Hacker News Reader

Comment by rayiner | Hacker News Reader

Fares revenues make up half of WMATA’s operating budget, which is on the low side. The London Tube fully covers its operating costs.

View on HN

Where did you get that from? WMATA’s farebox recovery ratio is 24%, as of 2020[1].

Edit: And from a quick look, that’s high for the US. The average seems closer to 10-15%.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farebox_recovery_ratio

2020 data is totally wrecked because of Covid. Check the 2019 data for comparison. Average is 39%. NY was 54%, WMATA was 39%.

https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/2020-11/...

Thanks! I’ll note that that’s still a far cry from half, but it’s certainly more favorable than 24%.

(NY’s 54% number is probably because of mixing of different fareboxes: recovery is much higher on the LIRR and MNRR than it is on the city buses and subways.)

Incidentally broken out at [1], the 2019 MTA recovery rates were:

- MTA heavy rail was 70%.

- Commuter rail was 55%.

- Commuter bus was 32%.

- BRT and Bus was 30%.

[1] https://www.enotrans.org/article/the-mass-transit-fiscal-cli...

That 39% is for all transit Bus is 19.7% Nationally and 13.6% for WMATA.

Nationally in millions, Bus: (Fare Revenues 3,778) / (Operating expenses 16,110.4 + Use of capital funds 3,0444.7) = 19.7%. They also break out Bus Rapid Transit which is much worse 16.1 / (166.1 + 51.7) = 7.4% as is Commuter Bus 57.9 / (597.7 + 170.7) = 7.5%

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, Bus: $124,011,141 / ( $731,946,008 + $182,850,687 ) = 13.6%

So for WMATA forgoing Bus revenue wouldn’t move the needle very much.

PS: And that’s ignoring the overhead of collecting fairs. Not only are some operating expenses devoted to collecting fairs, busses can move faster if people aren’t stopping and fiddling with payment.

That's a solved problem, don't allow paying on the bus and require them to buy their ticket beforehand.

The driver or buss still needs to verify your ticket.

Compare a line of 20 people all try to get on and swipe a metro card vs a line of 20 people all trying to get on. Even collage busses where all people need to do is show school ID you still get people in line who suddenly can’t find their ID.

A public transport bus usually has several entrances, you can have a machine inside the bus at each entrance. Not everyone will play nice and pay if the bus driver doesn't check the ticket, but you could have random controls on the bus from time to time. In practice you of course have to weigh the costs of these different approaches.

fwiw, Caltrain's farebox recovery rate going into COVID was among the highest in the US at around 73%. Bart around 72%. WMATA was about 33%. Muni is among the lowest at 23%. [1]

I agree farebox recovery rate is not something to optimize for. Public services don't lose money, they cost money. Nobody talks about how much the army loses.

However. The choice was between (a) eliminating the $666M farebox recovery and taking it out of the municipal budget vs. adding $666M more funding without eliminating the farebox take. I strongly suspect the municipality would be far better served by the latter.

The former plan doesn't address what people actually want. They want shorter headways. Instead they got the same headways, but cheaper.

People aren't avoiding transit because it's too expensive. They're avoiding transit because it doesn't come often enough, it doesn't go where they need and stops running too early. It doesn't meet their needs. The average American spends $11,000 on a new car per year [2], or almost a half million dollars lifetime. If service was better, they wouldn't have to. This plan doesn't make service better. So, they still need their real cost center: their car.

[1] https://www.enotrans.org/article/the-mass-transit-fiscal-cli...

[2] https://newsroom.aaa.com/2022/08/annual-cost-of-new-car-owne...

> Nobody talks about how much the army loses.

I mean, I do. But that boils mostly down to me perceiving more value in a robust public transit network than in a bloated MIC.

The average spend on a new car per year is not the same thing as what the 'average American' actually buys. Lots of people keep the same car for many years, or buy used, or even don't have a car.

Used cars cost roughly what new cars cost still, interest rates are higher than ever - insurance, gas, maintenance, car payments, parking, tickets, tolls, registration, license, etc, etc, it adds up really fast. Since it's so diffuse people aren't as sensitive. Not to mention with a used car w/o warranty you're on the hook for the whole cost if something goes wrong.

Of course there will be outliers, but owning a car is a massive money sinkhole and a disproportionate burden on the poor.

The average car insurance payment alone is $136 (and significantly more for those with 'bad credit' - i.e. the poor). Gas is another $150-200 per month. That's almost $4000 per year right there.

The average monthly transit pass in the US is $83. [1, 2]

[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/990891/us-average-monthl...

[2] https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/insurance/how-much-is-car...

Tube fares are extremely expensive compared with other European transit systems.

And yet people happily use it, even in parts of London where it's feasible to go by car. One of the biggest reasons is probably that the tube has high frequency on all lines, much higher than most other cities.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com