5 ms·

No, the point is to incentivize people to keep their cards, ie: conserve. It's a good thing, just like the charge for a new card. I'm a New Yorker, so at leas

by wdewind 12y ago

No, the point is to incentivize people to keep their cards, ie: conserve. It's a good thing, just like the charge for a new card. I'm a New Yorker, so at least some of us like it.

yahelc 12y ago
To be fair, it's a less relevant tactic now that they charge $1 for the card itself. This is essentially seigniorage.
tomp 12y ago
The correct way to do that is to charge a deposit for a new card. That's how London's Oyster cards work, although it's a scam in other ways (to get the "deposit" back, you need a proof of address, i.e. if you're a tourist, you can't get the deposit back (except on some specific tube stations)).
- Someone1234 12y ago
  That wasn't my experience. I just went to a ticket desk and they not only gave me my deposit back but also the remaining balance on not one but two cards. Wasn't a hassle at all. That was at the underground Victoria station ticket counter.
- shawabawa3 12y ago
  > to get the "deposit" back, you need a proof of address, That's only for registered cards. Which makes perfect sense, because they're registered to an address to prevent people stealing them and returning them for cash
  - tomp 12y ago
    That's a rather bad argument; that's like saying you should only be able to use cash that is registered to an address, to prevent people from stealing it.
    - randyrand 12y ago
      That actually sounds like a decent idea. Bitcoin is already this way. All "cash" is associated with an address. To use that cash you need to be the owner of that address.
      - schoen 12y ago
        Pretty different senses of "address", though! A street address or a cryptographic key.
        randyrand 12y ago
        Yeah, it's an interesting comparison. For the Oyster card, you just need proof that you live where you say you do. For bit coin you just need to not lose your key. Similar purpose. Different execution. note: lose as in someone steals it.If it's totally lost the money is gone, as we know.
    - shawabawa3 12y ago
      I don't understand your comment. You don't have to register your card. If it is unregistered and someone steals it there is nothing you can do to recover any money on the card. You can choose to register it, in which case you can transfer the balance to a new card in the case it is lost or stolen.
- wdewind 12y ago
  MTA does both. Serious question: what difference does it make? I have a hard time understanding the outrage here.
  - tedunangst 12y ago
    Government taking money -> instant outrage.
    - coldpie 12y ago
      No, it's because you're forced to pay for services not rendered.
      - seanflyon 12y ago
        "forced"
      - gknoy 12y ago
        That's frustrating for rare users (tourists, etc), but seems optimized for the regular traveler. The rare user might prefer to buy Exactly One (or two or four) tickets, as they know they won't use the excess. This is similar to the frustration of a first-time user at the bay area ferries, where the process of registration, app installation, etc, is much less convenient than most parking. The regular user, however, doesn't care as much about the initial overhead, as the convenience outweighs the overhead. A remainder balance on the card is less frustrating than for a tourist, as they know they're going to fill it up again. That said, it would have been nicer if the transit company had phrased pricing in terms of Number Of Rides, rather than dollars (dollar amounts made up): 4 rides ($10.42) 10 rides ($21.37) 50 rides ($90) 100 rides ($180)
        esrauch 12y ago
        It is still strictly worse for the repeat riders if they get a card valued at 10.41 than 7.91. The only reason for the city to even allow someone to do it is to underhandedly get more money when someone inevitably loses their metro card.
- randyrand 12y ago
  Got my deposit back as a tourist. No problem. Had to give them my address as you said.
- pbhjpbhj 12y ago
  When I last travelled to London, with kids, I was researching how to get an Oyster card. I'd used one before but borrowed from relatives in London, that wasn't going to work this time. So I assumed I'd need a "tourist" Oyster as I wasn't a resident. But when I looked in to it as a tourist you had to book well in advance so they can post a card to you - whilst if you ignore the "tourist" offering you can just pick up the card at your arrival station (Victoria for me, very easy, was from a machine IIRC). Also the charges seemed higher for tourists somehow and there seemed to be difficulties giving the card back and getting a refund - I could see no reason to have a tourist Oyster. One of the kids travelled free, with me, as it happened which was great. The only problem is that the automated turnstiles wouldn't let us through separately without us paying twice (for which we'd need a different Oyster) and I got "munched" on a couple of occasions one of which gave me a very sore back, it was quite vicious. Traveller beware!
  - dblacc 12y ago
    In the situation you are travelling with a kid who is eligible for free travel, rather than going through the barriers you should've just spoken to the the person on duty. Theres always at least 1 person standing by one of the barriers that would let you through.. takes like 5 seconds longer but doesn't involved getting munched :)
    - pbhjpbhj 12y ago
      Not always, I looked. I imagine if you're familiar with the stations you can do that without being stampeded, getting lost, etc..
citizens 12y ago
The cards expire ~one year after the first purchase. At that point you'll have up to two years to transfer the balance to a new card. I don't see the conservation. - http://web.mta.info/metrocard/problems.htm#expired http://web.mta.info/metrocard/problems.htm#expired
- jrockway 12y ago
  It is weird how frequently the cards expire. I was quite surprised to visit Tokyo and have my Passmo card still working after not being there since 2009. (They expire 10 years after the last use.) Octopus cards never expire, as far as I can tell. The US is, not surprisingly, way behind here.
  - greenyoda 12y ago
    MetroCards are so cheaply made and thin that you'd be lucky if you can actually use one on a daily basis for a year without it becoming mangled or unreadable. The MTA probably enforces a one-year expiration to avoid the expense of having to deal with massive numbers of complaints about unusable cards. Because of the unreliability of MetroCards and MetroCard readers, the MTA is planning to phase them out in a few years and replace their card readers with equipment that can directly read contactless (RFID) credit cards.
randyrand 12y ago
They already charge $1 for the card so why would you throw it away even when it runs out of money? Your comment makes no sense.
- thedufer 12y ago
  That's a fairly recent change. The fare thing described in the article drastically predates it.
jgalt212 12y ago
The police want you to keep the same card so that the citizenry are easier to track. Fill up a card 1,000 times with cash and just one time with a credit credit and your entire transit history through the system can be found.
- greenyoda 12y ago
  However, if the police arrest a suspect, they can still find their transit history by examining any card they have in their possession, regardless of how it was bought. So if you plan on committing a crime (or just don't want to be tracked), you should buy some low-denomination MetroCards with cash at random locations and discard them immediately after passing the turnstile. And you should leave your cell phone at home too, since that also leaves a trail of where you've been. Don't drive to the scene of the crime either, since you might be identified by one of the NYPD's license plate scanners (or a red-light or speeding camera, or an E-ZPass toll scanner). And if you manage to avoid all those pitfalls, you might still get identified by one of the thousands of surveillance cameras around NYC. It's getting very hard to travel anonymously in NYC.

by wdewind 12y ago

No, the point is to incentivize people to keep their cards, ie: conserve. It's a good thing, just like the charge for a new card. I'm a New Yorker, so at least some of us like it.

yahelc 12y ago

To be fair, it's a less relevant tactic now that they charge $1 for the card itself. This is essentially seigniorage.

tomp 12y ago

The correct way to do that is to charge a deposit for a new card. That's how London's Oyster cards work, although it's a scam in other ways (to get the "deposit" back, you need a proof of address, i.e. if you're a tourist, you can't get the deposit back (except on some specific tube stations)).

Someone1234 12y ago
That wasn't my experience. I just went to a ticket desk and they not only gave me my deposit back but also the remaining balance on not one but two cards. Wasn't a hassle at all. That was at the underground Victoria station ticket counter.
shawabawa3 12y ago
> to get the "deposit" back, you need a proof of address, That's only for registered cards. Which makes perfect sense, because they're registered to an address to prevent people stealing them and returning them for cash
- tomp 12y ago
  That's a rather bad argument; that's like saying you should only be able to use cash that is registered to an address, to prevent people from stealing it.
  - randyrand 12y ago
    That actually sounds like a decent idea. Bitcoin is already this way. All "cash" is associated with an address. To use that cash you need to be the owner of that address.
    - schoen 12y ago
      Pretty different senses of "address", though! A street address or a cryptographic key.
      - randyrand 12y ago
        Yeah, it's an interesting comparison. For the Oyster card, you just need proof that you live where you say you do. For bit coin you just need to not lose your key. Similar purpose. Different execution. note: lose as in someone steals it.If it's totally lost the money is gone, as we know.
  - shawabawa3 12y ago
    I don't understand your comment. You don't have to register your card. If it is unregistered and someone steals it there is nothing you can do to recover any money on the card. You can choose to register it, in which case you can transfer the balance to a new card in the case it is lost or stolen.
wdewind 12y ago
MTA does both. Serious question: what difference does it make? I have a hard time understanding the outrage here.
- tedunangst 12y ago
  Government taking money -> instant outrage.
  - coldpie 12y ago
    No, it's because you're forced to pay for services not rendered.
    - seanflyon 12y ago
      "forced"
    - gknoy 12y ago
      That's frustrating for rare users (tourists, etc), but seems optimized for the regular traveler. The rare user might prefer to buy Exactly One (or two or four) tickets, as they know they won't use the excess. This is similar to the frustration of a first-time user at the bay area ferries, where the process of registration, app installation, etc, is much less convenient than most parking. The regular user, however, doesn't care as much about the initial overhead, as the convenience outweighs the overhead. A remainder balance on the card is less frustrating than for a tourist, as they know they're going to fill it up again. That said, it would have been nicer if the transit company had phrased pricing in terms of Number Of Rides, rather than dollars (dollar amounts made up): 4 rides ($10.42) 10 rides ($21.37) 50 rides ($90) 100 rides ($180)
      - esrauch 12y ago
        It is still strictly worse for the repeat riders if they get a card valued at 10.41 than 7.91. The only reason for the city to even allow someone to do it is to underhandedly get more money when someone inevitably loses their metro card.
randyrand 12y ago
Got my deposit back as a tourist. No problem. Had to give them my address as you said.
pbhjpbhj 12y ago
When I last travelled to London, with kids, I was researching how to get an Oyster card. I'd used one before but borrowed from relatives in London, that wasn't going to work this time. So I assumed I'd need a "tourist" Oyster as I wasn't a resident. But when I looked in to it as a tourist you had to book well in advance so they can post a card to you - whilst if you ignore the "tourist" offering you can just pick up the card at your arrival station (Victoria for me, very easy, was from a machine IIRC). Also the charges seemed higher for tourists somehow and there seemed to be difficulties giving the card back and getting a refund - I could see no reason to have a tourist Oyster. One of the kids travelled free, with me, as it happened which was great. The only problem is that the automated turnstiles wouldn't let us through separately without us paying twice (for which we'd need a different Oyster) and I got "munched" on a couple of occasions one of which gave me a very sore back, it was quite vicious. Traveller beware!
- dblacc 12y ago
  In the situation you are travelling with a kid who is eligible for free travel, rather than going through the barriers you should've just spoken to the the person on duty. Theres always at least 1 person standing by one of the barriers that would let you through.. takes like 5 seconds longer but doesn't involved getting munched :)
  - pbhjpbhj 12y ago
    Not always, I looked. I imagine if you're familiar with the stations you can do that without being stampeded, getting lost, etc..

citizens 12y ago

The cards expire ~one year after the first purchase. At that point you'll have up to two years to transfer the balance to a new card. I don't see the conservation. - http://web.mta.info/metrocard/problems.htm#expired http://web.mta.info/metrocard/problems.htm#expired

jrockway 12y ago
It is weird how frequently the cards expire. I was quite surprised to visit Tokyo and have my Passmo card still working after not being there since 2009. (They expire 10 years after the last use.) Octopus cards never expire, as far as I can tell. The US is, not surprisingly, way behind here.
- greenyoda 12y ago
  MetroCards are so cheaply made and thin that you'd be lucky if you can actually use one on a daily basis for a year without it becoming mangled or unreadable. The MTA probably enforces a one-year expiration to avoid the expense of having to deal with massive numbers of complaints about unusable cards. Because of the unreliability of MetroCards and MetroCard readers, the MTA is planning to phase them out in a few years and replace their card readers with equipment that can directly read contactless (RFID) credit cards.

randyrand 12y ago

They already charge $1 for the card so why would you throw it away even when it runs out of money? Your comment makes no sense.

thedufer 12y ago
That's a fairly recent change. The fare thing described in the article drastically predates it.

jgalt212 12y ago

The police want you to keep the same card so that the citizenry are easier to track. Fill up a card 1,000 times with cash and just one time with a credit credit and your entire transit history through the system can be found.

greenyoda 12y ago
However, if the police arrest a suspect, they can still find their transit history by examining any card they have in their possession, regardless of how it was bought. So if you plan on committing a crime (or just don't want to be tracked), you should buy some low-denomination MetroCards with cash at random locations and discard them immediately after passing the turnstile. And you should leave your cell phone at home too, since that also leaves a trail of where you've been. Don't drive to the scene of the crime either, since you might be identified by one of the NYPD's license plate scanners (or a red-light or speeding camera, or an E-ZPass toll scanner). And if you manage to avoid all those pitfalls, you might still get identified by one of the thousands of surveillance cameras around NYC. It's getting very hard to travel anonymously in NYC.