17 thoughts on “About 8,000 people rode Expo Line to USC game on Saturday”

1. David,

   Metro has stated blog board that they are looking to move to distance based fares once the Regional Connector is built.

   It’s the only way to be fair for everyone. It doesn’t make sense for one to be charged $1.50 taking an one station ride from Little Tokyo to Union Station while another can go from Venice Beach to Montclair for the same price.

   And practically everybody else that gets transit right (London, Japan, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore) all uses distance based fares over flat rate fares. Shorter the ride, the cheaper you pay, the longer the ride, the more you pay. It’s practically becoming a global standard. And such a fare system has proven to be show better farebox recovery ratios that makes them more self-sufficient with less or no taxpayer dependency.

   And in order to get full fare system integration going on, it has to be done. As it stands today, Metrolink and Metro Rail is totally incompatible with each other and is hard to implement using TAP. The former uses distance based fares the other uses pay per ride fares. If fare integration is to be done, you have to choose one or the other. And I doubt Metrolink will be for $1.50 rides from Union Station to Orange County or Ventura County, so the ball is in Metro’s court to adapt to the distance based fare system.

   And no, LA isn’t the only one looking at this.

   CTA in Chicago is also considering the change.
   http://news.medill.northwestern.edu/chicago/news.aspx?id=200925

   UTA in Salt Lake City is going to switch to that system soon as well.
   http://www.ksl.com/?nid=960&sid=17311018

   The change to distance based fares are being discussed all over the US from Atlanta’s MARTA to Seattle’s SoundLink.
   http://georgiapolicy.org/five-ways-to-move-ahead-on-transportation-policy/
   http://seattletransitblog.com/2012/05/17/tap-on-tap-off/

   When Boston’s MBTA recently aised their fares, the option of moving to distance based fares like Washington DC Metro was on the table.
   http://www.slideshare.net/rob.goodspeed/evaluation-of-alternative-fare-structures-for-bostons-subway

   Many transit experts agree that distance based fare structures are the way to go instead of flat rate policies:
   http://people.hofstra.edu/geotrans/eng/ch6en/conc6en/ch6c4en.html

   It’s the way things are going, and I assume Metro will have to adapt to changing times at some point as well.

   Besides, you can’t keep on doing fare hikes over fare hikes over and over again just to cover the cost of running public transit as the system expands. Keep that up, you’ll end up $3, $4, $5 flat rate fares which really makes no sense at all to travel short distances; everyone will go back to driving their cars because you end up saving more driving anything under 10 miles than taking public transit. How stupid is that and it defeats the purpose of public transit.

   Get used to it, distance based fares will be coming soon to Metro.

2. Nearly all the game attendees were cleared from the station by 9 p.m. Because the game was a blowout, a lot of people left early and that helped ease crowding at the stations.

   Steve Hymon
   Editor, The Source

3. I don’t think it’s accurate to say that distance-based fares are coming soon. The agency has said before that it will look at different fare structures in the future — there’s no disputing that. But there’s no timetable as to when that may happen, nor is there a current proposal on the table. It’s also worth noting that the Regional Connector has not even begun construction yet.

   In other words, the current fare structure is what we have for now. If or when something else is proposed, I’ll report about it here.

   Steve Hymon
   Editor, The Source

4. I think can imagine a tap-in, tap-out system coming to Metro, but first all stations will need to be outfitted not only with turnstiles but more secure turnstiles to boot as I’ve already begun to see folks hopping the turnstiles (even the unlocked ones) and using the emergency exit gates. Since all stations are unstaffed, I would figure more secure turnstiles (or station staffing) will have to be in Metro’s future if/when they move to distance-based fares.

   I’m OK with distance-based fares as long as I can keep my monthly all-you-can-ride pass. (The flat fee really encourages me to use transit whenever possible as opposed to a stored-value card which encourages me to spend less and drive more, FWIW.)

5. I think they should keep the monthly all-you-can-ride pass for those that have longer commutes. But for those that have shorter commutes, $75 per month may not be worth it and they would be better off under a distance based fare structure.

   It’s kind of a like a cell phone plan if you think about it. If you travel 20 miles each way to work, you’re better off with a monthly pass. But if you only travel less than 10 miles round-trip daily or if the place where you live and work is only two stations apart, you’ll be better off on a pay-by-the-distance fare.

   In either case, I agree that the current $1.50 flat rate structure has its limits, especially in a city as big and diverse as LA. Eventually, Metro will have to raise fares, and if they do, it just gets more unfair for those who have shorter commutes and they’ll just go back to driving. If Metro decides that due to budget contraints to keep up with operational costs that they need to raise the monthly pass to $100 and raise flat rate fares to $2.00 per ride, those that have shorter commutes will begin to say “it’s not worth it, I’m going back to the car.”

6. Where is the Silver line ridership for the day?

7. Hi Vic;

   I don’t have the ridership numbers for individual bus lines for that day. I’ll see if I can rustle something up but no guarantees.

   Steve Hymon
   Editor, The Source

Comments are closed.