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

The Heathrow Express only runs a 30 minute headway after 21:30.

Has anyone converted the ridership shortfall into actual dollars? That might inform how valuable some of the suggested fare adjustments would be.

- Paul
 
Friday's frequently seem higher (the 3,420 being last Friday). I'd think the June average should be tossed from the dataset - as it seems to include promotional events on June 6 and June 14 - weren't they giving out free rides those days? The only trend I see in the data (which Steve plotted), is it declined over the first 4 weeks, but then relatively static since, with a dip in August after the Pan-Ams finished, that reversed now that September is upon us.

I think the real answer, is that it's too early to tell much.

The Heathrow Express only runs a 30 minute headway after 21:30.
It also charges over $40 a trip!
 
That would be $5.09 to Westo and $4.77 to Bloor as opposed to $15.20 and $11.40. Might be worth a shot. Or perhaps something like $7.50 and $6. Those stations are so underused, that it might not make a lot of difference to ridership. But do you risk having trains too full in rush hour?

Here's a thought. What about an off-peak fare for Weston and Bloor?

An off-peak fare would be interesting, but how about just reserving one or two cars for airport-only travel?
 
Interesting. I was one of those 3,420 riders on Friday. My train was nowhere near full though.

Does anyone off the top of their head know the ridership numbers for comparable airport trains? I think that would be a much more relevant metric.
 
By the way, no one linked to this, but Steve Munro posted the actual Metrolynx ridership numbers:
https://swanboatsteve.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/ridership-summary-20150921.pdf
Gold! Precious data!

Please excuse the following, I'm using Excel.

Daily ridership:
daily riders.PNG


Average daily ridership per week, to show the trend:
averageweeklyridership.PNG


Average ridership per weekday:
riders per weekday.PNG



Monthly trend per weekday:
Thursday/Friday staying strong, Saturday/Sunday (joyrides?) dropping.
weekday ridership over time.PNG
 

Attachments

  • daily riders.PNG
    daily riders.PNG
    13.5 KB · Views: 628
  • weekday ridership over time.PNG
    weekday ridership over time.PNG
    15.5 KB · Views: 629
  • riders per weekday.PNG
    riders per weekday.PNG
    6.6 KB · Views: 625
  • averageweeklyridership.PNG
    averageweeklyridership.PNG
    6.3 KB · Views: 607
That 90% figure is statistical manipulation. If accurate the capacity is 25,000 a day. Which means that the plan was to be 88% under capacity.

Since we know that they use a variety of train sizes....do we even know what their in service capacity has been before people throw around "90% empty" or "10% full"?
 
The same people who are providing the money to make up the difference now... Taxpayers.

Might as well lower the price and let them actually benefit from the service than continuing to run empty trains and subsidizing a white elephant.

Fares can always be increased once ridership picks up.

I suspect stops will be eliminated before fares are adjusted. GO will throw a fit if UPX starts poaching their customers.
 
I suspect stops will be eliminated before fares are adjusted. GO will throw a fit if UPX starts poaching their customers.

You make a good point about Weston. That stop shouldnt exist on UPX at all. Rather than cutting fares to compete with GO, leave the low ridership there alone, so that there is data to support closing it altogether.

Looking at those wonderful charts and graphs, I was struck by what seems obvious - ridership is best on the days when the airport is busiest. (Doh!) That makes me think that we should stay out of the compete with GO rabbit hole, and address the central issue - what price point will bring in the most money and/or maximise the value of the investment on the true purpose of the line ie airport business?

I can't think of a market where the prudent strategy is to set price high until demand picks up. Personally I would rather see my tax dollars wasted subsidising people who might pay more if asked to, instead of wasted by running empty trains. So let's drop the fare to $10 and see what happens. A flat fare, Presto or not, no bells and whistles as exists now. Give UPX some time to do intelligent planning around incentives, package fares, time-of-day pricing etc as these take time to think through. Make it clear up front that fares will rise according to utilization.

- Paul
 
I don't know about GO worrying about UPX "poaching". A full packed UPX train is maybe 2 GO cars and underutilization of UPX hurts Metrolinx more in the media. It seems to me that the marginal cost of fuel for a full UPX train vs an empty one can't be that much.
 
There are a few more things that I would like to see in the data:
  • Full-fare versus reduced fare (I know some corporate groups have lower rates).
  • Boardings by station.
  • Load factors, both median and peak.
This extra bit of data would help design a strategy. As much as I would like UPX to cost $3, it can't be priced such that people don't get on at peak. I have to wonder how much the highly differentiated Presto/non-Presto pricing plays a role in lowering demand. For tourists arriving elsewhere, they probably just see the high number and have no idea where they would get a Presto card at the airport. Also since the TTC is not really on Presto yet, they couldn't use it for the rest of their trip. It's not like buying an Oyster card for London.
 
You make a good point about Weston. That stop shouldnt exist on UPX at all. Rather than cutting fares to compete with GO, leave the low ridership there alone, so that there is data to support closing it altogether.

It would have a bit of irony if groups opposed to this line use Weston station ridership as a reason to oppose the line.....since it was never in the plans until groups opposed to the line forced it to exist. That said, many people (me amongst them) think the concession of having a Weston stop was granted with the full knowledge that it would be poorly used and that there would be lots of ammunition to close it once the new stop connecting to the Crosstown at Mount Dennis was up and running.
 
The other thing to remember about Heathrow Express is that it's only one of several ways to get to LHR by rail. As a semi-express, Heathrow Connect might be a better comparator to UPX.
 
The other thing to remember about Heathrow Express is that it's only one of several ways to get to LHR by rail. As a semi-express, Heathrow Connect might be a better comparator to UPX.
True. Similar distance. Similar fare to airport. It stops places.
 
You're assuming that everyone traveling to Toronto is from Toronto. It's easy for us, because we know it exists and where to look. For people coming from outside of Toronto, it hasn't been easy.

Judging by the ridership numbers, it seems like many are keeping away. When cabs are waiting within spitting distance of the arrivals exit, of course someone is going to choose one right away over looking around for the UP terminal. (Which is why he ended up in a cab instead... it was waiting right there)

There are many airports with much better signage than ours that we can learn from. Madrid's Barajas airport has an amazing system that is clear and intuitive, Heathrow has their signage in bright colours that stand out easily, making them no trouble to find, and even YVR here in Canada has signs along corridors that people walk through pointing you to the train from arrivals. Heck, even Shanghai does a better job of directing you to the trains.

I walked out of the International doors a month ago, looking for my wife and not the train, looked up and immediately saw the 'Train to City' logo. I remember thinking at the time, "What's with all the fuss about signage? It's right there with everything else."

Also, unless it was 3am or something, there's a CIBC kiosk to ask and the actual ticket sellers booth (IIROC) all within 50m of the international entrance.

There was also, as I walked in, a temporary booth from University of Toronto greeting international students, a different booth doing the same for other international university students, and about 300 people there to greet travelers, any of whom your friend could have asked.

Choosing a cab because it's right there is a choice of ease. And maybe the UP folks underestimated how many people will take a cab when the cab's paid for, even if the roads are complained about incessantly. Maybe the real issue is that, despite the incessant whingeing from car users, our highways are not so bad that they will actually change their behaviour. That may be a real blow for UP -- that they listened to the carping and didn't properly model the actual usage.

In that case, those folks wanting UP to be as cheap as the TTC might get their long-term wish, as the UP might actually become a commuter train to Pearson, at least during rush hour.

I'm still agnostic. I think UP will have a great deal of appeal in the cold winter months for business people going from PATH-linked buildings to Pearson, and I would have thought vice versa but maybe incoming business passengers are so used to grabbing a cab they'll need a huge Heathrow-style push to start using the train. (Which I think should be done, anyway: three UP ticket sellers on commission and the usage triples overnight.)
 
: three UP ticket sellers on commission and the usage triples overnight.)
Good point. If it was easy to find someone selling UP tickets as people trying to illegally hustle taxi rides. (always amazed me that a supposedly secure facility like an airport can't even be bothered to stop that ... it's not like you can't tell exactly who is doing it ... makes me wonder if those taking payoffs to let them be, would also take payoffs for other things ...)
 

Back
Top