Saturday, August 11, 2012




  • What the structure of pricing will be for users,









  • Private bus services were rolled into the MyZone revenue sharing framework

  • Sydney’s Trams were rolled into MyZone revenue sharing framework








Example of how it’s been done before




  • 1989: CapitalCard merged into TravelCard. 


Geographic Zones Critical







Revenue Division Challenging






Action required now






UPDATE 27/8/2012




UPDATE 22/9/2012






  1. Regarding your comments about London Tube/bus journeys, is that right? My reading of the rules is that a separate fare is payable for the bus (flat fare 1.35) and tube (zone based).

    1. Hi Simon the current arrangement is that buses are indeed on a flat fare, up to a daily cap limit. If you only use buses there is a special (zone independent) cap, but if you use the tube or trains, the corresponding TravelCard zone cap applies. If you have a travelcard (daily or otherwise) you have access to all buses irrespective of zone.
      Historically my understanding is that zones applied to London Buses as well but this was simplified before the role out of oyster, as acompromise.
      Other cities like Zurich and Hamburg (and even Sydney under the old TravelPass regime) apply the zones equally to all modes.

  2. Re: Ferries and myZone. I can see where IPART is coming from. The way the myMulti tickets were setup, it is cheaper to buy a myMulti ticket than it is to buy a Travel Ten myFerry ticket. This leads to the perverse scenario where it is never worthwhile buying a myFerry ticket unless you make only occasional trips, which is the problem that IPART is seeking to solve.

    A somewhat similar issue exists with the long distance bus routes from the city to Northwest Sydney, the Northern Beaches and Parramatta. Bus tickets are now capped at around $3.40.

    In both cases the solution would be to rebuild the fare structure from the ground up, and Opal provides the perfect opportunity to do so. Fares could be calculated point to point, regardless of what or how many modes of transport are used, or with a zonal system as currently exists for myMulti periodical tickets.

    Unfortunately, with regards to fares on ferries at least, IPART's band aid solution could potentially make things worse. But I can definitely see where they are coming from.

    1. Hi Bambul thanks for the comments, Agreed to the extent that there are some very unfortunate consequences of the merging of the previously separate "inner harbour 1" "inner harbour 2" and Manly periodicals, and Red and Green Travelpasses. As a starting point the earlier inner Sydney zones should be reintroduced, and Manly should be removed from the MyZone1 fare band. You rightly observe the current arrangement is ridiculous.

      However I totally disagree with IPART on two counts: 1. characterisation of ferry subsidies as upper-class welfare and 2. failure to recognise general principle of fare integration (which I'll come back to). Areas that are served by feries are in many cases areas that are also poorly served by transport infrastructure (be it roads or rail) otherwise. Good examples include the dropping of Bradfield's Eastern Suburbs (Rose Bay) Railway, and of the indefinitely postponed northern beaches/ spit bridge bypass tunnel. Multi-billion dollar projects in the current value of money, permanently alleviated by zero-dollar infrastructure cost of ferries, like the rose bay and manly services.

      These in turn free up finite capital for major works like the North West Rail Link. Operating subsidy is not "dead money" when viewed in the context of how it influences mode choice and infrastructure requirements of alternatives.
      IPART's economists work within very narrow terms of reference which ignore these kinds of effects.

      I also agree that it seems technologically plausible that point-to-point fares, with no flag fall component, should be workable. But the lack of such systems in global practice is a warning I think. There is no need to invent systems from scratch, there are great examples throughout Europe ready to copy, the HVV (Hamburg) and ZVV (Zurich) being my two favourites,

      On my 2nd objection to IPART's view of transport consumer economics, it is integrated ticketing that broadens the ferry patronage catchment beyond the wharf walking distance. Failure to enforce an integrated pricing regime- one where interchange between modes is not penalised- produces a self-fulfilling elitist, marginalised destiny for harbour transport, one where the economics only works for those in harbour-side walking distance to a wharf, rather than the many tens of thousands who were once efficiently connected by feeding trams and buses to interchanges at Manly, Balmain, Rose Bay etc.