Another idea for a frequent user scheme

[Derwan]

We've had a few ideas for frequent users, including capping, a "weekly" or "monthly" pass, etc.  I have expressed my opinion in the past that paying an amount upfront (e.g. monthly cap) defeats the purpose of having a Go Card - and that the system should be able to determine what kind of discount to apply depending on usage.

There also appears to be limitations in what can be programmed with regards to capping - with the current system simply counting the number of trips in a week.

My idea is inspired in part by something Bob mentioned in another thread.  It is based on the current "number of trips" method but combines discounts for frequent users.

Here's the idea:

Daily Discount
Once someone has done 2 trips in a day, each additional trip during the day attracts a 50% discount.

Weekly Discount
(Current discount.)  Once someone has done 10 trips in a week, each additional trip during the week attracts a 50% discount.  (This could be adjusted to 8 trips to encourage people to catch PT every day instead of some days in the week.)

Monthly Discount
Once someone has done 40 trips (equivalent to 10 trips per week) in a month, each additional trip during the month attracts a 50% discount.

Now the important bit.  The discounts can be combined!  Examples:

• Someone does 10 trips in a week (Monday to Friday), then 3 trips on Saturday.  The first 2 Saturday trips are at a 50% discount.  The 3rd attracts two discounts, so a discount of 75%.  (All 3 trips would also attract the off-peak discount.)
• Someone does 40 trips in a month, 10 during one week and then 3 trips on one day.  The first 2 trips attract a 75% discount (monthly + weekly) and the 3rd attracts a 87.5% discount.
• Someone travels from Caboolture (zone 8 ) to the city for work (normally $10.80).  One day they travel to and from a location within zone 1 for a lunch appointment (that ends up taking just over an hour).  $5.40 + $2.07 (off-peak) + $1.03 (off-peak + 50% discount) + $2.70 (50% discount) = $11.20 (not much more than the normal daily cost).
  
• The same person travels from Caboolture and stops in at Toombul (zone 2) on the way home (for just more than an hour).  $5.40 + $2.70 + $2.70 (50% discount) = $10.80 (same as the daily cost).
• Someone does their 40 trips in a month, including 10 in the last week.  They head to the Gold Coast (Robina - zone 15) for a day trip on Saturday.  The return trip costs them $4.05 instead of $16.20 (or $8.10 if eligible under the current FU scheme).

In some hi-zone cases, doing 3 trips in a day will actually be cheaper than 2 trips!  This encourages people to get out and about.

For people who do more than 10 trips each week, their monthly discount will kick in earlier.  If you travel 6 days a week instead of 5, the monthly discount will kick in after 3 and a bit weeks into the month.

Frequent users (i.e. most commuters) are rewarded with extremely cheap long-distance trips once a month.  They're not "free" as per the old weekly/monthly tickets if the trip is within the zones on the ticket, but it offers longer trips at significantly discounted rates.

All of this without the need to nominate zones or pay set amounts upfront.

What do you think?

[somebody]

Not bad, with a few provisos:
I don't see much reason for the monthly discount.
Discounted daily trips should probably only count as half a trip for the purposes of determining the weekly discount.

But the main problem with all this is that it doesn't address the main problem with the fare structure as I see it which is that the off peak discount is woefully inadequate.  Pretty much all the infrastructure and trains are to cater for the peak commuters, therefore shouldn't they pay the lion's share of the fares too?

[Derwan]

I don't see much reason for the monthly discount.

It's for the people who were used to monthly tickets.  It's also to encourage regular PT use due to the potential savings towards the end of the month when the discounts are combined with the weekly or daily discounts.

Discounted daily trips should probably only count as half a trip for the purposes of determining the weekly discount.

I'm not sure that could be programmed in.  It's not much worse than the current situation where someone who travels from zone 15 every day could find it cheaper if they did a couple of zone 1 trips in the middle of the day - as trips later in the week would be at half price.

I really think that the weekly discount should kick in sooner (similar to what it was before) - even if the other discounts aren't introduced.  At the moment, there is no incentive to use PT every day (for those who do not use PT on the weekend).  The daily price is the same whether they use PT 1 or 5 days a week.  If they started receiving a discount after 3 or 4 days, it might encourage them to use PT every day instead of when they feel like it.

[ozbob]

Great suggestions Derwan.  Clearly there is a lot of room for better fare structures.

[Emmie]

They are interesting suggestions, but very complicated, not just to enter into the GO system, but to explain to the public.

I think we need to start at the other end by determining the basic principles.  I think the current problem is that Translink and the Government have not decided what their objectives with GO actually are.

Capping fares after a certain number of journeys - per day, per week or per month - is the simplest system both to explain and to program - but it means that people will make more trips by PT, since the marginal cost of a trip, after a certain period, is zero.  So, for instance, I might dash across from UQ to Mater Hill on the Green Bridge to meet someone for lunch, and dash back to work.  It's a discretionary trip I might not otherwise make on a heavily used service.  I don't myself think this is a bad thing - but it's a basic issue that needs to be thrashed out by policy makers.

If we go with discounted tickets after a certain number of trips, then there's still a marginal cost to each trip, and currently the discounts don't kick in early enough to reflect most people's current PT usage.  The system is designed around the 9-5, 5 days a week, suburb-to-city-centre commuter - and that isn't the work experience of most people these days - people like me work from home on broadband one day, then spend the next dashing from location to location on multiple trips best done by PT.  This is now much more expensive with GO, rather than a paper daily (though still easier than finding a parking spot) - so I guess I'm contributing to Translink's resources for further infrastructure.  Maybe that's worthwhile - but for some people, they'll make the decision to go back to using the car, in these circumstances.

But somebody - Nolan, Translink, whoever - has to decide whether they want people paying a marginal cost on increased PT usage or not.  And choose the option that best encourages people to get off the roads.

[#Metro]

I like the monthly caps idea that was discussed by dwb and myself.

Keep it simple as possible IMHO.  Discounts upon discounts (i.e. off-peak on a concession on a 6th trip) are complicated, and really I want people not to think of the price when they travel. Nobody pulls out a calculator when they jump in the car. They just drive out of habit and convenience.

What is the dominant limiting factor in public transport? Is it really price?
It is well within most people's means to pay for public transport. Its the service frequency (services/hour) and service access (is there a bus going to where I want to go?) that is holding back growth. Increasing frequency and more BUZ and 15 minute trains on a clock-face timetable will do more for PT patronage than a discount ever would. I am affirmed in my belief when I see services full and read how buses don't turn up or fly past full leaving people waiting for 50 minutes or so. If PT was overpriced, those services should wouldn't be full as people would rather drive.

Myki-style ticketing would be great, but as we are locked into this abominable fare system (why are they so stubborn with the fares schedule?) and various bunglings... I would keep it so simple that even a toddler could understand it (and it would be unbunglable for the administrators administering it!)

1. A pre-purchased monthly capped ticket GoCard fare based on value (i.e. $300 of PT for $150) which expires after one calendar month.

[Derwan]

I like the monthly caps idea that was discussed by dwb and myself.

1. A pre-purchased monthly capped ticket based on value (i.e. $300 of PT for $150) which expires after one calendar month.

This is my frustration.  We are locked into 60's paper-based pre-purchased ticket mentality.

Why should I have to pay upfront for a month's worth of travel when the system could simply calculate eligible discounts and apply them on the fly?  What if I'm going on holiday for a week?  I would have to "pull out the calculator" and work out whether it would be cheaper to pay the upfront monthly fee or travel as a casual user!  I'd much rather "jump on the train out of habit and convenience" and know that if I was eligible for discounts, they'd be applied.

We need a smarter system that simply applies discounts as you go - so you know you're getting better value the more you travel on PT.

"Discounts upon discounts" may sound complicated, but in simple terms, it means that for the average commuter:

• Discount if they happen to do more than 2 trips in a day
• Saturday and Sunday at half the off-peak price
• Additional 50% discount on the last weekend of the month

Can't get much simpler than that.

[#Metro]

Why should I have to pay upfront for a month's worth of travel

Because you get the discount up front as well.
It is just like mobile phones and how monthly tickets work now. The same when I had a monthly paper ticket.
I just used it and used it and used it. Ditto for discounts etc. I always knew what the cost was going to be $X upfront.

Simple. And voluntary.

What if I'm going on holiday for a week?

Well then don't buy one at the top up machine. Just pay the usual pay-as-you-go chart prices as you do now.

Its just like the paper ticket monthlies we had before- only on GoCard. And people have always pre-purchased monthly tickets.

Back to the future. And while we are going back to the 60s, bring back the 5 minutes to everywhere tram system that the BCC destroyed!

[Derwan]

It is just like ... how monthly tickets work now. The same when I had a monthly paper ticket.

Its just like the paper ticket monthlies we had before- only on GoCard. And people have always pre-purchased monthly tickets.

"Just like before".  Where's the innovation?  What is the point of a "smart" card if we use it exactly the same as we did before?  What was the whole point in spending millions of dollars on this system?

I shouldn't need to worry about when my "monthly advance" is due - or "Oh I'm going oh holidays soon so I better do casual trips 'til then".  This is archaic thinking.  We need to innovate and move forward.

Mobile phone plans are a completely different issue - developed by private companies with agendas, who want to keep/attract customers.  This is about a public service.

Dailies/weeklies/monthlies were an easy method to provide frequent user discounts back in the days when we only had paper tickets.  Time to move forward.

[#Metro]

Well I'm sure that everyone has their own proposal that they are working on to better the fare structure.
To be honest, it is TL that should be doing this work! 

What is the point of a "smart" card if we use it exactly the same as we did before?  What was the whole point in spending millions of dollars on this system?

There were many reasons for the smart card rollout. I don't mind the smart card actually. The problems centre around three areas (1) It is the general inconvenience of topping up when there are not functional machines around, (2) the errors and (3) the fare structure.

[O_128]

Well I'm sure that everyone has their own proposal that they are working on to better the fare structure.
To be honest, it is TL that should be doing this work! 

What is the point of a "smart" card if we use it exactly the same as we did before?  What was the whole point in spending millions of dollars on this system?

There were many reasons for the smart card rollout. I don't mind the smart card actually. The problems centre around three areas (1) It is the general inconvenience of topping up when there are not functional machines around, (2) the errors and (3) the fare structure.

would be better if we could use the cards at those paypen things in some IGA stores and for parking etc. Visa should team up with Cubic and create a card

[#Metro]

I want to go back to what Emmie said about principles. Here are a few:

1. Simple to use and to understand
2. Value for money from the commuters' view and the government's view
3. People who use PT often should be rewarded

There are a number of possibilities, and not mutually exclusive either. A quick look at Myki shows that there are actually three fare schemes running at the same time:

1. Myki Money (Pay as you go, like GoCard is now but also capped at a maximum fare)
2. Myki Passes (like a monthly etc, but you pick the number of days 28 min, 365 max and select zones)
3. Paper ticketing (these are more expensive like in QLD as well).

See Vic fares and ticketing manual here: http://www.metlinkmelbourne.com.au/fares-tickets/victorian-fares-and-ticketing-manual-myki/

The main differences appear to be:
* How discounts are applied
* The size of the discount
* Whether people should be able to nominate zones and days
* To pre-pay or not to pre-pay

I think there is a need to separate the frequent users from the occasional users. Frequent users should pay less.
This means that a definition(s) of who is a frequent user and who isn't need to be found. I can see the merit in Derwan's proposal- no pre-pay and automatic calculation.

What is clear is the current discount system where a discount applies after 10 trips isn't so great as something like 3% or so actually used it. IMHO casual users are tourists, visitors and those who suffer a car breakdown etc, frequent users are commuters. There is only ~3% who use more than that, the price of an extra trip beyond 10 trips in a week may as well be $ zero for simplicity. To me this implies a monthly solution (perhaps a weekly) for committment, but I know that the whole topic is up for discussion.

One problem. Many solutions.

[#Metro]

Mobile phone plans are a completely different issue - developed by private companies with agendas, who want to keep/attract customers.  This is about a public service.

So? I don't see why ideas can't be applied in new contexts. Public or otherwise.

[Derwan]

What is clear is the current discount system where a discount applies after 10 trips isn't so great as something like 3% or so actually used it. IMHO casual users are tourists, visitors and those who suffer a car breakdown etc, frequent users are commuters. There is only ~3% who use more than that, the price of an extra trip beyond 10 trips in a week may as well be $ zero for simplicity. To me this implies a monthly solution (perhaps a weekly) for committment, but I know that the whole topic is up for discussion.

The history of the FU scheme is that it used to apply after 6 trips (3 return trips).  This meant that that majority of people got to enjoy the benefits - and people were encouraged to travel by PT every day to enjoy the benefits.

Then the overall Go Card prices were reduced by 20% and the number of trips increased to 10.  This was to appease the former ten-trip saver ticket users on buses.  Now that the ten-trip savers are gone and the fares have been completely revised, I think the current FU scheme should revert to 6 (or even 8 ) trips per week (as I mentioned before) - even if no other schemes are considered or implemented.

[ozbob]

Just  as an aside, if a myki pass holder gets sick they can claim back  the days they were unable to use their ticket.

http://www.myki.com.au/default.aspx?ArticleID=187#7

[Emmie]

I like this summary, Tramtrain:

1. Simple to use and to understand
2. Value for money from the commuters' view and the government's view
3. People who use PT often should be rewarded

For most people, I imagine a monthly ticket sold at a reasonable price would suit fine.  But while the following is roughly accurate:

casual users are tourists, visitors and those who suffer a car breakdown etc, frequent users are commuters.

there are a fair number of users in between these two groups, and many fall into disadvantaged categories:
1. seniors, including those who can no longer drive safely
2. people too poor to have a car, who may be on various forms of welfare and get cheap fares
3. students and teenagers generally, old enough to travel independently but too young to have a driver's licence
4. part time workers, and people who work partly from home to avoid a daily commute

Some of these can be accommodated with a monthly capped ticket costed with 10 trips per week in mind - but a lot of them can't, because their pattern of usage isn't heavy enough to bear the cost, especially if the cost is up front.  So some alternative needs to be available for them.

[#Metro]

1. seniors, including those who can no longer drive safely
2. people too poor to have a car, who may be on various forms of welfare and get cheap fares
3. students and teenagers generally, old enough to travel independently but too young to have a driver's licence
4. part time workers, and people who work partly from home to avoid a daily commute

Hi Emmie, yes I agree.
The 50% discount (or similar) should apply to all the caps because you can't charge people for money that they don't have. I would assume that this would also be the same under Derwan's proposal as well.

[Derwan]

I would assume that this would also be the same under Derwan's proposal as well.

Indeed!  Under my proposal, discounts would be applied to the appropriate rate (Adult or concession).  :-)

[somebody]

I would add to tramtrain's first principles:
Maximum possible cost recovery
Maximum possible diversion of travel away from cars

If you make 4 trips in a day, it feels rude to be charged 4 times.  But why?  If you drove it, you'd pay the petrol for all 4 trips.  I think we should just get used to the end of a rort in ending multi trip tickets like dailies, weeklies and monthlies.

Oh, I don't like the idea of reducing the number of trips for the frequent user discount below 10.  That would mean that peak time trips are getting the discount, which isn't quite what is desirable.  Peak time trips should pay full price.  The major problem with that is for those who are making 3 trips/day the current discount kicks in second trip on Thursday.

Also, myki and oyster's periodical options make the system more complicated for no real benefit to public transport (or society) that I can see.

[#Metro]

I would add to tramtrain's first principles:
Maximum possible cost recovery
Maximum possible diversion of travel away from cars

If you make 4 trips in a day, it feels rude to be charged 4 times.  But why?  If you drove it, you'd pay the petrol for all 4 trips.  I think we should just get used to the end of a rort in ending multi trip tickets like dailies, weeklies and monthlies.

Oh, I don't like the idea of reducing the number of trips for the frequent user discount below 10.  That would mean that peak time trips are getting the discount, which isn't quite what is desirable.  Peak time trips should pay full price.  The major problem with that is for those who are making 3 trips/day the current discount kicks in second trip on Thursday.

Also, myki and oyster's periodical options make the system more complicated for no real benefit to public transport (or society) that I can see.

Hi Somebody.
1 & 2 present special problems. I will provide a more detailed response later.

[Derwan]

Oh, I don't like the idea of reducing the number of trips for the frequent user discount below 10.  

So for the average commuter, there is no incentive to catch PT every day.  Might as well drive a couple of days a week!

If people get a discount for travelling by PT every day, it will give them a REASON to travel by PT every day.

The major problem with that is for those who are making 3 trips/day the current discount kicks in second trip on Thursday.

Exactly!  Hence the term "frequent user discount".

Are you saying everyone should pay full price no matter how many trips they do?

[somebody]

Oh, I don't like the idea of reducing the number of trips for the frequent user discount below 10.  

So for the average commuter, there is no incentive to catch PT every day.  Might as well drive a couple of days a week!

If people get a discount for travelling by PT every day, it will give them a REASON to travel by PT every day.

Few people would use PT some days and their car on others for the purpose of getting to work, except those that need their cars at work only a few days/week.  These people aren't going to change their behaviour because of the fare structure.

I can't see what people you are giving an incentive to use PT to here, you're only eroding the revenue base.  Or at least that's the way I see it.

The major problem with that is for those who are making 3 trips/day the current discount kicks in second trip on Thursday.

Exactly!  Hence the term "frequent user discount".

Are you saying everyone should pay full price no matter how many trips they do?

The point was that their expensive peak trips which are likely to be more zones are discounted and their cheaper trips Mon-wed are full price.

[Derwan]

Few people would use PT some days and their car on others for the purpose of getting to work, except those that need their cars at work only a few days/week.  These people aren't going to change their behaviour because of the fare structure.

I know and have known people who drive in occasionally.  The do what they feel like on the day.  If they know they'll get a day or two at half price, it just might give them the incentive they need to catch PT every day.  (Granted some will continue to just do what they feel like doing on the day.)

Aside from that, people should be rewarded for doing the right thing.

The point was that their expensive peak trips which are likely to be more zones are discounted and their cheaper trips Mon-wed are full price.

Unless the to/from work trip is through a high number of zones and the mid day trip is a short one, people are paying more than a weekly ticket (under the old fare structure) if they do more than 2 trips in a day - which is precisely the reason why many chose to stick with paper tickets.  Even now, paper weeklies are sometimes a cheaper option.  The fact that some of the peak trips attract a discount on the Go Card is irrelevant when comparing it to the weekly cost.

[#Metro]

I wish there were some Transport Economists on here.
A lot of policy questions draw heavily on how much things cost and how big the benefits will be.

[#Metro]

Hi Somebody.
1 & 2 present special problems. I will provide a more detailed response later. Smiley

OK, here is my more detailed response. I've read both Somebody and Derwan's more recent posts.

1. What is the object of the frequent user scheme? Why should long term commuters have lower fares?
The costs to get the network ready to run a service are large, you want people to catch it often and return. That said I think that we are focusing far too much on pricing. If the aim is to maximise PT use, just increase the frequency. People aren't catching PT not because they can't afford it (though price is a factor) but because the service isn't there when they want it.

2. An ideal PT system IMHO is one that
- requires zero subsidy (Hong Kong MTR, Bogota Transmilenio and now Delhi metro fits this)
- has frequent services
- is efficient and fast
- has very high capacity
- is cheap
- is equitable (this is the CSO bit)
- never has a problem putting a new service on

In Australia we are further away from the ideal due to low density, excellent roads and our "low and flat" city forms. We also seem to be fearful of tall buildings near our homes.

[somebody]

we are focusing far too much on pricing

Hear here!!

I know and have known people who drive in occasionally.  The do what they feel like on the day.  If they know they'll get a day or two at half price, it just might give them the incentive they need to catch PT every day.  (Granted some will continue to just do what they feel like doing on the day.)

Aside from that, people should be rewarded for doing the right thing.

I've done it myself, probably a dozen times in my life.  Is that the sort of market we should be focussing our efforts on?

Unless the to/from work trip is through a high number of zones

There's also the off peak discount.  It's only 10% now on go, but it will rise.

Besides, isn't it likely that the peak travel is through more zones?

[#Metro]

3. Maximum cost recovery and maximum diversion from cars
In the Australian scenario, we need subsidy for PT as without it the road system would not function at all! Overseas and I have seen what happens when you only have roads and bad PT.
3 hour commutes one way and not much time to yourself. At this stage subsidy is also required to ensure CSO social objectives are met and the buses run early in the morning and late at night.

Though I do find it strange that a bus with 50 people is more expensive to operate than a car with one person in it. Why can't the bus be 50x cheaper? Anyway.

4. Frequent user discount below 10 trips.
This one is a pickle. You don't want a mad rush on Thursday and Friday just because it is Thursday and Friday. Frequent discount should apply to those who stick with PT. Now, does this mean a frequent user if one who consumes more trips (in number) or uses the service longer? (i.e. travelling all day every day for years on PT). Lets just say that I would support a "Committed user" discount over a frequent user one... LOL. To me that means at least monthlies/monthly cap etc.

5. Eroding the revenue base
Yes and no. PT has a social CSO component so full fare can't be charged in many cases, on the other hand it is wrong to waste the community's money, taken from their wages, needlessly on people who can already can afford to pay anyway. That is no extra benefit to anyone.
It is also wrong to lower prices to curry favour for electoral gain (i.e. vote for me and I'll give free X to you).

Finally, lets have one fare schedule. Victoria having three is a bit over the top. You shouldn't need a massive fares and ticketing manual to refer to. Simplicity.

[#Metro]

I've done it myself, probably a dozen times in my life.  Is that the sort of market we should be focussing our efforts on?

It depends on whether it is worth the discount. My answer is that it doesn't matter actually so long as you can find people to take their place.

I suspect that many people use PT to commute (due to traffic and parking) but use the car at all other times (shopping, friends, entertainment). I see the problem with PT being to areas that are outside of the immediate city footprint. This means places like Ipswich, Logan, Caboolture, and those living behind Mt Coot-tha in Brookfield, Karalee etc.

[ozbob]

Lets just say that I would support a "Committed user" discount over a frequent user one... LOL. To me that means at least monthlies/monthly cap etc.

Subtle but spot on IMHO  Tramtrain.

[ozbob]

I wish there were some Transport Economists on here.
A lot of policy questions draw heavily on how much things cost and how big the benefits will be.

We are a commuter group essentially, non expert.  Transport economists are commuters and are welcome here if they so desire of course.  A forum such as ours is basically a sounding board for 'non-expert'  comment, ideas and suggestions, informed by every day use of the public transport system.  So it is a view point that is very valuable even if non-expert.

Everyone please post your ideas and opinions. it matters not they may not be informed by the expert rigour of a discipline or whatever as we are what we are.

Public transport first choice!

[Emmie]

Don't worry, Bob.  It was transport economists who decided, in 2002, that Redcliffe didn't need a rail line built - just a year or so before fuel costs went through the ceiling.  Economists don't have a terribly good record at prediction.

On the other hand, it would be useful to have the sort of information Tramtrain is looking for - e.g. do people travel through many zones during peak hour, fewer zones during the day?  This is EXACTLY the sort of information the GO card is supposed to pick up - but won't, so long as those particular people are sticking to paper tickets because they can do the maths.

If indeed 30+% of PT users are now on GO, when are we going to get really detailed information of PT habits?  That doesn't mean spin about total numbers, it means mapping travel patterns. It should be possible.

[somebody]

3. Maximum cost recovery and maximum diversion from cars
In the Australian scenario, we need subsidy for PT as without it the road system would not function at all! Overseas and I have seen what happens when you only have roads and bad PT.

Indeed.  Getting cars off the road was what I meant when I said "Maximum diversion from cars", if it wasn't clear.

Though I do find it strange that a bus with 50 people is more expensive to operate than a car with one person in it. Why can't the bus be 50x cheaper? Anyway.

Probably because the average load is below 50?  Also, buses require a driver to be paid rather than the self drive cars.

Finally, lets have one fare schedule. Victoria having three is a bit over the top. You shouldn't need a massive fares and ticketing manual to refer to. Simplicity.

Which is exactly what the current plans for 2011 are.