CTA ridership lost to ride share

[orionbuslover]

1 hour ago, Busjack said:

Since you won't read what I posted above.........

So, CTA just needs to study and fully understand the rideshare market? Gotcha.

[Busjack]

3 hours ago, orionbuslover said:

So, CTA just needs to study and fully understand the rideshare market? Gotcha.

If that's what you take from it, fine, but as @andrethebusman and I implied, there doesn't seem to be much it can do with it with buses and trains to provide door to door service on demand.

[andrethebusman]

The only way CTA (or any transit agency) could deal with this is to provide such service themselves. Only one I know that actually tried on a large scale was San Jose CA in the early 1970's, using almost 150 small buses. It was a fiscal disaster, and they soon went back to a traditional fixed route system with 30 some buses.

[Busjack]

31 minutes ago, andrethebusman said:

The only way CTA (or any transit agency) could deal with this is to provide such service themselves. Only one I know that actually tried on a large scale was San Jose CA in the early 1970's, using almost 150 small buses. It was a fiscal disaster, and they soon went back to a traditional fixed route system with 30 some buses.

That basically gets down to whether community transit works. RGRTA set up a similar service in Greece, N.Y. (a northwest suburb of Rochester) using converted GM recreational vehicles, but it fell apart in 1977, replaced by 2 fixed routes on I think was an hourly schedule.

On the Pace side, Call and Ride is in the Dial a Rude portion of the budget, but the line item for it shows projected revenue of $101,000 and expenses of $1.4 million, and a recovery ratio of 6.8% (page 16). While somewhat demand responsive, one still has to call at least an hour in advance. I suppose @garmon757 could tell us how Lyft response time compares. Pace justifies this by that it is the last mile it doesn't want to serve by bus (like it used to do in the Geneva-St. Charles, and Wheaton-Winfield areas), but CTA, with an approximately 60% recovery ratio requirement, can't afford to run something with about 9% of that.

[Pace831]

Pace's online reservation system for Call-n-Rides is supposed to be implemented this year. It was mentioned in the budget that the system is expected to attract more younger riders. I'm willing to bet this was a response to the "rideshare market". Online reservations have been available for the Arlington Heights Call-n-ride for several months but ridership hasn't increased (RTAMS). However, technology upgrades including this one could allow for the creation of a Call-n-Ride which covers a larger area and uses multiple vehicles. I don't know if Pace has considered anything like that, but that would have more potential to "compete with" rideshare.

[Busjack]

12 hours ago, Pace831 said:

However, technology upgrades including this one could allow for the creation of a Call-n-Ride which covers a larger area and uses multiple vehicles. I don't know if Pace has considered anything like that, but that would have more potential to "compete with" rideshare.

If you look at the page of the budget I cited above, the successful services (at least from a recovery ratio perspective) are those sponsored by someone else.Of course, in the case of Community Transit, Pace only provides a vehicle, but the county coordinated projects seem to be doing well. I bet there's not anything competing with them..

[garmon757]

On 2/6/2018 at 1:01 PM, Busjack said:

I suppose @garmon757 could tell us how Lyft response time compares.

Are you asking how long it takes for Lyft to pick up a passenger?

[Busjack]

1 hour ago, garmon757 said:

Are you asking how long it takes for Lyft to pick up a passenger?

Yes, how long it takes from when the potential passenger orders a ride on the app until the car shows up.

I was interested in comparing that to one has to call at least an hour in advance for Call and Ride on the flex portion of the route.

 

[jtrosario]

Lyft (or Uber for that matter) arrives from <1 to 20 minutes after ordering, usually 1 to 5 minutes in more popular areas, or 3 to 10 minutes in less ride-share dense areas. The request doesn't go through if there are no cars within 20 minutes(rare). Solution is to try again later, although the better solution is to keep trying as others are doing the same. Cars can free up anywhere whenever they drop off their previous passenger or are close to doing so - with a message stating that your driver will come to you after dropping off the previous passenger.

[Busjack]

10 hours ago, BusHunter said:

Cant beat the "L" though nothing can beat its speed.

As noted above, not on weekends. The L is certainly not faster compared to before CTA eliminated skip stop service, supposedly because the interval became so long that people would not wait for the second train. Maybe in 2025 or 2029 when they get thfe RPM done, but not now. Then, there's stuff like the crime alert in the Jackson transfer tunnel, which can't be a marketing asset.

[andrethebusman]

The L has been getting progressively slower for decades. When cab signals were activated in 1974-75 things really started slowing down. Before, the normal practice was to be at about the proper speed just as you entered the curve, and start speeding up as soon as most of the train was out of it. Now, the cab signal forces you to run slow through the entire zone, regardless of train length, and most zones are set up so that if you don't slow down when the cab signal says to, you will be stopped before you hit the curve. As a result, most curve zones are quite long. 

Eliminating skip-stop was part of CTA's long-term plan to reduce number of trains (and train drivers). North-South used to be four cars midday, West-Northwest, Lake-Dan Ryan and Ravenswood two. Now every line is max length all day. Number of cars required is about the same, but number of trains is way down from 30 years ago.

[Busjack]

Somewhat related to this was a CBS This Morning story that Arlington Texas dropped its buses and replaced them with VIA ride share (official source). Obviously, one is dealing with a much smaller city,but maybe Pace should consider an app for Call and Ride.

[Busjack]

Related is this Washington Post story that all the major cities in the Northeast and Midwest are losing transit ridership,especially on buses. Exceptions noted are that Houston moved from a hub and spoke to a grid bus system (something CTA always had), and Seattle has Amazon.

There was also something on the Pace March board video (darn! I can't find it now) that the only place where ridership was up was River Division, due to I-90.

[pudgym29]

Transit authorities are in a difficult stance now. I can believe that it will take an error by Uber and | or Lyft which will make its service less appealing. But I can also contemplate that Uber and | or Lyft will intentionally make an error. That “error” would be a more-frequent application of surge pricing which we know each can already practice. In Tokyo, taxicab services charge a post-24:00 hour surcharge. Uber and | or Lyft could do that tomorrow, and pocket the additional profit. I can also see certain fees when Uber and | or Lyft pick up at an address of a licensed beverage purveyor. Again, the money would go to corporate.

If you then add in the possibility that an individual Uber and | or Lyft operator senses his passenger may not be 100% alert due to inebriation, I would not be surprised if that passenger got the six-mile ride home instead of the three-mile ride it should have been.

In any instance, the Uber and | or Lyft passenger will notice that the fee for getting him | her back to the abode is escalating in an unpredictable manner. If this rises to the level where it compares unfavorably with the amount he | she spent at the venue, transit re-enters the sphere.

[Busjack]

6 hours ago, pudgym29 said:

That “error” would be a more-frequent application of surge pricing

That already happened, and was proximately caused by CTA. As reported here, there was a shut down of the L at Fullerton, and the app sent surge pricing through the roof, but after a stink, Uber refunded the excess. It did not lead to disaster, and, besides,part of the business model is what the market would bear. The only thing that would be disastrous to Uber is if the city regulated it in the same manner as taxis,and Chicago has shown an unwillingness to do that.

6 hours ago, pudgym29 said:

f you then add in the possibility that an individual Uber and | or Lyft operator senses his passenger may not be 100% alert due to inebriation, I would not be surprised if that passenger got the six-mile ride home instead of the three-mile ride it should have been.

Someone such as @garmon757 could confirm, but my impression is that the app tells the prospective rider what the fare will be up front. Private cars certainly don't have taxi meters.

The biggest mistake would be unleashing a fleet of autonomous vehicles that, besides putting the "independent contractors" out of business, have a habit of running over people.While one blogger says that "According to data from the Association for Safe International Road Travel (ASIRT), somewhere in the ballpark of 3,287 other people around the world died in car accidents on that same day while driving or riding as a passenger in cars that did not have Tesla’s Autopilot engaged" and hence this is no big deal, a bunch of rogue autonomous vehicles mowing down pedestrians on Michigan Ave. might be.

The other one would be if Uber drivers became frequent rapists (there was the one driver who was arrested, but had his phone on and recorded that a crime had not happened) or had a much worse accident record, but I also assume that the city imposes insurance requirements.

[artthouwill]

Surge  pricing by Uber and  Lyft is simply the law of supply and demand.   It is also fluid in that it could happen  at anytime..  Customers have also tried to game the system by putting a 3 mile destination in the  app  then ask the driver to take them 6 miles.

[Busjack]

7 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

Customers have also tried to game the system by putting a 3 mile destination in the  app  then ask the driver to take them 6 miles.

That wouldn't happen in an autonomous car. Google Maps would say "here's your destination" and that's that,whether or not it is.

[BusHunter]

I was reading an interesting article that cta ridership has plummeted on some rail lines by as much as 20 percent.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20180119/ISSUE05/180119872/whats-killing-cta-train-ridership-two-four-letter-words

CTA doesn't want to admit this, but it might be true, because along the red line Uber and Lyft are king. There are so many drivers and riders many don't wait longer than 4 minutes. Can CTA say this especially at night? CTA is still cheaper but you get what you pay for. Many seem to ride Uber because of it's convenience, but it can run into money. There are people out there who have ditched there cars for a life of Uber and Lyft. People who live busy lives on Uber can work to from work instead of driving.

For CTA to remain competitive, it needs to offer it's own rideshare service or something like it, get Rahm on the horn and make him tax rideshares with the city service getting the free pass. Ultimately, the autonomous car will take down Uber and Lyft because the thing that they offer, convenience can now be had with your own car. You don't have to pool and have that obnoxious passenger sitting next to you. One day CTA may have an autonomous bus that will go to your house, At least CTA should test it and call it Premium CTA or something to that effect. Would it be feasable to charge a premium fare for a eldorko type bus that has curbside service? This is a question CTA needs to explore. This could be done today, it doesn't need an autonomous vehicle to do it. It could be done with minivans if the streets are an issue.

[Busjack]

1 hour ago, BusHunter said:

I was reading an interesting article that cta ridership has plummeted on some rail lines by as much as 20 percent.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20180119/ISSUE05/180119872/whats-killing-cta-train-ridership-two-four-letter-words

That's the same article cited at the top of this topic, and was referring to weekends.

 

1 hour ago, BusHunter said:

Can CTA say this especially at night?

Especially when the Guardian Angels say it isn't safe to ride at night.

1 hour ago, BusHunter said:

get Rahm on the horn and make him tax rideshares

You obviously missed that Rahm is taxing them, including to pay for the CTA's signal system upgrades.

1 hour ago, BusHunter said:

You don't have to pool and have that obnoxious passenger sitting next to you.

There isn't any pooling with Uber and Lyft. It seems misnamed as ride share (certainly not Pace's version of it), but apparently the driver is sharing the ride with the paying customer.

1 hour ago, BusHunter said:

Would it be feasable to charge a premium fare for a eldorko type bus that has curbside service?

Pace again proves obviously not. If you are talking about an ENC 30 foot 27 passenger bus. definitely not, but even considering an 11 seat vehicle, paratransit has a 10% recovery ratio, and call and ride 6%.

 

1 hour ago, BusHunter said:

This could be done today, it doesn't need an autonomous vehicle to do it. It could be done with minivans if the streets are an issue.

Again, city paratransit uses minivans, and has a 10% recovery ratio.Maybe you can find someone willing to pay $40/ride for similar service, but I doubt that such consumers exist. They'd rather call a limo or party bus company.

[jtrosario]

23 hours ago, Busjack said:

There isn't any pooling with Uber and Lyft. It seems misnamed as ride share (certainly not Pace's version of it), but apparently the driver is sharing the ride with the paying customer.

FYI: It  "WAS" that Uber had/still has their Uber-X, and Lyft had/still has their standard Lyft car service as the lowest cost service. You put 1-4 people in the car and you are only sharing the ride with the driver. "NOW" the lower cost options are UberPool and LyftLine, where you put in your destination and share the car with other pickups and drop offs. You are allowed yourself and optionally one other rider($1 surcharge with LyftLine, included with UberPool), also no changes to destination(except to exit car early) So these days, you can choose a less costly pooling option or not, ie. "you don't HAVE to pool"

I would know. Yesterday night, I drove my longest UberPool ever, 11 pickups with 11 drop-offs of 1-2 riders each before getting my Prius back to myself. It took about 3 hours for me, the driver, and was mostly North and South and North again in the general vicinity of the north side Red Line the entire time. People were NOT thrilled with the 2-4 additional pickup and drop offs before getting to their destination, since the car was near full almost the entire time. Also, it seems that both "pooling" services limit the number of passengers in the car to 3 plus 1 driver most of the time. The only time I've seen Uber/Lyft max out car pooling with 3 riders in back plus 1 rider in front(plus 1 driver) was on New Year's eve, or if someone requests for 1 rider, but shows up with 2 riders when 2 other riders were already in the car (I also make sure the count gets corrected BEFORE starting their trip, so as not to get assigned more riders)

[Busjack]

10 minutes ago, jtrosario said:

"NOW" the lower cost options are UberPool and LyftLine, where you put in your destination and share the car with other pickups and drop offs.

Thanks for pointing out the different levels of service.

I still doubt that a transit authority running a community vehicle could still compete with the pools. Pace Van Pool could, but that's not flex destinations.

[artthouwill]

31 minutes ago, jtrosario said:

FYI: It  "WAS" that Uber had/still has their Uber-X, and Lyft had/still has their standard Lyft car service as the lowest cost service. You put 1-4 people in the car and you are only sharing the ride with the driver. "NOW" the lower cost options are UberPool and LyftLine, where you put in your destination and share the car with other pickups and drop offs. You are allowed yourself and optionally one other rider($1 surcharge with LyftLine, included with UberPool), also no changes to destination(except to exit car early) So these days, you can choose a less costly pooling option or not, ie. "you don't HAVE to pool"

I would know. Yesterday night, I drove my longest UberPool ever, 11 pickups with 11 drop-offs of 1-2 riders each before getting my Prius back to myself. It took about 3 hours for me, the driver, and was mostly North and South and North again in the general vicinity of the north side Red Line the entire time. People were NOT thrilled with the 2-4 additional pickup and drop offs before getting to their destination, since the car was near full almost the entire time. Also, it seems that both "pooling" services limit the number of passengers in the car to 3 plus 1 driver most of the time. The only time I've seen Uber/Lyft max out car pooling with 3 riders in back plus 1 rider in front(plus 1 driver) was on New Year's eve, or if someone requests for 1 rider, but shows up with 2 riders when 2 other riders were already in the car (I also make sure the count gets corrected BEFORE starting their trip, so as not to get assigned more riders)

That is the true definition of ride share.  This is the model the Pace (formerly CTA) city paratransits use to maximize clients served.  However, most Uber and Lyft riders don't choose to "pool" when it's still cheaper than a taxi or airport shuttle service.  Even owner operator limo drivers are doing UberX, Uberselect to get some work.  While these timeshares have made a lot of people self employed, it has also turned the transportation industry on it's head, added significantly to traffic, and has driven down earnings potential for taxi, limo, shuttle drivers.  Even rideshare drivers struggle to make a decent  full time income with glutton  of drivers and the low fares.  It's amazing that Uber and Lyft somewhat survive and thrive considering driver turnover.  Their future depends on autonomous cars to be profitable. 

Timeshare pickups at O'Hare are on upper level between Terminals 1 an2 and between  Terminals 2 and 3

.  At Midway the timeshares are on the lower level in the center lane near door 2 and 3.

 

[Busjack]

27 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

That is the true definition of ride share.  This is the model the Pace (formerly CTA) city paratransits use to maximize clients served.

I would argue with that (although @jtrosario comes closer when mentioning the pooling). The concept implies sharing, whether it is mommy taking the neighbors' children to after school activities and Mrs. A is responsible this Thursday and Mrs. B is responsible next week, or riders getting into a Pace van pool and paying Pace a fare.

What we have here is some "information company" actually engaged in the taxi dispatch business, not much different than getting into a suburban taxi owned by the driver and paying by credit card. O'Hare Midway Limo may be a ride sharing platform in the pool sense, as if one reserved the lower rate ride from the airport, it would drop off others at the hotels it passed before dropping you off at home, but it always worked that way. At least the company paid for a limo ride for one's business trip.

[artthouwill]

22 minutes ago, Busjack said:

I would argue with that (although @jtrosario comes closer when mentioning the pooling). The concept implies sharing, whether it is mommy taking the neighbors' children to after school activities and Mrs. A is responsible this Thursday and Mrs. B is responsible next week, or riders getting into a Pace van pool and paying Pace a fare.

What we have here is some "information company" actually engaged in the taxi dispatch business, not much different than getting into a suburban taxi owned by the driver and paying by credit card. O'Hare Midway Limo may be a ride sharing platform in the pool sense, as if one reserved the lower rate ride from the airport, it would drop off others at the hotels it passed before dropping you off at home, but it always worked that way. At least the company paid for a limo ride for one's business trip.

Let me clarify pooling as it relates to CDT and  CAR under Pace ADA

  Client A gets picked up at 71st and Jeffery and is going to Rush Presbyterian.   Along the way, client B gets picked up at 63rd and Dorchester and is hoping to the Art Institute..  Along the way Client C gets picked up at Fullerton and Clark going to Mr Sinai hospital.  All pay the Pace fare but the carrier is using 1 vehicle for these 3 trips at one time rather than 3 separate  single ride vehicles.  SCR has been doing this before Uber and Lyft  existed, so their pooling options aren't  really new.  But the ADA passenger are kind of a captive consumer.  The concept of the public sharing rides with other people is beginning to find disfavor. Whether it's an airport shuttle or Uber pool, no one wants to spend 2 hrs in a vehicle with stranger going different  places regardless of how cheap it is.  At least with Airport Express, either the pickup or drop off location has a commonality  (the airport).  What Uber and Lyft have done is brought this concept to technology via smartphones, apps, and gps.

Btw the Blue Line is still a very popular option for travelers at O'Hare, even with Uber and Lyft. 

[andrethebusman]

CTA still gets ORD business because the Kennedy is often VERY slow.