occidentalcapital said:
Not sure how you can draw that conclusion when the 'experiment' occurred on a day with massively increased nightlife demand. Clearly there were other factors here at play, such as NYE?

Until we get a handle on the violence and harassment problem on transit, fares are a must to maintain at least some measure of control where only people who are actually using transit should be in transit spaces.
Click to expand...

Silly me. I guess I connected the choices I made on NYE (based on free fares) to consumer behaviour.

Oops
 
accord1999 said:
For this debate, the question is if ETS had another $125-$150M/year in funding, would it be better to use it to make fares free or to improve transit service.

Free fares seems to be mostly a thing for US transit systems that have low ridership and don't actually have much passenger revenue to lose, unlike the much more successful Canadian ones.
Click to expand...
It’s been proven elsewhere that free or reduced fares is often not the biggest deciding factor in adoption. Usually it’s frequency, trip length, experience quality, safety. Especially in Edmonton’s current state, it’s quality, not cost, stopping ridership.

Whether it’s $50 or $100 for a monthly pass, if you can’t replace your car and still need a car for most trips, it’s not helpful. Most will keep driving.

I do think the “first 6 rides free” each month could strike a unique balance though of not decimating revenues, but attracting new users, especially for peak times (rogers events, festivals, holidays) and for one off trips to things like city attractions, mall trips, main streets. Gets ARC cards into pockets, people semi-familiar with transit near them, and ups ridership.
 
I would disagree with that. If bus passes were reduced to $50 that would catch a number of people's attention, particularly these days when people's budgets are tight and particularly for travel on routes that serve areas with very limited free parking (ex. downtown and the university). I don't buy a pass because I am an occasional user, but at $50 I would probably use transit more.

The Arc card does have potential flexibility to attract more users, but currently it is actually set up to do the opposite. First you have to pay a flat fee to get the plastic card, which is the first disincentive and then you have to use it a lot (not just a little) for it to become cheaper. Its fairly obvious the current system was designed by people who have little understanding of marketing and consumer behavior which is one reason the system continues to struggle to get new users.
 
I would disagree with that. If bus passes were reduced to $50 that would catch a number of people's attention, particularly these days when people's budgets are tight and particularly for travel on routes that serve areas with very limited free parking (ex. downtown and the university). I don't buy a pass because I am an occasional user, but at $50 I would probably use transit more.

The Arc card does have potential flexibility to attract more users, but currently it is actually set up to do the opposite. First you have to pay a flat fee to get the plastic card, which is the first disincentive and then you have to use it a lot (not just a little) for it to become cheaper. Its fairly obvious the current system was designed by people who have little understanding of marketing and consumer behavior which is one reason the system continues to struggle to get new users.
 
The pigeons are already back at Churchill -- they're coming from the Square and the Library where locals are feeding them.

They've also taken up residence in Churchill Connector. Don't know if the incoming winter weather will drive them elsewhere.
 
David A said:
then you have to use it a lot (not just a little) for it to become cheaper. Its fairly obvious the current system was designed by people who have little understanding of marketing and consumer behavior which is one reason the system continues to struggle to get new users.
Click to expand...
This is false.
Cash fare: $3.50
10 tickets @ $27.75 = $2.775 per ticket
Arc: $2.75

You can use it as little as you want and it's cheaper than cash. And while it's not much cheaper than tickets, you don't need to put out nearly $30 to buy 10 tickets whether you need them all or not, so for occasional users this is a positive, or people who might not be able to afford $30 in one shot.

Assuming 2 round trips per day, you reach the fare cap after 18.18 days, so if you are just taking transit 5 days a week for commuting to a job, you'll reach your fare cap and pay the same as a bus pass for the same period.

There's been months where I've had a week or two of holidays and debated whether I should fork out for a bus pass when I might not get my $100 worth of use, and if I should just buy tickets instead because it would be cheaper. I found tickets inconvenient. Having to remember to take them with me, or I having a bunch of them stashed in my wallet.
Arc... it doesn't matter. If I do travel for those 20ish days to work, I get fare capped and pay the same as a bus pass. If I travel less I pay slightly less than using tickets, and that's all without the hassle of buying the fare products, or trying to predict how much I'm going to need to use transit before the start of the month.

I don't get why this concept is so tough. There was a really off base letter the editor in the Journal today, claiming that ETS has ceased paper pass and ticket sales (they haven't) and similar complaints about Arc.

Yes, there's the $6 cost of the card initially, but since I got mine the convenience of not having to go and buy passes and tickets has been more than worth it.
 
ETS are not issuing tickets with end of 2024 expiry instead you can use last year’s tickets this year. I don’t know if that indicates they will be getting rid of tickets this year or not but it does sound suspicious.
 
David A said:
I would disagree with that. If bus passes were reduced to $50 that would catch a number of people's attention, particularly these days when people's budgets are tight and particularly for travel on routes that serve areas with very limited free parking (ex. downtown and the university). I don't buy a pass because I am an occasional user, but at $50 I would probably use transit more.

The Arc card does have potential flexibility to attract more users, but currently it is actually set up to do the opposite. First you have to pay a flat fee to get the plastic card, which is the first disincentive and then you have to use it a lot (not just a little) for it to become cheaper. Its fairly obvious the current system was designed by people who have little understanding of marketing and consumer behavior which is one reason the system continues to struggle to get new users.
Click to expand...
I’m sure there’s threshold for the occasional user to just go get a “monthly pass” (if those still existed), but it’s likely under $20. Most people don’t use transit in Edmonton due to quality, not pricing. To convert the “middle class” users, it has to be reliable, convenient, and safe. People glad pay for Ubers all the time over transit. Or for 2 vehicles in a household just for the convenience of having a car accessible to both adults, even if they only both need it for separate uses 1 or 2 times a week.

Price isn’t the issue.
 
thommyjo said:
I’m sure there’s threshold for the occasional user to just go get a “monthly pass” (if those still existed), but it’s likely under $20. Most people don’t use transit in Edmonton due to quality, not pricing. To convert the “middle class” users, it has to be reliable, convenient, and safe. People glad pay for Ubers all the time over transit. Or for 2 vehicles in a household just for the convenience of having a car accessible to both adults, even if they only both need it for separate uses 1 or 2 times a week.

Price isn’t the issue.
Click to expand...

And for those where the fee is a barrier, they may qualify for monthly passes at $35/month - based on income and other factors.

www.edmonton.ca

Ride Transit Program | City of Edmonton

The Ride Transit Program provides greater access to transit by offering adult and youth passes to eligible Edmontonians at a subsidized rate.
www.edmonton.ca www.edmonton.ca
 
Foolworm said:
Wait... A Flexity vehicle only has 1.5x the capacity of a SD-160 despite being almost twice the length?
Click to expand...
Yeah. That's with Edmonton's suboptimal seating arrangement, and the lack of walkthrough trains that should probably be implemented (see Frankfurt U5).

With better seating and walkthrough trains, ETS would be closer to around 1,300 people per 5 car train compared to the current capacity of around 950 people. The Subway in Edmonton will be able to move just slightly under the TTCs highest capacity line, with no modifications to any stations.

Now imagine you're Calgary. Sinking billions into an underground subway line, but running low floor CAF Urbos trains, with only slightly higher capacity than Edmonton's Valley Line trains.
I think it's stupid, and it will put their subway system at around 60% the capacity of ours, despite being 50-60 years newer.

We complain here about ETS' decision to have at grade crossings, the choices made regarding Valley Line, etc. Atleast the people running things here know the difference between a tram-like line and a subway.

I do think the Valley Line is going to run into capacity issues shortly, and will need to run exclusively 2 car trains. This can be solved to an extent by increasing frequency, and creative train stacking during extreme peak times. Still, it's currently capable of moving 16,500 sardines per hour at 5 minute headways.
 
Regarding ARC vs paper ETS fare media, iirc ETS has already noted a drop in "fares" initially as people went for the card as they didn't need/want a full booklet, so buy what you need, equals less purchases until you reload, and should eventually even out.
Of course, off loading the costs to ARC and their administration should be cheaper than keeping things in house, anybody recall what ARC costs?

But going back to the buy what you need theme, It's past time to initiate fare zones.
As an example, a person boards the bus in Secord, and is set to go downtown (or further). Nice, maybe 1 or 2 transfers, and a seat.
Picture the same rider boarding at 124th going into downtown. Rider lucks out and finds a seat, but more likely, no seat, and crammed in line sardines.
Or a rider boarding downtown to southgate, vs downtown to whyte avenue.
The buying what you need/use philosophy fails as there are not any fare variances related to a different product. Should be a simple enough with the ARC programming.
I read a lot of backlash regarding the cards cost and registration when first rolled out. Yes, they passed out many free cards, but the 6.00 fee may be an issue to some, maybe 2.00?
Then the registration issue, how much revenue will this create for ARC, because, let's face it, that is happening (ARC is not a charity) with the offer of saved balances and replacement cards seems a reasonable solution.
Some will never freely give out our information, and yes I am one of "them". I prefer anonymity and will select whom my information is shared.

Still would have liked the high floor vehicle vs the low floor as capacity is greater, and allows greater accessibility look at McKernan Station or Calgarys 39th
 
heard on a podcast from the ETS manager that they aren’t doing fare zones anymore as originally planned due to “equity”.

I disagree and would love to see their report/logic.

Essentially their argument is that you can’t punish low income people who have to live further away from work.

What about all the low income people paying $3 to travel 20 blocks downtown though, while rich suburbs kids take a bus and the LRT 100+ blocks into uni or downtown?

I don’t think the framing should be “pay more for farther”, but rather “pay less for shorter”. I actually think the non fare zone approach is more inequitable.
 
I'm gonna come out and say that I don't really care for the equity argument, but I'm against fare zones. Fare gates at all stations where it's possible (regardless of the line) can be paired with the flat rate of $2.70 for the entire city. I don't think discouraging suburban ridership on transit would be a good idea at all. I ride StAT enough to know what limited service from low demand does to a service area. None ARC payment options should have been scrapped at the end of 2023, in my opinion. Allowing paper transfers delays fare gates until at least 2025 now.
 
Habibfazil said:
Then the registration issue, how much revenue will this create for ARC, because, let's face it, that is happening (ARC is not a charity) with the offer of saved balances and replacement cards seems a reasonable solution.
Click to expand...
I fail to follow. How does registering a card create revenue?
Registering does protect balances.

Benefits of Registering an Arc Account:
Protect your money if your card is ever lost or stolen.
Auto-reload money on your account.
Link multiple Arc cards on one account.
Required for access to eligible discounted fares - including for seniors, youth and other discounted programs - when available in 2023.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top