The move to do tap based transit with cc s is pretty stupid as that cc s get replace far more frequently than transit cards. The only person this really benefits is new users to the system that haven't figured out how to get a transit card yet.
I live in London and recently passed a convenience store whose signage advertised the usual stuff: "Fresh veg. Off licence. European specialty foods. Oyster". I was genuinely confused for a second that such a place would carry such short shelf life seafood...
Pre-pay card are gone here. The only people I know now who have an Oyster branded card are those who get discount or free travel.
Occurs to me Oyster may still make sense for travelers whose credit cards have foreign transaction fees.
The keywords one should be looking for is Osaifu-Ketai.
iPhones are the exception, and just takes some finnicking with the settings.
Also with it baked into your card you don’t have to pull anything out since your phone is almost always at hand.
I respectfully disagree. I’ve lost more transit cards than credit cards. And since the tap-to-pay on credit card also works with Apple Pay and Apple has the ability to choose which card to apply transit charges to, it gets the same one every time. I have found the new system to be preferred. Plus, if every system implemented this, it makes it easier to travel and not worry about loading up a transit card that then loses its value (I have a few in my drawers from cities I’ve visited once).
Well,
1. I said I lost more transit cards than credit cards. I’ve “lost” exactly one credit card so far. And I didn’t even lose it, I left it at a restaurant and when I realized it, it was a few hours later so I just got it replaced.
2. A transit card is something you use while in motion and frequently while in a hurry. When using it multiple times per day while commuting, there is significantly more opportunities than when I use my credit card. Compared to a credit card where the transaction is slower and usually not rushed.
3. Transit cards for many cities (e.g. NYC when I lived there) are designed to be mostly disposable, so they are flimsy. Compared to a thick, rigid credit card.
I also still have dozens of transit cards from different places I’ve visited. But for my home city, I lost it a few times.
Oyster card, ventra card, charlie card, SUBE, etc.
In many transit systems, that's millions of people per year: Tourists, occasional riders that would just forget the pass at home if they're not using it regularly etc.
> This system really sucks because you can't just slide your wallet over the reader. It'll pick up your cc before your transit pass.
There's theoretically ways to preferentially pick a given type of card, but it's quite hard and unreliable to implement, so I guess that rather than promising something they can't reliably deliver (and slowing things down in the process), transit systems just pick the first card.
It is slightly inconvenient for transit-pass-only users, but I do also see the huge benefits for the transit system and its users in aggregate.
I can't speak towards other systems but the CTA in chicago is having issues with:
1. Actually keeping a schedule [we've been lied to about wtih them adhering to their frequency schedule they advertisesd]
2. Safety in the trains [people are using the trains to smoke, drink, deface, start fights, and live there]
3. Being reliable. There are times where they just won't run for 20-40 minutes. That makes it hard to want to use it. But they're claiming "oh we don't have enough bus/train drivers" .. yet they haven't been doing anything about it and let people go during the lockdowns.
The ease of payment isn't really a big deal with people who live and depend on these the most. (They're the 80%+ of the ridership)
You know what would prevent all friction? Making it free and properly funding it from public funding. It's literally one of those things where it doesn't matter who uses it because everyone benefits (if a rich guy gets on it for free, that's still good even though they "could have afforded it").
The CC being picked up means you're paying the full fare immediently even if you have the pass on the other card.
Nah. The end game here (as seen in NYC and London) is just getting rid of the transit card entirely. Which is a very positive thing, it’s an unnecessary extra layer of administration to keep track of the balance, top them up, etc etc.
Certainly as a New Yorker I’m very glad to be rid of my Metrocard. (though the new system costs $4 extra per month for unlimited travel which is BS and should be fixed)
While true, the negative side of this is that you lose your anonymity.
It allows you be tracked via your card, and if you look at this with an dystopian viewpoint could enable you to become targeted by specific advertising based on your purchases while riding the escalators for example.
Rather than a transit card which isn't associated to any name. At least not on the London Underground
If you buy a transit card with a credit card already (how most people do), there goes your anonymity from the transit system.
You can reduce tracking by credit card companies (with is the group I think would be doing a lot of analysis of spending, including when and where you travel (they get when, since it posts immediately, but they might not get where, if the transit billing all originates the same). That reduction in tracking is probably valuable.
I would think facial recognition cameras in transit systems will become commonplace, if they aren’t already. New York is already using other “AI” for fare evasion (saying they don’t currently use facial recognition). Then anonymity is completely out the door.
Transport for London already do much deeper tracking than that based on WiFi. They know how many people use the stairs vs the escalator, which areas of the station become congested fastest during peak. It's helped them redesign stations for the better. I'm fine with that, I can opt out by turning WiFi off.
TFL is run by the Mayor, so if dystopian microlocation-based advertising was even proposed I would expect it to end very badly for him in a political sense.