My choice of excerpt was semi-incidental. The internet revolution fantasy slathered on revenue maxing strat in that book is unavoidable. Still Oyster is a volume tool.

A characteristic common to telecom and mass transit enterprises is, both are general utilities.

Another is rate structure being a function of distance between origination and termination of service per purchase per person. That is, both producers meter length of service by zone transited, regardless of mode or payment method.

The problem then facing bureaucrats masquerading as civil engineers of unified transit operations is usually, fundamentally, revenue collection. The value of information lies not in "individual profiling" or idiosyncratic preferences. For none would argue, mass transit riders could, did, and do easily "game" a rudimentary system of "information" required to calculate price of passage.

Particularly bus fare.

I've seen it with my own two. Ridiculous situation. Not even in NYC, still a coin and paper subsidized operation, bleeds like that. omg. Marginal rate of recovery of losses attributable to that division of the London metro system alone had to make the case for installing Oyster readers.

Passenger car congestion notwithstanding,

It takes £1.8 billion (US $3 billion) to keep London buses running, but riders only pay £1.1 billion (US $1.8 billion) in fares [probably an improvement YoY since 2003], creating a 40 percent subsidy at the expense of motorists. The London Underground subway system is more efficient with £1.8 billion (US $3 billion) in fares collected to cover £2.4 billion (US $3.9 billion) in expenses, meaning riders only enjoy a 25 percent discount at the expense of drivers. Read more...