Nah. I don't believe that my train or bus would cost substantially more without the advertising. And even if it did, it's just an internalization of costs. T

Nah. I don't believe that my train or bus would cost substantially more without the advertising. And even if it did, it's just an internalization of costs. The advertising (if it works) pulls money in through a side channel (someone sees an ad and later buys a thing). It makes far more sense to just pay for the bus. Other examples, like ads at the side of the road, don't even pay for anything. Driving along the road, I see an ad in a farmer's field. I'm not using that field in any meaningful sense. edit: I actually looked up the transport example. Transport for London had approximately a 1:20 ratio of advertising to fare revenue last year. So, I'd have to pay approximately 5% more, or 7 pence per bus fare, to not have adverts plastered on the inside and outside of buses, tubes, station platforms, corridors within stations, and probably various roads under TfL authority as well. I think the world in which we pay 7 pence more for bus fare and have nice artwork on the bus or something instead of hair loss adverts that call us ugly balds is better.