|
Post by Low Light Mike on Dec 3, 2014 15:52:41 GMT -8
More info on price and discounts. Starting on page #72 of the PDF. ----------
(this might not work in Bremerton)
--------------------
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2014 16:09:30 GMT -8
I've been skim-reading Mr. Horn's reports, and two things that stood out for me were: -Access to discounted fares subject to availability. I'm wondering what the "availability" level will be. -I also read something along the lines of Premium fares will be no higher than regular fares plus a reservation fee adjusted to limits set out in the price cap. Well, we all know that a fare increase is happening on April 1 2015, and likely more in the future.
The one thing I'm glad about is that we should be able to buy a ticket online once these changes happen. WSF has been doing this for a little while... no more worrying about cutoff time anyways.
It's tough to read these long reports and take them seriously, given the record of fare affordability. In any case, I'm glad we have this forum ("this here forum") to discuss these issues.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Dec 3, 2014 16:11:59 GMT -8
So, not withstanding what appears to be extreme BCFS jargon* the company is proposing to move to an airline style advance booking structure for the major routes offering various fare levels with various levels of flexibility. It looks to be a move in the right direction and something many have been suggesting for a few years, now. Might this further discourage spur of the moment decisions by tourists to take a trip to Vancouver Island? * Digital Experience Initiative might be a description of how a good portion of their client base feels about the 'company'??
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Dec 3, 2014 16:32:07 GMT -8
Some interesting commerce-tech items: - from page 170-171 of PDF
|
|
|
Post by arrrrmatey on Dec 4, 2014 19:34:53 GMT -8
Maybe this is a bit off topic here, though having read the bulk of the discussion of dynamic fare pricing on page 1 I'd like to add my 2 cents on The fares issue. And as a disclaimer, no I haven't read everything covered on this forum and yes, I have spent the majority of my life living in small landlocked communities serviced by bc ferries.
First, regarding the issue of service to the minor routes and islands. I think that expecting convenient and affordable transit service over a body of water to meet your every need and whim is a bit ridiculous. If you live on and island, you can't expect it to be treated like part of the mainland. It is too expensive and you can't expect it to continue sustainably. The price of energy is going up. And no, alternative energy will not make it cheaper. That means the cost of EVERYTHING is going up, especially huge energy users like ferries. I grew up in Powell River. I spent almost 4 years commuting to Sechelt for work, and did a round trip on Saltery-earls every week. Yet I support many (not all) of the changes made to bcferries service. I've seen the island sky sail almost empty most of my trips on her. This always struck me as extremely wasteful. I understand that a certain level of service is necessary, and I appreciate being able to travel to and from powell River when I wish to. But still I understand that it can't continue to be like that forever.
Look at the cuts made to other government services over the last few years. Community living associations across BC for instance are really struggling. That's just one example. I don't agree with every decision made by the government, but I still can't expect them to pour money in increasing or even maintaining ferry service that will not be efficiently utilized. If you live on an island, that is your choice. You don't get to make that choice and still expect a convenient commute to downtown vancouver or wherever.
The variable fare system is a great idea. Don't raise prices during the peak times, just drop them in the off peak. I have for a long time thought this would be a great idea. Obviously it won't fill up minor route sailings in the off peak times, but could definitely generate revenue on major routes, which could support the rest of the system.
I think the entire system should run on a reservation basis. Make a smartphone app or something that would cost very little to maintain. Maybe they could charge a premium for first on/first off vehicles, but don't charge for regular reservations. If you want to just drop in, you're taking your chances.
On Saltery bay/Earls for example, I would be ok with a much smaller ship than the Sky. That ship is large enough to prevent overloads almost all the time, even at peak hours in the summer. This capacity is way overkill in the winter. Coupled with a reservation system, it wouldn't be a big deal. Not everyone would be able to travel at peak hours of course, that's why you reserve ahead of time. If you live in a landlocked community, making travel arrangements ahead of time shouldn't be something you consider beneath you.
Another big expense that really bothers me about the ferries is the sheer volume of regulations placed on ships by transport Canada. If I remeber correctly, fuel is only about 30% of BCFC operating costs. Labour and regulatory maintenance make up a much larger percentage. Much of this is due for example to the amount of crew required per passenger. Many people won't agree with me when I say this, but I don't believe that human life is the absolute #1 priority. Considering that our world is becoming overpopulated, I believe the future of our society is more important. Travelling by sea implies a certain risk. The government doesn't need to hold our hand and keep us in a bubble. Reducing the safety regulations could greatly reduce operating cost.
I'm sorry for ranting but it really bothers me when people mindlessly complain about the ferry system. Yeah, it could be better. A lot better. But at least we have it. I know most people here are much more well informed than the average person, and so maybe dropping this on you all is uncalled for, but I needed to vent. Please let me know what you think... Maybe I'm being ridiculous too haha.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2014 15:15:38 GMT -8
arrrmatey, how was the commute from Powell River to Sechelt like?
The Sky is a bit wasteful, but we don't have a vessel for every season. The schedule could be improved, as there's a four hour gap mid day, and a six hour gap on Sundays. I believe the capacity on the Island Sky is also utilized in the summer season, especially with fewer sailings. Honestly think the Chilliwack is a good winter boat for route 7 (she had the role when the Tsawwassen was around - what changed?), but I don't live in Powell River. It was a good vessel when the car deck doors weren't shrunk at least.
I agree on the new fare system - but I have my reservations for the smaller routes. I think it will be great to be able to buy tickets online, and plan ahead. For the twenty minute sailings, some freedom will be lost and that might negatively affect ridership.
From my hometown, I know cuts to route 3 were expected, and many of us were resigned to having that Sunday 0620 cut. The Government/BC Ferries also didn't think they would save $100 000 a year by cutting October-May, which was the original plan, so they cut from September-June.
As for the Sunday 0620 - The passenger count on that sailing is well below 100, and just over 100 for the 0720 (very low for a ship on a 1200-passenger license). I personally believe that the 6:20 should be gone for the "season of cuts", as the bulk of demand is later in the day. But some interest groups lobbied the Ferry Advisory Committee, so it is what it is.
|
|
|
Post by arrrrmatey on Dec 7, 2014 20:57:18 GMT -8
arrrmatey, how was the commute from Powell River to Sechelt like? The Sky is a bit wasteful, but we don't have a vessel for every season. The schedule could be improved, as there's a four hour gap mid day, and a six hour gap on Sundays. I believe the capacity on the Island Sky is also utilized in the summer season, especially with fewer sailings. Honestly think the Chilliwack is a good winter boat for route 7 (she had the role when the Tsawwassen was around - what changed?), but I don't live in Powell River. It was a good vessel when the car deck doors weren't shrunk at least. I agree on the new fare system - but I have my reservations for the smaller routes. I think it will be great to be able to buy tickets online, and plan ahead. For the twenty minute sailings, some freedom will be lost and that might negatively affect ridership. From my hometown, I know cuts to route 3 were expected, and many of us were resigned to having that Sunday 0620 cut. The Government/BC Ferries also didn't think they would save $100 000 a year by cutting October-May, which was the original plan, so they cut from September-June. As for the Sunday 0620 - The passenger count on that sailing is well below 100, and just over 100 for the 0720 (very low for a ship on a 1200-passenger license). I personally believe that the 6:20 should be gone for the "season of cuts", as the bulk of demand is later in the day. But some interest groups lobbied the Ferry Advisory Committee, so it is what it is. The commute wasn't terrible, it just felt like I was spending way too much time and money on it, so I've moved on to other things. I really didn't mind having to commute on the ferry, you just have to accept that it's not cheap or quick. The Sky is a great vessel for that route as far as customer service goes. I hated it when the Chilliwack was on that route last fall. It is slow, takes forever to load and unload and was frequently late. I don't think she would be any more cost effective than the Sky, however I know nothing of the actual cost. The sky was never late or overloaded when I was travelling. When the Bowen Queen did a brief stint there a few years ago, she did a great job as well. Route 3 is Langdale right? I'm guessing you're from the coast?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2014 22:18:34 GMT -8
arrrmatey, how was the commute from Powell River to Sechelt like? The Sky is a bit wasteful, but we don't have a vessel for every season. The schedule could be improved, as there's a four hour gap mid day, and a six hour gap on Sundays. I believe the capacity on the Island Sky is also utilized in the summer season, especially with fewer sailings. Honestly think the Chilliwack is a good winter boat for route 7 (she had the role when the Tsawwassen was around - what changed?), but I don't live in Powell River. It was a good vessel when the car deck doors weren't shrunk at least. I agree on the new fare system - but I have my reservations for the smaller routes. I think it will be great to be able to buy tickets online, and plan ahead. For the twenty minute sailings, some freedom will be lost and that might negatively affect ridership. From my hometown, I know cuts to route 3 were expected, and many of us were resigned to having that Sunday 0620 cut. The Government/BC Ferries also didn't think they would save $100 000 a year by cutting October-May, which was the original plan, so they cut from September-June. As for the Sunday 0620 - The passenger count on that sailing is well below 100, and just over 100 for the 0720 (very low for a ship on a 1200-passenger license). I personally believe that the 6:20 should be gone for the "season of cuts", as the bulk of demand is later in the day. But some interest groups lobbied the Ferry Advisory Committee, so it is what it is. The commute wasn't terrible, it just felt like I was spending way too much time and money on it, so I've moved on to other things. I really didn't mind having to commute on the ferry, you just have to accept that it's not cheap or quick. The Sky is a great vessel for that route as far as customer service goes. I hated it when the Chilliwack was on that route last fall. It is slow, takes forever to load and unload and was frequently late. I don't think she would be any more cost effective than the Sky, however I know nothing of the actual cost. The sky was never late or overloaded when I was travelling. When the Bowen Queen did a brief stint there a few years ago, she did a great job as well. Route 3 is Langdale right? I'm guessing you're from the coast? Yeah that's correct. I am indeed from the Coast, and I commuted the past two summers to West Vancouver to a seasonal job. Although it was easier this year as I had a place on both sides.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Feb 3, 2015 16:54:53 GMT -8
The BC Ferry Commissioner has conditionally approved this initiative. The only item of interest to me was the final item, bolded by me. Here is the document, with the approval and the conditions: from HERE
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Feb 23, 2015 16:29:37 GMT -8
Here's a link to a new 127 page report on the BC Ferry Commissioner's website, re the reasons for conditionally approving this project HERE============ Reasons (ie. commissioners findings and determinations) are on pages 8-12 Public comments are noted, starting with page 13. The #1 comment was that reservations won't work on minor routes. The consultant's report starts on page 18 of the PDF. The entertaining items (the detailed public comments) start on PDF page 49. Comments are a good mix of style and detail. Take a look at comment #29, which covers 6 pages of the PDF.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Jul 29, 2015 12:12:02 GMT -8
For those following the ACE (Automated Customer Experience) project, here's a new report. HERE
|
|
|
Post by titanium48 on Mar 4, 2016 12:03:21 GMT -8
I'm now on page #67 of the PDF doc, and it has some pricing guidelines: Is that degree of restriction on discount fares really necessary? It seems to me that there are three goals here: 1) Maximize revenue for high demand sailings - use variable pricing to hike the price for these while lowering prices elsewhere to keep to the overall fare increase within the legislated maximum 2) Use discounts to reduce overloads by directing those with more flexible travel plans to lower demand sailings 3) Use discounts to help fill lower demand sailings with new customers who would not otherwise have used the ferry at all. Advance booking restrictions and change / cancellation fees do not help attract customers, and if one needs to pay full price to maintain flexibility there is no longer an incentive to avoid peak demand periods. As a tourist who considers promotional fares when deciding whether to go to the Island or somewhere in the interior, but who has difficulty predicting exactly how long it will take to drive to the ferry terminal, I'd suggest the following: Divide sailings into three groups, based on historical demand: those that are very likely to be full, those that are occasionally full and those that are unlikely to fill. For the first category, no discounts should be available. For the second, a ~25% discount should be available until the sailing is 75% full, after which full fare would be charged. For the lowest demand category, a 50% discount should be available until the sailing is 50% full, then the 25% discount until 75% full, then full fare thereafter. All advance purchase fares should be fully refundable up until 24-48 hours prior to sailing, and fully creditable to an alternative sailing or a stored value card thereafter. Discounts should be available as long as the fill criteria have not been met, right up until the sales cutoff just before departure.
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Mar 4, 2016 14:11:02 GMT -8
I'm now on page #67 of the PDF doc, and it has some pricing guidelines: Is that degree of restriction on discount fares really necessary? It seems to me that there are three goals here: 1) Maximize revenue for high demand sailings - use variable pricing to hike the price for these while lowering prices elsewhere to keep to the overall fare increase within the legislated maximum 2) Use discounts to reduce overloads by directing those with more flexible travel plans to lower demand sailings 3) Use discounts to help fill lower demand sailings with new customers who would not otherwise have used the ferry at all. Advance booking restrictions and change / cancellation fees do not help attract customers, and if one needs to pay full price to maintain flexibility there is no longer an incentive to avoid peak demand periods. As a tourist who considers promotional fares when deciding whether to go to the Island or somewhere in the interior, but who has difficulty predicting exactly how long it will take to drive to the ferry terminal, I'd suggest the following: Divide sailings into three groups, based on historical demand: those that are very likely to be full, those that are occasionally full and those that are unlikely to fill. For the first category, no discounts should be available. For the second, a ~25% discount should be available until the sailing is 75% full, after which full fare would be charged. For the lowest demand category, a 50% discount should be available until the sailing is 50% full, then the 25% discount until 75% full, then full fare thereafter. All advance purchase fares should be fully refundable up until 24-48 hours prior to sailing, and fully creditable to an alternative sailing or a stored value card thereafter. Discounts should be available as long as the fill criteria have not been met, right up until the sales cutoff just before departure. I fly with frightening regularity, so I am very used to this pricing structure (I usually commute with Air Canada for work, who have five fare groups: Tango (advance discount), Flex (tango + free checked bags and other perks), Latitude (highest economy), Business Low/Tango, and Business Flex). That said, I am probably in the minority here on this forum who is, so I am bearing that in mind. It makes a lot of sense to me, and I would assume the same for those who travel by plane a couple times a year or more. Book in advance for the best rate, pay more for the perks and last-minute travel. That said, I do agree with elements of your proposal, and I understand that air travel is not the same as ferry travel, particularly considering that ferries are car-carrying extensions of the BC highway network. I get frustrated with the idea of having to pay extra for a reservation (but I do always seem to suck up and pay it because I like the predictability). It is my opinion that there should be a discount for booking in advance, and helping BCFS predict their loads.
|
|
|
Post by shipyard on Mar 5, 2016 10:37:19 GMT -8
I do not like the idea of having to book the trip in both directions to get the maximum savings. I can usually predict and plan when a trip will begin, and will often time it to take advantage of any savings offered, especially if travelling with my 50' RV rig, but all bets are off as to when exactly we will be returning. This would remove the incentive to plan the initial crossing for non-peak times in my case.
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Mar 5, 2016 10:47:53 GMT -8
I think this idea is terrible.
BC Ferries is, in my mind, a "dumb pipe" of transportation. Essentially I think it is a baseline service that should be consistently provided at a baseline rate to keep things consistent and accessible - like public transit fares staying the same (at least in most places, Vancouver does fluctuate a bit). Even the expansion of the reservation system a few years ago wasn't something I was happy to see, the convenience of a few came at the delayed expense of the many.
Looking at the airline industry where there is a somewhat similar experience I do not see any benefits. Purchasing flights sucks because it is unpredictable and an inconsistent experience. Additionally it is a model based on competition primarily, and capacity demands secondarily - the first variable being a non issue for BC Ferries... unless fares keep going up on the current trajectory and in twenty years flying and a walk on will cost the same.
I also do not buy the need for so much complexity in forecasting and responding to demand. BC Ferries has fixed routes with relatively stable traffic markets. There is more than enough existing information in existence, and being created, to forecast the need for service. This, if anything, will be a tool to cut more and not add service.
It is a shame this system will be implemented prior to the next election because I think it will be a powerful tool in reducing sailings even more, making it more difficult to restore the ferry system later as a part of the highway system.
|
|
|
Post by titanium48 on Mar 5, 2016 23:02:27 GMT -8
Paying extra for a reservation under the current fare structure makes sense to me - you are guaranteeing yourself a spot at the time you want to leave, potentially at the expense of another customer. Why shouldn't you be charged extra for that service? The problem is that you have to guess whether you will need a reservation - guess wrong and you will have either paid too much or you will be waiting at the terminal for a while. A demand-based discount system would take away the guesswork. The base fare would include the reservation fee, while discounts would be available on the sailings where you would not have needed a reservation.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 5, 2016 23:07:36 GMT -8
The base fare would include the reservation fee, while discounts would be available on the sailings where you would not have needed a reservation. Will those discounted sailings be determined in-advance? ie. rigid discount pricing. or Will those discounted sailings be determined "as they happen"? ie. fluid real-time discount pricing. I'm not sure which one you are suggesting.
|
|
|
Post by titanium48 on Mar 5, 2016 23:20:19 GMT -8
As a customer, I would prefer rigidly scheduled discounts for predictability, but in order for the system to most effectively spread demand there would need to be a cutoff at some percentage of maximum capacity (I suggested 75% earlier, but that may or may not be the best number), with any further tickets being sold at full price. Otherwise the most desirable of the discount sailings could end up overloaded as well.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Sept 2, 2016 10:24:06 GMT -8
RE the Digital Experience major project, BCF has asked the Commissioner to approve a budget increase, and indicates that the implementation schedule is moved forward a year from the original timeline. For those interested in this project, here's the link to the recent report re the changes: HERE
|
|