Off Topic

Union Pearson Express

  • Last Updated:
  • Nov 17th, 2017 6:15 pm
Tags:
None
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Jan 11, 2004
8229 posts
288 upvotes
Toronto
playnicee1 wrote:
Mar 22nd, 2016 12:25 am
It's a balancing act. For free, there's just too many people. @ 27.50/$19-Presto there were not enough people.
Hopefully, @ $12 cash and $9 Presto, the difference brings in better revenue.

However, did they REALLY need to spend crazy money on Uniforms? :arrow: http://www.torontosun.com/2016/03/16/me ... -week-spot
everyone has complained that the fare were too high, ridership sure showed them!! lol running empty trains all day long.. doesn't look good.
"When operating the viewfinder diopter control with your eye to the viewfinder, care should be taken not to put your finger in your eye accidentally."
Sr. Member
Jun 5, 2015
871 posts
10 upvotes
Toronto, ON
playnicee1 wrote:
Mar 22nd, 2016 12:25 am
It's a balancing act. For free, there's just too many people. @ 27.50/$19-Presto there were not enough people.
Hopefully, @ $12 cash and $9 Presto, the difference brings in better revenue.

However, did they REALLY need to spend crazy money on Uniforms? :arrow: http://www.torontosun.com/2016/03/16/me ... -week-spot
It is actually simple math : when the price was 27.5, the ridership was average low-mid 2000s, and now that the price is 12, the ridership is average 5000... i.e. the price is reduced by more than 50%, and the ridership went up by a bit more than 50%... So basically the revenue wouldn't be much different from before the price cut... Let's see if the ridership would grow more than 70% for then to make a bit more (or lose a bit less to be more realistically) than last year
Deal Addict
Feb 14, 2003
1985 posts
62 upvotes
GTA
So the 5000/day ridership is still only 30% of the full capacity.. Price needs to be further reduced to attract more riders to fill the train..
thisismyid wrote:
Mar 22nd, 2016 10:31 am
It is actually simple math : when the price was 27.5, the ridership was average low-mid 2000s, and now that the price is 12, the ridership is average 5000... i.e. the price is reduced by more than 50%, and the ridership went up by a bit more than 50%... So basically the revenue wouldn't be much different from before the price cut... Let's see if the ridership would grow more than 70% for then to make a bit more (or lose a bit less to be more realistically) than last year
Deal Fanatic
Nov 1, 2006
6319 posts
490 upvotes
Toronto
elmst200 wrote:
Mar 22nd, 2016 10:59 am
So the 5000/day ridership is still only 30% of the full capacity.. Price needs to be further reduced to attract more riders to fill the train..
The problem with these statistics is that they are all averages. Some trains are almost full while many are almost empty so, on average, 30%. However, I think it's now a casual decision to take UP Express or not. Also, I notice a significant number of people taking the train to Bloor ($5.65/$5.02) and switching to the subway there. However, I'm not sure if this is because of pricing or their destination.
Deal Fanatic
Sep 16, 2004
6762 posts
713 upvotes
Toronto
mrweather wrote:
Mar 21st, 2016 9:45 pm
UP Express boss has resigned over all the issues.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/transpo ... rvice.html
What a joke.


“Kathy’s deep understanding of the customer has provided her with the vision and insight to anticipate market needs and deliver new and innovative services that elevate the entire customer experience.”

Unfortunately, her previous success did not seem to translate to UPX’s riders, who had complained since the train’s launch that the fares were out of their reach.
Deal Fanatic
Nov 1, 2006
6319 posts
490 upvotes
Toronto
gh05t wrote:
Mar 22nd, 2016 12:16 pm
What a joke.


“Kathy’s deep understanding of the customer has provided her with the vision and insight to anticipate market needs and deliver new and innovative services that elevate the entire customer experience.”

Unfortunately, her previous success did not seem to translate to UPX’s riders, who had complained since the train’s launch that the fares were out of their reach.
Read "lack of understanding" and "before" ;)
Deal Addict
Feb 14, 2003
1985 posts
62 upvotes
GTA
Are there any latest updates on ridership?
Sr. Member
Jun 5, 2015
871 posts
10 upvotes
Toronto, ON
elmst200 wrote:
May 27th, 2016 10:34 am
Are there any latest updates on ridership?
Tripled since the price drop, i.e. from 10% occupancy to 30% and still won't make any profits, taxpayers will take care of it as usual
Deal Guru
User avatar
Apr 4, 2001
10112 posts
118 upvotes
Regardless of profits or ridership, Toronto needed a service like this in order to be taken seriously. If taxpayers need to step in to help then so be it.

It's kind of a joke to arrive at a major international airport and then have no way of getting to the city other than with a car.

With the price reduction, the ridership can be a bit grotty at times.

The main issue is that they had this as the only real option for most travellers. London has an airport express train as well, and it's equally as expensive. But they also have a subway option that is a bit cheaper (though, really, with zone-based pricing it's not necessarily that much cheaper depending on where you are going to, and what time of day).
Sr. Member
Jun 5, 2015
871 posts
10 upvotes
Toronto, ON
What does it mean "Toronto needs this to be taken seriously "? So places without it should not be taken seriously ? People in those cities would just live in shame ?
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Oct 23, 2003
6627 posts
783 upvotes
thisismyid wrote:
May 27th, 2016 5:40 pm
What does it mean "Toronto needs this to be taken seriously "? So places without it should not be taken seriously ? People in those cities would just live in shame ?
yes, basically a badly planned/poor city. Even 2nd rate cities like Vancouver have the subway linked to their airports, and the airport here is tiny.
Deal Fanatic
Nov 1, 2006
6319 posts
490 upvotes
Toronto
mbg wrote:
May 27th, 2016 5:12 pm
... London has an airport express train as well, and it's equally as expensive. But they also have a subway option that is a bit cheaper (though, really, with zone-based pricing it's not necessarily that much cheaper depending on where you are going to, and what time of day).
The Heathrow Express is a completely different kettle of fish. First, it came long after the subway option was available so there was clear evidence that it would work. Second, it was built by the Heathrow Airport Authority and paid for by them and not the public purse. Thirdly, it's pricing made it attractive to business travellers. The UPX had none of these.

Top