SunriseChampion
Senior Member
Might have something to do with OC Transpo not being as rigid as the TTC.
|
|
|
Voltz
Senior Member
I must have missed the part where the TTC was offered oodles of cash to implement the Presto system and turned it down.....
Platform 27
Active Member
The province is covering the core system costs and the operating costs. Municipalities are only on the hook to install the readers. And every other municipality happily paid, in part because they figured they'd save money in the long run when they could phase out the old fare media.
Incidentally, passing through St. Patrick station today I noticed that workers were at that moment installing new token vending machines, and that an unmarked Presto unit had been installed into one turnstile.
Last edited:
Paleo
Active Member
How many of these other shining examples have dozens and dozens of half-century-old filled with asbestos stations to retrofit? It's a lot easier when all you have to do is retrofit a fleet of 10 buses at $20,000 a pop.
Jonny5
Senior Member
Aye. The TTC doesn't just up and decide to spend hundreds of millions to install Presto on it's own. That direction has to come from the commission, which would need coundil to allocate it in the capital budget, which they haven't.
DavidH
Senior Member
This is missing the point, somewhat, because the political masters of all of the other local authorities were on board. TTC has only slowly gotten on board when (A) they realized that fare countfeiting was becoming a major problem and (b) the province forced the issue by tying adoption of Presto to the funding of new lines.
I agree TTC's costs are higher but for a long time, they did not present the image of being in the least bit interested.
TOareaFan
Superstar
Aside from the slow and costly installation/implementation of Presto, I get the sense that ultimately there will be dissapointment.
I only say this because there appears to be a belief/desire that this system will lower the cost of GTA transit use by co-ordinating the various fare regimes and, from a fare perspective, treat "a ride as a ride" irrespective of what system provided the transit. While it might make changing systems more convenient, I can't see it delivering lower (overall on average) costs to users when all transit systems in the region are already short of cash and consistantly and constantly increase fares.
Unless Presto brings along with it quite large subsidy increases, I suspect fares/cost will be the same (if not higher) after it is roled out. (IMO)
I only say this because there appears to be a belief/desire that this system will lower the cost of GTA transit use by co-ordinating the various fare regimes and, from a fare perspective, treat "a ride as a ride" irrespective of what system provided the transit. While it might make changing systems more convenient, I can't see it delivering lower (overall on average) costs to users when all transit systems in the region are already short of cash and consistantly and constantly increase fares.
Unless Presto brings along with it quite large subsidy increases, I suspect fares/cost will be the same (if not higher) after it is roled out. (IMO)
DavidH
Senior Member
As has already been stated on this thread, the implementation of Presto is about convenience. For example, I use GO every day but occasionally use DRT and very occasionally use TTC. With Presto, I don't need to worry about those DRT and TTC fares; I just use my card (at least, once everything is fully implemented).
The question of fare integration is a separate point and it is on Metrolinx's list. Subsidies should go up (I don't think anyone here thinks that having the highest fare recovery rate in North America is actually a good thing) but let's be realistic; with governments hugely in hock since the recession started, there's only so much that is going to happen.
TOareaFan
Superstar
It will certainly solve the convenience thing but a refrain I hear quite a lot is "why should it cost X to travel from Y to Z just because the trip crosses some artificial line on a map when a trip of the same length within the municpal borders costs p% of that".......people who are looking for that sort of issue to be solved will be disappointed I think. Presto will be a more convenient way of charging the same amount of money (if not more).
DavidH
Senior Member
I don't disagree with that our fare models need to move to a cost-by-distance approach. It remains unfathomable to me that it costs me considerably more to get to the Toronto Zoo from Ajax than it does someone living in Long Branch.
But no one has ever said that Presto would address this, so it's a bit unrealistic to hang the lack of true fare integration on Presto's head.
TOareaFan
Superstar
That is not what I was trying to do. I just think that the expectations of a decent number of people is that Presto will address that and make those adjustments. So, my original point was I think there is going to be a fair amount of disappointment when it rolls out.
Not sure enough people realize that the only way to make that Ajax-Zoo trip cheaper is to increase the cost of that Long Branch to Zoo trip (in the absence of a totally new revenue/subsidy model that is)........since a significant number of the trips that would have to be increased would be trips within the city of toronto and a significant number of the trips that would be made cheaper are 905-to or through-416 trips it is likely a very difficult political battle....no? What mayor of Toronto wants to be the guy saying to the guy at Long Branch that his fare has to go up to venefit the guy in Ajax?
Jonny5
Senior Member
I think they didn't seem interested because no one knew how Presto would pan out at first. I recall it was an idea kicking around and then one day the Province decided they liked it and it changed from a fuzzy "someday" implementation date into an ASAP launch practically overnight. The whole GTA got onboard because the costs were so low for them, but it left the TTC expected to pay a $400million bill to join the program. I picture a Presto consultant giving the TTC a presentation of how it works, polite golf claps followed, then the consultant says "Oh by the way, the rest of the GTA already agreed to launch in two years, you need to be ready, it'll cost about $400 million. Gotta go, bye!".
This reminds me, I remember Burlington transit actually had a fare card scheme up and running some time in the late 90's to early 2000's. Was this a very early Presto experiment (it had a differenct name at one point, didn't it?) or was it their own independant project?
Last edited:
GregWTravels
Active Member
ComboCard. I think mine had a rainbow on it, though I am not sure why. Not sure exactly when they started up the system, but I recall that they were new when I had mine sometime between 1995 and 1997.
Just found this on Transit.Toront
n.Ca: Burlington Transit’s smart card the “ComboCard” will be fully decommissioned on effective September 4, 2007 to be replaced with paper ticket and pass products. The system was fully implemented in 1994 and has served Burlington Transit and our customers very well over the past 13 years.
drum118
Superstar
ComboCard. I think mine had a rainbow on it, though I am not sure why. Not sure exactly when they started up the system, but I recall that they were new when I had mine sometime between 1995 and 1997.
Just found this on Transit.Toront
I Still have a ComboCard with about $15 still on it.
Took some photos of the presto system on a Burlington bus today that was just installed.
I like the ComboCard better than the Presto
Drivers don't think the Presto will beat the ComboCard and attend to agree with them.
AH!!!!!! the ZOO!!. I have used it and Long Branch when doing fare, travel and cost as a comparison. It shows that fare by distance is ""NOT"" the way to go, but by time.
RedRocket191
Senior Member
Here's the fundamental problem with fare-by-time.
Jimmy rides the bus for 2 hours, while Susie rides the GO train for 2 hours. They both pay the same for a two hour pass, but Susie can cover more distance. She may be able to get back home on one fare, while Jimmy can't.
Susie gets more value out of her fare and the inequality remains.
Jimmy rides the bus for 2 hours, while Susie rides the GO train for 2 hours. They both pay the same for a two hour pass, but Susie can cover more distance. She may be able to get back home on one fare, while Jimmy can't.
Susie gets more value out of her fare and the inequality remains.