With the RTA board poised today to cut $35 million from CTA's budget, now's a great time for ideas on generating non-fare revenues.
So, look no further than New York City, where the Metropolitan Transportation Authority board approved a $4 million deal to sell naming rights for the Atlantic Avenue-Pacific Street subway station in Brooklyn. And soon it will adding Barclays to the name, after the London-based bank. It's the second busiest subway station in Brooklyn, serving more than 10 million passengers annually.
How about we suggest some naming ideas for our friends at the CTA. Here's a start; add yours in comments:
- Belmont LifeLube station.
- 18th Street Blick station.
- Clark/Division Viagra stop.
- Diversey Starbucks stop.
- Addison Axe station.
13 Comments
sargas said:
Howard Apartments Station in honor of the Howard Station Apartments
jack said:
Including some I have proposed elsewhere:
81 KimChee
24 WonTon
11 Sauerkraut
22 Nuts on Clark
80 Psychotics on Irving Park
56A Superdawg (wait, there was a trademark dispute over that yesterday)
97 Old Orchard (wait, it's already called that northbound)
77 Sticky Buns
93 N. Ahnold
94 S. Ahnold
44 Moo 'n Oink
63rd Street El Rukhn L
Bleeping Golden station at Eastwood and Sacramento
Supermercado Uno, Dos, Tres, Quatro, Cinco... on the NW Blue Line and far end of the Pink Line.
87th Street Harold's Chicken Shack #53 Station
51st Street Olympic Stadium on the Green Line by Sominex (in your dreams)
Isabella Bob Hartley nonexistent station, sponsored by Elliot Carlin Real Estate
And, of course,
47th Street Jake and Elwood El, sponsored by Ray's Music Exchange.
_________________
BTW, I remember the days when the various Muhammad Speaks enterprises on 79th bought up all the interior advertising on south side buses. I didn't feel like visiting their Whiting Wearhouse (whether named after the fish, city, or refinery).
chris said:
$4 million out of $35 million is hardly anything. If we could get $4 million for every station go for it. Otherwise it's not worth the hassle of changing all the signage.
Save more on fuel by getting more hybrids should save more money. When our fuel hedges run out, we should start doing better (When is this anyway?). Start an advertising campaign along highways where people sit in bad traffic. Eliminate some bus stops to increase efficiency. Implement increased prices during rush hour for those paying cash on buses.
There's lots of ideas that can be implemented.
MK said:
"Implement increased prices during rush hour for those paying cash on buses."
Chris,
Virtually nobody uses cash anymore on buses. I believe it is around 5% of bus users. So that would have virtually no effect (and may even cause less revenue if the increase repels enough of those riders, who I assume are mostly occaional riders and therefore the most elastic).
Selling naming rights to el lines should have been done years ago. They would no doubt fetch a pretty significant amount of money. In fact, lots of things that would have should have been done awhile ago. For example, the bus system needs to be operated more efficiantly. You cannot have three bus lines and one el line operating all day for the full length of the north side in a small one and a half to two mile area near the lake. This is not even including the express or rush hour buses. Hopefully, this will be one of the changes made because of the budget constraints. And it should not be temporary.
chris said:
"Virtually nobody uses cash anymore on buses. I believe it is around 5% of bus users. So that would have virtually no effect (and may even cause less revenue if the increase repels enough of those riders, who I assume are mostly occaional riders and therefore the most elastic)."
5% is not much, but it is still significant.
Since there are not that many users that pay with cash, this shouldn't be that big of a deal to implement then. This will help push riders to Chicago Cards. In turn, this tends to have a benefit for the CTA in that people with Chicago Cards use the system more, which means more revenue.
In addition to this, counting/collecting this cash revenue is very expensive according to the CTA. Eliminating more of this cost will be beneficial. You are potentially right in that casual users might choose not to pay with cash and use another option, but this will be offset by the higher fare of other riders.
This will also speed up service for other customers who will benefit by having a higher satisfaction level.
MK said:
For more specifics on my suggestion, please see this thread: http://www.ctatattler.com/2009/01/top-tattler-tales-of-2008-november-bus-tracker-complaints-threetrack-progress-and-barack-elected.html?cid=144086908#comment-6a00d83451c39e69e2010536a95669970b
Cheryl said:
Obviously, it should be the UPS Brown Line.
Alex said:
Ad rap the entire rail and bus fleet with one ad campaign. A clever company could have a lot of fun with this. Also, it'd be completely obnoxious and hopefully annoy local and state officials enough that they get funding for public transit at the top of their lists.
James Reyes said:
Why change the signs?
Have WLUP or Sammy Haggar sponsor the Montrose station.
jack said:
When our fuel hedges run out, we should start doing better
Although I replied to your request for evidence in the other thread, you seem to now acknowledge the existence of that problem.
JMan said:
First of all, how about repealing the service additions that the Board approved just a couple weeks ago? In this environment, how ridiculous was that? And where is Ms. Brown this week--how on Earth does RRod get put out there all alone to announce these things? Where's the lady who said at the beginning of the year she'd rather work for Obama? Can't put your face and name out there when it comes time to cut service?
Look it: selling naming rights, yes, gets some money. Repealing senior free rides? yes, gets some money. Did you know Blago later snuck in free rides for persons with disabilities? Yes he did last Summer, doesn't get as much press, but it's real. yes, gets some money.
Still, MK is right, the bus system is bloated. There are services to be cut without sacrificing too much. But: There has to be a conversation with the Transit Union. Why in this environment do they still get COLA raises when everyone else is either laid off or on furlough? Why does a riders get less service without at LEAST a pay freeze. RRod and Mr. Daley (and I guess Ms. Brown, wherever she is) need to answer this.
This strategy should have started months ago, but now that it began, let's see what kind of leadership Mr. Daley has put in place at CTA.
MK said:
My God. If CTA workers are actually getting pay increases at this time then I really am speechless. Wow! It is time that everybody learns that in this economic environment there are going to need to be some sacrifices. The union should not only have a pay freeze but they should be agreeing to a pay reduction (it is a matter of record that they already get paid much higher than the industry norm). Very few workers in the entire country (I would guess less than 10%) are getting salery increases in the same job at this time. It certainly should not be occuring at a government agency that is almost broke.
And it is also about time that people understand that it does no good to expect every entity of government to never change with the times and always continue to provide each and every service they always did. I have called for service reductions for months for exactly this reason. You need to operate efficiantly at all times, not just when there is a shortage of revenue. Yet unfortunetely there are too many people who would start complaining about something being cut even when they know nothing about how a specific cut would affect anyone nor even what exactly those specific cuts would be. Even if the CTA were flush would cash, a lack of smart service reductions means the inability to expand service in areas that make sense. We see a similar thing occuring with the state right now where there are actually people expecting that NO state spending cuts occur at all and that everyone should have their income tax increase by one and a half to two percent. On the other side, you have people who think that no taxes should ever be raised at all. It is really sad that there are so many people who are not willing to ever engage in any sacrifices and who even subscribe to ideological principles based on this notion (even if they don't realize it).
MK said:
Chris,
You are making the mistake many do. You assume that every CTA rider is exactly the same. The reality is that those use use different fare methods are generally different types of CTA riders (though there isn't as much of a difference between transit card and Chicago Card users since there now is no difference in the fares and benefits of each.) The 5% who pay with cash cannot simply be encouraged to use another form of payment. The overwhelming majority of these people are not regular CTA riders and therefore mostly decide to take the bus on a whim. Regular CTA riders, for the most part, transfer frequently (if not for their normal commute, at least a fair amount of other trips). And when they transfer there is almost a 100% increase in price if they use cash as opposed to a transit or Chicago Card. Therefore, regular riders are not going to be paying with cash. The people who pay with cash are generally tourists or other occasional riders. These are the most elastic and the most likely to be repelled from using the CTA if the fare were too high. And we actually would rather have them pay with cash than with a much cheaper method such as a visitor pass, wouldn't we?. Your suggestion is counterproductive.
Though you are certainly correct that people should be incentivised to use the Chicago Card due to its much lower processing costs (and speedier boarding which shortens the commute and saves on gas) vs. the transit card. That is why, as I've said before, the decision made at the last fare increase to elimanate the two tiered fares for these cards was utterly stupid.
Leave a Comment?
What your comment will look like:
said: