Megabus is a spin-off from a U.K. company of the same name that is offering bus service along the lines of RyanAir and other European cut-rate airline companies. It is offering a few $1 seats along selected routes.
Take Megabus to Chicago from Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, Detroit, Indianapolis, Milwaukie, Minneapolis, or St. Louis.
Flickr photo by femaletrumpet02.
Most seats will go for around 10 cents a mile. For example, tickets for the 525-mile trip from Chicago to Kansas City are around $55 — if you want to go tomorrow. But when I chose this itinerary for a month from now the web site quoted me $43 for a daytime ticket, $15 for a nighttime bus. By comparison, Amtrak starts at $50.
You are cheapest sildenafil not complete without a partner, this is the law of nature. Here are the most essential cialis from india online 5 supplements for men to boost their fertility: 1. From the local sports organization to the professional athletic club, coaches and trainers realize the benefits of recognizing employees who perform exceptional work and duly publish their reward and recognition heritageihc.com levitra prices programs on their websites. Spinach This dark green leafy vegetable is loaded with vitamin C which is known to boost immunity and help uk viagra prices maintain vitality. Megabus is only the latest discount bus service to appear on the scene. For awhile it seemed that intercity buses were disappearing completely: Greyhound was taken over by Laidlaw, which mainly runs school buses, a decade ago, an action which contributed to Laidlaw’s bankruptcy a few years later. Now, suddenly bus ridership is growing, fueled by discount lines like the Chinatown buses that connect New York City with other cities in the East.
Megabus has operations in California and the Midwest and is opening service in the Northeast. Soon it may come to a city near you. So why should we continue subsidizing Amtrak?
Megabus has six round-trips a day between the Milwaukee Amtrak station and Chicago Union Station. So why should Wisconsin spend hundreds of millions on a new commuter train that would only go through to Chicago only once a day?
Interestingly, the Surface Transportation Commission report that recommended so much rail passenger service a couple of months ago never mentioned intercity buses, even though in 2005 they carried more than 25 times as many passenger miles as Amtrak (a number that is probably growing). In fact, intercity buses carried almost three times as many passenger miles as all public transit plus Amtrak combined.
The Antiplanner loves trains and would love to see passenger trains go everywhere. But, unlike some so-called conservatives, I don’t insist that my preferences receive billions of dollars of taxpayer support.
Heck, even TriMeth’s MAX toy train, here in Portland OR, carries more people than Amtrack every day.
Probably more drug dealers too.
Thanks
JK
But buses aren’t as sexy as trains. 😉
What would happen with train service if anyone who wanted could provide it?
Yet another example of private carriers seeking out and exploiting remaining market niches. Auto-highway systems, like most transportation technologies, are mature. That does not mean, of course, that there are not opportunities for modest improvements in the scale or scope of existing operations.
Megabus seems to be doing quite well for itself in the Midwest, judging by the level of service they are able to offer. Given the size of the Northeast market, they should be able to do even better there.
Let’s leave Amtrak in place a while longer. As Megabus and other regional operators continue to eat away at Amtrak’s market share, we will obtain further evidence about what it is that intercity travelers really want and are willing to pay for.
I love examples like this, because it shows the absurdity of the expensive proposals offered to us by the likes of the Surface Transportation Commission and the Midwest Regional Rail Association. While those plans would cost us tens, and perhaps hundreds, of billions and not be ready for decades to come, Megabus and others can put vehicles on the road tomorrow and serve existing markets.
Again, I don’t worry about the STC report omitting intercity bus service. Intercity operators will do just fine without federal intervention. The STC has their favorites and they are gambling on a loser. Nothing ruins an industry’s productivity like nationalization.
Well since we all know that the Anti-Planner is also anti-market, he conveniently forgot to mention that the very same company has a rail operation too, though in England.
http://www.megatrain.com/uk/stops/index_megatrain.php
On another note:
“The Antiplanner loves trains and would love to see passenger trains go everywhere. But, unlike some so-called conservatives, I don’t insist that my preferences receive billions of dollars of taxpayer support.”
Isn’t this hypocritical since highways have received sextillions of dollars worth of taxpayers support/protection and that privately built taxpaying rail lines were trashed by Uncle Sam?
What ever happen to that classic Antiplanner GUIDING PRINCIPLE?
“What government does for one it should do for all;
What government does not do for all it should do for none.”
Hey AntiPlanner, why havent you said anything about the EcoDensity planning initiative over here in Vancouver, BC? Its certainly recevied enough attention and we know how much you dislike Vancouver and its highrises. Or are you ignoring Vancouver because it is such a desirable place for high density living? Have you realized that the market is demanding density in many cities? You wrote a report on the Vancouver regional plan after all, so why the silent treatment?
Isn’t this hypocritical since highways have received sextillions of dollars worth of taxpayers support/protection and that privately built taxpaying rail lines were trashed by Uncle Sam?
JK: Highways receive little subsidy. You do know the difference between a subsidy and a user fee, don’t you?
Highways are funded mainly be users fees, unlike transit which is funded mainly by fees paid by non users. Fees paid by non users are called taxes.
Thanks
JK
Further to #5, shouldn’t we be decrying the Home Mortgage Interest Deduction as well?
And what about the road subsidies for the local roads that run in front of your house? Those are typically funded out of local general funds, as are all road classifications below state level.
Look it up, people.
DS
JimKarlock wrote:
“Heck, even TriMeth’s MAX toy train, here in Portland OR, carries more people than Amtrack every day.
Please don’t insult toy trains. On a peak day, the Bronx Zoo shuttle carries more riders than the Acela.
AP wrote:
“Megabus is a spin-off from a U.K. company of the same name that is offering bus service along the lines of RyanAir and other European cut-rate airline companies.
Worthy of greater mention in the newspaper article was the role of companies such as Apex in proving that money could be made competing against Greyhound (Amtrak as a competitor is irrelevant). Apex is now moving into the Cal-Nev market; with the increased competition from Megabus, this may be all the excuse Greyhound, which always wanted to be a gov’t monopoly, needs to get out of the fixed-route passenger business.
As for your comment:
…the Surface Transportation Commission report that recommended so much rail passenger service a couple of months ago never mentioned intercity buses, even though in 2005 they carried more than 25 times as many passenger miles as Amtrak”
Not surprising since it appears from the members’ bios that the principal requirement for appointment is a total lack of practical experience in providing passenger transportation solutions. As for your Amtrak vs. Bus passenger miles comparison, even more telling are Amtrak’s car and train-miles. Easy to see why Amtrak’s press releases always focus on ridership; you can play games by (1)reopening or renaming lines or adding station stops, (2) ignore higher growth in competing modes, and (2)gloss over where ridership growth is coming from — premium service in select markets while the system as a whole is contracting.
BTW, I’m sure you’ve read Amtrak’s FY 2009 grant request–I suggest it would make an interesting thread topic.
Jim Karlock wrote:
“JK: Highways receive little subsidy. You do know the difference between a subsidy and a user fee, don’t you?
Highways are funded mainly be users fees, unlike transit which is funded mainly by fees paid by non users. Fees paid by non users are called taxes.”
Oh I know the difference between a user fee and a tax, though you just to keep playing with a loaded deck, when it comes to transport policy.
My comments are not showing up.
the highwayman said: Oh I know the difference between a user fee and a tax, though you just to keep playing with a loaded deck, when it comes to transport policy.
JK: Got anything to say, besides attacking the messenger? Can I assume that you have no rational argument?
Thanks
JK
Just the aspect of that the street in front of your house is not being judged on a profit or loss basis is a priceless political entity onto it self.
Railways and streets are accounted differently. I’m not saying that streets shouldn’t be in a good state of repair, but that rail lines should have just as much of a right to exist as streets.
The two can complement each other, “Ship on railways & save on highways.”
OT
Never mind, I found something you had written a while back on EcoDensity.
My response: WHAT THE HELL?
Like the man said:
What is the use of a house if you haven’t got a tolerable planet to put it on?
Henry David Thoreau