The bus might just win out afterall...

[overthewater]

From Passenger transport twitter:

Its front page highlights; because of the tightening of the purse strings for the young the number of them learning to drive has gone from 62% from the late 90s down to 50% until 2014. I wouldn't be surprised if that number is now even lower... it goes further by saying.. The tread will continue and these people are very unlikely to learn, even in the later life?

Yes people are shopping less on the high street, more online but if these people cant drive there need other ways to get to work, once you get that way there more likely to use the bus for socialising and drinking.

 

[gingerheid]

It's hard; once you have a car you've prepaid a certain percentage of your future journeys.

I hate driving and resisted getting a car as long as possible. But now I have it... I use it.

Within the town I live in both buses and cars are hopeless so usually I cycle. Objectively my new (and most unwelcome, but my office closed and what can you do?) 120 mile commute is more expensive by car, but the train already takes an hour longer each direction even before it starts being chronically unreliable. In one month the *median* delay was 58 mins on the way there. Yes that was unlucky, but the £3.50 delay repay payments don't really make that worth it, and you get more lucky if you drive

 

[Non Multi]

Young people and their eye-watering car insurance quotes! Outside of urban areas, especially where bus routes have been decimated, and fares aren't subsidised you're at a disadvantage without access to private transport.

 

[PeterC]

The trouble is that if you are doing a "lower paid less secure" job you really do need a car because you don't know where the next gig is going to be.

I agree with Non Multi that the killer is insurance. My mother wanted to make my duaghter a present of a car when she was 18, I had a devil of a job trying to get her to understand that she would be handing her a huge debt rather than an asset.

 

[Dentonian]

It's hard; once you have a car you've prepaid a certain percentage of your future journeys.

I think that's a major point, and one which makes me think some of today's younger generation have both a different attitude to money and a healthy resistance to Media propoganda and the UK concept of Class distinction. In my day (cliche), apart from a mortgage, you never went into debt. If you couldn't raise the cash, you did without - simples. Today, it seems money is a problem for the future, particularly ironic as our NHS crumbles, but hey.

As regards working it out logically - and I know circumstances vary in different parts of individual areas, never mind he country - public transport would seem to be FAR worse than it was a generation ago. I gave up the notion of driving in 1983, just four months after passing my test - absolutely appalling timing as it turned out, but a couple of specific events (irrelevant to this thread) led me to he decision.

When I did learn, I paid £7 an hour for lessons. 34 years later, I was surprised to walk down a street a few hundred metres from where I live and be passed by a L car advertising lessons for £11 an hour or £20 for two. That's barely 50% increase in over a generation. In the same time, single bus fares have gone up eleven fold and period tickets have also gone up well above inflation - particularly in the last two years. Petrol/diesel, at the pumps I believe has increased roughly in line with inflation for a number of decades, so with improved fuel efficiency, a smoothly driven smallish car costs less than 20p a mile to run. My nearest Supermarket is 1.5 miles away (0.3 mile walk to bus stop, and 1.2 miles bus journey. So if I had a car, it would cost 60p there and back, with room for plenty of shopping and up to extra passengers. By bus, it would be £4.50. The drive would be probably 15 minutes return with no waiting time. The walk/bus journey would be at least 20 minutes each way, and obviously the return would involve heavy bags.
Peak hour commutes would tend to have less stark a difference, but even if congestion increased fuel (and other variables) to 25p a mile, it would mean at least 6 miles each way before the bus matched the car cost wise*. A 6 mile journey at peak time would take maybe 30 minutes by car and 50 minutes by bus, even assuming you have direct bus.

Then there are the factors of unreliability/poor punctuality (although herabouts, reliability is good and punctuality is usually worse off-peak than at peak times); climate, waiting environment, overcrowding etc.

So, whilst accepting with some surprise that this is a positive development, I can't see it lasting in terms of people continuing to do without a car once they get into their 30s.

*Many - but by no means all - city centre workers pay parking costs. These are virtually non existant for shoppers and workers in smaller towns.

 

[gazthomas]

Based on depreciation, fuel, maintenance , road tax and insurance costs over 12,000 miles per year I would think it costs me 75p a mile to drive

 

[Non Multi]

I'm fairly sure that similar research findings to the O.P's article lead the Ford Motor Company to invest in the Chariot bus startup in the U.S. Chariot is now operating routes in London.

 

[Dentonian]

Based on depreciation, fuel, maintenance , road tax and insurance costs over 12,000 miles per year I would think it costs me 75p a mile to drive

That's the point: Road tax is a fixed cost and depreciation, maintenance and insurance are semi-fixed at best, as are tyres and oil. Only fuel is the true variable.
This is probably what gingerheld is thinking, because if you have acquired, taxed and insured a car, it makes no economic sense to leave it sat on the drive (or more commonly nowadays, the pavement outside), doing nothing. You would by a Villa in Spain if you only had a fortnight's annual leave from work would you?

 

[gazthomas]

That's the point: Road tax is a fixed cost and depreciation, maintenance and insurance are semi-fixed at best, as are tyres and oil. Only fuel is the true variable.
This is probably what gingerheld is thinking, because if you have acquired, taxed and insured a car, it makes no economic sense to leave it sat on the drive (or more commonly nowadays, the pavement outside), doing nothing. You would by a Villa in Spain if you only had a fortnight's annual leave from work would you?

I think there is more variability than you think, especially in terms of depreciation and servicing, often frequency takes precident over distance as an example.

 

[Dentonian]

I'm fairly sure that similar research findings to the O.P's article lead the Ford Motor Company to invest in the Chariot bus startup in the U.S. Chariot is now operating routes in London.

Is my calender exactly two months behind? In a city that supposedly is the most restrictive and expensive in the UK to use a small road vehicle, this firm is going to charge bargain fares with a capacity of just 14 pax - and legally use bus lanes?

 

[gazthomas]

Is my calender exactly two months behind? In a city that supposedly is the most restrictive and expensive in the UK to use a small road vehicle, this firm is going to charge bargain fares with a capacity of just 14 pax - and legally use bus lanes?

Sounds like a loophole

 

[radamfi]

This is not news and falling licence owning and car use among the young has been noted for about 10 years, not just in the UK but in many industrialised countries. Professor Phil Goodwin coined the term "peak car" as per capita driving started to level off or decline a few years after 2000. Various theories have been presented, not just economic ones. Young people don't appear to have the same desire to own a car compared to previous generations. Many young people have migrated to major cities, especially London and Manchester, meaning car use is less necessary or even impossible. But buses outside London do not seem to be picking up much business from this unexpected pool of captive users.

 

[Dentonian]

This is not news and falling licence owning and car use among the young has been noted for about 10 years, not just in the UK but in many industrialised countries. Professor Phil Goodwin coined the term "peak car" as per capita driving started to level off or decline a few years after 2000. Various theories have been presented, not just economic ones. Young people don't appear to have the same desire to own a car compared to previous generations. Many young people have migrated to major cities, especially London and Manchester, meaning car use is less necessary or even impossible. But buses outside London do not seem to be picking up much business from this unexpected pool of captive users.

Its interesting that you say it goes back a decade or more. I do recall that overall, Car ownership (per household) in either 1991 or 2001 was 72% nationally and 62% in Greater Manchester; By 2011 the national figure had only crept up slightly to 74%, but GM had reached the previous 72%. I suspect that GM might even have overtaken the national figure now - certainly if south and central Manchester were excluded.

 

[Non Multi]

... But buses outside London do not seem to be picking up much business from this unexpected pool of captive users.

In many places outside of London £1.50 would not buy you a ticket to the next stop!

 

[yorkie]

I've decided not to own or learn how to drive a car.

It used to be because I could not afford to drive a car (financially), but I can't really say that any more.

I am keen not to drive for various reasons. The cost is still a factor, but one of the main reasons is that I fear I will become lazy and unfit as I may be too tempted to drive places. I'd also end up comparing the marginal cost of each journey with a train ticket, so I'd take the train less often too.

I do like the 'challenge' of finding an alternative way to get to places, and to do so affordably. There are not many occasions when I am prevented doing something I want to do because I don't own a car. Admittedly not everyone can do that. But I chose to live here so that I could.

..but if these people cant drive there need other ways to get to work...

Agreed, and in some cases that will be the bus. But people are less likely to switch from using cars to buses in my opinion. #

For me it's under my own power, or when I am working in somewhere further afield, it'll be the train.

Young people don't appear to have the same desire to own a car compared to previous generations. Many young people have migrated to major cities, especially London and Manchester, meaning car use is less necessary or even impossible. But buses outside London do not seem to be picking up much business from this unexpected pool of captive users.

I agree with all of that.

 

[96tommy]

In many places outside of London £1.50 would not buy you a ticket to the next stop!

You can say that again, when I'm living down here £1.50 can get me pretty much across the city. To get from my town to York when I'm back home is now over £7.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I am keen not to drive for various reasons. The cost is still a factor, but one of the main reasons is that I fear I will become lazy and unfit as I may be too tempted to drive places

Being in Scouting I've lost count of the number of 16 year olds I've known who have been skinny and fit from walking and cycling everywhere (given MK's historically poor bus service but excellent provision for walking and cycling), but on getting a car at 17 have rapidly piled on the weight.

It's interesting how things have gone a bit full-circle, though. My generation (18 in 1997) tended to learn to drive using their parents' car but not own one until much later (with some exceptions) - I didn't own my first car until age 22, and had my first job not been in MK but rather somewhere with vaguely decent public transport it could well have been later. The next generation near enough all got an old banger at 17 - and now it's going back the other way.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Nobody has so far mentioned taxis. Outside of London their numbers have been rising steadily though the availability is still highest in London. That rise can only reflect increasing demand suggesting increasing affordability. Uber and similar services will inevitably apply downward pressure on pricing making taxis even more affordable. The big unknown is what effect autonomous vehicles will have on all current forms of transport: the potential is enormous but it remains to be seen whether they can be sufficiently acceptable from a safety regulation point of view. But they could easily see the end of all bus services in some areas I suspect.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I'm fairly sure that similar research findings to the O.P's article lead the Ford Motor Company to invest in the Chariot bus startup in the U.S. Chariot is now operating routes in London.

Those lame route names...

I'd rather walk, thanks!

 

[Non Multi]

Those lame route names...

I shall not defend the indefensible!

 

[Mikey C]

Nobody has so far mentioned taxis. Outside of London their numbers have been rising steadily though the availability is still highest in London. That rise can only reflect increasing demand suggesting increasing affordability. Uber and similar services will inevitably apply downward pressure on pricing making taxis even more affordable. The big unknown is what effect autonomous vehicles will have on all current forms of transport: the potential is enormous but it remains to be seen whether they can be sufficiently acceptable from a safety regulation point of view. But they could easily see the end of all bus services in some areas I suspect.

Yes, Ubers have had a significant effect, especially in big cities, both on car ownership AND on bus use. I know people who use them as a default option, rather than public transport

Zip cars (and their rivals) are also an option, hiring a car by the hour, rather than owning your own.

 

[higthomas]

When I did learn, I paid £7 an hour for lessons. 34 years later, I was surprised to walk down a street a few hundred metres from where I live and be passed by a L car advertising lessons for £11 an hour or £20 for two. That's barely 50% increase in over a generation.

I don't know where you live, but boy I'd love that sort of price! It's at least £25-28 down near me (Surrey and Oxfordshire) Given my mum had an automatic, learning to drive was excruciatingly expensive!

But speaking as a uni student, I think most of the reason that people haven't learnt to drive is they don't see the need. Whilst you're still at school, mum's taxi is often an option, and given most people live in urban areas one can cycle/walk where you're going. Also, at least amongst people I know the get up and go to get holiday/weekend jobs doesn't seem to be what it used to be. This means no one has the money to pay the exorbitant insurance prices.

Whilst at uni, no one wants a car in a city, and after people leave, most are going to cities, so still have no neeed.

 

[nerd]

Its interesting that you say it goes back a decade or more. I do recall that overall, Car ownership (per household) in either 1991 or 2001 was 72% nationally and 62% in Greater Manchester; By 2011 the national figure had only crept up slightly to 74%, but GM had reached the previous 72%. I suspect that GM might even have overtaken the national figure now - certainly if south and central Manchester were excluded.

The key change is in persons using their own cars to get to work (and too in the course of their work). Formerly - certainly up to the 1990s - as families became more affluent, so they were more inclined to drive to work (and less inclined to use public transport). But in the 2011 census we find the opposite overall; the more affluent a family, the less inclined their members are to drive to work themselves - and the more likely they are to choose to commute by bike, rail or tram - though the most affluent tend rather to work from home if they can. This change far from uniform though. In London and the South of England it is very strongly present; but in the North East and North West (outside Manchester) the former pattern is still found. This does not mean that more affluent households do not have cars - rather that they see their cars as 'domestic' and 'family' assets; not as 'employment' assets. Moreover, over time this changes the nature of drivers expectations of 'normal' road use; people who are using their cars to get to work want the roads to be cleared for priority travel through a locality as fast as possible; whereas people who are using cars for family purposes prefer slower roads that you can stop along easily to pick people up; and park easily to access the local area. Hence local road traffic in peak periods is becoming steadily slower (which does bus operators no favours at all).

What is not apparent in the 2011 census, is any overall increase in consequent use of buses. Car commuting now appears to included large numbers of reluctant drivers; who would switch to an alternative mode of travel if there was one available and acceptable. But so far the general configuration of bus services does not meet these users' standards. Hence the need for investment in forms of enhanced bus provision that these reluctant drivers will switch to. A problem being that these same 'enhancements' are very often characteristics that existing regular bus users do not value - wider stop spacings, off-bus ticketing, integration with other transport modes.

 

[nerd]

Nobody has so far mentioned taxis. Outside of London their numbers have been rising steadily though the availability is still highest in London. That rise can only reflect increasing demand suggesting increasing affordability. Uber and similar services will inevitably apply downward pressure on pricing making taxis even more affordable. The big unknown is what effect autonomous vehicles will have on all current forms of transport: the potential is enormous but it remains to be seen whether they can be sufficiently acceptable from a safety regulation point of view. But they could easily see the end of all bus services in some areas I suspect.

Driverless travel is being heavily promoted by the US information technology giants (Google etc); and hence has concentrates on 'selling' the principle as a form of private car ownership. If people are driving, they are not using Google; but put them in a driverless car, and they will. But the technology is far more suitable as driverless taxis than as driverless private cars - as Google's pilot examples clearly demonstrate. However the same logic also means that the technology is more suitable as driverless buses than as driverless taxis. My view is that driverless technology will be introduced first for urban busways; and that it will be found that these deliver so much of the potential benefits of driverless technology (you can access Google on a bus as well as a taxi) that driverless taxis will lag a long way behind; and driverless private cars will never happen at all in any numbers.

 

[edwin_m]

Nobody has so far mentioned taxis. Outside of London their numbers have been rising steadily though the availability is still highest in London. That rise can only reflect increasing demand suggesting increasing affordability. Uber and similar services will inevitably apply downward pressure on pricing making taxis even more affordable. The big unknown is what effect autonomous vehicles will have on all current forms of transport: the potential is enormous but it remains to be seen whether they can be sufficiently acceptable from a safety regulation point of view. But they could easily see the end of all bus services in some areas I suspect.

There are some interesting articles on London Reconnections about the rise of Uber.

One of the key points is that their price is unsustainable because they are making a huge loss but shareholders are supporting them for the time being because they are seen as a disruptive tech company. This is even with the sorts of tax advantage and employment methods that a tech multinational is able to benefit from compared with more conventional competitors.

Normally this sort of shareholder support exists because they expect the business to drive its competitors out and become effectively a monopoly with a lower cost base and therefore huge potential for profits (see Amazon in particular). This is unlikely to happen with private hire, at least until/unless driverless becomes viable, as local minicab firms are relatively easy to set up and also have a low cost base. However buses (and black cabs) may be more at risk and there is some sign that Uber is damaging bus operations in the smaller American cities where they are pretty marginal in any case. If this spreads to the UK it could be serious because outside London there are few bodies with the clout and the funds to defend bus services, or the willingness when they are sometimes seen as having been run for the benefit of private interests but the disbenefit of the travelling public.

Driverless potentially brings another round of changes and could give the likes of Uber an unassailable advantage over smaller taxi firms (depending who ends up controlling the technology) and another hit for buses. They are unlikely to be cheaper than bus travel but could take enough passengers and revenue that many bus services disappear and travellers have no choice.

I think this all means that regulators need to step in and ensure a fair playing field including doing something about predatory pricing.

 

[radamfi]

Driverless potentially brings another round of changes and could give the likes of Uber an unassailable advantage over smaller taxi firms (depending who ends up controlling the technology) and another hit for buses. They are unlikely to be cheaper than bus travel but could take enough passengers and revenue that many bus services disappear and travellers have no choice.

I think this all means that regulators need to step in and ensure a fair playing field including doing something about predatory pricing.

Driverless buses should be cheaper than driverless taxis, but I would expect driverless taxis to be considerably cheaper than buses are today. The fixed costs of a driverless taxi would be shared among all users so the fare should be little more than the cost of fuel. Driverless taxis would probably be sufficiently cheap that most people won't care about getting a cheaper fare on a driverless bus, unless road pricing or similar is imposed.

 

[telstarbox]

The Census only shows the main mode for commutes - lots of people in leafy Home Counties drive 10 mins then get a train for an hour so the car element wouldn't show up in the stats.

 

[Dentonian]

In many places outside of London £1.50 would not buy you a ticket to the next stop!

Greater Manchester being one of them - unless its Salford/Swinton or Wilmslow Road.

 

[Dentonian]

Nobody has so far mentioned taxis. Outside of London their numbers have been rising steadily though the availability is still highest in London. That rise can only reflect increasing demand suggesting increasing affordability. Uber and similar services will inevitably apply downward pressure on pricing making taxis even more affordable. The big unknown is what effect autonomous vehicles will have on all current forms of transport: the potential is enormous but it remains to be seen whether they can be sufficiently acceptable from a safety regulation point of view. But they could easily see the end of all bus services in some areas I suspect.

Fair point. Even without uber, taxi fares have come DOWN in the last 10 years where I live, unless they have introduced unpublished discounts for pensioners. The last time I used a taxi locally for a journey of approx 2 miles it cost £6.60 for two of us. That was Summer/Autumn 2008. Last week, my elderly mother caught a taxi for approx. 90% of the same journey and was charged £5.20! Both journeys were made about Noon on weekdays. Although not as steep as I had thought, the single fare on the bus (for both equivalent journeys) has gone up from £1.80 to £2.50.

 

[Starmill]

Not having a car is rubbish. There are so many problems and compromises that result, and the price of travel by public transport is often very poor value for money - this applies both to local jounrney and long-distance travel. The key reason I do not drive is because I'm concerned about the very high levels of air pollution in urban neighborhoods, including the one I live in, and because apart from flying, driving is one of the worst things you can do to increase your atmospheric carbon emissions. We are committed to these aims as a country and I firmly believe it's important I should play my part.

We are up against it though. Government policy is not at all going in our favour. We are hit with super-inflationary price rises all the time, sometimes huge ones. I am not saying nobody should ever drive or fly - that would be ridiculous. I often get lifts to places because public transport is simply nonexistent. But it is good to really consider if you can use alternatives to these two modes every time you make a journey. Even though I am unhappy at the ripoff prices for those of us who are trying to do the 'right thing', there are benefits. Time spent on trains and buses can be used to read, or relax and enjoy the view, while long hours spent driving are not good for your health. I apologise to those of you who think I'm a broken record at this point, but I would like to see changes to government policy that make flying and driving more expensive and travel by bus and train considerably cheaper.

I do like the 'challenge' of finding an alternative way to get to places, and to do so affordably.

In the past, I used to enjoy this too. Now, though, it's far more likely to put me in a very bad mood seeing that i can't get somewhere I want to go to because the prices are too high when I could easily afford to go if I drove.