Dublin Bikes prices to double

Qualitymark

In another unsurprising tax-the-poor initiative, our fatsos rulers have decided to slightly extend the range of Dublin Bikes, while doubling the annual fee and more than doubling the day fee:

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/deal-agreed-to-increase-dublin-bicycles-service-1.1389342

JustAThought

Qualitymark wrote: »

In another unsurprising tax-the-poor initiative, our fatsos rulers have decided to slightly extend the range of Dublin Bikes, while doubling the annual fee and more than doubling the day fee

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/deal-agreed-to-increase-dublin-bicycles-service-1.1389342

It's still really good value thou.

And we don't want the city destroyed with advertising at every point. Saw a few on their way out to Howth on the free bikes as I sailed past them on my way into Howth last beautiful day & thought what a fabulous scheme : )

Thou was at Collins Barracks & Heuston looking for one & couldn't believe they didn't go that far!!! You could walk the distances they cater for!!! More bikes!!!

Harrybelafonte

Don't know what you're complaining about tbh, The annual fee is still good value, especially with more stations and the tariffs aren't changing. All good.

Qualitymark

I'm complaining about the fact that all new taxes are taxes on the poorest. Yes, it's good value. I doubt very much that the extension of the scheme will match the doubling and more-than-doubling of the price.

delta_bravo

Qualitymark wrote: »

I'm complaining about the fact that all new taxes are taxes on the poorest. Yes, it's good value. I doubt very much that the extension of the scheme will match the doubling and more-than-doubling of the price.

I really don't understand your logic that Dublin bike users= the poorest. In fact I would Its quite far from the truth

markpb

Qualitymark wrote: »

I'm complaining about the fact that all new taxes are taxes on the poorest. Yes, it's good value. I doubt very much that the extension of the scheme will match the doubling and more-than-doubling of the price.

The number of bikes will triple. The number of stands will double. The price will double. Proportionally I'd say doubling the price is reasonable.

And how is this anything to do with the poor!? Your post is beyond ridiculous. Mega rich people will also pay €20 a year so its nothing to do with taxing the poor and, unlike public transport, the distances covered by DB users are walkable so if the extra €10 a year is such a massive financial burden, they can easily walk.

Cienciano

They should do whatever they have to do in order to make more stations. The only problem with Dublin Bikes is that there isn't more stations further out.

Qualitymark

Cienciano wrote: »

They should do whatever they have to do in order to make more stations. The only problem with Dublin Bikes is that there isn't more stations further out.

Every few months there's a big announcement that there are going to be more stations and further out. Then there's a gap of a couple of months, and another announcement.

Harrybelafonte

Qualitymark wrote: »

I'm complaining about the fact that all new taxes are taxes on the poorest. Yes, it's good value. I doubt very much that the extension of the scheme will match the doubling and more-than-doubling of the price.

Any more cliches you want to pull out there. Your second point may be valid, but you're targetting the wrong project. Twenty a year is, as stated, still extremely good value and I say that as dole queue scum, maybe not a member of the poorest, but as said previously, I don't think they're the people using Dublin Bikes.

Lumen

Qualitymark wrote: »

In another unsurprising tax-the-poor initiative

Where is the evidence that Dublin bike users are poor?

I am a Dublin bike user and I'm not.

Skill Magill

The "poor" cant avail of them anyway, you need a credit card to cover the deposit.

the world wonders

Qualitymark wrote: »

I doubt very much that the extension of the scheme will match the doubling and more-than-doubling of the price.

Did you read your own link?

The council has secured €5.2 million from the National Transport Authority to cover most of the €6.1 million cost of installing the new stations.
...
Even still, the council estimates it will need to find €500,000 a year to supplement the running costs.

So yes, the cost of the extension will more than match the increased revenue from the price increase. Every cent of the increase (plus several million more from the government, and half a mill that we don't know where it's going to come from yet) will go into improving the scheme.

Disclaimer: I live in Kilmainham

Skill Magill wrote: »

The "poor" cant avail of them anyway, you need a credit card to cover the deposit.

They let you sign up with direct debit as well.

Diarmuid

OP couldn't be more wrong!
An analysis of the role of bicycle-sharing in a European city : the case of Dublin

UCD Research wrote:

The results show that 53% of respondents earn a salary of more than €40,000 while only 16% earned less than €30,000 annually. This indicates quite strongly that the dublinbikes scheme has an affluent user profile i.e. upper middle and higher income earners.

And it's not a tax.

niceonetom

And to the poor all bike racks work as DB stations only without the need to sign up, own a credit card or ever return the bike.

Qualitymark

niceonetom wrote: »

And to the poor all bike racks work as DB stations only without the need to sign up, own a credit card or ever return the bike.

So you think all poor are thieves?

Qualitymark

Diarmuid wrote: »

And it's not a tax.

You may not be familiar with the concept of analogy?

Diarmuid

Qualitymark wrote: »

You may not be familiar with the concept of analogy?

you're a tax on my patience

Schnitzel Muncher

Qualitymark wrote: »

I'm complaining about the fact that all new taxes are taxes on the poorest. Yes, it's good value. I doubt very much that the extension of the scheme will match the doubling and more-than-doubling of the price.

What a load of socialist rubbish.

The 'poorest' are the ones who benefit the most from the state. I suppose you think they should get everything for free, or even be paid to use the scheme.

I'd love to hear how you'd feel if you were paying a marginal tax rate of 52%.

Qualitymark

Schnitzel Muncher wrote: »

I'd love to hear how you'd feel if you were paying a marginal tax rate of 52%.

I'd love to tell you; I have paid various tax rates, and have felt at all times that I was paying my share.

However, this thread appears to have become a chance for people to abuse me, and nothing to do with the more-than-doubling of the rate for this cycling scheme. Unfollowing.

Dermot Illogical

Schnitzel Muncher wrote: »

I'd love to hear how you'd feel if you were paying a marginal tax rate of 52%.

Bliss! When I were a lad we could only dream of a 52% marginal tax rate.

Schnitzel Muncher

Qualitymark wrote: »

I'd love to tell you; I have paid various tax rates, and have felt at all times that I was paying my share.

However, this thread appears to have become a chance for people to abuse me, and nothing to do with the more-than-doubling of the rate for this cycling scheme. Unfollowing.

Let me try to figure out why it was derailed...oh yeah, read the first post and your subsequent references to the 'poorest'.

ROK ON

I have never used a Dublin bike largely as I have my own bikes.
I use Hueston station weekly and I would use a DB to get to and from the station from the city centre if there was a DB depot nearby.

Mostly I walk to and from Hueston but when weather is poor I use Luas or taxi.
The proposed new cost of DB is significantly better value than Luas or taxi. In fact €20 is possible less than the average pedestrian uses in "shoe leather costs" in any given year.

While I agree that the tax burden in Ireland is onerous relative to the recent past and many neighbouring countries, sometimes when you pay for the use of a service it is simply payment not taxation. Lose the sense of entitlement please.

Harrybelafonte

Schnitzel Muncher wrote: »

What a load of socialist rubbish.

The 'poorest' are the ones who benefit the most from the state. I suppose you think they should get everything for free, or even be paid to use the scheme.

I'd love to hear how you'd feel if you were paying a marginal tax rate of 52%.

Really? OP was a little OTT in his "analogy" but your approach brings it into the After Hours arena.

You may want to revisit your understanding of socialism too.

Schnitzel Muncher

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

Really? OP was a little OTT in his "analogy" but your approach brings it into the After Hours arena.

You may want to revisit your understanding of socialism too.

Indeed.

delta_bravo

Qualitymark wrote: »

However, this thread appears to have become a chance for people to abuse me, and nothing to do with the more-than-doubling of the rate for this cycling scheme. Unfollowing.

People aren't always going to agree with you in life, especially when you are clearly wrong. I suppose in following is the equivalent of taking your ball and going home when your team starts losing the match

NuMarvel

The OP is technically correct. This increase will hit the poorest the hardest. But only the poorest of DublinBikes users.

From what I've seen, the poorest of Dublin Bikes users are those still using a 2 year old smart phone, so I don't think the extra 20 cent per week will send them spiralling into debt.

Darkwarriorcok

20 quid is feck all, this scheme is the greatest thing to hit Dublin since sliced bread.

I remember the day i was walking down talbot street and came across the db station, i was shocked, wasn't a man for keeping up with the news then, probably still don't!
It was a shock of deadliness, i immediately sussed it out and subscribed! Now all we need is more trees and i'll die happy!

buffalo

NuMarvel wrote: »

From what I've seen, the poorest of Dublin Bikes users are those still using a 2 year old smart phone, so I don't think the extra 20 cent per week will send them spiralling into debt.

I have a seven year old phone... am I poor?

slap/dash

Good lord. The ad hominems are a bit much. Op is correct to point out that a flat fee for service does constitute a higher burden on lower income groups. The amount doesn't alter the logic. A bit ott in the op though I agree.

As for the cost jump, it's not like an expansion is happening for any reason other than the expectation of increased revenue, so it is valid enough to question the level of the cost hike. 3 times more availability will probably translate into a similar increase in usage, but a 6 fold increase in revenue for the new additions. Add in the original stations/bikes and it will be significantly more than a 6 fold increase in revenue.

ted1

Did I just read its 35M euro ?

They could pay a **** load of bikes and just put them on the street without the fancy stations if only a small fraction survive it'll still work out cheaper

It works out at 36k a bike.

the world wonders

ted1 wrote: »

Did I just read its 35M euro ?

no you didn't?

slap/dash wrote:

As for the cost jump, it's not like an expansion is happening for any reason other than the expectation of increased revenue

Incorrect, dublinbikes is not a for-profit scheme.

ted1

the world wonders wrote: »

no you didn't?Incorrect, dublinbikes is not a for-profit scheme.

A €35 million deal to expand the Dublin bike scheme. Yes I did.

Believe me at 35M someone is making a savage profit

the world wonders

ted1 wrote: »

A €35 million deal to expand the Dublin bike scheme. Yes I did.

Believe me at 35M someone is making a savage profit

the Irish Times need to change the batteries on their calculator then

€1.925 million a year for 10 years to run the service and maintain the bikes.

The council has secured €5.2 million from the National Transport Authority to cover most of the €6.1 million cost of installing the new stations.

that adds up to 25.35 million

ted1

I think an other article I read put it at 39M which includes the revenue lost on the deal by giving away the advertising rights.
The downturn in revenue from advertising is part of the reason for an increase

Trampas

If they increase the area I've no problem paying the extra. I'd like to see it go to heuston, rathmines, ranalgh, ballsbridge on southside.

I don't use on northside but I presume north circular road as a ring at least to be covered.

When they hit heuston I say they'll get a good few extra signing up. Even ballsbridge might pick a few as aib and IBM are based around there.

coolemon

Qualitymark is correct. Any increase in the cost of anything will hit the poorest hardest - by virtue of the fact that they have lower income. Common sense really.

However whether the increase in the annual fee presents a barrier to entry to the scheme for those on the lowest income is unknown, and possibly unlikely. But the peoples streets were given away to private advertisers for this scheme. So any increase of the fee should be looked at critically. The streets belong to the poorest as much as they do to the wealthier demographic who tend to use the dublin bikes. And whether the increase in the fee presents a barrier or not, the poorest will be hardest hit irrespective.

That aside.

Does anyone know in detail exactly where the new stations will be located? Will they extend south-west towards St. James's hospital, Rialto, Dolphins Barn?

All that has been mentioned in the westerly direction are Heuston and Kilmainham.

fat bloke

Darkwarriorcok wrote: »

20 quid is feck all, this scheme is the greatest thing to hit Dublin since sliced bread.
!

I'm not sure about that now. Sliced cheese, followed by sliced ham, would be up there in greatness imo. Especially when they decided to make the ham and cheese slices all the same size as the bread.

But then I've yet to actually use a Dublin bike...

dave2pvd

An annual fee?

That means tourists won't use them.

That be me.

buffalo

coolemon wrote: »

So any increase of the fee should be looked at critically. The streets belong to the poorest as much as they do to the wealthier demographic who tend to use the dublin bikes. And whether the increase in the fee presents a barrier or not, the poorest will be hardest hit irrespective.

What do you suggest - a means-tested income-linked tiered fee scheme?

There is a map of the new stations in the print version of the article, but I can't find it online.

buffalo

dave2pvd wrote: »

An annual fee?

That means tourists won't use them.

That be me.

There's already an annual fee for residents, but also an option for a three day ticket (IIRC) for tourists.

coolemon

buffalo wrote: »

What do you suggest - a means-tested income-linked tiered fee scheme?

There is a map of the new stations in the print version of the article, but I can't find it online.

I dont suggest anything. An increase in the fee is probably unavoidable to expand the scheme.

But any increase will hit those with lowest income hardest. This is an obvious fact which I dont think can reasonably be denied. How useful that fact is is another matter.

Its not this map here is it? Dosnt show exact locations

http://dublinobserver.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/expmap-large.jpg

buffalo

coolemon wrote: »

Its not this map here is it? Dosnt show exact locations

Nay, it has green pins for existing stations and red for proposed ones. The guts of the expansion are out west to Heuston and Royal Hospital/IMMA, and east to the Docklands. A few up north around the existing stations, and filling in the gaps - Aungier St, York St area.

Can I post a pic mods?

Ole Rodrigo

Its a great scheme - the best thing DCC has ever done. An increase to 20 quid is not a lot for what you get, which is essentially unlimited use of the bikes for the year. And if the extra tenner means being able to go out further even better.

There have been other recent measures that are more punitive to people on low incomes, and more deserving of criticism.

My only reservation is that there will be more yearly increases.

ThreeBlindMice

The 100% Increase is very reasonable considering the service and usage they are getting. DB and DCC should think of other means of raising revenue such as allowing their extended use at weekend nights to compete with taxi services. I would prefer to cycle one of these back from the pub the sis miles rather than get ripped off by taxi fares.

Drkitkat

[QUOTE=ThreeBlindMice;84565083 I would prefer to cycle one of these back from the pub the sis miles rather than get ripped off by taxi fares. [/QUOTE]

I don't think that's the best plan

expectationlost

doesn't really sound like they got this sorted at all, how long will it take to find a further sponsor?

Plastik

buffalo wrote: »

I have a seven year old phone... am I poor?

Yes.

Beasty

Plastik wrote: »

Yes.

Well I've not upgraded the dog for over 16 years, which I guess makes me even poorer ...

Grandpa Hassan

Trampas wrote: »

If they increase the area I've no problem paying the extra. I'd like to see it go to heuston, rathmines, ranalgh, ballsbridge on southside.

I don't use on northside but I presume north circular road as a ring at least to be covered.

When they hit heuston I say they'll get a good few extra signing up. Even ballsbridge might pick a few as aib and IBM are based around there.

I'd love to see bike racks out there. But it's that expansion that hugely increases the costs per bike.

Take Houston. Everyone will be going the same way in the morning. The first 30 people off a train will get a bike. No one else will get one unil the truck turns up to replenish the racks. So you need a constant flow of trucks.

Evenings woud be worse. You rock up for the 6.00 train and there's no rack space. Unless there is a truck on hand you'd have to cycle back to Smithfield or somewhere. And miss your train.

Same with the suburbs at rush hour, either way

Self replenishment wouldn't happen at all, massively increasing costs. A fleet of trucks will be needed. It's a major logistic issue in the way of suburban expansion

Plastik

Beasty wrote: »

Well I've not upgraded the dog for over 16 years, which I guess makes me even poorer ...

Your collection of bikes vastly outweighs your decision to carry around one of these



Is that you, Beasty?

hfallada

I can't see what the issue with the price increase. It's being used for expansion and not so DCC can increase their wages or anything like that. €20 is the price of 2 packets of cigarettes or about 10 bus journeys.

€20 is amazing value for what you are getting. If your not happy with the price go buy a bike and try finding a quality lock for under €50