Split thread from Re: Go Card Feedback - tell us of your Go Card experiences!!

[techblitz]

james...

ive never ever come across any bus driver be it BCC,westside,logan,or hornibrook that intentionally runs late.
Get over yourself with your plain as day obvious BCC/BTT itch on the shoulder you cant seem to scrape off.

Oh, to the contrary.

I have actually spent 8 minutes waiting for a late-running 427 at UQ (Chancellors Place). This bus, and this bus driver - I could see just sitting in the layover zone. There was no reason why he could not have departed on time. I've had similar issues with numerous 428s at both Indooroopilly and UQ. At Indooroopilly, the bus will just sit in the spot where the P88s used to lay over. You can see the bus, and there is no reason why it should be held up. But it just sits there.

It is an especially big issue when dealing with the large loads the UQ buses deal with. Especially if a 428 goes out completely full and a 427 almost empty, passengers at intermediate stops get frustrated seeing a half-empty express bus pass them.

I have a beef specifically with BCC as the way they operate the bus network is not in the best interests of customers. Now I have not used many other bus carriers, but I can say Surfside does very well. It isn't common for buses to run late, and I've certainly never come across the farce situation of bus drivers leaving late.

So how many routes per day network wide does this purposefully late running happen? Have a hunch do we?
So you know for certain that those purposely late running drivers are not having legally required meal breaks? What am i thinking of course you do...

Buses run late due to peak traffic,simple mistakes by drivers or bus control due to rostering conflicts,maintenance issues. Simply stating that a lot of bt drivers are late running on purpose proves your ignorance. Im keeping quiet on this issue from now on as i honestly dont see one. Majority of bus drivers do an honest days work imo!

Sorry ozbob but as you can see its quite easy to bag bus drivers on a forum....as james has proven.
Will keep it toned down 

[longboi]

Mobility, you paint this grim picture which just isn't based in reality.

The only point which really has any validity is lining up to touch off during busy periods. Other than that, it isn't an overly difficult concept.

In my own experience, the group you would imagine would have the most difficulty adapting to change - the elderly - surprisingly have the most positive things to say about go card.

[Gazza]

True progress does not need to be imposed on the market. If something is truly progressive, people want to buy it and they don't have anything to whinge about.

I think you are being kidding yourself if you think any technology is captivating enough get 100% uptake in a short period of time.

And yes, it does have to be "imposed" because it's not economical to run parallel systems over the long term.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Or maybe the holder uses it wrong, which is very easy to do

How? The card works in any direction, upside down or right way up.
Can you give examples of people using go cards wrong?

One sort of common thing I see at Strathpine and on a few BT buses now and then are the double taps because they are in a hurry and it didn't beep straight away so they tap again. But that's user error and not an error with the GoCard system. IMHO GoCard is one of the best PT systems in the world. It has some flaws and limitations but for a ticketing system across multiple modes of transport, a host of different operators and the size of the region its brilliant. Its only recently that we have seen other PT operators have similar systems to GoCard but look how long we've already had it for.

[newbris]

The question is why did they need to increase the price of paper tickets this much if the Go Card is inherently the better choice, in terms of price, convenience, speed and other factors?

The issue is the old fashioned people won't adopt new tech unless pushed, "because that's the way they've always done it", so unless you create a financial disincentive, they'll continue to pay the bus driver every time, slowing it down for everyone else.
It's bad enough as it is when paper ticket buyers stand in the doorway such that go card users can't continue to file past.

There's only one real way of dealing with that.  Do some progress and remove paper tickets altogether.  Sure, they'll jump up and down, whinge, but hey people move on, life goes on.

True progress does not need to be imposed on the market. If something is truly progressive, people want to buy it and they don't have anything to whinge about.

Being a universal change means not only do you have to convince those open to change but also those not open to it. I think it is different to new tech like mobile phones in this way where people can come around in their own good time, and some not at all.

How is that different? If Go Card were as simple and easy as some people claim, nobody would have a problem with switching. Nobody would prefer paper tickets if they were really a more difficult system

Different in the sense that it is one system that must be changed all at once...with things like mobiles people can take up the new tech at a pace that suits them...some people hate change, some struggle learning, some are sporadic users etc. The inevitable teething problems can put some off as well. Also the benefit to some groups is far bigger than others sometimes and some don't want to change for the good of the whole if they can't see a massive improvement for themselves. Many who complained when the GoCard was first announced and/or went through it's teething troubles are now converts so obviously many do need a period of adjustment before they see the benefit.

Anecdotal, but my elderly parents were saying to me this morning how great it is to get around armed with just a GoCard...I know many who think it is a lot more convenient to have a card in your wallet always topped up that charges you for the zones you travel through....don't have to pre-plan zones/coins etc.

Weekly and monthly tickets. Even easier. You don't even have to take them out of your pocket, except at city stations.

I can see the argument that "some" 5 day/week in and out commuters preferred their weekly/monthlies. But these only suit a section of the system users. For example:
- people who only travel some days of the week
- people who aren't sure how much they will travel
- people who travel long trips part of the week and short trips for the rest
- people who travel on weekends
- people who travel mixed mode
- people who don't know the zone map of each mode they will be using that day (bus/train/ferry).
- people who want an automatic journey continuation between modes.
- tourists

My parents would not travel consistently enough (zones or number of days) to get a weekly or monthly so the GoCard is perfect. Mucking around with having the correct money, knowing the zones you are about to travel etc was such a pain for many of us...I have found it far better for my use of PT plus I love the boarding speed I usually see. So much better than pre GoCard usually.

[Mobility]

Yes, often.

No, not often. I use the bus twice a day every weekday and sometimes more often. It is very rare that I come across faulty go card readers. (BCC drivers who intentionally run late however, are a far more common occurrence!)

It happens to me often and I can't just be the one unlucky person in SEQ.

Weekly and monthly tickets. Buy them once per week or month and other times you just show the driver, who can read a ticket faster than a Go Card reader can read a card.

Weekly and monthly tickets are designed for commuters, and commuters only. Yes, they make up a lot of the amount of travel, but what if they don't travel enough to justify a weekly ticket? Then they'd be buying a paper ticket every time they travel.

You would like everyone to commute by public transport unless by bicycle or foot. Or at least use it often.

And with regards to weekly tickets - lets say you can purchase them on the bus. Guess what happens to the buses on Monday? They all run 10 minutes late because everybody is buying weeklies.

Not everyone buys weekly tickets on the same day of the week. Then there are also monthlies. They could be sold at newsagents. Many people would buy them at train stations.

Anyone can get on an unattended station and travel to another unattended station (i.e., all stations besides Roma Street, Central and Fortitude Valley) and not swipe on and off. Or if you get on at one of the city stations, get out of the train at Milton, Bowen Hills or South Brisbane, swipe off, get back on the train and continue to Caboolture, Ipswich etc. Can do the same if traveling to the city from a suburban station.

The difference here is if you can paper, you can fare gate every single railway station on the network. People can top up their go cards after passing through the fare gates. By putting fare gates at every single station, and putting cameras there, it becomes very f***ing obvious when someone fare evades and jumps the gates. CCTV/go card data can then be used to track down the fare evaders. Heck, if people get caught just find the go card data and charge them $20. That will slow them down.

For that we need staff at the gates at every station on every line from first service to last. Otherwise people just jump the gates.

Anyway, fare evasion is a different issue. We are talking about whether Go Card is either cost effective for users. If you think fare evasion prevention compensates for higher prices, that's a different point.

Right now even at gated stations like Helensvale, I can just walk through the 'paper ticket entry' and travel for free.

See what I mean?

Can't do anything about that.

I'm aware you can't do anything about that, but my point is, the time spent touching off is diddlysquat. There are much larger gains to be had by educating the PT users of Brisbane on how to get on and get off a bus in reasonably quick time. If it is just me getting off the bus, I can get off (with a go card swipe) in under 5 seconds. I do this because I recognise how much of a PITA it is when people fiddle around with their go card trying to touch off.

Just educate everyone; that sounds easy. This is an inherent problem with mass transit - you can't educate everyone, not even most people. Even people who know better are PITAs in spite of it.

See above post. That's not even all of it.

To be honest, most of your complaints seem to mostly relate to technological ineptness on the part of users rather than genuine system faults.

No, not all the reasons I have given - not even most of them - are to do with human error. However, any system which does not eliminate the human error or ineptness factor is flawed, either inherently or in design.

Because I do a lot of traveling by bus and train each day, I relatively often simply forget to swipe on or off at stations where there are no gates and on buses when getting off. Each time I do this I am fined $10 and have to phone Translink to get it back, if possible.

As if jacking fares up 40% when they introduced the system wasn't enough of a "fine" on us.

[Mobility]

Weekly and monthly tickets. Buy them once per week or month and other times you just show the driver, who can read a ticket faster than a Go Card reader can read a card.

Weekly and monthly tickets have their own difficulties too, because they require you to predict your travel in advance for the next month, and are difficult if your travel isn't in set patterns (Eg during undergrad I'd study at UQ during the week in St Lucia, but I worked down on the GC on weekends, but lived in zone 40

If you have a steady job or you are a full-time student, you know you at least regularly travel in those zones and it saves money and time to have a weekly for those. Any less frequent travel outside those zones you can buy singles for. Most people do have a set pattern of travel, i.e., travel most often within a particular zones.

To be honest, most of your complaints seem to mostly relate to technological ineptness on the part of users rather than genuine system faults.

This, the reason some people don't use go card is because they are afraid of technology in general, not because GoCard is actually that bad.

Does it really seem like I am just afraid of technology? Or might it be, for example, that I don't like paying 40% more for fares for no good reason? I'm currently paying around $3 just to travel one zone. If I buy a paper ticket, it's $4.50 for one zone, i.e. travel to the next station.

Quicker than a go card, because a person reads them instead of a machine which has to communicate with the central computer for the SEQ-wide network, which all other readers are simultaneously communicating with.

Is a person really reading them? My memory of monthly tickets is people waving them in the drivers face for a fraction of a second from a distance away. How many people would wave any old ticket at the driver and get away with it because it was hard for the driver to see, or the driver was running behind?

When they look at four hundred tickets a day they probably don't have to look long to tell. They look for more than a fraction of a second.

Or maybe the holder uses it wrong, which is very easy to do

How? The card works in any direction, upside down or right way up.
Can you give examples of people using go cards wrong?

I often did. It was easy to unwittingly double-swipe the card or swipe it without the reader reading it properly. Now I look carefully at the display every time to check what happens. This takes extra time but it's better than being charged $10 every day.

[Mobility]

Mobility, you paint this grim picture which just isn't based in reality.

The only point which really has any validity is lining up to touch off during busy periods. Other than that, it isn't an overly difficult concept.

I'm not painting a picture, I'm making valid criticisms - more than just one. How about the initial 40% increase in fares when the system was introduced? The overall advantages of the system (which I believe is zero) don't justify that far higher price.

In my own experience, the group you would imagine would have the most difficulty adapting to change - the elderly - surprisingly have the most positive things to say about go card.

Being retired, elderly people generally have more time than younger people.

[Mobility]

True progress does not need to be imposed on the market. If something is truly progressive, people want to buy it and they don't have anything to whinge about.

I think you are being kidding yourself if you think any technology is captivating enough get 100% uptake in a short period of time.

And yes, it does have to be "imposed" because it's not economical to run parallel systems over the long term.

It is always economical to provide choices in the market place. If the Go Card system is expensive and uneconomical, that is the fault of the Go Card system and a good reason why there should be no parallel system. There was never a good reason to leave paper tickets. Go Card doesn't do any of the things it was claimed to: cut staff, save expense, cut costs to passengers, cut fare evasion, save time. You still need the same amount of staff, fares are much higher, the system is slow to use and more prone to human error as well as technical faults and damage. It doesn't stop fare evasion unless you have staff attending every station, in which case you would not need the Go Card for this anyway.

[HappyTrainGuy]

The GoCard system isn't expensive. Its the network design (BT being the only operator not willing to improve its network and reduce costs - as a result of BCC) and fare leakage from political promises making the system expensive.

[Mobility]

Different in the sense that it is one system that must be changed all at once...with things like mobiles people can take up the new tech at a pace that suits them...some people hate change, some struggle learning, some are sporadic users etc. The inevitable teething problems can put some off as well. Also the benefit to some groups is far bigger than others sometimes and some don't want to change for the good of the whole if they can't see a massive improvement for themselves. Many who complained when the GoCard was first announced and/or went through it's teething troubles are now converts so obviously many do need a period of adjustment before they see the benefit.

......

I can see the argument that "some" 5 day/week in and out commuters preferred their weekly/monthlies. But these only suit a section of the system users. For example:
- people who only travel some days of the week
- people who aren't sure how much they will travel
- people who travel long trips part of the week and short trips for the rest
- people who travel on weekends
- people who travel mixed mode
- people who don't know the zone map of each mode they will be using that day (bus/train/ferry).
- people who want an automatic journey continuation between modes.
- tourists

My parents would not travel consistently enough (zones or number of days) to get a weekly or monthly so the GoCard is perfect. Mucking around with having the correct money, knowing the zones you are about to travel etc was such a pain for many of us...I have found it far better for my use of PT plus I love the boarding speed I usually see. So much better than pre GoCard usually.

In any market, people must be given choices. That is the only way to determine which choice is best, both individually or in general. There is no reason why we could not have both Go Card and paper tickets, at their natural respective prices, so that people can choose individually what suits them in terms of price, travel patterns, convenience etc. There is no need to impose Go Card on everyone whether it suits them or not.

Public transport is not perfect. It is inherently slow, expensive. prone to abuse and so on. There is futile to attempt to change these inherent features of public transport.

[newbris]

Different in the sense that it is one system that must be changed all at once...with things like mobiles people can take up the new tech at a pace that suits them...some people hate change, some struggle learning, some are sporadic users etc. The inevitable teething problems can put some off as well. Also the benefit to some groups is far bigger than others sometimes and some don't want to change for the good of the whole if they can't see a massive improvement for themselves. Many who complained when the GoCard was first announced and/or went through it's teething troubles are now converts so obviously many do need a period of adjustment before they see the benefit.

......

I can see the argument that "some" 5 day/week in and out commuters preferred their weekly/monthlies. But these only suit a section of the system users. For example:
- people who only travel some days of the week
- people who aren't sure how much they will travel
- people who travel long trips part of the week and short trips for the rest
- people who travel on weekends
- people who travel mixed mode
- people who don't know the zone map of each mode they will be using that day (bus/train/ferry).
- people who want an automatic journey continuation between modes.
- tourists

My parents would not travel consistently enough (zones or number of days) to get a weekly or monthly so the GoCard is perfect. Mucking around with having the correct money, knowing the zones you are about to travel etc was such a pain for many of us...I have found it far better for my use of PT plus I love the boarding speed I usually see. So much better than pre GoCard usually.

In any market, people must be given choices. That is the only way to determine which choice is best, both individually or in general. There is no reason why we could not have both Go Card and paper tickets, at their natural respective prices, so that people can choose individually what suits them in terms of price, travel patterns, convenience etc. There is no need to impose Go Card on everyone whether it suits them or not.

Public transport is not perfect. It is inherently slow, expensive. prone to abuse and so on. There is futile to attempt to change these inherent features of public transport.

Disagree. The everything is a market philosophy doesn't match every reality imo as it risks slipping into being an empty political slogan. Running just the one fire service suits me fine.

I grew up with single paper tickets, then things moved on with weeklies on the buses, monthlies on the trains. All sorts of things I didn't like about it were fixed by the GoCard. Buses had weeklies, trains had monthlies. I had to care about zone maps and knowledge of the bus zones, train zones, ferry zones. My weeklies had to be for the right number of zones which didn't match how I used the system at all. Monthlies could only be used by regular train 5 day commuters. I HATED making sure I had the right money. Transfers were a pain in the arse. The system felt disjointed, complicated, clumsy and parts of it felt off limits to me as a casual user. The paper system was for a small city of in/out commuters. Big cities need integrated ticketing. Providing the benefits the GoCard does with paper tickets would have been prohibitively expensive if it was even possible.

Now it is FAR, FAR better. I can jump on a bus with my son, decide on the bus where we are getting off. Transfer to a citycat or jump on train. We don't have to concern ourselves with the system at all. Swipe on, swipe off and leave the rest to the computer. We can do this from Sunshine Coast to Gold Coast with all different council/private operators and on buses, trains, citycats, ferries, light rail, GoGet cars, citycycle bicycles. I love it and if someone tried to sell me the crappy old system back. NO SALE

[Gazza]

To be honest, it's only really the monthly ticket deal that was a real loss (But then it's arguable what benefit there is to only having a discount available to one group of users...I'm of the school of thought that it should be a set everyday low price for everyone, no favouritism, but i digress)


Weeklies are replicated by having 9 trips then free on the go card, so no need to duplicate it on paper.

There is no reason why we could not have both Go Card and paper tickets, at their natural respective prices, so that people can choose individually what suits them in terms of price, travel patterns, convenience etc.

But again, the problem is people buying a paper ticket every time they ride, because it slows down things for other users.

In this case, the needs of the 30 people already on the bus outweighs any preference of the individual who repeatedly holds up the bus by paying with cash every time.

Why is their convenience more important to you?

[HappyTrainGuy]

To be honest, it's only really the monthly ticket deal that was a real loss (But then it's arguable what benefit there is to only having a discount available to one group of users...I'm of the school of thought that it should be a set everyday low price for everyone, no favouritism, but i digress)


Weeklies are replicated by having 9 trips then free on the go card, so no need to duplicate it on paper.

There is no reason why we could not have both Go Card and paper tickets, at their natural respective prices, so that people can choose individually what suits them in terms of price, travel patterns, convenience etc.

But again, the problem is people buying a paper ticket every time they ride, because it slows down things for other users.

In this case, the needs of the 30 people already on the bus outweighs any preference of the individual who repeatedly holds up the bus by paying with cash every time.

Why is their convenience more important to you?

A prime example of this is being on a southern busway service and someone decides to buy a ticket. Bus after bus goes past all because one or more people are buying a paper ticket.

[James]

It happens to me often and I can't just be the one unlucky person in SEQ.

How often? If its a frequent occurrence I'd report it to TransLink. But I think it is just the minority of cases standing out.

You would like everyone to commute by public transport unless by bicycle or foot. Or at least use it often.

Not everyone buys weekly tickets on the same day of the week. Then there are also monthlies. They could be sold at newsagents. Many people would buy them at train stations.

This is hardly a response to my question.

Lets put an example person in a Uni student position. We'll call him Commuter.
Commuter has Uni 3 days a week, and travels two zones to do this.
Commuter does one round trip a week to the local shops, travelling one zone.
Commuter also does one round trip to the Gold Coast on Saturday to visit a family member/friend. This is a 12-zone trip.
Commuter does not, and will not, travel by PT at any other time. (There can be any reason for this - closeness, lack of social life etc.)

Under the current fare structure, Commuter (assuming he is a full time Uni student), will only pay around $18 for his travel, getting his trip back from the coast free.

Under your proposed fare structure, if a weekly costs 9 two-zone fares, Commuter is better off buying a paper ticket every time he travels, as he will have to purchase a paper ticket for his cost trip in both directions, and the two-zone weekly will not pay for itself.

Another example could be someone working part-time in Brisbane but living on the coast. Admittedly the current fare structure should be improved (8 then 50% is a good idea IMO), but the one you suggest will drive people to buying paper tickets. And this could end up being every single commuter. If we proceed like you suggest we would, I personally would just prefer if we brought back ten-trippers.

The go card system caters well to both regular commuters and irregular commuters alike. Paper would only appeal to one group, the regulars buying their weeklies/monthlies.

Regarding purchase spread - a lot of commuters still commute by bus. In a proper network, where people are fed into rail, people's first contact with PT would be on a bus - hence needing to purchase a weekly on the bus.

For that we need staff at the gates at every station on every line from first service to last. Otherwise people just jump the gates.

Anyway, fare evasion is a different issue. We are talking about whether Go Card is either cost effective for users. If you think fare evasion prevention compensates for higher prices, that's a different point.

See what I mean?

Yes, there's the aspect of staff at gates - but under the current set up, someone can just walk around the gates without a question, and there is no way of determining whether they are fare evading or not. Under a go card only set up, fare evaders become very obvious. Put a puddle of water near where they land and both break their ankle and fine them $220 for fare evasion. 

No, not all the reasons I have given - not even most of them - are to do with human error. However, any system which does not eliminate the human error or ineptness factor is flawed, either inherently or in design.

Because I do a lot of traveling by bus and train each day, I relatively often simply forget to swipe on or off at stations where there are no gates and on buses when getting off. Each time I do this I am fined $10 and have to phone Translink to get it back, if possible.

As if jacking fares up 40% when they introduced the system wasn't enough of a "fine" on us.

And this is why you need to remember to touch on and touch off. I manage to do it, millions of other travellers manage to do it too. And only paper fares were jacked up. And rightly so.

But again, the problem is people buying a paper ticket every time they ride, because it slows down things for other users.

In this case, the needs of the 30 people already on the bus outweighs any preference of the individual who repeatedly holds up the bus by paying with cash every time.

Why is their convenience more important to you?

^ good posting.

[techblitz]

To be honest, it's only really the monthly ticket deal that was a real loss (But then it's arguable what benefit there is to only having a discount available to one group of users...I'm of the school of thought that it should be a set everyday low price for everyone, no favouritism, but i digress)


Weeklies are replicated by having 9 trips then free on the go card, so no need to duplicate it on paper.

There is no reason why we could not have both Go Card and paper tickets, at their natural respective prices, so that people can choose individually what suits them in terms of price, travel patterns, convenience etc.

But again, the problem is people buying a paper ticket every time they ride, because it slows down things for other users.

In this case, the needs of the 30 people already on the bus outweighs any preference of the individual who repeatedly holds up the bus by paying with cash every time.

Why is their convenience more important to you?

A prime example of this is being on a southern busway service and someone decides to buy a ticket. Bus after bus goes past all because one or more people are buying a paper ticket.

Not wrong...
every passenger at some point or time misses a connecting service due to a passenger purchasing their paper ticket. I frequently miss connections from the 120 due to paper ticket purchasers or is that coz the bus driver is purposefully late 

[Gazza]

Because I do a lot of traveling by bus and train each day, I relatively often simply forget to swipe on or off at stations where there are no gates and on buses when getting off.

Bit of a weak excuse.
Forgetting to touch off is a bit like forgetting to flush the toilet, or forgetting to lock the car after you park it.

[HappyTrainGuy]

There is a way around fare gates being staffed and that's ceiling height doors that open once a ticket is read in the machine. France is a common place to see this.

[James]

There is a way around fare gates being staffed and that's ceiling height doors that open once a ticket is read in the machine. France is a common place to see this.

One problem I see with this is vandalism, or people breaking the things. The vandals will find a way. May I suggest a conveniently placed steel beam instead, so anybody who tries to jump over gets seriously injured. Issue could be the lawyers may very well have a field day on it. Two getting through the gate at once isn't as big an issue to me right now. Fare evasion is causing massive fare box leakage, especially on off-peak services. Even if half of the fare evaders end up paying, it is far more preferable to the current situation where a lot of people don't pay full stop.

[HappyTrainGuy]

AFAIK they are a steel panel door. Pretty sure they were on the exit gates so they only open/close when someone wants to exit the subway so you could rig up a ticketing system to it.

[SurfRail]

I don't know if Mobility has touched on one of the most important benefits of go card - it increases the quality of data available for service planning.  That is one of the most significant reasons why TransLink's proposals for the Brisbane bus network looked like they did, being based on actual data and not just a lot of guesswork.

[Mobility]

The GoCard system isn't expensive. Its the network design (BT being the only operator not willing to improve its network and reduce costs - as a result of BCC) and fare leakage from political promises making the system expensive.

What is there to improve? The system is cards, readers, gates, cables and a big CPU. I don't know what fare leakage has to do with political promises.

[bcasey]

I don't know if Mobility has touched on one of the most important benefits of go card - it increases the quality of data available for service planning.  That is one of the most significant reasons why TransLink's proposals for the Brisbane bus network looked like they did, being based on actual data and not just a lot of guesswork.

I was going to mention this, but you beat me to it. Go-card data provides a wealth of quality data for transit planners, researchers and application developers to work on. The recent Translink Review used the origin-destination data from Go-Card to develop the high-frequency, well-connected network that was presented. While the feeder lines could have been better communciated to the public, and it had some issues with certain areas, overall it was a very good plan, and the go-card data was a primary reason for this. Obtaining this data from the previous payment systems in place would be very difficult, if not impossible, and definitely not with the same quality that the go-card system provides.

Additionally, this data could be used by application developers to help include features in public transport apps to tell you approximately how full each of the services will be, in order to give you alternatives in case you don't want to get on a near-to-capacity vehicle. Obviously, unless the data is provided in real-time, this will not be 100% accurate, but even using it as a historical source is better than no data at all.

Ultimately, I expect that newer systems that allow you to swipe a NFC-equiped mobile phone with a public-transport app that has access to your bank-account, paypal or credit-card details, may be introduced in the future, to make things even more easier. But the current go-card system is superior in many ways to the paper-based system that came before it.

[Mobility]

In any market, people must be given choices. That is the only way to determine which choice is best, both individually or in general. There is no reason why we could not have both Go Card and paper tickets, at their natural respective prices, so that people can choose individually what suits them in terms of price, travel patterns, convenience etc. There is no need to impose Go Card on everyone whether it suits them or not.

Public transport is not perfect. It is inherently slow, expensive. prone to abuse and so on. There is futile to attempt to change these inherent features of public transport.

Disagree. The everything is a market philosophy doesn't match every reality imo as it risks slipping into being an empty political slogan. Running just the one fire service suits me fine.

Giving people choices about what individually suits them is bad in this case. It's not realistic. Instead, we should only have the system that suits you.

I grew up with single paper tickets, then things moved on with weeklies on the buses, monthlies on the trains. All sorts of things I didn't like about it were fixed by the GoCard. Buses had weeklies, trains had monthlies. I had to care about zone maps and knowledge of the bus zones, train zones, ferry zones. My weeklies had to be for the right number of zones which didn't match how I used the system at all. Monthlies could only be used by regular train 5 day commuters. I HATED making sure I had the right money. Transfers were a pain in the arse. The system felt disjointed, complicated, clumsy and parts of it felt off limits to me as a casual user. The paper system was for a small city of in/out commuters. Big cities need integrated ticketing. Providing the benefits the GoCard does with paper tickets would have been prohibitively expensive if it was even possible.

These are all inherent problems with public transport. What do you want, to be able to get into a vehicle and travel from A to B and pay only for the distance you travel? Why, only a car can do that.

The Go Card stops you from having to watch zone boundaries but with a 40% increase in fares across the board. So instead of worrying about zone boundaries to make sure you save money, now you just pay 40% more for a system that automatically watches the zone boundaries. Financially, you may as well keep the paper tickets and not watch zone boundaries; you are still ahead.

Monthlies and weeklies could be revived and allowed to be used on both trains and buses. They are not intended to fix all the problems with zone boundaries, they are just ways to save money (and time) for the frequent types of trips you make.

Now it is FAR, FAR better. I can jump on a bus with my son, decide on the bus where we are getting off. Transfer to a citycat or jump on train. We don't have to concern ourselves with the system at all. Swipe on, swipe off and leave the rest to the computer. We can do this from Sunshine Coast to Gold Coast with all different council/private operators and on buses, trains, citycats, ferries, light rail, GoGet cars, citycycle bicycles. I love it and if someone tried to sell me the crappy old system back. NO SALE

If anyone did that much traveling every day. Again, the 40% increase cancels all these benefits.

[Mobility]

To be honest, it's only really the monthly ticket deal that was a real loss (But then it's arguable what benefit there is to only having a discount available to one group of users...I'm of the school of thought that it should be a set everyday low price for everyone, no favouritism, but i digress)


Weeklies are replicated by having 9 trips then free on the go card, so no need to duplicate it on paper.

Except Weeklies only leave your wallet when you need to show them. And you don't get charged $10 every time something goes wrong, because nothing does go wrong.

There is no reason why we could not have both Go Card and paper tickets, at their natural respective prices, so that people can choose individually what suits them in terms of price, travel patterns, convenience etc.

But again, the problem is people buying a paper ticket every time they ride, because it slows down things for other users.

In this case, the needs of the 30 people already on the bus outweighs any preference of the individual who repeatedly holds up the bus by paying with cash every time.

Why is their convenience more important to you?

One person buying a ticket holds up the bus? If you care that much about saving time, why are you on a bus?

[Arnz]

One person buying a ticket holds up the bus? If you care that much about saving time, why are you on a bus?

Yes it actually does from my and many other users' experience.  Why should they hold up the bus for a few minutes in peak hour traffic whilst they fumble for their change or the occasional person throwing out lose change?

As other already said, most other places in Australia are progressing towards a paper-free system.  Sydney's system is slowly progressing but will eventually get there whilst Melbourne and Perth are already for the most part paper free.

Whilst the go-card system in Queensland is not perfect, the London system (which uses the same provider as Queensland) already shows that periodicals (eg monthlies) can be done.  It was the bungle of the previous Queensland government by purchasing an outdated version of the software which led to the "9 and Free" weekly pass on the go card.

For those with genuine medical/health/disability conditions preventing them from using a go card, TransLink already offers the TransLink Access Pass for those with those unable to use the go card due to said conditions.  Link - http://translink.com.au/tickets-and-fares/concessions/translink-access-pass

I know many Queenslanders are slow, but why should Queensland pander to the vocal minority (the few insisting to keep paper) by keeping a outdated system which is wasting money?  It is thinking like that which is why Queensland is laughed at by the rest of Australia and the world for being the most backward state in the world on many issues. 

There is already a Access Pass for those with health/medical/disabilities that may prevent certain passengers from using go cards, so there is no excuse for them to keep paper.

[Mobility]

It happens to me often and I can't just be the one unlucky person in SEQ.

How often? If its a frequent occurrence I'd report it to TransLink. But I think it is just the minority of cases standing out.

Those minority cases cost $10 each time. Sure, tell the halfwits who lumbered us with the mess in the first place. I've tried talking to those cretins. It's no accident the only customer relations staff they have is a closed-off call centre in Milton. They had an info centre on Albert St near King George Square but the staff there were just paid to neutralize any criticism or complaints.

You would like everyone to commute by public transport unless by bicycle or foot. Or at least use it often.

Not everyone buys weekly tickets on the same day of the week. Then there are also monthlies. They could be sold at newsagents. Many people would buy them at train stations.

This is hardly a response to my question.

People who don't travel often enough to use weekly or monthly tickets also won't often hold up your bus by paying for singles.

Lets put an example person in a Uni student position. We'll call him Commuter.
Commuter has Uni 3 days a week, and travels two zones to do this.
Commuter does one round trip a week to the local shops, travelling one zone.
Commuter also does one round trip to the Gold Coast on Saturday to visit a family member/friend. This is a 12-zone trip.
Commuter does not, and will not, travel by PT at any other time. (There can be any reason for this - closeness, lack of social life etc.)

Under the current fare structure, Commuter (assuming he is a full time Uni student), will only pay around $18 for his travel, getting his trip back from the coast free.

Under your proposed fare structure, if a weekly costs 9 two-zone fares, Commuter is better off buying a paper ticket every time he travels, as he will have to purchase a paper ticket for his cost trip in both directions, and the two-zone weekly will not pay for itself.

Daily tickets. Then he only buys a ticket once a day. Make tickets available at stores so people don't have to buy them from bus drivers.

Another example could be someone working part-time in Brisbane but living on the coast. Admittedly the current fare structure should be improved (8 then 50% is a good idea IMO), but the one you suggest will drive people to buying paper tickets. And this could end up being every single commuter. If we proceed like you suggest we would, I personally would just prefer if we brought back ten-trippers.

Also a good idea.

The go card system caters well to both regular commuters and irregular commuters alike. Paper would only appeal to one group, the regulars buying their weeklies/monthlies.

I'm a regular and I would prefer weeklies/monthlies, and I have posted at length here about why.

Regarding purchase spread - a lot of commuters still commute by bus. In a proper network, where people are fed into rail, people's first contact with PT would be on a bus - hence needing to purchase a weekly on the bus.

Only once per week. They could be sold at newsagents as well.

For that we need staff at the gates at every station on every line from first service to last. Otherwise people just jump the gates.

Anyway, fare evasion is a different issue. We are talking about whether Go Card is either cost effective for users. If you think fare evasion prevention compensates for higher prices, that's a different point.

See what I mean?

Yes, there's the aspect of staff at gates - but under the current set up, someone can just walk around the gates without a question, and there is no way of determining whether they are fare evading or not. Under a go card only set up, fare evaders become very obvious. Put a puddle of water near where they land and both break their ankle and fine them $220 for fare evasion. 

Walk around the gates?

We can't afford to have staff at gates at every station from 5 am to 11:30 pm.

No, not all the reasons I have given - not even most of them - are to do with human error. However, any system which does not eliminate the human error or ineptness factor is flawed, either inherently or in design.

Because I do a lot of traveling by bus and train each day, I relatively often simply forget to swipe on or off at stations where there are no gates and on buses when getting off. Each time I do this I am fined $10 and have to phone Translink to get it back, if possible.

As if jacking fares up 40% when they introduced the system wasn't enough of a "fine" on us.

And this is why you need to remember to touch on and touch off. I manage to do it, millions of other travellers manage to do it too. And only paper fares were jacked up. And rightly so.

I remember most times but it is easy to forget sometimes. My point is that there is human error inherent in the system and not only that, you are heavily fined for it.

The introduction of Go Card increased fares for both Go Card and paper tickets, because of the cost of running and maintaining the Go Card network.

[Mobility]

But again, the problem is people buying a paper ticket every time they ride, because it slows down things for other users.

In this case, the needs of the 30 people already on the bus outweighs any preference of the individual who repeatedly holds up the bus by paying with cash every time.

Why is their convenience more important to you?

A prime example of this is being on a southern busway service and someone decides to buy a ticket. Bus after bus goes past all because one or more people are buying a paper ticket.

Not wrong...
every passenger at some point or time misses a connecting service due to a passenger purchasing their paper ticket. I frequently miss connections from the 120 due to paper ticket purchasers or is that coz the bus driver is purposefully late 

That's just an inherent problem with public transport. You can't transfer the blame to users. Public transport just is slow and requires connecting services. What, you think you can just get in one vehicle and go from A to B with no stops? Science fiction!

[Mobility]

Because I do a lot of traveling by bus and train each day, I relatively often simply forget to swipe on or off at stations where there are no gates and on buses when getting off.

Bit of a weak excuse.
Forgetting to touch off is a bit like forgetting to flush the toilet, or forgetting to lock the car after you park it.

Except I swipe on and off up to eight times every day. I'm not making excuses, I'm pointing out a flaw in the system: proneness to human error. There is such a thing.

[Mobility]

There is a way around fare gates being staffed and that's ceiling height doors that open once a ticket is read in the machine. France is a common place to see this.

One problem I see with this is vandalism, or people breaking the things. The vandals will find a way. May I suggest a conveniently placed steel beam instead, so anybody who tries to jump over gets seriously injured. Issue could be the lawyers may very well have a field day on it. Two getting through the gate at once isn't as big an issue to me right now. Fare evasion is causing massive fare box leakage, especially on off-peak services. Even if half of the fare evaders end up paying, it is far more preferable to the current situation where a lot of people don't pay full stop.

With no staff watching, people can still get through more than one at a time.

Yes I think the lawyers would enjoy people being badly injured to prevent fare evasion.

Fare evasion is presumably compensated by the huge fines issued by transit cops. That's all that's really needed for prevention of fare evasion. A better way is to bring back ticket inspectors who can sell people tickets instead of fining them. Far more user-friendly.

[Mobility]

I don't know if Mobility has touched on one of the most important benefits of go card - it increases the quality of data available for service planning.  That is one of the most significant reasons why TransLink's proposals for the Brisbane bus network looked like they did, being based on actual data and not just a lot of guesswork.

Ticket sales provide this data too.

[Arnz]

I don't know if Mobility has touched on one of the most important benefits of go card - it increases the quality of data available for service planning.  That is one of the most significant reasons why TransLink's proposals for the Brisbane bus network looked like they did, being based on actual data and not just a lot of guesswork.

Ticket sales provide this data too.

Paper tickets don't exactly provide the data on where the passenger exactly gets off.  Go cards do via Stop IDs.

[Mobility]

One person buying a ticket holds up the bus? If you care that much about saving time, why are you on a bus?

Yes it actually does from my and many other users' experience.  Why should they hold up the bus for a few minutes in peak hour traffic whilst they fumble for their change or the occasional person throwing out lose change?

As other already said, most other places in Australia are progressing towards a paper-free system.  Sydney's system is slowly progressing but will eventually get there whilst Melbourne and Perth are already for the most part paper free.

Whilst the go-card system in Queensland is not perfect, the London system (which uses the same provider as Queensland) already shows that periodicals (eg monthlies) can be done.  It was the bungle of the previous Queensland government by purchasing an outdated version of the software which led to the "9 and Free" weekly pass on the go card.

For those with genuine medical/health/disability conditions preventing them from using a go card, TransLink already offers the TransLink Access Pass for those with those unable to use the go card due to said conditions.  Link - http://translink.com.au/tickets-and-fares/concessions/translink-access-pass

I know many Queenslanders are slow, but why should Queensland pander to the vocal minority (the few insisting to keep paper) by keeping a outdated system which is wasting money?  It is thinking like that which is why Queensland is laughed at by the rest of Australia and the world for being the most backward state in the world on many issues. 

There is already a Access Pass for those with health/medical/disabilities that may prevent certain passengers from using go cards, so there is no excuse for them to keep paper.

Wasting money? Paper costs next to nothing and the prices for paper tickets (everybody!) were 40% less than Go Card, and that was before the two fare increases which have occurred since.

Let's see, machines which print on paper or a network of electronic readers one or more for every platform, station office, bus connected by cables clear across SEQ. I need a calculator.

[Arnz]

One person buying a ticket holds up the bus? If you care that much about saving time, why are you on a bus?

Yes it actually does from my and many other users' experience.  Why should they hold up the bus for a few minutes in peak hour traffic whilst they fumble for their change or the occasional person throwing out lose change?

As other already said, most other places in Australia are progressing towards a paper-free system.  Sydney's system is slowly progressing but will eventually get there whilst Melbourne and Perth are already for the most part paper free.

Whilst the go-card system in Queensland is not perfect, the London system (which uses the same provider as Queensland) already shows that periodicals (eg monthlies) can be done.  It was the bungle of the previous Queensland government by purchasing an outdated version of the software which led to the "9 and Free" weekly pass on the go card.

For those with genuine medical/health/disability conditions preventing them from using a go card, TransLink already offers the TransLink Access Pass for those with those unable to use the go card due to said conditions.  Link - http://translink.com.au/tickets-and-fares/concessions/translink-access-pass

I know many Queenslanders are slow, but why should Queensland pander to the vocal minority (the few insisting to keep paper) by keeping a outdated system which is wasting money?  It is thinking like that which is why Queensland is laughed at by the rest of Australia and the world for being the most backward state in the world on many issues. 

There is already a Access Pass for those with health/medical/disabilities that may prevent certain passengers from using go cards, so there is no excuse for them to keep paper.

Wasting money? Paper costs next to nothing and the prices for paper tickets (everybody!) were 40% less than Go Card, and that was before the two fare increases which have occurred since.

Let's see, machines which print on paper or a network of electronic readers one or more for every platform, station office, bus connected by cables clear across SEQ. I can't decide.

It is wasting money by operating two types of systems, not to mention a waste from a environmental (aka "greenies") perspective by having to cut the trees down to make the paper.

Again I still can't see a strong argument why Queensland should pander backwards to the vocal minority on why they should keep paper whilst most other places in Australia and the world have already either got rid of paper, or are progressing towards getting rid of paper. 

How about Queensland leads for once (either alongside a group or being the first) instead of being laughed at by the world for being the most backwards state in the world courtesy of a number of vocal minority groups.

[techblitz]

I don't know if Mobility has touched on one of the most important benefits of go card - it increases the quality of data available for service planning.  That is one of the most significant reasons why TransLink's proposals for the Brisbane bus network looked like they did, being based on actual data and not just a lot of guesswork.

Ticket sales provide this data too.

Paper tickets don't exactly provide the data on where the passenger exactly gets off.  Go cards do via Stop IDs.

which is hands down the best for suburb by suburb analysis

[Mobility]

I don't know if Mobility has touched on one of the most important benefits of go card - it increases the quality of data available for service planning.  That is one of the most significant reasons why TransLink's proposals for the Brisbane bus network looked like they did, being based on actual data and not just a lot of guesswork.

Ticket sales provide this data too.

Paper tickets don't exactly provide the data on where the passenger exactly gets off.  Go cards do via Stop IDs.

Like they'd drop a service just because five less people get on.

All that service use data tells us is which presently existing services people use. It doesn't tell us where people would like new services to go.

[Mobility]

It is wasting money by operating two types of systems, not to mention a waste from a environmental (aka "greenies") perspective by having to cut the trees down to make the paper.

Again I still can't see a strong argument why Queensland should pander backwards to the vocal minority on why they should keep paper whilst most other places in Australia and the world have already either got rid of paper, or are progressing towards getting rid of paper. 

How about Queensland leads for once (either alongside a group or being the first) instead of being laughed at by the world for being the most backwards state in the world courtesy of a number of vocal minority groups.

Go Card's electricity use exceeds the impact of paper tickets on resources. Just making one Go Card reader would use more oil. paper and metal than the equivalent in paper tickets for one year.

Queensland would only be leading if it were a good idea in the first place. We would not be leading, we would be following. That's what being afraid of being laughed at means: conformity to the ideas of others. I hate this kind of emotional blackmail. It's the last resort for someone who can't defend something on it's actual merits.

[Arnz]

It is wasting money by operating two types of systems, not to mention a waste from a environmental (aka "greenies") perspective by having to cut the trees down to make the paper.

Again I still can't see a strong argument why Queensland should pander backwards to the vocal minority on why they should keep paper whilst most other places in Australia and the world have already either got rid of paper, or are progressing towards getting rid of paper. 

How about Queensland leads for once (either alongside a group or being the first) instead of being laughed at by the world for being the most backwards state in the world courtesy of a number of vocal minority groups.

Go Card's electricity use exceeds the impact of paper tickets on resources. Just making one Go Card reader would use more oil. paper and metal than the equivalent in paper tickets for one year.

Queensland would only be leading if it were a good idea in the first place. We would not be leading, we would be following. That's what being afraid of being laughed at means: conformity to the ideas of others. I hate this kind of emotional blackmail. It's the last resort for someone who can't defend something on it's actual merits.

The paper ticket machines also use a similar amount of electricity to the go card machines.  Making a paper ticket reader also uses oil, paper and metal.

You may take what I've said as blackmail, but at the same time it is common-sense to not to have two systems running when it's cheaper to run one.   

When Melbourne got rid of paper, there were a few people against it, but they got over it over time as the Vic state government offered to help out and stood by their stance against those that wanted to bring back paper.  Queensland should be following a similar lead as well as helping out, and at the same time direct those with genuine medical/disability conditions to apply for the Access Pass.

[bcasey]

I don't know if Mobility has touched on one of the most important benefits of go card - it increases the quality of data available for service planning.  That is one of the most significant reasons why TransLink's proposals for the Brisbane bus network looked like they did, being based on actual data and not just a lot of guesswork.

Ticket sales provide this data too.

Paper tickets don't exactly provide the data on where the passenger exactly gets off.  Go cards do via Stop IDs.

Like they'd drop a service just because five less people get on.

All that service use data tells us is which presently existing services people use. It doesn't tell us where people would like new services to go.

It's not the only data Translink would have used in their review. As far as I know, they conducted a number of community feedback sessions to get people's views on how the service could be improved for them.

The origin-destination information could be used to modify the network to improve services while still satisfying existing public transport users demand. Plus it could be combined with other data, such as traffic counts, population density and demographic information, etc, for the bigger picture, in order to figure out where  the high-frequency and feeder lines should be placed.

Ticket sales do not provide precise origin-destination information, depending on the type of ticket, they don't even provide information on which particular services were used. Go-card and other electronic systems like it do provide this data in detail.

[Arnz]

^^ Exactly, the go card data provides which service is used, which exact stop did a passenger get on, and which exact stop did a passenger get off at. 

Something the paper ticket lacks, the paper ticket only provides the data of the zones used, and only provides the place of issue (whether if it's a certain bus number, or at a bus/train station).   Making it a tad difficult for planners to modify the network if needed.

At least with the origin/destination data, it makes it easier for the planners to check the patterns, and to modify the routes where necessary (such as removing a busy route from a diversion that picks up less than 5 passengers a day for example, and redirecting the busy route on a more direct corridor.  At the same time, the affected diversion gets a coverage bus route (or a on-demand alternative such as FlexiLink) to replace the resource being re-allocated to the busier route/corridors.