On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 12:31:47 +0000 (UTC), Mike Bristow
wrote:

That's not sufficent; I could use the 257 in one direction and the
WsomethingIforget the other.

OK, how about a radical change? Replace the single with a 2-hour
ticket, and legitimise what you suggest. They do that in Prague.

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

--- Neil Williams said...


OK, how about a radical change? Replace the single with a 2-hour
ticket, and legitimise what you suggest. They do that in Prague.


That's no good. It would *still* overcharge people making a local
journey, just like the present system does. They'd pay for two hours
but only travel for 15 minutes, and no chance of a refund on the unused
time!

A system based on point-to-point fares is the only honest option.

"Solar Penguin" wrote in message
...

--- Neil Williams said...


OK, how about a radical change? Replace the single with a 2-hour
ticket, and legitimise what you suggest. They do that in Prague.


That's no good. It would *still* overcharge people making a local
journey, just like the present system does. They'd pay for two hours
but only travel for 15 minutes, and no chance of a refund on the unused
time!

A system based on point-to-point fares is the only honest option.

Its only "honest" if it completely covers the cost of the short journey.
If you take into account the cost of maintenance, staff wages, depreciation,
management costs, and all the other fixed costs, the actual cost of a 2 hr
journey
is probable only marginally above a 15 minute one.

peter

--- peter said...

If you take into account the cost of maintenance, staff wages,
depreciation, management costs, and all the other fixed costs,
the actual cost of a 2 hr journey is probable only marginally
above a 15 minute one.

But most of those fixed costs would still be in place even if there were
no journeys at all. (e.g. an empty bus still needs to drive along its
route looking for passengers to pick up.) Why should customers be made
to pay for costs which aren't our fault?

In article ,
Solar Penguin wrote:
But most of those fixed costs would still be in place even if there were
no journeys at all.

Yes.

(e.g. an empty bus still needs to drive along its
route looking for passengers to pick up.) Why should customers be made
to pay for costs which aren't our fault?

Where else is the money to come from?

--
Mike Bristow - really a very good driver

"Solar Penguin" wrote in message
...

--- peter said...

If you take into account the cost of maintenance, staff wages,
depreciation, management costs, and all the other fixed costs,
the actual cost of a 2 hr journey is probable only marginally
above a 15 minute one.

But most of those fixed costs would still be in place even if there were
no journeys at all. (e.g. an empty bus still needs to drive along its
route looking for passengers to pick up.) Why should customers be made
to pay for costs which aren't our fault?

That's my point. The fares have only a passing relationship to the costs.
The fare levels are based on what the market will tolerate and not drive
users to other modes of transport. In some cases it's a social decision and
some wouls argue that public transport should be free and the cost covered
by general taxation.
peter