On 18 Dec, 11:11, Robert wrote:

On 2008-12-18 10:13:36 +0000, Peter Campbell Smith
said:

Robert wrote in news:2008121807091316807-
coppercapped@googlemailcom:

The technology is a solution looking for a problem. Somebody, somewhere
is trying to skim a few percent off small everyday transactions. Why
else would they be pushing the idea? Why increase the costs of small
transactions and complicate something that is very simple - and above
all, works?

I don't disagree with what you say, but there are some other reasons. One
is the cost of handling cash, especially when it has to be collected from
otherwise unmanned places like vending machines. The other is security and
audit; for example vending machines are frequently stolen or broken into
and the cost of repair or replacement usually greatly exceeds the value of
the money inside.

I assume the machines have to be visited to be re-stocked. Then remove
the money at the same time. It is not necessary to make two visits.

If they are so often stolen or broken into then they can't be very
profitable because of all the extra costs. Remove them.

The argument is that they wouldn't be broken in to (or at least not
nearly as often) if they didn't contain cash. I think that's a pretty
strong argument, to be honest.

Plus with a number of such vending/self-service machines is it not the
case that sometimes the restocking and the cash emptying are carried
out separately? I'm not enough of an observer of such matters to know
that much about them. With some, such as car parking payment machines,
the predominant issue will be emptying them of cash as opposed to
restocking them - especially in the case of multi-storey car park
payment machines (though I suppose these may issue a receipt, so that
roll needs would need to be restocked - they'll certainly need to if
payment is made via credit/debit card).


Coin, and especially note, accepting equipment is expensive and much less
reliable and prone to vandalism than RFID interfaces.

Agreed.


Much the point I was making above.


Even at a manned position, RFID transactions are faster than cash, so that
at a busy place fewer counter staff are required, or queues can be handled
faster (as can be seen by reduced dwell times on buses since the
introduction of Oyster).

I have seen supermarkets (on the continent I will admit) where the
change (in coin) was held in an automatic machine at the checkout. You
handed the check-out person your money, the amount was registered in
the till and the change was automatically delivered down a chute. Only
notes were handed out by hand. It was very quick.

This could be adopted for all sorts of other transactions. even
ruggedised to work on buses. The buses in Munich are fitted with coin
operated ticket issuing machines and I have never yet found one that
hasn't worked.

Do they issue change?


I am not familiar with this 'Oyster' thing, so I have no experience of
the reduced dwell times. If dwell times do cause a significant cost,
then the dwell time can be reduced to zero (i.e., excess time above
that required for getting on and off) by bringing back the conductor....


Oyster has basically been revolutionary on London's buses. Dwell times
have been greatly reduced, as hardly anyone pays cash on board any
more - I'm serious, it is very rare to find people actually buying a
ticket from the driver (and when they do it's quick as there's a flat
cash fare of £2). Reduced dwell times means faster and more reliable
journeys, leading to a more reliable service that is far more
attractive to passengers - in essence buses are faster and more
frequent.

To be fair, before Oyster buses in London had a significant number of
passengers who already held pre-paid tickets - either season tickets
or day tickets (in either case Travelcards or bus passes), both of
which were available for purchase in many local newsagents - so there
were already many people flashing tickets at the driver (though it's
likely these people were commuters on their regular journey). However
lots of people were still paying cash on board (and at the time there
was not a flat fare scheme either so they had to request a destination
or alternatively the correct fare).

The Oyster card is an electronic smart card - it works by the
passenger touching the card on a reader. It has two modes - either
loaded with a Travelcard or bus pass, or alternatively in pay-as-you-
go (PAYG) mode whereby the passenger tops up their card with a load of
credit (this can be done at many newsagents and corner shops, and also
at Underground stations and a few rail stations).

The appropriate amount is then deducted from the PAYG balance when the
passenger travels - a flat fare of 90p (£1 from January) for bus
journeys where all a passenger needs to do is 'touch-in' on boarding,
differing fares on the Underground (and a few rail routes) where a
passenger needs to 'touch-in' and then 'touch-out' for the correct
fare to be deducted (if they don't touch-out the highest fare is
charged).

The amount deducted and PAYG balance is shown on a display on the bus
ticket machine (though it is hard too see and catch in time), it can
also be obtained by checking on the readers in the aforementioned
shops, and also at self-service ticket machines at Underground and a
few rail stations. If one registers their card appropriately the
balance can also be found online, albeit updated every night.

It's a great system, and really does make a difference to bus travel.

Regarding conductors - it is simply very expensive to put conductors
on buses, and where smartcard ticketing exists it would be an
unjustifiable luxury.