Transit rewards (Waymo pays you to take the train)

(waymo.com)

36 points | by raybb 1 hour ago

4 comments

  • novia 37 minutes ago
    Waymo pays you $2.85 in Waymo credit to take the train

    (Waymo takes $2.85 off your next ride if you take the train)

    I live in East Bay, and I often take gratuitous Waymo trips all the way across the city to Embarcadero Station to ride BART back home. I do this because I like seeing the pretty skyscrapers and the bustling city and the pretty townhomes painted interesting colors. They may want to rethink their reward structure a bit to avoid paying out to people like me.

    • aix1 5 minutes ago
      > They may want to rethink their reward structure a bit to avoid paying out to people like me.

      Maybe, but who is Waymo to decide whether your trip was gratuitous? Perhaps you had brief business in Embarcadero and chose the particular mix of modalities for one reason or another (timing; or had to carry something heavy one way but not the other etc).

    • evmar 28 minutes ago
      A trick I learned from an east bay friend is that (when possible) the bus across the bridge is way nicer than the BART under the bay, especially around sunset.
      • novia 17 minutes ago
        Yeah but then you're on a bus...
    • nonethewiser 26 minutes ago
      I never considered that. But if you dont have to be anywhere else why not.
      • novia 11 minutes ago
        Make traffic for everyone else worse with this one easy tip
  • dcrazy 42 minutes ago
    Meanwhile, the 47 Muni bus that connects the Van Ness transit corridor to Caltrain has been “suspended” since 2020, and the extension of Caltrain to the transit center is still unfunded.

    I appreciate solutions that meet us where we are, but it’s depressing that we don’t seem to actually have the will to make a sustainable, integrated mass transit plan.

    • 8f2ab37a-ed6c 35 minutes ago
      In the Bay Area it's easier to create AGI than reliable, consistent, clean public transit.
    • tristanj 26 minutes ago
      The reason there's not more public transit is because the economics are terrible. Looking at the financials:

        Cost per passenger trip:
          BART: $1.07B operating expense / 59.5M trips = $16.92
          SF Muni: $1.13B / 160M trips = $7.06
          Caltrain: $225M / 9.1M trips = $24.73
      
        Passenger Fare collected per trip:
          BART: $259M / 59.5M trips = $4.35
          SF Muni: $111M / 160M trips = $0.69
          Caltrain: $58.7M / 9.1M trips = $6.45
      
        Subsidy per trip:
          BART: $12.57
          SF Muni: $6.37
          Caltrain: $18.27
      
      Every single ride requires a $6 to $18 subsidy, paid for by tax dollars.

      For comparison, the government subsidy for the interstate highway system is about 2-3 cents per passenger mile.

      • milesskorpen 4 minutes ago
        Cars are also subsidized (roads) - isn't that what taxes are for?

        If we could go back to pre-pandemic ridership levels, the subsidy rate would be inverted (fares covered 70% versus 30% now). Public Transit struggles with low utilization. It'll take 10+ years to get back to that ridership level though.

      • anewhnaccount2 9 minutes ago
        Infrastructure for cars is massively subsidised too. Since tansport is infrastructure it it interacts with everything else (eg less cars in the city => less spending on car infra) and has a lot of positive externalities. The investment pays back in positive outcomes which can also be quantified in terms of money of you like. It's like you've got a balance sheet but you're filtering it to only look at two items.
      • dcrazy 15 minutes ago
        But the Bay Area’s highway networks are at saturation during peak hours. 101 and 280 are at least as bad as before the pandemic.

        We have under-utilized transit corridors that could alleviate much of this strain if they weren’t so damn far away from where the people sitting in traffic want to go.

      • tyzoid 21 minutes ago
        Are you factoring in fixed costs to that estimate? That may be partially misleading if so.
        • tristanj 5 minutes ago
          Obviously yes, you have to since the vast majority of expenses (>70%) are fixed costs. If you only exclude them and look at marginal costs, they're profitable.

          But you cannot run a transit system on marginal costs, so using that comparison is also misleading.

        • what 14 minutes ago
          How is it misleading? Taking the total cost to operate and dividing by the number of rides tells you what it costs per ride.

          I’d be more interested to know how so many people are paying less than $1 for a mini trip when the fare is closer to $3.

          • dcrazy 7 minutes ago
            Because it makes in implicit comparison with a hypothetical transportation mode with zero dollars of government subsidy.

            The automobile analogue to fares is gas taxes, so the first crack at a true comparison is to compare the Caltrans budget to gas tax receipts.

          • toufka 7 minutes ago
            Subsidies for public goods create economic multiples. It’s not plainly obvious that it’s bad to subsidize a trip by $10. And compared to what? How much is interstate infrastructure subsidized per trip? Or airline infrastructure?
  • lokar 28 minutes ago
    I would really like a full door to door with one payment. Put in the destination, one price and get a Waymo on each end. React as best as possible to delays, etc.
  • kelnos 26 minutes ago
    Ugh, looks like this only works if you pay for the Waymo with a Visa card, and also use that same Visa card to pay for transit. I don't use a credit card for transit in SF; I use my Clipper transit card.

    I get that integrating with the Clipper system is a lot more difficult, but... c'mon.