JeffK wrote:Flat fares can work in areas where there are a lot of free interchanges on a broad-based system like the NYC subway.
Failure to understand the impact of transfer charges was one of the major holes in the Phoenix study's conclusions about how to reform SEPTA's fares...
Phoenix was all excited about a flat fare per boarding, which would reduce the cash base fare SEPTA was getting beat up over, in exchange for raising the cost of a transfer to the full base fare.
That system was quite the fad in the industry a few years ago, when Phoenix did its report. Phoenix got all caught up in the buzz of various systems adopting it, but didn't recognize the differences between SEPTA the systems that were switching to that structure.
Where a fare structure like that can work is in highly radial route structures like Baltimore, where most everyone is traveling to and from the same place, and few need to transfer. The fare structure caught on because it's cheap and easy to manage. There are some managers in SEPTA who want to drastically reduce the number of fare instruments SEPTA offers, for the stated reason of reducing administrative costs--that it makes their jobs easier was a bonus. However, in a system like ours, the revenue lost from flattening the fare stucture and the cost of unintended consequences would outweigh the administrative savings.
Jeff has correctly identified some of the many reasons that system would be a bad idea here.
Matt Mitchell
(relies on small children for coin counting services)