Toronto Union Pearson Express | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | MMM Group Limited

TOareaFan said:
^so, ML based their projections on $20....the AG says it breaks even at $28...so we end up with a range of $20-28/30 ....so the "range" was actually two different people setting the two ends?
Click to expand...
The AG said it would likely end up in the $20 to $30 range after their discussions with Metrolinx.

It's as good as we've got, as far as I know.
 
dowlingm said:
In a sense though, at least there's an honesty in having to discuss the actual costs vs revenues of a project. Imagine if TTC said "the Spadina Extension is projected to lose $10m a year in operating, so we're going to add a zone fare north of Downsview to recover 50% of the net deficit".
Click to expand...

this would be completely reasonable.
 
TOareaFan said:
That is such a modern and crass view on journalism.....what used to be a very respected industry has now got to "you haven't told us what your new service is gonna cost, we can't wait any longer so we are gonna make up a price, tie that to you, embarrass you with it and drive public ire against that price.......and if you don't like it, too bad you should have gotten out in front of it."
Click to expand...
That's the way it is in the twitter era. They still have not come clean on the pricing either. They are a public agency.

nfitz said:
The range was reported by the Ontario Auditor General back in 2012 - http://www.auditor.on.ca/en/reports_en/en12/309en12.pdf where they reported that to break een, the fare would have to be $28, and that it may cost $20 to $30. They reported that Metrolinx's ridership projections were based on a $20 fare.

This was widely reported in 2012, and discussed on this very thread. See for example page 159:
http://torontoist.com/2012/12/ontar...union-pearson-rail-link-may-be-a-money-loser/
http://www.insidetoronto.com/news-s...olinx-for-high-costs-on-presto-union-station/
http://stevemunro.ca/?p=7047
http://www.thestar.com/news/city_ha...t_card_cost_has_ballooned_to_700_million.html


Here's an article in the Torontoist from then - http://torontoist.com/2012/12/ontar...union-pearson-rail-link-may-be-a-money-loser/

Metrolinx has been very coy about numbers. But they were required to release information to the Auditor General. We know that their ridership numbers are based on $20 (2011$ ?) and that the break even projection is $28. We also know they've recently discussed breaking even.

There's a story here.
Click to expand...
So it will be somewhere between 25-30 on opening day is my guess.
dowlingm said:
In a sense though, at least there's an honesty in having to discuss the actual costs vs revenues of a project. Imagine if TTC said "the Spadina Extension is projected to lose $10m a year in operating, so we're going to add a zone fare north of Downsview to recover 50% of the net deficit".

I don't think that UPX needs to be profitable, but it shouldn't be a millstone on the organisation either when so much extra service (and operating cost) is needed in the rest of the network.
Click to expand...
Fair but they could have at least not cut Eglinton West, that way people would not care about this at all. If this is not public transit, then we need public transit to the airport.
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
So it will be somewhere between 25-30 on opening day is my guess.
Click to expand...
Well, it would have been (for single trips at least by those landing at the airport) if it weren't for the huge fuss in the last few weeks. I expect there will be some backroom conversations involving Queens Park ... and who knows where they will land.

denfromoakvillemilton said:
Fair but they could have at least not cut Eglinton West, that way people would not care about this at all. If this is not public transit, then we need public transit to the airport.
Click to expand...
Good point. When Metrolinx announced the current form of the Union Pearson line, they were also still promising the Eglinton line would open in 2016, and be extended to the airport by 2020. If they were to commit to a timeframe for Phase 2 of the Eglinton line, there would likely be less fuss.
 
dowlingm said:
I think the real problem is that we don't have a firm idea of what Metrolinx does or does not intend, and they are not accountable should they decide to change tack so long as they keep their political masters at Queens Park happy by going along with THEIR whims.
Click to expand...

I think it's a perfectly valid question and one that Metrolinx should be answering.

If the auditor-general is right {and god knows I trust them more than Metrolinx} then the fares will have to be in the high $20 range. Toronto City Hall yesterday stated that fares should be "reasonable" {whatever the hell that means} but clearly there is pressure to keep the fares on the lower end.

I don't know of any transit lines that make money and certainly not one that is only expecting ridership of 5000 to 6000 / day so if it is running a deficit how will it keep running? The line is already expensive and if they need higher revenues that could easily scare off any potential passengers. This is particularly true of two or more passengers as their fares become uncompetitive with simply taking a taxi.

If they have to raise fares to $30 one way then they begin to be uncompetitive and especially if the passengers are going straight to Union for their hotel. If their hotel is even 4 or 5 blocks from Union that means they would have to spend another $6 to take the transit their as they won't carry their luggage. Sane people would just take the cab and not have to worry about finding their hotel little alone carry their luggage when they can get someone else to do it for them.

Also, seeing the line seems already quite unpopular with the general public I can't imagine Queen's Park being in a hurry to electrify a line that is geared strictly towards tourists and the business class when there are other pressing issues for that money that would better serve Torontonians themselves. Torontonians will not tolerate any of their tax dollars going towards UPX to help it keep running especially when they know how Metrolinx gave the GTAA $2 a fare extra for recover their "losses" on the parking revenue...........people not driving are having to subsidize those that do. Not exactly what you think of when you think of a supposed transit authority.

If the loses are obvious after even the first year, how will it keep operating? If it is run like a private business line it would go belly up and be put on the auction block.

This is something Metrolinx should be answering now, not later but Metrolinx has lied and been tight lipped around this whole line since day one that I'm sure they will simply avoid the question.
 
ssiguy2 said:
Also, seeing the line seems already quite unpopular with the general public I can't imagine Queen's Park being in a hurry to electrify a line that is geared strictly towards tourists and the business class when there are other pressing issues for that money that would better serve Torontonians themselves. Torontonians will not tolerate any of their tax dollars going towards UPX to help it keep running...
Click to expand...

I wonder what the Weston folks have to say about that.
 
nfitz said:
Good point. And if the $28 was in 2011 dollars, then break even price would be closer to $32 in 2015 dollars.
Click to expand...

Since the price of diesel has increased much faster than the rate of inflation (retail price of diesel is about 25% higher in January 2014 than January 2011) we may as well call it an even $35 and insist that Metrolinx justify that price...now!

Or we could ask the city of Toronto to tell us where they are gonna find the money to subsidize the fares down to the $7 per ride they seem to want.
 
TOareaFan said:
Since the price of diesel has increased much faster than the rate of inflation (retail price of diesel is about 25% higher in January 2014 than January 2011) we may as well call it an even $35 and insist that Metrolinx justify that price...now!

Or we could ask the city of Toronto to tell us where they are gonna find the money to subsidize the fares down to the $7 per ride they seem to want.
Click to expand...

Yeah!

Or, we could, I dunno, wait until an actual price structure is proposed?
 
Markster said:
Yeah!

Or, we could, I dunno, wait until an actual price structure is proposed?
Click to expand...

Why would we do that ....clearly we should force people to defend what they have not said.....anyway the media/public furor over this is gonna get pushed the back burner.......Warren Kinsella's lawyers have just served Kouvalis with a suit via twitter!
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
If this is not public transit, then we need public transit to the airport.
Click to expand...

We have public transit to the airport -- an express bus that runs at a higher average speed than the subway. We don't have rail transit to the airport, but I don't honestly see why what kind of wheels it runs on are super relevant. If the Eglinton Crosstown is extended west it probably wouldn't be any faster than the subway + 192 combo, even after factoring in the transfer time.
 
Platform 27 said:
We have public transit to the airport -- an express bus that runs at a higher average speed than the subway. We don't have rail transit to the airport, but I don't honestly see why what kind of wheels it runs on are super relevant. If the Eglinton Crosstown is extended west it probably wouldn't be any faster than the subway + 192 combo, even after factoring in the transfer time.
Click to expand...

We also have the GO Buses that deliver people in relative comfort from York Mills and Yorkdale to the airport.
 
Getting back to seriousness, the outrage has already effected change, and that's good!

The letter from Metrolinx offered the first confirmation of several things:
This will occur closer to the end of the year, but will include variable pricing for families, children and frequent users including airport employees and for passengers boarding at Bloor or Weston stations.
Click to expand...
Now let's stop with the calls for public inquisitions over some assumed (but never made) promises, and instead hold them to these current statements.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top