Transit
Metro's proposed monthly pass could serve more riders
An unlimited-use pass could allow Metro to reward their most frequent customers and increase off-peak usage. But the pass needs to be well-designed if it's going to succeed. A good pass system needs to work on SmarTrip, offer price levels that would work for many commuters, and provide enough of a discount to be worthwhile.
Photo by jcolman on Flickr.
System shutdowns for track maintenance and replacement are making rail service outside of peak hours worse. Unlimited monthly passes would allow customers to get their off-peak trips for free, giving them reasons to keep riding even though the service has degraded during maintenance.
A pass would let customers pay a lump sum up front each month, then ride as much as they want. The proposal has merit, but will likely prove unpopular unless it is tweaked to provide a better deal than the weekly paper pass that already exists.
Under Metro's proposal, riders could choose from two differently-priced 28-day passes, good for trips up to $3.25 or unlimited. Any trip of the pass value or less would be free. If customers use a pass for a more expensive trip than the cap, they'll pay the difference.
Passes need to be on SmarTrip
Metro's pass proposal calls for using paper farecards, at least initially, for the monthly pass. But that will depress use of the passes, as it does with the two existing weekly passes.
The weekly rail fast pass and short trip pass are not popular, in part because paper farecards are inconvenient and relatively fragile. The short trip pass is especially inconvenient since it requires Metro customers to carry exact change for every ride that is more than $3.25. With a Smartrip card, this extra fare could be automatically deducted from stored value.
The risk of damaging the card combined with the need to carry a bunch of coins for more expensive trips tilts the field away from using passes. And the calculus is even worse for a pass that needs to last a full month rather than a week. If the new passes are paper-only, customers likely won't buy enough of them to make the new passes worthwhile.
Add a 3rd tier for the shortest trips
While a choose-your-own-value pass is ideal, Metro believes it's too technically complex to implement. But they could improve upon their proposal by adding a third tier for shorter trips.
The two existing passes are good for trips up to $3.25 and up to maximum fare. This offers a good deal for customers that regularly take medium and long-distance trips, but is not a very good deal for customers that live closer in and rarely take a trip that long.
The new pass should be good for trips costing up to $2.10. Any additional fare would automatically come out of the stored value in the customer's Smartrip account. Metro should encourage customers to buy higher-tier passes by adjusting their prices. The higher-tier passes should be slightly cheaper in comparison.
Price 28-day passes differently than weekly passes
Under the current proposal, the "monthly pass" would actually be a 4-week pass, and it would cost exactly 4-times the amount of the weekly pass.
Mathematically that may make sense, but it doesn't make sense from a customer service perspective. Considering the added risk of losing or damaging a farecard, or of not using it on vacation or sick days, customers would have little incentive to purchase a monthly pass instead of 4 weekly passes.
The monthly version would be a greater risk, and would offer no corresponding greater deal to compensate. So why buy it?
If WMATA wants customers to pay more up front, there will have to be some added incentive to do so. One option might be to make the 4-week pass a true monthly pass, which would essentially make the 29th, 30th, and 31st days of each month free to pass holders. Another option might be to reduce the cost of the 4-week pass, to be slightly less than 4-times the cost of a weekly pass.
Based on these ideas, Here's table showing suggested passes and prices:
| Good for trips up to | Day | 7-day | 28-day | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Very Short | $2.10 | N/A | $22 | $84 |
| Short | $3.25 | N/A | $32.50 | $125 |
| Unlimited | Max fare $5.75 | $14 | $55 | $210 |
WMATA deserves praise for considering more flexible payment options, but needs to more carefully consider its pricing structure. If monthly passes don't offer a stronger incentive, customers will probably not use them. That should not be taken as a sign that monthly passes aren't needed, only that the math isn't working for customers.
 | Michael Perkins blogs about Metro operations and fares, performance parking, and any other government and economics information he finds on the Web. He lives with his wife and two children in Arlington, Virginia.    |
 | Dan Malouff is a professional transportation planner for the Arlington County Department of Transportation. He has a degree in Urban Planning from the University of Colorado, and lives a car-free lifestyle in Northwest Washington. His posts are his own opinions and do not represent the views of his employer in any way. He runs the blog BeyondDC and also contributes to the Washington Post Local Opinions blog. |
 | Matt Johnson has lived in the Washington region since mid-2007. He has a Master's degree in Community Planning from the University of Maryland and a BS in Public Policy from Georgia Tech. He has worked in the planning field since 2006 and lives in Greenbelt, where he serves on the city's Advisory Planning Board. |
Comments
- Young kids try to assault me while biking
- Metro bag searches aren't always optional
- Focus transportation on downtown or neighborhoods?
- Endless zoning update delay hurts homeowners
- Redeveloping McMillan is the only way to save it
- DDOT agrees to repave 15th Street cycle track
- Vienna Metro town center won't have a town center
by MJ on Feb 7, 2012 11:06 am • link • report
There's another reason why it's essential that the monthly pass be on SmarTrip: employee transit benefits. Virtually all Federal agencies now require employees to use SmarTrip cards that are, technically, owned by their agency in order to receive WMATA transit benefits. Many private companies do the same. A SmarTrip-only benefit package, because it's electronic and traceable, is easier for the accountants and reduces the risk of graft.
by tom veil on Feb 7, 2012 11:10 am • link • report
1. You've address the pricing issue in MPerkins last post on this, so I won't rehash it here. And you're not even making the argument, which is probably better. But the rewards to WMATA, as I see it, are rewarding customers and increasing off peak. I don't see WMATA wanting to reward customers. And it is very unclear to me whether they want to increase off peak traffic. Yes, I go back to lower off-peak fares as a better tool for that, but I don't want to go too off track.
2. From readint between the lines, I got impression that WMATA though passes were not posible on the current smartrip software. I don't see you addressing that problem -- if it is real.
3. Buckets. As I understand it now, you have 3 buckets on smartrip. Transit benefit, parking and personal travel money. Given a huge bulk of metro customers get either the federal benefit or the transit benefit, where does that money dip into? And for that matter, would federal benefit users get to buy passes -- which would defeat the entire purpose unless the pass was MORE expensive than the benefit they were receiving.
by charlie on Feb 7, 2012 11:14 am • link • report
by NoPass on Feb 7, 2012 11:26 am • link • report
The cost of a 28 day pass is actually greater than the cost of a DC-New Carrollton TLC pass, which would give unlimited use to not only the Metro but any service that takes SmarTrip in DC or Baltimore... plus it would be unlimited rides on MARC to New Carrollton and discounted rides anywhere else.
At $202 a month for a TLC, why on earth would anyone get a 28 day pass that only works on Metro and costs $8 more?
by Dave Murphy on Feb 7, 2012 11:26 am • link • report
by Phil on Feb 7, 2012 11:48 am • link • report
I think Metro is being honest here. The complexity required is part of the underlying complexity in the fare structure.
The solution is for Metro to simplify their overly complex fare structure. Perkins has long advocated passes as a way to bypass that complexity, but passes have their own merit. The solution requires simplification of the fare structure while also offering passes.
A straight-up zone system isn't likely a good fit, but Metro could stay true to the existing fare principles by simply reducing the number of possible fare permutations.
Round every rail fare to the nearest 50 cents. So, your potential rail fare, instead of being any possible combination of 5 cent increments from 1.60 to $5.00 (or higher, with increases) would be one of:
2.00, 2.50, 3.00, 3.50, 4.00, 4.50, 5.00, 5.50.
Or use whatever break points would work better. The point is that any given peak trip would have 8 possible fares, rather than dozens, each in five cent increments.
Thus, the variable pass structure that Perkins has proposed would only have 8 pass permutations to chose from, instead of hundreds.
You'd still have peak and off-peak, you'd still have fares based on distance, but they'd be easier to understand and easier to collect.
by Alex B. on Feb 7, 2012 12:05 pm • link • report
Question 1 requires analysis to determine the magnitude of the revenue risk, which is inherently tricky to forecast because there's limited data for WMATA to use to predict likely outcomes
Question 2 requires Board members to do policy analysis: are the benefits to customers and businesses from the pass worth the possible increase in subsidies required for Metro?
by jnb on Feb 7, 2012 12:33 pm • link • report
by Joe on Feb 7, 2012 12:47 pm • link • report
by Em on Feb 7, 2012 12:49 pm • link • report
wrt Dave Murphy's point, I agree but the fact is that the MARC prices are going to increase. According to the WMATA site, it says that the subway portion for unlimited service costs $102/month. Recognize that the MARC monthly pass already includes "free" additional access to MTA subway, regular bus, and light rail, regular Metrobus, and RideOn.
- http://www.wmata.com/fares/purchase/passes.cfm#link
by Richard Layman on Feb 7, 2012 12:50 pm • link • report
@Dave Murphy: These pass prices are based on the proposed fare structure after the fare increase expected in July. I would expect the price of the TLC to increase at the same time.
@everyone offering ideas for zone fares or simplified fare system: This proposal is for a pass system that works with our existing fare system. Since a complete fare system overhaul is not on the table for this budget season, I limited the proposal to what could actually be implemented in July.
@Nopass: There's a $15 weekly bus pass that's a pretty good deal. Unfortunately, combining bus and rail on one pass comes with a lot of complexity. My Smart Pass proposal covers this complexity but unfortunately I don't think Metro is there yet. It doesn't help that the bus and rail systems are essentially separate fare systems and budgets. If you look at the way Metro is structured, Bus and Rail are not very well integrated, from operations all the way to fares and budgeting.
@charlie: In terms of "which purse" the extra would come out of, it should follow the same rule as fares today. That comes from the transit-only purse first, then from the undesignated purse second.
by Michael Perkins on Feb 7, 2012 12:57 pm • link • report
We didn't argue that a zone system was too complex. We argued that it was almost as complex as a graduated fare system and that the tradeoffs would hit many riders hard.
http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/9261/should-metro-switch-to-zones-no/
by Matt Johnson on Feb 7, 2012 12:58 pm • link • report
And, again, that is for someone living and working in DC, and thus not ultilizing the full value of the federal benefit.
Under your proposal, she would qualify for the short or very short pass. Why the difference between 2.15 and 2.10 in fare I don't know. So let's go with the very short pass, at $84 a month.
That is going to be loss to WMATA of $22 a month.
I have no idea how that scales out. I've seen a lot of numbers about the number of workers getting the federal benefit, but not how many don't get the full amount and use WMATA -- as opposed to another agency.
Perhaps a better way to frame the pass is to capture more money from other agencies -- if they offered a max pass where people who use commuter buses/trains buy a WMATA pass first?
by charlie on Feb 7, 2012 1:09 pm • link • report
by Michael Perkins on Feb 7, 2012 1:13 pm • link • report
by charlie on Feb 7, 2012 1:19 pm • link • report
by James on Feb 7, 2012 1:31 pm • link • report
by Michael Perkins on Feb 7, 2012 1:48 pm • link • report
If you do the math, Metro would lose less money as opposed to allowing unlimited weekend trips with a monthly pass and riders could still get a couple free weekend rides per month...
by AM on Feb 7, 2012 3:32 pm • link • report
by Laura on Feb 7, 2012 4:33 pm • link • report
Also, with the fare bonus additional trips are slightly discounted but still cost something, whereas with unlimited ride passes additional trips are already paid for and feel "free" (or at least heavily discounted).
The other thing is that with passes, there's a chance that someone buys a pass for a whole month and doesn't end up using it enough to have made it a good deal for them. If you can subscribe to passes, this would be more likely as people might put their pass on autopilot. Compare this to the fare bonus where it is automatically a discount for the customer regardless of how much or how little you ride.
The fare discount program would require a large increase in general fare levels to balance out, and doesn't enhance many policy goals, while an unlimited pass program requires a smaller increase in general fares and enhances the policy goals of having zero marginal cost for transit trips and rewarding frequent customers.
by Michael Perkins on Feb 7, 2012 6:34 pm • link • report
by Laura on Feb 7, 2012 7:16 pm • link • report
It's appalling that this Metrorail-only pass will cost more than a pass in one of the world's most expensive cities, and not even include bus rides.
by James on Feb 8, 2012 10:39 am • link • report
Why does Metro feel the need to re-invent the wheel here? Us the sturdier cards like NYC and Chicago do. Problem solved.
by beatbxo on Feb 8, 2012 2:04 pm • link • report
@beatbxo: You don't need to register your smartrip card if you don't want to. And switching to the sturdier cards would require a wholesale replacement of all equipment.
by Michael Perkins on Feb 8, 2012 3:09 pm • link • report
I think that DC should have a congestion charge, but even so, this is still dramatically more expensive than an unlimited MetroCard in NYC, which is one of the world's great transit bargains. And NY does not have congestion pricing.
by James on Feb 8, 2012 5:02 pm • link • report
by Michael Perkins on Feb 8, 2012 11:25 pm • link • report
by Steve Yaffe on Feb 9, 2012 12:09 pm • link • report
Cheaper is good if it's as easy, but given telework and compressed work schedules and sick days and work travel, ten commutes a week isn't as common as it used to be.
by Kim on Feb 9, 2012 5:55 pm • link • report
Add a Comment