MTA board member suggests off-peak bus discounts to woo back riders.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

People already pay what ever they want 24 hours a day ( 0$-2.24$). how about enforcing the fare. Cops on buses.

Thats where the revenue is

 

Another thing that irritates me is people that pay when they get off and hold up the entire bus load of folks waiting to get off. :mad: I like the B/Os that hold the bus until the come and pay and embarrass them. :cool:

[Q43LTD]

Off peak fares=increased ridership. Plain and simple

[checkmatechamp13]

Another thing that irritates me is people that pay when they get off and hold up the entire bus load of folks waiting to get off. :mad: I like the B/Os that hold the bus until the come and pay and embarrass them. :cool:

 

And delay a busload of passengers in the process? Including yourself?

[KeystoneRegional]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[nostalgia]

The real issue is REVENUE NOT RIDERSHIP. You have to understand the concept of economic elasticity of demand. The easiest way to explain is the lower the price, consumers will buy more of a product. But in terms of public transportation, will consumers take more trips or will there be NEW riders? If current riders just delay their trips to the off peak period, the MTA loses money.

 

Inelastic demand means that demand ISN'T responsive to price changes and that price and revenue move in the same directions. Higher fares lead to more revenue. Even if ridership goes down, total revenue goes up.

 

Motorists can search for a gas station with the lowest price. Passengers really don't have any other place to search for public transportation. The alternative is getting back into the car. At first glance, they may seem cheaper but after you add in travel time and cost of parking, it may not be a viable financial alternative.

 

The issue comes down to public policy that if public transportation is a "good thing" because it reduces pollution, then the government should support it through subsidies.

 

In Washington, DC, the subway system has a farebox recovery rate of 75%. I couldn't find a recent figure for bus operations but the latest TOTAL recovery rate is 62% which means bus operations drags down the total recovery rate.

 

Wikepedia shows the MTA recovery rate [2009] (all operations) of 56%.

[checkmatechamp13]

The real issue is REVENUE NOT RIDERSHIP. You have to understand the concept of economic elasticity of demand. The easiest way to explain is the lower the price, consumers will buy more of a product. But in terms of public transportation, will consumers take more trips or will there be NEW riders? If current riders just delay their trips to the off peak period, the MTA loses money.

 

Wikpedia shows the MTA recovery rate [2009] (all operations) of 56%.

 

 

First of all, you have to consider that peak travel is relatively inelastic. You may have those who will wait the extra 10 minutes so they could get the discount, but most people will be stuck paying the peak fare if they travel during rush hours.

 

Second of all, if people shift their trips to off-peak, then it's better because the MTA can run less peak service, which is the most costly to operate. It isn't like selling a magazine or something from a store, where it costs the same to manufacture no matter what time you sell it: If you can get extra riders where there's more capacity, it's better.

 

Finally, you have to consider that the MTA also runs the LIRR and MNRR, which bring down the farebox recovery ratio (also, is it for direct operating costs or total operating costs?)