3 ms·

> The $3.2 million [...] so far, the service has exceeded Metro’s daily ridership goals and served up more than 70,000 total rides. So far this has cost Seattl

> The $3.2 million [...] so far, the service has exceeded Metro’s daily ridership goals and served up more than 70,000 total rides. So far this has cost Seattle $46 dollars a ride. Now, it looks like we're just 6 months in, so a simple projection would halve that number to $23 per ride after a year, potentially less if they scale up. Why not just subsidize Lyft and Uber rides? For these short distances, it'd probably be less than $5.

rayiner 7y ago
It's worse than that, because the trip will take the passenger to the light rail, which itself will cost an additional $4 per trip subsidy. For the $27 each ride is being subsidized, Seattle could easily subsidize a point-to-point trip downtown from the suburbs.
- vidarh 7y ago
  That misses the point entirely, which is to get more parts of people's journeys over onto public transport. That has a substantial value in reducing congestion and allowing higher density growth, allowing expansion of public transport and reduced dependency on these services over time. As a permanent solution feeder routers are always likely to be expensive. But as a means to change user behaviour they can be highly beneficial over time.
flyGuyOnTheSly 7y ago
>Why not just subsidize Lyft and Uber rides? For these short distances, it'd probably be less than $5. They are already subsidized, by billions and billions of dollars of venture capital. When you pay less than $5 to get from one side of your city to the other in the middle of rush hour, that's not covering the entire cost of the trip.
- TylerE 7y ago
  You could pay 2x the market rate and still be paying less than half of what they are now.
namdnay 7y ago
Omly because the negative externalities aren’t correctly priced. Whether you’re talking pollution or traffic, public transport is going to be better for everyone else
- caymanjim 7y ago
  Except the comparison here is between a Via car or an Uber/Lyft. They're identical in externality-cost.

rayiner 7y ago

It's worse than that, because the trip will take the passenger to the light rail, which itself will cost an additional $4 per trip subsidy. For the $27 each ride is being subsidized, Seattle could easily subsidize a point-to-point trip downtown from the suburbs.

vidarh 7y ago
That misses the point entirely, which is to get more parts of people's journeys over onto public transport. That has a substantial value in reducing congestion and allowing higher density growth, allowing expansion of public transport and reduced dependency on these services over time. As a permanent solution feeder routers are always likely to be expensive. But as a means to change user behaviour they can be highly beneficial over time.

flyGuyOnTheSly 7y ago

>Why not just subsidize Lyft and Uber rides? For these short distances, it'd probably be less than $5. They are already subsidized, by billions and billions of dollars of venture capital. When you pay less than $5 to get from one side of your city to the other in the middle of rush hour, that's not covering the entire cost of the trip.

TylerE 7y ago
You could pay 2x the market rate and still be paying less than half of what they are now.

namdnay 7y ago

Omly because the negative externalities aren’t correctly priced. Whether you’re talking pollution or traffic, public transport is going to be better for everyone else

caymanjim 7y ago
Except the comparison here is between a Via car or an Uber/Lyft. They're identical in externality-cost.