Direct to your destination: the size, scope and competitive status of express coach carriers in the United States
Tóm tắt
The advent of express coach bus lines offering guaranteed seating and emphasizing curbside pickup and drop-off is contributing to a revival in intercity bus travel in the United States. Relatively little is known, however, about the scale and geographic scope of these carriers or the competitive landscape in which they operate. To fill this void, this study evaluates the service networks operated by the two largest express coach operators in the country, BoltBus and Megabus, and evaluates a data set of 4775 fares sold on megabus.com. The results show that these carriers cumulatively serve 127 intercity segments and operate about 52.9 million bus miles per year. Together, these carriers have grown to about one third of the size of Amtrak, with Megabus and BoltBus providing 3.3 billion and .69 billion seat miles of service, respectively, compared to Amtrak’s 12.8 billion. With respect to the types of routes it serves and the competition it faces, Megabus has evolved into a carrier quite different than Boltbus; more than one third of Megabus’ bus miles are operated on segments without Amtrak service, while virtually all of BoltBus’ miles face this competition. The analysis of Megabus’ pricing shows that fares rise modestly within 2 weeks of departure, while the per-mile costs are much less ($.08/mile) for 300–399 mile trips than for those 50–99 miles ($.22/mile). Nevertheless, the dispersion of fares tends to fall as the departure date nears, regardless of distance. Together, these prominent bus lines serve 66 of the 100 most heavily traveled U.S. city pairs that have characteristics suitable for intercity bus service—which is more than Amtrak. With further growth on the horizon, planners, federal regulators, and researchers should collaborate on establishing reporting requirements for this expanding sector.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Amtrak: Monthly Performance Report for September 2016. https://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/188/327/Amtrak-Monthly-Performance-Report-September-2016-Final-Audited,0.pdf (2016)
Airlines for America: Data and statistics: U.S. airlines traffic and capacity. http://airlines.org/data/# (2017)
Augustin, K., Gerike, R., Sanchez, M.J.M., Ayala, C.: Analysis of intercity bus markets on long distances in an established and a young market: the example of the U.S. and Germany. Res. Transp. Econ. Compet. Ownersh. Land Passeng. Transp. 48, 245–254 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2014.09.047
Blayac, T., Bougette, P.: Should I go by bus? The liberalization of the long-distance bus industry in France. Transp. Policy 56, 50–62 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2017.03.004
Bureau of Transportation Statistics: Figure 3-7: domestic average air fares by distance traveled, 2009–2015. https://www.bts.gov/archive/publications/transportation_economics_trends/tables/ch3/fig3_7 (2017)
Federal Transit Administration: TCP Report 79: Effective Approaches to Meeting Rural Intercity Bus Transportation Needs. Transit Research Cooperative Program, Washington (2002)
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA). Motor Carrier Registrations—Census Files. Washington, DC. Retrieved from https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/motor-carrier-registrations-census-files-61ade (2017)
Florida Department of Transportation: Florida Intercity Bus Service Needs Assessment and Action Plan. Florida Intercity Bus Service Tech Memo One: Baseline Conditions (2009)
Florida Department of Transportation: Florida Intercity Bus Service Needs Assessment and Action Plan: Final 2010. Central Transit Office, Tallahassee, FL. http://www.fdot.gov/transit/Pages/FloridaIntercityBusServiceNeedsAssessment.pdf(2010)
Grengs, J.: Intercity Bus and Passenger Rail Study: Prepared for the Michigan Department of Transportation, University of Michigan, Department of Architecture and Urban Planning (2009)
Higgins, L., Warner, J., Morgan, C., Dunham, P.: Examining long-distance express buses as an extension of and feeder to passenger rail systems. University Transportation Center for Mobility, Texas Transportation Institute, The Texas A&M University System (2011)
Farivar, C.: Murder and vice on the lower east side: the past, present and future of the ‘chinatown buses.’ http://cyrusfarivar.com/docs/farivar.chinatownbuses.html (2005)
Hough, J., Mattson, J.: The changing state of rural transit. TR News A Publ. Transp. Res. Board 303, 34–37 (2016)
Klein, N.J.: Emergent curbside intercity bus industry: chinatown and beyond. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2111, 83–89 (2009)
Klein, N.J.: Get on the (curbside) bus: the new intercity bus. J. Transp. Land use 8(1), 155 (2015)
Mattson, J., Peterson, D., Thoms, W., Ripplinger, D., Hough., J.: Assessing demand for rural intercity transportation in a changing environment. Small Urban and Rural Transit Center, Upper Great Plains Transportation Institute, North Dakota State University (2010)
Meyer, J.R., Oster, C.V., Gómez-Ibáñez, J.A., Clippinger, M.: The other modes: bus, rail and auto. In: Meyer, J.R., Oster, C.V. (eds.) Deregulation and the Future of Intercity Passenger Travel, pp. 161–182. MIT Press, Cambridge (1987)
RSG, Inc.: Developing refined estimates of intercity bus ridership. Prepared for the Federal Highway Administration, 23 Apr 2015 (2016)
Schwieterman, J.P.: Data Supplement: 2013 Year-in-Review: Intercity Bus Service in the United States. Chaddick Institute for Metropolitan Development, DePaul University, Chicago (2014)
Schwieterman, J., Fischer, L.: Competition from the curb: survey of passengers on discount curbside bus operators in eastern and midwestern cities. Transp. Res. Rec. 227, 49–56 (2012a)
Schwieterman, J., Fischer, L.: The decline and recovery of intercity bus service in the United States: a comeback for an environmentally friendly transportation mode. Environ. Pract. 13, 7–15 (2012b)
Schwieterman, J.P., Fischer, L., Smith, S., Towles, C.: The Return of the Intercity Bus: The Decline and Recovery of Scheduled Service to American Cities, 1960–2007. DePaul University, School of Public Service Policy Study, Chicago (2007)
Schwieterman, J., Antolin, B., Levin, A., Michel, M., Spray, H.: The Remaking of the Motor Coach: 2015 Year in Review of Intercity Bus Service in the United States. Chaddick Institute for Metropolitan Development, DePaul University, Chicago (2016)
SRF Consulting Group Inc.: Intercity bus network study. Final report. Prepared for Minnesota Department of Transportation (2010)
Transportation Research Board: Interregional travel: a new perspective for policy making. Transportation Research Board Special Report 320 (2016)
U.S. General Accounting Office (USGAO): Surface Transportation: The Availability of Intercity Bus Service Continues to Decline. GAO/RECD-92-126. USGAO, Washington, DC (1992)
Walsh, M.: Making Connections: The Long-Distance Bus Industry in the USA. Ashgate, Aldershot (2000)
Walter, M., Haunerland, F., Moll, R.: Heavily regulated, but promising prospects: entry in the German express coach market. Transp. Policy 18(2), 373–381 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2010.11.001
White, P., Robbins, D.: Long-term development of express coach services in Britain. Res. Transp. Econ. 36(1), 30–38 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2012.03.012