I think most southerners in Australia would have expected the NSW buses would have been Opalcard already so this comes as a surprise.

State Transit Goes Cash Free

I think most southerners in Australia would have expected the NSW buses would have been Opalcard already so this comes as a surprise.

State Transit Goes Cash Free

Thing is, you can still top up your myki a maximum of $20 with cash on a Melbourne bus. Seems silly to remove another point of top up access.

It annoys me they are called State Transit.  They are busses and operate mainly in Sydney, call them that.  Dont pretend they do more than that.

I think most southerners in Australia would have expected the NSW buses would have been Opalcard already so this comes as a surprise.

State Transit Goes Cash Free

Thing is, you can still top up your myki a maximum of $20 with cash on a Melbourne bus. Seems silly to remove another point of top up access.

I think the number of people who don't use opal is diminishing rapidly, particularly on the North Shore/Northern Beaches where busses are actually not bad to use and many wealthier people will get the bus, particularly to get to work in the morning (as opposed to the south/wests where there are a fair few ferals present...).  So makes sense to go this way - also lots of these routes are commuter routes too, not tourist or go to the shops routes.  Some routes are not in this, eg 263, for whatever reason which are more go to the shops routes.

But that’s the point - in Melbourne people can still use cash to top up their myki with the bus driver. And everyone has to use myki.

This seems unecessesarily inaccessible, regardless of how many people are actually using Opal. Cash is ideal for these “round number” transactions.

But that’s the point - in Melbourne people can still use cash to top up their myki with the bus driver. And everyone has to use myki.

This seems unecessesarily inaccessible, regardless of how many people are actually using Opal. Cash is ideal for these “round number” transactions.

Agree, particularly for low income people, that is just ridiculous and likely to lead to more fare evasion. Maybe they think that the money saved in not having to handle and reconcile cash makes up for increased fare evasion and reduction in accessibility.

BG

It annoys me that they are called State Transit. They are busses and operate mainly in Sydney. Call them that. Don’t pretend they do more than that.

Not that I take much notice but they were quite recently styled Sydney Buses with that written under the driver’s window. And the same deal in Newcastle. Have they dropped that ? Must take more notice.

Opal remains the best public transport stored value card in the country. It’s not perfect but it’s user friendly, reasonably intuitive, good value, and covers a lot of territory. What I would like to see is one card covering all public transport networks in Australia, like e-tags do with tolls in cars. I’ve got five cards for five cities and that’s just daft.

....................................................................................

Opal remains the best public transport stored value card in the country. It’s not perfect but it’s user friendly, reasonably intuitive, good value, and covers a lot of territory....

What’s not user friendly and intuitive about the others? They all work on the same principle; top up, tap on and (mostly) tap off. If you’ve used one you’ve used them all. The value is determined by the fare structure, not the card. The territory covered is a state by state matter. Mount Gambier, SA’s fourth biggest, has a population of 25,000. There are plenty of 25,000+ NSW cities that don’t have Opal. By the bye, the Victorian LNP has promised to extend myki to all Victoria, meaning it must now consider myki wonderful, despite bagging it all these years and being the ones to limit the initial rollout. Put that down as a non-core promise, probably first on the list.

....... What I would like to see is one card covering all public transport networks in Australia, like e-tags do with tolls in cars. I’ve got five cards for five cities and that’s just daft.

The big difference is tollways make a profit (well most now do, despite the dodgy traffic forecasts) and can recover the cost in fees. It would be unnecessarily complex and costly to introduce for the small amount of revenue recovered for what is already a loss (unless a surcharge is added for interstate use). When the smartphone apps are fully developed, users can have as many apps as are needed  (Perth, Melbourne, Newcastle, Hobart, Burnie, Adelaide, etc) on their phone and pay the costs themselves.

Why would they bother? - they will just migrate to 'contactless' and let the banks deal with it.

NSW is still trying to rip off contactless users by charging them single cash fares and not opal prepaid fares, but sooner or later the lure of doing 'what London does' should take effect.

London is not the only city where using a contactless bank card is the same fare as using their operator specific stored value card, it's just the one I have personal experience with.
That is the future, not a gazillion separate cards or apps on your phone each with a separate credit on them.

Multiple cities have small amounts of my money stashed away as the excess balances left on the smart-card I acquired to use their systems while there. Great source of money for them - but not for me or a large number of other tourists who left with credit still on their cards probably never to be used.

Who actually pays the convenience costs and what they actually are needs to be studied. When your running a service at a loss, paying banking and other third party fees is taking money away from the pointy end.  A surcharge perhaps.

Speaking of the Opal card, I will bear responsibility for causing world war 3 if it eventuates, but does it cost more to have a daily fare cap for travel, compared to what it would cost without it?

Virtually every PT user in Adelaide seems to be passionately against such a thing being implemented, presumably due the possibility of a massive spike in the fare prices. What is the difference with Sydney?



And FYI user Aaron, this is just a simple question, so keep your tirades away from the forum. You're the only one who likes reading them.

Who actually pays the convenience costs and what they actually are needs to be studied. When your running a service at a loss, paying banking and other third party fees is taking money away from the pointy end.  A surcharge perhaps.

Issuing cards that cost several dollars that are used for several days and then disappear from the system are not without costs either.
By using someone else's card issuing infrastructure there is a whole pile of your own overhead no longer required. It's not just 'we don't want to pay a bank'.

The Commonwealth bank is part of the Perl consortium running Opal anyway. It's them who will be holding all that credit stored on Sydney Opal cards, not TfNSW.
TfNSW is already paying fees to 'Perl' to operate the Opal system for them.

Speaking of the Opal card, I will bear responsibility for causing world war 3 if it eventuates, but does it cost more to have a daily fare cap for travel, compared to what it would cost without it?

Virtually every PT user in Adelaide seems to be passionately against such a thing being implemented, presumably due the possibility of a massive spike in the fare prices. What is the difference with Sydney?

What they are passionately against is losing their flat fare and 'passes'.

Melbourne has insanely large zones with effectively flat fares within the zones.

Sydney's fares have always been broadly distance based and not flat fare. Opal didn't change that, just tinkered with the edges.

Adelaide commuters are afraid of a distance based system being implemented.

What Sydney has pulled off, that many systems probably want to do, but can't for political reasons, is abolished passes - no discounted weekly/periodical tickets at all - replaced by day/week caps.
Other cities have suggested doing similar but usually back off pretty quickly.

TfNSW/New Government then tricked us - first the 8 then free trips to replace the loss of weeklys. Most people came
out more or less the same. Some were better. I certainly was - I used to buy periodicals of terms up to 6 months. (I'd work out my holidays long in advance and buy to that time), but the free weekend travel outside of the validity of my former periodicals certainly was a bonus.

Then they abolished the free trips and made that half fare - that was a 20% fare increase for me over my former use of periodical tickets on the spot and a direct 10%-12% increase over previous opal fares I was paying per week. And they had the hide to then brag about no fare increases.

The reason why bus drivers are no longer a point for ticket purchase is because they were increasingly becoming the victims of robbery. Bus drivers in Sydney never sold opal tickets but single trip passes.

The reason why the trip counter was removed was because of the opal run scam. https://www.news.com.au/finance/business/travel/sneaky-opal-card-loophole-that-let-passengers-game-system-closed/news-story/4823a231bce887d5b78145a72aeb39ea

Virtually every PT user in Adelaide seems to be passionately against such a thing being implemented, presumably due the possibility of a massive spike in the fare prices. What is the difference with Sydney?

Sydney has 1 million rail passengers a day and 720 thousand who use buses each day. Without the trains, buses, ferries and light rail the city grinds to a halt and that is what keeps prices low.

But that’s the point - in Melbourne people can still use cash to top up their myki with the bus driver. And everyone has to use myki.

This seems unecessesarily inaccessible, regardless of how many people are actually using Opal. Cash is ideal for these “round number” transactions.

Agree, particularly for low income people, that is just ridiculous and likely to lead to more fare evasion. Maybe they think that the money saved in not having to handle and reconcile cash makes up for increased fare evasion and reduction in accessibility.

BG

These routes serve mainly moderate income people - if this was done on the South and West network busses you would definitely see more of that problem.

James.au, this is a continuation of what other state governments in NSW have always done... Count their Sydney votes first and to hell with the rest of the state. State transit. Call it Sydney and Newcastle transit.

The seat of state power should be moved, say...  to Bourke.

Then Broken Hill residents and anyone else living outside of Sydney just might think themselves as being a part of New South Wales.

James.au, this is a continuation of what other state governments in NSW have always done... Count their Sydney votes first and to hell with the rest of the state. State transit. Call it Sydney and Newcastle transit.

The seat of state power should be moved, say...  to Bourke.

Then Broken Hill residents and anyone else living outside of Sydney just might think themselves as being a part of New South Wales.

No im referring to only Sydney passengers here - regional areas dont even know what a State Transit bus is.....

James.au, this is a continuation of what other state governments in NSW have always done... Count their Sydney votes first and to hell with the rest of the state. State transit. Call it Sydney and Newcastle transit.

The seat of state power should be moved, say...  to Bourke.

Then Broken Hill residents and anyone else living outside of Sydney just might think themselves as being a part of New South Wales.

Oh yeah the seat of state power should be in a town with a population of under 2,000 people instead of it's largest city that has 5 million.

Canberra was once a paddock....

Canberra was once a paddock....

still is, it is run by sheep

Canberra was once a paddock....

So?  Sydney was once a forest....