DavidH
Senior Member
Absolutely. It's out of print so you'll have to search for it (I got mine from ebay about 8 years ago) but it's well worth it.
|
|
|
The need for private mass transit in the GTA
- Thread starter bloor_christie
- Start date
Second_in_pie
Senior Member
Weird, I thought someone pointed out the obvious success of European transit agencies as an indicator that the TTC should go private.
T
Tdot_one
Guest
You should go see privatized transit in cities in Melbourne. There really isn't much gains in efficiency outside of state subsidizing the operator. Besides TTC is well-run, with buses and subways providing excellent service.
The subway with its 2-3 inter-peak minute frequency is quite good vs. the 30-minutes common in DC, Melbourne, Sydney and elsewhere. The gripe may be from outer suburban users who are not well connected to the TTC.
GO and the pro-car municipalities are the issue imo and it's not like those suburbs aren't affluent. That can be improved, benefiting the city greatly. I could see pretty fast service if the damn lines were electrified like the commuter system in European cities.
The subway with its 2-3 inter-peak minute frequency is quite good vs. the 30-minutes common in DC, Melbourne, Sydney and elsewhere. The gripe may be from outer suburban users who are not well connected to the TTC.
GO and the pro-car municipalities are the issue imo and it's not like those suburbs aren't affluent. That can be improved, benefiting the city greatly. I could see pretty fast service if the damn lines were electrified like the commuter system in European cities.
waterloowarrior
Senior Member
The successful agencies are tendering routes or entire areas and basically partially privatizing transit (in some cases a public bus company still exists), but maintaining control and regulation... The goal isn't to make a profit but to reduce costs and therefore reduce the government subsidy needed for transit. Some routes may be profitable, some may be unprofitable. The UK outside of London has a more deregulated system (which still subsidizes some non-commercially viable service), but it had a lot of problems.
hkskyline
Active Member
I thought Sydney's CityRail is more like GO Transit, so the frequencies are in-line with suburban commuter service in Toronto.
sjc
Active Member
I believe that there may be many opportunities for private operators to offer targeted services at a higher price point than the TTC, but less than a cab.
What if, rather than completely privatizing the transit system, they simply allowed private operators to offer service if they wish?
For instance, why should I not be allowed to buy a bus and sell service to commuters by running an express bus from a residential area (such as Forest Hill or Rosedale) to downtown at rush hour? The TTC currently offers only a very limited rush hour express service.
Regional transit is another opportunity -- right now, if you aren't going far enough out from the city for VIA or Coach Canada to operate, you are stuck with GO transit. Private operators could compete with GO transit by offering a higher level of service on busses (perhaps bigger and/or fewer seats, entertainment) at a higher price point.
Another possibility would be for private operators to operate individual cars on the GO train. What if someone fitted up a car as a pub and charged $5 on top of your GO train fare for entrance?
My biggest issue with transit in Toronto is that you can either go mass transit for cheap or cab for expensive. There are no options in between.
GregWTravels
Active Member
Didn't the TTC have issue with the private company that was going to run a bus from Palace Pier to downtown a few years ago? Did that ever get off the ground?
Conversely, private coach operators are moaning about lost revenue with GO service now going to Niagara. Bus Lines Feel GO's Pinch:
Jim Devlin, president of Coach Canada, said he has been forced to slash prices on some fares to match the provincial taxpayer-subsidized GO Transit, which started running a bus service in Niagara in September.
Last month, the company's average fare was down $3.65 per passenger compared with 2008.
Ridership dropped to 39,000 last month from 41,000 in October.
"The bottom line is, financially, we're losing money on the route," said Devlin.
Conversely, private coach operators are moaning about lost revenue with GO service now going to Niagara. Bus Lines Feel GO's Pinch:
Jim Devlin, president of Coach Canada, said he has been forced to slash prices on some fares to match the provincial taxpayer-subsidized GO Transit, which started running a bus service in Niagara in September.
Last month, the company's average fare was down $3.65 per passenger compared with 2008.
Ridership dropped to 39,000 last month from 41,000 in October.
"The bottom line is, financially, we're losing money on the route," said Devlin.
T
Tdot_one
Guest
Yes, it is. It is a commuter service akin to GO. The difference is that its frequencies are much higher at the 15-30 minutes range, vs the hourly range of the GO.
TTC is much more superior at a 90-150 frequency, and that's one of the reasons why so many want the system expanded substantially. There isn't anything like that in either of the Australian networks. However, Sydney is going to be developing a subway line within the CBD.
http://sydneymetro.net.au/faq/index/1
pilinha
New Member
I am against privatization of transit.
Look what happened to the 407, what a disaster.
Look what happened to the 407, what a disaster.
Justin10000
Banned
You can look at Metronet in London also.
GregWTravels
Active Member
And potentially Tube Lines as well, the second of the "infracos" that is responsible for infrastructure improvements. Add this to the quasi-nationalisation of Network Rail (former Railtrack), and it gives a poor picture of the prospects of successful privatisation of the infrastructure associated with transit - both long and short haul.
Disparishun
Active Member
Exactly.
wyliepoon
Senior Member
They should be blaming private Chinatown casino bus operators, such as Safeway Tours that run the buses between Toronto and Fallsview Casino, before they blame GO. Safeway runs a more convenient bus service from various locations in Toronto, and for holders of the casino's PAC cards the fare is either $5 or free.
On such a high-demand route like Toronto-Niagara, I'd like to see both Coach Canada and GO run services like Safeway. For GO this could mean running buses to Niagara from places other than Union Station.
http://www.safewaytours.net/casinobus.html
Epi
Active Member
A lot of this is due to regulation. For instance, say we allowed ANYONE to own and operate a taxi. There actually are 'underground' taxi services to the airport (I know of them within the Chinese community for instance) which are 1/2 the price than an airport limo/taxi.
Or another example would be the so called 'Chinatown' buses that run between Boston and NYC for $5-10 and are super successful. Those casino buses are also a good example.
I think as long as there's some sort of regulation to ensure that stuff is safe (i.e. buses aren't deathtraps) it will be fine. The entire transportation sector is way too regulated for any good.
As for these so called 'unprofitable routes'. Doesn't logic tell us that if a route is unprofitable no matter what you do (down to running a TTC mini-van 4x/hour), perhaps it's just not worth doing in the first place?
If there is something that can be done that just isn't done for whatever reason, perhaps the TTC should change the way it does things in a large way or let someone else figure out how to do it properly.
urbanfan89
Active Member
The TTC is an essential service. It's not a money-making organization. Because it has a mandate to serve all parts of the city, its emphasis will be on coverage rather than profitability. As a result, some neighbourhoods *will* either have loss-making routes or have no transit altogether. This is not fair to them.
The similar argument exists with the highway system. The 401 is "profitable" given that the fuel tax paid for using the highway is higher than the maintenance costs of the highway. Highway 10 north of Orangeville is probably not "profitable", since the maintenance cost is far greater than the gas tax paid for those driving on it.
"Sorry guys, the highway is closed from here. The government has deemed it unprofitable and they can't find a private company willing to take it over."