2013 Fares

[ozbob]

No sign yet of the fare table for 2013 ... very slow in releasing this information ...  rethink going on?

[ozbob]

Be interesting to see if the planned 7.5% increase goes ahead, and what will happen with the present Q Connect fares ...

[somebody]

Be interesting to see, but I'd be surprised if the 9 then free policy is changed.  I'd also wonder if paper tickets will remain.

[ozbob]

Be interesting to see, but I'd be surprised if the 9 then free policy is changed.  I'd also wonder if paper tickets will remain.

Me too, they need to do a proper fare review, but meanwhile I could live with,

daily cap = two x highest journey for day

off peak to 30%

Children travel free with a 'fare paying' adult weekends

CPI fare increase only for 2013

Pull paper ...

[somebody]

I thought having it capped to 2x the highest zone journey wasn't possible technically?

Why increase from current levels, which are too high?

off peak to 30% is the one which has the best case in that mix.

[ozbob]

Money saved by pulling paper could be used to support these further offsets and make it more acceptable politically ..

[ozbob]

I thought having it capped to 2x the highest zone journey wasn't possible technically?

Why increase from current levels, which are too high?

off peak to 30% is the one which has the best case in that mix.

Journey capping is possible as I understand it, not a fixed monetary level.  I don't think Opal will be sticking with a flat $15 cap as it means long haul becomes very cheap.  It looks to me that Opal is going to have a dynamic cap to address the fare leakage issue.

They cannot continue to allow the leakage as such, as it is just going to go through the roof if they keep jacking up the fares ..

With a two journey cap if someone attempts 9 one zoners on a Monday, only two will count as paid journeys ...

Lunch time one zoners won't count either.  Eg.  VL to Central   Lunch time one zone  Central to VL   cap = two x VL/CBD journeys, lunch time don't count.

The two journey cap already exists on the system (albiet flat) for Seniors, easy to tweek for the rest ..

[somebody]

The two journey cap already exists on the system (albiet flat) for Seniors, easy to tweek for the rest ..

Yes, but that is capped to the FIRST two journeys.

I don't think Opal will be sticking with a flat $15 cap as it means long haul becomes very cheap.

Well the current MyMulti 3 weekly, good Scone to Goulburn, only costs $60 so a $15 cap 5x per week works out at $75.

One thing me and others are wondering if with "NSW Trains", will the MyMulti 3 still be good beyond Berowra, Emu Plains, Macarthur and Waterfall?  I expect trips beyond that will need a ticket not covered by the cap, or at least that is certainly possible.

[ozbob]

The two journey cap already exists on the system (albiet flat) for Seniors, easy to tweek for the rest ..

Yes, but that is capped to the FIRST two journeys.

That is why I said it needs to be tweeked for the rest, basic algorithm is on the system, non seniors card is just the highest zone x 2 cap ...

[ozbob]

Face it, if they just keep things as they are for the go card, ramp fares a further 7.5%, real patronage will fall, free trips will increase as 'optimisation' becomes a  SEQ survival skill, actual paid journeys will continue to slide.  Fare box continues to slide dramatically.

[somebody]

per capita patronage is already falling.

Not sure if the "tweak" you are suggesting will be as simple as you suggest.

[ozbob]

The two journey cap already exists on the system (albiet flat) for Seniors, easy to tweek for the rest ..

Yes, but that is capped to the FIRST two journeys.

I don't think Opal will be sticking with a flat $15 cap as it means long haul becomes very cheap.

Well the current MyMulti 3 weekly, good Scone to Goulburn, only costs $60 so a $15 cap 5x per week works out at $75.

One thing me and others are wondering if with "NSW Trains", will the MyMulti 3 still be good beyond Berowra, Emu Plains, Macarthur and Waterfall?  I expect trips beyond that will need a ticket not covered by the cap, or at least that is certainly possible.

They intend to phase out the paper tickets, so the cap may well change.  None the less it is lot smarter than go card land, 8 paid journeys and free is going to be cap restricted at least.

[ozbob]

per capita patronage is already falling.

Not sure if the "tweak" you are suggesting will be as simple as you suggest.

Sure is and will just get worse.  Which makes me think there will be some offsets ...

Tweak is not difficult, I was assured by the former CEO TL they can do anything they want at a price.  The question is do they want to and pay the price.  Changes are very expensive, obviously very botched contract from the outset.

[somebody]

[ozbob]

Very true ... 

[ozbob]

I have sent a tweet to TransLink but don't hold your breath ...

================

Twitter

2h Robert Dow ‏@Robert_Dow

@TransLinkSEQ Any idea when the 2013 fare tables will be made available publicly please?

[somebody]

Which makes me think there will be some offsets ...

Not sure why you have such a thing for this.

Tweak is not difficult, I was assured by the former CEO TL they can do anything they want at a price.  The question is do they want to and pay the price.  Changes are very expensive, obviously very botched contract from the outset.

So how would the business case stack up?  I can't see it.

[ozbob]

TransLink have said themselves that affordability is the issue.  Doing nothing and increasing fares 7.5% is not making fares more affordable.

Fare leakage is already running at 7 times the budgeted cost.  It is a no-brainer in terms of fixing.

[somebody]

Well I don't see it like you.

[ozbob]

Well I don't see it like you.

Are you happy to see continuing base fare increases with no offsets?  Fares that are turning many away.

Well I am not. Simple.  Unless the leakage is addressed base fares will not reduced.

What is your preferred option Simon?

[somebody]

I thought you didn't want to talk about it?

Not at all a no brainer to spend an unknown amount of money to fix a finite problem.

As I've posted before, I agree with stopping the 7.5% price rises for 2013 & 2014 as well as the 30% off peak discount.  I also agree with reducing the fare for the shortest trips and fixing up zone anomalies.  Not to mention consolidated rounding errors.

Ideally, I'd bring back the 10 weekly trips then 50% discount, preferably charging the most expensive 10 trips at the full rate.  However, given that this cannot be done in such a way that no one is worse off, I don't see it being politically achievable in this term of government.

I'm happy to see ideas like "Family Funday Sunday" reaching Qld, but I just don't see that these things are a priority.

[ozbob]

Thanks, a lot of commonality there.  Stopping the leakage is a priority.  Only by doing that can the rest of it be sorted IMHO.  Reverting back to 50% fares is my preferred option, but they may not be brave enough as you suggest.

The thing is, the present fare path is seriously flawed, something I think all here essentially agree.  You can spend weeks arguing minutia, not really the end game, the solution is to have a proper fare review, so that full community consultation, consideration of best practise elsewhere, proper expert input and so forth is achieved. 

If you think about it, every fare structure, price  has been imposed on the community with no real consultation, and in complete disregard of the formal processes set up, eg. go card reference group, and then the PTAG.

[somebody]

Stopping the leakage is a priority.  Only by doing that can the rest of it be sorted IMHO.

I guess this is where we disagree.  The leakage actually pales next to the overall subsidy required for our public transport system.

[Gazza]

Why is increasing off peak discounts so important? it will save people money, but it won't increase patronage.

[Golliwog]

Why is increasing off peak discounts so important? it will save people money, but it won't increase patronage.

I'd disagree with that. I think there are a decent number of people who are able to make trips by PT in the off-peak who don't because the cost compared to driving isn't that much cheaper. Off peak is also where it's easiest to cater for increased patronage as it's where the fleet is least used.

[ozbob]

Stopping the leakage is a priority.  Only by doing that can the rest of it be sorted IMHO.

I guess this is where we disagree.  The leakage actually pales next to the overall subsidy required for our public transport system.

Around $60M per year already?  That is a lot of money better directed to driving patronage, getting the short zones properly priced .. even more services ...

[ozbob]

Why is increasing off peak discounts so important? it will save people money, but it won't increase patronage.

I'd disagree with that. I think there are a decent number of people who are able to make trips by PT in the off-peak who don't because the cost compared to driving isn't that much cheaper. Off peak is also where it's easiest to cater for increased patronage as it's where the fleet is least used.

The Cross River Rail review identified increasing off peak fares as one of the strategies.  Would not be surprised to see that implemented.

[Gazza]

I completely disagree that going form 20 to 30%  would be enough of a price difference to notice and change behaviour like you describe.

So few extra would be attracted that it wouldn't offset the money lost overall, over all offpeak periods

[ozbob]

Until it is tried, who knows how it will go?  They might go for 40% LOL

[somebody]

Stopping the leakage is a priority.  Only by doing that can the rest of it be sorted IMHO.

I guess this is where we disagree.  The leakage actually pales next to the overall subsidy required for our public transport system.

Around $60M per year already?  That is a lot of money better directed to driving patronage, getting the short zones properly priced .. even more services ...

Isn't the subsidy closer to $800M p.a.?  It's still an order of magnitude higher.

Not 100% sure how you have estimated the $60M either.

I completely disagree that going form 20 to 30%  would be enough of a price difference to notice and change behaviour like you describe.

It would make some difference.  Clearly high fares are deterring off peak trips.  Better to have tried.

[ozbob]

See here --> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=9120.msg112819#msg112819

[Gazza]

Simon, well then reduce the base fare instead of 'discounting' a high fare

[ozbob]

Simon, well then reduce the base fare instead of 'discounting' a high fare

I think that is essentially what we have been putting forward Gazza. 

I really think we can discuss for ever minor variations.  What needs to happen is a full blown fare review.  Out of that should come a much better structure, prices and sustainability.  It needs to drive patronage not turn them away, as is happening now.

I have heard (unconfirmed however) that patronage has continued to slide on rail first quarter this financial year.

[somebody]

Simon, well then reduce the base fare instead of 'discounting' a high fare

That is an option, but clearly the market will bear a higher fare much more at peak time.

[Gazza]

But what i mean is, what solid reason is there to go from 20% to 30%?

It costs money in the long term, costs money to implement and promote, and cannot be easily reversed politically, so there has to be a strong reason to do it.

The 30% number just sounds like an arbitrary "feel good" clean number.

Is it even supported by price elasticity modelling.

I don't pay adult fares at the moment, but if I did this change in discount from 20 to 30% would only save a pissy 45c over 3 zones.
(But as a concession traveller, this would be even more pointless, a saving of 23c compared to present)

Better for TL to keep everyones 45c (+/-) collectivley over the millions of trips per year done in the off peak times and use it for services.
Seems dumb to advocate spreading that some money out to everyone with 30% off peak discount...Like, what is anyone going to do with 45c?

[somebody]

So you are arguing for lower fares at peak time, which will mean less money to pay for services and/or higher subsidy?  Is that where you are coming from?

[Gazza]

So you are arguing for lower fares at peak time

Well, i thought we were all arguing that the 15% fare increases have been too much right, such that it is hurting patronage in peak hours too.

At the same time, what I'm basically saying is I dont see why there needs to be a minor increase in the off peak discount, its probably fine how it is.

[somebody]

I think 20% is too small of a distinction between peak and off peak.  Wellington have suggested 50%.

[ozbob]

50% will get them moving where they can ...

30% was the traditional paper discount here in Brisbane I recall, maybe that is why it is prominent  ...

[somebody]

Up until a few years ago, the discount for an off peak return ticket on Cityrail was 40%, now reduced to 30%.

I don't understand why you (Gazza) are arguing this point.  Do you dispute the information that peak is still growing slightly, while off peak is shrinking?