Design Template by Bikingtoronto

« Tuesday Morning Commute - Bar | Main | New Belgium Brewing’s Tour de Fat Breaks Records, Raising More Than $20,000 for Local Bicycling Nonprofits »

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

"Even shifting from transit to biking is still a win" - esp if it's peak period replacement, the most expensive transit trip for WMATA to provide

5M miles avoided also doesn't include any foregone taxi mileage

not taking the helmet bait

There is a lot to digest here.

As I said on GGW, the driving numbers are way overstated. If you want congestion and/or air quality benefits I'd like to see metrics that are directly tied into congestion and/or air quality.

You've got to get more granular on the transit shift (buses or rail). But I understand the data is going to help there.

81% white? And for a heavilty DC centric suvey? And what is recent members (april?)

I do think the survey is a good data point to raise membership prices.

Observers should note that this is just a survey of registered members, not daily users. Since daily and 3-day (and the former 5-day) users make up the majority of riders on a daily basis, the survey only shows a small slice of the CaBi-riding populace.

However, it does help to show what local CaBi riders are like.

There actually was a slight price increase for annual members, but in the form of a pay-monthly deal. I think that's a good idea even if the loss of interest on prepaid plans offsets the higher year-end revenue from annual members.

The price increase for daily and 3-day members helps the system's finances. That group doesn't seem to be motivated by pricing in their use of CaBi (within reason). Many people want to enjoy their trips to D.C. so they don't mind paying a couple extra dollars for a daily membership.

I don't think there's a need for a large increase for annual membership fees. But a small increase every other year or so would be reasonable.

charlie, why are the driving numbers way overstated?

What metrics related to congestion and air quality would you look for? You'd have to compare the actual values to the expected values, which would probably show nothing (CaBi is still very small) and would be only based on an estimate.

recent members are those who joined between between July and November 2011.

They are not going to raise membership prices. Not any time soon at least. Not while they're turning a profit.

Yep, Michael H is right, the monthly payment deal is a price increase and is handled the right way.

Look, more fees = more more for expansion.

@Wash; I don't trust the driving numbers because it all based on estimates and induced demand.

Lets look at their estimate : 5 million VMT. Total DC VMT is in the 4 billion range. So to see a 1 or 2% reduction in VMT we'd have to expand the system by 10x or 20x

And remember, we are paying from CMAQ money to replace driving for .01% of road use?

@Michael H

Since daily and 3-day (and the former 5-day) users make up the majority of riders on a daily basis,

Can you cite this? It has been a while since I looked at the numbers (before the mall stations opened), but this doesn't sound right. Revenue, yes, but not riders.

Best argument for bikeshare -- it will pay fo your booze!

http://www.cdc.gov/VitalSigns/pdf/2012-01-vitalsigns.pdf

I see the ads now -- ride bikeshare, drink for free!

charlie, more fees only = more expansion if you think that money will be dedicated to expansion. But if you look at Mayor Gray's budget that isn't what happens. He doesn't dedicate Bikeshare ad revenue to expansion. Nor does anyone really think that any net money will go to expansion.

Plus, higher fees will meed lower membership which would result in less use of the system.

So to see a 1 or 2% reduction in VMT we'd have to expand the system by 10x or 20x

It's congestion mitigation - not congestion elimination. What is the required amount of VMT reduction per dollar for CMAQ money?

we are paying from CMAQ money to replace driving for .01% of road use?

I'd put CaBi against any other program that has received comparable money. Go out and find some thing else that has more success dollar for dollar.

http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2012/06/20/yuppies-on-bikeshares/

Fair point on linking expansion to fees.

CMAQ is about the marginal reduction, not absolute. But I'd hazard the CMAQ money spent on the natural gas facilities achieved a much higher reduction in air quality (althouhg not congestion)

Now, throw all the bike money DC has spent (and it is getting to be a lot) and you might see some ticks. But I don't see actual code red days going down.

And in terms of marginal costs, biking on days like today (100 degreees) are prety painful too.

Just to be clear more fees does necessarily mean higher fees.

An expansion of the system both in density and geographical footprint should attract more members thus more fees.

Tom, I'm not following your first sentence. We can get more fees without higher fees, right?

I'll agree with your second statement. But I don't necessarily believe that revenue can be coupled with expansion.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Banner design by creativecouchdesigns.com

City Paper's Best Local Bike Blog 2009

Categories

 Subscribe in a reader