New fare strategy - articles and discussion

[somebody]

I regularly talk to fellow passengers on off peak services.  Their overwhelming concern is the poor frequency and bus connections or non connections.  The actual travel time once on board is not a real big issue for them.

Trying to understand the RAILBoT philosophy, and put this delicately, but I think I will fail at the latter:
A number of regular posters have commented on the slow down.  Do these conversations with fellow passengers trump what members of this site think?  It was similar with the "fare structure", which I never understood the fixation on.

[ozbob]

I have always taken on a wider role in supporting the community, as well as individuals issues.  It is there upfront.

Frankly, I think we do a good job at that balance. You have had plenty of opportunities to put forward the timetable issue.

Where is the a timetable comparison chart?  Where are the responses to action plans?

Nothing.  Just content to niggle away, unproductively.  Draft a release.  Why nit pick and whine all day, how about some constructive input?

For the record, I was just making the point that off peak travellers they see frequency and connection issues with bus as more important than the actual travel time on the train.  Sorry, if that rocks your boat, it doesn't mine.  It is a no-brainer.

[somebody]

I have always taken on a wider role in supporting the community, as well as individuals issues.  It is there upfront.

Frankly, I think we do a good job at that balance. You have had plenty of opportunities to put forward the timetable issue.

Where is the a timetable comparison chart?  Where are the responses to action plans?

Nothing.  Just content to niggle away, unproductively.  Draft a release.  Why nit pick and whine all day, how about some constructive input?

For the record, I was just making the point that off peak travellers they see frequency and connection issues with bus as more important than the actual travel time.  Sorry, if that rocks your boat, it doesn't mine.  It is a no-brainer.

What do you mean?  I've drafted a number of releases.  Timetable comparison chart?  Never heard of one of them, but that has me interested.  Do you mean a graph of distance vs time 1995 compared to 2011?  Would that be useful?

The only Action plan I am aware of on this site I had the first response.

If you think my input isn't useful, then I will reconsider it.  I have certainly been feeling some frustration lately.

[ozbob]

Sorry Simon, your input with respect to the draft releases etc. is good, and much appreciated.  What I meant was the position statement request I made. Nothing received, no drafts nothing.

I have started to write some myself but it takes time.

What we need is a comparison of the timetable degradation over the years, either table or chart.  That will drive home the point.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Only problem is if you delay freighters for too long in one part they can have a knock on effect for other lines and services especially if they are scheduled for crosses along the dedicated paths on the DG as has been the case with delayed NCL freighters forcing the ex-FI freights to use the passenger lines in order to meet their crosses along the range. Freight with passengers is always going to be a double edge sword 

[somebody]

What I meant was the position statement request I made. Nothing received, no drafts nothing.

Can you link me to this or was it an email?

[Fares_Fair]

Only problem is if you delay freighters for too long in one part they can have a knock on effect for other lines and services especially if they are scheduled for crosses along the dedicated paths on the DG as has been the case with delayed NCL freighters forcing the ex-FI freights to use the passenger lines in order to meet their crosses along the range. Freight with passengers is always going to be a double edge sword 

The Federal Government's long term plan is to separate passenger and freight services.
A story in the Australian dated 22 February, 2011 titled 'Freight haulers to get own network' a case in point.
I posted it on the site here under infrastructure IIRC.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[ozbob]

What I meant was the position statement request I made. Nothing received, no drafts nothing.

Can you link me to this or was it an email?

--> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=6628.msg72828#msg72828  (members' only link)

[dwb]

For the record, I was just making the point that off peak travellers they see frequency and connection issues with bus as more important than the actual travel time on the train.  Sorry, if that rocks your boat, it doesn't mine.  It is a no-brainer.

Time wasted on the bus/train doesn't seem to go so slowly as time wasted on the platform... there is a substantial amount of evidence that passengers prefer frequency and reliability over pure speed.

[Gazza]

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[dwb]

This graph is interesting, but I'd contend that a reliable 30min journey would be considered a "fast journey" in the sense of overall time being shorter than that magic comfortably acceptable 40min commute... so it is more relevant that this is shorter than a long journey, ie under 40mins, than 29mins as opposed to 30mins/ or described better as average speed of 29km/hr vs 33km/hr.

[ozbob]

Of course people want fast journeys and expresses, but if you are waiting an hour between rides (trips), whether the trip on the train is 31 minutes or 33 minutes is largely of no consequence.   Be nice if every station had their own expresses, but that is just not going happen.  Note it is the length of time on rail, doesn't include waiting time.  

TransLink often comments that the two factors that matter to punters here are frequency and reliability.

[dwb]

TransLink often comments that the two factors that matter to punters here are frequency and reliability.

And I think TL principally have it right... they're just not that great at providing either! Actually that is a little harsh, given constraints put upon them, but yeah I think you get the point.

[ozbob]

TransLink often comments that the two factors that matter to punters here are frequency and reliability.

And I think TL principally have it right... they're just not that great at providing either! Actually that is a little harsh, given constraints put upon them, but yeah I think you get the point.

And the increase in frequency from Darra has been largely ignored from a marketing point of view, not only by TransLink but Queensland Rail as well.  High frequency bus gets beaten right up, the one opportunity for rail is just passed over ...

[ozbob]

From the Couriermail Opinion click here!

TransLink fare hikes putting southeast Queenslanders off public transport

TransLink fare hikes putting southeast Queenslanders off public transport

    by: Mike O'Connor
    From: The Courier-Mail
    November 21, 2011 12:00AM

A COMMITTED car user unfamiliar with the vagaries of public transport, I ventured into Queensland Rail's Fortitude Valley station last week and asked for a one-way ticket to Bowen Hills.

Uncertain of the fare structure but aware it was a journey of two minutes over a distance of about 1km, I slid a $10 note across the counter.

"That's $3.90," the clerk said.

"That seems a little steep," I said, pocketing the change.

"It's a joke, mate" he said. "The whole thing's a joke."

Commuters seem to agree, with public transport patronage falling by 1.7 million trips in the April-June quarter according to a survey by TransLink.

Tellingly, two out of five commuters surveyed said it was now cheaper to drive and park than catch a train.

You would have to be intellectually impaired not to see the link between the results of the survey and the fact fares have risen more than 30 per cent in the past two years.

The State Government's solution, however, would indicate that it does not believe in the principle of cause and effect, for it plans to increase fares by a further 15 per cent from January 2, pushing the price of my two-minute journey up to $4.50.

It will, it has said, continue to lift them by this percentage each year until 2014.

What will happen beyond 2014? It would be a brave, or dim-witted, soul who would predict that fares will not continue to rise even further.

I am what TransLink calls a "casual" train traveller.

We casual users are punished for our failure to fully embrace the Queensland Rail experience by being charged more for trips than the holders of go cards.

"Let's charge them $3.90 for a two-minute trip. They don't use the system frequently so let's gouge them," seems to be the mentality, one which fails to appreciate the possibility that if the fare system was more reasonable, we might be tempted to move from being casual users to regular users.

I was in Istanbul, Turkey, a few months ago and used the public transport system daily, travelling anywhere on the light-rail system for two lira ($1). It didn't matter how far you travelled or when, the fare was the same.

It seemed a simple and highly effective system, an example of how public transport can be affordable and relevant and one at odds with the philosophy in play here.

The Queensland Rail system is about squeezing the maximum dollar from its customers, the art lying in striking that point at which the severity of the financial pain being inflicted stops just short of that which will put them back in their cars and cause them to start pooling with their neighbours and friends.

I had always thought the aim of public transport was to get people to leave their cars at home and walk to the nearest bus or train station, whistling happily as they did in the knowledge they were doing their bit for the environment and saving money.

This may well be the case in more enlightened societies.

Here, the aim is to keep jacking up the fares because the State Government is desperate for funds due to the parlous state of its finances.

It's a cynical and slightly desperate approach and one underlined by a much publicised Government response to the fall in rail patronage.

This was to announce that go card holders who made more than 10 trips a week would get free travel.

Let's see. You catch the train to work in the morning and home every evening. You do this from Monday to Friday. That's 10 trips.

Sorry. You'll have to go to work on Saturday as well to get your free trip. You don't want to work all weekend so you can get a free train ride? Tough luck.

The "free trip" offer, then, was a scam, a product of that well-tried government strategy of offering taxpayers an artfully wrapped gift box which, upon opening, they find to be empty.

In making this "free travel" announcement, Treasurer Andrew Fraser said: "We need to remember that we're running these trains and buses anyway and there are spare seats so we're happy for those regular commuters to get the benefit."

The seats are empty because they would be on weekends, Minister, when people are travelling to Coles, Woolies and Bunnings, not commuting to the city.

With high petrol prices, traffic congestion and some of the country's most expensive car parking charges, it takes a particular genius to drive people from public transport and back into their cars but the State Government appears to have achieved it.

The Westfield Chermside shopping centre debacle reveals its lack of vision.

With the introduction of paid parking at the shopping complex, the surrounding suburb has become a giant parking lot because the Government refuses to build a park-and-ride facility.

There's a transport hub there but unless they can find a street park, former commuters can no longer use it.

We cannot afford, then, to encourage people to use public transport because the State Government can't afford to cap fares and there's no money to build park-and-ride facilities, but there's plenty of money to stage the Commonwealth Games.

The ticket seller in the Fortitude Valley station was right. It's a joke.

[Gazza]

Whats with the compatrison to Istanbul? Are less wealthy countries valid comparisons?

Also, what is wrong with infrequent users having a go card?

[somebody]

Of course people want fast journeys and expresses, but if you are waiting an hour between rides (trips), whether the trip on the train is 31 minutes or 33 minutes is largely of no consequence.   Be nice if every station had their own expresses, but that is just not going happen.  Note it is the length of time on rail, doesn't include waiting time.  

That's true.  But once you get frequency to 15 minutes or better the 2 minute time saving starts to become more significant.  Really rail needs to provide faster journeys than road to compensate for walking and waiting times.

[SteelPan]

I (representing "me", "myself" and on occasions, when I'm well behaved and smarten meself up "I") hereby call upon the Queensland Government (and Opposition) to hereby scrap the proposed 2012 15% fare rise and that no fare rise will take place before the next state election.

[Spoken by "me", for "myself" and "I", on the understanding that "I" and "me" will enter into further detailed anaylsis of said comments, both in the company of and excluded from "myself", at such times and places as "me" and "I" may determine in agreement with "myself", but not to the exclusion of private discussions between "my" and "I" and any other combination of "me", "myself" and "I" on other subject matter as my require any such combination as "me" or "I" or "myself" at any future time.]

It is said I may have confusion issues   :conf  ...but the first part of my post is very serious!  VERY SERIOUS!  Nice bit of writing by Mike O'Connor in this-mornings Moreton Bay Courier!

[colinw]

I have to wonder what happened to the 15% compounding price rises to road tolls, car registration and other Government charges.

It seems that public transport users are special - to be gouged if they insist on using the service, or have their service withdrawn if they stop using it.  Either way Treasury wins.

[Jonno]

Very serious indeed.  The current price increases to reduce subsidy for public transport completely ignores the indirect benefits that are gained from every single person who take public transport or long distance rail.  The message I take from this policy is that this Government does not accept these indirect benefits exist and is looking at this purely as a direct financial venture.  

I am not against the price rise because of the extra cost as I happily pay it but because it shows our Government is looking at transport through only a direct cost/revenue basis.  

[Fares_Fair]

Whats with the compatrison to Istanbul? Are less wealthy countries valid comparisons?

Also, what is wrong with infrequent users having a go card?

What I think is interesting Gazza is that less wealthy countries (if indeed that is the case here) are able to do the things they do with public transport.
Not sure what the population (read 'taxation') base is there, but that would certainly affect its capacity to do so.
It speaks volumes then about our situation.

As for infrequent users, perhaps their wallet is full to the hilt with plastic cards already and they do not want another thing to lose or expire.
There are many other views out there.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[#Metro]

"Let's charge them $3.90 for a two-minute trip. They don't use the system frequently so let's gouge them," seems to be the mentality, one which fails to appreciate the possibility that if the fare system was more reasonable, we might be tempted to move from being casual users to regular users.

Usual Courier-Mail rubbish. I note that any explanation or justification from TL in the story (the other side/perspective) is noticeably absent.
TransLink is not raising fares just because they want to be punitive or think it is fun to irritate the populace, as nice as that would seem to some.

Think about it. Most trips on the network will be short trips. Parking costs in the CBD are high, parks are hard to come by but distances are short- which means walking and cycling will be the main modes of getting around the CBD on short distances.

So I don't think it makes sense to discount short trips, because doesn't that prop the rest of the network up and provide the bulk of the funding?
If you did drop those prices, not only would you fail to cut into car mode share-- you'd probably cut more into cycling and walking than car mode share.

Fact is, if this gentleman didn't want to pay $3 or whatever, then that's just tough. He's a casual user, which by definition means although that cost seems like a lot, because he doesn't catch PT often, it isn't going to make a big dent in his pocket. Of course he didn't get a Go Card, he took the super expensive option to heighten the dramatic effect and make out that the cost is crippling for the average person using PT. But the average person is unlikely to be a casual user- by definition! And thus would have paid less.

Perhaps if the trip was so short, he should have walked the distance between the Valley and the CBD. Or got a bicycle. Or ride a citycycle.

Australian public transport systems are some of the most heavily subsidised systems on Earth.
Canadian (cf TTC's 60-70% farebox recovery) and European cities tend to do better on recovery.


I hope TransLink continues to roll out the Core Frequent Network on buses, ferries and trains (trains in particular). That way it will start changing the network from rotten apple to crisp apple , and crisp apple can be charged for. Network efficiencies (feederisation in the outer suburbs such as into Indooroopilly) should save money overall and boost patronage.

Its not as if people don't choose public transport because it is too expensive- if that were the case, most people wouldn't own a car which easily cost $20 000 to buy, more to fill up and run, and more to register and repair.

[#Metro]

As for infrequent users, perhaps their wallet is full to the hilt with plastic cards already and they do not want another thing to lose or expire.
There are many other views out there.

He can walk! Its not like he can't afford the cost either- from the article not only can you tell that (a) he has a decent paying job
you can also tell that (b) he drives his car around the city which IMPLIES he can afford the car (wonder what model it is) and
the parking charges that come with that.

How much is a coffee in the CBD again?

[#Metro]

Let's talk about CPI-- Cappuccino Price Index for Brisbane


http://www.coffee-prices.com/


Brisbane $3.34 <----

[dwb]

What I think is interesting Gazza is that less wealthy countries (if indeed that is the case here) are able to do the things they do with public transport.

When your workforce's households don't each own three cars, when you've an old city, when you've got cheaper labour... there are lots of reasons and I don't think it is fair to compare necessarily. When I was in Rio, the metro was cheap for me, but not exactly cheap compared to the hourly minimum wage. I don't think Mike's article really adds much to the debate, it just rehashes all the whinging and doesn't add any understanding.

[Gazza]

As for infrequent users, perhaps their wallet is full to the hilt with plastic cards already and they do not want another thing to lose or expire.
There are many other views out there.

Oh well, they'll live.

[#Metro]

I don't think Mike's article really adds much to the debate, it just rehashes all the whinging and doesn't add any understanding.

Typical Courier Rubbish. Same frame in all their stories - it never changes. Like reading the same story over and over- incompetent money grabbing govt
out to get us all, opposite view point entirely missing, no attempt at understanding the issues or even reasoning, just lots of drama and a big whinge to top
off the icing.

WAAAA!!! I DON'T LIKE PAYING!!!

[somebody]

What I think is interesting Gazza is that less wealthy countries (if indeed that is the case here) are able to do the things they do with public transport.

When your workforce's households don't each own three cars, when you've an old city, when you've got cheaper labour... there are lots of reasons and I don't think it is fair to compare necessarily. When I was in Rio, the metro was cheap for me, but not exactly cheap compared to the hourly minimum wage. I don't think Mike's article really adds much to the debate, it just rehashes all the whinging and doesn't add any understanding.

That might apply in Sth America, but not in Canada, High Income Asia, Europe.  We still under achieve in this country re: PT.  Federal govt policies are a factor here, and more in the US.

[dwb]

What I think is interesting Gazza is that less wealthy countries (if indeed that is the case here) are able to do the things they do with public transport.

When your workforce's households don't each own three cars, when you've an old city, when you've got cheaper labour... there are lots of reasons and I don't think it is fair to compare necessarily. When I was in Rio, the metro was cheap for me, but not exactly cheap compared to the hourly minimum wage. I don't think Mike's article really adds much to the debate, it just rehashes all the whinging and doesn't add any understanding.

That might apply in Sth America, but not in Canada, High Income Asia, Europe.  We still under achieve in this country re: PT.  Federal govt policies are a factor here, and more in the US.

We do substantially better than most of the US don't we?!

[Jonno]

The subsidy of PT alone is not the deciding factor in PT %!of all trips. We need to look at the billions spent subsidizing directly and indirectly the main competitor...THE MOTOR VEHICLE!!!!

[somebody]

We do substantially better than most of the US don't we?!

Didn't I imply that we do?  I think in peak hour a lot of our PT is better, but outside of peak it is a poor show in most of the country.  Even Perth has 30 minute frequencies in the evening.

The subsidy of PT alone is not the deciding factor in PT %!of all trips. We need to look at the billions spent subsidizing directly and indirectly the main competitor...THE MOTOR VEHICLE!!!!

Not to mention the competence with which the subsidy is spent.

[colinw]

WAAAA!!! I DON'T LIKE PAYING!!!

I think you're over-cooking this one TT.  There is nothing wrong with paying for decent, convenient services, but there is something very wrong with being gouged some of the highest fares in Australia for some of the worst services.

While I'd happily pay the current level of fares for a decent service, I don't think it is at all reasonable to keep bumping up fares until they are amongst the highest in the world for comparable systems while offering a service that is nowhere near as good.  Frankly, a couple more of these 15% hikes and my already declining use of the system is likely to dwindle away to nothing. Many of my friends & relatives have already given up.

So. "WAAAA!!!! I DON'T LIKE PAYING!!! for infrequent, inconvenient, slow services".

OTOH when in the UK I happily pay several pounds to get whisked the 20km from Chippenham to Bath Spa in as little as 11 minutes.  And in Spain I happily pay a few Euros for a suburban train into Madrid, knowing that the longest I could possibly have to wait is about 8 minutes unless it is very late in the evening. Also in Spain I also happily paid Euro 19.10 (approx $AUD 26) for a 275 km/h max speed return journey to Toledo - 70km in 20 minutes each way.  And so do lots of other punters, those overseas trains I mention are all full, all the time.

By all means support the continuing 15% hikes if you want the half hourly offpeak trains to wander around carrying loads of air, leading to a decline in cost recovery of the system and maybe even a spiral into declining service levels. That is the trajectory we're on, which will become clear as the pressure builds to start culling lines like Doomben & Rosewood.

People in general have a very good intuitive sense of what is good value to them. I sense we are very close to a tipping point with fares where a lot more people are going to start walking away from the system and going back on the roads. Even though an analysis of the full cost of motoring would show PT is still cheaper, most people do NOT look at it that way, and there's little point trying to fight that bit of psychology.

[dwb]

chicken or egg?

egg or chicken?

[colinw]

chicken or egg?

egg or chicken?

Dinosaur :-)

[#Metro]

chicken or egg

It doesn't matter where you start. Although that budget is competing against things like health (which is going crazy on costs) and education. The fact that Brisbane City Council contributes ANYTHING to PT is a blessing and has saved the Queensland Government a lot of money. In other states, local councils do squat all contribution for PT.

There is a difference between price and value. As I've stated many times, the largest cost for PT isn't the price printed on the ticket (and in this case, Mr Courier Mail could not only afford to pay (because he has a car and a job!), had cheaper alternatives (walk, bicycle) and isn't a regular user. It is the value of time. This has been proven time and again- the speed of the service and ticket prices are held constant but the time spent waiting at the bus stop is cut in half-- and patronage goes through the roof.

Think about it. If you make casual use cheap, then you are going encourage casual use not regular use! Mr Courier-Mail has his argument backwards.
In fact, his implication that charging cheaper prices for casual tickets would result in THE EXACT OPPOSITE TO WHAT HE INTENDS. Be careful what you wish for!

If you make casual tickets the same cost or cheaper than a regular ticket, then there is no incentive to get a go card and become a regular user.

Australian public transport systems are some of the most heavily subsidised systems in the world. Funds need to be spent on 'building' a core frequent network that people are happy to pay for, and then, because BUZzing everything is impossible and would take up to 100 years to do, once this core is in place, the lower frequency services can be re-cast as high frequency local feeders terminating at interchanges in the off-peak.

There have been a number of improvements to the system in recent times, particularly on buses, trains are the elephant in the room. The cost of a ticket is comparable to that of a coffee. I really doubt that people aren't catching public transport because 'they can't afford it'. If that was the case why are they driving a $20 000 car, plus rego plus insurance, plus petrol, enough to travel between Gympie North and the CBD every weekday on single tickets for the next ~2 years or so?

For those who genuinely can't afford it, there are concessions.

[#Metro]

WAAAA!!!! I DON'T LIKE PAYING!!! for infrequent, inconvenient, slow services

I would agree with this, but insofar that rail users in particular are getting a raw deal. There is little doubt that
the price has gone up for them but the service they get has not (in many cases the train has had fat added leading to slower services, or the frequency off peak has not
been improved, so they are paying more for the same rotten apple service).

The second thing, and this was raised yesterday in discussions about Centenary BUZ, was how much of the network do you want to be
running as 'coverage' services that stop everywhere and run half-hourly or hourly. If you insist on a network that is mostly made up
of coverage services, and insist on slow, stop-everywhere services, and you don't want to offend people by ripping out bus stops or steam ironing their bus route
so that it no longer runs outside their house, then that's not going to make money and that cash then needs to be
found somewhere else.

None of this is to say that network X design is better than network Y design, but if that's what you choose then that's what the
consequence will be-- services that don't get a lot of pax, and need a lot of subsidy to run.

[ozbob]

A letter to the editor published in the Couriermail 22nd November 2011

Fare policy commonsense

MIKE O'Connor's article on Queensland Rail's fare policy brings a welcome dollop of commonsense to the debate about southeast Queensland's public transport failings (Viewpoint, Nov 21).

Last week, a fusillade of meaningless statistics was fired from behind the barricades of City Hall and George Street, each trying to pin the blame on the other for falling patronage numbers.

O'Connor's cause and effect description of higher fares leading to lower patronage hits the nail on the head.

In economic jargon this is a demonstration of elasticity, where raising the price of one product in a competitive marketplace le ads to customers favouring a competitive product in this case, their private vehicles.

For some reason our transport planners are not aware of or ignore this theory. Maybe they just assume public transport operates as a travel monopoly.

Of course this is far from the case, particularly in southeast Queensland where most commuters reach for the car keys rather than a go card.

TransLink is responsible for planning and funding southeast Queensland's public transport services, including the QR City network.

In 2010-2011, taxpayers, through the State Government, pumped more than $1 billion in subsidy into TransLink. Yet public transport still only accounts for 7 per cent of all daily travel trips.

There is every possibility this will drop further as 15 per cent fare increases kick in.

This could well lead to an overall reduction in fare box revenue which currently covers a paltry 23 per cent of TransLink's costs.

As O'Connor ends his article, this is indeed a joke, but one which is likely to go down like a lead balloon with the Queensland taxpayer.

[dwb]

From the Couriermail Opinion click here!

TransLink fare hikes putting southeast Queenslanders off public transport

I slid a $10 note across the counter.

"That's $3.90," the clerk said.

"That seems a little steep," I said, pocketing the change.

"It's a joke, mate" he said. "The whole thing's a joke."

It is too bad the clerk in this case didn't explain what go card was and how it was cheaper and could be reused, Mike may have then been converted to a go card holder instead of finding an outlet for his inner blue hate of the current govt via this disproportionately expensive trip.

Customer service QR - might want to think about it!

Oh, and wrt pushing people back to roads, that is more of an expression of how OVER funded roads are, even when the govt seeks to implement user pays, it doesn't do it across the board.

[colinw]

Great comment dwb.  Alas they have stopped accepting comments by the look of things.

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

23 November 2011

Request to the media

Greetings,

Hey, how about when doing up yarns and opinion pieces on the  fare structure for public transport on the TransLink network, assign responsibility properly. Some do, many don't ...

The fare structure/price is in the realm of TransLink.  Has nothing to do with Queensland Rail.

Thanks.

And by the way. Do you think we might have entered the terminal phase of the road failure?  What a sad tragic circus it is again today.

Best wishes
Robert

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