• mondoman712@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    11 months ago

    Making it free just for residents is an interesting choice. I guess the argument is that they’re paying taxes to cover the use while non residents are, but then you have to maintain all of the ticketing infrastructure for much lower revenue. They’ve also banned taking bikes on the trams as part of this, which isn’t great.

    • roastpotatothief@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      For private business the tickets are to fund the business. But for public transport they are never expected to cover the costs of the business.

      It is run as a public service, not to make money. The function of tickets is to prevent overcrowding.

      That’s why in well designed systems, the price is different at rush hour, and for high traffic routes and times.

      I don’t know anything about montpellier specifically though.

      • 𝒍𝒆𝒎𝒂𝒏𝒏@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        That’s why in well designed systems, the price is different at rush hour, and for high traffic routes and times.

        Introducing something variable or unpredictable into public transit would probably deter a few people from using it

        From an efficiency perspective this makes sense, but I don’t like it to be honest. The long distance trains do that here and it’s very off putting, although I can understand why - the trains are already usually very overcrowded, long and don’t fit in most stations, no funding is available to extend the platforms any further, and companies can’t buy newer, denser, faster trains because the railway electrify project is decades late…

        As an alternative I’d propose increasing the frequency of the trams if possible, or maybe even use longer trams during those times if the stops are suitably long

      • mondoman712@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        It’s not too make money but they still need money to run it, and in a lot of places a significant portion of that comes from fares. If they’re replacing all of it with money coming from elsewhere then great.

  • AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Great news everyone! Hopefully the system works well and other cities will follow suit. I know in the USA (in the few places we do have public transit) the argument for keeping fares is always 1.we don’t want to pay taxes for that and 2.if we charge that’ll keep the vagrants from using it. Two arguments that make no sense at all, 1. We already pay taxes for the public transit, why pay more to actually use it? And 2.anyone who has used public transit knows the fare doesn’t keep vagrants out.

    • Aux@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s not even the first city in Europe to do so. It works, but also causes some issues.

        • Barbarian@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          In the short term, there’s also a lack of capacity. Fares function as a limiter on the number of people using it. Too many people for your capacity? Raise prices. Spare capacity? Lower prices.

          This can be solved by increasing capacity, but it takes time to figure out what the capacity necessary actually is and then buying more trains/buses and hiring/training drivers.

        • Aux@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          My home city of Riga tried to do that after success in Tallinn. The mayor thought of releasing special Riga cards to residents. The issue was that many people come to Riga for work from other cities, towns and villages and they got angry to pay for transport. So mayor said to declare themselves in Riga instead of their home towns. That caused an uproar from town councils as that meant that they will lose all the tax income and won’t be able to provide local services. And Riga is already home to a third of the country’s population, so town budgets are overstretched.

          In the end the government had to step in and ban the whole thing. The end.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    11 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    The French city of Montpellier in southern France became the latest European metropolis to allow all its residents to ride public transport for free.

    From Thursday evening, Montpellier residents with a special pass were able to ride trams and buses free of charge in the southern city.

    Michael Delafosse, the Socialist mayor of the city of 500,000 people, promised free public transport when he was elected in 2020.

    Before the initiative to make public transport free in Montpellier, just 86,000 people had paid subscriptions to use it, according to figures obtained by AFP.

    But that figure has tripled to 260,000 subscribers in recent days running up to the launch of the free pass, either in card or smartphone app form.

    Last year city residents accounted for 90% of the 39 million euros in public transport ticket sales.


    The original article contains 292 words, the summary contains 137 words. Saved 53%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!