POLL: Is using the go card to achieve 10 trips early a loophole?

[Fares_Fair]

SNAP POLL:
Is using the go card to achieve 10 trips early a loophole?
Have your say.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[Jonno]

Not at all.  It just encourages other trips to be by public transport that may have other wise been by car.

[longboi]

No, it's not.

I have heard it directly from people in both the marketing and go card teams that in rewarding people for their frequent use, it also has an incidental effect of promoting PT use outside of just the old to/from work.

[Gazza]

Not at all.  It just encourages other trips to be by public transport that may have other wise been by car.

At the same time, it would encourage trips that would not have been taken at all. Rather than staying in the lunchroom, people head out and take a 1 stop bus ride.

I think a 2 trip cap with any additional 'out of zone' travel charged for, would have been better.

But I don't care enough to see it changed from what it is now.

Also, why isn't this topic in the Go Card and translink fares subforum?

[Golliwog]

I agree with Simon that people will use it to avoid paying for their long distance fares, but I don't see it as a loophole as that's what it is designed to do. Sure, there will be some who just grab a bus down Adelaide St at lunch to get an extra journey or two, but I also think that most people have better things to do with their lunch break, so will look to other journeys they can make. Which is why I like this idea.

Sure, there will be farebox leakage, but I think this will be compensated for by more people getting to 10 journeys or more. Wasn't the old average around 6 or something? Plus, there's more to Pt than farebox revenue, as we point out frequently with the road toll and congestion. IMO, if you save a life from one drunk 20yr old deciding to use a night link bus rather than drink drive and crash, this is worth it.

[Arnz]

No.

As I said in the previous threads it would encourage the use of their local bus network for trips after work (where they may not normally make a trip).  Sure some might take a trip at lunch, but I personally don't think thousands of people would do that (Many have other things to do).  

Many regions and the associated operators could do with the slow but eventual increase of patronage on their services after 6pm.  Having said that, discouraging the use of PT after work would not do wonders for patronage in the outer regions (which the PT share in most regions are low enough already).

[aldonius]

Not a loophole (as it's deliberately planned). If it works, then we'll see a virtuous circle of patronage and service rises outside of commuter peak.

It should also generate some additional leisure trips if enough people in a circle of friends are at the 'free' stage. Other friends will probably not be. Thus, there is a new revenue source. Call it the social network effect. This of course is also dependent on service quality.

I estimate the average overall fare reduction per lunch-break-trip commuter to be 10-15% (17 zones is ~30%, 6 zones ~10% with one zone lunchtime trips on the first 3 days).

Golliwog, your point about weekly average number of trips has a lot of positive implications for overall revenues - I was worried about 'cannibalisation'. Not if the average is 6 trips/week.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Many have other things to do.  

Like standing for 25 minutes outside that Sushi place next to the Queens Plaza entrance 

[Fares_Fair]

Many have other things to do.  

Like standing for 25 minutes outside that Sushi place next to the Queens Plaza entrance 

HTG, for the Sunny Coast it's like queuing outside that sushi place, only it's only open part-time !
PS I've seen the queue, it must be good.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[Mr X]

Using a system for the full purpose it was designed for is definitely not "exploiting a loophole". It exists for people to use the system regularly and get a benefit as a result and that's what's being done.

[STB]

I'll be quick and to the point - not a loophole.

[dwb]

I felt like saying no to be concise, but really I went with indifferent.

[Fares_Fair]

I felt like saying no to be concise, but really I went with indifferent.

Hello dwb,

I see you opinion, but I'm curious at to what is your rationale would have been for the no case?
Is it based upon the point that long-haul commuters can gain a lot out of it if they do lunch time trips, as can University students who do many trips, and the whole subsidisation thing?
Or is it the loophole definition?

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[dwb]

I felt like saying no to be concise, but really I went with indifferent.

Hello dwb,

I see you opinion, but I'm curious at to what is your rationale would have been for the no case?
Is it based upon the point that long-haul commuters can gain a lot out of it if they do lunch time trips, as can University students who do many trips, and the whole subsidisation thing?
Or is it the loophole definition?

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

I guess it is the definition, "a means of evading a rule without actually infringing the letter of it"... when we talk about government loopholes we think badly written legislation that allows tax dodges to dodge tax... perhaps this go card programming is or isn't the same. i tend to think they have developed a product which they see has a benefit, gives back a part of what they took, is easily implementable and they've sold it as being beneficial to commuters.

I do think it could create some odd behaviours, but only in the minority, I don't think there will be broad exploitation of the benefits however as they do take some action on behalf of the user. i see no problem with encouraging lunchtime trips, except that if they're simply being taken for $ purposes... I don't think we should encourage more short (or long) trips that needn't be taken.

[dwb]

http://translink.com.au/travel-information/how-to/how-to-transfer-between-services

If you're using a combination of buses, trains or ferries, touch on and off each trip.

If you change from one train to another train without leaving the station there is no need to touch off and then back on again. Simply touch off when you arrive at your destination.

go card transfer rules
You can transfer up to 3 times across all zones.
You have 5 hours to complete your journey.
The final trip of the journey must start within 3.5 hours of when you started the first trip.
There is a 1 hour time limit between transfers.

I wonder, however if you could take your bike with you, ride to station, get train mostly in to just before a zone boundary, deboard, ride into the next zone then catch a bus the remainder... you could then effectively get to free with just three longer distance journeys, three one zone finishing journeys, four lunch time one zone journeys.

Or would that still be a journey, cos its an adjoining zone?... doesn't say on webpage about zones

[Fares_Fair]

I felt like saying no to be concise, but really I went with indifferent.

Hello dwb,

I see you opinion, but I'm curious at to what is your rationale would have been for the no case?
Is it based upon the point that long-haul commuters can gain a lot out of it if they do lunch time trips, as can University students who do many trips, and the whole subsidisation thing?
Or is it the loophole definition?

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

I guess it is the definition, "a means of evading a rule without actually infringing the letter of it"... when we talk about government loopholes we think badly written legislation that allows tax dodges to dodge tax... perhaps this go card programming is or isn't the same. i tend to think they have developed a product which they see has a benefit, gives back a part of what they took, is easily implementable and they've sold it as being beneficial to commuters.

I do think it could create some odd behaviours, but only in the minority, I don't think there will be broad exploitation of the benefits however as they do take some action on behalf of the user. i see no problem with encouraging lunchtime trips, except that if they're simply being taken for $ purposes... I don't think we should encourage more short (or long) trips that needn't be taken.

Thanks dwb,

I certainly agree with you that not many can/would take advantage of it for the reasons you specify.
I'm sure that the possibilities highlighted would have been considered by TransLink/Government and discounted for the same reasons.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[Fares_Fair]

http://translink.com.au/travel-information/how-to/how-to-transfer-between-services

If you're using a combination of buses, trains or ferries, touch on and off each trip.

If you change from one train to another train without leaving the station there is no need to touch off and then back on again. Simply touch off when you arrive at your destination.

go card transfer rules
You can transfer up to 3 times across all zones.
You have 5 hours to complete your journey.
The final trip of the journey must start within 3.5 hours of when you started the first trip.
There is a 1 hour time limit between transfers.

I wonder, however if you could take your bike with you, ride to station, get train mostly in to just before a zone boundary, deboard, ride into the next zone then catch a bus the remainder... you could then effectively get to free with just three longer distance journeys, three one zone finishing journeys, four lunch time one zone journeys.

Or would that still be a journey, cos its an adjoining zone?... doesn't say on webpage about zones

I would think the '60 minutes from touch off to touch on' rule would still apply, irrespective of zones.
Perhaps Ozbob may know for certain.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[Arnz]

I guess it is the definition, "a means of evading a rule without actually infringing the letter of it"... when we talk about government loopholes we think badly written legislation that allows tax dodges to dodge tax... perhaps this go card programming is or isn't the same. i tend to think they have developed a product which they see has a benefit, gives back a part of what they took, is easily implementable and they've sold it as being beneficial to commuters.

I do think it could create some odd behaviours, but only in the minority, I don't think there will be broad exploitation of the benefits however as they do take some action on behalf of the user. i see no problem with encouraging lunchtime trips, except that if they're simply being taken for $ purposes... I don't think we should encourage more short (or long) trips that needn't be taken.

I'll consider "lunch time trips" for any worker (regardless of where they live) as somewhat odd, but very enterprising, especially for those do that for exercise (It's a good way to reduce the waistline).

However, taking a trip after work I don't consider as odd, as I've said earlier in past threads it's more of "encouraging" PT where folks would otherwise use the car.

[Fares_Fair]

I guess it is the definition, "a means of evading a rule without actually infringing the letter of it"... when we talk about government loopholes we think badly written legislation that allows tax dodges to dodge tax... perhaps this go card programming is or isn't the same. i tend to think they have developed a product which they see has a benefit, gives back a part of what they took, is easily implementable and they've sold it as being beneficial to commuters.

I do think it could create some odd behaviours, but only in the minority, I don't think there will be broad exploitation of the benefits however as they do take some action on behalf of the user. i see no problem with encouraging lunchtime trips, except that if they're simply being taken for $ purposes... I don't think we should encourage more short (or long) trips that needn't be taken.

I'll consider "lunch time trips" for any worker (regardless of where they live) as somewhat odd, but very enterprising, especially for those do that for exercise (It's a good way to reduce the waistline).

However, taking a trip after work I don't consider as odd, as I've said earlier in past threads it's more of "encouraging" PT where folks would otherwise use the car.

I do not consider it an evasion of the rules at all, it is adundantly clear that it is within the rules absolutely - they are not stretched in any way.
If they were any issues of impropriety with it, I for one would not do it.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[Arnz]

I guess it is the definition, "a means of evading a rule without actually infringing the letter of it"... when we talk about government loopholes we think badly written legislation that allows tax dodges to dodge tax... perhaps this go card programming is or isn't the same. i tend to think they have developed a product which they see has a benefit, gives back a part of what they took, is easily implementable and they've sold it as being beneficial to commuters.

I do think it could create some odd behaviours, but only in the minority, I don't think there will be broad exploitation of the benefits however as they do take some action on behalf of the user. i see no problem with encouraging lunchtime trips, except that if they're simply being taken for $ purposes... I don't think we should encourage more short (or long) trips that needn't be taken.

I'll consider "lunch time trips" for any worker (regardless of where they live) as somewhat odd, but very enterprising, especially for those do that for exercise (It's a good way to reduce the waistline).

However, taking a trip after work I don't consider as odd, as I've said earlier in past threads it's more of "encouraging" PT where folks would otherwise use the car.

I do not consider it an evasion of the rules at all, it is adundantly clear that it is within the rules absolutely - they are not stretched in any way.
If they were any issues of impropriety with it, I for one would not do it.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

+1.

However, living near a bus route I now use that in the evenings (to do my 30 minutes of exercise/go to the shops) whereas I would've either stayed home or used the car (to the shops) otherwise.

[Golliwog]

Exactly Arnz, that's the sort of thing I really hope picks up. Too bad many routes drop off completely after (or during) peak.

[ozbob]

Twitter

TransLinkSEQ TransLink SEQ
go frequently then go free; leave your car at home & take advantage of free go card travel http://t.co/M68wDtgQ
19 minutes ago

[pangwen]

+1.

However, living near a bus route I now use that in the evenings (to do my 30 minutes of exercise/go to the shops) whereas I would've either stayed home or used the car (to the shops) otherwise.

+2. From where I live, I am able to catch one of two BUZ services to the nearest shopping centre (same zone). This week, I managed to do two trips in the evening offpeak going to the shops/going down the road for a walk. Combined with my lunchtime trips, my trip this morning (Wednesday) will be free.

[ozbob]

+1.

However, living near a bus route I now use that in the evenings (to do my 30 minutes of exercise/go to the shops) whereas I would've either stayed home or used the car (to the shops) otherwise.

+2. From where I live, I am able to catch one of two BUZ services to the nearest shopping centre (same zone). This week, I managed to do two trips in the evening offpeak going to the shops/going down the road for a walk. Combined with my lunchtime trips, my trip this morning (Wednesday) will be free.

[Golliwog]

No word from TL Bob to show off increased patronage compared to this time last year?

[ozbob]

No word from TL Bob to show off increased patronage compared to this time last year?

Haven't heard, but I think there has been.  Darra was parked out heavy today, as was Oxley.

[BrizCommuter]

BrizCommuter expects an increase in off-peak use this year, but not too sure about peak.

BrizCommuter took 14 journeys last week, more than any week in the last 2 years.

[Fares_Fair]

BrizCommuter expects an increase in off-peak use this year, but not too sure about peak.

BrizCommuter took 14 journeys last week, more than any week in the last 2 years.

Well done Briz.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[Golliwog]

I did 13 last week and 14 the week before. Depending if it ends up being a continuation or not when I go shopping after work tomorrow I should be doing 13 this week as well, or more if I go out on the weekend. The car park at Ferny Grove seems to be filling up earlier than it used to. Also, seeing a regular crowd of about a dozen people heading to Samford on the 399 that meets the 5.05pm ex South Bank to Ferny Grove express. I didn't really see this service last year, but the ones I did see usually only had half that.

[Fares_Fair]

Well done Golli.
I too did 14 last week and will again this week.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[WTN]

I've also done 14 last week and I'm up to 13 this week (free travel today). The new structure is definitely changing the way I use my go card. It certainly encourages me to make extra journeys early in the week (whether going to to shops, gym, lunchtime walking, touring the bus stations/Adelaide St). Even later in the week, further travel is encouraged because it's free.

There has been some discussion at my workplace as to how much money could be saved and how one could rack up 10 journeys as soon as possible. I found it reasonably easy to break my morning commute into 5 trips, hopping on and off along the busway/Adelaide St, without changing direction of travel or adding much time to the journey. This counted as 2 journeys, one of which is 1 zone. During lunchtime, taking 5 trips along the busway wasn't too lengthy or difficult. It took me about 40 minutes to rack up an extra 2 journeys. Adding the journey home, then 2 more to the shops, and I could rack up as many as 6 journeys on a Monday. Repeat some of this on Tuesday and the rest of the week is free.

Unfortunately, in the afternoon, I found a slight "glitch" where I was charged for my 11th journey, which commenced 10 minutes after the 10th. I was wondering if there's a time delay before the free travel kicked in. The day after was free.

One of my colleagues (a Gold Coaster) managed 10 journeys on a Monday morning before he started work.  It took him about 1.5 hours to cycle up and down Mater Hill-South Bank-Cultural Centre, after getting off the train at South Bank. He saved around $60 by doing that. He also said it was much quicker and easier on the buses than trains because of the bus frequency and location of the go card readers.

[Mr X]

HBU did... err.. 0 

[Fares_Fair]

I've also done 14 last week and I'm up to 13 this week (free travel today). The new structure is definitely changing the way I use my go card. It certainly encourages me to make extra journeys early in the week (whether going to to shops, gym, lunchtime walking, touring the bus stations/Adelaide St). Even later in the week, further travel is encouraged because it's free.

There has been some discussion at my workplace as to how much money could be saved and how one could rack up 10 journeys as soon as possible. I found it reasonably easy to break my morning commute into 5 trips, hopping on and off along the busway/Adelaide St, without changing direction of travel or adding much time to the journey. This counted as 2 journeys, one of which is 1 zone. During lunchtime, taking 5 trips along the busway wasn't too lengthy or difficult. It took me about 40 minutes to rack up an extra 2 journeys. Adding the journey home, then 2 more to the shops, and I could rack up as many as 6 journeys on a Monday. Repeat some of this on Tuesday and the rest of the week is free.

Unfortunately, in the afternoon, I found a slight "glitch" where I was charged for my 11th journey, which commenced 10 minutes after the 10th. I was wondering if there's a time delay before the free travel kicked in. The day after was free.

One of my colleagues (a Gold Coaster) managed 10 journeys on a Monday morning before he started work.  It took him about 1.5 hours to cycle up and down Mater Hill-South Bank-Cultural Centre, after getting off the train at South Bank. He saved around $60 by doing that. He also said it was much quicker and easier on the buses than trains because of the bus frequency and location of the go card readers.

Hello WIN,

Not sure how that is possible given that there needs to be 1 hour between touch off and touch on to be a separate journey. I don't doubt what you are saying, just not sure why.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[ozbob]

You can only transfer three times, after that a new journey is triggered.  It matters not if still within the transfer time limits.  After three transfers, new journey commences on the next transfer attempt.

[Fares_Fair]

You can only transfer three times, after that a new journey is triggered.  It matters not if still within the transfer time limits.  After three transfers, new journey commences on the next transfer attempt.

Ahhh !  Oh.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[somebody]

BrizCommuter expects an increase in off-peak use this year, but not too sure about peak.

I'd agree.  The trouble is that it is only targeting those who are doing 10 journeys/week anyway.

There has been some discussion at my workplace as to how much money could be saved and how one could rack up 10 journeys as soon as possible. I found it reasonably easy to break my morning commute into 5 trips, hopping on and off along the busway/Adelaide St, without changing direction of travel or adding much time to the journey. This counted as 2 journeys, one of which is 1 zone. During lunchtime, taking 5 trips along the busway wasn't too lengthy or difficult. It took me about 40 minutes to rack up an extra 2 journeys. Adding the journey home, then 2 more to the shops, and I could rack up as many as 6 journeys on a Monday. Repeat some of this on Tuesday and the rest of the week is free.

It's a great fare structure 

[WTN]

I do have to admit, racking up trips to force the transfer counter to reset and start a new journey feels somewhat like a loophole. Racking up all 10 journeys on a Monday in one hit feels even more so. However, the time and effort required is enough to dissuade most. If done in the morning peak, one would have to arrive over 1hr early and forgo the offpeak discount. And it would be too lengthy to do it all in a lunch break. So I think we'll see more sensible alternatives to displace as many (but not all) full fare trips as reasonable.

Offpeak use would increase, but I also think peak use will decrease or stay much the same. Sadly, those who consider peak fares are too high will probably get lost to other forms of transport, given no option to travel offpeak.

[ozbob]

The number of pax who genuinely do more than three transfers in a regular journey would be very small.  It is been mentioned that if the three trip transfer rule was opened up to just the transfer time limits ie. you could do up to 10 or more transfers theoretically in the present time limits would close off that loophole, and have no effect on the majority at all.  The one hour rule would still apply so they only pax really disadvantaged would be rorters as such.

[Fares_Fair]

Agreee 

Thank you to all those who contributed to the poll.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.