4 ms·

The article briefly mentioned competition from ride sharing services but I wonder to what extent it's made an impact. Anecdotally, given how cheap Uber and Lyf

by mdolon 8y ago

The article briefly mentioned competition from ride sharing services but I wonder to what extent it's made an impact. Anecdotally, given how cheap Uber and Lyft are in Manhattan (typically $4-5 for a shared ride), I often find myself opting for that instead of dealing with the hassles of the subway system. Both are unreliable when it comes to timeliness, as ride sharing services often take longer than expected (especially Uber Pool and Lyft Line). And as painful as the subway system can sometimes be, I do appreciate the rich history and incredible performances you'll often come across in subway stations. I'm torn, to be honest.

andy_wrote 8y ago
Yeah, I'd be very interested to learn about anything about the sensitivities of ridership to other external variables in general. Looking at the article's linked presentation [1] and the MTA's most recent financial plan [2] it seems like all the hurt is coming from really huge declines in projected revenues - labor costs seem to be growing pretty reasonably but there's basically zero projected growth in fares. If someone can give me a layman's explanation of what "Capital and Other Reimbursements" is, which accounts for about a $500mm decline between 2019 and 20222, I'd be much obliged. So I am curious how sensitive riders are to the increased service problems, how much that makes them switch out, to get some sense as to how much the signal improvements will help solve this problem. Also how much to a fare hike, which seems like the more straightforward answer in a vacuum (i.e. other than taxes or other government infusions). The MTA says in [1] that even "draconian service reductions would have a relatively small impact on the deficit." [1] - http://web.mta.info/news/pdf/MTA-2019-Final-Proposed-Budget-Nov-Financial-Plan-2019-2022-Presentation.pdf http://web.mta.info/news/pdf/MTA-2019-Final-Proposed-Budget-... [2] - http://web.mta.info/news/pdf/MTA-2019-Final-Proposed-Budget-Nov-Financial-Plan-2019-2022-Vol1.pdf http://web.mta.info/news/pdf/MTA-2019-Final-Proposed-Budget-...
- bobthepanda 8y ago
  Reducing service, unless you want to do it really painfully, is unlikely to do much in the long run. A good chunk of the costs are employee related (health/pensions) and debt service. The MTA shouldn't default on its bonds, and in NYS you can't constitutionally modify government pensions after they've been given. And the MTA hires as many drivers and buys trains and buses based on peak demand; cutting off-peak is unlikely to do much since you wouldn't be reducing the absolute number of drivers you need. In fact, cutting off-peak services would probably worsen the budget outlook long-term, since the marginal cost of an off-peak service is very low.
orev 8y ago
I think ride sharing services will be facing their own reckoning soon. With so many cars and the prices so low, it’s not sustainable for anyone to make a living. And the medallions were created to address both this problem and the problem of too many cars on the roads, which is also turning into a huge problem.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
Shivetya 8y ago
ride sharing services are the new bogeyman and politicians and others are simply relying on the old mechanism of, say it enough times and people will believe its true. they love to tout huge mileage numbers because it sounds impressive but when compared to the whole of what is driven its one percent or less. better yet a large amount of ride sharing is off peak. the reason of course is money, the subsidies to mass transit systems are in the tens of billions which in turn allow for existing systems to not have to be competitive or even maintain their lines because they know they can grab more cash. if anything beyond the hundreds of billions in deferred maintenance many light rail systems have there is nearly similar in pension liabilities.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

by mdolon 8y ago

andy_wrote 8y ago

Yeah, I'd be very interested to learn about anything about the sensitivities of ridership to other external variables in general. Looking at the article's linked presentation [1] and the MTA's most recent financial plan [2] it seems like all the hurt is coming from really huge declines in projected revenues - labor costs seem to be growing pretty reasonably but there's basically zero projected growth in fares. If someone can give me a layman's explanation of what "Capital and Other Reimbursements" is, which accounts for about a $500mm decline between 2019 and 20222, I'd be much obliged. So I am curious how sensitive riders are to the increased service problems, how much that makes them switch out, to get some sense as to how much the signal improvements will help solve this problem. Also how much to a fare hike, which seems like the more straightforward answer in a vacuum (i.e. other than taxes or other government infusions). The MTA says in [1] that even "draconian service reductions would have a relatively small impact on the deficit." [1] - http://web.mta.info/news/pdf/MTA-2019-Final-Proposed-Budget-Nov-Financial-Plan-2019-2022-Presentation.pdf http://web.mta.info/news/pdf/MTA-2019-Final-Proposed-Budget-... [2] - http://web.mta.info/news/pdf/MTA-2019-Final-Proposed-Budget-Nov-Financial-Plan-2019-2022-Vol1.pdf http://web.mta.info/news/pdf/MTA-2019-Final-Proposed-Budget-...

bobthepanda 8y ago
Reducing service, unless you want to do it really painfully, is unlikely to do much in the long run. A good chunk of the costs are employee related (health/pensions) and debt service. The MTA shouldn't default on its bonds, and in NYS you can't constitutionally modify government pensions after they've been given. And the MTA hires as many drivers and buys trains and buses based on peak demand; cutting off-peak is unlikely to do much since you wouldn't be reducing the absolute number of drivers you need. In fact, cutting off-peak services would probably worsen the budget outlook long-term, since the marginal cost of an off-peak service is very low.

orev 8y ago

I think ride sharing services will be facing their own reckoning soon. With so many cars and the prices so low, it’s not sustainable for anyone to make a living. And the medallions were created to address both this problem and the problem of too many cars on the roads, which is also turning into a huge problem.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

Shivetya 8y ago

ride sharing services are the new bogeyman and politicians and others are simply relying on the old mechanism of, say it enough times and people will believe its true. they love to tout huge mileage numbers because it sounds impressive but when compared to the whole of what is driven its one percent or less. better yet a large amount of ride sharing is off peak. the reason of course is money, the subsidies to mass transit systems are in the tens of billions which in turn allow for existing systems to not have to be competitive or even maintain their lines because they know they can grab more cash. if anything beyond the hundreds of billions in deferred maintenance many light rail systems have there is nearly similar in pension liabilities.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]