Live data from Hacker News

The Megabus Effect

businessweek.com

31–37 of 37 posts

Re: The Megabus Effect

#31
post #2

Short summary: Megabus are one of a few companies operating low-overhead, curbside pickup intercity bus service. "On most city-to-city trips under 300 miles, the curbside bus offers tickets that cost a tenth of those of Amtrak and far less even than the price of the gas to get there by car." Passengers book online, tickets are delivered to cell phones, busses are equipped with WiFi and power outlets at each seat. Art…

>Article points out the advantages of busses over high-speed rail, which has tended to get more press as being the future of mid-haul intercity

It doesn't have to be an either-or situation, as both modes have their strengths and weaknesses. For example, while bus is cheaper than rail, it still has to deal with the same problems that automobile traffic has to deal with (weather and traffic delays being the most common). HSR is more expensive than bus, but is faster (talking about real HSR, not the Acela) and it's cheaper to add capacity.

That said, buses and HSR are complementary in lots of ways and there's no reason why they can't work together (just like no one is asking people to choose between buses and cars, we can have both). One example is the joint-ticketing arrangement between the Amtrak Downeaster (Portland ME) and Concord Coach Lines. Buy a bus ticket and miss the bus? Just jump on the next train (and vice versa).

Re: The Megabus Effect

#32
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to put the lid on the kettle here, WIFI works on about 1/10 Megabus trips.

Does the power strip work? Given the ubiquity of 3G coverage, I don't mind lacking wifi that much anymore.

Their wifi is just a hub plugged into a 3G modem. If it's not working, your 3G probably isn't either.

Re: The Megabus Effect

#33

I vastly prefer these busses to air travel for routes like New York to Boston. Lots of space, lots of comfort, Internet, power, nobody groping my body (at least not anybody in uniform), don't have to undress or wait in long lines, and probably 10x more eco-friendly.

probably 10x more eco-friendly

I don't claim to have done the numbers myself, but during the volcanic shutdown last year, More Or Less' (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006qshd) presenter was stranded on the far side of Europe and calculated the emissions cost of travelling back overland by various means as he did. The answer - it was roughly level; the problem wasn't so much the plane as the long-distance travel.

Re: The Megabus Effect

#34
Stagecoach, the parent company of Megabus, began growing shortly after UK bus services were deregulated and privatized (mid 90s). Their tactic was to take the busiest (and most profitable) routes in a city and saturate them with buses, charging lower fares. The 192 route in Manchester suddenly went to literally a bus every two minutes, and Stagecoach buses were half the price of everything else.

They made losses but took nearly every passenger on the route. They then bought the company which previously ran the route and fares rapidly escalated. Manchester now has extortionate bus fares and Stagecoach run virtually all routes.

I imagine that their business model is almost identical with Megabus: sink the competition by undercutting their profitable routes, buy them out/bankrupt them and then reap your rewards.

sidenote: I used to vaguely know the chap who almost founded Stagecoach with his wife. They divorced and she took what was a small local bus company and built it up with her new partner. He started a new company called Highwayman (robs the stagecoach). It remained a small (< 8 buses) operator in scotland until he died a couple of years ago.

Re: The Megabus Effect

#35
post #11

I still don't understand their business model though. On the UK website, I've never seen prices over £5. Multiply that by often not completely filled up buses, say 50 people, and you've got 250 pounds for a 100-mile trip.

Did you actually attempt to buy a ticket though? On the Canadian site, the front page advertises the 'cheapest' rate, which you can only get if you buy the first couple tickets on any given ride. After that, the prices escalate (they don't hide that from you though... it just not on their front page).

Re: The Megabus Effect

#36

I vastly prefer these busses to air travel for routes like New York to Boston. Lots of space, lots of comfort, Internet, power, nobody groping my body (at least not anybody in uniform), don't have to undress or wait in long lines, and probably 10x more eco-friendly.

probably 10x more eco-friendly I don't claim to have done the numbers myself, but during the volcanic shutdown last year, More Or Less' ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006qshd ) presenter was stranded on the far side of Europe and calculated the emissions cost of travelling back overland by various means as he did. The answer - it was roughly level; the problem wasn't so much the plane as the long-distance travel.

I'd love to see the numbers on this, I agree that it's usually long-distance travel that's the problem.

A typical single passenger automobile trip has about equivalent CO2 emissions, per-passenger, as a typical jet trip. (At least whenever I've run the numbers.)

But since the bus ride is less than the cost of gas for an automobile, I would think that the bus must be per-passenger somewhat more efficient. It's hard to get much of a discount on commodities like fuel.

Re: The Megabus Effect

#37

I vastly prefer these busses to air travel for routes like New York to Boston. Lots of space, lots of comfort, Internet, power, nobody groping my body (at least not anybody in uniform), don't have to undress or wait in long lines, and probably 10x more eco-friendly.

probably 10x more eco-friendly I don't claim to have done the numbers myself, but during the volcanic shutdown last year, More Or Less' ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006qshd ) presenter was stranded on the far side of Europe and calculated the emissions cost of travelling back overland by various means as he did. The answer - it was roughly level; the problem wasn't so much the plane as the long-distance travel.

CO2 emissions depend on distance travelled, since take-off consumes a lot more than being at cruising altitude - short-haul is about 50% more costly. This doesn't take into account increased impacts from night travel for planes, or that buses will tend to be fuller.

See e.g. http://www.greenrationbook.org.uk/resources/footprints-air-t...

Post reply on HN