turini2
Active Member
I've done a fair bit of reading about this recently - in light of TfLs financial difficulties following COVID-19 and the loss of all of their fare revenue, and looking at other ways to fund transit operating costs. TfL has set up its own property development company - so it can gain rental income rather than just selling off the land. But that's going to make money in the long term, not the short term - and TfL doesn't have the cushy relationship with government like MTR does (where they get the land at the price before railway development, and get to capture the value of said development).If you follow the link, the year the data was collected is present; it varies by authority; but the vast majority is pre-covid, ~2016.
An entirely fair point on fares.
In Toronto, GO is separated out for its own calculation, in some other places commuter rail may be blended in; doing an apples to apples comparison can be a challenge.
Equally, the MTR makes a ton of money off its real estate which is factored into the calculation, I believe, and many other systems have substantial retail revenue.
The TTC does have some signature property leased out, albeit much of it at sub-market rates, and it doesn't have any real estate development arm as such.
I think that's probably a fair take. My only point at the start of the tangent was to poke at a very broad brush.
I'm a big fan of the approach in Paris, where employers over a certain size have to pay a transport subsidy tax (Versement mobilité) as well as the obligation to cover 50% of the cost of transport for staff. This funded around 48% of the €10billion ish budget of Île-de-France Mobilités.
That's an incredibly low farebox ratio for a region!Revenue from transport tickets represents 33% of financing resources in 2023. After deducting the share paid by employers and communities, the share from travelers corresponds to 27% of resources.




