on, go to middle of zone 3 get off;  But you have still paid for all 3 zones, so you might as well have run through.

Woops, sort of wrong but right use of trip chaining. Transport lingo for doing more than one thing in an outing (eg: Go to work, come home via shops/gym/pick up kids from school). In this case what I meant was things like catching a train in to the city, then say a bus back out to UQ or something similar where you're travelling through zones that you've already paid for.

Is that relevant?  That's more of an issue for a zone system - a route-km system wouldn't suffer leakage from this sort of usage.

Nothing to do with the flag fall, unless I'm missing something.

[triplethree]

I think you need some sort of flagfall component. Fares should reflect the fact that there are fixed costs (e.g. building and maintaining the infrastructure, age-related depreciation) as well as variable costs (e.g. costs which increase the more distance the fleet travels or the more hours a service is provided, such as labour, fuel, electricity, distance-related depreciation, etc.)

It doesn't matter whether you're riding a bus 1km or 20km, that $600,000 bus still had to be built to cater for your trip, as well as the bus stops and shelters at each end. And whether you're riding a train 1 station or all the way to Gympie North, the stations you use at each end of your travels have to be built and maintained at much the same expense as any other typical station.

But, the passenger who travels 20km on the bus rather than 1km uses more fuel and more of the driver's wages. And the traveller who goes all the way to Gympie North also uses more labour, more electricity, etc. So I think a flagfall which contributes to fixed costs combined with a distance component which contributes to variable costs is appropriate.

The trouble is, finding the right balance. I agree that for very short trips (e.g. Mitchelton to Oxford Park; Cultural Centre to West End 5 Ways) $3.05 is rather steep. But what if it was only 60 cents as Simon alluded to? Do we really want inner-city buses already experiencing capacity issues to be even more overloaded by large numbers of people getting on and off for a few stops? Do we want bus services slowed down by people who could very easily walk three stops because at 60 cents the cost is so trivial that the demand curve for short-distance transport goes through the roof?

Maybe cut the flagfall component to, say, $1.50 but to compensate increase the distance component to, say, 80 cents per zone? This will disadvantage longer-distance commuters (read: lower-income outer-suburban people who live where housing is more affordable) while benefitting wealthier inner-city dwellers though. Like I said, it's about finding the right balance - and balance is very much in the eye of the beholder!

(BTW, the "purest" distance-based fare system that I know of belongs to Singapore. Even they have a flagfall. It's two years since I visited that island, and I'm working off memory so my figures might not be correct, but using their smartcard it was a flat fare of 69 cents for up to 3km, then it increased in increments of roughly 3 to 5 cents for every kilometre thereafter, up to a maximum of $1.94 for 40km+, which is from one end of the country to the other. Transfer rules were somewhat similar to Brisbane: up to five trips per journey, only one trip can be rail, 45-minute transfer window.)

[somebody]

Some valid points, but I'm going to pick fault.

If you ride the bus 1km you have used much less of the bus's time than someone riding it 20km, so it is no different to the driver's time on this point.

The issues you mention with infrastructure and CBD bus congestion would be better charged for with respect to a surcharge for entering zone 1.  This is similar to Myki's/Metcard's structure.

Thanks for your thoughts though.

[Gazza]

It doesn't matter whether you're riding a bus 1km or 20km, that $600,000 bus still had to be built to cater for your trip, as well as the bus stops and shelters at each end. And whether you're riding a train 1 station or all the way to Gympie North, the stations you use at each end of your travels have to be built and maintained at much the same expense as any other typical station.

But correspondingly, 1km of bus versus 20km of bus needs more buses to maintain the headway.....It would take more buses to run the 444 than the 412 off peak for instance.

[Derwan]

If you reduce the flagfall, you have to increase the fee per zone travelled (to maintain the same revenue).

If you take a look at the stats, there are more people who travel within just 1 or 2 zones than a higher number of zones.  That's a lot of flagfall revenue lost, so the per zone increase would have to be significant.

This will simply lead to more people driving for part of their journey in order to reduce the amount they pay for public transport.

[somebody]

This will simply lead to more people driving for part of their journey in order to reduce the amount they pay for public transport.

I don't think too many would drive for part of their journey to save about a dollar for an extra zone return, but perhaps to reach a station with more parking or more frequency they might.  It's a bit different in Melbourne where it's a far bigger hit and you do see this behaviour.

Fact is that the current and planned price rises are severally constraining growth in PT use.  I think this is both far more targeted and far more likely to be done.

[Golliwog]

I already know someone who drives to Gaythorne station from Keperra rather than Ferny Grove because it's usually quicker, and it's 1 less zone to travel in. I'm sure he's not the only one to have worked this out.

[somebody]

I already know someone who drives to Gaythorne station from Keperra rather than Ferny Grove because it's usually quicker, and it's 1 less zone to travel in. I'm sure he's not the only one to have worked this out.

So for him it is quicker?  Why would he/she ever go to Keperra?

[Golliwog]

I already know someone who drives to Gaythorne station from Keperra rather than Ferny Grove because it's usually quicker, and it's 1 less zone to travel in. I'm sure he's not the only one to have worked this out.

So for him it is quicker?  Why would he/she ever go to Keperra?

He doesn't. He used to use Ferny Grove but then found you can drive to Gaythorne faster than he can get there on the train so now he drives to Gaythorne every morning, or drives all the way in to the city.

[Derwan]

I don't think too many would drive for part of their journey to save about a dollar for an extra zone return, but perhaps to reach a station with more parking or more frequency they might.  It's a bit different in Melbourne where it's a far bigger hit and you do see this behaviour.

If we get rid of the flagfall, the difference between zones might make it worth it - particularly if you can drive a couple of zones.

It might be - say - $1 each way.... but that's $2 per day - $10 per week - around $500 a year!

For someone who lives close enough to a station to walk, it might not be enough to get the car out.  But for people who drive to a station anyway, they might just keep going to a station closer to the city.

[somebody]

If the price rises to maintain the same revenue per trip then yes, that is possible.  I would have thought the point was to promote more shorter distance trips.

[Golliwog]

If the price rises to maintain the same revenue per trip then yes, that is possible.  I would have thought the point was to promote more shorter distance trips.

Similar to the argument in the shoulder peak discount thread, I don't think some small discount is going to encourage people out of their cars for short trips. You need a better frequency on most services, as well as service scheduled to complement each other. Case in point, I was looking to get to an interview on St Paul's Terrace the other day. This is served by routes 301 and 320, both of which come every 30 minutes off peak, and serve the same route Albion - CBD (except for their final city stops) yet instead of timing them to give an even 4bph service you get the 301 coming 8 minutes after the 320.

My opinion is that fixing up things like that will generate more useage than playing with flag fall.

[somebody]

Yeah, but it wouldn't be effective without *cough* city stop locations *cough*.

[Golliwog]

Yeah, but it wouldn't be effective without *cough* city stop locations *cough*.

Generally true, though not everyone is trying to get to the city around Queen St. I'd expect theres a decent number equally trying to get to parts of Spring Hill that this would serve.

[somebody]

Yeah, but it wouldn't be effective without *cough* city stop locations *cough*.

Generally true, though not everyone is trying to get to the city around Queen St. I'd expect theres a decent number equally trying to get to parts of Spring Hill that this would serve.

You're missing the point!

If you want to go to St Paul's Tce from the CBD, where do you board the bus?

[Golliwog]

Yeah, but it wouldn't be effective without *cough* city stop locations *cough*.

Generally true, though not everyone is trying to get to the city around Queen St. I'd expect theres a decent number equally trying to get to parts of Spring Hill that this would serve.

You're missing the point!

If you want to go to St Paul's Tce from the CBD, where do you board the bus?

No I understand that point, but my point is that people aren't necessarily trying to go CBD-Spring Hill (or vice versa), but can be just as easily going Suburbs-Spring Hill. Of course to improve the CBD connection you'd want to fix up the stop locations, but the free Spring Hill loop goes alright for that, plus it's not that hard a walk.

[somebody]

You understand the point yet you are arguing against it?  What is wrong with you?

When have you ever used services affected by this problem?

[Golliwog]

I wasn't arguing against giving them the same or adjacent city stops, just saying that city stop location isn't important if you're not coming from the city. I do agree that city stop locations do need to be fixed up, and nowhere here did I say they shouldn't be.

I've had to deal with Chapel Hill sevices a few times, as well as services to The Gap. Also working at South Bank getting back to work from the CBD during my lunch break.

[somebody]

I wasn't arguing against giving them the same or adjacent city stops, just saying that city stop location isn't important if you're not coming from the city. I do agree that city stop locations do need to be fixed up, and nowhere here did I say they shouldn't be.

I've had to deal with Chapel Hill sevices a few times, as well as services to The Gap. Also working at South Bank getting back to work from the CBD during my lunch break.

If minimising the point isn't an argument against the point, then what value then did reply 21 add to the thread? 

[Golliwog]

The point to be making was that not every trip on a CBD bound bus starts and ends in the CBD. Yes the 301 and 320 both share a route from Albion to Spring Hill and have different city stop locations. Past Albion though they go in completely different directions. How many people boarding these routes in the CBD do you really expect are going to be going to Spring Hill on these routes when people in the city can use the free Spring Hill loop or just walk?

IMO improving the sychronisation of these two services would be more about serving the joint served route better than with serving the CBD better. While having a joint city stop location would be useful for those coming from the city, I was aiming at improving the servies for those outside it.

As for mentioning walking and the Spring Hill Loop, you asked about how people can get to Spring Hill from the city.

[somebody]

I never mentioned walking.

In this particular case there is also rail services, but I see no reason to run the bus services ineffectively here.  There is also the 310/315 to St Pauls Tce, but these are limited stop services.

[Golliwog]

I agree, and figure as well that if you're tweaking the departure times of these services, it wouldn't be too hard to tweak the stop locations. But I still believe that coordinated run times would do more for patronage than synchronised stop locations. *ducks*

Of course both combined would be the best outcome.

[somebody]

I d agree with that.  But no reason to half fix the problem.  Do it properly.

[ozbob]

Media release 1st July 2012

SEQ: Reduce or eliminate the fare 'flag-fall'

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport passengers calls for the fares for short distance trips to be reduced.

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"Presently it costs $3.05 for a one zone peak trip, reducing to $2.44 off peak using an adult go card.  These rates are too high. Paper single tickets are $4.50 for a one zone journey, there is no off peak paper ticket equivalent."

"Adelaide, Perth and Sydney all have '2 section' tickets which are good for approximately 3.2km and cost in peak hour $1.67, $1.62, $1.68 respectively when purchased with the comparable cheapest products (1,2,3)."

"Reducing all fares by $1 to a $1.50, that is reducing the flag-fall component, would bring short zone journeys back into a more realistic comparative fare cost structure."

"A $1 reduction on a one zone peak adult go card fare represents a 33% decrease in cost, a $1 reduction on a zone 20 fare represents a 6% decrease.  Such adjustments are reasonable when one considers that public transport fares have increased 65% over the past 4 years. There are also further fare increases planned of 7.5% for 2013 and 2014."

"A reduction in the 'flag-fall' component would restore a better cost relativity between all zones."

"A reduction in the 'flag-fall' component could be balanced by ensuring matching zones for all modes. For example Oxley by rail is zone 3 but by bus is zone 4. Reducing the flag-fall would make zone adjustments cost neutral and better position for the future."

"RAIL Back On Track supports a reduced 'flag-fall', which due to the present high cost distortion acts as a strong disincentive for public transport use other than the to and from work commute trips (4)."

References:

1. http://www.adelaidemetro.com.au/ticketing/fares

2. http://www.transperth.wa.gov.au/TicketsandFares.aspx

3. http://www.131500.com.au/tickets/fares/fares

4. http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=8551.0

Contact:

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org