[nfitz]

Are they high? I suppose when Transit City's all done built it'll be $150/month.

I'd think it would be a lot higher than that just from inflation by then ... when's Lakeshore West scheduled for? 2028?

But how would it effect operating costs? There will be significantly less vehicles on each route; the primary cost is labour. That will cut operating costs. (which was the folly in the save money by closing Sheppard subway discussion in 2007 ... if you crunched all the costs for extra buses on Sheppard, and all those extra drivers ... it would have cost them more money to not run the subway; assuming they could find enough buses).

 

[kEiThZ]

$126 is not that bad. Especially when you take into account the transit tax credit and the transferable nature of a metropass (which other transit agencies don't allow). The transit tax should make the break-even about 42 tokens. And that's not taking into account the MDP. That means just using the pass to/from work everyday makes it cost effective. Run one extra errand with a round trip once a week and you've saved quite a bit with tax credit or broken even without.

And if you are sharing a pass with someone then it truly becomes an incredible deal. Perhaps what they should consider are different rates for transferable and non-transferable passes.

 

[nfitz]

$126 is not that bad. Especially when you take into account the transit tax credit and the transferable nature of a metropass (which other transit agencies don't allow). The transit tax should make the break-even about 42 tokens. And that's not taking into account the MDP. That means just using the pass to/from work everyday makes it cost effective. Run one extra errand with a round trip once a week and you've saved quite a bit with tax credit or broken even without.

A 16% increase isn't bad?

I can understand the need to raise funds; but the worst part of this is that, the multiplier has changed. That pushes the break even point to 43 tokens ... or a minimum of 22 round trips.

It would seem to me that it would have made more sense to just raise all the fares proportionally. Say 15% across the board. Or better yet 10% and put the pass to $120, and raise parking rates accordingly, so as not to encourage people to drive more. I bet GreenP rates aren't planned to increase 15%!

 

[UD2]

stupid unions...

i doubt the TTC can really be short 100 million dollars due to not enough riders or such.

TTC is a subsidized service. In theory, the more riders it has, the more money it should be losing. Like almost all local public transportation around the world. Infact i can't really think of one creditable system simliar to the TTC that doesn't lose money. Infact I think the TTC is one of the least subsidized services of them all.

 

[nfitz]

Yes, excellent point ... we need to raise fares to reduce ridership. The added bonus is that this allows services to be cut without creating overcrowding.

 

[junctionist]

That's assuming you have to provide capacity through a lot of small vehicles. If you can fill subway trains, you can actually make a profit.

 

[nfitz]

Yes, another excellent point. That can be accomplished by cancelling surface routes, and reducing off-peak subway frequencies. Why not run the BD line once every 20-minutes at midnight ... New York City has subway lines that run that infrequently.

 

[MetroMan]

This is something that the next Mayor needs to put a focus on. In fact, this should be THE election issue in November, 2010.

McGuinty's knees are beginning to tremble with the HST and a history making deficit... so I'm not quite sure he's guaranteed to be re-elected in 2011. However, the Liberals need to stay in power because they're our only chance of having the TTC re-uploaded and financed by the province.

These TTC prices are getting out of hand. At this rate, by the end of the next decade, we'l be paying $5 bucks just to hop on a streetcar...

I think it's time to implement fare zones at this point. It'll be the only way to rationalize such high prices. Look to the London Tube for a good example on how to run fare zones. If they weren't on such a system, the Tube would be absurdly expensive, even to go just one stop.

 

[Yoshimura]

A great idea would be to allow for privately run buses, but have them all in the same color (not the same make) and using the same pay system.

If you want, only allow individuals to have like one or two busses max.

 

[doady]

TTC is a subsidized service. In theory, the more riders it has, the more money it should be losing. Like almost all local public transportation around the world.

Wrong. A full bus or train requires less subsidy, if any, than an empty bus or train.

If this increase in the cost of the Metropass results in a decreased ridership, the revenue might decline and the TTC might require even more subsidy. AS I said, this fare increase could backfire on the TTC.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Wrong. A full bus or train requires less subsidy, if any, than an empty bus or train.

If this increase in the cost of the Metropass results in a decreased ridership, the revenue might decline and the TTC might require even more subsidy. AS I said, this fare increase could backfire on the TTC.

This bus must be profitable then.

This train must be profitable as well.

 

[kEiThZ]

The only way to increase 'profits' would be for the TTC to load match, something airlines are really good at. This means that the TTC would have to dramatically cut off-peak service. Essentially, they'd become more like GO and become just as 'profitable'.

 

[doady]

No need to look to India for profitable buses and trains. You can sees profitable buses and trains in the Toronto area. The TTC subway trains are definately profitable. The 19 Hurontario buses are profitable.

Profitability is not just about full vehicles either. Along a route like Hurontario, people travel short distances so the turnover in passengers is very frequent. Passengers are constantly boarding the buses, but passengers are also constantly disembarking, and freeing up space on the bus. So ridership and revenue are very high compared to the actual service provided, i.e. the money needed to operate the route.

So if the TTC Metropass encourages more short distance rides, do these rides actually put that much pressure on the TTC??? Not really. For that same reason, time-based transfers would not put pressure on the TTC either.

Trying to discourage people from using transit, especially people who would travel short distances using a pass or time-based transfer, would not make it more profitable. I think the reason the TTC is so efficient compared to the rest of North America is because riders travel shorter distances compared to the other systems. If this changes, the TTC could find itself in a very bad situation.

And of course lower ridership would also mean lower revenues from the provincial gas tax, as the portion allocated to the TTC is mostly based on ridership and is enough to cover more than one-third of the subsidy required for the operation of the TTC. So no, lowering ridership is probably not a good strategy...

 

[UD2]

No need to look to India for profitable buses and trains. You can sees profitable buses and trains in the Toronto area. The TTC subway trains are definately profitable. The 19 Hurontario buses are profitable.

Profitability is not just about full vehicles either. Along a route like Hurontario, people travel short distances so the turnover in passengers is very frequent. Passengers are constantly boarding the buses, but passengers are also constantly disembarking, and freeing up space on the bus. So ridership and revenue are very high compared to the actual service provided, i.e. the money needed to operate the route.

So if the TTC Metropass encourages more short distance rides, do these rides actually put that much pressure on the TTC??? Not really. For that same reason, time-based transfers would not put pressure on the TTC either.

Trying to discourage people from using transit, especially people who would travel short distances using a pass or time-based transfer, would not make it more profitable. I think the reason the TTC is so efficient compared to the rest of North America is because riders travel shorter distances compared to the other systems. If this changes, the TTC could find itself in a very bad situation.

And of course lower ridership would also mean lower revenues from the provincial gas tax, as the portion allocated to the TTC is mostly based on ridership and is enough to cover more than one-third of the subsidy required for the operation of the TTC. So no, lowering ridership is probably not a good strategy...

One can argue that with out the money losing routes to complete the network and making it relevent, people wouldn't be bothering to use the service in the first place.

 

[nfitz]

One can argue that with out the money losing routes to complete the network and make it relevent, people wouldn't bother taking the service in the first place.

Bingo! Which is why neither the 19-Hurontario or Yonge subway makes money; the majority of users are transferring to something.