Moved to Forum: Original Link
Firstly, I'm not sure if this is a deal or a forum topic. I'll leave it to the mods.
This is awesome news for people that live in a Zone 2 area, as you will now be paying far less for travel into Zone 1. The saving is around $2.50 for a two hour full fare and $5.00 for a daily fare. Gowrie & Upfield commuters rejoice! And the free tram travel is the icing on the cake. Well done PTV!
Merry Christmas everyone :)
let me say…the rise in fares come 1/1/2015 will erase most of the saving form this combined Zone 1/2 ticket. And beware if you are within the free tram zone, and you accidentally touch on , touch off or do both like you were always taught to do. You will be penalised! You will be charged for touching on/off. Whereas before, if you did so in the tram free zone, you'd just see a 0 charge in the statement, now you are charged. And you need to know in advance if you are boarding tram at a no free zone or alighting at a no free zone. Because if you are, you will then need to touch on touch off on the tram and if you didn't and got caught, you are in for an on the spot fine. This must be the silliest most complicated convoluted crazy system in the world. Not in Europe, not in the US, have I ever seen a transit system that has so many different charges and scenarios attached to it. I feel sorry for the tourists who come into a complete unfamiliar city and its streets. They could have at least made ALL tram travel free with one less thing to worry about.
Silly. Sydney is far more complicated than Melbourne by a factor of at least 10.
Public transport in the US? Hilarious! You should become a comedian.
The few exceptions like New York and uhm…. Thats it.
Even places like San Francisco which has the second best PT in the US is complete shit compared to Melbourne.
Try going to Singapore, Bangkok or Hong Kong. They leave our PTS for dead!
Those cities are much higher density than Melbourne.
@Drew22: I partly agree Drew. Singapore certainly is a lot more densly populated and geographically more compact, but its public transport system copes miraculously well. Almost every time I visit Singapore a new station is built somewhere.
Bangkok on the other hand is relatively stagnant in terms of public transportation infrastructure expansion, but Bangkok is not a small city like Singapore. It actually has some distance in it. But nevertheless, monorail and subway trains don't have a schedule as they don't need one - trains arrive every few minutes.
Not to mention it's dirt cheap.
@apey75: Public transportation system requires several things if you want them to work really well. One of them is, unfortunately, population density.
I am not denying that the chances of building a decent public transport system with low population density is there, I am just saying that high population density does help a lot with planning. You cannot build a public transportation system without thinking about traffic around the place, and if the population density is high, then the chances of points along your plausible routes having enough people for the stations along it to be profitable/meaningful is high.
Try going to Singapore, Bangkok or Hong Kong. They leave our PTS for dead!
Yeah, why don't we get MTR to operate the trains.
After all they do in London, Stockholm, Beijing, Shenzhen, Hangzhou, and Melbourne
@Baysew: And? Does the fact that it's the same corporation operating the PTS in Singapore and Melbourne excuse the fact that they're piss poor in Melbourne and pretty darn good in Singapore?
Did you know that trains don't skip stations in Singapore in order to meet KPIs, but do so in Melbourne?
Did you know that you get charged based on distance travelled in Singapore, but not so in Melbourne?
EDIT: Have you actually used the PTS in Melbourne?
MTR operate the trains in HONG KONG, not Singapore.
Prepared to be challenged on this, but in my opinion, Singapore's MRT would have to be one of the best in the world.
However, they do have problems, as Singaporeans will happily point out to you. But as I understand it, the Singapore Government, is trying to build a system that runs as well as it can, so people don't turn their small island into one giant car park!
@johninmelb: Just realised my earlier reply had too much beer in it! But I did figure how to bold words so at least something was achieved! :P
Have you actually used public transport in the US? New York as you mentioned is fine, Boston's public transport is fantastic, DC's is quite good, Philadelphia's is fine, even the LA bus/metro system is very affordable and gets you from A to B without much hassle. It's a misconception that public transport in the US is completely shambolic.
Yes, yes I have.
I visit the US about four times a year in a slow year.
Thanks.
Perfect timing for summer. Go for a trip to the botanic gardens and just relax and let your mind wander ;)
I think a lot of people miss the point of the zoning system in Victoria. I think it's inherently fairer than many other systems around the world, but most only care about their bottom dollar so much that they forget the benefits to the greater community and the environment.
There was a point brought up regarding how you can travel from Pakenham to Werribee (around 70km, I think?) for the same price as someone travelling from, say, Box Hill to the city (around 10km).
If we look at this from a purely "I pay for what I get" point of view, then maybe that's not fair. But how about looking at it another way. If you take the freeway from Pakenham to Werribee, you'll probably spend $15 on petrol and that's it. But if you travel from Box Hill to the city, you'll be spending $5 on petrol + parking, right? So if you think about the costs you can offset by taking PT, then the current system does make a lot of sense.
Both are getting a great deal, the guy going from Box Hill to the city can get there and go to work for significantly cheaper than what he was going to pay if he took his car and the guy going from Pakenham to Werribee can get there for significantly cheaper than if he took his car too. That sounds pretty fair to me and seems like a great way of encouraging everyone to take public transport.
BS. I live 3 stops from the city (< 1km) and pay close to $20 for my family of 3 to go to the city, have lunch and go back home.
You can't compare modes of transport… car vs train vs whatever. If you cycle from wherever to wherever, you effectively pay nothing. But that isn't the point.
Let's compare what we pay to travel 1km on our public transport system versus what the rest of the world pays to travel the same distance. Here in Aus, we lose!
Might be worth considering what you have just described as a very short walk.
I agree and as a family we do usually walk. On my own I will rely on my bicycle most of the time.
However for the times when it is raining or simply too hot (especially for kids) I would like it if I had access to a public transport system that actually charged fairly. For the convenience of using the tram for 3 stops I pay the same as someone coming into the city from the suburbs. This defies logic.
Yesterday I drove my car 1km to pick up family from the CBD as they bought too much stuff to walk the distance of 1km on a hot day. Why? Because it's cheaper than a tram. This is the sort of environmentally unfriendly behaviour that the public transport system should be trying to discourage, but fails miserably through it's inadequate ticketing system.
@Drew22: And not being able to read relevant material an inch up on the screen is probably one of the reasons a lot of our projects (like Myki) fail miserably.
Tell your family to buy less crap when they know they cant get it home themselves?
It's called planning ahead, probably one of the reasons a lot of our projects (like Myki) fail miserably.
@Drew22: S**t happens Drew (sometimes literally with kids) and as adults we have to deal with things. I'll always choose the more cost effective way of achieving the same result. I'll continue to drive my overweight 4x4 into the city for as long as it's cheaper to do so.
But thanks for the wisdom regardless - I'll be sure to pass it on to the family.
I live 3 stops from the city (< 1km) and pay close to $20 for my family of 3 to go to the city, have lunch and go back home.
And you can't walk 3 stops because?
You can't compare modes of transport… car vs train vs whatever. If you cycle from wherever to wherever, you effectively pay nothing. But that isn't the point.
No, it is the point. You're just being selfish and thinking about how much YOU are paying without thinking about the fact that you're still getting a great deal.
What are the alternatives for you? You could drive to the city and pay more than $20 for parking. So compared to driving you're still getting a great deal for your whole family true?
That's great, if you get a great deal and everyone else gets a great deal using PT then everyone wins.
Let's compare what we pay to travel 1km on our public transport system versus what the rest of the world pays to travel the same distance. Here in Aus, we lose!
Yes, but the problem is it takes 15 mins to walk 1km at a leisurely pace or like less than 10 mins powerwalking. If you live any less than 5km, you really should be considering cycling. You can cycle 5km in less than 15 mins.
But let's look at the alternatives here. If we make it cheaper for those who live closer to the city and more expensive for those who live further away, then the argument will look something like this:
Ticket to City from Box Hill = $5
Ticket to Werribee from Pakenham = $20 (because it's over 4 times as far!)
What about the alternatives?
Car to City from Box Hill = $5 petrol + $20 (minimum) parking = $25
Car to Werribee from Pakenham = $25 petrol (max)
So the guy going to the City from Box Hill saves $20 (great incentive to take PT), the guy going to Werribee from Pakenham saves $5 (not such a great incentive to take PT).
Why not make the tickets $10, then everyone saves $15 and everyone is encouraged to take PT? That's fair no? Otherwise the guys from Box Hill going to the city save a disproportionate amount.
I'm a major, major advocate of not jacking up the prices for cross-city travel. We need to encourage more people to consider taking the train for cross-city travel (i.e. from East to West, for example).
Also, I think the abandoning of Zone 1 + 2 is great, as long as prices aren't jacked up for Zone 1. It encourages people who live in far places such as Pakenham to take the train to work in the city and unlike abolishing Zone 2 altogether, it also encourages people to travel within Zone 2 by itself.
There are lots of problems with the train system in Melbourne, including punctuality, reliance on signal boxes that fail way too often. Congestion at hub stations such as Richmond. Overcrowding - everyone heading East can never find a seat at Parliament even near peak times.
@ paulsterio
And you can't walk 3 stops because?
Your point is pointless - this isn't about me being lazy. I cycle 90% of the time, but the other 10% when I use public transport I feel completely ripped off.
No, it is the point. You're just being selfish and thinking about how much YOU are paying without thinking about the fact that you're still getting a great deal.
Is there something wrong about me thinking about how much I am paying? I certainly don't want to be subsidising your travel! I like to pay for what I use. What's so wrong or hard about that!?
What are the alternatives for you? You could drive to the city and pay more than $20 for parking. So compared to driving you're still getting a great deal for your whole family true?
Wrong! It's not uncommon for me to drive my hulking 4x4 1km into the city to pick up the family because they bought too much groceries. I'd like for them to take the tram, but it's simply cheaper for me to drive in and pick them up! The point of public transport is to move people around efficiently and affordably. If it costs more to use public transport than a vehicle that has the aerodynamic properties of a brick and consumes 15L/100km then clearly something is wrong.
Yes, but the problem is it takes 15 mins to walk 1km at a leisurely pace or like less than 10 mins powerwalking. If you live any less than 5km, you really should be considering cycling. You can cycle 5km in less than 15 mins.
Irrelevant. I own 3 bicycles and cycle 100km+ per week. The point is that when I do have to rely on public transport - I am being ripped off. This thread is about the costs of using public transport and not about alternative modes of transport.
PS. Try not to derail this thread even further and knock my choice of vehicle - it was a bad decision a few years ago which I regret but for the moment it makes economic sense for me to keep it as I hardly use it. I fill the petrol tank once every 1-2 months.
Is there something wrong about me thinking about how much I am paying? I certainly don't want to be subsidising your travel! I like to pay for what I use. What's so wrong or hard about that!?
One of the things I don't think people understand is that it's not about "paying for what you use". Let's think of another example. Does it cost any less for Metro to run trains if everyone came from Pakenham or from Caulfield? Of course not, regardless of whether you are on the train or not, the service has to run.
Don't you think the cost of running that service from Pakenham to the city should be borne equally by all who benefit from it?
This isn't a taxi service where the vehicle only travels as far as you need it to. The costs should be borne equally by all who use and benefit from the service. So I think this is a good step forward.
Wow. You're full of excuses.
Is it always raining and 40 degrees while you're ill with a broken bike?
Its life, its not always going to be perfect weather.
Does it cost any less for Metro to run trains if everyone came from Pakenham or from Caulfield?
Agreed, it doesn't. But to use an analogy - an ISP (TPG, Internode, iiNet, Optus, etc) build their infrastructure at a fixed cost. Of course the cost is determined by the dimensioning of this infrastructure, which is based on their best estimate of how many users they will have. The ISP's then bill users of their infrastructure according to what they use. If you have a 100Gb plan you pay less than someone with a 200Gb plan, etc. Similar principle applies to mobile operators (Telstra, Optus, Vodafone) that really have a fixed (dimensioning based) cost to build their network, but bill customers on the amount of calls they make. They bill down to individual calls, which have granularity down to the level of cents. Similar principle applies to electricity, gas, water providers.
So from my perspective, I would like the flexibility to be billed on what I use on the public transportation system. I'd like more granularity in billing, but this doesn't seem to be on offer. Whether you travel 1km on a tram of 15km on a train bears no difference in pricing.
Once again I agree with you in that the public transportation system needs to encourage (not discourage) transportation between all parts of the city. But at the end of the day it needs to be affordable to everyone based on the relative usage / benefit.
Maybe there is a better way, maybe fixed pricing is the way to go but most other indurstries (utilities, etc) charge based on what you use and offer significantly more granularity in billing than Myki does.
@apey75: Utilities is different. You're charged for how much you use because what you don't use isn't wasted. If you use 1L of water, you get 1L of water. That's like if you were to travel in a taxi. Pay for 1km if you go 1km.
With PT, regardless of whether you go 1km or 50km, the train always goes 50km. But anyway, I think at least we can agree on some points :)
Maybe there is a better way, maybe fixed pricing is the way to go but most other indurstries (utilities, etc) charge based on what you use and offer significantly more granularity in billing than Myki does.
I think the best way is to make all PT free. The cost of running it should come out of the Victorian Budget. Before all the people who don't take public transport jump on me, I just want to point out that everyone benefits from more people taking public transport. There will be less pollution, less road congestion (good for road users)…etc.
If you think about it, it actually works out really well. At the moment, people who have to use the road (e.g. where they're going isn't serviced by PT or they need to go at dangerous times) share it with people who really should be taking PT. I'm sure the guys needing to take the road wouldn't want to be paying other people's Myki fares, but if we can tempt a significant majority of the second group into taking PT, then the first group does benefit significantly, i.e. less traffic jams.
It's such a shame that we've privatised the train system to companies who only care about the bottom dollar.
And also, let's not forget that if we make public transport free, we won't have to pay those thugs acting as ticket inspectors, we won't have to maintain Myki machines, we won't have to queue at gates to get out of stations, we wouldn't have had to spend billions on Myki in the first place and the list just goes on.
@Drew22: You're supposed to pick one Drew, not all of the above. In my estimates one of the above will be true 10% of the time.
@paulsterio: Food for thought I guess! Free PT is beyond my level of understanding in terms of how it would mesh with the government budget, taxation system, etc. But it's worth thinking outside the box and worth throwing the idea out there.
I have never been to the Nordic countries, but would be interesting to see the costs associated with PT in those countries. A lot of the Nordic cities have well established cycling infrastructure so I'd imagine there'd be much less need for PT. Would be curious to see if that means PT prices are generally high or low.
My 2 cents in response to your ISP analogy: Every time some business tries to make everything super-granular, I find it becomes more expensive, administratively. Hence, the massive myki-failure. It just couldn't do it. :(
Public transport is just that - public transport. One system shared by all, as opposed to many systems, resulting in inefficiencies. I came from a country where there are different train networks (think corruption and nepotism/cronyism) covering an overall smaller area (I think!), but because they are different networks, there are different train stations, within 5 minutes of each other. So, each time anyone wants to get from point A to C, they have to change trains and networks and pay to use each section. I think that costs more (land, administration, marketing communications, staff) than to just have it streamlined and shared by everyone.
This is awesome for my local Laverton station! No longer the final zone 1 station :-)
Myki - total cost = 1.5 billion Australian Dollars
such gross mismanagement in the implementation of this ticketing system. when there are so many examples of effective public transport systems in the world that already worked. it was a case of "adopt one of those" . e.g. tokyo have an awesome ticketing system, as does london. they work. yet stupid vic govt had to pour $1,500,000,000 into …..re-inventing the wheel. "hey let's cut disability services by $250,000 and get rid of those those non-essential 6 rural support workers".
i just find it so baffling that establishing a ticketing a system on an existing transport system could cost so much.
Even bangkok does better than Melbourne when it comes to ticketing system. It's cheap, bills you based on how far you travel and it hassle free. FFS… how wrong can we go here in Aus!?!?!?
It is only a matter of a year or two before the fares for zone 1 monthly pass will reach the current zone 1+2 monthly pass rates.
Lots of people moan – and it certainly could be better – but Melbourne's public transport system is pretty good. That said, I'm not sure about this movement to make CBD trams free. I know it's "public" transport, but it just makes sense that those that use the service should be the ones paying for it.
It won't make a difference anyway. Most people who are catching trains within the CBD are people who have come in via trains or trams from outside, so they've already paid. The rest are people who wouldn't have paid otherwise anyway.
Personally, I don't fare-evade, because I have already paid for my ticket from catching the train into the CBD, but at peak times, the trams are so crowded there's no way you could check tickets and you can easily fare evade anyway.
I think it's a populist measure more than anything, nobody really benefits. It's more convenient for people who park in the city to go to work and stuff I guess, but they probably weren't paying in the first place.
Interesting view, either people have paid coz they came out of town, or they are evaders anyway, is ur argument.
So u categorise everyone in city living as fare evaders? Bit presumptuous.
Of course not, but let's be real. In peak hour, you can't even touch on your Myki on a tram. So if you're using Myki money, you can't even pay if you wanted to because it's so crowded. So I'm not saying people want to fare-evade, it's just that most people can't/don't touch on during peak times.
I'm not making this up, like go take a tram every day at peak time and you'll see what I mean.
There is good and bad in all of this, as there is with everything else government touches.
It seems to me that it was a populist move by Napthine to try and appease people because of the ongoing public transport debacle in Victoria caused by both parties over a long period. Almost nothing, other than the City Loop, has been done to the railways since Bolte was premier. That's why they are now falling apart so dramatically, eg, the signalling, track faults, overhead cables, driver train control communication, et al.
Then there's the ongoing going problems with those shit Siemens trains. I hate those trains with a vengeance. We should take them out now and give them as a foreign aid donation to a third world country where they belong. Siemens should be banned from ever tendering for trains again. Still reckon the best trains we ever had were the Blue Harris trains that were introduced in 1956 for the Olympic Games. They were spacious and comfortable. No reason why they can't build that design again, but to modern standards, with auto doors, air con, and up to date motors, etc.
But the fact remains, NOTHING IS GOING TO CHANGE. Fares will continue to go up, the service will continue to deteriorate. THAT'S A GIVEN.
Now, for people in Melbourne, DO YOU WANT THIS TO CHANGE OR NOT??
If you want change then WE, the people have to do something about it. Writing to newspapers, airing grievances on Ozbargain etc, makes not one scrap of difference.
Politicians DON'T CARE. They don't have to. They know as well as you that you can't change anything. Sure you can vote out one lot of dills, and replace with another. That achieves nothing. If you haven't learnt that simple lesson by now, then there is no hope for you.
We basically need to scare the shit out of the politicians to make them do what they promise, ie people power.
If we really wanted to, we could fix the problems with Abbot and his ratbag cabinet quite simply by decimating the Liberal Party at an election. It would only take one election where the ruling party loses almost every seat, to show them that we are not going to put up with this stuff any more.
Sorry for going off topic there. The railways are one of my hobby horses I guess!
2 billion dollars on the MYKI system, and it cant deal with complexities! The damn thing takes a good 2-3 seconds to realise there is a card in its proximity which is awaiting some form of communication from the reader.