Amsterdam has one system while Rotterdam has another, yet only 30 minutes apart in the same country. The same goes for Germany where Hamburger is one while Frankfurt is another. Germany currently has the 9 euro monthly pass that can be use on any system in it. Even Italy Rome and Milano systems are different.
What exactly is the argument that you are making here? Toronto and Kitchener-Waterloo will never be a pairing that is equal to Rome and Milano, so the sooner we accept that, the sooner we can have discourse within the parameters of what is rather than what we'd like to see.
Secondly... so? What does the lack of fare integration with various European cities have to do with us? We can't do something because Europe also doesn't do it?
Funding "SHOULD Not Be Tie" to the Presto system "PERIOD".
Counter argument: implementing Presto would make the transit system more accessible and user friendly to visitors from areas where Presto is already widely implemented, such as tourists, students, or even people who work in another place beside their hometown.
If a region doesn't want to help integrate their transit system with the rest of the province, why exactly should the province open their pocket books for them?
What does a system do when ML charges X 5% fare collection fee in the beginning only to see it balloon to 9% years later and 4% more over straight fare collection??
There are three separate arguments that I see here. The first one is that the nature of transit means that it is unfeasible for them to run their operations from operating revenues alone, and the results with or without a Presto surcharge are not enough to run any transit system of an appreciable scale. This argument is also a compelling one against having other expensive features in a transit system where something analog would be cheaper, such as digital destination signs or air conditioning. We need sufficient political funding for this to not be a concern.
Moreover, as much as this may be a problem, it is not something that should be of any concern to the clients of the service. It is an internal issue and needs to be sorted out accordingly. All the client sees is that their extremely convenient fare card, which they can use for travel in much of southern Ontario, is no good for the system in question, and their perception of the system rightfully goes down in estimation.
Finally, Presto was not the only solution I mentioned. Having payments via debit or credit cards is another state of the art solution we in the region have failed to implement, and companies like VISA collect less charges on a transaction than Metrolinx does with Presto. Do you think that if we adopted some European fare card system, the provider wouldn't collect their own fees? It is the cost of running the organization. How many big box stores do you see around that only accept cash? If the profit driven private sector can figure this out, why can't public transit organizations?
Why is TTC looking at another system now when their contract comes up for renewal in 4 years??
The TTC in the post Byford era is one of the worst run organizations on the continent, so I'm not sure how much weight I should ascribe to this information. Furthermore, in typically Torontonian style, I expect that whatever solution they will end up adopting to replace Presto will be some in-house designed, barely functional boondoggle that will run way over budget instead of something useful like credit/debit based fare payments.
It maybe great to have one card for X area, but at what cost???
Such is the cost of running a modern, integrated, user friendly transit system. Everything costs something, even your much lauded European fare cards cost something to develop and implement. The simplest and cheapest solution is to have only cash fares, but that would be insane.
