[rbt]

No-bid Contract?

The real question here is do we want to place a no-bid contract to Accenture for an arbitrary amount or do we want various companies to compete and bid on installation of a fare-payment system which can 1) use a single electronic media card, 2) support fare integration by communication at the backends, 3) reduce staffing, etc.

The reader and fare media does not impact integration. In fact, Presto is installing Open Payment readers for Ottawa and most of the GTA anyway and an Open Payment based reader can handle Presto cards fine (later designs of Presto will fit Open Payment protocols). Fare integration simply requires communication between agency backends for an electronic fare medium.

This is the exact same debate we held when the subway contract to Bombardier was awarded without any bidding. Do we want private industry to compete or do we believe Accenture is the best for the job at any cost they demand?

With the value difference anticipated between Accenture and another software/financial firm for the same functionality; I would demand an open bidding process for the work. Hell, even if we stuck strictly with Presto cards, I would still want TTC to run a bid process for the installation, maintenance, and backend system design work.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Apologies on the nomenclature - I was talking about a couple of things at the same time. I was referring to the idea of having multiple transit systems using the same payment system (ie Presto) vs. having everyone on Presto except TTC.

The Globe has an interesting article on the issues with open payment, incidentally.

 

[EnviroTO]

As I said earlier, the longer everyone waits the better the technology will be but you can't keep pulling the rug out every time something better comes along.

If you did that, you'd be replacing your computer every three months and have every single movie you like on Beta, VHS, a couple of DVDs and Blu Rays. Most of us pace ourselves a little.

All of my credit cards and debit cards are magnetic strip and have been since the day I got them. The TTC has been using tokens as long as I can remember. This technology isn't going to change often because changing the technology means retooling retailers globally. Once RFID credit and debit cards are out there they will be with us for quite some time.

You seem to brush off the fare integration issue but is an absolute key plan of Metrolinx's plan and it will happen. People are not going to use open payment for TTC while paying cash for every other system.

People will not use Presto in significant numbers when the TTC doesn't support it but people will use open payment for the TTC because the card will be in their wallet already and in many cases it will give them Air Miles, Aeroplan points, cash back, or whatever else the card is giving them. There is no fare integration with Presto. Presto is like the province standardizing on a Diners Club card only system. It is a card nobody has and there is little point in getting it.

So, now you're asking people to sign up for 2 systems and there is no way Metrolinx/MTO will let that happen, and rightly so.

No, you aren't asking people to sign up for two systems. You don't need to sign up for open payments... you already have it. Look in your wallet and if you have a debit card or credit card you are already signed up for open payments.

 

[kEiThZ]

Personally, I am not a fan of sole-sourcing unless there is a ton of substantiation. My experience comes from the military world so I'll relate some tales from there where so-called "sole-sourcing" works and didn't.

Sole-source makes sense when you understand the risks and know that a competition won't deliver.

Case in point. The Air Force's purchase of the C-17. The media likes to say it was sole-source. It wasn't. It was a pre-qualification process. The CF announced the intention to buy the C-17 and gave industry a month to respond. Airbus actually responded with a counter-offer which was deemed non-compliant by the Air Staff because of costs and schedule risk. Turns out the Air Staff was right. We've now had the C-17 for years. Airbus hasn't delivered a single A400M to a customer on schedule, on budget with the projected performance specs. So was that sole-source? And was that a bad decision of the CF's part? Even the arguments that the CF paid too much can be countered by looking at all the money that was saved from cancelling leased freighter operations.

Now compare that example to the recent fighter buy. This true sole-source. What was the rationale here (and it's completely not been covered by the media at all)? The CF buys jets every 30-40 years. We need a jet that will last that long. Looking at the strategic picture over that timeframe leads to the conclusion that the CF needs a 5th generation fighter jet. There's only one on the market. Other than that, the Air Staff also looked at all the 4.5 generation aircraft on the market. The Super Hornet, the Typhoon and/or the Rafale, etc. while being either the same price or slightly cheaper on acquisition costs almost twice as much as the JSF to maintain. So there's no economic case to purchase anything else (despite what the so called 'analysts' in the media say...they only focus on acquisition costs not the 20-40 year bill of maintaining the thing). So if you know there's no way in hell that the economic case will be there for any of the other alternatives (and they aren't even close here), is it really necessary to hold a sham contest with one real contender and spend all that time and money?

So while competition can yield better results for the taxpayer, I don't think this should be taken as a given. Sometimes, it could actually hurt you. In the case of the fighter buy, had it gone to competition, the CF would have been committed to holding a contest with only one real contender, going through a year of flight testing costing tens of millions, all for what we all knew would be the result. And there's rumours that Canada was getting a firmer price than everybody else and possibly an out-of-proportion share of industrial benefits....a repeat of the Trudeau era Hornet buy where we were the launch customer along with the USN and USMC and got a huge amount of benefits because we committed early. So is it bad sole-sourcing if it's getting exactly what you want at roughly the price you expected to pay?

Then there's sole sourcing of a different kind. What we in defence procurement refer to as directed buys. This is where the government decides that requirements don't matter and that the industrial base will take priority. This is what happened when the Chretien government decided to buy 100 Griffon helicopters from Bell Helicopter. That chopper is underpowered and is barely useful in hot and high conditions (fine in Canada though). The requirements called for a medium lift machine. But the government decided that Bell's survival was at stake and that the only way to save them was to give them a large CF order. Nothing wrong with that. But politicians should understand the risks they take with those kinds of decisions. Now we have a helicopter that can't lift a full infantry section in Afghanistan and can't keep up with the Chinooks they are supposed to be escorting.

Where the project offices and managers know there's money to be saved, then they should hold a competition. But if there's a strong rationale to go no-bid, I have no issue with it. I'd just like to hear the rationale. Admittedly though, governments suck on sometimes translating that rationale into publicly consumable arguments (See C-17 and the fighter). But they really should explain to the public what they are doing and why. The bureaucracy isn't stupid. They know what they are doing. And regardless of the level, I've never met a bureaucrat who preferred to sole-source. Bureaucrats love competitions. It makes us feel important. But sometimes it may not make sense. And when that happens, it's up to the pols to convey our messages on why it may not make sense.

In this case, I don't see why another Canadian company (or any other company if CanCon is not a requirement) could not necessarily do better. Or that Accenture needs the contract to survive. So why no-bid?

 

[W. K. Lis]

Will there be a fallback or backup system for whatever system the TTC gets? What happens if a glitch occurs? Will the HAL 9000 computer prevent Dave from entering a turnstile?

[video=youtube;ukeHdiszZmE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukeHdiszZmE[/video]

What about power failures? Or computer viruses? Or counterfeit cards? All items that have to be tested.

I'll be watching.

 

[kEiThZ]

Will there be a fallback or backup system for whatever system the TTC gets? What happens if a glitch occurs? Will the HAL 9000 computer prevent Dave from entering a turnstile?

...
What about power failures? Or computer viruses? Or counterfeit cards? All items that have to be tested.

I'll be watching.

How do other cities deal with this stuff?

 

[GraphicMatt]

The TTC and other transit system already make extensive use of technology that could be vulnerable to power outages, hardware failure, computer viruses, etc. They deal.

 

[waterloowarrior]

How do other cities deal with this stuff?

Based on London's Oyster card, people are waived through fare gates until the glitch is fixed, which for the examples I looked up took about 4-5 hours.

 

[kEiThZ]

Based on London's Oyster card, people are waived through fare gates until the glitch is fixed, which for the examples I looked up took about 4-5 hours.

How do you tap out then?

 

[hkskyline]

I think as long as there is power passengers should be able to tap out. Or they can open the gates and the next time the passenger enters the system, somehow the system can be programmed to read the last entry, time, and deduct / waive the fare.

 

[Jonny5]

I got an email auto-reply to my feedback form that said they would respond within 5 business days, so I will let everyone know by Friday what they say, if anything!

Response today:

Dear X, Thank you for your inquiry. We are currently investigating your inquiry, when further information becomes available we will be in contact with you. Thank-you for your patience and we apologize for any inconvenience Sincerely, The PRESTO Team This email was sent from an outgoing-only address that cannot accept incoming emails. If you still have questions, please visit www.prestocard.ca and select "contact us" to log further feedback.

So another form-letter reply, the third so far. I can only hope this was generated automatically by someone actually reading my original inquiry...
I want my $1.85! .

 

[Electrify]

A couple of drawbacks from each system that may or may not have been brought up yet

Presto: How widely distributed will these smartcards be once it is beyond the beta stage? Will you be able to pick them up as easily as you can get calling cards (grocery stores, gas stations, convenience stores, etc) or will their distribution be limited to stations and specific vendors? If it is the former, will this kind of distribution be affordable?

Open-Payment: Assuming that this system is only supported by the TTC, how will one be able to check their account as to how many rides they took, and what they were charged? I assume with Presto you will be able to log in to a website and see what you were billed exactly, but besides your monthly statements how would you do the same with Open-Payment?

 

[EnviroTO]

Presto: How widely distributed will these smartcards be once it is beyond the beta stage? Will you be able to pick them up as easily as you can get calling cards (grocery stores, gas stations, convenience stores, etc) or will their distribution be limited to stations and specific vendors? If it is the former, will this kind of distribution be affordable?

Presto charges $6 for an empty card but you must put a minimum $10 on it (total $16). They could give a commission on the card sales to the retailers. I have my own opinion on how affordable $6 is to get an empty card which can only be used by a single person at a time (no passbacks) when you can get a day pass for $10 which on weekends lets the whole family ride for the day. Every other vendor I have dealt with does not make you pay for the empty card.

Open-Payment: Assuming that this system is only supported by the TTC, how will one be able to check their account as to how many rides they took, and what they were charged? I assume with Presto you will be able to log in to a website and see what you were billed exactly, but besides your monthly statements how would you do the same with Open-Payment?

Most credit card companies and banks have online banking where you don't need to wait until the monthly statement to see your transactions. You will see what the TTC charged you day by day.

 

[Electrify]

Most credit card companies and banks have online banking where you don't need to wait until the monthly statement to see your transactions. You will see what the TTC charged you day by day.

Oh I know, I use online banking regularly. But if I log into my Mastercard, will it update itself automatically? So if I use the TTC once a month, it will say $3.25 for that day. But if I use it 4 times during that month will it automatically reduce each usage to $2.50, or will it just say $10 for the whole month? And if it is the latter, would I be able to keep track of each use to make sure it operated correctly (ie: make sure it ddin't charge me twice when I transferred because the specific unit was faulty)?

 

[rbt]

Oh I know, I use online banking regularly. But if I log into my Mastercard, will it update itself automatically? So if I use the TTC once a month, it will say $3.25 for that day. But if I use it 4 times during that month will it automatically reduce each usage to $2.50, or will it just say $10 for the whole month? And if it is the latter, would I be able to keep track of each use to make sure it operated correctly (ie: make sure it ddin't charge me twice when I transferred because the specific unit was faulty)?

It will be up to the TTC to determine how to consolidate fares and charge the card owner. It will be a trade-off between fraud and transaction fees but there is a good chance they will sum-up and charge the fares between daily and weekly. They may opt to have output screens on the tap devices which display the fare charged for that trip (or leg of the trip).

Of course, we don't know what the RFP would include yet but the identifier (Credit Card, cell phone, etc.) isn't really related to the output shown.